Maggie's Farm

There is a correspondence, I think, between Pascal's Wager and St. Anselm's thinking on this matter. I'll post the Wager here, but it was more his conclusion of the matter when answering a hypothetical skeptic who was compelled by his argument. The skeptic asked, but what if I can't believe. IIRC, the response was, act as though you believe and faith will follow.

The Wager:

"God is, or He is not"

A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.

According to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions.

You must wager. (It's not optional.)

Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.

Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.

(Ripped from the pages of Wikipedia).

I have not found a persuasive apologetic, and yet I proclaim faith. I would argue this is the faith-will-follow part. God is immanent and engaged in the lives of his redeemed by my reckoning of Scripture. God is the apologetic. If I read the bible correctly I Cor 2:4 makes this argument:

"My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power...."

What that means in the life of a believer is a matter worthy of consideration. And, O happy coincidence, I find this question to be informed by Dr. Bliss' post on Coincidence Studies. I am greatly amused, though your coincidence mileage may vary. At least though, I can argue this for the skeptic: It does not cost to consider.