i received a lot of recommendations but sadly i cannot access that full list at this time, but seem to recall the name Alvin plantiga was thrown around quite highly

>>28 Why is atheistic liberal Enlightenment literature on that chart?

>>35 How did the Roman church end up with a marxist neo-pagan for a pope? When you walk away from Scripture as the fundamental authority of your faith and ex post facto anathematize the beliefs of the early church when those beliefs stand in contradiction to "sacred tradition" you end up idolzing vain philosophy over the carefully discerned truth of God.

>>35 Which?

>>39 Les Misérables. I've yet to read it, but I am loathe to, because I am aware of the context it was written in, and the general subject matter. Even if there are or appears to be Christian messages, Victor Hugo himself became increasingly anti-Catholic and deistic as he grew older. Even if you hate Catholicism, you cannot deny the man was hardly Christian. >>38 Are you a Protestant? >>28 But really, it's not just that. It is extremely questionable putting modern novels like Redeeming Love and The Shack in a list like that. Perhaps they may be good novels, but I highly doubt that. And while Lewis and Tolkien are better fits on the list, they make up too much of it,.

>>40 >Are you a Protestant? Not him but is that even a question?

>>40 >>41

>>41 Don't make assumptions. Even if it appears to be the case, in which case, prepare, but do not make the final judgement.

>>43 Yeah, I could be a Jansenist.

>>28 Just a quick look into some of the texts listed under the Fiction section, and it's clear that Les Miserables and Paradise Lost are filled with heretical nonsense (e.g. in PL, an angel discourages Adam from building a temple due to it being "idolatry"). Otherwise, there's some decent texts. >>33 This is a much better chart.

greetings anons. newfag christbro here. i just read 12 rules for life by jordan peterson. i know its a meme book and all that, i know that a lot of people doubt he's even christian but he got me reading the bible and now im here. my favourite parts in 12 rules was when he wrote about the bible from a symbolic /psychological perspective. can you guys recommend any books like that? im looking specifically for books that go into the symbolism or jungian takes of the bible.

>>38 >2020 >Still believing the gommunists are gonna take over the world

>>33 Woah Anon, that mysticism section is badly out of order. I made the mistake of a bad reading order much to the detriment of my soul. Start off with Teresa of Avila. Here anon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKXOFOSM4zo , this audio version is quite good. It will serve as a primer. After that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKXcKnGuwrg&list=PLGLhrnM7t_JOqaJL7ajJOilRg1hqjKntz&index=4&t=4031s will serve as a good read. My only warning here is to not fall into the temptation of reading into Divine will or differentiating it from chance. Simply be at peace with it. "Who can know the mind of God? Who can fathom its depths?" From there, I would chose some more Teresa of Avila, but I have been supplementing my mystical practices with sources from other traditions-- Buddhism, Stoicism, Hinduism, etc. One must be very careful with this, so it is probably better to stay with the Saints. Just to drive in a second time how bad this list is: Dark Night of the Soul is the second part of The Ascent of Mount Carmel. If you picked up The Ascent it would be bad enough, but starting with the Dark Night would be agonizing and unusable.

>>318 If you're awake to symbolism and layered meaning, just keep reading the Bible and things will jump out at you. Often something will appear irrelevant or out of place or contradictory to worldly eyes, and these things are very interesting to dissect and discuss. Me, I was thrown off almost immediately in Genesis 1:26 when God says "Let us make man in our image and likeness..." Who is us? Does this point to the Trinity? I'd be satisfied with that explanation, but I couldn't recall any other time when God uses this plural phrasing. He refers to Himself singularly when He appears to Abraham and to Moses. Is He talking to the angels? Angels have a different image and likeness than man, right? Men don't have wings and wheels and multitudes of eyes. Is it just an idiosyncrasy of Hebrew or an artifact of translation? IDK, maybe someone with mastery of the language can pick this one up. I think this is an important thing to get right because wrong interpretations can lead to things like that whole feminist cult in Korea that worships two Gods, male and female, claiming the patriarchy has suppressed knowledge of the divine feminine.