If it's Run Baby Run...you should probably read Wilkerson's The Cross and The Switchblade first.

Before I respond I just wanna clarify - I'm not trying to bust your chops or be a jerk here Shades (though I fear I'm succeeding ), I just feel I need to point out the problems I'm seeing. Nothing personal, k?



Similar somewhat to Theo's three doors approach I see. That makes the situation somewhat better, but still is it loving to allow/cause someone to cease to exist simply because they didn't jump through the right religious hoop while alive?



The problem is, this statement "we will consider the judgments just and fair" says nothing about the actual justice or fairness of God, but rather speaks about human opinion. Depending on who (from the context) "we" is intended to be this could mean any number of things:

- "We" meaning those who are saved/end up in heaven. Of course these people will think everything is just and fair - they are blinded by their reward and love of God. (One can see the same thing at work today, just bring up the inherent injustice of the biblical genocides - as we've seen many Christians will excuse even such blatant atrocity due to their devotion).

- "We" meaning the entire human race. This would mean the entire human race would have the same opinion on something - I seriously doubt it. Further, I doubt the damned would agree that their fate is just or fair (look at how people behave when busted on something now). Lastly, according to the three doors idea, those that cease to exist cannot agree that anything is just or fair.



This essentially changes the definition of human to something we cannot understand and have never experienced or seen (only those who knew Jesus first hand in the 1st century would have seen it - we cannot).



This is acceptable, if one does not presuppose an all powerful deity. If one conceives of God as all powerful, the previous objection still applies, albeit in a milder form.

(For what it's worth I don't presume that Christ - or any other god - is all powerful, as the evidence points against such. I do consider the Sacred/the Father to be essentially all powerful, but then I'm far from certain that it/he is sentient in any way we can understand)



Is this "Or once humanity left God's presence (the fall)," not the same thing as saying that? Adam and Eve (much less the rest of humanity) certainly made no conscious decision to the point of "lets leave God's presence".



There is a difference between ritual impurity and the type of sin you are talking about. In essence, ritual impurity (which for the context of the practices of the ancient world and from minutae that the Deuternomical laws cover - things which are utterly illogical to view as sins) says one should not stand in the divine presence until cleansed.

Sin (of the infectious magical type you seem to be talking about) on the other hand says one cannot stand in the divine presence until covered or cleansed, as you noted. Why this is so however is never really stated.

Do you see how this second view inflates sin (a mere action) into some kind of magical disease or force? One that even God could not overcome save by special circumstance (ie the elaborate ruse of the crucifixion)?



Nope, I'm assuming that the definition of omnipresence is consistent and meaningful - if God's omnipresence extends only to the physical world as you suggest, then God is not truly omnipresent. I'm well aware of the differences in operational rules (what would be called physics in the physical world) between the physical and spiritual realms



This however enters into the realm of speculation however, as we do not and cannot know what a pre-fall/post-judgment universe would look like or entail.



Then we would be merely slaves.[/quote]

I disagree - then we would truly be free (as I posit we are). In the view you are stating Jesus is essentially saying "love and serve me or die (ie cease to exist or be damned)". This is not freedom, it's coercion via threat. Regardless of how much one actually loves God in this view, the threat of "death" always lingers. In essence Shades, tis the view that you are positing that results in humanity being merely slaves regardless of what choice we make.

Now, in a hypothetical wherein God simply willed humanity reconciled to him, this changes. The statement Jesus makes is essentially "come, love and serve me" with no 'or else' tacked Mafia-style on the end. Should humans not wish to take that offer they could go on their merry way on their own with no negative consequences. That would be true freedom.



If you look at the pre-Christian religions you find one thing in common - one's fate in an afterlife is dependent on one's actions. In Hinduism, if one leads a virtuous life one is reincarnated into a better state. In Norse paganism, if one leads a life of valor and honor (in that order) one ends up in the All Father's hall of Valhalla. In Greek paganism, a virtuous life leads one to an afterlife in Elysium. In Egyptian paganism, a life lived in accordance to maat leads to admittance to the afterlife ("sinners" are consumed and cease to exist). In Judaism, one's actions are determined either sinful (and thus in need of sacrifice to make amends for) or just.

