Using Circular Reasoning to prove that the God of the Christian Bible does exist...

Yes, you heard me right.

You can and should use circular reasoning when you are going about to prove that your God exists.

Evolutionists (atheists) do this all the time as well but fail in staying consistently within the boundaries of their supposed worldview. They believe that all things can be proven within the natural, physical realm and through what they call science.

The godless naturalist argues that origins explained by evolution is real science and that origins explained by creation is not.

Sad news for the godless naturalist. David Hume, one of the gods in the world of atheism (naturalism, etc) said that essentially science can not prove science based on the problem that he saw in inductive reasoning in that it was circular in nature and could not prove anything beyond what it assumes. I agree with him given the limits that ought to be recognized within the Atheist's worldview. They should not be able to rely on inductive reasoning but they do regardless of the boundaries that should be there in their worldview. They have no way of predicting outcomes but they pretend to do so by borrowing from the Christian Worldview.

And yet they continue to insist that they have the real science.

Christians have the means to prove beyond what we are assuming and then some...

"The validity of Scientific Laws were undermined by Hume when he contended that we have no rational basis for expecting the future to be like the past - to be the types of events (so that when one event happened, it's a type of event so that when you see it happening somewhere else) you can expect the same consequence from similar causation. Hume suggested that there was no rational basis for expecting the future to be like the past, in which case Science is based simply on convention or habits of thought." - Dr. Greg Bahsen
People accuse Christians all the time for using circular reasoning. And they are correct in doing so. But the Christian is not being logically fallacious in using God's word to prove that God is real and that He indeed does exist exactly as the Bible states.

Darius and Karin Viet stated it well when they responded to a Christian who was being accused of this very thing. They said that "God exists and has revealed Himself in His inerrant, authoritative Word—is the ultimate standard. Presupposing God exists to argue that God exists is a reasonable circular argument because without the God of the Bible, we have no basis for assuming the laws of logic and their properties, let alone absolute morality or the uniformity of nature."

Darius and Karin also stated that "everyone uses some degree of circular reasoning when defending his ultimate standard (though not everyone realizes this fact)" and that "Circular reasoning is a logical fallacy only when it is arbitrary, proving nothing beyond what it assumes."

For more see https://answersingenesis.org/apologetics/circular-reasoning/