It proves that some people are sophists. The argument presented here is utterly bogus and absurd.
If presented with this phony choice, I would take a fourth course of non-action; I would give the proposition the robust horselaugh it deserves, proving that I have faith in humor.
I’m afraid your fourth choice of non action is the same as either the first choice: not reading the book with continuing non belief in God. You would have essentially convinced yourself that the work is bogus and erroneous despite its apparent conversion of many people to a theistic world view. Would you not even read the work? If only to prove it wrong?