Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => REG and ORDIR => Topic started by: spacy32 on June 22, 2016, 05:17:26 PM
-
I was doing some research and it has come to my attention that Herod the Great was an Edomite.
During the Maccabean wars, the Edomites were subjugated by the Jews and forced to convert to Judaism. Through it all, the Edomites maintained much of their old hatred for the Jews. When Greek became the common language, the Edomites were called Idumaeans. With the rise of the Roman Empire, an Idumaean whose father had converted to Judaism was named king of Judea. That Idumaean is known in history as King Herod the Great, the tyrant who ordered a massacre in Bethlehem in an attempt to kill the Christ child (Matthew 2:16-18).
I am trying to find out if this is fact. Any help would be appreciated and if proven, would this mean the REG will be updated
-
I think it might be a bit of a long stretch to say that Herod the great was an Edomite. From what I researched, his father was from the land that was previously edom, but was not an Edomite himself.
-
What about this:
A prominent city in Edom was Petra. This city, accessible only through a narrow canyon within cavernous mountain walls, was featured in the movie Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. In the fifth century B.C., a people called the Nabateans defeated the Edomites and removed them from Petra. The Edomites were forced to move to southern Palestine in an area that would become known as Idumea. In the New Testament, Herod the Great, who commanded the murder of all boys two years old and younger in Bethlehem (Matthew 2), was an Idumean.
Another reference
-
and other Edomites:
31 cThese are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom, before any king reigned over the Israelites. 32 Bela the son of Beor reigned in Edom, the name of his city being Dinhabah. 33 Bela died, and Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his place. 34 Jobab died, and Husham of the land of the Temanites reigned in his place. 35 Husham died, and Hadad the son of Bedad, who defeated Midian in the country of Moab, reigned in his place, the name of his city being Avith. 36 Hadad died, and Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his place. 37 Samlah died, and Shaul of dRehoboth on the Euphrates2 reigned in his place. 38 Shaul died, and Baal-hanan the son of Achbor reigned in his place. 39 Baal-hanan the son of Achbor died, and Hadar reigned in his place, the name of his city being Pau; his wife’s name was Mehetabel, the daughter of Matred, daughter of Mezahab.
-
and other Edomites:
31 cThese are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom, before any king reigned over the Israelites. 32 Bela the son of Beor reigned in Edom, the name of his city being Dinhabah. 33 Bela died, and Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his place. 34 Jobab died, and Husham of the land of the Temanites reigned in his place. 35 Husham died, and Hadad the son of Bedad, who defeated Midian in the country of Moab, reigned in his place, the name of his city being Avith. 36 Hadad died, and Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his place. 37 Samlah died, and Shaul of dRehoboth on the Euphrates2 reigned in his place. 38 Shaul died, and Baal-hanan the son of Achbor reigned in his place. 39 Baal-hanan the son of Achbor died, and Hadar reigned in his place, the name of his city being Pau; his wife’s name was Mehetabel, the daughter of Matred, daughter of Mezahab.
I forgot this is Genesis 36
-
What is the source of your first quote?
-
Wait, he isn't considered an Edomite? All the Herods should be.
-
Relevant quote from a google search that quotes Josephus:
Bible Question:
Was King Herod a descendant of Esau?
Bible Answer:
Flavius Joephus (approx. A.D. 30 – 100), the Jewish historian, tells us that Esau’s descendants inhabited the region of Idumea at least two times in his writings.
. . . and these were the sons of Esau. Aliphaz had five legitimate sons: Theman, Omer, Saphus, Gotham, and Kanaz; for Amalek was not legitimate, but by a concubine, whose name was Thamna. These dwelt in that part of Idumea . . . (Josephus. The Antiquities of the Jews. Book 2, Chap. 2).
So he fell upon the Idumeans, the posterity of Esau, at Acrabattene, and slew a great many of them, and took their spoils. (Josephus. The Antiquities of the Jews. Book 12, Chap. 8).
This means the Idumeans were considered to be the descendants of Esau. Then in chapter 12, Josephus tells us that King Herod was an Idumean. This means that King Herod the Great was a descendant of Esau.
. . . but Antigonus, by way of reply to what Herod had caused to be proclaimed, and this before the Romans, and before Silo also, said, that they would not do justly if they gave the kingdom to Herod, who was no more than a private man, and an Idumean . . . (Josephus. The Antiquities of the Jews. Book 12, Chap. 8).
Conclusion:
The secular historian Flavius Josephus tells us that King Herod the Great was a descendant of Esau. Herod’s father was an Idumean and his mother was an Arab.
-
And I'm a descendant of Adam, does that make me a Garden of Edenian?
