I created summary post under Religious discussion the thread present evidence here.
The naturalistic explanations argument doesn't actually hold water. For instance a car can be explained by nothing more than an appeal to natural known laws of physics yet we know cars are designed and caused by personal agents to exist. If the argument held water it would mean a car was caused to exist unintentionally by naturalistic forces that didn't intend a car to exist.
Correct ... but materialists don't accept personal agents, even themselves ... they do what they do, "unintentionally by naturalistic forces that didn't intend for a person to exist" ;-)) Reductionism doesn't allow teleology. And rationalists frequently aren't ... usually rationalism just means agreeing to materialism/reductionism. I do agree that "intelligent design" is stupid ... because clearly reality isn't intelligent at all ... "stupid design" is a much more accurate term. Basically reductionism assumes, that all the fancy structures we see, particularly in living things, are implicit in the equations, and if we were smart enough, we could calculate why bacteria have flagellum (rather than engaging in the usual post-facto Darwinian explanation). Flagellum as a means of escaping predators is such an obviously advantageous adaptation for collective and individual survival (even though not for survival for sex ... bacteria divorce without getting married first) that all bacteria should have them by now, since all the slow-pokes should have gone extinct. After 4 billion years, bacteria should have evolved Evinrude outboard motors ;-) Other arguments go ... that reductionism is all we got ... so it can't be anything else. They even use this if they are super-string theorists.
People here usually argue regarding cause/effect that an "unmoved mover" is unnecessary as an explanation .. that a structured semi-chaotic status-quo is sufficient. In my case, I dispense with cause/effect arguments entirely. My view is "shit happens". People rationalize a fallacious cause/effect on everything. In Greek terms, the Greeks were optimists that we are in a Cosmos ... in fact we are in Chaos, playing connect-the-dots with semi-random dots. We impose an imagined order on randomness ... because it is sometimes beneficial to survival, not because of its ontological status (Platonism).