To take for granted the preconditions of intelligibility is only consistent with the Bible.

What reason to you have to take the bible or God for granted? Con:"perhaps the evolutionist would say, "We know that the laws of logic exist because we use them." Well if they know that the laws of logic exist, they would have a reason to take them for granted. Which they do not because they discourage the biblical world view. So they believe they know the laws of logic. The fact that the evolutionist agrees that laws of logic exist means that the biblical world view must be correct. I will explain why later." In the future could you explain these things in the same round. Con:"My opponent's evidence for us being able to know anything about the universe is that we have evolved to become more intelligent than other creatures. However again this a fallacy. Evolutionists only believe we are more intelligent than any other creature via the senses. Yet as I have discussed, they cannot be a reliable source for gaining knowledge." they are not a completly reliable form. While they must always be questioned they are our only method of gathering data, regardless of if we have a biblical world view. Con:"These problems don't apply to the biblical world view because the Word of God is the ultimate standard, not laws of logic or any other preconditions of intelligibility. We take them for granted but for a reason, however a secular or even just a non biblical world view does not have reason to take them for granted." This is just shifting the problem, what reason do you have for taking God for granted? Con:"God designed us and therefore He created our brain and our senses. Thus we can trust them and gain knowledge through them." I will grant that in the biblical world view senses can be trusted entirely. As we both argued in reality senses can not be trusted entirely. Therefore the biblical world view clearly contradicts reality. Con:"if evolution were true, then there would be none of these preconditions available. Morality, laws of logic, senses and memory and so on." aren't we in agreement that senses and memory should not be preconditions? Con:"Since the evolutionist has no reason to take them for granted, then they could just as easily not take them for granted." Our acceptance of the preconditions are hardwired into us through evolution. Whether they are true, or we are a crazy species by evolution has no bearing on reality. Con:"only the biblical world view can be logically correct." I am still waiting for the justification of this claim. In defense of the problem of evil. God is all knowing, and created everything. Therefore he knew that his creations (us) would sin. Also he could have created a world with no suffering, therefore he clearly made the choice to introduce suffering into the world. In response to con's origin of morality argument. We are a social species, this means that we evolved to work together. Therefore a subspecies with it hardwired into our brains that killing another person is 'wrong' would survive better than one that considered it 'right' These morals our further reinforced with social evolution. I don't want to be killed. Therefore it is in my interest to live with other people who do not want to be killed. As a group we agree not to kill each other. To maintain this through the generations children are taught 'killing' is wrong.