#Comparative analysis: Genesis and Abraham | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

twelvedreamsfortheredqueen · 7 years ago

Text

Vampyr’s Vampires and Their Connections to Previous Vampiric Figures in History: An Analysis

When Outermode interviewed Stéphane Beauverger, narrative director, and Grégory Szucs, art director, of Dontnod, they both spoke of the sexual elements of the vampire as a creature itself, it’s history and mythological roots, and why that within Vampyr, the player is always damned to misfortune no matter their choices. Above all, however, they spoke about their vision for what kind of vampire that Vampyr was meant to represent:

“We wanted to go back to the roots of the vampire figure. The Victorian, tragic, romantic, and adult vampire. Who is very sexual. Who is a very erotic creature, always seducing his prey. I wanted to go back to this gothic vision of that particular character...The vampire is seductive. He knows what he was, who he was, and he’s always trying to remember his love. He’s a quite erotic and sentimental figure, a romantic figure actually.”

I wanted to dig deeper into this aspect, of exactly what the developers were trying to accomplish with the vampires they presented to us within the game, and most importantly, what type of vampire Jonathan is as well as other characters in the game, and how we got to those kinds of vampires. This will be a pretty long essay, and will only be covering vampire works that I believe Dontnod may have taken some inspiration from (since Vampyr’s inspirations as a whole branch much farther than only vampiric literature), but I will do my best to split it into sections so you can skip around. I also don’t have any kind of formal training in writing essays, so I apologize if anything seems messy or hard to follow! Just send me a PM/ask if anything is off or strange to read. And of course, please message me if you feel there’s something inaccurate or want to share any thoughts! Feel free to respond and add to this essay as you wish!

Be wary of unmarked spoilers! Most of the sections in this essay will discuss Vampyr in length and will be chock-full with them, so do not read the essay if you don’t want the game spoiled or ruined for you (there will also be spoilers of other vampire works, but they will be marked)!

Tagging you, @cursedbethechoice as asked! And a big thank you for helping me with sources and editing!

Here are the sections to skip through with CTRL + F/Scroll to in order:

I. The History of the Vampire: Background II. The Dichotomies of Vampyr’s Species: Ekon, Skal, Vulkod, Nimrod, Ichor (Ikor), and Disasters III. Credits, Extra Comments, and Sources

I. The History of the Vampire: Background

Before we start any discussion on how Vampyr connects to other vampire works, we first need to establish what a vampire was and most importantly, what it has become in our era and the era during Vampyr‘s time, which was 1918, and just generally answer the questions: What is a vampire? What were they known as before present times? And what has remained throughout all the years of their interpretation? This section will mostly be re-iterating the history, and will have a little bit of analysis here and there, but it’ll mostly be to help give a general understanding of how the vampire came to be! (*Also note, that vampire works and history are INCREDIBLY long and require their own anthologies to truly go through them all, so I only picked and discussed notable ones, but many more works in vampire history have changed the way we view vampires!). The vampire that we know of is actually very modern compared to the whole history of vampires. Vampires in ancient times were not even referred to as vampires. Ancient vampires were always associated with some sort of ruin, unholy aspects, and said to be the work of Evil or the Devil itself. Vampires are stories of humans, and we as humans are made of blood, so something that rids of that life force, is something that invites death to our door. The majority of cultures in the world have some sort of vampiric variation of a mythological creature: shtriga in Albania, garkains in Australia, jiangshi in China, lamia in Libya. Many figures or creatures that already existed became vampires in a variation of these myths or shifted into one, the same applied to religious figures. Lilith (or Lilītu) is the most famous example in Abrahamic religions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism), seen as a dangerous woman and demon of the night for denying Adam subservience before Eve, and has existed since the Old Testament in the Bible, from Genesis 1:27, where it was stated that she was born from the same soil Adam was in. Away from Jerusalem, were the kumiho (gumiho) in Korea; wicked, nine-tailed fox spirits that could freely transform, often as beautiful women, in order to seduce men and eat their livers or their hearts. In the interview I linked above, Beauverger mentions his own ancient vampiric creature, the Greek creature known as a “vrykolakas” (or vorvolakas or vourdoulakas), which is an example of an ancient vampire creature that spanned to ancient Greece. It is a word derived from the Slavic word “vǎrkolak”, and was known ultimately known as a creature of blood. The Greeks believed that a person would become a vrykolakas if they lived in an unholy manner, were excommunicated from their communities, left buried in unconsecrated (unblessed) ground, or by eating the meat of a sheep that was harmed by a wolf or even a werewolf. This legend spanned from Ancient Greece to the Ottoman Greece periods, the earliest recorded being the Neolithic period at Cyrpus, or circa. 4500–3900/3800 BCE. Vampyr itself actually mentions these creatures within the game:

Full screenshot

Full screenshot

But throughout the eras between ancient times to our modern beliefs, what did these creatures look like, and what abilities did they develop that stuck with us today? Given how unholy they were and believed to be, many of them did not take the shapes of humans, and instead took the shape of monstrous, grotesque beasts. Many creatures could even be compared more to werewolves, and some took shapes that were incomparable altogether. The most modern example of this monstrous look before the evolution to the more humane, walking corpse that we know of, was the old German horror film Nosferatu in 1922, who looked like this.

Chupacabras, or literally “goat-suckers”, are creatures famously known in parts of the Americas and were first have said to be seen in Puerto Rico, and expanded to Chile and Mexico. “Chupar” means “to suck”, “cabra” means goat, and this refers to how they would often attack and suck the blood of livestock. They’re described in a variety of ways, but all of them remain quite monstrous.

Jeff Carter, Flickr, 2001.

Some interpretations are much more dog-like, and is one of the many examples of how vampiric creatures have been compared to werewolf or canine-like mythological creatures (many legends often considered the two synonymous, as werewolves were known to have a craving for flesh, and were also seen as damned or cursed).

“Chupacabra” by 000Fesbra000 on Deviantart.

The abilities denoted by these creatures, be they humane or monstrous in appearance, have remained rather consistent throughout folklore. The main key ability would of course, be the ability to consume blood or at least, have their main source of sustenance be from blood. The majority of their abilities came from some malicious and profane force, often victimizing the poor soul through means of brute force, seduction, or by haunting their own bodies. Vampires are creatures of physical and spiritual violation (in the act that they both violate the body by ripping it of its life force, and by spiritually “corrupting” the soul and shaping the victim to a vampire, in many legends). Many succubi and incubi, for instance, are synonymous with vampires due to their legendary notoriety for preying on those in slumber, and because sexuality in many religious was deemed impious outside of marriage. Many ancient cultures considered sleeping to be a moment where one’s dreams held a greater meaning to the Gods (Ancient Egyptians), or that it was reaching a state of pure consciousness (Hinduism). Thus, anything that disrupted such pureness and piety would be something that one could easily deem as demonic and evil.

The Nightmare, 1781, Johann Heinrich Füssli

Incubus, c. 1870 - 1879

To further expand on how incubi and succubi were seen as bastardizations of religious faith, notice the pose the incubus takes in the second image. It is similar to the pose Jesus took during his crucifixion. There is also fire in his right hand and a dagger in his left. The right hand is often associated with salvation and fortune, yet it is being burnt, much like the infinite flames that occur in Hell. The left hand is the sinister hand due to it’s association with evil in the Classical Latin era because of translations; the word “sinister” during this era was synonymous with outright malignancy. It was seen as the hand touched by the Devil. Estries of Jewish mythology were specifically female vampires that were considered identical to succubi. The name is a derivation from the French word “strix” or lit. “night owl”; blessed with haunting beauty and a craving for blood, they were seen as mistresses of the night that fed on the living. Specific legends tell of succubi that would kill pregnant women or babes out of spite and envy, and some would seduce (or rape) men as they slept. Much like many other vampiric creatures, they could take the shape of various animals that are still symbolically associated with vampires—cats, bats, and birds. This seductive and beguiling quality of the vampire we know today came due to the nigh-synonymous association with sexually demonic creatures. The ability of mesmerization we see in modern vampires is also due to this association. From these monstrous depictions, however, as time moved forward along with science, the vampire transitioned into a much more humane form (while the succubi and incubi I mentioned above could take a humane shape, they were rarely depicted as such and were more commonly depicted as eerie beings that simply took the flesh of a human as their skeleton of sorts). This is where the most modern examples start beginning to take shape. European folklore (Western and Eastern) had an intense craze and mass hysteria in the 18th century due to the fear that the dead were now rising from their graves to haunt their loved ones and cause mischief. This craze fascinated and feared many, spreading all across Europe and causing the mass desecration of graves, stalking, and accusing very healthy people as vampiric in this hysteria. Why the hysteria at all? And why was the dead during this time associated with vampires in the first place? Without becoming too grisly in details, this was due to ignorance about the process of human decomposition. Our image of the modern vampire being pale with translucent veins, and lack of breath or heartbeat, is due to this old belief. Early folk beliefs around this time believed that the “swelling” that occurred during the process of death was proof that the corpse was indeed, undead, believing that the swelling was their stomach after feeding on the blood of the living. Remember the ancient vrykolakas that I mentioned? Their features, when not described as lupine, fit this obsession with corpses perfectly.

“They do not decay; instead, they swell and may even attain a "drum-like" form, being very large, they have a ruddy complexion, and are, according to one account, "fresh and gorged with new blood". People with red hair and gray eyes at this time in history were thought to be vampires according to accounts near the region of modern Serbia.“

Corpses that still did not decay were seen as vampires for appearing “healthier” than expected, and holes near the grave, for whatever reason, was seen as a sign of the vampire leaving their coffin and returning. Some even said the corpses had fresh blood on their faces (this is due to that gases that build up in the body, which causes blood to ooze from the mouth and the eyes, and other orifices), or that they felt that throughout the night if they lived near a graveyard with a vampire, that they were being pressed on in their sleep (another allusion to succubi and incubi), or that the work of a poltergeist occurred nearby in malicious ways (vampires were commonly also seen as disturbed spirits; to be technical, the creature did not have to be physical to be considered a vampire—it merely had to feed on blood and be seen as “evil” in some aspect). In reality, this was the result of decomposition either being slowed or naturally occurring at a different rate than expected due to either the condition of the soil or the temperature of the land. The pathology of this presumably unimaginable dilemma in pre-industrial society was explained perfectly through Paul Barber’s work in “Vampires, Burial, and Death”:

This causes the body to look "plump", "well-fed", and "ruddy"—changes that are all the more striking if the person was pale or thin in life. In the Arnold Paole case, an old woman's exhumed corpse was judged by her neighbours to look more plump and healthy than she had ever looked in life. The exuding blood gave the impression that the corpse had recently been engaging in vampiric activity... After death, the skin and gums lose fluids and contract, exposing the roots of the hair, nails, and teeth, even teeth that were concealed in the jaw. This can produce the illusion that the hair, nails, and teeth have grown. At a certain stage, the nails fall off and the skin peels away, as reported in the Blagojevich case—the dermis and nail beds emerging underneath were interpreted as "new skin" and "new nails"...

