the global conspiracy would have next to no chance of being kept under wraps given what we know about human competence. on the other hand a god would be exempt from his own created laws. i don't see that as being biased towards the latter. i think you are trying to give both situations equal plausibility.
No, a creator
god who is outside of time and created all the rules of the universe would be exempt from the rules. Those things are not all inherent properties simply of "a god". Take for example a god from a pantheon religion, like Thor for example - not hypothesised to be the creator of the universe, and fabled to have powers but still be subject to certain rules.
In your scenario you are saying "God exists" and then saying "God has these unlikely properties, of being the creator and being outside the universe".
That is equivalent to saying "A conspiracy exists" and then saying "and has this unlikely property of being hidden".
If anything, the hidden-ness of the conspiracy is more
likely because simply saying "a conspiracy exists" carries the inherent property that it must be hidden, since otherwise we would already be aware of it. A god, on the other hand, does not inherently have the property of being the creator.
Presuppositionalists argue just as JD Holwick describes, that God is the basis not only of material existence, but of logic itself. That without the Christian God the very logic and rationality that allow us to make sense of the world would be impossible.
Tue, although my understanding is that presuppositionalism goes a bit further... They dont only claim that god is necessary for critical thought, but that the appearance of knowledge and critical thought in our brains has to be directly caused by god putting it there (as a result of the doctrine of Total Depravity
- human thought is corrupted by sin unless god first directly intervenes to Save the person).