The Reasons to Believe in Yahweh

[John V]

Better evidence, or stronger claims? I once heard (read) someone claiming that Muhammad's excuse for not performing miracles was weak, therefore Christianity has more evidence. When, in fact, neither can be proven to have done what they did, miracle or not. Does it really boil down to which one has more miracle claims, and which has more made up stories about it?

No, it doesn't boil down to that, but that's certainly a factor. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This challenge was put forth to Muhammed, and he admitted he had no extraordinary evidence.

Also, this is argued from a perspective that assumes one religion must be right, and that atheism is not a viable option. If it weren't, then the arguement wouldn't be made at all.

It's made from the perspective the OP specified.

---

In short, the evidence for Christianity is better than for other religions, as we know more about its prophets.

Please confirm I am not included, because I don't want to scratch my eyes out...!

Fair enough. Most internet atheists these days don't know jack. I should have said that more knowledge is available for some religions' prophets than for others.

---

Regarding evidence, a dictionary definition is:

ground for belief or disbelief; data on which to base proof or to establish truth or falsehood

The Bible doesn't fit the second definition, as "establish" is too strong a word. However, it does fit the first. There are people who have read the Bible and found it acceptable grounds for belief in the events described within it. It's not conclusive, and you're free not to believe. However, you don't get to proclaim what is and isn't evidence for all people.