Even multiple diseases were presumed to be the work of vampires. There is even such a thing as “Clinical vampirism”, which is an obsession with drinking blood (poor Mr. Renfield)! Porphyria was linked with vampiric legends as modern as 1985. Rabies also shared a common connection, because vampires throughout this time period of European hysteria were seen to be weak to garlic and light. Rabies also caused an animal (or person) to have neurological disturbances in their brain that caused them to become hyper-sexual, nocturnal, feral, and most of all: bite others and froth at the mouth with blood; all common traits of a vampire. Bats and wolves also carried Rabies as a disease. Not to also mention real Vampire Bats do exist! Three species specifically exist, the Desmodus rotundus native to the Americas, Diphylla ecaudata native to South America, Central America, and Southern Mexico, and lastly, the Diaemus youngi native to Argentina and Trinidad. These kinds of occurrences truly show how superstition originates from the environment around us and that, in our ignorance, we seek ways to explain what was otherwise seen as fantastical and more importantly: impossible. With impossibility, comes infatuation.

Now, instead of monsters written in books and told through word of mouth as bedtime stories to haunt us, we were starting to see vampires as something very real through this hysteria. Our own loved ones, reanimated to haunt us and cause mischief, corrupted by the Devil himself. The vampire of this era was now inevitably human, yet horrifically inhuman, but what was once human, is often left behind as something romanticised and mourned over. Romanticism in Europe spanned from the 1800s to the end of the 1850s, alongside it came the revival of the Gothic Era, architecture, and literature, a juxtaposition of movements that focused on what it means to be human, and what it means to face death. We see here the birth of the Penny Dreadful, serial tales of horror that costed you a penny, telling the stories of the supernatural, the underworld, and other thrillers. Here is where we finally get to the modern vampire that we know of and is seen in Vampyr. The modern, romantic, charming, and heartrendingly melancholic vampire of our age originated itself in the work of The Vampyre by John William Polidori in 1819, just 99 years before the events of Vampyr in 1918. Lord Ruthven makes his iconic appearance as one of the first vampires in English literature; a suave, charismatic, and seductive gentleman who is both amorist and deceiver. (THE FOLLOWING BLOCKQUOTE SPOILS THE ENTIRE PLOT OF THE STORY):

“In the story, a young Englishman Aubrey meets Lord Ruthven, a man of mysterious origins who has entered London society. Aubrey accompanies Ruthven to Rome, but leaves him after Ruthven seduces the daughter of a mutual acquaintance. Aubrey travels to Greece where he becomes attracted to Ianthe, an innkeeper's daughter. Ianthe tells Aubrey about the legends of the vampire. Ruthven arrives at the scene and shortly thereafter Ianthe is killed by a vampire. Aubrey does not connect Ruthven with the murder and rejoins him in his travels. The pair are attacked by bandits and Ruthven is mortally wounded. Before he dies, Ruthven makes Aubrey swear an oath that he will not mention his death or anything else he knows about Ruthven for a year and a day. Looking back, Aubrey realizes that everyone who Ruthven met ended up suffering. Aubrey returns to London and is amazed when Ruthven appears shortly thereafter, once again alive. Ruthven reminds Aubrey of his oath to keep his death a secret. Ruthven then begins to seduce Aubrey's sister while Aubrey, helpless to protect his sister, has a nervous breakdown. Ruthven and Aubrey's sister are engaged to marry on the day the oath ends. Aubrey writes a letter to his sister revealing Ruthven's history and dies. The letter does not arrive in time. Ruthven marries Aubrey's sister, kills her on their wedding night, and escapes.”

The short story became immensely popular, due to the clear connections to Lord Byron’s works and the work of a Byronic Hero, arguably the titular character of the Romantic age. Lord Ruthven came decades before Dracula, and was the character who transformed the once atrocious creature of the Devil to a suave man or woman of the night, whom stalks and dotes on his prey before consuming them to their ultimate demise. The vampire from thereon was now a creature of sole temptation, of a now very humane lust and representation of our sins. It held so much influence to the public’s perception of vampirism that the story itself has become a citation when discussing the development of vampiric folklore. It led to an even further vampiric craze all the way to just before the Edwardian Era (Georgian and Regency eras, from 1714 - 1837 and 1811 - 1820 respectively, to the most infamously known Victorian Era 1837 - 1901 of where vampire works were the most prominent, all the way up to the Edwardian Era of 1901 - 1914. Vampyr takes place just at the end of the First World War Era of 1914 - 1918), with works such as the play Le Vampyre in 1820, the opera Der Vampyr in 1828, Varney the Vampire: Feast of Blood from 1845 - 1847, and the ever famous Dracula in 1897. Varney the Vampire may seem unknown and foreign compared to the legacy of Dracula, but the 876 page epic itself deserves mention. Many of the major tropes of the vampire we now see was even passed onto Dracula from Sir Francis Varney himself. The image of the vampire with fangs to leave the trademark punctured flesh wound on the neck, attacking a sleeping maiden through a window in the dead of night, hypnotizing others with a mere glance, and of course—bearing unnatural, inhumane strength and prowess. Most importantly, he defines the sympathetic vampire of the Romantic era and ours. One whom despises his condition yet cannot help but succumb and stay slave to it; it is virtually its own archetype and a definitive trait of the Romantic vampire. Several times through the series, Varney attempts suicide only to return in another kind of origin story, immortal and undying, suffering evermore. His vampirism, unlike works that succeed this one, was not granted to him, but rather it was cursed onto him. Only after betraying Oliver Cromwell, a royalist of the English military, and murdering his own son by accident in a fit of rage, the curse was then put upon him.

This idea that vampirism is a “sin” and only placed upon those who lived an unholy life or committed a great crime is not new, but Varney brought this sympathy and sin to the modern age, and its legacy has remained with us since. The archetype of the sympathetic, self-deprecating vampire finally saw its natal day with Varney. Of course, Dracula would forever change the face of vampires as we know it, expanding onto the Romanticised image that Lord Ruthven’s and Sir Francis Varney’s legacies left behind with the archetypal vampire of Count Dracula. A charming foreigner from Romania, Transylvania, seeking refuge in London, situated in a decaying castle near the Borgo Pass of the Carpathian Mountains. Unlike the typical depiction of Eastern European folklore of vampires which was that of decaying corpse or spirit that ravaged the lands (strigoi) Dracula was more like Ruthven, boding the proud, aristocratic charm so commonly shared with vampires in modern times. He is nostalgic with Jonathan Harker about his travels, seducing with his knowledge and kindness towards his guests whilst hiding his deep plots of terror beneath the castle walls, three brides, and unbeknownst to Jonathan, begins to haunt the women he holds dearest to him. All of these figures associated vampires with traditionalism, old spirits in youthful forms, and most of all, aristocracy and human gentry (Ekons).

Dracula also began to make vampires a representation of the greatest sexual sin or forbidden desire of that era, and some saw vampires as downright sexual predators, given their relation to sexual demons (for Dracula, it was a hint to Invasion Literature, of Eastern European men coming to the West to ravage their pure, demure women. For Carmilla (1871), it became a representation for the sexual fear of lesbianism. However, it’s good to note that, overall, the majority of the works from the Victorian Era had a very looming theme regarding vampires and sexuality: that female sexuality above all was seen as forbidden and dangerous. To have them as victims and victims alone is the most purest form of representing them, which is why male vampires are much more popular).

This archetype that Dracula shaped from both Varney and Ruthven is arguably the most well-known, and now the most shared around the world for our haunting, mysterious image of the vampire. Lord Ruthven birthed the ideal image of the Romantic vampire, Sir Francis Varney expanded upon it, with Count Dracula finalizing its full form, its influence still grasping us today. For Vampyr, 1897 is not a far cry from 1918, being a mere 21 years after publication; the first edition covers were still being sold during this time period. A copy of the book can actually be seen outside of a bench at Pembroke. Ashbury’s manor also contains an original, signed copy with the same cover.

Full screenshot

There is one last thing worth noting about vampires, and I believe this aspect is one of the most prevalent in Vampyr, that being, the psychological and psychiatric aspects of a vampire. Vampires are naturally creatures of death, or rather, undeath, and the hysteria that came before and during the Romantic era was very reflective of the psychology of the people at the time concerning this so-called “horror”. That, in some way, the concept of a vampire was a way of seeing a loved one once again with the mourning projecting their loss onto the dead believing that they, too, did not want to die at any cost. This is where the correlation of how a vampire is often seen as a curse or a deal with the Devil; immortality at the price of another life, or immortality at the price of being seen as something accursed for your unworthy and unnatural life, comes to play. This ideal, that the dead do or did not wish to be dead, is where the idea of how vampires come to haunt their loved ones stems from.

Some even speculate a sexual connotation with this aspect of death, or a “morbid dread” of sorts—desire replaces fear; sadism replaces love; loved people and objects are replaced with strange entities to escape the dread. Some hold a much more simple idea; that the idea of being with a loved one who can never die, allows them to escape their inevitable thanatophobia (fear of death), hoping that their loved ones may turn them to be the same (a scenario which is exactly described by Lady Ashbury, who deems it to be extremely painful to consider).

The dichotomy of being haunted, cursed, and ultimately damned for all your eternal life, entwined with the Romantic, Gothic ideal of living on forever with those whom you love, to live one’s eternal life with the possibility of eternal solitude and happiness, is the concept which has us all entranced by the horror and love of the modern vampire: To live eternally, you must take the lives of those mortal for eternity. The modern vampire has become the ultimate, Romantic idea of selfishness that we cannot help but become enthralled with, for we feel pity, envy, and love for the vampire.

II. The Dichotomies of Vampyr’s Species: Ekon, Skal, Vulkod, Nimrod, Ichor (Ikor), and Disasters

The species presented in Vampyr are all rather archetypal, but still have their own intricacies when looking at them individually verses looking at them all as just a collective of vampires. So I’m going to try and match them to a specific kind of vampire, overall analyze their influences, themes, and how they are presented within the game!

1. Ekon

The Ekon are the most easy to distinguish, given the characters that represent them and what kind of abilities they have. With their ability to manipulate shadows, hemomancy (blood magic), mesmerization, and perform overall supernatural feats combined with the ability to sense things no mortal can sense and yet, to be able to appear as mortal as ever. The Ekon are, without a doubt, a representation of the Gothic, Romantic vampire, or what we by now consider as the “traditional vampire”. This is easily shown with the characters that inhabit this kind of vampire, both sympathetic and unsympathetic.

Jonathan struggles with his vampirism throughout the entirety of the game and suffers several moral dilemmas with himself. Even when you play him as evil, one cannot help but feel sympathy for him, as it can easily be seen as him being unable to cope with what he has now become. A good playthrough plays the sympathetic vampire archetype straight, with how he despises his condition and does his best to not succumb to its temptations. He also seeks to heal the people he is meant to feast upon.

Lady Ashbury is a mentor figure within the game, wise and old in spirit but not in charm or appearance, abstaining from feeding on the living and only gives herself a chance to feed to grant the dying their merciful deaths. Her curse through the Blood of Hate, implanted into her through William Marshal, makes her realize that she is the walking epitome of death and despises herself further, feeling that true death from there is the only key to salvation.

Lower on the moral compass, we get the Ascalon Club, with Lord Redgrave acting as leader of of it in his haughty, blue-blooded manner. Believing himself to be above the “lesser” vampiric races stating Ekon supremacy, (though, he interestingly detests the idea of “purebloods”) intensely stubborn and Gothic, as well as holding onto his antediluvian values. He represents the archetype of the “vampire lord”, and most of all, an eternal struggle between vampires and the world around them, that being—the world around them changes, but the vampire often can never change, let alone escape their origins. Aloyisus also represents this with his bitterness and hatred towards those who are not like him (the wealthy gentry, and most likely later on, mortals).