Note how none of this leaves any room for mistakes, good intentions gone awry, or disability on the part of the individual. People that are in situations wherein they cannot pursue a virtuous path are just as screwed as those that deliberately choose a "sinful" path in life. There is no mercy. In modern evangelical Christian terms, there is an inherent legalism in all of these systems (in their original states - Neo-pagan versions thereof, save the hardcore reconstructions, tend to be more forgiving). Also note how similar to these systems Original Sin based Christian soteriology (such as you are stating) is, with the sole difference being that the only action of consequence in the system you've described is belief in/relationship with Christ.

This is where the crucifixion comes in (to my present understanding). Through it, God basically says "that's cool, take a mulligan" so long as one's intent is pure (or reasonably so). As long as one doesn't deliberately choose a malicious path, mercy applies. And even if one does, should a change of heart occur mercy allows for past misdeeds to be washed away. The crucifixion was not strictly necessary for this (again to my present understanding) but was "for" mankind in the sense of being a sign of this. Kinda an "Now open for business!" type of thing.

Please note that there is also an element to the crucifixion that I am still failing to understand, something Christ vaguely explained to me in terms of "sympathetic magic" which I take to have some relation to the tradition of the scapegoat. Whatever this element is, I understand it to be a creative act (as in making something new that didn't exist before).



It's "One Holy Fire", though he makes frequent references to Run Baby Run.

Ritual purity was a temporary "covering" allowing humans to be in God's presence without death....the covering provided by Christ is the eternal version, so that we may be a Kingdom of Priests. You see I see the patterns laid down in the physical as the reflection of what is going on in the spiritual or heavenly realm.

I see God as omnipresent through His Presence...perhaps the Holy Spirit or something of the like. (There seems to be 7 spirits that God sends out in the world). This may or may not also be the Shekinah (the Glory of God).

I find it odd that you judge the justness of (per your own opinion) the only Diety that offers mercy as an option.

I believe that you’ll find that the common usage of the term derives from Augustine, who accepted Paul’s letters to be authoritative.


Then, I look forward to understanding your different take on universality and the origins of defect.


Agreed, although I see a divine fingerprints on existence and on humanity reaching its’ current state.

My mistake - I mixed terms inadvertently A demi-god is indeed a half-god (interestingly Jesus is a noted example on Wikipedia - which I would agree thereto) in the common parlance. In terms of Greek myth hero and demi-god are very nearly if not completely synonymous. My mistake made when I used the term demi-god as a stand in for lesser god (too much D&D perhaps )
Even with the terms of D&D I still find it difficult to describe what I understand Yahshua’s earthly existence to truly have been. There is a similarity to demi-godhood like Heracles in that Yahshua had an earthly parent and a divine source for balance of His DNA. Yahshua differs from Heracles in that Heracles to my knowledge was in no sense a diminished manifestation of Zeus, but was a completely separate being who had a supernatural strength attribute thanks to his divine parentage. Yahshua describes Himself more than as an avatar at least while not separated from Yahweh’s set-apart Spirit. The aspect of avatar-ness I’m less clear on D&D wise is just how much of the source deity is present in the physical avatar? Does the avatar commune with or otherwise channel power and words from the undiminished source deity?

Actually Theo I'd love to hear both your option on Augustinian Original Sin and a more detailed view of your own exegesis on the matter
I’m pleased to hear that and look forward to the discussion.



I’m unclear on just what you mean here. Are you thinking that Messiah taught fellowship with God on the basis of self-righteousness?
I do agree that the crucifixion does add mercy into the equation, as it makes possible the fulfillment of Passover, Unleavened Bread and First Fruits as the sacrificial Lamb of God that atones the penalty of sin. I find His clearest teaching on the matter to be in John 3, which is not justification purely through self-righteousness.

There’s much else in this thread that I hope to respond to but it may take me some time (days) to do so.

-Theophilus

That is my understanding also, and what I understand to be occurring according to Scripture.

What I see to be in the balance is that human souls are perishing apart from Spirit on the one side, but that relating to Spirit is based on each person’s free-willed choice.


This is a topic I think is worth greater examination. All of Adam’s descendants are cursed in the sense of being born mortal and not in a default state of fellowship with Yahweh’s Spirit. Abraham’s descendants are clearly not universally blessed as NM noted of the rich man in Luke 16 who received the Tanakh but still didn’t subscribe to its’ revelations in order to relate to Yah. What I suspect is pictured in the blessings associated with the children of Yisra’el is in the sense of having access to the Scriptures of Yahweh and for many acting on these to become related with Yah’s Spirit.

-Theophilus

It does make you wonder about omni-presence. It seems to me that this is a different matter from existing dimensionally outside of our time-space continuum, or being omni-present – fully aware of our existence.


