Replies

So you admit no rational basis for your assumption.

Nothing about the text of Genesis is irrational. The evidence of an orderly universe is substial enough to conclude the text is a reliable foundation for the rest of science to operate under the laws God created. If there's anything irrational going on here, it is your dogged fear of acknowledging the things common sense knows to be true.

Go ahead and lock yourself up in that little "science box" over there. Go ahead and tell the world how you are a free thinker who operates without any foundational assumptions. The evidence speaks differently on all counts.

Nothing about the text of Genesis is irrational.

Sure, if you're assuming your conclusion. Rational people, however, don't assume their conclusion and use it as a premise for their argument.

The evidence of an orderly universe is substial enough to conclude the text is a reliable foundation for the rest of science to operate under the laws God created.

Except that your "evidence" was evaluated with the presumption that the Book of Genesis is accurate, meaning that your argument assumes your conclusion. It's a logical fallacy. You're using the Book of Genesis to support your claim that the Book of Genesis is accurate. That's illogical.

I asked you how you determined that the order of the universe was evidence that intelligence created it rather than concluding that the order of intelligence was evidence that the orderly universe created it. Your answer was the Book of Genesis. Why do you assume that the information in Genesis is accurate? Well, apparently because you look at the order of the universe and see that it must have been created by intelligence, meaning that you're supporting your conclusion with itself, which is a circular argument. There is no honesty in your reasoning.