Visit Blog
Explore Tumblr blogs with no restrictions, modern design and the best experience.
#Socinian
trinitiesblog · 4 months ago
Text
podcast 314 - 10 Fundamental Questions about the Trinity
https://trinities.org/blog/podcast-314-10-fundamental-questions-about-the-trinity/
0 notes
trinitiesblog · 7 months ago
Text
podcast 305 - Two Readings of Mark - popular or esoteric? - Part 1
https://trinities.org/blog/podcast-305-two-readings-of-mark-popular-or-esoteric-part-1/
0 notes
relcfp · 13 days ago
Text
[ May 14, 2021] Talk or similar: Locke’s Reasonable Christianity: A Religious Enlightener’s Theology in Context
Venue: Unknown Speakers at this event: Diego Lucci (American University in Bulgaria)
Abstract
John Locke’s religious interests, concerns, and views permeate his oeuvre and are expressed openly in his later theological writings, which represent the culmination of his studies. In The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695) and other public as well as private texts, Locke explained his religious ideas in an unsystematic and, at times, ambiguous way. However, an accurate analysis of Locke’s public writings and theological manuscripts reveals that his religion was a unique, heterodox, internally coherent version of Protestant Christianity. Locke had good knowledge of the theological debates and controversies of the time, and his religious thought denotes many similarities with heterodox theological currents such as Socinianism and Arminianism. Nevertheless, he always made sure that his religious views were consistent with, and indeed grounded in, the Scriptures, since he adhered to the Protestant doctrine of sola Scriptura. The main elements of Locke’s Christianity are an original historical method of biblical interpretation, a moralist soteriology based on a theistic and rationalist ethics and revolving around the fundamentals of Christianity (i.e., repentance for sin, obedience to the divine moral law, and faith in Jesus the Messiah), a mortalist position concerning death and resurrection, and a non-Trinitarian Christology. Due to Locke’s heterodoxy, and particularly to his moralism, mortalism, and disregard of the Trinity, his religious views attracted criticism from different quarters but, in the long run, had an impact on the Enlightenment search for a “reasonable” religion and, also, on the development of several Protestant movements (e.g., Unitarianism, Methodism, and various Baptist churches). Therefore, his legacy as a theologian, albeit largely neglected by historiography, eventually proved to be as significant as his contributions in the fields of epistemology and political theory.
from Philosophy of Religion | PhilEvents https://ift.tt/2PEXEdT
0 notes
madewithonerib · a month ago
Text
What does John 5:39 mean? | Bible.Ref
Tumblr media
      John 5:39-40 | ³⁹ You pore over the SCRIPTURES       because you presume that by them you possess       eternal life. These are the very words that       testify about ME, ⁴⁰ yet you refuse to come to ME       to have life.
      v.s 39 & 40 summarize a crucial point about the       difference between faith & belief.
      A person who refuses to believe cannot be convinced,       no matter what evidence they are given [John 5:40].
      In verses 37 & 38, JESUS criticized the local       religious leaders for never hearing the voice of GOD.
      They are rejecting JESUS & HIS message       [John 5:18] because they are unwilling, not because       they are uninformed.
      This is a key idea to consider when discussing       ideas such as evidence, proof, & faith.
      The BIBLE never calls on anyone to express       "blind faith," which is belief without evidence.
      In this very passage, JESUS is responding to       criticism by giving 3 separate forms of evidence.
      HE has mentioned human testimony [John 5:33]       direct observation—in the form of HIS miracles       [John 5:36].
       ●  John 5:33 | ³³ YOU have sent to John             & he has testified to the truth.
       ●  John 5:36 | ³⁶ But I have testimony more             substantial than that of John. For the works that the             FATHER has given ME to accomplish—the very             works I am doing—testify about ME that             the FATHER has sent ME.
      Now, HE is referring to the evidence of GOD's       written SCRIPTURE.
      And yet, for some, this is not enough & never       will be. This is why GOD does not offer       "proof" to all people: it won't necessarily produce       obedience or trust.
      Simply knowing that GOD exists does not mean       obedience will follow [James 2:19].
       ●  James 2:19 | ¹⁹ You believe that GOD is one.            Good for you! Even the demons believe that            —and shudder.
      Having knowledge does not always mean trusting       in GOD, as Israel's own disobedience showed       [Numbers 14:20–23; Nehemiah 9:16-7; Psalm 78:11-12].
