Skillet, get a life man! Seriously you are more religious than me and that's saying something! I am in a leadership position in my church, read the bible most days and enjoy regular fellowship with other believers, the only thing that separates us is WHAT we believe in. The fact that you feel the need to spend so much time 'refuting' Christianity to prop up your atheism just shows how insecure you really are.
Now I know you don't like debating creationists, I don't blame you even Richard Dawkins won't do that, but I must pull you up on a basic assumption you obviously don't see. Every single objection you posted, and believe me I'm not about to spend the hours it would require to honestly research and reply to each and every one, assumes the reality of naturalism. May I remind you that the scientific method requires observation and repetition so my simple question to you is this: how is anything in the past truly open to the scientific method? Until a time machine is invented and we can travel back in time and OBSERVE the events in question, our conclusions remain a product of our assumptions. This is why you and Richard Dawkins will not debate creationists, because you need to keep interpretations based on naturalism 'scientific' and interpretations based on the bible as 'religious'. This way you don't need to face the fact that there are valid alternate interpretations of the natural world that conflict with your religious ideas.
With respect Skillet, your passion to refute Christianity is based purely on your need to justify your rejection of God. God's existence is plain to see to anyone who is truly open to Him, in both the natural world around us and, most importantly, in the historical person of Jesus Christ. For, literally, heavens sake, do yourself a favor and open your heart and mind. To use your own words: "Think man, think!".
God bless