/lit/ - Literature

>>19427015
I like Dyer’s critique of the predominant atheist worldviews of the current time, and I appreciate that he has made me question the presuppositions that most people take for granted. However, I think his transcendental argument for God is a bit ‘too good to be true’. In his debate with Dr Malpass he just name dropped for most of his time and tried to obfuscate the fact that the argument basically boils down to ‘my worldview is right because I don’t think you can justify knowledge without it’. This can allow him to believe in things like young Earth creationism and back it up by saying that a geologist just has faulty presuppositions. I haven’t watched him for a while now desu so I could be remembering some things wrong though. What are /lit’s thoughts on him?

Recommend me a sexy book to read. Something obscure enough to make me seem interesting and intellectual to my peers

>>14927460
It's not a larp you stupid nigger, this is true of any serious texts, even the Bible. There is such a thing as simply being too dumb and too spiritually dead to even comprehend it, and this is very common. Hence the Bible used to be only for the clergy and in Latin until the protestant heresies. If your soul is that of a worm then you have nothing to gain or lose by reading the Bible, it's pearls wasted on swine. The same goes for mystic texts and the occult, one of the reasons it's better not discussed on imageboards.

>study philosophy, theology, greek, and latin in seminary
>have a comfy life reading the bible, and writing sermons