The stories and other assertions found in the Bible are claims, not evidence.
And, the unfounded assumption that the universe appeared out of nothing (the standard atheist worldview) and that all phenonoma is a product of chance, chaos, and disinterested self-guidance is also not evidence.
That is a fallacious strawman argument. It is not the question here is it Jeffro? We are talking about consistency and logic - correct thinking. The question that thinking people what to know is how atheists come to put so much trust in things like logic in a chance and self-guided universe? It is an inherent inconsistency.
Like the 'law of gravity', the 'laws of logic' are simply descriptions of the way things are, not prescriptions.
That doesn't make any sense. Gravity is a description of the way matter attracts other physical things. It is irrelevant to abstract thoughts like laws of logic, laws of morality etc.
If I say a proposition has the opposite truth value of its negation, what aspect of the physical universe am I talking about? Likewise, If I say it is wrong to steal from your neighbor, what part of the physical universe am I describing?
And, while we are on the subject of relevancy, why would a consistent worldview be important to someone who believes that we are products of Big bang explosions, chemical accidents and copying mistakes?
In my worldview, I am obligated to try and think correctly because God himself created me with the capacity for correct thinking. Since I don't always think correctly, I need laws of logic to keep me on course. That makes sense.
But, in your worldview - why should you care about correct thinking at all? Why care about universal morality? And, how can you account for its existence?
In other words, since blind chance cannot account for such laws, you have to borrow God's laws in order to argue against a biblical worldview.
You are like a man giving a talk about the non-existence of air, while breathing air to make your case.