Edgar Swansea is arguably one of the most morally ambiguous, as he fully embraces his condition, much like Redgrave does, but for very different reasons. To me, he appears to be a “mad scientist” archetype mixed with an all-too-eager vampire.

McCullum is an even more ambiguous character. He mentions how he can possibly be the greatest vampire hunter there ever was with his newfound power, but there also appears to be doubt and guilt within him, despite knowing that his vampirism was forced upon him by Jonathan (once more, a circumstantial victim of “sin”). He was also begging for death just before his Turning. Because of this, interpretations can either lead to him becoming Nimrod OR Ekon.

Mary takes a completely darker turn morally, being a representation of how low one can go; a remorseless killer who sees no point any longer in attempting to remain human. Yet, she seeks the most human thing of all—death. Morrigan bearing another scorned woman’s flesh, scarred by grief and now a corrupt soul of what was once an embodiment of empathy and compassion. Mary represents how, for some, the monstrous nature of the vampire cannot come to terms with the kind heart of a human. She represents how quickly this immortal gift turns to a curse.

It appears that Jonathan himself is considered to be of a power lineage because he can efficiently use Blood and Shadow abilities; the Rogue Ekons you begin to see in West End are either solely Blood focused or solely Shadow focused. Blood Ekons are also unable to see you in Shadow Veil, unlike Skals or other mobs that can with their indicating white eyes. This correlates with Jonathan once again, being a chosen figure, even if it comes at the cost of tragedy.

To inspect deeper, the word “Ekon” has it’s origins in the Greek word, “εἰκών”, and is defined as:

“An object shaped to resemble the form or appearance of something; likeness, portrait; that which has the same form as something else; that which represents something else in terms of basic forms and features.”

The word itself comes from the word “εικόνα”, or “eikóna”, which means a picture, image, illustration, or some form of portrait. Further back in the etymology leads you to the word “εἰκών”, or “eikṓn”. It also has a second definition, which refers to a religious icon or a religious painting, with synonyms such as:

αγιογραφία (agiografía, “religious painting”) εικόνισμα (eikónisma, “religious icon”) ίνδαλμα (índalma, “cultural icon”)

In English, we have an eerily similar word known as “Eikon”, which is most known specifically for a religious being or figure that is idolized, or at the very least, stands as a representation of something sacred or holy. From all of this, I believe that the was chosen to specifically represent how Ekon walk freely with mortals. As Lord Redgrave himself stated; the Ekon are the only race he knows that is able to blend in and take not only take the shape of a human, but to also mimic the presence of one. @cursedbethechoice summed this idea up nicely:

“In Vampyr’s world, Ekons are simulacra of humans. They look like, talk like, walk like, sound like humans but are are not actually humans themselves.”

Beauverger wanted to go back to the more Gothic roots of the vampire, as well as the seductive, romantic, and particularly erotic charm that the vampire has from the Romantic era. The Gothic roots Vampyr took with it’s presentation (among many other aspects across all the vampires) have to do with the biting itself. In the present day, the most popular type of vampire works involve being able to feed partially from the victim while still keeping them alive. Vampyr most certainly does not have that. The concept itself is actually much younger than Dracula (anything bitten by the Count was instantly turned or became very ill), and the presentation Vampyr gives when it comes to how vampire bites someone, it is to the death, it is actually much more accurate to Gothic vampire works. However, this applies to all species in the game.

What I want to discuss are the “erotic” aspects presented through Ekons, which both the Ascalon Club and Jonathan himself have perfect examples of to talk about. In the E3 2017 trailer for Vampyr, there is a scene where a woman (who uses Venus’ NPC model, for... some reason) is being fed upon by Redgrave, surrounded by the other members of the Ascalon Club, all of which are male.

This image, of a delicate, pure woman being fed on by a male vampire (or multiple, in this case) is an erotic staple of the vampire, seen in multiple works all across vampire media and has existed since even the ancient interpretations of the vampire. For the Ascalon Club specifically, Redgrave states that victims are brought in only for “special occasions”, which could mean many things and could be theorized in quite the variety of ways (either incredibly explicit, or just truly sharing a meal. Another essay topic, maybe?).

Full screenshot

Naturally, since vampires are seen as sexual predators and women are meant to be seen as a virginal, demure maidens, there was nothing more perverse in the Victorian Era than the perversion of the Victorian woman. Even in Carmilla, which is the origin work of the lesbian vampire, she, too, was feeding on a woman that was seen as chaste and unsullied, which was seen as the greater sin than the lesbianism itself. This image also usually invoked the “Death and the Maiden” trope, an erotic trope involving a figure representative of death, often cradling an innocent, youthful woman. Some examples of this would be:

(SOME OF THE FOLLOWING IMAGES ARE NSFW)

“Interview with the Vampire" (1994 film, 1976 book), Anne Rice

“Dracula”, 2010, Anne Yvonne Gilbert

The next example of Vampyr’s Ekons invoking this trope, and being representative of the erotic and seductive outlook Dontnod wanted to share, has to do with a detail I noticed in Jonathan’s worst/most evil ending and in the second worst ending. Specifically, how in the both bad endings you can get, all of his victims shown in the cutscenes are women. Let’s start with the monstrous/most evil one.

These endings alone deserve their own in-depth essays as to why the only victims we are shown are women. It could have to do with him losing Elisabeth and filling to the void, it could be preference, something much darker, or something else entirely. I believe that this choice to make all of his victims thereon to be women (or at least, appear to be women), is to directly go back to not only the seductive qualities of the vampire, but also to present another theme Beauverger wished to share—the quality of a vampire that seeks to remember what he loves. An image that reeks of decadence and hatred, but also telling of a hollowness that is unyielding and undying as the creature that holds it. Vampires are victim to the world around them changing, for they themselves lie in still, never-changing bodies. Jonathan in this moment, no matter what, is succumbing to his thirst because of his loss. The ending makes you believe there is the slightest bit of chance to the player’s heinous actions, only to tear it away from both you and Jonathan. The woman he loved denied his attempts to accept his own monstrosity, and in retaliation, he shall deny himself love and only seek pleasure, yet forever continue to remember that lost love (alongside that; the first shot of him that we are shown shows him in Paris, the country of love. Hmm...).

This image, of remembering what one has loved and lost, is also present in the second worst ending you can get. Redemption is even more tantalizing in the beginning, but instead of accepting Elisabeth’s choice to put herself to the pyre (in a rather haunting, almost emotionless way), Jonathan is mad with remorse and instead begs for Elisabeth to reconsider. She casts him aside, yet states that she forgives him in the end. We are left with this image:

Rather than this:

This ending is for the most morally ambiguous Reid played throughout the game; it involves him burning the castle down much like the first ending, yet here, a tear is shed a tear for what is lost. He loses Elisabeth in agony and grief, but does not retaliate with hedonism or rage like the most monstrous interpretation of him—he instead retaliates by condemning himself to eternal solitude, feasting still, but instead of filling him with pleasure, it fills him with an even greater void.

This ending actually feels much more sympathetic to me, as well as much more bittersweet. Notice how he took a painting of Ashbury for himself before burning the castle to nothing. The same sihiloute seen in the worst bad ending is also shown here, which leads me to further believe that no matter which bad ending you get—it is ultimately about the loss of love and condemnation to eternal isolation. Dontnod truly shows us in these endings, what it is like to be an immortal creature with mortal emotions. Eternal suffering piled on by the cost of consuming mortal life that share the same emotions as thee. Jonathan himself, however, only represents one kind of vampire that I have described, that being the sympathetic, self-deprecating one. A inhumane creature wearing humane flesh. Ekons, according to Dontnod, are considered to be the most “fertile” of vampires, fertile in both emotion and in the physical. The primary target for considering the human condition. They also claim benevolence in vampires, are an “exception”. How true that claim is, depends on how one views it.

Full image

“In Vampyr, Ekons are the most fertile of the blood drinkers, closest to the traditional Vampire figure. Unlike most vampires, Ekons are still able to feel human emotion. Some of them even appear to show benevolence to humanity… but they are the exception...”

What of the others I mentioned above? How do they represent the image that Dontnod wished to show us with the presentation of the Ekon?

Given how Ashbury is Jonathan’s love interest, I feel as if she and him are of the same ilk (putting aside all the complaints of how forced their romance is, anyway). They only become polar opposites if Jonathan takes the completely evil route through the means of the player, where he is much like Mary instead. In that, his own kind soul becomes corrupted because he can no longer cope with the fantastical, yet monstrous being he has become and gives in to his more primal desires as an Ekon. Ashbury is one thing that Jonathan is not, however, and that would be the mentor figure and a message about gender and symbolism within vampire history.

We learn either in the middle or the end of the game that Ashbury was born in 1551; the specific details being these:

Full screenshot

For some context, only very recently have minority groups gained equal social power and standing compared to previous generations in the vast scope of history involving such events. Even in Vampyr’s 1918, women were still fighting for their right to keep their suffrage amongst a variety of other class issues that still plagued Europe and other developed nations. Ashbury, by design, almost appears to outright ignore these things for this era, presumably due to her vast experience throughout each generation and watching women slowly progress. Yet, she’s still self-aware to realize from all this experience that Lord Redgrave’s ideals are backwards and as she says, antediluvian.

The role of women in the Victorian Era, even under the role of a Queen at the time, was still incredibly kept to the cult of domesticity even, arguably more so than ever as Europe approached it’s industrial, modern age. Anti-sexual ideals ran rampant at the time. The concept of chastity, purity, and the myth of the Victorian woman being the demure “Angel of the House” and nothing more, had made such an impact in such a short amount of time that parts of its influence have lasted well into the First World War Era. Remember, a female vampire is already seen as a corrupt version of a woman, and thus, no longer the perfectly pure Victorian ideal, because vampires are corruptions of sexuality, something that the Victorian era was very keen on scrutinizing to the fullest extent (even if none would dare to admit it). Here is where Ashbury presents us with another kind of vampire as well, one that is not only a branch into history (akin to Dracula who woo’d guests with tales of bygone ages), but she is also something else; an ironic form of progress for a creature that never grows itself, which is what makes her the perfect mentor figure for Jonathan. She has learned something that Redgrave and other vampires like him have not; she has learned how to change. Something very distinct for the Romantic vampire, where one of the main attractions to such a character, is their haunting love and connection with their past, and due to it, never change. A walking relic in the flesh. We see it when she actively mocks such propositions even when showing her affections for Jonathan:

Sexuality as a concept for vampires has and will forever exist, from the idea of gender roles throughout the eras (as we see with Ashbury and to an extent, Redgrave with his sexist views), as well as various implications, but those deserve it’s own analysis and history section. However, staying on the topic of gender, we veer to another female figure that is much different than the rather pure Ashbury—the tragic figure that is Mary. Mary is many things. Other than a possible allusion to Bloody Mary, she is, without a doubt, a figure of tragedy, and yet, resembles her older brother very much. After the loss of her son and husband, she seeks Jonathan in a mass grave hoping that he, too, has no succumbed to the insurmountable loss she has been facing, only to face loss herself. We see her full of hatred, anger, and above all, a fatal sadness. She attempts to murder her own brother for what he did to her, even while knowing he was remorseful and attempted to his own life. She releases their mother if Jonathan is played as a moral soul, or slaughters her before Jonathan if she feels that he is now as irredeemable as she. She represents what Jonathan’s evil end represents and is much like a twin in this way. A compassionate soul twisted into a nightmarish version of what she once was because she cannot believe what sort of monstrosity she has become. Even after Mary goes mad, there is a moment of clarity. A moment of peace, where she contemplates her immortality.