It appears to me that you’ve identified why eternal beings wouldn’t reproduce.

-Theophilus

It does make you wonder about omni-presence. It seems to me that this is a different matter from existing dimensionally outside of our time-space continuum, or being omni-present – fully aware of our existence.


It appears to me that you’ve identified why eternal beings wouldn’t reproduce.


I hope that you can elaborate on you understanding as to why the crucifixion was needed (if it was indeed needed in your opinion) in order “to bring the option of mercy unto the metaphoric table”?

-Theophilus

In addendum to my previous opinion on Jesus's humanity:


There’s a clue that I found helpful to understanding Yahshua’s title in one source that said:

So while Messiah or Mashiyach as “anointed one” is certainly the more prevalent renderings and meanings among Christians and Jews, there is a basis to contend that MessiYah is indeed Anointed Implement of Yah. If the latter rendering is correct, it adds to the notions of kingship and / or Spiritual indwelling, the connection to the title being an implement of Yahweh is I think significant and revealing.

Repectfully,

-Theophilus

Firstly, it seems you are mistaking the means of cleansing (animal sacrifice vs the crucifixion) for the very real difference between the concept of ritual purity (and it's converse ritual impurity) and the concept of sin that you have presented.

Secondly, could you please explain why humans could not "be in God's presence without death"? Especially in light of Abraham, Moses, and other figures having (according to the Torah) done so without issue?



Umm, huh? That makes little sense at the moment - I'm not understanding your meaning.



Am I judging the justness of God, or the justness of a set of ideas about God? Myself I say the later

Previously I would have accepted those ideas at face value, and thus judged God based on them. Now, having more information about God, I can see that the injustice of said ideas does not reflect him, thus making said ideas likely incorrect.

I could of course be wrong - that is always a possibility. But at the present it seems unlikely (in regard to this matter at least).

To clarify, the defect I'm talking about is lack of individuated continuance after death (for the majority) and lack of awareness of the spiritual world (again for the majority) - I see these as related issues.

From my research it would seem that this is simply the way the human species has evolved - whereas other animal species seem to have an innate connection to a species wide animus (but again seem to generally lack individuated continuance after death), human beings do not. This is perhaps due to our highly individuated psychologies. This lacking would seem to have the effect of reducing the overall spiritual awareness of the species, making those that are aware into anomalies (the reason between which - aside from specific attention by a spiritual being - I have yet to discern).

As for individuated continuance after death, it seems to me that human continuance is directly related to the strength of the individual's psyche - the stronger the psyche, the more likely continuance is. As to what form it takes and "where" this continuance occurs, that would seem to be a highly variable situation (based on multiple factors).



Agreed to some extent - what extent I'm unsure.



In 3rd edition (and previous editions as well iirc) an avatar is defined as follows:

An avatar serves as a deity’s alter ego, effectively allowing the deity to be in two or more places at the same time. An avatar is an extension of a deity. The deity senses and knows everything the avatar senses and knows and vice versa.
- Deities & Demigods, Chapter 2 (here in the SRD http://www.d20srd.org/srd/divin/divineAbilitiesFeats.htm#avatar)

Stat wise, an avatar is a direct copy of the deity, only scaled down.

Needless to say, a divine avatar isn't human in the slightest in these terms If I were stating Jesus in 3rd edition D&D it'd look like this:

Jesus of Nazareth (NG human cleric [9th - 13th level])
(Judging by the effects of the Create Food & Water spell - which can feed one person/3 caster levels - he should be at least a 1,111th level caster assuming the use of the Empower Spell feat. This would give him 1,111d8 hit points at average Constitution. BUT that's utterly insane and incongruous because the Romans were able to kill him without taking literally years and/or using siege weapons to do it - thus the more reasonable/minimalist approach. I'd also remove the weapon and armor proficiencies the cleric class normally gives. In order to explain the insane spell effects - namely the feeding of the 5000 - I'd either say he was using a custom more potent version of the normal spell or [more likely] had the ability to cast the miracle spell a given number of times per day due to his unique status.)



That would seem to be the case to some degree based on the example in Luke, no? He also seemed to hold the Deutoronomical law in high regard, as opposed to Paul who poo-pooed it as basically a waste of time.



If one accepts John 3 as valid - I cannot however, not entirely, for two reasons.

First, verse 13 "No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man." This contradicts noted fate of Elijah, who "went up by a whirlwind into heaven."

