From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Sun Mar 30 05:29:52 1997 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by deliverator.io.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id FAA12904; Sun, 30 Mar 1997 05:29:26 -0600 (CST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id FAA28395 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Sun, 30 Mar 1997 05:33:11 -0600 Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 05:33:11 -0600 Message-Id: <199703301133.FAA28395@lists.io.com> From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #96 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Sunday, March 30 1997 Volume 01 : Number 096 In this digest: Re: IN> Voodoo Rules Re: IN>Re: Cain's mom IN> In Nomine - the Movie IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #95 IN> Pictures... IN> Another stupid joke Re: IN>Re: Cain's mom IN> Cain's Mom = Eve! Re: IN>Re: Cain's mom Re: IN> In Nomine - the Movie Re: IN> Cain's Mom = Eve! Re: IN> New Vessell on the list... Re: IN>Re: Cain's mom Re: IN> In Nomine - the Movie IN> Roles IN> INC: Argh! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 19:06:59 +1000 From: "Patrick O'Duffy" Subject: Re: IN> Voodoo Rules Bodhi wrote: > > > Okay, I've got two problems here. > > > > First off, I'm a little useasy with the division you've made between > > Petro and Rada loa, particularly with the implication that some are > > 'good' and others 'evil'. The impression I've had is that all the loa > > are largely neutral bodies, with some inclination towards benevolence or > > 'violent emotion' in some cases. > > You are absolutely correct. I guess my impression is that certain > Loa are concerned with helping out in small ways, with you doing most > of the work, while other Loa are concerned with doing major services > for major fealty/sacrifice. The Petro loa are far more concerned > with "gettin' stuff DONE", which I saw as falling more towards the > diabolical's end. " Lettin' things be" is more celestial in nature. > We know that Diabolicals try to alter the Symphony, while Celestials > try to perceive the Symphony. Hence, my division. Hmmm... yeah, I see your point. I'm a little uncomfortable with the active/passive distiction between Heaven/Hell, but that's simply personal preference. > > My second problem is with some of the correlations you've made for the > > loa. I get an impression from reading your outline (and I could be > > wrong so easily) that these Princes/Archangels are almost 'masquerading' > > as loa, slipping on the Damballah costume and mask and going down to > > impress the locals. I think that does some disservice to both Voodoo > > and the Celestials involved. > > Okay... They're not so much masquerading, as showing different facets > of themselves. They're allowing a slightly different perception of > themselves, and not bothering to correct it too much, simply because > it serves their purposes. I guess I always thought that NO RELIGION > had it correctly, but they'll happilly take the attention of any > religious individual, so long as it furthers their Word without > putting undue stress on the Symphony. Voodoo does that. It doesn't > stress the Symphony, and with a little visitation now and then, they > get their Word furthered. Yeah, I agree with that. It's just that the Archangels and Princes in the rulebook don't fit that neatly into the descriptions of the Loa, and I got the impression from what I read (and bear in mind I was sleepy and kinda hungover) that you considered the loa to be human labels or ideas, into which the Celestials have put themselves, rather than vice versa. My mistake, most likely. > > Calling a celestial a 'loa' rather than an 'Archangel' is just > > terminology, and I think the celestials involved would take their roles > > pretty seriously (certainly the Archangels - the Princes might be more > > cynical). To have Yves as being two different loa is almost to have him > > lying to his followers. I'd personally cast Eli in the role of > > Damballah, with Yves as Legba. > > Of course, this could very likely be my misinterpretation of what > > you're getting at. Feel free to call me names. > > Nope, you're right. I think the celestials probably do take their > roles pretty seriously, and so do the princes. > > I've got a fairly NON-ANTHROPOMORPHIC vision of the Archangels. Oh, > Sure, they act like "people" for the convenience of those below, but > they're really a collection/conflomeration of powers, far outside the > ken of mortal man. So, Yves IS Legba in a very real sense, and he is > also Danballah... just different aspects of him. I actually like the idea of the celestials being fairly anthropomorphic, notwithstanding some different processes for different forms. Both celestials and humans are made in God's image, and while they may be another layer of complication above humans, at the core they're still