How would you answer an agnostic who says that God isn’t relevant?

This text is from a transcript of a talk by David Gooding, entitled ‘Finding Truth in our Modern Age’..

I should want to say things like I have said tonight to try and show that God is relevant all the way down the line to our basic understanding of how we came to be. If the agnostic thinks that God isn't relevant because science has shown that the universe came into existence without God and without a designer, I should argue that such a view is scientifically untenable.

And then I should raise the whole question of the purpose of life and life's values. Even an agnostic has got to face the question of where our values are founded. If God is not relevant to it, I shall want to know what his values are based on, and such like things.

Regarding it not being relevant, I should ask if, perhaps, he hasn't thought too much about it. I can understand the agnostic who says, 'God may be there or he may not, but it is not possible to find out. No one can know about it.' Most of my agnostic friends take that position. Some of them are hard agnostics; they say that God cannot be known. You cannot know about God. But I say to them that they are claiming to know a colossal amount. Agnostic is the Greek for somebody who doesn't know. If an agnostic says that you cannot know God, I'd ask him to prove it, for he is claiming an enormous amount when he says nobody can know there is a God.

Secondly, some agnostics are what I call weak agnostics. They say, 'Well, some people could know God perhaps, but I personally don't know and can't know.'

And I would say, 'But if you say that, my good friend, you are making Jesus Christ into a liar, actually, because he says you can know (John 17:3). If you say you know that Jesus Christ is false, you're claiming to know a lot, so you shouldn't call yourself an agnostic—someone who doesn't know. If you know that Jesus Christ is telling untruths, you know a colossal amount.'