-
Imo, an Edomite and an Idumean are two different things. Edomites were people from the country of edom. Idumeans were people from Idumea. Just because they are the same region doesn't mean they are the same country. Plus, it's two completely different time periods.
-
Imo, an Edomite and an Idumean are two different things. Edomites were people from the country of edom. Idumeans were people from Idumea. Just because they are the same region doesn't mean they are the same country. Plus, it's two completely different time periods.
Idumean is the greek word for edomite
-
I always just assumed the Herods were Edomites because that's what they are in history. I used to be fascinated by that sick little dynasty.
-
I just ask on this website
http://www.gotquestions.org/
It's amazing what you find on there. Then of course I check to make sure it is biblically sound
-
Still waiting for officials confirmation on the obvious truth
-
This will be added to our discussions, but we will all have to review the historical documents that are acceptable for Redemption purposes and determine from those whether such a determination can be made. At this time, I don't believe that we are ready to make a snap judgement that they are Edomites, but will continue the discussion and report back.
-
Idumeans literally redirects to Edom on wikipedia. Herod the great being Edomite has 5 references on Wikipedia.
-
if you google 'were herods edomites' a lot comes up
-
Idumeans literally redirects to Edom on wikipedia. Herod the great being Edomite has 5 references on Wikipedia.
We won't be using Wikipedia or straight Google searches as our source, though the Josephus references you provided earlier will be examined and will prove useful in reaching a conclusion.
I didn't say that we have decided against Herods being Edomites (far from it), but that we will need to discuss it as a group to complete the research and determine the ruling based on sources that can be used for Redemption purposes. I would expect a response within two weeks, but none of us are going to make snap judgments on this (just like every other identifier discussion).
-
Speaking of which, where are we at with the Bible saying Moses is a Priest but Redemption saying otherwise?
-
Moses and Samuel were already on the agenda to be discussed alongside this item. The official responses will come at the same time.
-
Could we see that list, or at least the portion of the list that has already been publicly discussed?
-
While we're talking about who's who and what's what, is Balaam a Canaanite?
-
Could we see that list, or at least the portion of the list that has already been publicly discussed?
What list? If you mean our agenda for our next call I don't believe that's something we wish to share publicly.
While we're talking about who's who and what's what, is Balaam a Canaanite?
What is the basis for the question? Without presenting evidence you might as well be asking if he was also Chinese. ;)
-
Could we see that list, or at least the portion of the list that has already been publicly discussed?
What list? If you mean our agenda for our next call I don't believe that's something we wish to share publicly.
While we're talking about who's who and what's what, is Balaam a Canaanite?
What is the basis for the question? Without presenting evidence you might as well be asking if he was also Chinese. ;)
Since you bring it up...was he chinese????
-
Idumeans literally redirects to Edom on wikipedia. Herod the great being Edomite has 5 references on Wikipedia.
We won't be using Wikipedia or straight Google searches as our source, though the Josephus references you provided earlier will be examined and will prove useful in reaching a conclusion.
I didn't say that we have decided against Herods being Edomites (far from it), but that we will need to discuss it as a group to complete the research and determine the ruling based on sources that can be used for Redemption purposes. I would expect a response within two weeks, but none of us are going to make snap judgments on this (just like every other identifier discussion).
Hey man,
if you notice, I said that wikipedia has five references. even wikipedia isn't dumb enough to cite itself, so presumably Herod the Great as an Edomite is pretty well established given those references and wikipedia's well known 99% accuracy. citing references gathered by wikipedia isn't wikipedia.
-
Not to mention blasting Wikipedia for shaky accuracy stopped being even pedantic years ago and moved straight to banal.
-
We're not talking about professors who don't want Wikipedia used to find sources or something like that. Rather, the game is designed in such a way that the sources we look at are going to be biblical or primary sources, like Josephus. The 5 sources on Wikipedia are either scholarly, non-fiction, or encyclopedia excerpts from the past decade, so they themselves do not count as proper source material in Redemption. They might point us to particular source documents, sure, but to say that we should rely on the fact that there are 5 very recent quoted sources in Wikipedia (also without examining their content or merits) ignores the point that none of those sources are acceptable for Redemption rules purposes, and so we will not be announcing any rulings with them as the foundation.
If the Herods are going to be ruled Edomites, it will be through biblical or primary source documents; as I already mentioned, the Josephus references already provided will obviously be considered.
-
I know in the past I have used my university's (at least before I graduated) to look up sources who quoted primary sources on at least one case before during one of the playtester calls in defining an identifier. Our calls have been pretty thorough in the past in researching evidence for these things, so don't worry, the decision won't be made unfounded.
