Suppose you have been brought up in a deep religious home; you have been told by your parents to believe in god, go to mosque, pray and fast but you have never had to learn to justify or argue for your beliefs. You know that, although there are people who would disagree with you, your belief is a righteous and necessary one, but you have never had to explain this to anyone, nor have tried to explain it to yourself.
But now, you are in the real world. You enter college, travel, and such. You are confronted by fellow friends, colleagues (or your bf/gf lol), who openly skeptical about religion. Others accept very different doctrines and beliefs, and vociferously defend these. Your first reactions may be almost physical; you feel weak, flushed, and anxious. You refuse to listen, and if you respond at all, it is with a tinge of hysteria. You may get into fights as well as arguments. You feel as if some foundation of your life, one of its main supports, is slipping away.
Now here is the turning point. You thought you got it all sorted out; you begin openly bash atheists, naively. You lose.You give yourself enough distance so that you will consider arguments about religion in just the same way you would consider arguments about some scientific or political dispute. Are the opposing arguments persuasive? Are their reasons good reasons? You ask yourself why you believe what you believe? You may come up with the answer that you were conditioned by your parents and by the society in general. Consequently, you realize you are not as 'true' as you thought you were, you naively murtad. You may perhaps for a lifetime, question or reject the ideas you had once 'naturally' accepted, which perhaps be 'the right path', but since you are so naive, you unable to justify your beliefs.
Do you want this to happen to you? If no, start hitting the books. Learn formal logic (mantiq, lihat quote Ibn. Rushd kat bawah), learn philosophy, and learn the opposing views. Ibn. Sina, Ibn. Rushd yang korang dok sebut-sebut, dok puji-puji dalam tv, scholars yang kita agong-agong kan kehebatannya, try baca diorang punya kerja2 (kalau tak pandai macam aku, baca la dengan commentaries). Arguing with atheists, proving the existence of god, and such may raises an immediate epistemological problems. If you never even heard the word 'epistemology', do you think you could argue with them? Read and read and read.
Mengenai reasoning mengenai tuhan, Ibn. Rushd dalam hal ni apa dia kata?
"But it is preferable and even necessary for anyone, who wants to understand God the Exalted and the other beings demonstratively, to have first understood the kinds of demonstration and their conditions [of validity], and in what respects demonstrative reasoning differs from dialectical, rhetorical, and fallacious reasoning. But this is not possible unless he has previously learned what reasoning as such is, and how many kinds it has, and which of them are valid and which invalid. The in turn is not possible unless he has previously learned the parts of reasoning, of which it is composed, i.e. the premises and their kinds" [Ibn. Rushd, "On the Philosophic Study of God"] [Ref: Introducing Philosophy, Oxford University Press]
I rest my case.