True believers

[1over137]

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.

Sounds like you are hiding. Tell us what caught your interest from that book. I have for-me-somebetter stuff to read now.

[1over137]

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.

Tell us why 'few true believers can read'.
Tell us why 'few can sincerely try to understand it'.

Tell us please, if for you it was really worthwhile to read it and why. And last question: do you consider yourself to belong to the few of the few?

[ultimate777]

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?

I'm not promoting it, I'm just telling you all its out there, and its existence should be recognized. What I really hope is someone can make a case against it that is not just satisfactory to the rest of the world but is satisfactory to me. In fact to be told that its satisfactory to others, therefore it should be satisfactory to me will be most unfelpful. If you want to make a hostile act against me, you could do worse Any hair splitting might even be worse. I'm not as good at dealing with hair splitting as some

[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.

Sounds like you are hiding. Tell us what caught your interest from that book. I have for-me-somebetter stuff to read now.

Hiding, what's that about?

I am interested in Y. I think he has done more for the welfare of the human race and to thwart the devil than many of his detractors here can even dream about. I met him once.

A couple of weeks ago I was listening to an old Art Bell "Coast to Coast" radio show. Y was on it promoting his book about his dismay at the O.J. Simpson verdict. On the internet I went to my public library's web page to see about getting that book. I found out about the agnosic book there.

[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.

Tell us why 'few true believers can read'.
Tell us why 'few can sincerely try to understand it'.

Because they probably cannot even try to sincerely understand if it goes against their beliefs.

Tell us please, if for you it was really worthwhile to read it and why.

The verdict is still out.

And last question: do you consider yourself to belong to the few of the few?

Not now, maybe if people can handle this stuff to my satisfaction, which I would welcome.


True believer is a term which means one is a strong believer in something. Its about the believer not what's believed in. If you are a strong believer in Communism or Fascism you re a true believer.

[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.

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

Read the book if you really want to know. I cannot speak for him, because I am bad at that sort of thing.

[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

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.

As Y might say, some things really deserve sarcasm.

[RickD]

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?

Read the book if you really want to know. I cannot speak for him, because I am bad at that sort of thing.

If you don't want to talk about the book, what's the purpose of this thread?

[PaulSacramento]

There is a book: Divinity of Doubt: The God Question by Vincent Bugliosi, 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 Bugliosi 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 Bulgosi makes a case for agnosticism in a way that no one else does and if so, could you explain?

Read the book if you really want to know. I cannot speak for him, because I am bad at that sort of thing.

Typically when a person suggest to others to read a book, they tend to be able to explain why they ( the others) should invest their time in reading it.
Let me put it this way:

I have two amazing girls and a wonderful wife and very limited time, what in THIS BOOK deserves that they take "second place" to it with my limited time?

[1over137]

Ultimite777,

First of all, I want to say to you that sarcasm is not really the best, as may be accordning to Bugliosi. Even Bible speaks about it. See http://www.openbible.info/topics/sarcasm.

You started this thread saying, hey, there is a book, many believers could not sincerely read, etc. I could read it and sincerely try to understand Bugliosi's mind. But I do not have time. Well, I will search some of his ideas on the net, though.
Anyway, I suppose you have read that book, so we all expected that you say some Bugliosi's ideas. But we haven't seen them yet. Or, you just wanted to make a post that such book exists and hoped that someone has read it and would express his opinions? If so, why you did not tell in the initial post? We are confused about what your point was?

You have to anticipate that when you say A, esp. present non-Christian book, we would like to hear also B. This is Christian forum, so do not expect that we will just leave here publicity for such book and leave it. NO!

I hope you understand.

[1over137]

Here is one opinion: http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.sk/2011/07/ ... ty-of.html

[RickD]

Oh great! Now we're reviewing reviews.

[ultimate777]

I think I have already talked a lot about it and its time for you all to do some research about it or admit you are unable or unwilling to do so. I top post because I am getting error messages supposedly about too many quotes [fixed by admin]

There is a book: Divinity of Doubt: The God Question by Vincent Bugliosi, 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 Bugliosi 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 Bulgosi makes a case for agnosticism in a way that no one else does and if so, could you explain?

Read the book if you really want to know. I cannot speak for him, because I am bad at that sort of thing.

If you don't want to talk about the book, what's the purpose of this thread?

[ultimate777]

Read the book if you really want to know. I cannot speak for him, because I am bad at that sort of thing.

Typically when a person suggest to others to read a book, they tend to be able to explain why they ( the others) should invest their time in reading it.
Let me put it this way:

I have two amazing girls and a wonderful wife and very limited time, what in THIS BOOK deserves that they take "second place" to it with my limited time?

I hope this is what you need.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-sch ... 47230.html

[B. W.]

Read the book if you really want to know. I cannot speak for him, because I am bad at that sort of thing.

Typically when a person suggest to others to read a book, they tend to be able to explain why they ( the others) should invest their time in reading it.
Let me put it this way:

I have two amazing girls and a wonderful wife and very limited time, what in THIS BOOK deserves that they take "second place" to it with my limited time?

I hope this is what you need.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-sch ... 47230.html

In regard to article - that is what bad doctrine does to a person...