-
Based on our research there is sufficient evidence to count Herod the Great (AP, DI) as an Edomite for Redemption purposes. This is effective immediately and will be added to the next REG update.
We have not found evidence that other Herods should be counted as Edmonites.
-
Why is his entire family not edomite thru relation?
-
Why is his entire family not edomite thru relation?
Unless a character is a patriarch of a Nation (Herod the Great is not) their descendants are not inherently the same culture or civilization for game play purposes. We must draw a line somewhere and we've chosen to draw that at the first generation that isn't part of a country/culture.
This is the same reason that Jacobs sons are not Syrians while Leah and Rachel are.
-
Makes sense to me. I'm just glad that the redemption elders are so understanding
-
That's the kind of meta-information I like to see. Will that be added to the REG along with a definition of Temple and Priestly artifact?
-
That's the kind of meta-information I like to see. Will that be added to the REG...?
I'm happy to add that. Considering we've used that logic for multiple rulings I expect the rest of the team will be too but I'll need to run it by them.
Will that be added to the REG along with a definition of Temple and Priestly artifact?
The definition of Priestly Artifact seems OK to me now. What do you feel needs changed?
Can you give an example of what you believe the definition of Temple Artifact should say? I know from past conversation the idea of "furniture" has come up but that will need to be phrased differently for an REG entry.
-
"A permanent item of furnishing or architecture in the temple."
The only thing that would jump camps would be The Silver Trumpets, which seems much more similar to the priestly artifacts than the temple artifacts anyway.
-
"A permanent item of furnishing or architecture in the temple."
The only thing that would jump camps would be The Silver Trumpets, which seems much more similar to the priestly artifacts than the temple artifacts anyway.
But, but, Eleazar Son of Aaron...
Also, the word "permanent" might cause headaches. Was the Ark of the Covenant permanent? It wasn't always in the Temple. Etc...
*****
Is it super important that the definitions of Temple Artifact and Priestly Artifact are mutually exclusive? The definition of Priestly Artifact:
"Priestly Artifacts include Artifacts used by priests on a regular basis as part of their duties in the Tabernacle or Temple that are not designated as Tabernacle or Temple Artifacts."
Where did the bolded portion come from? Or, why was it added? Is there any reason The Bronze Laver, etc. shouldn't be a Priestly Artifact in addition to a Temple Artifact?
Or are Priestly Artifacts being kept distinct from Temple Artifacts because of Eleazar Son of Aaron's ability?
-
Initially the Priestly Artifacts definition was made to have cards reference artifacts not referenced in another way. It could change but the original intent was to give these "forgotten" artifacts some more synergy.
-
Why isn't Joseph's Silver Cup a priestly artifact?
-
Why isn't Joseph's Silver Cup a priestly artifact?
Why not Unholy Writ?
-
30 Pieces of Silver? :o
-
30 Pieces of Silver? :o
Well, the priests of the time were running a treasury and collection boxes for the upkeep/expansion of the temple so this actually could be legit...
-
Boom. Can we please get a clear definition for both?
-
Boom. Can we please get a clear definition for both?
What isn't clear about this?
Priestly Artifacts include Artifacts used by priests on a regular basis as part of their duties in the Tabernacle or Temple that are not designated as Tabernacle or Temple Artifacts.
I don't actually see any way that the cards you, Justin or I mentioned could qualify.
-
30 Pieces of Silver were taken from the temple treasury by the temple attendants to pay for temple business. That's how. Furthermore, what possible reason could there be fore being against defining a class of cards?
-
30 Pieces of Silver were taken from the temple treasury by the temple attendants to pay for temple business. That's how. Furthermore, what possible reason could there be fore being against defining a class of cards?
I'm pro-defining. If there's a problem with the current definition I need to understand it before I can help fix it.
I don't see how the coins were used to perform the priestly duties. What part of a priests duties is outlined in scripture to involve coins?
-
Doesn't matter, those aren't parameters of the definition.
-
Doesn't matter, those aren't parameters of the definition.
Yeah, why?
-
Because there aren't any.
-
He just posted the quote from the REG that includes parameters for what defines a priestly artifact. "Artifacts used by priests on a regular basis as part of their duties ... not tabernacle or temple artifacts". How are there no parameters?
-
+1
-
There is no definition for a temple artifact, which Priestly artifact includes in its own definition.
-
There is no definition for a temple artifact, which Priestly artifact includes in its own definition.
There is a current definition there as welI, so that is moot to the discussion of Priestly (it only has to reference the list, not include the definition of Temple/Tabernacle).
I also know Temple/Tabernacle is being beefed-up for the next release, so something about that should come out soon or when the REG is published.