“Don’t you see? This is not me. Flesh that never ages... All nightmare, no dream. Bring it to a close. Let me sleep.”

In that moment, we once again face the very mortal crisis of a vampire. The crisis of living only by killing another. Denied refugee to God’s holy palace. Faced with death all around you, whilst becoming death yourself. A symbolism for insanity, perhaps. That those who are mad now see a very real aspect of the world that Jonathan himself cannot describe nor see. It is quite Lovecraftian—madness through witnessing the reality, be it of one’s world or condition. Vampirism has always been linked with illness, so it would not be unwise to consider the idea that Vampyr is using a very Lovecraftian about it—that madness beseeches enlightenment.

Mary herself is most likely afflicted by the Blood of Hate that once afflicted Ashbury, and simply has succumbed to her immortal vs. mortal crisis—she cannot bare to understand how one could live as a metaphor of death whilst attempting to still remain a symbol of love, hope, and kindness which is why she finds Jonathan’s words useless no matter how he is played. They are no longer humane, they are the inhumane and thus, the evils of the Earth. This is why she only forgives him when he kills her, because she sees only a fragment of kindness from Jonathan when he commits murder because it is now, in her eyes, their true nature. Ekons are merely simulacra of humans, so can one still consider them human at all?

Full screenshot

The vampire is nothing but a symbol of death, no matter how humane their understanding and flesh, and Dontnod tells us well that through the character of Mary, and with the fact that we are able to play Jonathan as a complete monster. Even a moral Jonathan still struggles between his urge to kill, and his duty to heal. Ekons are Romantic, aristocratic, and above all, symbolism for how one’s morality can shift as quickly as their mortality does.

They must, above all, decide as to how they shall live their immortal lives—decide as to whether they shall become savior, or stalker.

2. Skal

Skals are curious creatures to place, given how much they vary with behaviour and the capacity to communicate. We have the mobs that are akin to mindless ghouls and mobs, but then there are places like the Skal sewer hideout where we get creatures that, while deformed, are able to communicate and understand who they are. Curiously, too; unlike the Ekon, they are said to feast on vampire blood much more than human blood. According to Ashbury, they are the deformed versions of their makers, the result of carelessness. With the ability to also produce claws, canines, manipulate the shadows, and their own unique ability of producing acidic clouds and blood, they are undoubtedly representatives to how vampirism throughout all mythology had been seen as an illness or pure corruption. However, Ashbury states they are lesser beings, from their abilities to controlling their hunger, so they are not as powerful as Ekons. A calling to the more monstrous interpretations of the vampire before it took the flesh of an alluring, humane visage. Various characters and types represent this dynamic about them, as well as... interesting in-game issues as to their creation.

The most obvious examples are the Rouge Skals and other variations of the mob we hunt and maim endlessly throughout the night. They seem to be lacking any resemblance of their former selves, with the only connection to Ekons being that they have similar abilities. They are mindless ghouls that spread the Skal Epidemic.

Old Bridget is an example of a Skal that is not only somewhat more human in appearance, but has retained her personality and has not succumbed to becoming a mindless ghoul. She was created by an Ekon, curiously, that being Redgrave, but it is unclear as to how. Ashbury states that it is because Redgrave comes from a bloodline that can only produce Skals, but how can this be, then, if Redgrave himself is an Ekon? It was not implied that it was done as an accident since we are told that he intended to have Old Bridget as his immortal wife; that would have fit the theory Ashbury states that Skals are simply the result of careless Turnings (and really, should have instead happened to Mary, in that case). Does the bloodline dilute and produce decayed vampires that are Skals? But Old Bridget is not mindless nor rouge; is she something in between? An Ekon gone wrong, perhaps?

Sean inevitably goes mad if you leave him be and do not decide to Turn him, which implies that Skals, depending on what they are turned by, do decay mentally. Which may also indicate that a lot of the rouge Skals both outside and in the Sewers Skal sanctuary, all share the same fate because of the Skal Epidemic. There seems to be a sort of “advancement” in the vampire species within the game, however. A Skal can become an Ekon with their blood, but can an Ekon decay to a Skal? He interestingly, also vowed to following the Lord’s way, but we see with Jonathan that one can be attacked by their faith. Yet, Sean easily opens a shrine filled with religious figures which has little effect on him. Are Skals immune to the faith, or is it simply an exception to him?

Elza Mullaney and the McPhersons are both mini-bosses, but are quite decayed and are considered to be part of the spread of the Skal contagion in the West End. However, the amount of mutation we see still doesn’t detract from the fact they can still talk, and are actually aware of their condition despite becoming completely fueled by rage. They also suggest that Ikors are a mutation of Skals (see more below), alongside all the Ill-Formed Skal mobs you begin to see starting with the West End.

We can tell that Dontnod clearly wanted them to be the game’s version of a ghoul through the concept art (which also portrayed them as very eldritch), which is an that is not foreign to modern vampire works. A human corrupted through vampire blood is also not new to vampire history at all, given their older depictions representing them as monsters and symbols of disease. Remember my comparison to Rabies? Skals are a good application of such a comparison, with their rabid, mindless flailing, as well their primal thirst for blood and flesh above all else. Even Jonathan himself in his 2015 concept art has a suspiciously Skal-like look.

Florent Auguy

Some examples of Skals in their earlier works, still appearing very similar as they do in-game:

Adrian Meriabault

We are told that the word Skal means “slave” by various characters and notes, but the etymology of the word goes quite a lot deeper than that. Here is what the game tells us of them:

Full screenshot

The word “slave” has etymology in the Old French word “esclave”, which comes from the Medieval and Late Latin variations of “sclāvus”, Medieval Latin standing for “slave” while Late Latin having the word standing for “Slav” (often due to Slavs being forced into slavery throughout the Middle Ages). While slaves have the first, and most known definition, that being:

a. (n.1 and adj.): One who is property of, and entirely subject to, another person, whether by capture, purchase, or birth; a servant completely divested of freedom and personal rights.

This is fitting for the position of the Skal in Vampyr, mentioned above with how they are kept as literal servants and overall, akin to slaves in reality, are seen as lesser by both humans and vampires. However, another interesting definition can be put to a slave, a much more symbolic one of desire, which fits all vampires:

adj. One who has lost the power of resistance; one who surrenders to something.

Beyond the connections to their bloodlust as well as social positions, comes their physical forms. Skals are connected to disease as they are representatives of ghouls, which are often seen in folklore as hulks of decaying flesh that still somehow walk the Earth. Skal, as a word, is incredibly similar to the word “scall”, which is a word to describe a disease of the skin, and “skal“ is actually a variation of this word. Alongside versions such as “scalle”, “skalle”, “skall”, and “scal,” this word (presumably) rooted in Old Norse etymology has much to share about the very visual deformities of the Skal in Vampyr.

adj. A scaly or scabby disease of the skin, esp. of the scalp. dry scall: psoriasis. humid or moist scall: eczema.

This is a clear reference to how they often lose hair on their scalp, as well as the various skin blemishes that plague their skin and are unable to be hidden. An extreme form of eczema, in a way. They are the centerpiece of the epidemic, a plague to be rid of, which all connects to how they are perceived by both humans (the Guard of Priwen in the West End hunt them furiously; leading Skal mobs to them also causes their A.I to attack them over Jonathan; they can also hurt one another), but Dontnod, with the inclusion of characters such as Old Bridget and Sean and all the conscious figures within the sanctuary, clearly wish to tell us that not all who seem monstrous are monstrous, while those who often appear the most human are often more likely to be the most evil, due to how fate likes to play its ironic game.

Speaking of evil, the origins and etymology of the word “ghoul” also bring up an interesting connections. Ghouls themselves actually originated from Arabic folklore, and became very popular once Arabian Nights, or, One Thousands and One Nights (أَلْف لَيْلَة وَلَيْلَة‎) was translated for the rest of the world to experience. Stemming from the words “غُول - “ghūl”, which comes from from غَالَ - “ghāla”, which means “to seize”, as a reference as to how they take the shape of human bodies. Persian folklore also has a reference to ghouls, named “غول”. A good, historical definition of a Ghoul would be this.

n. or adj. late 18th century: from Arabic ġūl, ‘a desert demon believed to rob graves and devour corpses.’

Skals are said to only feed from the dead, while Ekons must feed from the living; even Nimrods only feed from live vampires. The robbing graves part, however, could be a connection to many things. Ghoul is sometimes seem as a way to mock someone with an intense interest in corpses, mortality, and death. Graverobbers and gravediggers were said to be such. It would also not be too out of the ordinary to imagine that Skals dig through graves in a cemetery to feast on the recent, and decaying, dead. We see an example of this in the game’s art after Mary’s death in a cutscene.

Full screenshot

One connection to Ekons, strangely enough, is the aspect of disease, but in a venereal (sexual) sense. Given how vampires were not only seen as corrupt vessels that plagued the Earth, but also as the darker half of human sexuality, it isn’t too far too imagine that the very physical skin lesions on Skals are symbolic to venereal diseases. A stretch, perhaps, but the hand lesions shown in the concept art above are very similar to many types of rashes one can get from those types of diseases (given how a lot of images on these things are essentially for shock value, I won’t put up any in this essay out of respect, but if you are curious, here is a link to the Healthline Newsletter showcasing some). They are also unflinchingly similar to the famous 1346 to 1353 Black Death/Bubonic Plague that consumed 1/3rd of the world’s population, crippled Eurasia for the following centuries regarding health, and has continued to stand as the most famous, widespread epidemic up until the Spanish Flu.

With the presence of Skals like Old Bridget, Sean, and the lucid ones we see in the Sewers, it feel as if Skals themselves lie on a scale. Given their canon, humanoid-esque appear, the only inhumane aspect is their decay, but that too varies almost on their lucidity. Sean still looks like Sean, but is beginning to experience a slight necrosis on his face. Old Bridget also has necrosis and has lost her hair, but she looks very humane otherwise. Redgrave is an Ekon that can only produce Skals, Skals that behave more like unfinished Ekons, than Skals. Skals can also become Ekons with enough Ekon blood, “finishing” the process, so to speak. We know that something like this is true due to Dontnod’s cards about Skals and Ashbury’s descriptions of them, of how they are victims by surprise, or that they are somehow “failed” attempts at completing the process into an Ekon (Redgrave also remarks that many willing Turns lead to death because the human body could not survive the process).

Full image

As Usher Talltree states, however, Skals, no matter how humane they are or could be, stand as the lesser, decayed half of the very much undead species of vampire.

3. Vulkod

Now here is where things get rather dark... on information, that is. We do not know much about the Vulkod other than the accounts of research done by Carl Eldritch and the statements from Lord Redgrave. At this point, we can generally conclude that all vampires appear to share the ability of manipulating blood, having canines, shadow magic, and other dark forces at their disposal. Unlike the Skal, however, they do not appear to be capable of making acidic substances. They do, however, have the ability to appear as large, canine beasts, as well as harbour immense physical strength. They are primal and territorial (much like a wolf), and also unlike the Skal, they still seem to be relatively conscious and capable of speech and intelligence.

