See Breeze:
The reason that you and I both subsribe to, use & have total faith in the laws of logic is because we both know the God of the bible. (Romans 1: 18) We are all "without excuse". You were made in his image same as I and use his inventions same as I do. You know those laws don't change because God "changes not." He is the source of your confidence in the truths we agree upon.
Sigh. No, irrelevant sophistry in a religious text does not trump what I know to be true about my own thoughts. š
What other conclusion could a thinking person come to?
A nonsensical question. Obviously, different individuals could hold any number of alternative real or imagined beliefs.
Straw man. I made no such claim that "an assumption of chaos, chance, and physicality can support nonphysical, stable and complex conceptual truths from such a source" (though you also haven't demonstrated that such couldn't be the case, hence an argument from incredulity). The expectation that I should have some alternative explanation at all to 'compete' with your imaginary explanation is a false dichotomy, and at its core, also a fallacious appeal to pride.You claim that an assumption of chaos, chance, and physicality can support nonphysical, stable and complex conceptual truths from such a source. It makes no sense.
Your worldview is inconsistent. And, that should matter to you.... logically speaking.