people, sorta. Archangels/Princes are a level again, but I like the idea of everyone being coprehensible to a certain degree. Maybe that's just my reaction of trying to play really non-human NPCs in my last few campaigns. > > What I'm curious on is how you see Voodoo being implemented in IN > > terms. Just a few thoughts of my own: > > > > Possession. > > Most likely, the Archangels/Princes do not personally possess the > > invoker. Instead, they send a Kyriotate/Shedim to attend to it. Each > > 'higher loa' would have a group of Kyr/Sheds dedicated to Voodoo, > > probably not Word-bound, but with some degree of distinction. Possibly > > these servitors would have one or two special attunements to manage the > > situation appropriately. Thus, the Baka (above) are just a 'special > > squad' of Shedim, or possibly Shedim who have the Song of Forms > > available. > > Yup, that's how I saw it. I saw Kyriotates and Shedim playing out > the roles and wishes of their Superiors, but translating them into > Voodoo terminology. Not every Kyriotate is going to be "taught" the > proper ways to communicate witht his culture... only special, > "distinctive" Kyriotates are going to be given these tasks. > > Sorry... I re-read what I posted and I realize I didn't include that. > You know, I always just assumed that mortals could never really get > the FULL attention of Archangels/Princes, but that they send > specially-instructed Kyriotates/Shedim to actually do the > communicating for them. Yeah, same here. You could have other servitors with the Song of Possession, but why would the Superior waste time teaching a subordinate the skills they need when they can get servitors with those skills built in? > > Good or Evil? > > This is the hard part, going by my arguments above. I'd suggest a > > certain uncomfortable level of cooperation between the 'higher loa', > > where they have to take responsibility for working with the servitors of > > the 'other side' upon occasion. For example, if a Bokor calls upon Ogou > > for help in murdering his enemies, Michael must (reluctantly) allow a > > Shedim to possess and assist the Bokor - that or allow one of his > > Kyriotates to do the dirty work. In all honesty, I don't like this > > idea, and any better ideas would be terrific. > > Yeah... I tried to preface the discussion with acknowledgement that > I'm uncomfortable relegating certain aspects to the EVIL side. I > also recognize that the whole question of GOOD and EVIL is not really > recognized through the Loa, but rather through one's actions there. > I guess what I'm trying to say is that, you can talk to Loa, you can > ask favours, but if the favours are extremely power-oriented or > self-serving, you wind up doing "evil". Thus, Baron Samedi will > gladly come and talk to you, even do you a couple of "non-evil" > favours... but he's really hoping that you'll call him for something > significant next time, and start your slide down the path. > Okay, I dig that. I have more of a problem with Bokors calling upon the 'good' loa to perform acts of dubious nature. > Just talking to Samedi shouldn't mean that you are Evil. It does > mean that you are dealing with an individual who is very interested > in affecting GREAT CHANGE in the world at large... and in In Nomine > terms this translates as a Diabolical. Or the Archangel Janus. Again, I dislike the passive Heaven concept. > I know that many people on > this list enjoyed the previous arguments as to whether or not > Diabolicals are truly EVIL, or are simply interested in affecting > change, regardless of what the "original plan" (God's will, > indeed!...) called for. So, of course, Samedi doesn't see himself as > Evil per se'... he just sees himself as willing to do big things... > in exchange for big payment! Umm... I don't grok that argument. Heaven is Good. Hell is Evil. End of story. Any grey or dubious area is the provision of Humanity, but celestials are one or the other (Outcasts and Renegades have some major self-image problems). I quite prefer to have absolutes in this game - I can do grey areas in a World of Darkness game. Sure, what constitutes Good and Evil (or even good and evil, small version) are open to debate - but Heaven are the Good Guys, Hell are the Bad Guys, and anytime they seem to stray from that distinction, then it is only a 'seeming', not the truth. That's my take, anyway. Sorry to go off on a tangent. > Quick Point: I mentioned that Bokor might not necessarily mean an > individual who CHOOSES to do black magic...all Houngans are > "potentially" Bokor, since they know the rules, regulations, and > rituals. However, they choose not to deal with the Left Hand. Fair enough. > > Just in passing, while I have no books on Voodoo available in the > > house right now, I might suggest that interested parties check out GURPS > > Voodoo, which I'm told has some very good stuff in it. Also try out the > > Tim Powers novel 'On Stranger Tides', or the Micheal Scott Rohan novel > > 'Chase the Morning'. Both decent and intelligent novels. > > On Stranger Tides I know... I really like his stuff!! I DIDN'T know > that there was a GURPS suppliment. Doh!! Haven't read it myself, but heard it was good. Written by C.J. Carella. > And, Patrick... you should know by now that I appreciate all your > comments and concerns. I'm not completely comfortable with this > system, so keep the critique coming!! I was happy to see your name > on the tag! (same to you, Ms. McCoy, if you're reading this) > > As to the more complimentary aspects of your post ("complete > Dude?"