Fergal is the most obvious example, as well as the Sewer Beast. Similar examples are also the Rouge Vulkods you find roaming around in the West End alongside with various other rogue vampire species beyond the Skal.

Large Beasts are most likely the reason why Redgrave states that humans often confuse them for werewolves. However, in the game, we never see a large beast capable of speech or intelligence. Given how Vulkod seem to also be a kind of “decayed” version of vampires alongside the vampiric/bloodline ladder, perhaps this is the most irredeemable version or the most primal version of Vulkod? Newton takes the (blond) shape of one in the sewers, and I believe Oswald does as well, and neither of them seem capable of speaking, but...

If Thelma is murdered, Thomas goes missing and takes the shape of a Large Beast too, yet he also speaks to you during the encounter with him. This could simply be mere consequence of the ludo-narrative nature of Vampyr (in that, the game mechanics often don’t line up with established narrative ones; I blame this on the game’s budget), or perhaps something else entirely about how vampires work, depending on how they are Turned?

Here are the notes Lord Redgrave writes on Vulkod.

Full screenshot

This “exotic”, yet bestial nature of the Vulkod is further emphasized in Carl Eldritch’s notes.

Full screenshot

So what can be garnered from these creatures? They are clearly meant to be an allusion as to how commonly vampires were compared to werewolves due to their similar thirst for blood and flesh. They are arguably described as the most primitive of all the vampire species in the game, but I would argue that such a title would better suit a Skal or Ikor. Their personalities appear to take quite a shift into primal rage, fury, and an increase an aggression. However, they do not appear to be completely red-eyed with rage and are still capable of enough intelligence to utilize their other vampiric abilities, be they in hulking human shape or in their more wolfish, beast shapes. Vulkod as a word, though... appears to be the most fictional, as I cannot personally find any connections to the word. Perhaps due to a misunderstanding of what they were known and confused for? Talltree makes note of such a common mistake, as does Redgrave. What they are confused for, a “Werewolf”, that is, is indeed something we can analyze and begin connections with.

The etymology of “werewolf” comes from the Old English word “werewulf” (think the Old English tale of Beowulf), with “wer” standing for “man” and “wulf” standing for “wolf”, hence, “man-wolf” or “wolf-man”. The Ancient Greeks had a word for them too: “λυκάνθρωπος lukánthrōpos, or, "wolf-person", as did many other languages (The old, West German Franks had “wariwulf”. Norse figures had multiple words and analogies for wolves and “wolf-men”, but the most popular would be “varúlfur”. Also; like vampires, they, to, have a clinical condition named after lycanthropy). Associated heavily with witchcraft, the Medieval Era, curses, death, cannibalism, Therianthropy (shape-shifting humans in folklore), and symbolism for another primordial sin of the human condition (vampires being primal Lust, werewolves being primal Wrath), the werewolf was very popular throughout the 13th - 17th centuries, but subsided just before the vampire boom of the 18th century (most likely due to the rise of Victorianism, and I suppose necrophilia was more alluring than bestiality). What do all these have to do with Vulkod? Quite a bit of connections can be made. The most obvious would be their highly aggressive, territorial nature that they develop upon turning. Another obvious connection would be their appearance, their dark, pitch-black skin resembling more the tone of fur given the rest of their physiques, and the Large Beasts are essentially just bi-pedal wolves, the exact definition of what a werewolf looks like in folklore.

Gabriel Lemaire

Adrian Meribault

The Werewolf or the Cannibal, Lucas Cranach der Ältere, 1512

Lyacon Changed into a Wolf, Hendrick Goltzius, 1589

Werewolves, once bitten, have the exact same personality change—as symbols for primordial wrath and a deep, humane rage, it could be said that Vulkod are turned through their own kind of Blood of Hate. Being wronged and dying in anger at some point in their life leads them to becoming a beast, rather than a decayed version of what they are, since Skals are a symbolism of disease, which takes victims unknowingly. Anger is something that is very noticed, and perhaps may BE the only thing they can feel or process anymore.

The Facebook reveals of each species by Dontnod, reveal that the Vulkod can no longer feel emotion. This implies that their primal, irritable nature stems from the fact that they can only feel the most baseless of emotions. Husks of what they are emotionally, but certainly not physically.

Full image

Yet, this still begs the question of what decides the fate of those who are Turned. Is your vampire species forced through bloodline, or is there a more symbolic, emotional bond that occurs in the blood? Vulkod appear to be part of the epidemic, given how we have NPCs that are able to be turned into them rather than mindless Skals, but some become Skals and some do not in this supposed Skal Epidemic. Vulkod, in all their beastly mannerisms, bring forth quite human questions about what true changes occur when one is forced to turn.

4. Nimrod

Nimrod are more fictional concepts in Vampyr, frankly because we never see one until the very end. Much like the Vulkod and the following species I will be speaking about, we have little to go on in terms of in-game lore as to what these things were and are, and if anyone we see is afflicted. However, we do have some historical accounts in the game for Nimrod, as their general premise is that of the self-hating vampire. A vampire hunter that feasts on vampires alone, hunts them actively as their immortal goal, and much like the Ekon, is able to blend in with mortals easily.

William Marshal is very likely a Nimrod. We see him starve himself, only sustaining himself on Ashbury’s blood, and speaks of how he was touched by the Archangel Gabriel for his “immortal” gift so that he may slay all other impurities in the world. However, the Blood of Hate that consumed him and later Ashbury leads him to becoming a true hunter of his own kind, mourn for what he did to Ashbury, and symbolically die at the hands of another vampire.

The founder of the Brotherhood of Saint Paul’s Stole, Pawl, is revealed to be a Nimrod after completing the True Dragonbane puzzle, which, of course, is both blissfully ironic and incredibly fitting. A self-hating vampire creates a group fully centered on these immortal beings and nothing else.

McCullum deserves his own place here again. As I said above, he can be either Ekon OR Nimrod depending on how one takes his character down the line. He seems rather accepting of his condition, or at least it’s benefits, at the beginning of his change as we see with Jonathan but who knows how quickly that may change.

All of these men also imply that, given how Nimrods can blend in with mortals, that Nimrods can only descend from an Ekon, as they are the only species we know of that can mimic human beings the most. Nimrods could essentially just be considered Ekons that commit cannibalization instead. Nothing ingame indicates that their physiology is different from that of an Ekon’s.

No discussions on Nimrods could start without the most sacred letter about them in the game. The note, “Recollection of Paulus Aurelianus”, tells of Pawl, the original founder of the Brotherhood of Saint Paul’s Stole.

Full screenshot

This is also another thing in the game that very much deserves it’s own essay, but for Nimrods and vampires as whole, it provides us with some rich information. The story we see here of Pawl is an engaging one, because not only does it give us an idea of just how far back the true history of Vampyr goes and some knowledge into what the original Brotherhood was like. It also shows us a glimpse as to why the Brotherhood of Saint Paul’s Stole was birthed in the first place. Usher Talltree speaks of a schism that occurred in the Brotherhood that gave birth to both the Brotherhood of Saint Paul’s Stole and the Guard of Priwen.

If you have Jonathan ask Talltree who the founder of the original Brotherhood was, he will respond like this.

Jonathan will then ask a question about whether or not the Brotherhood of Saint Paul’s Stole act as much than just the scholars and academics they claim to be, which leads to this interesting dialogue.

Upon completing his sidequest, “Pandora’s Box”, he gives you a note that speaks about the Brotherhood’s origins which also shed some more light.

Full screenshot

1801 puts us at exactly 117 years ago from 1918. Ashbury makes mention of the first Great Hunt that the Guard of Priwen launched to be about a half a century before the current game’s events; she specifically states 75 years ago.

This means the first Great Hunt occurred roughly around 1843 (1918 - 75 = 1843). Knowing this and Talltree’s explanation of events, this most likely means that Pawl’s Recollection note was made in 1801 because he mentions one of the split factions of the Brotherhood. This may indicate that Pawl, as one of the first Nimrods to exist, is alive, and since the Brotherhood still hunted at this time, those hunters would of course be outraged to know that one of the founders of the old, original Brotherhood was a vampire.

There’s a kind of irony in the idea of Nimrods, given the definition of what a Nimrod is in a Biblical sense and how ironically see them as sympathetic. A hunter of his own kind, using his eternity not to feed on the flesh of the living, but to smite the corpses of the undead. Their origins in Vampyr all come from them trying to either eradicate or co-exist with said creatures, but never trying to follow the “true” nature of a vampire. Such extreme ideologies on how vampires should be treated, of course, only lead to the schism we see today.

It also brings forth McCullum’s conflict and what I believe exemplifies the Nimrod Vampyr means to share, if we were to ever get one in the flesh (because sadly, you do not get to see much of Turned McCullum since it is at the very end of the game). His first instinct when you force him to Turn is to beg for his death, for the one thing that defines an immortal from a mortal, their ability to die and leave this world. We learn that he most likely joined the Guard due to the tragedies that struck his family regarding vampires (interestingly, this is also very telling of his character. Swansea adores his vampirism and sees it as a gift, yet his own family faced the same kind of fate; McCullum uses his immortality to continue hunting vampires, Swansea uses his immortality to continue experimenting with them, and to keep peace).

If you have Jonathan ask him how he is doing with his new immortality, his first answer is how he could imagine himself becoming the greatest vampire hunter there ever was. But he also expresses the realistic concern of the Guard of Priwen; trained hunters who can discern a mortal from an immortal by a mere glimpse, yet his first suggestion is to still consider attempting deceit to remain the leader. Not unlike Pawl, no?

As mentioned prior, the word “Nimrod” has religious connotations; referring to the Hunter Nimrod, a grand king who was reknown for his hunting abilities by Christ, as well as being the great-grandson of Noah, the man who sailed his vessel that is now known as “Noah’s Ark”, during the Book of Genesis’ Great Flood. Nimrod also has connections to the Tower of Babel.

Genesis 10:8-10, King James Version (KJV)

“And Cush begat Nimrod, who began to be mighty in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord. Wherefore it is said, As Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord.”

“And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.”

Usher Talltree’s notes also talk of the Nimrod in this fashion, referencing the mythical nature of the hunter.

Full screenshot

Nimrod’s etymology is not very different; stemming from the late 16th century Hebrew word “Nīmrōḏ” or “נִמְרוֹדֿ”. Nimrods in vampire represent the same fervor that the Biblical Nimrod did, becoming mighty hunters of the same evils that Nimrod saw himself face, yet unlike their Biblical counterpart, they are the embodiment of the evils they so wish to defeat, encapsulating these vampire hunters into their own twisted fate and irony.

The Nimrod also remind me of another figure that you cannot mention vampire hunters without referencing, the character of Professor Abraham Hellsing from Dracula, the vampire’s sworn enemy and, in many interpretations of the doctor, a vampire hunter turned hunter himself. McCullum is very much the Van Helsing to Jonathan’s Dracula. Not only that, Nimrods are defined in that, they deny the supposed natural instincts of the vampire, using their dark abilities instead to cleanse the world of the evil that vampires represent and spread. Van Helsing’s personality is described in Dracula very thoroughly, and in it, there is a particular line that shares (what I believe) the same ideology and true goal that Nimrods seek.