Secondly, verse 18-21 note the same soteriological system that I've taken issue with throughout, and brings up the same objections. What about people that never heard anything about Jesus? What about people that are unable to believe? etc etc etc This is the same black and white legalism I talked about above, there is no mercy in it.

Thirdly, and minor perhaps, Jesus was being quite the jerk toward this Nicodemus guy, who is apparently sincere. Such would seem out of character.



Already did bro - see the post of Tue Mar 09, 2010 10:43 am above.



What you're saying here seems to have alot of conceptual overlap with the position of Executor (which Vader occupied) and the Emperor's Hands in Palpatine's Empire in Star Wars.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Executor_%28Imperial_rank%29

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Emperor%27s_Hands

Now that I ponder it, the Sith hierarchy under the Rule of Two would seem to be a rather instructive model for at least some aspects of the YHVH/Christ relationship (save for the adversarial nature of the Sith model, of course).

Thanks for the 3rd Ed recap. That avatar definition sounds more like what I understand Yah’s earlier manifestations such as walking with Adam in Eden or meeting with Abraham in human form to have been like.

Needless to say, a divine avatar isn't human in the slightest in these terms If I were stating Jesus in 3rd edition D&D it'd look like this:


I’d think that we may need to look to OGL d20 variants to get closer to reflect Yahshua of Nazareth. A 9-12th cleric, while human does not reflect the oneness Yahshua described of Himself. A human character class that IMO better fits is the Prophet core class from Testament d20. I’m not sure here how to link it to you but it is in Green Ronin’s forum. Maybe I could PM it to you over in the Moot? I've encountrered other OGL d20 sources with differing defeinitions for avatars. One interesting one was in Avalanche Press' Nile Empire - War in Heliopolis. THat source has it were the Egyptian Gods cannot enter the Prime Material Plane directly but may manifest an avatar in an already existing human vessel who meets the prereqs for that specific deity.



1) Given your chosen rendering of John 3:13 I can understand where you make those conclusions:
My understanding of verse 3:13 is closer to ‘No one has the ability (or power in the active tense) to enter the Abode of God..” , whereas Eliyah was noted for being taken up in the passive tense. As Messiyah, Yahshua is saying that no other person has the ability or active power in and of themselves to ascend or descend the abode of God. The question I see being if Yahshua is indeed Yahweh existing in a diminished human form, and His audience rejects relationship with Him, then on what basis would these same people accept relationship with His undiminished state?

2) This is a topic we’ve discussed at some length and I’m open to continuing and considering other possibilities. What I understand Yahshuah to be saying here is that apart from associating our souls are created mortal and perishing apart from being associated with / “born anew from above / or below in an immortal Spirit. This association being relational and chosen.

3) I suppose that you could view Yahshua as “being a jerk”. My own view is that He was doing nothing of the kind, but was indeed answering the questions presented to Him and spoke to this teacher in such a manner as to jar him out of his fixed conceptions and to get his attention with the purpose of enabling him to change his perspective.


I’ll confess that I didn’t think of the Palpatine and the Sith as a model of the relationship between Yah and Messiyah. While I feel like I’m already familiar with both Vader and Jade, I’ll dig more into these concepts.

-Theophilus

Agreed totally - I was speaking from my ongoing revamp of the 3.5 classes when I noted cleric (it's the only divine caster that is directly devoted to a god - like all the classes in my system it uses a spontaneous casting/spells known system and leaves tons of room for customization). I should have noted that

In strict 3.5 terms I'd say Favored Soul would be more accurate. I haven't picked up Testament yet, though I intend to eventually (yay PDFs ) and I found the Prophet on GR's forums now that you mention it - looks fairly good (the Piety level mechanic seems interesting, as is the idea of a sin penalty for spellcasting - arcane spells or divine spells from non-Judaic deities only I assume) and could be easily with my version of the cleric class (save that smite evil wouldn't be possible, and less spells would be known automatically). If we go with prophet (the core class version) what level are you thinking?



Interesting take there, I like it As for differing takes on avatar-hood, I would tend to find the 3rd edition version inadequate for mechanically representing Jesus (as noted, he wouldn't be anything near human - which is apparently important, why I'm not sure - and it would have taken alot more for the Romans to kill him due to the amount of hp he would have) - a custom template added on to the base human race would be more appropriate in 3rd edition terms. Of course, this is the limitation of using game mechanics to describe real world or mythological events - the game mechanics are abstract models and approximations at best (and were originally never intended to be more realistic than that) and eventually one runs in to situations that can't be easily modeled without reducing the subject in some manner for the matter of practicality. But then as a gamer I'm sure you know this already



Not precisely my chosen rending, simply the one I can find and access most easily In the manner you describe it, such makes perfect sense. Having been (astrally) to some rather heaven like places (Micheal's abode namely) I would scratch my head to the veracity of such a statement, but given that I'm not certain Micheal's abode and the noted abode of God are the same place tis not a major concern.