...), I enjoy doing this sort of stuff. So long as people keep > writing back and telling me that it is useful, I'll keep coming up > with things to follow. Hey, it never hurts to let someone know if you appreciate what they do. There should be more of it. - -- Patrick O'Duffy, Brisbane, Australia I told the priest, don't count on any second coming God got his ass kicked the first time he came down here slumming He had the balls to come, the gall to die and then forgive us No I don't wonder why, I wonder what He thought that'd get us ANDY PRIEBOY, "Tomorrow Wendy" ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 01:31:54 -0800 (PST) From: James Foster Subject: Re: IN>Re: Cain's mom > > Hmmm...did *not* come up with this from a comic book. > Is based on what the Bible says...What do you think the "fruit" was > that Satan tempted Eve with? Let's see... fruit from a *TREE*, maybe? At least that's what all the historic sources claim. > Cain & Abel were in the womb at the same time, but of different > fathers. According to whom? The account in Gen. clearly implies the paternity of Adam, as well as the seperate nature of their births (i.e. *not* twins) > Ask a physician. It happens sometimes. You can read this in > any legit study of the Bible. Read some Greek and figure it out. What do you consider "legit" Biblical study? I must ask, because, you see, I *do* read Greek, and Hebrew. Both the Hebrew Masoretic text, the Greek Septuagint and the Hebrew Talmudic texts uphold the traditional (i.e. not *your*) interpretation. Where do you get yours? > Just because *you* never heard this does not make it wrong. Not wrong, no- but suspect. > Why the hell would I make a statement as such if it were not based > in fact? I was wondering the same. > > Another point: The Bible is *NOT* about everyone. It is a story about > the geneology of Jesus. Basically, Adam & Eve are created on Earth as > the originators of the line of Christ. They are most assuredly not the > first man and woman. Lucifer tried to corrupt the line, and was successful, as > Cain did murder Abel. Seth was then born, and from him we get the Jews. > Sounds like an odd mix of Valentinian and Sethian Gnosticism with just a smattering of fringe occult thought and racism to boot. Sad. > Geeze, read a book... > I do. Many. Perhaps just not the same as yours. Who's the illustrator? > >James Foster > >Religious Studies Dept. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >University of Oregon > > I guess this legitimizes your critisism of the interpretation I present? No, it means I've spent a great deal of time studying the information, and someonw thought I was competant enought to teach it at the University level. > I don't have a fancy title, or a degree in Religion (will some day), but > does > this mean I'm wrong? I challenge you to dispute what I said with a fact. Fact? How about the whole community of noted Biblical exegetes? Since my position is the standard and norm, and yours is the view that deviates from all known sources, perhaps *you* should be producing sources and facts? I'd love to hear you cite a few. It doesn't mean you're wrong (though I posit that you are). It does suggest that perhaps you should do a bit more studying, and at the very least have not done as much studying as the "authorities in the field" all of whom disagree with you. Note- I don't consider myself an authority. Either way, this thread is surely not germain to this list. Should you desire to continue this via private email, feel free to do so, but we really should not assault the other readers of the list with this. James Foster Religious Studies Dept. University of Oregon ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 03:22:58 +0000 From: "Bodhi" Subject: IN> In Nomine - the Movie Okay... It's late, and I have a migraine, and I'm not necessarily feeling all that great right now, and my judgement may be clouded, but... Does anybody else think that "In Nomine" would make the coolest movie ever, or what? I've had this recurring dream for three nights running, in which I'm sitting on a movie set, directing various famous actors, and coaching them on their lines and their character motivations. I've even got the rudiments of the plot