How do I convince an Atheist that God exists?

[tonyrey]

Well, I suppose one could be positive that Zeus does not exist. But that’s probably not what you meant.

Being positive that Zeus does not exist implies that you have a superior explanation.

The first step to convincing me at least would be to define your God and lay out in unambiguous terms exactly what it is you are trying to prove the existence of.

One thing at a time! The Creator of all that exists.

 

[stevicus]

A prideful mind abhors simplicity, if creating this orderly and awe-inspiring universe out of naught is indeed simple

It seems a lot simpler in our own three-dimensional existence, even if we can perceive the fourth dimension of duration/time. Trying to contemplate all the different choices one can make in one’s life and imagining all the different outcomes can be mind-boggling enough, but try to do that along with all the other billions of people in the world and all the different choices they can make and being able to see how they all clash together in a single instant.

 

[RainbowNight]

Or say that, strange but true, the material world, or simply matter, has always existed, which is kind of puzzling except to many atheists, then state as seriously as you can that a cosmic explosion that nothing/no-one caused but happened out of its own volition, I guess, brought this orderly universe out of total chaos. An atheist’s worldview is that of someone who finds a watch on the floor and thinks all the tiny parts came together over a long period of time, and that it’s pure coincidence that it’s working. That’s very intellectually advanced, dontcha think? That would be the intellectual elite. I’ve a question for you RainbowNight and since you quote André Gide, I assume you must be thoughtful and wise: I don’t like dogs, never have, never will, I’m absolutely indifferent to them, now there’s this forum that I heard about for people who like dogs or want to discuss things that have to do with dogs, should I join?.

You consider the idea that something came from nothing as non acceptable, but you believe in the existence of a god which you admit that he is the origin of everything?
In this case what made your god different from the universe, since both subjects of our discussion came from nothing (or God or the universe)?
In a question, who made God and how can you accept that he came from nothing, and he’s the origin?
A simple answer would be by an atheist: “at least the universe is a part of material, sense measured world I live in, while I can’t see this applied to God(s), which could possibly be a phenomenon made by old civilizations to explain our existence.”
Again being part of this material world is a not the only reason for “us” to not believe.

Concerning the question, you have the right to make your own choices, to join or not.
In another thought, I believe that our opinions, feelings and beliefs are able for changes, it’s good to keep the door open to different ideas offered by other people, if you are interested, you can join the group and try to understand the reasons of these people for loving dogs, it will help you to connect with them, understand more what they have to say, respect them, build a good communication and mutual understanding. Who knows, after having good experiences with them and their loyal dogs you might accept their reasons and turn into a dog-lover. Everything is possible.

 

[cerad2]

One thing at a time! The Creator of all that exists.

And at this point I kind of lose interest. Science cannot currently describe what was going on before the big bang therefore a god did it. Boring.

So lets assume that some intelligence did in fact kick start our universe. Demonstrate that this intelligence is in fact the Catholic God.

 

[DPMartin]

You consider the idea that something came from nothing as non acceptable, but you believe in the existence of a god which you admit that he is the origin of everything?
In this case what made your god different from the universe, since both subjects of our discussion came from nothing (or God or the universe)?
In a question, who made God and how can you accept that he came from nothing, and he’s the origin?
A simple answer would be by an atheist: “at least the universe is a part of material, sense measured world I live in, while I can’t see this applied to God(s), which could possibly be a phenomenon made by old civilizations to explain our existence.”
Again being part of this material world is a not the only reason for “us” to not believe.

RainbowNight

Any honest scientist will agree that order does not come from chaos, and nothing comes for nothing. Therefore, how can there be order without the presence of order? It’s my understanding that the science community used to assume that the universe always was, but now the “Big Bang” theory has disproved that (at least as far as the science community is concerned) therefore what started the universe to come into being? Unless there is being before that. (Hope I said that right). In the context of the “Big Bang”, being would have to be before the “Big Bang” in order to cause something else to be.

Also, how can life be, without a source of life? Life does not come from that which has no life. No more then light comes from darkness.

 

[Prophesy]

Well, I suppose one could be positive that Zeus does not exist. But that’s probably not what you meant.

The first step to convincing me at least would be to define your God and lay out in unambiguous terms exactly what it is you are trying to prove the existence of.

I’m tempted to start all greetings with “Hey, did you know Zeus isn’t real? Well let me tell you who is…”

In terms of a debate, I think it’s best to lay down a philosophical groundwork, discuss why there is something rather than nothing, discuss if the universe was created or not, discuss morality and continue on that path from general to specific.

-Prophesy

 

[estesbob]

You cant. You pray for them, you teach them the faith by example and then leave it up to the Holy Sprit

 

[cerad2]

I’m tempted to start all greetings with “Hey, did you know Zeus isn’t real? Well let me tell you who is…”

In terms of a debate, I think it’s best to lay down a philosophical groundwork, discuss why there is something rather than nothing, discuss if the universe was created or not, discuss morality and continue on that path from general to specific.

-Prophesy

I for one am perfectly will to assume:

1. There is something as opposed to nothing, not really concerned why but I’ll accept whatever reason you might care to put forth for now.
2. Some intelligence created our universe roughly 13 billion years ago.

