To begin, I haven't had time to read in detail what everybody has written yet so I apologise if what I say has been said before.
Firstly,
Genesis asserts that there was 'light' ("night and day") before the Sun even came into existence. This is naturally impossible.
I know this won't change your overall argument, but from what I can tell of you Scorch, you seem to be the kind of person who likes to corrected when factually wrong. So I would like to point out that the accepted timeline of the universe has light (photons) existing well before the first generation of stars were formed. Photons were first formed about 10secs after the big bang where as the first stars were not seen until about 150 million years after the big bang.
Indeed, photons were formed a good couple of minutes before the universe cooled enough for even the first Hydrogen atoms to form.
Secondly, for all of the devout atheists out there, could one of you please provide me with a scientific theory of the creation of the universe. Don't be afraid of dumbing it down, I am in my 7th year of studying physics at uni and can handle it (or at least be able to understand the general idea of it).
It seems that religion, is the only side which is attempting to offer an explanation of the creation of the universe. Granted it unfortunately is being told in a form of Jewish poetry (or so I have been told by people who study it in the original languages) and is very light on specifics, but at least they are trying.
Now I have probably confused many of you by this point, and you are already moving your hand on the keyboard to type "The Big Bang", but before you do I want you to stop and think about what the big bang is actually explaining. It is not a theory to describe the creation of the universe, but rather it is more of an astronomical equivalent to the theory of evolution. It describes how the universe started as an infinitesimally small point of extremely energetic "stuff" and finished as we see and love it today. It does not explain where this "stuff" came from nor how it was created.
And yes I do realise that religion has this same problem in the age old question of "If God created everything, then who created God?", so unless somebody has an actual theory that they can point me towards, that explains how, without violating its own laws, something can be scientifically created from nothing. Then both sides of this argument must start their assumptions from a point of faith. Be it that an all powerful, perfect being existed and then created the universe, or that in the beginning the universe was an infinitesimally small point of extremely energetic "stuff" which underwent an expansion from which was created time, space and even the fundamental forces of physics.
Thirdly, and more as an aside then anything else.
I find it funny how now days the atheist camp has claimed the big bang as their proof. When it was first published, most atheists were against the idea as it showed that the universe was indeed created. Indeed the first to propose the idea of the big bang (he didn't call it that, rather an opponent of the theory coined the phrase and it stuck) was Georges Lemaître who was a Jesuit (catholic) priest as well as a professor in physics and astronomy.
Anyway, I would love to read and argue more, but at the moment I am procrastinating from doing any uni work and my supervisor will not be impressed if I don't get anything done today.