worked out, and I've got the COOLEST trailer already done in my head. (and NO, I've never done drugs, but I guess I should quit eating just before going to bed ;-) ) Anyway, the silly question for pondering, the next time you're watching a movie, is this... What actors best represent what choir/Archangel or band/Prince combination? Examples: Gary Oldman, Remnant Seraph of Yves (shadows of nobility inside a ruined, straggly degenerate... holds the secret to unveiling the plot somewhere inside his deeply tortured mind) Steve Buschemi, Mercurial of Marc (talks a mile-a-minute, a real huckster) Julie Delpy, Lilim of Andrealphus (oh, please...) Tim Roth, Impudite of Kronos (real likable, dry/mocking wit, never really trust him) Quintan Tarantino, Calabite of Belial (likes to make things go BOOM!!!) Alan Rickman, Seraph of Gabriel (noble, loyal, but things are a little shaky `round here) Sandra Bernhard, Cherub of Michael (All that fanatically intense loyalty/dedication/honour/violence pent up inside...) I don't know... the previous list was composed while flipping through the various channels this evening. Any ideas? Walk in Beauty, Rob Wolff / Bodhi rob@v-wave.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 10:47:42 -0600 (CST) From: rogue@ez-net.com (RogueLdr) Subject: IN> Re: in_nomine-digest V1 #95 > > It's semi-canon that force/6 humans don't just happen. >Either they have to be exposed to the divine/infernal and >be recruited, they have to be striving for 'something more', >or they have to have special genetics (descended from a >Celestial, perhaps). > A few examples might be someone who _truly_ believed >in Dianetics and worked on improving themselves every day >and in every way. Or the martial artist who was always >training and trying to enhance his 'ki'. Or even an >artist who would go beyond what everyone else accepted and >was constantly trying to improve his performance and skills >and means of expression. Very rare, it's true! Something I've been meaning to ask. Once a human acquires their sixth Force and becomes a soldier, is it then possible for them to have a sort or mini-Fall/Redemption? For example, a Soldier of God realizing that Evil is just kinda more fun (the poor misguided fool) and becoming a Soldier Of Hell? > One thing about the 'faith healer' description that I should >have pointed out is that _any_ use of Essence, unless specifically >masked in some way (and the exceptions are few and far between) >will cause a disturbance no matter what the Role used. Does that '_any_' include mortals using Essence subconsiously? >As to the more complimentary aspects of your post ("complete >Dude?"...), I enjoy doing this sort of stuff. So long as people keep >writing back and telling me that it is useful, I'll keep coming up >with things to follow. > > >Walk in Beauty, > >Rob Wolff / Bodhi >rob@v-wave.com Great job, Bodhi! I like this voodoo material- I'm going to see if I can get hold of a copy of the Shadowrun sourcebook that detailed voodoo and cannibalize some more. GREAT job!> >Just joined the list (somewhat prematurely as my In Nomine RPG is due very >shortly) due to the great material I have seen and from what people have >been saying about the game. > >I've been having heaps of trouble getting a copy of this game so far here in >Australia. I had an advance order but the company "forgot" about it and >they were all sold out before I even knew they were there... Doh!!! I almost had the same thing happen to me up here in the States. >In Nomine will be my first new RPG since buying GURPS over ten years ago, >but it looks great. Does anyone here know if there will be minitures >produced to support the game? I haven't heard anything about them yet. Someone a while back (sorry, I forget who) came up with the idea of using miniatures from World Of Darkness, and grafting on wings from gryphons or other miscellaneous monsters. >Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 01:35:20 -0600 (CST) >From: "Q (not from Star Trek)" >Subject: Re: IN>Re: Cain's mom > >On Sat, 29 Mar 1997, Deathdog wrote: > >> >> > Cain's mother is most assuredly Eve, and his father is Lucifer, oddly >> >> > enough. >> > >> >This is most decidedly fiction of some sort. It has no basis biblically >> >speaking, nor talmudically. Perhaps the original author of this has read >> >it in a comic book somewhere? >> > >> >James Foster >> >Religious Studies Dept. >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >University of Oregon >> >> Hmmm...did *not* come up with this from a comic book. >> Is based on what the Bible says...What do you think the "fruit" was >> that Satan tempted Eve with? It was a *seed*, hence, sperm. > >I really, really hate this. I will try to be patient before someone gets in >over his or her head. I have gone over the first several chapters in Genesis >and nowhere is the fruit referred to as a seed. It is called the fruit