Book of Acts: Pure Fantasy

[Angrboda]

If this was your point, then you've lost round one. The Christian can simply assert that we do not live in a naturalistic universe (perhaps cosmos would be a better term), and you're left proving a negative to prosecute your case. Good luck with that.

Well either it looks like a natural universe because it is
...or...
there's really all this sorcery, angelic activity faith healing and other such going on under the radar and somehow it's all been kept under wraps thanks to a monomaniacal god who likes to remain hidden.

Occam's Razor. I win.

See below.

If you can't demonstrate that God has no possible reason for the change in affairs, you're left with nothing but a silly look on your face.

Or I can say, "Burden of proof. I win."

You can, but doing so will just make you look like an idiot. I realize that many atheists have internalized the notion that the burden of proof is always on the theist, because that's what they always hear, but that's not the case. The burden of proof rests on the positive assertion, regardless of whether that person is a theist or an atheist. You're asserting something about the disparity between the miracles in Acts and the lack of miracles today - that makes you the one making the assertion, and thus you are volunteering to accept the burden of proof.

Anything else, imho, is either sophistry or stupidity.

"God is mysterious." QED. Cue the fat lady.

The Occam's Razor card trumps the "Mysterious and stuff" card.

Occam's razor doesn't trump jack shit. It's a heuristic, not a deductive or inductive principle. Occam's razor cannot bail you out of a jam, and if you think it can, then you don't understand the razor.