For me, its easier to convince them they’re agnostic, like everybody else.
It’s one thing to say you aren’t sure. It’s another to say there is no God.
Most of the time, I say, “So, prove God doesn’t exist. I’d like my Sunday morning’s back.”
They inevitably say, “You can’t prove a negative.”
To which I say, “I can prove you aren’t dead, so let’s dispense with that and let’s see your evidence that the Earth and everything in it could have come about as a great cosmic accident. Proceed.”
The idea of convincing them they’re agnostic is really ingenious for a number of reasons!
First, it is so easy since atheists main motivation for absolutely denying the existence of God is pride—the pride of being “awakened” to the “truth” when everybody else is mindlessly following God. This perceived intellectual superiority solidifies their faith of non belief. Yet when you simply explain why an agnostic is much more intellectually superior, since they practice very little faith at all, only relying on that which can be observed, then they will likely gradually lean towards weak atheism, and then agnosticism (moving towards theism) out of sheer need to feel intellectually superior to others (in this case, both atheists and theists.)
From this position of agnosticism, one can get the person to claim theism is possible, albeit unknowable. Simply admitting that theism is possibly correct is a huge step in helping them have faith in God.
Ultimately, this is the best tool to get them to admit the possibility that theism is correct. Thank you for sharing this!