       ●  Numbers 14:20-23 | ²⁰ “I have pardoned             them as you requested,” the LORD replied.             ²¹ “Yet as surely as I live & as surely as the             whole earth is filled with the glory of the             LORD, ²² not one of the men who have             seen MY glory & the signs I performed in             Egypt & in the wilderness—yet have             tested ME & disobeyed ME these 10x—             ²³ not one will ever see the land that I             swore to give their fathers. None of those             who have treated ME with contempt             will see it.
       ●  Nehemiah 9:16-17 | ¹⁶ But they & our             fathers became arrogant & stiff-necked             & did not obey YOUR commandments.
            ¹⁷ They refused to listen & failed to             remember the wonders YOU performed             among them. They stiffened their necks             & appointed a leader to return them to             their bondage in Egypt. But YOU are a             forgiving GOD, gracious & compassionate,             slow to anger & rich in loving devotion,             & YOU did not forsake them.
       ●  Psalm 78:11-12 | ¹¹ They forgot what HE had             done, the wonders HE had shown them.
            ¹² HE worked wonders before their fathers             in the land of Egypt, in the region of Zoan.
      And, here, the fact that the Pharisees were       knowledgeable in the SCRIPTURES did not       necessarily mean they were willing to accept       JESUS [John 7:17].
       ●  John 7:17 | ¹⁷ If anyone desires to do HIS will,             he will know whether MY teaching is from GOD             or whether I speak on MY own.
      v. 40 will show the real problem behind the       disbelief of these religious hypocrites, which       is also the basic problem with all who reject       JESUS CHRIST: they do not believe because       they will not believe.
      No amount of proof is enough to overcome that.
Tumblr media
Context Summary
Tumblr media
      John 5:30–47 continues JESUS' response to HIS       critics in Jerusalem.
      After healing a crippled man on the Sabbath &       claiming to be equal with GOD, JESUS now speaks       about evidence.
      Rather than simply saying, ''have faith,'' or       ''believe ME because I said so,'' HE offers       reasons why HE should be believed.
      These include human testimony, the miracles       HE is performing, & the words of SCRIPTURE.
      JESUS also makes the point that those who reject       the prior words of GOD—the OT SCRIPTURES       —aren't going to believe in CHRIST, no matter what.
Tumblr media
Chapter Summary
Tumblr media
      JESUS again returns to Jerusalem, as required        for the various feast days.
      While there, HE heals a man who had been crippled       for nearly forty years.
      Since this occurred on the Sabbath, local religious       leaders are angry—more upset with JESUS for       working on the Sabbath than amazed at HIS miracle.
      In response, JESUS offers an important perspective       on evidence.
      JESUS refers to human testimony, scriptural testimony,       & miracles as reasons to believe HIS declarations.
      CHRIST also lays claim to many of the attributes       of GOD, making a clear claim to divinity.
Tumblr media
https://www.bibleref.com/John/5/John-5-39.html
Tumblr media
Matthew Henry, Nonconformist [1662-1714] | John 5:39
Tumblr media
     https://biblehub.com/commentaries/john/5-39.htm
      5:39-44 The Jews considered that eternal life       was revealed to them in their SCRIPTURES, & that       they had it, because they had the word of GOD       in their hands.
      JESUS urged them to search those SCRIPTURES with       more diligence & attention.
            Ye do search the SCRIPTURES, &             you do well to do so.
      They did indeed search the SCRIPTURES, but it       was with a view to their own glory.
      It is possible for men to be very studious in the letter       of the SCRIPTURES, yet to be strangers to its power.
      Or, search the SCRIPTURES, & so it was spoken       to them in the nature of an appeal.
            Ye profess to receive & believe the             SCRIPTURE, let that be the judge.
      It is spoken to us as advising or commanding all       Christians to search the SCRIPTURES.
      Not only read them, & hear them, but search them;       which denotes diligence in examining &       studying them.
      We must search the SCRIPTURES for heaven       as our great end; for in them you think you have       eternal life.
      We must search the SCRIPTURES for CHRIST, as       the new & living Way, that leads to this end.
            To this testimony CHRIST adds reproofs of             their unbelief & wickedness; their neglect of             HIM & HIS doctrine.
      Also HE reproves their want of the love of GOD.
      But there is life with JESUS CHRIST for poor souls.