of the >tree of (the) knowledge (of good and evil), and not other name is ever used >for it. I would like to know where you receive your information. > >> Cain & Abel were in the womb at the same time, but of different >> fathers. > >First of all, Cain and Abel were not twins. Cain was, in fact, Abels older >brother, and Adam was, in fact, the father of both of them. I quote >Genesis 4:1-2: > >"Now, the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave >birth to Cain, and she said 'I have gotten a manchild with the help of the >Lord.' And again, she gave birth to his brother Abel...." > >notice that the births are listed separately, and nowhere does it state that >they were twins. Also, note that Cain is specifically mentioned in connection >with Adam. > >Ask a physician. It happens sometimes. You can read this in >> any legit study of the Bible. Read some Greek and figure it out. > >Perhaps you could enlighten me as to what the Greek says. > >> Just because *you* never heard this does not make it wrong. > >Unlike my friend who made the original observation, I have heard of this >from several sources, most of them affiliated with various anti-Christian >cults, such as the Ku Klux Klan, for instance (who also hold that the mark of >Cain is dark skin) however, i see no reason hold their view in higher regard >than that of biblical scholar. > >> Why the hell would I make a statement as such if it were not based >> in fact? That pisses me off... > >There could be a great many reasons, perhaps you were simply misinformed. > >> Another point: The Bible is *NOT* about everyone. It is a story about >> the geneology of Jesus. Basically, Adam & Eve are created on Earth as >> the originators of the line of Christ. They are most assuredly not the >> first >> man and woman. Lucifer tried to corrupt the line, and was successful, as >> Cain did murder Abel. Seth was then born, and from him we get the Jews. > >This is an interestingly limited view of the Bible you have, I would be >interested in how you acquired it. > >> Geeze, read a book... > >I believe the question is not simply whether a person reads books, but rather >which books a person spends his time in. You, for example, may hold certain >books in high regard, as great literature. I, and others like me, however, >may regard such as crap. There is a good chance you could widen your >perception noticeably by taking your own advice. > >- -Q Allright, gentleman, calm down please, before this gets into personal flaming! Interpretations of the Bible are many and varied. While I do tend to agree with those saying that Adam was father of both the Good Ol' Boys, there is room for Mr. Everman to hold his own opinions, regardless of their validity. This thread still has the semblenses of civility, but I'm not sure how much longer it'll take to become an all-out flame war. Thank you. - -Rogue, He Who Runs Red Lights "Yo Lucy! Was the tall one yours?" "NO. I WOULD HAVE REMEMBERED." "Great!" "AND STOP CALLING ME LUCY." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 10:02:04 +0000 From: "Bodhi" Subject: IN> Pictures... Here's a snippet of information. I got a present from my friend about 3 years back. It was the two promotional posters for an upcoming game, called In Nomine (he owned a game store here in Edmonton). The posters are a matched set: 1 demon, 1 angel. They now hang beside my computer. Now, everybody loved the posters, particularly the angel. This angel has a cut-off leather jacket, ripped jeans, sunglasses, pony-tail, dagger-earring, ammo-belt, fingerless gloves clutching an automatic pistol, a tattoo of the crosson his shoulder, with a button on his lapel saying "Left hand of God", with a caption saying "On a Mission from God". Now, I look in the book, and the demon on pg. 3 (table of contents) is the demon from the 2nd poster (caption says "Don't play this game backwards"). The Angel on pg. 4 is definitely NOT the super-cool angel from my 1st poster, even though it is posed in the same position. Any of you SJG types know why they changed it? The angel on pg. 4 is decidedly SAD when compared to the poster angel. Even though the general pose is the same, it lacks the unique juxtaposition with the biker-demon. You know... two sides, but the pawns are more similar than dissimilar... Anyway, does anybody know if there is a scanned version of this angel... I'd like to use it for my wallpaper, combined with the demon. I'm constructing an In Nomine Theme for my Win95 desktop, and I'd really like this guy. Anyway, thanks for listening. Let me know if anybody's seen this angel. Walk in Beauty, Rob Wolff / Bodhi rob@v-wave.