“...This, with an iron nerve, a temper of the ice-brook, and indomitable resolution, self-command, and toleration exalted from virtues to blessings, and the kindliest and truest heart that beats, these form his equipment for the noble work that he is doing for mankind, work both in theory and practice, for his views are as wide as his all-embracing sympathy.”

— Letter From Dr Seward to Arthur Holmwood, chapter 9,

Nimrods deny their nature by hunting what they are to ensure the betterment and continuing kindness of mankind. In their conquest to deny all that they are, they forever hunt what they have become and what they now hate, never foregoing that cause and perhaps even hoping that, through this endless hunt which they have made themselves slaves too, they may find redemption for themselves and their sins.

5. Ichor (Ikor)

We don’t really see any mobs that are outright labeled as Ichor, and the only real information we have of them are from Dontnod’s introduction to vampires on Facebook, and one note from Carl Eldritch about their threat. However, I have some theories, given the one thing that discerns them. They appear to be indistinguishable from Skal and otherwise share all their abilities but they have one key difference. That difference being, that they attack with the intent to spread disease, rather than to outright kill.

Full image

“Meet the Ichors! In Vampyr, Ichors are putrid monstrosities carrying sickness and spreading epidemics, and among the most feared of all blood drinkers. Instead of killing their prey, Ichors seem to prefer infecting their target by bite or touch – turning them into contagious carriers of disease.”

Full screenshot

I believed the Ill-Formed mobs that we see are the Ichor, as they are a mutation that now spreads the contagion through means of touch rather than by direct biting, which is what the Ichor are said to be. Skals may have picked up the mutation from Ichor, the Ichor themselves may just be the Ill-Formed prefix mobs and only kill because the ludo-narrative of the game requires it. Jonathan himself expresses shock as you investigate West End’s source of plague of these creatures after you kill Elza Mullaney, as he believed the epidemic was only transmitted through biting.

There is not much to say on Ichor, other than their curious choice of name. We do know that they are always female, according to reports from Friar Tobias Whittaker, which could mean they are the precursor to Disasters. They represent as much symbolism as the Skals do with their grotesque appearance and as symbols of plague and contagion that haunted all vampires in past generations. Lore-wise, they also appear and act the same, for the most part (even if they prefer not to kill directly, they are still rather violent and just seek death through means of plague regardless). However, The word “ichor” is a far cry from plague, if you look at mythology. “Ichor” is most known for being the name of the fluid that flowed in the veins of Greek Gods. Some comparisons would see it akin to the Precious Blood, or the Blood of Christ, from which one drank at communion. A fluid that was not mortal blood like our own, but rather something of an immortal fluid, and it is often why Communion has us “drink” the Blood of Christ so that we may be blessed by him.

An Iliad verse tells us of this supposed, ethereal fluid.

Iliad V. 339–342[2] “Blood follow'd, but immortal; ichor pure, Such as the blest inhabitants of heav'n May bleed, nectareous; for the Gods eat not Man's food, nor slake as he with sable wine Their thirst, thence bloodless and from death exempt.”

“Ichor” as a concept originated in Classical mythology and the word itself comes from an Ancient Greek, but it’s exact etymology is said to be unknown and lacks a concise theory as to how it was created. Fitting since the word is used to describe something that is already unknown and otherworldly to begin with.

n. ˈaɪkər/ or /ˈɪkər/; Ancient Greek: ἰχώρ. also mid 17th century “ikhōr“ - The fluid that flows like blood in the veins of the gods.

Of course, “ichor” has another meaning as well; a medical one involving pathology, even if it’s considered archaic. It is the more fitting connection as it is a direct reference to the plague they carry and how they walk around as decaying corpses with deep mutations and acidic blemishes.

n. pathology - a foul-smelling watery discharge from a wound or ulcer. fetid discharge.

“Fetid” meaning an extremely unpleasant scent, originating from the Latin word “fetidus” or (erroneously) “foetidus”, with “fetid” having its arrival in Late Middle English. This is an obvious correlation to the bleeding ulcers found on the Ill-Formed Skals and even Large Beasts that you encounter much later in the game when the epidemic begins to take a deep hold onto London as the contagion progresses.

Given the supposed rarity of these creatures according to Carl Eldritch, and Jonathan’s shock when he first begins to encounter them throughout the West End much later in the game, Ichor only appear when plague has spread so rapidly and only after a very long time has passed for mutations to start appearing. This implies that Ichor are a type of “advanced” form of Skal almost, that not only can they have the potential to kill directly with their strength, they also have the potential to cause an epidemic or worsen an epidemic, like we see with the Skal Epidemic, where the plague begins to start spreading by touch alongside the violent biting.

6. Disasters

Disasters are the ultimate form of the contagion in Vampyr, the embodiment of the Red Queen’s rage and the final result of the Blood of Hate’s influence. They exemplify the eldritch horror of the Red Queen’s influence, only targeting women who have been wronged and have become creatures of ultimate hatred, while Myrddin counters this by Turning men who have a purpose, as champions to resist the utter, perpetual cycle of hatred. Very much real, biblical, and mythological all at once in the Vampyr universe, Disasters are not exactly vampires in their own right, but much like the Ichor, are meant to represent the hatred and the chaos that consumes many vampires. As the sole source of the Skal Epidemic and other tragedies, as well as the main fear of the Guard of Priwen and their reason for commencing Great Hunts to avoid their existence coming into fruition, Disasters act as boogeymen to both vampire and hunters alike. With their eldritch, grotesque appearances and the ability to plague any land or person they touch, much like Brood-mothers, Disasters are Hells that haunt the Earth wearing female flesh.

Doris Fletcher is the first Disaster you encounter right before you encounter her mother who is also a Disaster, a sad tale of both mother and daughter being scorned. As the greatest actress of her time, her dreams wore torn asunder when she caught the plague from the original Disaster in London, that being her own mother. The infection became a greater, grotesque beast that began to infect the West End. A scorned starlet that was doomed by her own mother’s hatred and bitterness, that being...

Harriet Jones, the original Disaster and start of the Skal Epidemic, caused by Edgar’s experiments and furthered developed her own bitterness and acrid hatred against the world, as well as her own daughter for not visiting her anymore. Jones wanted everyone to suffer for what they did for her, for abandoning her as a sad old woman, and this tragedy developed into London’s Skal Epidemic, all planned by the Red Queen.

Lady Ashbury was the original source of both of these predicaments, however. William Marshall infected Ashbury with the Blood of Hate, and while she believed herself to be cured thereafter with the Tear of Angels, the Blood of Hate’s influence still coursed through her veins and caused her to be what Jonathan described as the “healthy carrier” and true origin of the Skal Epidemic. The Tear only cured the outward symptoms of her hatred and rage, but the condition in her blood never left, which is what made Edgar’s experiment so deadly, unbeknownst to both of them.

Disasters remind me very much about the Biblical “Day of Judgement” told throughout all Abrahamic religions, where the soul is judged based on their sins and virtues, and are chosen for Hell, Purgatory, or Heaven. The variations vary between religions, but overall it is generally a judge of character, of the soul, and how much that soul has escaped their Original Sin at birth. Usually, Judgement Day occurs at death, but what of the creatures of blood like we see? Of immortal beings who now represent death and the Reaper, rather than it’s victims? Getting into the religious symbolism of Vampyr as well as the mythological concepts behind the Red Queen and Myrddin would require their own book, let alone an essay, so I will focus on the connection I feel matches: the cyclic nature of Disasters. We know that in the past, Disasters have plagued England as well as neighboring nations, with Carl Eldritch telling us of how William Marshall brought one of the first Disasters (due to his Blood of Hate), and how McCullum accuses Swansea and Jonathan of attempting to recreate another Disaster to start a plague of vampires during his boss fight at Pembroke.

Full screenshot

This kind of “Day of Judgement” seems to be something that the Red Queen always brings down upon the land from Stonehenge once her avatar awakens, and Myrddin attempts to fight against his mother’s hatred by making “champions” of his own to protect the land from her wrath. Jonathan succeeds in saving the Red Queen from destruction and kills the Disasters of London, but Myrddin has mentioned that his champions have not always succeeded in their cause, or fail somehow in other ways. such as being unable to even accept their own immortality, or causing their own self-destruction through other means (take Jonathan’s bad endings).

It seems that Disasters are always inevitable, because hatred and evil within humans are always inevitable, but Myrddin seeks to also show that benevolence and the will to fight are also inevitable parts of the human condition. It is a balance, a Yin-Yang of sorts, with the Red Queen’s Disasters being the much more evil half whilst the Champions of Myrddin being the more benevolent half (to various, ambiguous moral degrees. ‘Good’ in this sense is simply being Turned to save the land, but how they go about it, is the moral ambiguity of it. For instance, no matter how much of a monster you play Jonathan to be, London is going to be saved, but at what cost? In the end, he can save London, but if all the districts are Hostile, overrun, and more mausoleum than city, does that not make him no more greater than a savior to a dead Empire?).

The Blood of Hate was the original “sin” that caused all of this so to speak, but even further back than that, is Pawl’s existence. Is it not impossible to think that a self-hating vampire from 500 A.D, could not already be a precursor to how far and how deep this bloodline follows to William Marshall’s era? Nimrods could arguably be considered the first kinds of Ekons we can actually hold any recollection of, so would it not make sense for the culmination of such hatred in vampires to be a Disaster? The cycle of life, death, and undeath that brings forth nothing but more death and inevitable hatred towards all involved; even if it is a mere cycle contained by Myrddin and the Red Queen’s existence.

Disasters, much like all vampires, are victim to an ancient, biblical, and mythological circumstance of the human condition, almost as if vampires themselves, are akin to the Original Sin from the Bible—much like Adam during the Fall of man, plaguing all humans thereon with the capacity to sin, vampires represent the ancestral sins of Myrddin and the Red Queen; that all mortals from birth have the capacity to become corrupted, immortal versions of themselves.

Yet, we only see Disasters as scorned women, she-devils in the flesh, and the only mention of Champions are men, be they victorious or as flawed as the Disasters they were born to face. This could be mere preference on both Myrddin and the Red Queen as a just another addition to their long lists of dichotomies between them, or could there be anything deeper with this? Eve was seen as the sinner for speaking to the serpent, as was Lilith when she denied Adam subservience—cursed, scorned women are not new in Biblical verses. Mórrígan, the female figure from Celtic mythology that the Red Queen has been referred as, is a symbol of both war and fate (the Red Queen incites wars with her Disasters, and the fate she produces is cyclic; fate is often something described as everlasting and primordial), as well as a symbol for the Earth and guardian of the people (Myrddin could be this, rather than the Red Queen herself—she incites war, but Myrddin, as a part of “she”, guards the Earth by creating Champions. A metaphor to the hypocritical nature of a vampire that seeks to save others or themselves, perhaps?).

Many natural disasters are seen to be the work of fate and otherworldly creations as well. Friar Tobias Whitaker, in all his insane ramblings, does hold some truth when he speaks of the Skal Epidemic as the work of the Devil, or as a sort of Armageddon for London’s sins (the earliesr Disaster also occured in 1666; 666 is the trademark number of the Devil. Coincidence?).

