There is more time than most people are willing to spend. They waste all day with their eyes glued to their phones, or playing video games, or watching sports. I don't do any of that, so I have plenty of time to read a lot, even opposing ideas so I know where they're coming from and I can refute them.
I read the entire Book of Mormon, even though I knew it was false. Then when the suit boys on the bicycles came by, I was able to refute them right from their own book. They gave up and left fairly quickly. Likewise, I have read works by Aleister Crowley and John Dee so I understand the evil they produced.
I see your point and definitely understand you. Not only reading to refute but also with an open mind, maybe my view was wrong? But there’s a definite limit no matter if all you do is eat, sleep, and read to how many books you can read. Is reading the Book of Mormon worth not reading something you KNOW will be enriching to you, just so you can set some Mormon straight? And couldn’t you also do that by reading 100 pages from Kingdom of the Cults, and still have time to read the book you actually wanted yo read?
I can set many more Mormons straight, if given the chance.
I have been reading since the 60s. That's time enough to read books I wanted to read, such as detective novels and science fiction, and books I needed to read, such as histories, religious works, sciences, and math. I have read thousands of books. I have a huge library at home. And I have many more years, hopefully, to read even more.
The blurb on that book you mentioned says "viewed through the lenses," which means someone else's ideas of what the books say. I'd rather read for myself and get it unfiltered by someone else's "lens."
There is more time than most people are willing to spend. They waste all day with their eyes glued to their phones, or playing video games, or watching sports. I don't do any of that, so I have plenty of time to read a lot, even opposing ideas so I know where they're coming from and I can refute them.
I read the entire Book of Mormon, even though I knew it was false. Then when the suit boys on the bicycles came by, I was able to refute them right from their own book. They gave up and left fairly quickly. Likewise, I have read works by Aleister Crowley and John Dee so I understand the evil they produced.
We can't fight what we don't know about.
I see your point and definitely understand you. Not only reading to refute but also with an open mind, maybe my view was wrong? But there’s a definite limit no matter if all you do is eat, sleep, and read to how many books you can read. Is reading the Book of Mormon worth not reading something you KNOW will be enriching to you, just so you can set some Mormon straight? And couldn’t you also do that by reading 100 pages from Kingdom of the Cults, and still have time to read the book you actually wanted yo read?
I can set many more Mormons straight, if given the chance.
I have been reading since the 60s. That's time enough to read books I wanted to read, such as detective novels and science fiction, and books I needed to read, such as histories, religious works, sciences, and math. I have read thousands of books. I have a huge library at home. And I have many more years, hopefully, to read even more.
The blurb on that book you mentioned says "viewed through the lenses," which means someone else's ideas of what the books say. I'd rather read for myself and get it unfiltered by someone else's "lens."
Once again you make excellent points. You’re right, it would just be regurgitating the summarizing authors POV.