Tell me how your believe is better than someone else's 'blind faith'?
Science is falsifiable - anything pushed forward by science has a way to be disproved built in (other wise it is not science). That's important because then you can update your worldview based on new evidence.
For the same to be true of religion - it must be falsifiable: it MUST have a way to disprove itself via experimentation... oh wait... the (Christian version) does...
Go do this test: "Kings 18:20-40": When you've soaked your bull in water and it doesn't magical catch fire by praying... I'll be waiting. (Or I'll be waiting video proof of the Christian god - that should be repeatable by many people... right?)
MAKE THE BULL CATCH FIRE WITH YOUR PRAYERS OR GTFO WITH YOUR NONSENSE
Just because that prayer lead to a miracle in the past, doesn't mean you can demand that God grants the same miracle again in different circumstances. That's trying to treat God as something like an appliance rather than an agent, and even an appliance would have instructions for when it would work.
If I may reverse the burden of proof, and be equally unreasonable, let me say that if you think that there is no afterlife, then you should go kill yourself. You're going to die at some point anyway, and this way you'll get your answer right away. It's a 100% falsifiable position, but unfortunately very few people who have done the necessary experiment have been able to communicate their findings to the scientific community afterwards.
>Just because that prayer lead to a miracle in the past, doesn't mean you can demand that God grants the same miracle again in different circumstances.
Why not? If a god has shown that they can intervene in the physical world we live in, why shouldn't we be able to test that?
This assumes the presupposition that god exists and is real which, as is the entire point of this thread, relies on a belief without evidence. You can't use the actions of a "god" as evidence for the existence of that god without evidence of those actions.
I'm not about to watch a 50 minute video to find out something that I already know. The entire premise of a biblical/textual god is based on the idea that there is no evidence and that's why "belief" and "faith" are required. Unless you have specific evidence, the initial statement stands.
You do realize that in verse 40 the unbelievers were slaughtered, right? Can I pick a miracle with less severe consequences?
Let's do Luke 5:4-8
Jesus tells fishermen to cast their nets and catch 2 boat loads of fish. Before you discount this miracle, I'll point out that Simon believed Jesus was God after this - but watching Jesus heal people is Ch 4 didn't convince him.
Great. Now for the miracle. It's at the nearest grocery store. In the fish department.
Science is falsifiable - anything pushed forward by science has a way to be disproved built in (other wise it is not science). That's important because then you can update your worldview based on new evidence.
For the same to be true of religion - it must be falsifiable: it MUST have a way to disprove itself via experimentation... oh wait... the (Christian version) does...
Go do this test: "Kings 18:20-40": When you've soaked your bull in water and it doesn't magical catch fire by praying... I'll be waiting. (Or I'll be waiting video proof of the Christian god - that should be repeatable by many people... right?)
MAKE THE BULL CATCH FIRE WITH YOUR PRAYERS OR GTFO WITH YOUR NONSENSE