An Armageddon is a sort of prophesied “battle of the end times”, and nowadays is used describe a sort of end-of-the-world scenario, not far off the Skal Epidemic’s influence given how much it can take over. Several comparisons of this sort of “primordial” belief about disasters can be made to the Red Queen’s cycle of her own Disasters and the various plagues that come with it.

Isaiah 45:7, English Standard Version (ESV)

7 I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create calamity; I am the Lord, who does all these things.

Chronicles 7:13 - 7:14, King James Version (KJV) 13 If I shut up heaven that there be no rain, or if I command the locusts to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among my people;

14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

Disasters, above all, are prophecies, a true representation of how vampires plague the hearts of man, of how vampires shall always be seen as nothing more than a courage that must be vanquished by a scourge of equal deadliness. A traditional view of the vampire, but also a very human one—for Disasters do not become Disasters solely due to being infected, they become Disasters once their hearts and souls pass the point of no return. Once more, the vampire lies bare in it’s true form, as a victim of a primordial, circumstantial “sin”, at the behest of the Red Queen.

After losing all hope for their own humanity, their redemption, their happiness, their love—they plague the Earth, haunting the land as slaves yearning for the most human thing that they, and all vampires, have lost—the gift of mortality.

III. Credits, Extra Comments, and Sources

CREDITS:

I would first off like to thank @cursedbethechoice for all their help and advice in writing this essay, as well as allowing me to use some of their work for this project. They also helped me access sources I otherwise would not have access too that were incredibly valuable and academic. A lot of this couldn’t have been done without them! Their essays cannot also go without notice, and I really recommend you checking out their blog for their own analysis on the game!

I’d also like to give a shout-out for @orionali, as they helped me with datamining the game and it’s assets, which came in handy multiple times while creating this essay.

EXTRA COMMENTS:

This essay is a whooping 14,293 words long! It took roughly 2 - 3 weeks to complete between my own life busy-ness, procrastination, and research. I assure you, I did not expect it to become this big.

This section is mostly for extra tidbits and comments I wanted to share, as well as some other interesting parts of the game that I feel have some relevance to the essay, but didn’t warrant enough of a reason to be elaborated upon. I ALSO APOLOGIZE to mobile users. sadly, Read Mores don’t block off the content... which sucks.

It is not mentioned in the Ekon section, but they can detect disease according to Edgar’s note in Jonathan’s office. This is why Jonathan is able to see what kind of illnesses people have, and to what degree it has decayed to! (I also imagine he’s able to clearly identify and name them because he’s a doctor).

Most of the music I listened to while writing this was the official soundtrack.

A vampire can Shadow Jump with a human (or anything) without them falling out of their grasp.

Vampires really dislike natural substances (because they’re unnatural beings, I suppose?), which explains this, I imagine.

Vampires have obtusely large fangs if this texture is anything to go by.

Pembroke Hospital was overcapacity by hosting more than 300 patients, as revealed if you send the district to Hostility Status. Is this due to Jonathan Embracing the hospital staff, or something else?

The Ascalon Club is wary about the Brotherhood’s traditions.

While writing, I felt like this sometimes.

ALL SOURCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY (in no particular order):

Oxford English Dictionary DONTNOD’s Facebook Page Ernest Jones’ “The Pathology of Morbid Anxiety” - The Journal of Abnormal Psychology (1911) Dr. Elizabeth Miller’s Dracula Homepage "Greek Accounts of the Vrykolakas" by D. Demetracopoulou Leefrom The Journal of American Folklore, No. 54 (1941) "May the Ground Not Receive Thee" An Exploration of the Greek Vrykolakas and His Originsby Inanna Arthen (1998) Bible Gateway’s Versions of the Bible Vampires, Burial, and Death: Folklore and Reality, Paul Barber (1998) Staking Claims: The Vampires of Folklore and Fiction, Paul Barber (1996) Prest, Thomas Preskett. Varney the Vampire; or, The feast of blood. Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library Bramstoker.org’s resources The Bryon Society’s resources Dracula (1897), by Bram Stoker Dracula’s Guest and other Weird Stories (1914), by Bram Stoker Deities or Vampires? Hecate and other Blood-Drinking Spirits of Ancient Times, by Ancient-origins.net John Polidori, "The Vampyre" Created by Keffer, Jeremy L, last modified by Goodmundson, Scott D on Dec 17, 2010 The Vampire in Literature - Old and New, University of Iceland, Elísabet Erla Kristjánsdóttir (2014) Did Vampires Not Have Fangs in Movies Until the 1950s?, Brian Cronin, Huffington Post (2015) The Vampire Goes to College: Essays on Teaching with the Undead, Lisa A.Nevárez, Editor. Jefferson: McFarland, 2014. The Vampyre, a Tale by John William Polidori (1819) - Arizona State University Merriam-Webster’s Online Dicitionary Wiktionary Catechism of the Catholic Church, The Holy See THE MYTHS OF THE VICTORIAN WOMAN - NY Times WOMAN AND THE DEMON, The Life of a Victorian Myth. By Nina Auerbach. Illustrated. 255 pp. Cambridge, Mass.: JSTOR - Harvard University Press "Penny Dreadful: From True Crime to Fiction > Sweeney Todd, The Demon Barber of Fleet Street in Concert”, PBS.org JSTOR’S Open Academic Resources Adam and Eve, Genesis 2 - 3, Christian Bible Reference Site Adam and Eve, New World Encylopedia The Word "vampire": Its Slavonic Form and Origin, Brian Cooper (2005) The Soul, Evil Spirits, and the Undead: Vampires, Death, and Burial in Jewish Folklore and Law, Penn State University, Saul Epstein and Sara Libby Robinson (2012) The Vampire Myth, Johns Hopkins University Press, James Twitchell (1980) Vampire bats have been caught sucking human blood for the first time, Helena Horton, Telegraph Press (2017) Vampire bat, ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA Biblica.com’s bible references Vampires of Capital: Gothic Reflections between Horror and Hope, Amedeo Policante (2010) From Demons to Dracula: The Creation of the Modern Vampire Myth By Matthew Beresford (2008) Re-masculating the Vampire: Conceptions of Sexuality and the Undead from Rossetti's Proserpine to Meyer's Cullen, Emily Schuck (2013) "Every age has the vampire it needs": Octavia Butler's Vampiric Vision in Fledgling (2008) Coitus Interruptus: Sex, Bram Stoker, and Dracula, Elizabeth Miller, Professor Emerita, Memorial University (2006) Werewolf Legends from Germany, University of Pittsburgh, translated by D.L. Ashlimann (1997 - 2010) British Library’s list of Penny Dreadfuls, Judith Flanders (2014) The Book of Were-Wolves, by Baring-Gould, S. (Sabine), 1834-1924 “Ghoul” - Arabic Mythology, ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA The Mythical Ghoul in Arabic Culture, Ahmed Al-Rawi, Rustaq College of Applied Sciences, Sultanate of Oman The White Devil: The Werewolf in European Culture, By Matthew Beresford (2013) Death and the Maiden - La Mort dans l’Art The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (3 rev. ed.) Edited by F. L. Cross and E. A. Livingstone (2009) “Original Sin” in the Cambridge Online Dicitionary “Armageddon” in the Oxford English Dictionary Pslam 51:5 - Biblegateway Porphyria and vampirism: another myth in the making, A. M. Cox (1995) Slayers and Their Vampires: A Cultural History of Killing the Dead, Bruce A. McClelland (2006) Porphyria - Mayo Clinic Rabies - Mayo Clinic The Iliad of Homer, Volume 1, translated by William Cowper, ESQ., (1809) The Black Death: Bubonic Plague - Themiddleages.net De-coding the Black Death, BBC.co.uk The etymology of εἰκών in Wikitionary Summary of “The Vampyre” from Wikipedia’s Article The etymology of “Nimrod” in Wikitionary

#vampyr #vampyr game #essay #Dontnod #cursedbethechoice #mine #reference #for sources that link to buyable books... i pirated some of them #JUST AS A NOTE #but #this was very fun to write! even if i just sat here for 6 hours for each time i did rip #but i hope you all like it!#this really is just me realizing my vampire obsessions have gone too far btw

184 notes · View notes

fortheheavenssake · 7 years ago

Text

British Throne of David (cont.)

3. The Rock of Israel

The is a strange story in the Book of Genesis, which has been somewhat enigmatic. In the light of knowing about the traditions surrounding the Stone of Destiny, and knowing its size and shape, and knowing that authentic or not, an unbroken chain of kings has been crowned on that stone for centuries, the following history now makes a lot more sense.

Nearly two thousand years before Christ, the Prophet Jacob (as in "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob"), was traveling back to the land of Haran to choose a wife. When he passed by a city named Luz, the following event occurred:

And he lighted upon a certain place, and tarried there all night, because the sun was set; and he took of the stones of that place, and put them for his pillows, and lay down in that place to sleep.

And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven: and behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it.

And, behold, the LORD stood above it, and said, I am the LORD God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed;

And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.

And Jacob awaked out of his sleep, and he said, Surely the LORD is in this place; and I knew it not.

And he was afraid, and said, How dreadful is this place! this is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.

And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it.

And he called the name of that place Bethel: but the of that city was called Luz at the first. (Genesis 28:11-19).

This account includes several puzzling features. First, a stone small enough to use as a pillow seems hard to imagine being set up as a pillar. Second, just because he had a dream about how the multitudes of his posterity would spread out all over the world, why would he anoint his pillow stone with oil? And what did he mean that the stone would be for God's house? It was important enough that he renamed the place Bethel,[16] which means "House of God." Did it have something to do with a temple?

3.1 The Stone of Jacob

The Stone of Destiny

The size and shape of Stone of Destiny helps make sense of this account, in case it really is this stone of Jacob. First, it is in fact about the size and shape of a big pillow, being about 26 x 16 x 10 inches. It was apparently already a stone which had been cut into a rectangular building shape when Jacob found it. It was probably rejected by the builders because it has a crack in it, so it had been discarded before being finished. If the Stone of Destiny really is Jacob's stone, then it is easy to see how he could stand it up on its end to be a "pillar." Actually, it might have been difficult because it weighs over 300 pounds. Checking the meaning of the word translated "pillar," we see that it means a "stone marker," which often were very large pillars. Most likely this one served mostly as a marker, so that he could find the location when he returned.

Two decades and a dozen children later, Jacob was commanded to return to Bethel. After Jacob returned, and had built and anointed a more permanent altar, God appeared to him there and announced that his name would be changed to Israel, adding "a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins" (Gen. 35:11). This is most likely the time when Jacob decided to bring the original stone with him, though we are not explicitly told that detail. Note that the announcement that kings would descend from him occurred there. It would not be surprising if he was also given to know the future relation that his stone might have to those kings.

The Stone of Destiny has two rings which have clearly been used for transporting the stone by sliding a pole through both rings. There is a groove worn between the two rings which testifies of having been gradually eroded by such transport for an extended period. The stone would have been taken not only to Egypt with Israel, but then also with them at the Exodus and the forty years in the wilderness. Presumably it stayed in Jerusalem from the time of David until the fall of that city in 587 B.C.

3.2 The Stone of Israel Symbolized Christ

Jesus Christ, the Rock of Israel

There is evidence in the Bible the it might well have been this stone which was specifically indicated to have been the "stone of Israel" which symbolized Jesus Christ. During the blessing of Jacob to Joseph, he inserted parenthetically, "from thence is the shepherd, the stone of Israel" (Gen. 49:24, compare D&C 50:44).