I dunno, I would tend to give the benefit of the doubt here. IMO it's not reasonable to expect people to believe some guy who says he's God made flesh to believe such - especially when believing such would be blasmphemous according to their religion. Now the special effects (ie miracles) would IMO go a long way toward reducing the unreasonableness of such an expectation, some room for good intentions has IMO to always be left. After all, if Jesus came back tomorrow and did all the same things there would be a good many Christians that would not believe it were him, no?



Agreed, but that is somewhat different that what the text (NIV) notes. The problem is one of belief specially of Jesus as described in the bible. If that belief is the criteria for the choice and the relationship (as the NIV would seem to state) then there are massive problems. On the other hand, if the criteria for this relationship and choice are more abstract and universal (as I understand them to be) then such is not a problem.



And I could agree with such (if you've seen the show Mortal Kombat: Conquest or the first movie, Raiden's behavior and mannerisms seem to be a good approximation for Christ's "I'm being a jerk to make you think dumb***" mode, as I know him at least).

However, the text of the NIV version reads like the "I'm better than you, you're an idiot that will never understand anything" speeches that I'm all too familiar with. That could be just the translation though.



I'd focus on Mara Jade and the Emperor's Hands in this regard, as Palpatine seemed to have a strong and near constant telepathic presence with them (at least in some descriptions). Vader's position as Executor is closer to the Messiah's position status-wise though.

Your system revamp sounds very useful. Do you have notes on your re-vamp?

Also, do you read “Order of the Stick” comics? If not please visit gianttip dot com. There’s a few that illustrate what I find frustrating on the base magic system. There’s a couple of early ones (#7 “ThorPrayer” & #40 “The Gods Must Be Busy”) on a cleric of Thor illustrating both from the cleric side and the deities what’s going on and the ridiculousness of it.


Thanks for the tip on favored soul. It looks like a usable variant divine class, at first glance.

Actually Testament details the Israelite, Canaanite, Egyptian and Mesopotamian cultures to include sins and piety systems for each. There is also an expansion for the Hittites on PDF but I’ve not yet sought it. I’m more curious about the Trojan War setting or possibly their Roman one. I confess that aside from the Virgil’s writings, I’m not aware of Roman mythic / heroic figures that match the likes of Achilles or Hector, much less the OT biblical heroes, for a game setting although I expect their battle system and gladiatorial options could be intriguing for players. (Indeed yay for PDFs )!

To clarify, in the core Testament book, Prophet is a prestige class, and is used for the likes of Moses who had a pretty active career before being called to convey the God of Israel’s messages to Pharaoh and the Israelites. My guess is that the core Prophet class would better fit people skilled in divination from an early state, such as Samuel who was learning the Levitical Priest (core class) or Joseph of the coat and dream interpretation fame. I would guess that this core class would best fit Yahshua of Nazareth since in youth He expressed an association with His heavenly Father, but lived under the tribe of Judah in the line of David, rather than as Levite. I’d also consider that His mother supposed He had some extraordinary abilities at the time of the wedding at Cana of Galilee. What is difficult is that He starts to then expand on His signs and wonders in a manner not easily reflected in a game system, under a conventional class.

The Prophet class(es) do allow for Greater Miracle, but only at the top level. Even then, Testament makes a note on the truly spectacular miraculous events such as the plagues visited on Egypt, as not being in the scope of the players direct abilities in game and is essentially the cooperation with a deity doing their direct works through that human implement. This is also where some form of merged Avatar state not completely unlike the one I mentioned in the Nile Empire setting would fit but likely with several SQ’s to match what is attributed. One of the Testament Mythic Feats taken as your human extra slot that could fit is one that allows for essentially angelic protection. If modeling this in d20 I’d presume a mid level (9-12th) core Prophet with a Profession as a stone mason (maybe perform fishing?) with corresponding Craft skills, Knowledge Religion – Biblical Judaism to include languages read / write Hebrew, speak Aramaic, and probably Greek and possibly Latin (Speak with Roman Centurion). That added to this would be a qualified Avatar not yet stated for the duration between His immersion and crucifixion.