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 10:13:41 +0000 From: "Bodhi" Subject: IN> Another stupid joke This one was told to me by a Scottish friend on Thursday night... so you have to imagine it being told in a THICK Scottish accent... __________________________ A Scotsman, dressed in his best Sunday kilt, goes to walk about town and brag about his youthful appearance. He goes to the newspaper stand. "Little girl", he says to the young girl behind the counter, "do you know how old I am?" "You're thirty-five", she replies. "No. It's my fiftieth birthday today!", he responds cheerfully. He then wandered off to his next stop. He goes to the bakery. "Little girl", he says to the young girl behind the counter, "do you know how old I am?" "You're thirty-five", she replies. "No. It's my fiftieth birthday today!", he responds cheerfully. He then wandered off to his next stop. He goes to the butcher shoppe. "Little girl", he says to the young girl behind the counter, "do you know how old I am?" "You're thirty-five", she replies. "No. It's my fiftieth birthday today!", he responds cheerfully. He then wandered off to the bus station. He meets an old woman at the bus station. "Old woman", he says, "do you know how old I am?" "Well," she replies," are ye a real scotsman, or no'?" "I'm a REAL Scotsman!" he proclaims. "Well, let's see..." she says, and reaches under his kilt. She then proceeds to fondle his genitalia for approximately one full minute, poking, stroking, fondling, and making various "Um Hmm" noises. "You're Fifty!" she states. "How the bloody-Hell did you figure that out?!?", he asks, somewhat shocked. "Easy", she says, "... I was standing behind you in the butcher shoppe!" __________________ sorry... I didn't have a religious-based joke like last time... anybody got any good ones? Walk in Beauty, Rob Wolff / Bodhi rob@v-wave.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 12:20:28 -0500 From: Shawn Goldman Subject: Re: IN>Re: Cain's mom Deathdog wrote: > > >> > Cain's mother is most assuredly Eve, and his father is Lucifer, oddly > >> > enough. > > > >This is most decidedly fiction of some sort. It has no basis biblically > >speaking, nor talmudically. Perhaps the original author of this has read > >it in a comic book somewhere? > > > >James Foster > >Religious Studies Dept. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >University of Oregon > > Hmmm...did *not* come up with this from a comic book. > Is based on what the Bible says...What do you think the "fruit" was > that Satan tempted Eve with? It was a *seed*, hence, sperm. > Cain & Abel were in the womb at the same time, but of different > fathers. Ask a physician. It happens sometimes. You can read this in > any legit study of the Bible. Read some Greek and figure it out. > Just because *you* never heard this does not make it wrong. > Why the hell would I make a statement as such if it were not based > in fact? That pisses me off... > > Another point: The Bible is *NOT* about everyone. It is a story about > the geneology of Jesus. Basically, Adam & Eve are created on Earth as > the originators of the line of Christ. They are most assuredly not the > first > man and woman. Lucifer tried to corrupt the line, and was successful, as > Cain did murder Abel. Seth was then born, and from him we get the Jews. > > Geeze, read a book... excause me geneology of Jesus. That is a christian statment if I ever did see one. There is no proof of that in the bible as far as I'm aware. I guess it is right though since ever Jew is a desendant of Adam and Eve. > > >James Foster > >Religious Studies Dept. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >University of Oregon > > I guess this legitimizes your critisism of the interpretation I present? > I don't have a fancy title, or a degree in Religion (will some day), but > does > this mean I'm wrong? I challenge you to dispute what I said with a fact. this has always confused me. In the bible it says that on the 6th day god created man and he saw that it way good. Adam was lonely(or something like that). Then he created eve from adam. Then whole thing about the fruit. They were banished. I guess what you say is right because once they had children how did there children have children. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Mar 97 13:00:02 EST From: Moriah - Steve Jackson Games <73407.515@CompuServe.COM> Subject: IN> Cain's Mom = Eve! >From: Deathdog > >>> > Cain's mother is most assuredly Eve, and his father is Lucifer, oddly >>> > enough. > >Hmmm...did *not* come up with this from a comic book. >Is based on what the Bible says...What do you think the "fruit" was >that Satan tempted Eve with? It was a *seed*, hence, sperm. How come then the bible says that this 'seed' was growing on the tree in the middle of the Garden made by God? Did God create a tree that had the sperm of Lucifer growing on it? How then is it possible for Eve to give this 'seed' to her husband who "also ate of it"? The word for fruit in the Hebrew text (Gen 3:3 & 3:6) is 'periy', which means fruit or bough. Seed, on the other hand, as in "enmity between her seed and your seed" (Gen 3:15) or "Onan spilt his