I can tell you are a logical thinker, and that's good, but here is the problem. If you said "I know the creator exists" you are simultaneously saying that life can exist without a creator. Because if the creator is, himself, alive, then where did that life come from? Was it created? Or did it always exist? If it always existed then there is no need to explain the existence of life with a conscious entity as its point of origin. Do you see?
I really want people to understand this so we can move forward in terms of thought and ideas. You are all intelligent people. That's why you're here.
How can a Creator have created life if the Creator wasn't alive? If Life requires a creator then it could not exist because a living creator would be a PARADOX. What we have always seen is that life creates life. And this is where creationists and evolutionists agree. Because the theory of evolution DOES NOT SAY that life came from nothing. Evolution simply describes how life comes from life. Evolution does not dictate the origin of life.
AND NEITHER DOES THE BIBLE.
The bible only describes an origin of HUMANITY. Not life. If it gave us an origin for life it would have to explain how God, who people believe to be alive, came into existence. It does not do this which means the bible does not contain an origin for life. It knows exactly no more about this than evolution does.
So why are you, or anyone else for that matter, so sure that you know who the Creator is? It's because someone told you. How do they know? Because someone told them. At some point this cycle has to start from somewhere and you are forced to believe that God, this concept that no ancient humans agreed on, told the story to one person in the midst of hundred of others making up hundreds of other stories about the same thing with not attempt to provide evidence or disprove or draw distinction from any of the other stories of creation.
But again, what I KNOW, is that the bible does not give us an origin story to life itself. So what we are left with is a logic puzzle.
If everything you see must have been created by a living Creator who possessed the knowledge, the skill, the science, to create everything in a way that clearly doesn't function by magic (ie we're not spirits), how can THAT being with all that power, how could it exist without being created by someone with the knowledge, the skill, the science, to create him? So if the reason you believe in a Creator is because of the greatness of Creation, then the Creator himself has to be far greater than Creation and thus the question how could he exist if he wasn't created? If a God with unlimited magical power can exist and create without the means of any technology or tool, then that means LIFE can exist and reproduce life without the means of any technology or tool. Do you see?
In fact, if nature doesn't contain any magic then nature wouldn't need magic to explain its ability to reproduce itself. This is why not only is God unnecessary to creation, God is a logical handicap of Creationist theory because another thing the bible never explains the origin of but has to rely on heavily... is the existence of MAGIC. And magic, like superstition, is an expression of human ignorance. To this very day, no one has ever successfully proven the existence of magic. So because it hasn't been proven nor its existence explained, we can conclude that, like the concept of race, it is simply a mental construct. In other words, it exists as far as we are willing and able to BELIEVE it exists. But it does not exist in reality.
So why do people believe these things so strongly? Is there a correlation to the power that religion tends to dictate over people's lives? Is it Babylon? How much freedom does the average religious person actually have to believe whatever they want? Think about this. One of the many reasons I value Rastafari so highly is because it stands against systemic oppression. But how many people have faced their own religious oppression? How many people would get excommunicated from their social and religious families if they didn't believe certain elements of doctrine? IMO, without forcing anyone to agree, religion coerces people to support certain ideas because of the consequences to them for not doing so. And it is challenging to face those consequences; especially if you feel like you're doing it alone.
Don't believe me? Consider this. On certain subjects, pay attention to whether or not everyone argues the merits of the subject strictly by their beliefs or the bible or if they say "that's not Rasta". The fault in this argument is that it is dependent on humans considered to be part of this group to be right without question. But this is a paradox because everything a rasta does is rasta. If a rasta has to do what another rasta does in order to be a rasta then one sheep is simply following another. And the first sheep is not necessarily smarter, wiser, or more informed than the last. And so if they're all going over a cliff they're too busy following the next sheep to notice or care. And what if it is the system, acting as shepherds, leading the first sheep? How would you know if you are just following the rest? So I say, do not be afraid to be different. Don't be afraid to not know everything or to allow yourself to need more evidence to be convinced.
Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands:
One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.