Aditya Prathap is a Philosophy and Political Science student at Stanford University. Initially raised in a Hindu household, Aditya’s path led him from agnosticism to atheism during his early teenage years. However, a fascinating encounter prompted him to embark on a quest to challenge Christianity, leading him to meticulously examine the historical evidence surrounding the Resurrection. To his surprise, Aditya found himself convinced by the weight of that evidence. Driven by a relentless pursuit of truth, Aditya embraced Christianity and was baptized as a non-denominational Protestant during his high school years. As his spiritual journey unfolded, he discovered the profound truth of the Catholic faith, ultimately leading to his conversion and official initiation at the 2021 Easter Vigil. Aditya describes his faith journey in an exclusive interview with SW News:

Growing up in a Hindu family, how did your religious background influence your views on spirituality and the concept of God?

In the form of Hinduism that my family practiced, it seemed that the Hindu’s relationship with God was far more transactional than relational. Before going to school for a test, I was reminded to pray for good grades. Before significant events in my life, I was reminded to pray for favor. This notion of God as a ‘granter of wishes’ became so reflexive that, without fail, I would pray every night before bed the following prayer: “God, give me health, wealth, and happiness.”

Such a transactional relationship was not seen as a bug but a feature. The praises offered in poojas (Hindu religious ceremonies) and shlokas (prayers) were rarely uttered out of deep love for who God is, but merely for the worldly benefits He has provided. Of course, to my parents, who had grown up poor, happiness consisted in those worldly benefits. Nonetheless, I developed a vision of God as more a benevolent bureaucrat than the subsistence of Love Itself.

What aspects of atheism appealed to you initially, and what made you question or challenge those beliefs later on?

While I initially applauded religious skeptics for their emphasis on reason, I now realize that it is the emotional components that attracted me the most. I remember watching a video by a favorite political YouTuber of mine, in which he explained that he could not be Christian because a loving God would never allow such a horrifying terrorist attack like September 11th to happen. His argument seemed to exude compassion and internal anguish as if he deeply desired to believe in God but simply could not because of how evil God would have to be for allowing suffering.

I resonated with this intense emotion, but I resonated even more with the indignation toward religion’s therapeutic deceptions. To tell people that God loves mankind seemed to me as nothing short of a self-evident and outrageous lie­–one that seemed inconsiderate and inhumane given how deeply many people suffer.

In other words, although I conveyed my religious skepticism as ‘philosophical’ and ‘reasoned,’ it was merely a rationalization of the contempt I felt for God’s seeming indifference toward mankind. After all, as a Hindu, I only saw God as a provider of health, wealth, and happiness–how could I believe in God when so much of mankind suffers sickness, poverty, and depression?

It was only later, when I began to research the historical evidence for Christ’s Resurrection, that I realized that Christianity is true regardless of what my emotions told me. But even this realization did not move me to repentance, for I ignored Christianity for months after I came to realize its truth.

Yet, God had never abandoned me. He knew that my heart was hardened with anger toward His quiet indifference, so He revealed Himself to me as the lover of my soul. During one of the most difficult days of my life, I truly prayed for the first time while looking through random Bible verses. Psalm 138 (137 in the Douay-Rheims) came up. As I concluded the passage, “O despise not the work of thy hands”, I was overwhelmed with grace. I felt that I was being dissolved in peace Itself, yet completely lucid of my own sin. I felt insignificant in the awe-inspiring presence of the Lord of the universe, yet more significant than I had ever known, for Love Itself has extended His right hand to rescue me from the darkness.

Were there any intellectual or philosophical arguments that played a significant role in your decision to embrace Catholicism?

As I mentioned, it was the historical evidence for the Resurrection that convinced me of the truth of Christianity. In fact, I began reading about this subject in order to disprove Christianity to a friend. At the time, I was dating a Protestant girl whose family and friends disapproved of our relationship due to my being a non-Christian. They had tried several times to change my mind, but with every passing day, it seemed more and more obvious to me that Christianity was both philosophically idiotic and morally bigoted. So, as I grew annoyed with their efforts, I decided to research the supposed ‘evidence’ for Christianity in order to show them how deluded they were.