seed on the ground" (Gen 38:8-9) is 'zera', which figuratively can mean fruit or posterity. But, as you can see, the 'fruit' that the serpent gave Eve (who in turn gave it to Adam -- something difficult to do with sperm) is not the same as 'seed' which can be found in fruit or figuratively meant as sperm. My source is STRONG'S EXHAUSTIVE CONCORDANCE OF THE BIBLE, a standard reference for all the mainline Christian Churches and for any denomination that uses the KJV. >Cain & Abel were in the womb at the same time, but of different >fathers. Ask a physician. It happens sometimes. You can read this in >any legit study of the Bible. Read some Greek and figure it out. Try Hebrew, the language of Genesis in the oldest texts. And define 'legit', please. No scriptural commentary in any Orthodox, Catholic, Reformed, Pentecostal, Evangelical, Lutheran, Episcopal, Anglican, Presbyterian, Baptist, or Methodist book I can find will back up your assertion. In fact, they all contradict you. Please give me just one example of this 'legit' source. I think it will be difficult seeing that over 90% of Christianity is against you. >Another point: The Bible is *NOT* about everyone. It is a story about >the geneology of Jesus. Basically, Adam & Eve are created on Earth as >the originators of the line of Christ. Ummm... they are the parents of all humans, of all lines (according to the text itself). Therefore, yes, they originated the line of Christ and all other lines, so, it *is* about everyone. And if you're going to bring in Lucifer and angels starting other lines, may I remind you that those lines did not survive the Flood. man and woman. Lucifer tried to corrupt the line, and was successful, as >Cain did murder Abel. Seth was then born, and from him we get the Jews. See my point above about the Flood. >Just because *you* never heard this does not make it wrong. >Why the hell would I make a statement as such if it were not based >in fact? That pisses me off... >Geeze, read a book... > >>James Foster >>Religious Studies Dept. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>University of Oregon > >I guess this legitimizes your critisism of the interpretation I present? >I don't have a fancy title, or a degree in Religion (will some day), but >does this mean I'm wrong? I challenge you to dispute what I said with a fact. May I remind you that a lack of civility (which you are becoming dangerously close to) will result in you -- or anyone -- from being removed from the list. Peace, Moriah ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 13:12:43 -0600 (CST) From: "Q (not from Star Trek)" Subject: Re: IN>Re: Cain's mom [snip irrelevant] > this has always confused me. In the bible it says that on the 6th day > god created man and he saw that it way good. Adam was lonely(or > something like that). Then he created eve from adam. Then whole thing > about the fruit. They were banished. I guess what you say is right > because once they had children how did there children have children. > In a nutshell: Genesis 5:4 "After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters" IOW, Cain, Abel and Seth were by no means the only children of A&E. This has been a disputed question for some time (since the Stokes trial early this century, in fact, and possibly before then) but suffice it to say that Cain and Seth settled down with two of their sisters and lived a long, fruitful life. - -Q - --------------------------------------- "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein Scott "Q" Meyer Scott.E.Meyer@wheaton.edu http://johnh.wheaton.edu/~smeyer ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 19:13:14 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> In Nomine - the Movie On Sat, 29 Mar 1997 03:22:58 +0000, "Bodhi" wrote: >What actors best represent what choir/Archangel or band/Prince >combination? ... >I don't know... the previous list was composed while flipping through >the various channels this evening. Any ideas? Michael's Ofanim of War: Buffy the Vampire Slayer ;) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 13:17:44 -0600 (CST) From: "Q (not from Star Trek)" Subject: Re: IN> Cain's Mom = Eve! On 29 Mar 1997, Moriah - Steve Jackson Games wrote: [snip very nice study in Greek words] > >Cain & Abel were in the womb at the same time, but of different > >fathers. Ask a physician. It happens sometimes. You can read this in > >any legit study of the Bible. Read some Greek and figure it out. > > Try Hebrew, the language of Genesis in the oldest texts. And define > 'legit', please. No scriptural commentary in any Orthodox, Catholic, > Reformed, Pentecostal, Evangelical, Lutheran, Episcopal, Anglican, > Presbyterian, Baptist, or Methodist book I can find will back up your > assertion. In fact, they all contradict you. Please give me just one > example of this 'legit' source. I think it will be difficult seeing that > over 90% of