      Many who make a great profession of religion,       yet show they want the love of GOD, by their       neglect of CHRIST & contempt of HIS       commandments.
      It is the love of GOD in us, the love that is a living,       active principle in the heart, which GOD will accept.
Tumblr media
      They slighted & undervalued CHRIST, because       they admired & overvalued themselves.
Tumblr media
      How can those believe, who make the praise &       applause of men their idol! When CHRIST & HIS       followers are men wondered at, how can those       believe, the utmost of whose ambition is to make       a fair show in the flesh!
Tumblr media
Johann Albrecht Bengel, Lutheran [1734] | John 5:39
Tumblr media
1.]  you search—Hafenreffer, in his edition of the NT,       Greek & Latin, translates,
            You inquire into [inquiritis] the SCRIPTURES.             HE thereby has guarded against any one             understanding search into [scrutamini] as             an Imperative.
      Of the ancients, Athanasius also recognises       it as an Indicative..
      For which reason Cyril need not have been afraid       of being left alone in giving, or being about       to give, that explanation.
      Brentius says, that there are interpreters of       great judgment, who decide for the Indicative:       & the whole structure of the discourse certainly       confirms it: compare.. John 5:33,
      etc., & especially that clause, because you think.
      JESUS approves of their search into the SCRIPTURES,       which they were not wanting in, inasmuch as at that very       feast they read much of them in public;
      just as HE approves of the embassy to John,       John 5:33, & their high estimation of Moses, John 5:45;       but HE adds, that none of these are enough by themselves.
      Wherefore this explanation is attended with no loss       to the sense: & they are usually, to say the least,       equally diligent searchers of the SCRIPTURES,       who decide on the Indicative
      [which very lately has been adopted by Zeltner & Walchius]       as those who decide on the Imperative.
      This clause, You search & you will not come,       Paul has rendered by synonymous expressions,       2 Corinthians 3:15-16,
            “Even to this day, when Moses is read, the             veil is upon their heart. Nevertheless, when             it shall turn to the LORD, the veil shall be             taken away.”
      Some one has demanded, that similar instances of the       2nd person plural indicative, closing a period, should       be brought forward.
      See therefore John 7:28, John 12:19; Matthew 22:29;       Matthew 24:6; Matthew 27:65; 2 Corinthians 8:9;       James 4:2-3.
      On the other hand, the imperative occurs with ye,       Matthew 28:5, Mark 13:23.
      The imperative, Search you,
      “Seek you out of the book of the LORD & read,”       Isaiah 34:16.
      The hearers of JESUS CHRIST [though they had       not heard the testimony even of John, who was       greater than the prophet, & though they had not       read the SCRIPTURES]
      might at that time have derived faith from the words       alone of JESUS
3.]  the SCRIPTURES—of Moses, John 5:46,
      “He wrote of Me;” & of the prophets.
3i]  ye—This is joined rather with the word think       han with search, & contains the proof, & is put       as it were by Anaphora [repetition of the same       word in the beginnings of clauses]: comp. the       notes, John 5:33.       So also ye, John 5:45, “Moses, in whom you trust.”       you appear to have—In antithesis to—that       ou may really have, John 5:40, “Ye will not come       to ME, that you may have life.” Akin to       his is that clause, John 5:45, Ye have placed       your trust in Moses.       in them—By the mere fact alone, that you search       them, you think that you have life.       life—Why dost YOU deny, O Socinian, that there       was known to the ancients the hope of eternal life       & those—and you will not—A double Epicrisis [an       enunciation added to a sentence, to make       he subject in hand the more clear], approves       of the search & trust of the Jews; the other,        etc., shows their defect.       Those, subjoined to the—in them, has in some        measure the force of removing to a distance.       Life is to be had more nigh at hand in CHRIST        than in the SCRIPTURES.       Charles John Ellicott, Theologian [1749–1905]        | John 5:39       [39] Search the scriptures.—Better, Ye search        the SCRIPTURES.       The question whether the mood is imperative       or indicative, whether we have here a commandment        to examine the writings of the OT canon,       or a reference to their habit of doing so, is        one which has been discussed through the whole        history of NT exposition, & one on which the        opinion of those best qualified to judge has        been, & is, almost equally divided.       It is not a question of the form of the Greek        word, for it may certainly be either.       The English reader therefore is in a position        to form his own opinion, & is in possession       of almost all the evidence.       HE should observe that all the parallel verbs        in the context are in the indicative—“Ye have        neither heard” . . . “nor have seen” [John 5:37];        “Ye have not HIS WORD . . . you believe not”        [John 5:38]; “Ye think that . . . you have”       [John 5:39]; “Ye will not . . you might have”        [John 5:40].       