From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Tue Jul 28 10:02:40 1998 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA23769 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 1998 10:02:39 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id JAA06796 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Tue, 28 Jul 1998 09:20:18 -0500 Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 09:20:18 -0500 Message-Id: <199807281420.JAA06796@lists.io.com> X-Authentication-Warning: lists.io.com: majordom set sender to owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com using -f From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #879 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 Tuesday, July 28 1998 Volume 01 : Number 879 In this digest: Re: IN> Sure-fire celestial detector? Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting [none] IN> Miltonian IN IN> Re: your mail Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting RE: IN> Re: your mail RE: IN> Re: your mail RE: IN> Re: your mail Re: IN> Re: your mail Re: IN> Re: your mail Re: IN> Why Stop the Apocalypse? (was RE: Tether-net book) Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting Re: IN> Singing Question Re: IN> Sure-fire celestial detector? Re: IN> Roles and what happens if you get caught without one Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting IN> Judaism 1.0 Re: IN> Re: your mail IN> INC Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting Re: IN> Judaism 1.0 IN> Miltonic Celestials IN> IN, Judaism, and more Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting Re: IN> Roles and what happens if you get caught without one IN> Judaism Again (Was Re: Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting) Re: IN> Singing Question ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 23:32:00 -0700 From: "E Kumar" Subject: Re: IN> Sure-fire celestial detector? Celestial or not, but how about wether they're infernal or not? No obvious behaviour statements please. My PC's had an Impudite 'friend' for so long that when they found out good ol' Joe was a demon, they actually felt bad about it.( And one of 'em is a Malakite!) Will wonders never cease. N.B. The Malakim still wants him dead, but he *does* feel bad. Akira-- - ---------- > From: David Edelstein > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com > Subject: IN> Sure-fire celestial detector? > Date: Monday, July 27, 1998 7:54 PM > > >>>A PC came up with a trivial way to determine whether a given person > is a celestial or not -- use the Corporeal Song of Dreams on the > target. If there is a dreamscape, then you know the target is human. > If there isn't one, then you know the target is a celestial.<<< > > > You can only find a dreamscape if the subject is dreaming, so first you > have to perform the Song on someone while they are asleep. (Of course > celestials don't normally sleep, but if you follow someone around long > enough to ascertain that, you can probably deduce whether or not he's a > celestial anyway...) > > -David ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 09:15:53 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting On Tue, 28 Jul 1998, Jo Hart wrote: > Well, does In Nom current canon include the following (all of which define > orthodox Jewish belief)? > a) There is one God. Depends on how you define "God". > b) He was the first being & has existed forever/ will exist forever > c) He is the God of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob (doesn't specifically say so but > I think we can reasonably assume). Possibly. I wouldn't take it for granted. > d) God is the master of the universe & it is wrong to direct prayers to any > other being. Certainly not. IN says very little about what is "right" and "wrong", and certainly hasn't said anything about prayer. Praying to some other god might strengthen it, if it exists in the Marches, but that hasn't been defined as "wrong" as far as I can remember. > e) The messiah has not already turned up. (It should say if he had!) > f) One day, the messiah will come (iffy... but definitely not ruled out.) Iffy? Not mentioned at all is more like it. > g) At some point, God will reward the good and punish the wicked. Doesn't say God does it. Selfish people go to Hell, unselfish go to Heaven, more or less. As far as I know, IN canon hasn't said anything about God sitting judgement on the last day, or anything like that. > Now, the important bits which haven't been addressed are: > > g) God communicates through his prophets (& Moses was the one who saw God > most clearly) > > (Note that g is also required by both Christianity & Islam, with a caveat > that favours their preferred prophets instead, so if that is out then those > both get hit also.) Considering that God doesn't even communicate with His -angels- very much, and that IN hasn't made any mention what so