What one thing would disprove Christianity to you?

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

It seems inconsistent with reality.

Why? Because God and angels do not exist?

The Christian God and all the supernatural beings of the Christian religion are purported to exist by the ancient writers in the Bible. The Bible claims these things exist but that is only a claim. The existence of the Christian God and all his pals (and also the existence of the afterlife, sin, salvation, and heaven and hell) has yet to be supported by argumentation and/or evidence.

It seems inconsistent with what I know of reality. What I know of reality only comprises of animals, planets, galaxies, space, time, etc. In other words, nature. These are things I know exist. I can experience and verify it. Some things I can't experience but I can at least reasonably assume they exist based on theory.

When somebody says the angels of the Christian religion exist, that claim on the face of it seems very inconsistent with reality. I have never experienced such beings nor am I offered proof or at least some reasons why I should believe such beings exist.

So in essence, what I am saying is that the claims of the Bible seem very inconsistent with what I know about reality from everyday experience.

(Don't you dare misconstrue the above paragraphs' use of the pronoun "I" to mean that I'm talking about my own ignorance specifically. The above is applies to everyone.)

How do you know these things exist?

That gets into epistemology, which truly is a different subject altogether.

No, you're again twisting my words to avoid the question. The question wasn't about knowledge. It was asking you for some proof of the supernatural beings and things of the Christian religion.

How can you say that the Bible is externally consistent with reality if it contains things such as angels, etc., that you don't know exist?

I don't? You can legitimately make claims about what I do and do not know? Is that a two-way street?

If you know these things exist, then please present your proof and/or arguments for these things and specifically the beings and things of the Christian religion.

Until such things can be shown to exist or that it is reasonble to assume they exist you cannot say the Bible is consistent with reality.

Yes? According to what or whom?

If you say the Bible is consistent with reality, but have no evidence or reasons to believe all the supernatural stuff like angels and hell, etc, you can't honestly say it's consistent with reality because it might be the case that those things do not exist. Now, I'm sure you think you have good evidence and/or reasons to believe those things exist so if you could present those things please so this conversation could go somewhere.

What worldview do I have to presuppose the truth of in order to evaluate my own?

You do not have to assume naturalism/atheism to answer these questions (I'm assuming you thought I would say that you must assume naturalism/atheism). Just something simpler than what you believe now. I never created this thread with the intention of challenging theism/deism in general. You can assume a God exists if you like. This thread only targets Christianity.

And can any criterion for reasonableness be trusted from a worldview which presents such a blatant fallacy as if it were logically legitimate?

I'm not sure what fallacy you're talking about. I don't see one. I was only asking for a logical argument in the absence of empirical evidence.