What I found shocked me. When considering the New Testament, Roman and Jewish writings, and historical criteria for ascertaining historical events, Jesus rising bodily from the dead was the only explanation of the data that did not make absurd and strained concessions.

Following my conversion of mind and the later conversion of heart, I was eventually baptized in the church that my few Christian friends attended: a non-denominational megachurch. For around a year, I was a Protestant with unequivocally negative attitudes toward Catholicism: I absorbed the views of those around me and the preachers I followed, leading me to believe that Catholics worshipped Mary, disregarded Scripture, and pursued salvation by works rather than faith in Jesus.

One day, I stumbled upon a video “Paul’s Baptismal Oopsie” from LutheranSatire, a YouTube channel that teaches Lutheran theology through comedy. The contents of the video confused me: apparently, Lutherans believed that St. Paul taught baptismal regeneration—that baptism is not merely an ‘outward symbol of inward faith’ (as I had been taught) but actually washed away original sin. I thought that only Catholics believed that.

So, I decided to consult the Scriptures. After several months of reading and researching, I was firmly convinced: the Scriptures teach baptismal regeneration. Acts 2:38, John 3:5, 1 Peter 3:21…the list goes on. After this, I discovered that the Lutherans also believed that the Lord’s Supper was the body and blood of the Lord. I also thought this was nonsense. Nonetheless, I went back to the Scriptures, and the evidence was clear: John 6, Acts 2:42, 1 Corinthians 11:27-30, and other verses bore witness to the truth of the Real Presence. Theologically, I was drawn to Lutheranism.

Yet, I felt uneasy with myself. I had thought that the Catholics were utterly foolish to believe in baptismal regeneration and the Real Presence. It turns out that I was the one in error. So, I decided to give Catholicism the benefit of the doubt and investigate its claims.

At some point, the critique of Sola Scriptura—the Protestant doctrine that Scripture is the sole doctrinal authority—emerged. To doubt Sola Scriptura seemed almost as absurd as doubting that my mother gave birth to me! As a Protestant, belief in Sola Scriptura was not taught—it was assumed as self-evidently true. I had never even heard of the Church Fathers.

Once I discovered that there was no authoritative Canon of Scripture for the first three centuries of the Church, I realized that the early Christians must have derived their doctrine from something other than the Scriptures alone. It was with this that my eyes were opened to the undeniable authority of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church in history and Scripture.

As a Stanford student, how has your religious journey influenced your academic pursuits or interactions with peers on campus?

When I converted to Protestantism, my parents were deeply offended. I felt that I had to really be certain that Christianity was true, for the sacrifice seemed great. Likewise, when I converted to Catholicism, my Protestant friends were shocked. As I learned more apologetics to respond to both of these groups, I developed a love for theology and philosophy that inspired me to study philosophy at the university.

As for my peers, Stanford hosts a very high proportion of STEM students. As a result, students are far more indifferent or apathetic than hostile toward Christianity. While this makes being a vocal Christian easier, it also makes evangelism more difficult because people simply don’t engage.

How has your newfound faith influenced your values, relationships, and overall sense of purpose in life?

My faith has given me true happiness. Throughout my life, I felt that in order to follow the truth, I must sacrifice everything—including joy and peace. Looking back, I now know that the Truth does not take away my peace but restores it tenfold. The joy of friendship with brethren in Christ reflects the joy of friendship with God—one that is everywhere and always filled with charity. Of course, I and others will make mistakes. But, as with the Prodigal Son, the forgiveness and reconciliation that inevitably follows is always sweeter than the bitterness is bitter. It truly is an ineffable relationship, one that I had never experienced prior to my baptism into Christ.

At the end of the day, the pressures of academic and personal life pale in comparison to the glory that will be revealed to us and the peace that has been bestowed upon us. After years of seeking the truth, I now see that it was the Truth who had been seeking me—how can a soul not leap with joy before the Mercy of God!