This claim--that all seekers find--is testable by experience, by experiment. If your are an honest scientist, here is a way to find out whether Christianity is true or not. Perform the relevant experiment. To test the hypothesis that someone is behind the door, knock. To test the Christian hypothesis that Christ is behind the door, knock... pray the prayer of the skeptic:"Scientifically fair"? I like that phrase.God, I don't know whether you even exist. I'm a skeptic. I doubt. I think you may be only a myth. But I'm not certain (at least when I'm completely honest with myself). So if you do exist, and if you really did promise to reward all seekers, you must be hearing me now. So I hearby declare myself a seeker, a seeker of the truth, whatever it is and wherever it is. I want to know the truth and live the truth. If you are the truth, please help me.If Christianity is true, he will. Such a prayer constitutes a scientifically fair test of the Christian "hypothesis"--that is, if you do not put unfair restrictions on God, like demanding a miracle (your way, not his) or certainty by tomorrow (your time, not his).
You see, I've heard such requests before. Steven Carr got one in his resurrection debate. I think he made a mistake by not taking them up on it. I have taken people up on such request, even though I didn't expect it to work. Rather, if God exists, I'd like to know about it. It's been at least eight months since I first did so, no effect so far. I bring it up now because in any "scientifically fair test," it is supposed to be possible to get both a negative and a positive result. This means unanswered skeptic's prayers should constitute evidence against Christianity.
When looking at my experience, it may be protested that I did not expect it to work, and in that case I am not a fair test. I should point out that because the prayer is not meant to be prayed by people who have a strong belief in Christianity, it must work for people who do not have a strong expectation that it will work.
Even so, there are examples of people for whom none of this works in spite of the fact that they might theoretically be seen as better candidates. A possible example is IIDB member Sol Invicitus who recently posted about his experiences being proselytized. Here's a snippet of the conversation:
OW: Well I apologize if we're not smart enough to explain it to you. I think if you pray god will reveal himself to you.An even clearer example is from Paul Doland's response to William Lane Craig on personal experience of God (scroll down to bottom). That would seem to be a fairly clear negative result on this "scientifically fair test" of Christianity
Me: But I prayed for YEARS. How long do I have to wait for an answer. Come on. How long? (said playfully)
Of course I don't expect any Christian to be convinced by this data. Rather, I suspect that I, Sol, and Paul will get the Susan Blackmore treatment. I'm pretty sure I mentioned this not to long ago, but Blackmore is a former parapsychologist who never found any evidence for psychic phenomenon and in response was told that she must be a "psi-inhibitory experimenter." Similarly, Christians will assume that skeptics whose prayers aren't answered must have something wrong with them. This, though, makes Christianity look rather like a pseudoscience.
Perhaps, though, this is not reason to say that Christianity is false. Martin Gardner once said that failed psi experiments are not enough for him to say that psi does not exist, but "I will say that the evidence is feeble." Perhaps that is the proper attitude regarding religious experience.
Anyway, this proposed experiment is much easier to do than most psi experiments, so we needn't give up like Dr. Blackmore. To all my readers: if you can agree with the statement "If God exists, I would like to know about it," please follow Kreeft and Tacelli's instructions, and leave a comment saying so. Promise to inform me if you get any results.