One of the goals of Apologetics is to deal with the objections that people have regarding the existence of God. For the last several weeks, we have been exploring some of these objections and the arguments that address them. This week we look at the effectiveness of using arguments and evidence:
Unconvincing Arguments. Some object that theistic arguments persuade only those who already believe, and who do not need them. Therefore, they are useless. But, whether anyone is convinced by an argument depends on several factors. For one thing, even if the argument is sound, persuasiveness will depend in part on whether the argument is understood.
Once the mind understands the argument, giving assent to it is a matter of the will. No one is ever forced to believe in God simply because the mind understands that there is a God. Personal factors may lead a person to remain uncommitted to belief. Theistic arguments do not automatically convert unbelievers. But persons of good will who understand the argument ought to accept it as true. If they do not, it does not prove that the argument is wrong; rather, it shows their reluctance to accept it.
Conclusion. Many objections have been proposed against the proofs for the existence of God. They are usually based on a misunderstanding of the proofs. None succeed in falsifying the arguments. If they did they would be a proof that you cannot have a proof. That is a self-defeating argument in itself.
Geisler, N. L. (1999). In Baker encyclopedia of Christian apologetics (p. 294). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.