Why should there be a sudden change of construction        in this instance only?       We find, then, this order of thought. [1] GOD        has in the OT witnessed of ME, but ye,       with unreceptive hearts, have never heard a voice        nor seen a shape of GOD [John 5:37]. [2]       Ye have not HIS word dwelling in you, or it would        have witnessed of ME [John 5:38]. [3] Instead        of receiving the SCRIPTURES as a living power        within you, you search & explain the letter       of them from without [John 5:39]. [4] Ye think        they contain eternal life, & hence your reverence        for them [John 5:39]. [5] THEY really are witnesses        of ME, & yet you; seeking in them eternal life,        are not willing to come to ME that you may have        this life.       It is believed that this is the most natural        interpretation of the words, & that it gives        a fuller meaning than any other to the teaching        of CHRIST.       The only objection to it of w8 is that the Greek        word for “search” [??e???te] is one which would        not have implied blame.       It means to search after, track, inquire after        [comp.       John 7:52]; but, surely, this is just the expression        for the literal spirit in which the Rabbis treated        their SCRIPTURES.       Moreover, it is not the searching which is matter        for blame, but the fact of the searching & not        finding, which is matter for wonder.       Here, too, as elsewhere, the argument from the        meaning of a Greek word must be pressed only        within strict limits when we remember that it        represents in translation a late Hebrew original.       The Hebrew language had a word which just at        that time was frequent on every Rabbi’s lips,        & which exactly corresponds to it.       As early as the Book of Chronicles we find mention        of the Midrashim, or Commentaries in the sense        in which this word is used, e.g., in “Cæsar’s        Commentaries.” The rest of the Acts of Abijah        are “written in the Midrash of the prophet Iddo”        [2Chronicles 13:22].       More than we now know of the history of Joash        is “written in the Midrash of the Book of Kings”        [2Chronicles 24:27].
https://biblehub.com/john/5-39.htm https://biblehub.com/commentaries/john/5-39.htm
0 notes
Link
by R. Scott Clark | The rise and development of Socinianism in the seventeenth century cannot entirely account for the variant trinitarianisms of the age, including the English debates of the 1640s and 1650s, the variant language and historical perspectives of the Cambridge Platonists, and the doctrinal...
4 notes · View notes
relcfp · 9 months ago
Text
[ August 11, 2020] CFP for conference or similar: Between Secularisation and Reform: Religion in the Enlightenment
Within over a decade a shift of interest could be observed, among scholars of early modern philosophy, towards the radical Enlightenment as that tendency in the eighteenth-century thought which, due to its apparently progressive character, would be most relevant for our contemporary social and political context. One of the key features of this movement would consist in the undermining religion and religious institutions leading up to what is nowadays regarded as secularisation of the social and political spheres. Yet, this picture of the Enlightenment as a source of ideas furthering secularisation can be challenged in favour of a more nuanced outlook on which the critique of religion would aim at reforming religious institutions and reconceiving their role in the public sphere, rather than eroding faith.
The attempt at a reform of religion can be traced back to as different movements and milieus as the Polish Socinians, the Dutch followers of Spinoza, the English deists, the German neologians and rationalists, including Immanuel Kant, and the French Catholic enlighteners (e.g. Claude Yvon). What these diverse ‘reformers’ share is a programme of rationalising religious faith, manifest, for instance, in new interpretations of Christian Scriptures: as a book which contains a universal moral doctrine justifiable within the limits of reason alone or even a book which encourages the identification of reason and the divine.
But how should we understand these attempts at reforming religion by rationalising its core contents? In light of what we know about religions nowadays, is it even a plausible enterprise? Are the arguments of rationalists with regard to religion philosophically coherent or do they consist in eclectic combinations of mismatching elements? Can relations between reason and religion be construed in such a way that the former would avoid the accusation of encroaching on the domain of the latter? Can rationalisation make religion compatible with the scientific worldview? Can there be a thing like rational religion, given that, for many apologists and critics of religion alike, faith is not compatible with reason? Last but not least, to what extent have the attempts to rationalise religion influenced the forms of religiosity? We intend to discuss these and related questions at a workshop following a lecture by Prof. Jeffrey D. Burson (Georgia Southern University).
