Of all the religions I discuss, Evolution is the most common. The reason I focus on Evolution so much is that it is one of the easiest religions to refute. Aside from the evidence mounting against it thanks to modern advances in science, even Charles Darwin recognised critical flaws in the "theory" that still have not been solved today. Let's have a look at a few examples:
"To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree." (1)
Without exception, every Evolutionist I have brought this quote up with has responded with accusations of "quote mining". While Darwin made this statement, he obviously wasn't going to refute Evolution in the very book by which he intended to prove it. However, while Darwin clearly didn't consider this problem to be as fatal as it is, he was at least honest enough to admit that it is a problem. The human eye (and, indeed, any eye) is exceptionally and unnecessarily complex. I say unnecessarily not because there is a better way to design an eye (thankfully, God did a brilliant job), but because the middle stages between a non-eye and an eye would be completely useless, and thus would not provide a survival advantage. In fact, they would likely provide a disadvantage. A creature with a half-evolved eye has a weak spot with little to no function, to which the body is still providing blood and energy that could be used for other things. Interestingly, even fully-functioning eyes tend to disappear in dark conditions. Blind tetras, for example, live in caves, which has resulted in them losing their eyes. If a fully developed eye can be lost when the species loses its need for it, how could an eye possibly evolve when it provides no survival advantage, and even hinders survival? [Post publication note: It actually appears the cause of losing eyes is epigenetic, i.e. cave fish are pre-programmed to lose their eyes in a given environment.]
"The sight of a feather in a peacock’s tail, whenever I gaze at it, makes me sick!" (2)
Darwin hated the tail feathers of peacocks because there is absolutely no reason beautiful features like that should exist. He even came up with the (now disproven) theory of "sexual selection" to explain how the tail feathers of a peacock help peahens choose mates. However, a study by Mariko Takahashi reveals that peahens show no particular preferences for their mates' tail feathers (3). Unfortunately for Darwin, his hatred of peacock feathers will have to remain for now.
"Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record." (1)
This is perhaps the most famous problem for Evolution. If life really has been evolving for 3 billion years, there should be at least some fossil evidence. There should be, as Darwin stated, "innumerable" transitional forms. Yet, such transitional forms are exceedingly rare, and the few that are put forward are very highly questionable. Transitional forms are so rare, Evolutionists have even been known to fake them (e.g. Piltdown man). They have also exaggerated real fossils based on their missing features (e.g. Pakicetus), and cling to well known non-transitions (e.g. archaeopteryx). Darwin's excuse of the "imperfection of the geological record" (4) is even less sustainable in our day than it was in his, as 97% of all living orders of land vertebrates are represented in the fossil record.
"But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?" (5)
The most critical flaw in Evolution is that if it was true, we could never really know it. As a Christian, I know that the human brain was designed for discovering truth, but an Evolutionist believes his brain is nothing more than the result of millions of years of death and suffering. It wasn't designed for discovering truth, and because of that, you have no more reason to believe you can draw correct conclusions than to believe a monkey can do the same. In other words, taking Evolution seriously, you cannot take Evolution seriously. This makes Evolution a self refuting religion, as acknowledged by its own prophet!
All of the above tells us that Evolution is in the same sorry state it was when Darwin stole the idea from Alfred Russel Wallace. For over 150 years, Evolutionists have been scrambling to prove their story, but the evidence just keeps defying them. Problems that Darwin himself spotted in his day remain up to ours. It is, to say the least, embarrassing the lengths that people will go just to explain the origin of life without God.
But explaining the origin of life when God is included is easy, not only because of the evidence He created life, but also because long after He created man, He came to Earth as a man. Jesus Christ was 100% human. He lived a real human life, and died a real human death. But being God, He has power over death, and so it took Him a measly 3 days to walk out of His own tomb, able to eat, drink, and be touched. How can Evolution explain this historical fact? It cannot. Evolution has no basis in history. Christianity is so solid that even sceptical historians do a good job of defending it, stopping just shy of admitting Jesus rose. So, who will you trust? The God who walked out of His grave, or the bearded story teller who gave you reasons not to trust him, and remains in his grave? Only Jesus can raise you. Darwin preached the path to death.
References
1. Darwin, Charles - On The Origin of Species, 1859
2. Darwin, Francis (Editor) - Letter to Asa Gray, dated 3 April 1860, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, D. Appleton and Company, New York and London, Vol. 2, 1911
3. Takahashi, Mariko - Peahens do not prefer peacocks with more elaborate trains, Science Direct, Animal Behaviour, April 2008 (link)
4. Darwin, Charles - Origin of Species, 1859, chapter. 9
5. Darwin, Charles - Letter to William Graham, 1881