ever of prophets, I'd say this is highly dubious. > h) Veracity of the Torah (I don't think we expect IN to go this far, > although you could say so without really harming the game, especially as it > is accepted by Xtianity & Islam, with their favoured amendments seen as > over-ruling some parts (Naturally this is heresy to Jews, because an item > of faith is that the Torah was perfect). Whole segments of learning are > based on the fact that there are supposedly hidden codes inside it :) ). Like you say, it hasn't been mentioned directly. I don't know enough of the Torah (read: hardly anything at all, beyond knowing it is connected with Judaism) to judge whether it is applicable to IN, but the fact that it hasn't been mentioned might be a hint. > If most of those things have some basis in game-fact, then it isn't a > million miles away from Judaism. It's just that... there is a lot of > _extra_ stuff. Well, I don't think many of these things have a basis in IN canon. IMO, the fact that Judaism doesn't assert the existance of Lucifer and Christianity does is a contradiction between the two. Ask a jew and a christian, and I think they'd agree with that. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 09:03:07 +0100 From: "Hart, Joanna" Subject: [none] NB. I'm not especially trying to push one set of beliefs here. It is just my interpretation of the main rulebook. >> a) There is one God. >Depends on how you define "God". Creator of the universe et al ;) If you want to play a game in which everyone's beliefs are right, there is always Mage... (And if you want to play one in which everyone's beliefs are wrong, there is always Kult, or CoC...). My reading of the book is that a standard view of the IN background includes monotheism as a fact. You can play it differently, but that's non-canon. >> d) God is the master of the universe & it is wrong to direct prayers to any >> other being. >Certainly not. IN says very little about what is "right" and "wrong", and >certainly hasn't said anything about prayer. Praying to some other god >might strengthen it, if it exists in the Marches, but that hasn't been >defined as "wrong" as far as I can remember. I'm assuming that it was on this basis that Uriel conducted the purification crusades. So even if it happens not to be true, a significant number of archangels agree with it. >> g) At some point, God will reward the good and punish the wicked. >Doesn't say God does it. Selfish people go to Hell, unselfish go to >Heaven, more or less. That's near enough for government work. (Although IMG Hell cheats and gets some souls it really has no right to...) >IMO, the fact that Judaism doesn't assert the existance of Lucifer and >Christianity does is a contradiction between the two. I think the fact that Judaism doesn't recognise Jesus as either the son of God or the messiah is a bigger contradiction... (and IN falls on the Jewish side on this one, in that it doesn't mention Jesus at all IIRC.) jo PS. On another topic, has anyone thought about trying to adapt IN to Milton's Paradise Lost? You'd have to change the names/ characteristics of the demon princes and the geography of Hell but it might be quite interesting to do... - --- "Some people leave money for the improvement of public buildings. I can leave dynamite for the improvement of public buildings." -- G. K. Chesterton ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 04:28:53 -0400 From: Pete Overton Subject: IN> Miltonian IN >PS. On another topic, has anyone thought about trying to adapt IN to >Milton's Paradise Lost? You'd have to change the names/ characteristics of >the demon princes and the geography of Hell but it might be quite >interesting to do... This is something I have been dying to do since I picked up IN (some of the folks on the list are aware of my opinion on the canon version :) but I have never had the time for yet to sit down and really hammer away at it. I'd be interested to hear if anyone has been working at it and how it has been going. Pete ===================================================== Pete Overton | E-Mail: pover@golden.net | ICQ:2192976 "If the world will end in fire or in ice, let it. I don't care, as long as I Dream... I don't care..." -- ^Daisy^, Undernet Exit Line ===================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 10:44:23 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: IN> Re: your mail On Tue, 28 Jul 1998, Hart, Joanna wrote: > NB. I'm not especially trying to push one set of beliefs here. It is just my > interpretation of the main rulebook. Same for me. :) > >> a) There is one God. > > >Depends on how you define "God". > > Creator of the universe et al ;) OK, just checking. :) > >> d) God is the master of the universe & it is wrong to direct prayers to > any > >> other being. > > >Certainly not. IN says very little about what is "right" and "wrong", and > >certainly