Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Simon Fuller sfuller@******.com.au
Subject: Darwin
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:48:26 +1000
Are there any facts on evolution and the Awakening? Maybe creationism is
enjoying a revival in the 60's.
Message no. 2
From: leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu
Subject: Darwin
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 06:37:40 -0600 (CST)
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, Simon Fuller wrote:

> Are there any facts on evolution and the Awakening?

Like what? The Duck-Billed Platypus is actually the non-Awakened decendent
of an Awakened being that hasn't survived (or has?) into the Sixth World?

> Maybe creationism is enjoying a revival in the 60's.

Doubtful, unless MitS changed stuff. Didn't the Grimoire state that
Christianity looked up magic as a tool of the Devil? And other religions
weren't as lenient as that?

Wouldn't creationism fall apart if God created man, outlawed magic, but
created the manasphere and the human ability to manipulate it?

Idle thought: Could the magicians in the holy texts actually have been
immortal elves that used a little of their stored magical power?


-Jared Leisner
leisnj48@*****.edu
Message no. 3
From: ( Arcaist ) arcaist@*****.de
Subject: Darwin
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 13:50:13 +0100
> Idle thought: Could the magicians in the holy
> texts actually have been immortal elves that
> used a little of their stored magical power?

Sure. And Jesus was... NOOOOOOOOO!!!! ; )

--
(>) Arcaist
Qui tacet, consentire videtur.

BABGY #101 ::: MMLX ::: www.s-s-r.de
Message no. 4
From: Allen Versfeld moe@*******.com
Subject: Darwin
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 15:05:34 +0200
leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu wrote:
>
>
> Doubtful, unless MitS changed stuff. Didn't the Grimoire state that
> Christianity looked up magic as a tool of the Devil? And other religions
> weren't as lenient as that?

I seem to remember something about the church being rather divided on
this issue (so what's new), and the vatican having their own magicians.

--
Allen Versfeld
moe@*******.com

"As a computer, I find your faith in technology to be quite amusing"
Message no. 5
From: Peter Steen Kristiansen sds@**.auc.dk
Subject: Darwin
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 14:10:19 +0100 (MET)
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, Allen Versfeld wrote:
> leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu wrote:
> >
> > Doubtful, unless MitS changed stuff. Didn't the Grimoire state that
> > Christianity looked up magic as a tool of the Devil? And other religions
> > weren't as lenient as that?
> I seem to remember something about the church being rather divided on
> this issue (so what's new), and the vatican having their own magicians.

As far as I remember the Christian church regarded magic and
spirits/elementals as being part of the natural world and as such were
not inherently evil, but how the sorceror/conjurer used those powers
dictated evil/goodness.

--SDS--
SRC v0.22 SR1++ SR2+ SR3++ h+ b++(+) B- (yeah right!) UB+ IE+ RN+ W- dk+
sa++ ma++ sh ad++ ri++ mc-- rk? m- gm M+ P
Message no. 6
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: Darwin
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 12:41:08 -0500
Allen Versfeld wrote:

> leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu wrote:
> >
> >
> > Doubtful, unless MitS changed stuff. Didn't the Grimoire state that
> > Christianity looked up magic as a tool of the Devil? And other religions
> > weren't as lenient as that?
>
> I seem to remember something about the church being rather divided on
> this issue (so what's new), and the vatican having their own magicians.
>

Well, here's the MITS version: in 2024, Pope John XXV issued In Imago Dei (In
the Image of God) which set forth the Catholic doctrine:
1) Metahumans are possessed of souls and capable of salvation
2) Magical abilities are not, by nature, evil. But like any other human
ability, they can be used for evil or good.
3) Spirits are living manifestations of nature, thus, conjuring is not in
itself evil.

However, John XXV declared that conjuring touches on so many questions of
faith that Catholics may not practice it without specific permission from the
Church.

>
> --
> Allen Versfeld
> moe@*******.com
>
> "As a computer, I find your faith in technology to be quite amusing"

--
--Strago

In Italy for thirty years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder,
bloodshed - they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the
Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly
love, five hundred years of democracy and peace, and what did they produce?
The cuckoo clock!
-Orson Welles

SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2+ SR3++ h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN+ SRFF W+ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++
d+) gm+ M P
Message no. 7
From: Sebastian Wiers m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Darwin
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 11:42:51 -0600
:Are there any facts on evolution and the Awakening? Maybe creationism is
:enjoying a revival in the 60's.


The "black info" (FASA's term for shadowtalk) in "PAoE" and
"PAoNA" was
actually pretty good, and hinted at something like that in a few cases. Its
not so much that creationism as we know it gained credence (one poster was
mercilessly bashed for suggesting it), but that scientists could not find
any reasonable genetic links to any species that could provide a
evolutionary pathway. Chupicabra might be one case (check "Cyberpirates").
In most cases they could, but with some of the real freakazoids (gargoyles,
IIRC), even some individuals within the species could not be genetically
linked to each other.
Anyhow, the implication was that yes, a few of the beings were quite
clearly "created", or at least not biological in origin. If they were
"evolved", their origin was so old, it left no link to any living species.
If you want to blame it on creationism, you could, but myself, I'd expect
some even less beneficent force was at work.

Mongoose

__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Message no. 8
From: Simon Fuller sfuller@******.com.au
Subject: Darwin
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 14:44:56 +1000
-----Original Message-----
From: leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu <leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu>
To: Shadowrn <shadowrn@*********.com>
Date: Thursday, March 23, 2000 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: Darwin


>> Maybe creationism is enjoying a revival in the 60's.
>
>Doubtful, unless MitS changed stuff. Didn't the Grimoire state that
>Christianity looked up magic as a tool of the Devil? And other religions
>weren't as lenient as that?
>
>Wouldn't creationism fall apart if God created man, outlawed magic, but
>created the manasphere and the human ability to manipulate it?
>

>-Jared Leisner
> leisnj48@*****.edu
>
Without getting all theological, God made all sorts of stuff and told Man
not to touch. Half of Genesis is about this very subject. What I mean is, in
a non specific religious way, that the evolutionists are left guessing when
it comes to things like dragons, the magophiles say they imprinted from the
Astral or something, and the creationists just say, well there's proof, they
can't have evolved, must have been God. There is no good counter arguement
here, so it is easier to believe.
Message no. 9
From: Simon Fuller sfuller@******.com.au
Subject: Darwin
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 14:51:04 +1000
-----Original Message-----
From: Sebastian Wiers <m0ng005e@*********.com>
To: shadowrn@*********.com <shadowrn@*********.com>
Date: Friday, March 24, 2000 3:55 AM
Subject: Re: Darwin


Chupicabra might be one case (check "Cyberpirates").
>In most cases they could, but with some of the real freakazoids (gargoyles,
>IIRC), even some individuals within the species could not be genetically
>linked to each other.
>Mongoose


The Goatsucker is in Shadowrun? For this reason alone I might buy
Cyberpirares :)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Darwin, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!