Thank you for your response. They say that we don’t know that the world has to have a cause. Just because, they say, we see things around us need a cause doesn’t mean the whole thing needs one.
At that point, I don’t know what to say.
Frankly, that’s just bad logic.
Every reaction has an action that causes it. What we see around us require a cause. Those causes themselves require a cause. So on an so forth, all the way back to the very beginning of the universe; that one moment at the start of time which set all other causes and effects in motion. There is
nothing in the universe which can claim self-sufficiency (the lack of a cause). These people simply refusing to acknowledge the obvious because of the implications it would have for their lives. I apologize if this sounds harsh, but with this kind of willful ignorance, bluntness is frequently necessary.
Ask the person saying this to give you one example of a thing which has no cause.
If they try to circumvent the question by claiming that particles have been observed popping in an out of existence, remind them that those particles emerged in a low-level energy field, which is
something, which itself demands a cause. I’ve had a number of atheist friends try to claim that this phenomenon (I believe it was observed in the large Hadrian collider) proves that the universe could have come from nothing. What they fail to realize is that a low-level energy field (which is necessary for the phenomenon to occur) is still something, which means that something did not come from nothing.
They may try to claim that the low-level energy field doesn’t demand a cause, but again, this is just bad logic. They are applying an exception to the field which violates all the laws of physics and science, and which is itself an unprovable (i.e., faith-based) assumption. Frankly, people who believe that have more faith than any Catholic I’ve ever met, because at least what we believe as Catholics coincides with reality and everything we’ve observed about it.
There’s a good chance that, even when they haven’t been able to come up with an example (because one doesn’t exist), they will simply say that that doesn’t prove anything, or that science will figure it out eventually. The first response is simply irrational denial. The second response is, again, an entirely faith-based response with no actual backing to it. In either case, sadly, I doubt they will actually be convinced at this point. Fortunately for you, the point is not to convince, it is to plant the seeds which will allow the Holy Spirit to convict them of the Truth eventually. If they are genuine seekers of Truth, eventually they will find their way to God.
I encourage you to pick up
Answer Atheism. It covers this topic in more detail, and is an outstanding tool for anyone who regularly debates with Atheists, or who simply wishes to bolster their own knowledge about the reasons to believe. It’s simple enough for even the most novice apologist to read (i.m.o.), but has enough depth and substance for seasoned apologists to gain from.
In the end, I leave you with this quote from the Angelic Doctor, St. Thomas Aquinas:
To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.
