In response to a series of questions asked of me by Matt Chewning
-------------------------------
Before answering your questions, I wanted to address your own views. The fact that you feel the need to have evidence for your claims is admirable. Blind faith has the unfortunate side effect of being both immune to discussion and impossible to defend. Given that you base your beliefs (at least in part) on a logical progression of facts, perhaps it would be enlightening to see you summarize your case.
With regards to your questions:
1. Are you Agnostic or an Agnostic Theist?
I am a strict Agnostic, meaning I take no position on the existence of any deity. My studies have focused around evidence for the possibility of the existence of a god in any form, and less on the specific revelation of god as defined by any particular religion. My father has been taking the position that the Christian tradition is compelling enough to make an ipso facto case for god's existence, so my discussions with him have focused around things like Jesus, the Bible, and all related Christian-specific beliefs. This is a much more difficult mountain to climb in my opinion, as he has to simultaneously demonstrate the existence of god at the same time he is differentiating Christianity from the countless other incorrect revelations of god. Since he (and you, from what you say) are convinced you have the answers though, it is completely understandable that you might be reluctant to posit from a position that ignores things you are certain of. In general though, I have typically found the atheistic arguments more compelling than the theistic ones. Whatever bias I might have in my Agnosticism is currently leaning toward the philosophy of Logical Empiricism, even though I am aware of the limited explanatory power of such a worldview.
2. What is your view on the bible and why?
I assume the question you really are asking is what I make of the proposed divine heritage of the Bible. This question is predicated on an answer to both god's existence and his nature. Without a framework that defines either of these traits, it is very difficult to presuppose how (if at all) god would choose to reveal himself. I would go so far as to say that any document claiming to be the infallible word of an omniscient being must be held to an enormously high standard. It isn't sufficient to say that the Bible meets standard historical criteria for truth (which I have read interesting arguments against this) and it isn't enough to say that the Bible has a high degree of historicity. In order for the the Bible to be what it is claimed to be, it needs to far exceed the standards of any document ever created. Any other claim would be inconsistent with the nature of an omniscient being. Given that you base your own belief in the Bible off of evidence, I am interested to see how overcame this rather large obstacle. From my own personal research, there seems to be legitimate reasons to doubt even some of the basic accuracy of the Bible, pushing the larger goal of proving it's divine nature out of reach. I will freely admit though, that I have not plumbed the depths of this subject. If you have insight into matters that I have not considered, I welcome them.
3. Who is Jesus and why is that your view?
If we're peeling back the onion of Christianity, Jesus is at the core. Jesus' divinity cannot be reasonably discussed until both god's existence and the divinity of the Bible are assumed. If you have already incorporated both of these assumptions into your worldview, then the claims made about Jesus should be an inevitable conclusion. If you could somehow prove that every claim about Jesus was true, then you could accept every other Christian tradition a priori. As I have mentioned earlier though, this is an almost insurmountable task. If you haven't first demonstrated that there is a god and that the Biblical account of Jesus can be accepted as historical fact (virgin birth, miracles, resurrection, and all), you really don't have much else to rely on as evidence. Anyone attempting to climb this mountain of improbability, is generally unaware of the assumptions they are making in the process.
4. If you were to have every single question that you have, answered, and it all leads to Christ being God, would you become a Christ Follower (Christian)? I understand that this is an impossible feat, but still a hypothetical question.
I follow the Socratic Method, which states that you "follow the evidence wherever it takes you". Even though my father has occasionally accused me otherwise, I am genuinely interested in this truth. I would like to present this question back to you though, as I think it points out a huge danger with the concept of faith. Is there any evidence, no matter how hypothetical, that would convince you that your god does not exist? Think about this before giving me a reflex answer. Human beings have a great capacity to adapt our perception of the world to match our beliefs. One only need to look at the myriad of mutually-exclusive world religions to see this fact. If your beliefs are correct, then there are billions of completely genuine Muslims in the world who are dead wrong. According to the Christian world view, they have deluded themselves and are following a false religion. Once you convince yourself that you've discovered the truth, you almost inevitably stop asking questions. More importantly, you start seeing the entire world through the lens of your belief structure. The entire apparatus becomes self-reinforcing to the point where it is almost impossible to tear down. My guess is that there is not a single piece of evidence that I can show a true believer to make them see that they are wrong. A true believer will find a way to explain away anything that does not fit what they know to be true. If you are luckily enough to be correct, then you have nothing to worry about. If you are one of the billions that choose wrong, then you have robbed yourself of the opportunity to know real truth.
Hopefully this gives you some insight as to where my thought process and research has taken me. I have posed some questions and made some assertions of my own here, so I welcome your perspective.