Everyone interested in participation in the workshop as a presenter is requested to submit an abstract of max. 500 words, related to the topic of the workshop, as well as a short bio note, by 10 August 2020 to the email address of the organisers:
religious.rationalism@iphils.uj.edu.pl
Notifications of acceptance will be sent by 20 August 2020. Participants accepted to the workshop as presenters are expected to prepare an approximately 40-minute talk to be followed by a 20-minute Q&A session. Participation without presenting is also possible upon sending an expression of interest to the organisers. There are no conference fees but the organisers cannot offer funding for travel and accommodation expenses of the prospective participants.   
Please note that due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, the event can be moved to an online platform or delayed until 2021.
from Philosophy of Religion | PhilEvents https://ift.tt/2D8ouEL
0 notes
solafiducian · 9 months ago
Text
All the privileges, benefits, and advantages of the offices and mediation of Christ will not avail us, unless we reduce them all unto faith in his person. Indeed it is not so much what is done, though that be inconceivably great, as by whom it is done, namely, “Jesus, the Son of God,” God and man in one person. It is a matter of somewhat a surprising nature, that divers in these days do endeavor to divert the minds and faith of men from a respect unto the person of Christ. But that the crafts of Satan have made nothing, be it never so foolish or impious in religion, to seem strange, a man could not but admire how such an attempt should be either owned or countenanced. For my part, I must acknowledge that I know no more of Christian religion but what makes me judge that the principal trouble of believers in this world lies herein, that they can no more fervently love, nor more firmly believe in the person of Christ, than what they have as yet attained unto. But this notion hath been vented and carried on among us by persons who, out of an aim after things novel and contrary to the received faith, have suffered themselves to be imposed on by those who have other principles than what they seem to own. For the Socinians, denying the divine nature of Christ, do their utmost, in the pursuit of that infidelity, to take the minds of men from a regard unto his person, and would reduce all religion unto a mere obedience unto his commands. And indeed there can be no place for that divine faith in him, trust on him, and love unto him, which the church has always professed, if it be supposed that he is not God and man in one person. And their reasonings, they are unto this purpose, which some represent unto us, who yet will not avow that principle from whence alone they are taken and do rise. But so long as we can hold the head, or this great foundation of religion, that the Lord Christ is the eternal Son of God, — which alone gives life and efficacy unto his whole work of mediation, — our faith in all its actings will be reduced unto his person; there it beginneth, there it endeth. It is Jesus who is this mediator and surety of the covenant, in whose person “God redeemed the church with his own blood.”
Hebrews 7:22
0 notes
daily-scripture · 10 months ago
Text
The weakness of the modern Church
The conviction behind the book is that ignorance of God - ignorance both of his ways and of the practice of communion with him - lies at the root of much of the church’s weakness today. Two unhappy trends seem to have produced this state of affairs. 
Trend one:
is that Christian minds have been conformed to the modern spirit: the spirit, that is, that spawns great thoughts of man and leaves room for only small thoughts of God. The modern way with God is to set him at a distance, if not to deny him altogether; and the irony is that modern Christians, preoccupied with maintaining religious practices in an irreligious world, have themselves allowed God to become remote. Clear-sighted persons, seeing this, are tempted to withdraw from the churches in something like disgust to pursue a quest for God on their own. Nor can one wholly blame them, for churchmen who look at God, so to speak, through the wrong end of the telescope, so reducing him to dwarf proportions, cannot hope to end up as more than dwarf Christians, and clear-sighted people naturally want something better than this. Furthermore, thoughts of death, eternity, judgment, the greatness of the soul and the abiding consequences of temporal decisions are all “out” for moderns, and it is a melancholy fact that the Christian church, instead of raising its voice to remind the world of what is being forgotten, has formed a habit of playing down these themes in just the same way. But these capitulations to the modern spirit are really suicidal so far as Christian life is concerned. 
Trend two:
is that Christian minds have been confused by the modern skepticism. For more than three centuries the naturalistic leaven in the Renaissance outlook has been working like a cancer in Western thought. Seventeenth-century Arminians and deists, like sixteenth-century Socinians, came to deny, as against Reformation theology, that God’s control of his world was either direct or complete, and theology, philosophy and science have for the most part combined to maintain that denial ever since. As a result, the Bible has come under heavy fire, and many landmarks in historical Christianity with it.
