True believers

[ultimate777]

There is a book: X by Y, which few true believers can read. Of those few, few can sincerely try to understand it. Of those few, few can understand it. Of those few, few can refute it. Maybe the best thing for you to do is just take the easy way out and not even try. But maybe, just maybe, in ways I cannot articulate, if you don't take the easy way out you can accomplish many things worthwhile.

[note by moderator:
Poster did not share his own views on the non-Christian book, nor he quoted from the book. The thread is moreless only the discussion of the poster's attitude.

Names and links are being removed.]

[Byblos]

There is a book: X by Y, which few true believers can read. Of those few, few can sincerely try to understand it. Of those few, few can understand it. Of those few, few can refute it. Maybe the best thing for you to do is just take the easy way out and not even try. But maybe, just maybe, in ways I cannot articulate, if you don't take the easy way out you can accomplish many things worthwhile.

Have you read it?

[1over137]

I googled homepage for that book. It says:
"--- erased ---"

Mmmm. So, the right answer is "I do not know"? Oh, I see on the website he promotes agnosticism.

The site says: "--- erased ---"

Agnosticism as most intelligent and most responsible? My opinion is this:

[Byblos]

I googled homepage for that book. It says:
"--- erased---"

Mmmm. So, the right answer is "I do not know"? Oh, I see on the website he promotes agnosticism.

The site says: "--- erased ---"

Agnosticism as most intelligent and most responsible? My opinion is this:

So the most intelligent answer is the one that requires no thought process whatsoever? is spot on.

[1over137]

I was atheist, I was agnostic, now am Christian.

If Y knew God he would not claim such things. But this is of course.

[jlay]

Sure seems to know a lot for an ignoramus.

[SonofAletheia]

So the most intelligent answer is the one that requires no thought process whatsoever? is spot on.

Do you think agnosticism is never a legitimate position?

I would argue there are things that we should stay agnostic on. For example, say we have little to no evidence on some scientific idea. We should say 'we don't know and we hope one day we will' as apposed to just picking a side when there is no plausible reason to.

Would you agree?

[1over137]

So the most intelligent answer is the one that requires no thought process whatsoever? is spot on.

Do you think agnosticism is never a legitimate position?

I would argue there are things that we should stay agnostic on. For example, say we have little to no evidence on some scientific idea. We should say 'we don't know and we hope one day we will' as apposed to just picking a side when there is no plausible reason to.

Would you agree?

For Y, it may be true, but his claims are about all people and about things not just scientific.

[PaulSacramento]

There is a book: X by Y, which few true believers can read. Of those few, few can sincerely try to understand it. Of those few, few can understand it. Of those few, few can refute it. Maybe the best thing for you to do is just take the easy way out and not even try. But maybe, just maybe, in ways I cannot articulate, if you don't take the easy way out you can accomplish many things worthwhile.

We can never speak for anyone but ourselves so I never TRY to use terms like "true" believers because ONLY God and Christ KNOW who is or isn't.
Even when I didn't believe I was never a fan of the agnostic position, it seemed a bit like a "cop-out" to me.
That said I know quite a few agnostics and they are such simply because they do NOT KNOW and feel their is not enough evidence to go either way.
I think the issue is what IS evidence? and what evidence IS acceptable to them.
I believe in God and Christ and I also have my moments of doubts, my moments of pain and in those moments I have come to understand that what I doubt is NOT God but MY UNDERSTANDING of God.
I think that is, IMO, THE crucial thing.

[ultimate777]

There is a book: X by Y, which few true believers can read. Of those few, few can sincerely try to understand it. Of those few, few can understand it. Of those few, few can refute it. Maybe the best thing for you to do is just take the easy way out and not even try. But maybe, just maybe, in ways I cannot articulate, if you don't take the easy way out you can accomplish many things worthwhile.

Have you read it?

Yes.

[ultimate777]

I googled homepage for that book. It says:
"--- erased ---"

Mmmm. So, the right answer is "I do not know"? Oh, I see on the website he promotes agnosticism.