Christianity is against you. > Particularly when you consider that these same denominations are always disputing various minor points. I think it quite significant when they actually _agree_ on something. - --------------------------------------- "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein Scott "Q" Meyer Scott.E.Meyer@wheaton.edu http://johnh.wheaton.edu/~smeyer ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 09:47:43 -0500 (EST) From: Gregory Littmann Subject: Re: IN> New Vessell on the list... On Sat, 29 Mar 1997, Davies wrote: > > > Hi guys > > Just joined the list Welcome! I think you will like it here. :) > In Nomine will be my first new RPG since buying GURPS over ten years ago, > but it looks great. Does anyone here know if there will be minitures > produced to support the game? > I don't know, but I see no reason for there to be. What do you want miniatures for? I am not anti-combat, but it does not seem to be a focus of In Nomine. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 09:53:55 -0500 (EST) From: Gregory Littmann Subject: Re: IN>Re: Cain's mom On Sat, 29 Mar 1997, James Foster wrote: > > > > > > > Cain did murder Abel. Seth was then born, and from him we get the Jews. > > > Sounds like an odd mix of Valentinian and Sethian Gnosticism with just a > smattering of fringe occult thought and racism to boot. Sad. Steady. I agree that he is wrong, but nothing in what he has said shows him to be a racist. Its a pretty heavy accusation. > > > Either way, this thread is surely not germain to this list. Actually, I think the thread itself is quite germain to an In Nomine list. What bothers me is the flames I have seen on both sides. We can disagree over biblical interpretation politely if we all want to. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 23:11:46 GMT From: w_mazur@primenet.com (Walt Mazur) Subject: Re: IN> In Nomine - the Movie On Sat, 29 Mar 1997 03:22:58 +0000, "Bodhi" wrote: >Anyway, the silly question for pondering, the next time you're >watching a movie, is this... > >What actors best represent what choir/Archangel or band/Prince >combination? I'm also reminded of a musical from the '50s(?), Damn Yankees. I'm not sure about Applegate, maybe a fallen Ofanim of Eli, retaining that attunement, but becoming a Shedite of Kobal? (Is that possible in game terms?) Lola seems an obvious Lilim of Andrealphus. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 16:48:42 GMT+10 From: "Leathal Weapon" <938269@wrpc.riv.csu.edu.au> Subject: IN> Roles Here's a thought to throw a spanner in the works. I was reading the info on Roles and it says that if something that would cause a disturbance occurs while the Celestial is performing their Role, there is a chance that no disturbance will occur. It then offers an example with a private detective and a soldier of hell (who's death would have created a disturbance, for those who were debating about soldiers). Because the Soldier got killed while the Celestial was doing normal Private Eye stuff, no disturbance was ultimately created (are you all with me so far?) Anyway, I was thinking, what if a Celestial (of any type) took a Role as a Professional Assassin? Then any killing they did of humans while being paid would have a chance of not creating a disturbance. While we're on it, what about Roles such as Mercenary, Serial Killer, Gangsta, Mafia Hitman etc etc. Am I seeing an abuse of the system here, or would other GMs allow such Roles, and just be mercilessly strict on their enforcement? Leath. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 03:28:23 -0800 (PST) From: Jason Newquist Subject: IN> INC: Argh! Folks, Job responsibilities have caught up with me. Since I began the In Nomine Collection , enhanced workplace responsibilities and moving to another shift (swing shift: the bane of gamers!), I am realizing I need to make tough choices with my time. I'm therefore putting it out to you: if anyone is interested in picking up maintainance of the INC before it gets forever behind, please email me and we can discuss terms and file transferral and whatnot. - --> You'll need your own web space, and a chunk of time at least once a week to keep it properly updated. You'll need to read this list religiously, if not cover-to-cover. You'll need to peruse Usenet. This is not a task to be taken on lightly! A thousand pardons to y'all that this kind of disruption has to happen, just when In Nomine is taking off. *sigh* Anyway, it was either this or not gaming at all. I trust I'm making the right choice. ;-) Please send any replies to my personal account: jason@nocturne.org Thanks! - ---------------------------------- Jason Newquist, lists@nocturne.org Network Operations, San Jose Netcom Inc. ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #96 ****************************** The material here is (C) 1996 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.