hasn't said anything about prayer. Praying to some other god > >might strengthen it, if it exists in the Marches, but that hasn't been > >defined as "wrong" as far as I can remember. > > I'm assuming that it was on this basis that Uriel conducted the purification > crusades. So even if it happens not to be true, a significant number of > archangels agree with it. Uriel's Crusade was his own idea, not conducted on God's orders. And "a significant number of archangels" disagreed as well. Remember that there is still debate on whether Uriel's getting pulle dUpstairs was a reward or just a way to keep him from doing more damage. Furthermore, Uriel didn't just Crusade against the pagan gods, but also against all kinds of fantastic creatures, which -weren't- worshipped, so this argument is still kind of moot. > >> g) At some point, God will reward the good and punish the wicked. > > >Doesn't say God does it. Selfish people go to Hell, unselfish go to > >Heaven, more or less. > > That's near enough for government work. (Although IMG Hell cheats and gets > some souls it really has no right to...) IMO, it's very different, but YMMV. > >IMO, the fact that Judaism doesn't assert the existance of Lucifer and > >Christianity does is a contradiction between the two. > > I think the fact that Judaism doesn't recognise Jesus as either the son of > God or the messiah is a bigger contradiction... (and IN falls on the Jewish > side on this one, in that it doesn't mention Jesus at all IIRC.) I was just pointing out one difference. In IN, the existance of Lucifer is - -very- important. IMO, with my very limited knowledge of Judaism, it's a big enough difference that IN isn't Judaistic. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 10:44:42 +0200 (MET DST) From: Jasper Reijer Floor Subject: Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting On Mon, 27 Jul 1998, Earl Wajenberg wrote: > Jasper Reijer Floor wrote: > > > Excuse me? You do realize that could be considered an extermely > > offensive statement, don't you? > > No, I don't. Well, I don't believe you meant for it to be offensive, but basicly, you're saying that jewish belief is a subset of christian belief. I'll agree there is overlap, in the same way that my personality is the same as that of my fathers. As to what IN does, I think it is based more on christian belief than on jewish belief. However, IN is not what christians believe. It tries to allow for all the other beliefs in the world somehow (either by saying their gods are in the marches, or saying that they are worshiping god). This means that IN has absorbed some of the beliefs of other cultures, but I still believe it more christian based than anything else. As for it being zoroastrianist, well, I wouldn't know, but I believe that the two beliefs are similar on certain principles (one god, a powerfull evil creature who opposes...) so that maybe when they abstracted from the christian, they ended up with something similar to what you would get if took zorastrianism as baseline. I only mean to say that the writers started with a christian bias. mvg, Jasper Floor Nothing is given so profusely as advice. Francis, Duc de La Rochefoucauld - Maxim 110 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 19:08:09 +1000 From: "Stevenson, Christopher (Pubs)" Subject: RE: IN> Re: your mail 8< Furthermore, Uriel didn't just Crusade against the pagan gods, but also against all kinds of fantastic creatures, which -weren't- worshipped, so this argument is still kind of moot. 8< Anders Gabrielsson In some ways I think even mythical creatures were worshipped, as they epitomised various beliefs about the way the world worked. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 11:33:37 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: RE: IN> Re: your mail On Tue, 28 Jul 1998, Stevenson, Christopher (Pubs) wrote: > 8< > Furthermore, Uriel didn't just Crusade against the pagan gods, but > also > against all kinds of fantastic creatures, which -weren't- > worshipped, so > this argument is still kind of moot. > > 8< > > In some ways I think even mythical creatures were worshipped, as they > epitomised various beliefs about the way the world worked. That's drawing it a bit far, I think. Was the unicorn worshipped? Mermaids? Dragons? If they were, so were many ordinary animals, and Uriel didn't seem to have anything against them. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 11:09:54 +0100 From: "Hart, Joanna" Subject: RE: IN> Re: your mail >That's drawing it a bit far, I think. Was the unicorn worshipped? >Mermaids? Dragons? If they were, so were many ordinary animals, and Uriel >didn't seem to have anything against them. I haven't actually read The Marches, but I've assumed that Uriel began on the actual ethereal gods, and then got a bit over-enthusiastic and decided that he might as well mop up the rest whilst he was at it. jo - --- "Some people leave money for the improvement of public buildings. I can leave dynamite for the improvement of public buildings." -- G. K. Chesterton ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 06:58:27 -0400 From: "Thomas J. Ladegard" Subject: Re: IN> Re: your mail Anders Gabrielsson wrote: > > >> g) At some point, God will reward the good and punish the wicked. > > > > >Doesn't say God does it. Selfish people go to Hell, unselfish go to > > >Heaven, more or less. > > > > That's near enough for government work. (Although IMG Hell cheats and gets > > some souls it really has no right to...) > > IMO, it's very different, but YMMV. And who sends souls to Hell? I find the two angels at the gates of Hell with the right of final refusal indicative of the fact that God is strongly involved. > > >IMO, the fact that Judaism doesn't assert the existance of Lucifer and > > >Christianity does is a contradiction between the two. > > > > I think the fact that Judaism doesn't recognise Jesus as either the son of > > God or the messiah is a bigger contradiction... (and IN falls on the Jewish > > side on this one, in that it doesn't mention Jesus at all IIRC.) > > I was just pointing out one difference. In IN, the existance of Lucifer is > -very- important. IMO, with my very limited knowledge of Judaism, it's a > big enough difference that IN isn't Judaistic. Actually, Job confirms the existance of the Adversary. In Judaic thought, however, his duties are assigned by God and his temptations are at God's direction. - - Tom ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 13:22:33 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> Re: your mail On Tue, 28 Jul 1998, Thomas J. Ladegard wrote: > And who sends souls to Hell? I find the two angels at the gates of Hell with the > right of final refusal indicative of the fact that God is strongly involved. > > > > >IMO, the fact that Judaism doesn't assert the existance of Lucifer and > > > >Christianity does is a contradiction between the two. > > > > > > I think the fact that Judaism doesn't recognise Jesus as either the son of > > > God or the messiah is a bigger contradiction... (and IN falls on the Jewish > > > side on this one, in that it doesn't mention Jesus at all IIRC.) > > > > I was just pointing out one difference. In IN, the existance of Lucifer is > > -very- important. IMO, with my very limited knowledge of Judaism, it's a > > big enough difference that IN isn't Judaistic. > > Actually, Job confirms the existance of the Adversary. In Judaic thought, > however, his duties are assigned by God and his temptations are at God's > direction. From what I've heard on this list, Judaism doesn't even have Heaven and Hell, at least not the way Christianity does. If the Adversary, who isn't necessarily Lucifer, is working in God's orders, that's still very different from IN, or at least the way the AA:s see the world. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 08:08:29 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Why Stop the Apocalypse? (was RE: Tether-net book) > Yeah, the Apocalypse is more of an excuse to have an "End of the World > Party"! I wasn't clear last night, apparently. What I meant was, why advert the apocalypse when it's so much more interesting just to go ahead and run it all the way through to it's messy, bloody, nasty conclusion. My stand - and I stand alone, woo! - is that averting the end is a total weenie way out. Don't want to be a weenie? Then don't go down that road. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 08:16:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting > > h) Veracity of the Torah (I don't think we expect IN to go this far, > > although you could say so without really harming the game, especially as it > > is accepted by Xtianity & Islam, with their favoured amendments seen as > > over-ruling some parts (Naturally this is heresy to Jews, because an item > > of faith is that the Torah was perfect). Whole segments of learning are > > based on the fact that there are supposedly hidden codes inside it :) ). > > Like you say, it hasn't been mentioned directly. I don't know enough of > the Torah (read: hardly anything at all, beyond knowing it is connected > with Judaism) to judge whether it is applicable to IN, but the fact that > it hasn't been mentioned might be a hint. This might be a little picky, but I have to ask: Why are you arguing about Judaism in _any_ context if all you know from it is that the Torah exists, and that's it? And arguing with people who either have somewhat decent religious backgrounds or - god help us all - are Jews? I utterly don't understand - and this might be an early morning pre-coffee thing. But if you haven't a clue, why are you continuing to post? Oh, btw, the Torah is the first five books of the old testament: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Within is contained the mitzvot, or the Law, which was handed down from God to Moses. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 08:19:48 -0400 From: neel@cswv.com (Neel Krishnaswami) Subject: Re: IN> Singing Question Julian Breen wrote: > >When a song is sung with verbal components, what is it sung _in_? The >native language of the singer? Or does the singer start spouting off in >Latin or Ancient Sumerian or somesuch? IMC, the ritual to invoke a song varies according to character concept. A Song is a way of using your celestial nature to transcend the laws of material reality, and as such works in a fairly personal way. So some recite in Hebrew, and others use Elvis tunes. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 08:24:51 -0400 From: neel@cswv.com (Neel Krishnaswami) Subject: Re: IN> Sure-fire celestial detector? David Edelstein > >>>>A PC came up with a trivial way to determine whether a given person >is a celestial or not -- use the Corporeal Song of Dreams on the >target. If there is a dreamscape, then you know the target is human. >If there isn't one, then you know the target is a celestial.<<< > >You can only find a dreamscape if the subject is dreaming, so first you >have to perform the Song on someone while they are asleep. (Of course >celestials don't normally sleep, but if you follow someone around long >enough to ascertain that, you can probably deduce whether or not he's a >celestial anyway...) I thought that it wasn't possible to enter the dreamscape of a waking person (though you could look into it and see daydreams), but that there wasn't really any problem with finding it. Speaking of, could a Cherub or Djinn on the ethereal plane find the dreamscape of someone they're attuned to? - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 08:26:27 -0400 From: neel@cswv.com (Neel Krishnaswami) Subject: Re: IN> Roles and what happens if you get caught without one Earl Wajenberg wrote: > >This just struck me: Celestials are supposed to be very concerned >about interfering with the Symphony. A reality re-write strikes >me as a very major interference. Shouldn't it cause an >enormous disturbance? This would be another argument for doing >Roles by forgery and imposture. How is it handled in TV shows like "Touched By An Angel" and "Highway to Heaven"? I am asking because I don't know; I don't own a television. - -- Neel Krishnaswami neelk@alum.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 14:38:25 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting On Tue, 28 Jul 1998, Emily Dresner wrote: > > > > h) Veracity of the Torah (I don't think we expect IN to go this far, > > > although you could say so without really harming the game, especially as it > > > is accepted by Xtianity & Islam, with their favoured amendments seen as > > > over-ruling some parts (Naturally this is heresy to Jews, because an item > > > of faith is that the Torah was perfect). Whole segments of learning are > > > based on the fact that there are supposedly hidden codes inside it :) ). > > > > Like you say, it hasn't been mentioned directly. I don't know enough of > > the Torah (read: hardly anything at all, beyond knowing it is connected > > with Judaism) to judge whether it is applicable to IN, but the fact that > > it hasn't been mentioned might be a hint. > > This might be a little picky, but I have to ask: Why are you arguing about > Judaism in _any_ context if all you know from it is that the Torah > exists, and that's it? And arguing with people who either have somewhat > decent religious backgrounds or - god help us all - are Jews? I utterly > don't understand - and this might be an early morning pre-coffee thing. > But if you haven't a clue, why are you continuing to post? I think you misunderstood what I wrote - I said, or at least meant to say, that I don't know about the Torah, not that I don't know about Judaism. I'm by no means an expert on Judaism, and I don't think I've tried to pose as one either. The beginning of this argument was that someone said that IN asserts basically the same things as Judaism (or something similar), and I contend that it doesn't. The person posted a list of things that he or she thought were included in IN canon, and I pointed out that I didn't think that was right. Then the discussion has floated off in all kinds of directions, and this is one of them, and I'm not on very familiar territory any more. Besides, what I said above was that the Torah hasn't been mentioned in IN. This is more or less true, whether I know anything about Judaism or not. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 05:40:14 PDT From: "Doug Muir" Subject: IN> Judaism 1.0 >Dude, do I ever want to see Judaism OS. Is that the one where, if you >mention the name of the hacker who wrote it, he personally shows up at >your house and strikes you dead? Heh. That's version 1.0, or "Orthodox". There are later versions that don't have this bug. I grew up with v. 3.1, "Reform". Mind you, there are those who say that the strike-you-dead thing is not a bug, it's a *feature*... and a core component of the OS at that. These guys tend to think that versions 3.0 or later are WAY too user-friendly, and in fact are not Judaism at all, but some different and inferior OS altogether... Doug M. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 08:42:48 -0400 From: "Thomas J. Ladegard" Subject: Re: IN> Re: your mail Anders Gabrielsson wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jul 1998, Thomas J. Ladegard wrote: > > > And who sends souls to Hell? I find the two angels at the gates of Hell with the > > right of final refusal indicative of the fact that God is strongly involved. > > > > > > >IMO, the fact that Judaism doesn't assert the existance of Lucifer and > > > > >Christianity does is a contradiction between the two. > > > > > > > > I think the fact that Judaism doesn't recognise Jesus as either the son of > > > > God or the messiah is a bigger contradiction... (and IN falls on the Jewish > > > > side on this one, in that it doesn't mention Jesus at all IIRC.) > > > > > > I was just pointing out one difference. In IN, the existance of Lucifer is > > > -very- important. IMO, with my very limited knowledge of Judaism, it's a > > > big enough difference that IN isn't Judaistic. > > > > Actually, Job confirms the existance of the Adversary. In Judaic thought, > > however, his duties are assigned by God and his temptations are at God's > > direction. > > From what I've heard on this list, Judaism doesn't even have Heaven and > Hell, at least not the way Christianity does. If the Adversary, who isn't > necessarily Lucifer, is working in God's orders, that's still very > different from IN, or at least the way the AA:s see the world. You're right, Judaism doesn't have Heaven or Hell the way Christianity. Of course, technically, neither does the Bible. Popular Christian ideas of Hell, and especially those used in IN are mostly drawn from medieval writers, Dante in particular. And yes, Lucifer isn't exactly Satan, the Adversary of Job (not that Christianity recognises a difference), but Judaism doesn't offer the possibility of anything being outside of God's plan. So, you're right, this is different from how the AA's view the universe, but as there is no canon answer to this question, there is no real reason to assume that Judaism isn't right on this. God isn't talking. Much, although admitted not all, of modern Judaic thought is at least not contradicted by IN. In the same way much, but not all, of modern Christian thought is at least not contradicted by IN. I haven't really finished looking at it through the eyes of Islam yet. IN postulates a root religion of which these three, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, each have pieces of the truth. Come to think of it, early Islamic thought has much the same idea, that all of the "children of the book" (The Torah and Tanakh) come from the same base, that each is a refinement of the last, and that while, as the latest (and presumably the last) Islam is the most perfect of the revelations, both Jews and the Christians have true religions. My personal call, YMMV of course, is that SJG was reaching for the same kind of idea, that each of these had some of the truth, but not all of it. But it certainly isn't exclusionistic of these. This also doesn't mean that it isn't exlcusionistic of other religions, but hey, to paraphrase and earlier and very much correct post, that's the way this game universe works. If you want a game the includes, or easily includes at least, non-monotheistic religions, play something else. - - Tom ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 08:50:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: IN> INC Just so everyone knows - I walked into work and had a ton of work, on top of my normal workload, dumped on me at 8:42am, not including reading and answering mail, yadda yadda. Since work pays me, and SJG does not, SJG is taking a back seat. So all new links and fixes and updates and the suchlike to the INC (and very likely the whole site) will be waiting until the end of the week at best. Cest la vie. - - Em Current Quote: Daimon leans over to the Boss, "You are familiar with _sarcasm_, yes?" Kobal blinks at Daimon. "No, but it sounds vaguely interesting." Daimon whispers to his Boss, "Don't try to out wit yourself, sir." Kobal murmurs back, "Impossible. I'm far too clever an opponent for someone of my meager intellect." Daimon leans over, whispering, "They have a column in Reader's Digest for people like you." - Exchange during the Mock Trial ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 09:12:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting > Besides, what I said above was that the Torah hasn't been mentioned in IN. > This is more or less true, whether I know anything about Judaism or not. Neither has most of the New Testament, but no one is arguing that it has no bearing on IN. *shrug* Just because it's not in the sourcebooks doesn't mean it doesn't have bearing on the game. In Nomine is actually so far away from Christianity, Judaism AND Islam that it's not even in the question. The closest is to Christianity, but in reality it's more of a nicely tweaked version of badly represented Zoroastarianism. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's something to keep in mind. - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 09:17:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Emily Dresner Subject: Re: IN> Judaism 1.0 > Heh. That's version 1.0, or "Orthodox". There are later versions that > don't have this bug. I grew up with v. 3.1, "Reform". Ya, me too that way. Law? Law? There's a Law? Wait, where? > Mind you, there are those who say that the strike-you-dead thing is not > a bug, it's a *feature*... and a core component of the OS at that. > These guys tend to think that versions 3.0 or later are WAY too > user-friendly, and in fact are not Judaism at all, but some different > and inferior OS altogether... Hee hee hee hee. :) "Oi," said the Rabbi (or my friend Laurel, it's hard to tell), "of course God exists! What a silly question. Do you think that Moses lead the Isrealites out of Egypt with a song, dance, and a catchy toon? But I can't even say His name or He'll strike me down. You'd think after all we've done for Him he wouldn't be so touchy." - - Em ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 09:18:14 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: IN> Miltonic Celestials Hart, Joanna wrote: > PS. On another topic, has anyone thought about trying to adapt IN to > Milton's Paradise Lost? This reminds me -- does anyone know of a place on the Web that lists all the celestials in "Paradise Lost"? I'd think that would make a nice little mine of celestial names, if it coould be found. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 15:44:48 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: IN> IN, Judaism, and more On Tue, 28 Jul 1998, Thomas J. Ladegard wrote: Snipping a lot to save bandwidth. I hope I'm not misrepresenting your position, or ignoring anything important. > So, you're right, this is different from how the AA's view the > universe, but as there is no canon answer to this question, there is no real reason to > assume that Judaism isn't right on this. God isn't talking. Much, although admitted > not all, of modern Judaic thought is at least not contradicted by IN. In the same way > much, but not all, of modern Christian thought is at least not contradicted by IN. I > haven't really finished looking at it through the eyes of Islam yet. IN postulates a > root religion of which these three, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, each have pieces > of the truth. There's not real reason to assume that Judaism is right either. I don't think IN postulates any kind of religion - it postulates a certain kind of reality. Religion is of man, not of nature, IMO, and the IN God doesn't seem to care much who or what humanity worships, as long as they Act Good(TM). Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 15:47:02 +0200 (DFT) From: Anders Gabrielsson Subject: Re: IN> Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting On Tue, 28 Jul 1998, Emily Dresner wrote: > > > Besides, what I said above was that the Torah hasn't been mentioned in IN. > > This is more or less true, whether I know anything about Judaism or not. > > Neither has most of the New Testament, but no one is arguing that it has > no bearing on IN. *shrug* Just because it's not in the sourcebooks > doesn't mean it doesn't have bearing on the game. > > In Nomine is actually so far away from Christianity, Judaism AND Islam > that it's not even in the question. The closest is to Christianity, but > in reality it's more of a nicely tweaked version of badly represented > Zoroastarianism. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's something to > keep in mind. I think we're pretty much on the same side of this argument, if one wants to talk about sides. :) I'm just trying to argue against the position that Judaism is not contradicted by IN. Anders Gabrielsson anders@stp.ling.uu.se The contents of this message belong to me and nobody else. So there! May you have the knowledge of a sage, and the wisdom of a child. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 09:48:24 -0500 From: Earl Wajenberg Subject: Re: IN> Roles and what happens if you get caught without one Neel Krishnaswami wrote: > > Earl Wajenberg wrote: > > > >This just struck me: Celestials are supposed to be very concerned > >about interfering with the Symphony. A reality re-write strikes > >me as a very major interference. Shouldn't it cause an > >enormous disturbance? This would be another argument for doing > >Roles by forgery and imposture. > > How is it handled in TV shows like "Touched By An Angel" and > "Highway to Heaven"? In "Highway to Heaven," the angel (and sometimes his mortal sidekick) usually appeared as pinch-hitters of some kind. "Hi, Ralph couldn't make it, so they sent me." No one ever asks who They are -- the faceless bureaucracy, the mortals assume. I always supposed there was some divine intervention to afflict Ralph with a stomach bug or an inspired need for a week off, plus some forged documentation, but that was just my supposal. Other times, they were the new guys on the job, once more sent by the faceless bureaucracy. Or they were "passing strangers" turning up at the providential moment. "Touched by an Angel" appears to use the same basic plot devices, with a few differences. The main one is simply that each episode usually has at least three angels, rather than just one, with consequent multiplication of roles. One may be a cop, another may be a family councilor, a third may be an emergency room medic. Another difference is that sometimes an angel needs no role at all. This is most commonly the case for Andrew, who is an angel of death. Or Tess, the supervisor of the trio, may not have a role, just pop in to give information, instruction, and advice. Also, these angels have a better props department, I think. They often make whole automobiles appear and vanish. Once, they whipped up an entire gourmet restaurant _ex_nihilo_, for a setting. (They were then rather embarassed when a stranger not in their scenario wandered in and demanded service. And he stayed and stayed because, after all, the food was *really* good...) Another time, the senior angel, Tess, conjured up a whole house. Michael Landon's angel in "Highway," on the other hand, barely had wardrobe control. Finally, these angels are a little more daring about the roles they assume, if I correctly recall "Highway to Heaven" for comparison. They'll show up, as I said, as cops, or paralegals, or other folk that are not usually that volatile in their social position, and would be expected to have long paper trails. The angel of "Highway" was distinctly portrayed as a drifter, as the very title underlines, and most of his roles were likewise transient. Earl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 14:57:09 +0100 From: Julian Breen Subject: IN> Judaism Again (Was Re: Eastern religion in the In-Nomine setting) >> >In general, any credence given to Christianity can also be applied >> >to Judiasm, since Christianity affirms essentially everything >> >Judaism does. >> > >> >> I understand what you're saying, Earl, but until we see Judaism in >> canon...Then I stand by my comment. >> > >It won't happen - seeing straight Judaism in canon, I mean. Jewish >folklore, maybe. Jewish history, or at least Judges, Samuel, Kings, >Chronicles and a prophet or two, well, possibly but I'm not holding my >breath. But Judaism itself? In Nomine is basically >Persia/Zoroastarianistic with nice Christian overtones, it's so far away >from Judaism that it's in another universe entirely. > I feel a strong sense of deja-vu, Em ;) History is more along the lines of what I had in mind by this anyhow. A little canon on such things as the patronage of the Jews would have been nice. After all, if Christianity shares common beliefs with Judaism, and Judaism predates Christianity, Heaven must have had a finger in there somewhere. All of the religions have got bits and pieces right and wrong. As Jon F. Zeigler once posited on these lists, maybe the reason that the Hebrews see Heaven as radically different to how it actually _is_ in the game is because they were introduced to it pre-Fall? _Or_ maybe the Prophets were shown dreams (post-Fall) of what Heaven used to be like and their outlook developed around this. Would that be an acceptable explanation? (Side note: Could this be why angels don't like referring to Lucifer as Satan? It was a nickname for him that he acquired before the Fall, and thus brings back painful memories of the beginnings of upset in Heaven.) - -- Julian jules@bigjules.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 13:47:53 +0100 From: Julian Breen Subject: Re: IN> Singing Question >I thought songs were just a cooler name than *magic*. >In tethers or in heaven, where an angels got lots of time I wouldn't think >angels would even have to spend essence, as long as they "sang the song". >But in most situations, they just blow off the essence and zap- a song is >born! My spin anyways! >Where does it mention components of a song anyhow? Pg 47, main rulebook. - -- Julian jules@bigjules.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #879 ******************************* The material here is (C) 1997 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.