So what is the next step from general to specific? Morality?

 

[Prophesy]

I for one am perfectly will to assume:

1. There is something as opposed to nothing, not really concerned why but I’ll accept whatever reason you might care to put forth for now.
2. Some intelligence created our universe roughly 13 billion years ago.

So what is the next step from general to specific? Morality?

If you’ve read C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity, I like how he goes. Instead of the philosophical Creator argument, he asserts that morality exists through a few arguments and then starts talking about the nature of morality, a “law of human nature”, whether the author of the law is good, etc. It’s actually a really good read in my opinion.

-Prophesy

 

[Robertanthony]

You consider the idea that something came from nothing as non acceptable, but you believe in the existence of a god which you admit that he is the origin of everything?
In this case what made your god different from the universe, since both subjects of our discussion came from nothing (or God or the universe)?
.

Back to the watch problem, anyone who hasn’t been poisoned by atheist philosophers/thinkers/authors and who doesn’t lay offerings on the altar of rationalism who sees the watch will know there’s bound to be someone who made that watch, ludicrous ideas of all the little gears and pieces of equipment getting together through chance or a cosmic explosion will be discarded as ludicrous. As mind-boggling as it is to the human mind/reason, God has always existed and was never created. You can’t go back to an earlier and earlier cause ad infinitum, there has to be a first cause to everything. Science is about conjectures, and the conjectures about the origin of the universe are basically anything but God. Bring on alternate universes, parallel worlds, big bang, big crunch, everything evolving from a single cell, thinking that the tilapia you’re eating is one of your remote ancestors etc. A true rationalist who won’t accept anything that he can’t make sense of will discard God/divinity as worthy of naive kindergarten kids but will fall for follies such as the big bang theory (has the “big bang hypothesis” been promoted to the rank of a theory or is it inappropriately called a theory?) Is the idea of an etenal being who is the first cause of everything more plausible than the idea that matter has always existed and every diverse element magically merged to form this universe? Why would anything at all (smallest particles, bacteria, atoms, protons etc.) exist if there was not someone to create it? The “anything but God” bias leads to an impasse.

 

[RainbowNight]

RainbowNight

Any honest scientist will agree that order does not come from chaos, and nothing comes for nothing. Therefore, how can there be order without the presence of order? It’s my understanding that the science community used to assume that the universe always was, but now the “Big Bang” theory has disproved that (at least as far as the science community is concerned) therefore what started the universe to come into being? Unless there is being before that. (Hope I said that right). In the context of the “Big Bang”, being would have to be before the “Big Bang” in order to cause something else to be.

Also, how can life be, without a source of life? Life does not come from that which has no life. No more then light comes from darkness.

Back to the watch problem, anyone who hasn’t been poisoned by atheist philosophers/thinkers/authors and who doesn’t lay offerings on the altar of rationalism who sees the watch will know there’s bound to be someone who made that watch, ludicrous ideas of all the little gears and pieces of equipment getting together through chance or a cosmic explosion will be discarded as ludicrous. As mind-boggling as it is to the human mind/reason, God has always existed and was never created. You can’t go back to an earlier and earlier cause ad infinitum, there has to be a first cause to everything. Science is about conjectures, and the conjectures about the origin of the universe are basically anything but God. Bring on alternate universes, parallel worlds, big bang, big crunch, everything evolving from a single cell, thinking that the tilapia you’re eating is one of your remote ancestors etc. A true rationalist who won’t accept anything that he can’t make sense of will discard God/divinity as worthy of naive kindergarten kids but will fall for follies such as the big bang theory (has the “big bang hypothesis” been promoted to the rank of a theory or is it inappropriately called a theory?) Is the idea of an etenal being who is the first cause of everything more plausible than the idea that matter has always existed and every diverse element magically merged to form this universe? Why would anything at all (smallest particles, bacteria, atoms, protons etc.) exist if there was not someone to create it? The “anything but God” bias leads to an impasse.

Still no answer to the question, who made God, how was he formed, how can he be the origin? how he came from nothing?
You are the ones who are saying it’s impossible for something to come from nothing, so how God (something), came from nothing?
The universe is a part of the material world we live in, there is no doubt for it’s existence, while God(s)…there is lot’s of doubts for many people to be true.

 

[tonyrey]

And at this point I kind of lose interest. Science cannot currently describe what was going on before the big bang therefore a god did it. Boring.

You prefer to close your mind to any possibility but scientific explanation> You obviously have great faith that science will ultimately explain everything even though science cannot even explain itself or the mind that created it. No wonder you lose interest!

So lets assume that some intelligence did in fact kick start our universe. Demonstrate that this intelligence is in fact the Catholic God.

 

[Robertanthony]

Still no answer to the question, who made God, **how was he formed, how can he be the origin? how he came from nothing? **You are the ones who are saying it’s impossible for something to come from nothing, so how God (something), came from nothing?
The universe is a part of the material world we live in, there is no doubt for it’s existence, while God(s)…there is lot’s of doubts for many people to be true.

