Using logical arguments to convert

[Renarax]

Hey guys
So a while ago when I was visiting a non-religious forum I was struck with an idea (no don’t go there) to convert based on their arguments there. Of course it didn’t work because they were too many and had the internet at their fingertips.

But if you know one personally in real life, take a walk or something (away from the internet) and if he’s open maybe you could talk about it.

1. ask him if he thinks we’re a mistake. If he does, no point in going further. But if he doesn’t, go ahead
2. ask him if he thinks the universe is ordered. Normally any smart atheist will say the universe is chaotic too. Good. Use that chaos against him.

3)then ask him why the universe is the way it is now. He’ll say (or if he doesn’t you say) that this was the only way the universe was possible to be.

1. now he’s caught. Explain to him -through logic- that he’s contradicting his earlier statement. The universe is not ordered. It is chaotic. Therefore after the universe formed, there was a chance of chaos, which itself is random. So being random, there are infinite possibilities of how the universe would’ve ended up. Why did we end up being created? Was it only through luck that out of all possible outcomes we received this one and ended up being born?

That would be luck. And a belief in god is more justifiable than belief in luck

 

[schaeffer]

With due respect. I don’t think any of those would “work”.

Internet or not at their disposal.

I think the best approach truly is to share what you believe, why and how it transforms your life and soul.

Share the good news.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Setting aside the actual argument, I’m curious as to why you would insist that your target not have access to the internet when presenting the argument.

I see a few possibilities, and there are likely several more:

1. The person is swayed by your argument, but when he or she researches it later sees the many flaws in it.
2. The person is not comfortable discussing the matter without the ability to investigate the matter at that moment, and thus would not be receptive to the argument.
3. The person is already knowledgeable about the flaws in the argument and makes note of the fact that you specifically waited for a moment away from all resources that would strike down the argument.

I don’t want to discuss the argument you presented here, as that’s really more for the Apologetics section. I just want to say that if any point to be made requires not allowing the party you present it to be able to research what others say about it, then it’s not a point worth making. This is true not only for religious viewpoints, but any viewpoint.