we have far better historical evidence for the life of Jesus than we do for the crossing of the Rubicon by Caesar, a major event in the history of the Roman Empire, which nobody questions.

Rocks, chairs and cats also lack belief in God. Does that make them atheists?

As a scientist he found it intriguing that the emergence of life on our planet seems to disobey one of the fundamental laws of nature. The second law of thermodynamics states that, when left to their own devices, all closed systems (such as our universe) will move towards increasing ‘entropy’ – the scientific word for disorder.

Atheists also believe they have the truth. The Christian might equally respond ‘So out of the thousands of beliefs about the nature of the world, yours just happens to be right?’

we aren’t obliged to exhaustively investigate the truth or falsity of every religion if we find compelling reasons from the outset that Christianity is true.

apologetics alone can never provide the whole picture in our search for faith. In the end, nobody gets argued into the kingdom of God.

The moral argument only deals with the beliefs you personally hold. You don’t need to believe in the Bible to acknowledge that objective moral values exist, and require a moral lawgiver.

Maybe God isn’t interested in people simply believing in him. Instead, I think God is far more interested in people loving him and trusting him than merely believing in him.

Within Christian belief suffering is at least a mystery we can hope to make sense of. In atheism, it is simply meaningless.