The basic bias that you live by (perhaps unconsciously) is : if I can’t wrap my mind around it, it doesn’t exist. If you can leave aside the difficulty you have with the fact that God is not a creature and that there was never a “time” when he was not (even before there was light or matter), do you think that God as the 1st cause and creator of everything makes more sense than any theory/hypothesis you’ve ever heard on the origins of things?

 

[cerad2]

If you’ve read C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity, I like how he goes. Instead of the philosophical Creator argument, he asserts that morality exists through a few arguments and then starts talking about the nature of morality, a “law of human nature”, whether the author of the law is good, etc. It’s actually a really good read in my opinion.

-Prophesy

Read it many years ago and was not overly impressed. Just skimmed the first part again.

For example:

There are two reasons for saying it belongs to the same class as mathematics. The first is, as I said in the first chapter, that though there are differences between the moral ideas of one time or country and those of another, the differences are not really very great—not nearly so great as most people imagine—and you can recognise the same law running through them all: whereas mere conventions, like the rule of the road or the kind of clothes people wear, may differ to any extent. The other reason
is this.

Moral law in the same class as mathematics? No real difference in morality across the ages? Cultures that embraced slavery are morally the same of those who reject it? Nope. Not convincing at all.

 

[Ben_F]

I used to try to evangelize by approaching others. I don´t anymore. I evangelize by example. If someone approaches me about why I believe the way I do, then, I just ask him or her if they are serious, or just want to debate. If they are serious, then I tell them to read the Catechism. That´s what Catholics believe. They can take it or leave it. I do pray for them. I´m grateful that I know the truth. This is the way I believe Jesus wants me to evangelize. God bless all you athiest out there. One thing is for sure. It´s got to be the most important decision that we humans must make in our lifetime.

 

[RainbowNight]

The basic bias that you live by (perhaps unconsciously) is : if I can’t wrap my mind around it, it doesn’t exist. If you can leave aside the difficulty you have with the fact that God is not a creature and that there was never a “time” when he was not (even before there was light or matter), do you think that God as the 1st cause and creator of everything makes more sense than any theory/hypothesis you’ve ever heard on the origins of things?

You are analyzing what I live by without knowing my thoughts, it isn’t about something that I don’t want to wrap my mind about , I always question things, actually it’s the contrary, many tend to run away from all the mysterious in the world, shut off their minds, and simply say God did it… So I want to now the origin of God, my question was not necessary about time.

 

[bethanysamuel]

Hey everyone. I am having a discussion with an Atheist about the existence of God. I am trying to convince him that God exists but I have no idea how to do that. Can anyone help me?

You have my sympathies- I found myself in a similar position today, except he wasn’t an Atheist, he was a “Christian who studies the bible”, and basically had Protestanty ideas. Fair enough, i respect that. The thing is, he was a stranger and the conversation just developed out of nowhere; i didn’t see it coming, and by the time it was full-blown,i just felt i couldn’t walk away without defending Jesus, or rather, Jesus’ teachings.

I felt flustered but remained calm and tried to politely counter-quote him on Scripture, but it wasn’t easy. I told him i respected his beliefs etc. even though he was trying to convince me that Mary wasn’t the Mother of God.

My point is that i know how you feel about evangelizing. its not so much about proving you’re right, or even convincing, but feeling called by God to spread the word and not retain precious Good News.

We parted on good terms, but i felt quite drained afterwards coz he was coming at me hard with quotes, but i guess he just felt as passionately about his beliefs as i do mine.

 

[tonyrey]

So I want to know the origin of God, my question was not necessary about time.

If you were told the origin of A and were told B
you would want to know the origin of B.
If you were told the origin of B and were told C
you would want to know the origin of C… ad infinitum!

An infinite regress is generally considered an unreasonable explanation - or an absence of explanation.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Holly

Hey everyone. I am having a discussion with an Atheist about the existence of God. I am trying to convince him that God exists but I have no idea how to do that. Can anyone help me?

If it was possible to convince an atheist logically that God exists, I think the way would have been found by now.

I think it more likely that the atheist can only convince himself that God exists. But he won’t do it by a purely analytical proof. He will do it by opening himself up first to the possibility, then to the viability, then to the probability, and finally to the certainty.

How he will open himself up is anybody’s guess. My own guess is that it generally is easiest for the atheist to contemplate the possibility of God as he approaches the nearness of his own demise. This is how it happened for Jean Paul Sartre and Antony Flew, world famous atheists who surprised everyone (including themselves) by turning to God near the end. I suspect many other world famous atheists have done as much, though it was never known or publicly broadcast by those in the know.

 

[samiam1611]

Hey everyone. I am having a discussion with an Atheist about the existence of God. I am trying to convince him that God exists but I have no idea how to do that. Can anyone help me?

There was a thread similar to your question awhile back that you might be interested in reading. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=546656

My advice is to read up on atheism. Find out the common reasons people do not believe God exists. Also ask the person you are trying to convert why they don’t believe God exists. Really listen and hear them out - and be prepared with counter-arguments. Avoid sounding preachy. Be more like here’s why you’re wrong…as opposed to here’s why I’m right.
I would think trying to convince an atheist God exists would be futile. But there’s always exceptions out there, isn’t there?