For ease of reading, I color coded this post, each new color starting a response to a different person.
@Cheif: Well, I'll take a crack at it.
There's no reason to interpret the days in Genesis as anything other than days. If they weren't 24 hour days, the Jews would have used another word representative of the time period. Other instances in the Bible of the word day, in reference to 24 hour periods, also use the same word given in Genesis.
There is no reason for there to be a first cause. Your claim is that all things without exception need a start. God would fall under that everything as well, so something must have created God if you're claiming such a universal rule. The inevitable response is that God is outside of time and/or the universe and doesn't need a cause, to which I say you need to find a better argument than special pleading. You're creating a universal rule then begging for one exception, and that's not the way universal rules work. Note also that recently renowned scientist Stephen Hawking pronounced his calculations that the universe would inevitably come into being as a function of the known laws of physics, no God required.
Now, in response to your claim that God is responsible for things science has already shown happen naturally. You have the loosest definition of evolution there (change over time). A more accurate definition would be that evolution is the tendency of traits that aid a species in survival to be passed on to later generations, adapting them to their environment to aid in survival. Now, you've actually made two mistakes in one here: you've assumed an untenable position that cannot be proven false, firstly, which is not the same as something being true. You've taken a position that cannot be shown as true nor as false and are asserting truth for no sound logical purpose. Secondly, you're claiming a God of the Gaps. Just because science doesn't have an answer, it does not mean that God is that answer, and the thing you cited as an example (mutation) does in fact have a scientific and natural explanation.
The field of science that deals with the origin of life would be abiogenesis, just in case you didn't know the name. It has been shown through controlled experimentation that non-living elements can come together to form strings of amino acids, also called 'the building blocks of life'. However, there is still a lot more research to be done to check this conclusion and ensure that it is factual.
@OP: I mean this in the nicest of ways, and say it so you can learn. You absolutely made a fool of yourself, and you have no one to blame but yourself. I read the thread, and there is no reason for you to feel persecuted like you do. They were cordial, factual, and while at points they were rude, it was was only because you came into the thread as if you were the end all be all of information. Your posts, honestly, were condescending, and you made no attempt to understand what was being said to you to correct the glaringly false claims you made.
Take the criticism, learn from it, and move on.
@Scarlet: A couple of problems with what you're saying. The 'In God we trust' stuff you're talking about came into being in the 1950's with McCarthyism to separate us from the 'Godless Communists'. It has nothing to do with Christianity, but everything to do with being better than the Soviet Union. Same for the Pledge of Allegiance. As for Thomas Jefferson, he is an avowed atheist according to the letters he wrote denouncing all religions, especially Christianity. I would ask you to prove God gave us the USA, but I know you can't, so I won't press it.
A document that I like to cite in the Christian Nation argument is the Treaty of Tripoli, which in article 11 declares that the USA was not founded on Christianity in any sense of it.
Gonna point out the irony of you supporting someone who specifically didn't keep their mind open against those trying to correct her baseless claims. More irony in you saying that THEY were the closed-minded ones, when they simply looked at the claim OP made and weighed it against known facts and reason before disagreeing. OP is in the wrong here, and you're demonizing the open-minded.
@Ambrosia: There is no God particle. There's gravity holding atoms together, and gravity that pulled the bits of matter in to form planets. Also, believed by who to be the source of creation? See the above about Hawking's findings.
I will also note, if you compare the times that Jesus is supposed to have lived with the historical events we can account for, it's impossible for him to have existed at all, or the Bible is vastly wrong. Either way, you lose when you bring facts in to line them up, because you either discredit your religion or you are blatantly dishonest with which facts you cherry pick and shift dates on. Note also that no contemporary historian makes mention of Jesus in any specific fashion save for Josephus, and his writings were tampered with by the Church (we know this for a fact). Also, there were over 300 recorded 'sons of god' at the same time Jesus was about. There are no records of the death of Jesus outside of the Bible, which is very strange because the Romans were notorious for recording everything, and especially important because they neglected to record anything about him coming back to life or about his miracles as well. In fact, outside the Bible, there are no reports at all of Jesus ever existing period.
Don't lie to yourself like that and think that history backs your story. It doesn't.
Like, at all.
DeistPaladin on Youtube has a great few videos about this.
One. Two. Three. 
Reply
