So here is the problem with presup.
Presup attempts to show that our God, the Christian God is the only God that can account for the preconditions of intelligibility therefore Christianity is true.
There are two problems with this method claim.
PROBLEM 1:
The very old testament saints, Noah, Abraham, etc couldn't have believed that the incarnated Christ was born in there day, so believing that "Jesus the carpenter has died on the cross in the past" cannot be essential to believing in the Christian God, otherwise Noah doesn't believe in our God.
However it is obvious that believing in Christianity requires you believe Jesus has come.
Thus it seems belief in our God does not require belief in the past resurrection of the messiah, it may be a requirement AFTER THE CHRIST ROSE but not for all people of all times.
PROBLEM 2:
The problem is its possible to refer to our God successfully but ascribing a false history to him.
Duet 18: 22 When the prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, and the thing does not happen or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you are not to be afraid of him.
Above we see that you can successfully craft sentences where God tells you things he never did.
Likewise the Samaritans, who have a gerrymandered version of the torah, are said explicitly to fear the lord in the following verse:
2nd kings 17 41 So while these nations feared the LORD, they also served their idols; their children likewise and their grandchildren, as their fathers did, so they do to this day.
The above shows that these men believed in the lord, but the ignored his commandments. We see this is true in Zephaniah as well see below:
5“And those who bow down on the housetops to the host of heaven,
And those who bow down and swear to the LORD and yet swear by Milcom
So it seems therefore that even if you prove the Christian God exists you have still failed to prove Christianity which requires the belief that Jesus has risen as Christ.
Presup attempts to show that our God, the Christian God is the only God that can account for the preconditions of intelligibility therefore Christianity is true.
There are two problems with this method claim.
PROBLEM 1:
The very old testament saints, Noah, Abraham, etc couldn't have believed that the incarnated Christ was born in there day, so believing that "Jesus the carpenter has died on the cross in the past" cannot be essential to believing in the Christian God, otherwise Noah doesn't believe in our God.
However it is obvious that believing in Christianity requires you believe Jesus has come.
Thus it seems belief in our God does not require belief in the past resurrection of the messiah, it may be a requirement AFTER THE CHRIST ROSE but not for all people of all times.
PROBLEM 2:
The problem is its possible to refer to our God successfully but ascribing a false history to him.
Duet 18: 22 When the prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, and the thing does not happen or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you are not to be afraid of him.
Above we see that you can successfully craft sentences where God tells you things he never did.
Likewise the Samaritans, who have a gerrymandered version of the torah, are said explicitly to fear the lord in the following verse:
2nd kings 17 41 So while these nations feared the LORD, they also served their idols; their children likewise and their grandchildren, as their fathers did, so they do to this day.
The above shows that these men believed in the lord, but the ignored his commandments. We see this is true in Zephaniah as well see below:
5“And those who bow down on the housetops to the host of heaven,
And those who bow down and swear to the LORD and yet swear by Milcom
So it seems therefore that even if you prove the Christian God exists you have still failed to prove Christianity which requires the belief that Jesus has risen as Christ.