© 1993 J.I. Packer - Knowing God
---
This is what the Lord says: “Stop at the crossroads and look around. Ask for the old, godly way, and walk in it. Travel its path, and you will find rest for your souls. But you reply, ‘No, that’s not the road we want!’ 
Jeremiah 6:16 NLT
9 notes · View notes
relcfp · 12 months ago
Text
[ October 8, 2020 - October 9, 2020] Conference or similar: Between Secularisation and Reform: Religion in the Enlightenment
Venue: Grodzka 52
Within over a decade a shift of interest could be observed, among scholars of early modern philosophy, towards the radical Enlightenment as that tendency in the eighteenth-century thought which, due to its apparently progressive character, would be most relevant for our contemporary social and political context. One of the key features of this movement would consist in the undermining religion and religious institutions leading up to what is nowadays regarded as secularisation of the social and political spheres. Yet, this picture of the Enlightenment as a source of ideas furthering secularisation can be challenged in favour of a more nuanced outlook on which the critique of religion would aim at reforming religious institutions and reconceiving their role in the public sphere, rather than eroding faith.
The attempt at a reform of religion can be traced back to as different movements and milieus as the Polish Socinians, the Dutch followers of Spinoza, the English deists, the German neologians and rationalists, including Immanuel Kant, and the French Catholic enlighteners (e.g. Claude Yvon). What these diverse ‘reformers’ share is a programme of rationalising religious faith, manifest, for instance, in new interpretations of Christian Scriptures: as a book which contains a universal moral doctrine justifiable within the limits of reason alone or even a book which encourages the identification of reason and the divine.
But how should we understand these attempts at reforming religion by rationalising its core contents? In light of what we know about religions nowadays, is it even a plausible enterprise? Are the arguments of rationalists with regard to religion philosophically coherent or do they consist in eclectic combinations of mismatching elements? Can relations between reason and religion be construed in such a way that the former would avoid the accusation of encroaching on the domain of the latter? Can rationalisation make religion compatible with the scientific worldview? Can there be a thing like rational religion, given that, for many apologists and critics of religion alike, faith is not compatible with reason? Last but not least, to what extent have the attempts to rationalise religion influenced the forms of religiosity? We intend to discuss these and related questions at a workshop following a lecture by Prof. Jeffrey D. Burson (Georgia Southern University).
Everyone interested in participation in the workshop as a presenter is requested to submit an abstract of max. 500 words, related to the topic of the workshop, as well as a short bio note, by 30 June 2020 to the email address of the organisers:
religious.rationalism@iphils.uj.edu.pl
Notifications of acceptance will be sent by 15 July 2020. Participants accepted to the workshop as presenters are expected to prepare an approximately 40-minute talk to be followed by a 20-minute Q&A session. Participation without presenting is also possible upon sending an expression of interest to the organisers. There are no conference fees but the organisers cannot offer funding for travel and accommodation expenses of the prospective participants.   
Please note that due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, the event can be moved to an online platform or delayed until 2021.
from Philosophy of Religion | PhilEvents https://ift.tt/3dYapqy
0 notes
mbgporvida-blog · 10 years ago
Text
Notes on Candide
These are my notes on Candide:
Quotes
(in the edition Andy has)
pg. 32 "The Old Woman's story"
- I think I was being a dork here.  I think Andy should read the first2-3 paragraphs on the story that starts on pg. 32. I think there was something racy in it!
pg 108 "The remarks led to new reflections, and Marin especially concluded that man was born to live in the convulsions of distress or in the lethargy of boredom."
"but we must cultivate our gardens"
*Women as commodity- this started to grate at me a bit
* Racism/intolerance
*hummingbirds for dinner! - I was appalled!  I was also reading a book called "The Humming bird's daughter"
Some definitions that I didn't know:
Socinian-follower of Faustus & Laelius. Traditional Christian doctrines
Manichean- dualistic religious combo - gnostic, buddhism, and various other elements. basic conflict between light and dark matter as dark and evil.
Lacryma Christi= Tear of Christ(i) ha! *table wine grown near vesuvius-sparkling wine
That's all I got. I can't seem to find any notes on Pale Horse Pale Rider at the moment.  I hope these scant reflections help any and all conversations around this book flourish!
-R. Suzanne
3 notes · View notes