Thinking on the HP case you noted, I wouldn’t read too much into this since Yahshua willing surrendered Himself to trial, beating and execution. That DR would have more to do with resisting a sustain flogging and the method of execution (Crucifixion) is an hours long exphisiation. Also death occurring only with the Spirit / Avatar-ness released so as to experience separation and physical death, with Soul and Spirit bound for different planes.


Can you elaborate on what that experience was like here or at the moot (or prehaps you already did so?)?


The key Greek word used here and rarely rendered properly is Pistis with the meaning being more of Trust and Reliance than faith and belief. While similar concepts the distinction I see being you can believe that which you don’t know but relationally trust and relay upon that which you do know.



I can see where you make this conclusion, based both on your experiences and on the NIV and many similar popular translations. Sadly it seems to me that roughly matching what was familiar and widely accepted before is a bigger factor in marketing a new translations at the expense of accurately rendering the earliest sources.

That I do I have six classes done (save for fluff text), six in some stage of done, and six still to do. Part of the goal of the revamp was to trim down the core class bloat that became epidemic over the course of 3rd (45+ core classes in official products alone at the end), focusing on what classes are the broadest archetypes and going from there.

I was thinking of starting a blog on the project, which I dub D&D Ultimate edition (kinda a middle finger towards 4th edition there ), but if you wanna see what I've got so far drop me an email and I'll send you the complete stuff for starters.



Most definitely I love that one. The specific comic/episode you mention definitely shows the inherent silliness of praying for one's daily spells. I do like the idea of clerics (and paladins and zealots [a divine assassin variant of the rogue class, I almost called them Sicarri ]) having to pray daily though, so I implemented a system by which they don't regenerate their spell energy points normally like other casters - they have to either pray or meditate to regain the raw energy, although they permanently know the spells they choose (unless they retrain of course).

On the web comics line, do you read Goblins? I totally recommend it if you don't - Big Ears is my hero



No prob



Agreed - he doesn't seem to have any other class or non-class (ie Commoner) characteristics prior to the start of his career.



Agreed - I like the added detail of skills too I'd add Profession (carpenter) and Perform (Oratory) to that list - a couple shows (namely "The Real Jesus" on National Geographic) note that Joseph's profession was more likely that of a day laborer, so I think multiple related Profession skills would be likely.



It's not so much the DR I was thinking about but the sheer amount of hit points a high level character would have. You make a very good point though - something that I thought of earlier. We know that there are instances of people surviving crucifixion, even with similar amounts of abuse prior. This always bugged me, since it seemed somewhat ridiculous for Jesus to die so quickly on the cross, even after being scourged. After all, the average individual took many days, up to and over a week, to die - Jesus cacks off in a few hours.

So, what if the actual cause of death wasn't the physical damage (the scourging and crucifixion) but in fact spiritual trauma caused by the "abandonment" of his indwelling spirit?

This could occur either by removal of supernatural endurance (stat bonuses and special abilities in game terms) and being left with only human endurance, subpar at that (in game terms, below average hit points without the avatar template, already depleted by the scourging/crucifixion).

Or it could occur by the separation itself causing physical trauma, that in his already weakened condition killed him. This is not without precedent, as I know for a fact directed spiritual force can result in physical trauma and even death in extreme cases.



This was a several years ago, and at the time I was at what I considered war with Michael and his kind. Sounds absurd, and absurdly egotistical, but tis what I thought. Regardless, the episode I mentioned occurred when I had tired of the conflict, and decided to negotiate a truce - basically "you don't mess with me, I don't mess with you".

Sparing the details of how I accomplished the feat (it wasn't hard) for the sake of site rules, I projected my puppet form to Micheal's realm and basically kinda kicked the door, doing a "take me to your leader" type bit to the first angelus I saw.

The entire place was cloudlike in nature, as if clouds were the ground, and the architecture of the buildings was Greco-Roman. An amber/gold/orangish glow suffused the environment and backlit the clouds. I was lead to an open air forum, wherein a number of angels (including Michael) participated in the "negotiations". After a short while, they agreed to the offer and I left. That's pretty much all there was to it.

Now, in retrospect, was that the "real" heaven? I doubt it - likely just some astral realm where Micheal's kin have set up shop. The rather stereotypical imagery alone makes me doubt that it was anything more than an outpost, as does the ease of my entrance.



Such would seem to be the case, unfortunately.