The site says: "--- erased ---"

Agnosticism as most intelligent and most responsible? My opinion is this:

That's a stroke of genius! Clearly you are a master of logic and rhetoric beyond compare. What more needs to be said? You have destroyed Y

[ultimate777]

There is a book: X by Y, which few true believers can read. Of those few, few can sincerely try to understand it. Of those few, few can understand it. Of those few, few can refute it. Maybe the best thing for you to do is just take the easy way out and not even try. But maybe, just maybe, in ways I cannot articulate, if you don't take the easy way out you can accomplish many things worthwhile.

We can never speak for anyone but ourselves so I never TRY to use terms like "true" believers because ONLY God and Christ KNOW who is or isn't.
Even when I didn't believe I was never a fan of the agnostic position, it seemed a bit like a "cop-out" to me.
That said I know quite a few agnostics and they are such simply because they do NOT KNOW and feel their is not enough evidence to go either way.
I think the issue is what IS evidence? and what evidence IS acceptable to them.
I believe in God and Christ and I also have my moments of doubts, my moments of pain and in those moments I have come to understand that what I doubt is NOT God but MY UNDERSTANDING of God.
I think that is, IMO, THE crucial thing.

A few minutes before the last Challenger launch I had a premonition it would explode upon liftoff, killing everone on board.
When it seemed to launch safely I was so relieved to be wrong I resolved to write a letter addressed to the whole crew
where I told them about my premonition and how relieved I was to be wrong. However I soon found out for all practical purposes I was right. I would be relieved to be wrong about the level of the criticism of Y would be here, but so far
I am not. The critics here have quite carefully stepped in his "trap". If you don't know what I mean I won't do your work for you. Read the book and hopefully you'll find out.

[RickD]

Ultimate777,

why are you promoting someone who claims he can prove Jesus is not the son of God? If someone is making a case for Agnosticism, he is making a case against God. why promote that?

[PaulSacramento]

There is a book: X by Y, which few true believers can read. Of those few, few can sincerely try to understand it. Of those few, few can understand it. Of those few, few can refute it. Maybe the best thing for you to do is just take the easy way out and not even try. But maybe, just maybe, in ways I cannot articulate, if you don't take the easy way out you can accomplish many things worthwhile.

We can never speak for anyone but ourselves so I never TRY to use terms like "true" believers because ONLY God and Christ KNOW who is or isn't.
Even when I didn't believe I was never a fan of the agnostic position, it seemed a bit like a "cop-out" to me.
That said I know quite a few agnostics and they are such simply because they do NOT KNOW and feel their is not enough evidence to go either way.
I think the issue is what IS evidence? and what evidence IS acceptable to them.
I believe in God and Christ and I also have my moments of doubts, my moments of pain and in those moments I have come to understand that what I doubt is NOT God but MY UNDERSTANDING of God.
I think that is, IMO, THE crucial thing.

A few minutes before the last Challenger launch I had a premonition it would explode upon liftoff, killing everone on board.
When it seemed to launch safely I was so relieved to be wrong I resolved to write a letter addressed to the whole crew
where I told them about my premonition and how relieved I was to be wrong. However I soon found out for all practical purposes I was right. I would be relieved to be wrong about the level of the criticism of Y would be here, but so far
I am not. The critics here have quite carefully stepped in his "trap". If you don't know what I mean I won't do your work for you. Read the book and hopefully you'll find out.

Do you find that Y makes a case for agnosticism in a way that no one else does and if so, could you explain?

[1over137]

I googled homepage for that book. It says:
"--- erased ---"

Mmmm. So, the right answer is "I do not know"? Oh, I see on the website he promotes agnosticism.

The site says: "--- erased ---"

Agnosticism as most intelligent and most responsible? My opinion is this:

That's a stroke of genius! Clearly you are a master of logic and rhetoric beyond compare. What more needs to be said? You have destroyed Y

I only expressed my opinion. Also, the word destroy is very unappropriate. I do not need to destroy people. I am not that kind of person.