Although I couldn't find any place where the Bible states explicitly that the stone of Jacob accompanied the Israelites during their exodus from Egypt,[17] Paul seems to imply it. He compares physical things such as the manna, water, and a rock which "followed" them to their spiritual counterparts which all symbolize Jesus Christ:

MOREOVER, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. (1 Corinthians 10:1-4)

Thus, the Rock of Salvation (Psalms 95:1) which shepherded the Israelites, apparently referred to the physical Stone of Jacob. Of course, as Paul explained, it was symbolic of Jesus Christ, who also identified himself as the Good Shepherd of Israel (John 10:11).

If the identification with the Stone of Scone is correct, then it is a very plain looking piece of calcareous sandstone[18], so ordinary that in preparing this article I noticed that several web pages describing the Stone of Scone were scoffing at how plain it is for the royalty to make such a fuss about. Thus, it has "no form nor comeliness" and "no beauty" that is should be desired, which is exactly how the Savior is described (Isa. 53:2). That led to it being "despised and rejected of men" (Isa. 53:3).

3.3 Rejected by the Builders

It may not only have been the original builders who discarded the stone. There is a also a tradition that when it came time to build the temple of Solomon, that the stone of Jacob, which was associated with the house of God from the beginning, should be included. But the builders rejected it because of the crack in it. There seemed to be no way that it could be a cornerstone to a temple.[19] Nor did it seem to the Jews who saw the Savior that there was any way that he could be the Messiah, the cornerstone of their religion. Thus, both were despised and rejected. David prophesied that the stone would be rejected (Psa. 118:22), and Jesus identified himself as fulfilling that prophecy. He explained that the "stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner" (Mat. 21:42, compare Acts 4:11). Knowning the Jesus Christ is the Rock of Israel (2 Sam. 23:3), we have long understood that scripture in the spiritual sense. But now that we learn about the Stone of Jacob, we see that the prophecy might well have been fulfilled in the physical sense also.

Is the Stone of Scone indeed the Stone of Jacob, which Jeremiah brought to Ireland, and on which British royalty has been coronated for so many centuries? Is there any way to verify these traditions, or will such ancient claims remain forever impossible to verify?

4. Geological Evidence

In the age of modern scholarship, it has become fashionable to demote all ancient history and tradition to the realm of legend, myth and fantasy. In many cases, that is like throwing out the baby with the bath water because there is usually a core of truth handed down in legend. In preparing this article, browsing the web for the "Stone of Scone" led to more articles ridiculing the traditions than those giving them any credence at all. Modern writers have assumed the Stone of Scone must have originated from a local quarry.

I am only aware of two scientific attempts to determine the origin of the stone. The first was by Professor Totten of Yale University. In response to suggestions that it had come from a local quarry, he issued the statement:, "The analysis of the stone shows that there are absolutely no quarries in Scone or Iona wherefrom a block so constituted could possibly have come, nor yet from Tara."[20]

The second study was done by Professor Odlum, who was a geologist and professor of theology at Ontario University. He made microscopic examinations of the stone, comparing it to quarries in both Scotland and Ireland, and found it dissimilar to stones from those areas. He became intrigued with the idea of that it might really be the stone of Jacob. That hypothesis could be tested scientifically by searching to see if a similar type of rock is found near Bethel, where Jacob found his stone. After considerable searching he found some strata rather high near a cliff that had exactly the type of composition he was looking for. He chipped off a piece and later performed microscopic tests. He concluded that his sample "matched perfectly" with the coronation stone.[21]

Desirous for even better proof he sought to get a little piece the size of a pea from the coronation stone, on which he could perform chemical tests. When he petitioned the Archbishop of Canterbury for such a piece, the reply was that it would take an act of Parliament signed by the King, and even then he wouldn't provide it.

To the best of my knowledge that was the end of a really fine scientific experiment which could at least partially validate the claim that the stone might have come from Bethel. This is an excellent example of how science can indeed be used to validate historical traditions. They cannot provide proof, but can greatly add to the credibility of a story. What is needed now is a really thorough scientific study of the stone to verify its authenticity.

5. Conclusion

Preliminary geological studies have indicated that the Stone of Destiny, upon which British monarchs have been crowned for centuries might indeed be the stone of Jacob as tradition asserts, because it matches a formation near Bethel, the Biblical location of the stone the prophet Jacob found. Further scientific testing is now required, such as a thorough chemical composition comparison, and even that can only confirm the possibility that the stone is authentic. In any case, on this fiftieth anniversary of the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II, we can pause to pay respect to what very well might be the continuation of the unbroken line of succession of kings reigning over the children of Israel, from King David, over three thousand years ago.

Notes

1. See www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page2333.asp for a complete summary of events.

2. E. Raymond Capt has written several books which summarize much of the evidence. Most of the information in this article was taken from his book Jacob's Pillar, Muskogee OK, Artisan Publishers, 1977. The author wishes to thank Colette Thomas Smith and William L. Walker, Jr., who pointed out to him several of the books on the subject, many of which are available from those publishers.

3. One son of Zedekiah named Mulek avoided being killed, and came to America and became king of the Mulekites. His seed continued as kings until the time of Zarahemla about 120 B.C., when the Mulekites merged with the Nephites whose kings descended from Joseph through Lehi (Helaman 6:10, 8:21; Mosiah 25:2; Omni 1:19; Alma 10:3).

4. The lower branch must refer to Zerah, son of Judah, whose kingdoms in Great Britain would go on to surpass that of the Kingdom of Judah, which was ruled by the higher branch of Pharez.

5. Argos and Athens, the early culture centers in Greece which helped establish its culture and laws, were founded by the Danai (named for Dan). Muller, in Fragmenta Historicorum II:385 summarizes: "Hecataeus [of Abdera, a fouth-century B.C. Greek historian], therefore, tells us that the Egyptians, formerly being troubled by calamities, in order that the divine wrath might be averted, expelled all the aliens gathered together in Egypt. Of these, some, under their leaders Danus and Cadmus, migrated to Greece." (Capt, p. 25). Another ancient historian, Diodorus, adds "Now the Egyptians say that also after these events a great number of colonies were spread from Egypt all over the inhabited world . . . They say also that those who set forth with Danaus, likewise from Egypt, settled what is practically the oldest city in Greece, Argos . . . Even the Athenians, they say, are colonists from Sais in Egypt." (G.H. Oldfather, Diodorus of Sicily, 1933, vol 1, I:1-II:34, pg. 91, quoted in Capt, p. 26). The Danai became associated with the Phoenicians, and gave them their alphabet (the Phoenician alphabet is same as ancient Hebrew), upon which the Greek alphabet was also based. The Bible mentions how Dan made ships during the period of the Judges (about 1300 B.C., Judges 5:17). Homer refers to all of Greece as Argos, and calls them Argives or Danai, but most Greeks are descended from Javan, son of Japheth (Gen. 10:2). The Argives apparently later became the Macedonians. See Gawler, J. C., Dan, Pioneer of Israel (London, 1880) reprinted by Artisan Publishers, 1984, pp 11-16. This was clearly part of how all the world would be blessed by the children of Abraham.

6. The Milesians were said also to called Gadelians, but the latter were probably a group that came later from the same area, because they were said to have remained in "Gothland" for a century and a half before coming to Ireland (Gawler, p. 31). I cannot help but notice the similarity of the name "Gadelian" and the name "Goth" to "Gad," one of the twelve tribes of Israel. I've never read of anyone else making that connection, so it might be merely a coincidence. Keatinge, in his History of Ireland p. 72 states, "The most ancient Irish chronicles assert that the Gadelians in general were called Scots because they came out of Scythia." (Gawler, p. 41). The original source seems to be Annals of Ireland, by the Four Masters, "The Milesians, according to our old annalists, were originally a colony from Scythia, near to the Euxine and Caspian Seas, on the borders of Europe and Asia, and about the country now called Crimea. From these people, called the Scoti or Scots, Ireland got the name of Scotia." (Gawler, p. 31).

7. Zerah is the usual spelling for this name (Gen. 46:12, 1 Chron. 2:4, etc.). The only time it is spelled Zarah is in the one verse describing his birth (Gen. 38:30).

8. David's promise of continually reigning descendants appears to be an extension of the same promise given to Judah. This article discusses the continuity of the regal line after David, but what about from Judah to David? Saul was from the tribe of Benjamin (1 Sam. 9:1-2), and before that Israel was ruled by judges from various tribes. Where were the kings from Judah at that time? A manuscript from the Archives of Constantinople, which might well be the last chapter of the Book of Acts, states that the apostle Paul visited the British Isles, and that "certain of the Druids came unto Paul privately, and showed by their rites and ceremonies they were descended from the Jews which escaped from bondage in the land of Egypt, and the Apostle believed these things" (E. Raymond Capt, The Lost Chapter of Acts of the Apostles, Artisan Publishers, Muskogee, OK, 1982, p. 6). If some Israelites escaped from Egypt as the bondage began, then Judah's descendants could have a continual reign beginning with Judah himself.

9. The Greek tradition is that Cecrops was the founder and first king of Athens, and that his brother Darda was the founder of Troy. Both were said to have come from Egypt. Some researchers have concluded that they were none other than Calcol and Dara, sons of Zerah (1 Chron. 2:6; Capt, Jacob's Pillar, p. 26). If so, it would mean that those cities were founded earlier than thought and that the founders left before, rather than after, the Egyptian bondage.

10. The Scottish tradition is that his people were officially named "Scots" in honor of his wife, although they also say the name came from Scotia, their former home (Scythia): "the ancestor of the Scots was 'ane Greyk callit Gathelus (father of Eochaidh ...) son (descendant) of Cecrops of Athens, untherways of Argus, King of Argives' who came to Egypt when 'in this tyme rang (reigned) in Egypt Pharo ye scurge of ye pepill of Israel.' Gathelus gained a great victory for Pharo against 'the Moris and Pepil of Yned' and 'King Pharo gaif him his dochter, callit Scota, in marriage' It explicitly states that after they moved to Lusitana (Portugal) and built the city of Brigance, that he 'callit his subdittis (subjects) Scottis in honour and affeccioun of his wyiff.'" (The Chronicles of Scotland, by John Bellenden, 1531, vol. I, pgs. 21-27, quoted in Pillar of Jacob, p. 30).

11. Capt, Jacob's Pillar, pp. 31-32.

12. Another regal line in England descending from David comes from Joseph of Arimathaea, who went to England shortly after the Crucifixion of Christ, and from whom King Arthur descended.

13. According to Capt (p. 26), after the fall of Troy, about 1200 B.C., Aeneas, the last of the royal blood of Zerah, took what was left of his nation and moved to Italy. He married the daughter of Latinus, king of the Latins, and founded the Roman Empire. His son (or grandson) Brutus with a large party of Trojans, removed to England. He arrived about 1103 B.C. and made a contract with his kindred in Britian. He built his new capital called Caer Troia ("New Troy"). The Romans later called it "Londinium" and today it is known as London.

14. See the CNN coverage of the return of the Stone of Scone.

15. The Companion Bible, quoted in Jacob's Pillar, p. 12.

16. Bethel was located within a few miles of what is now Ramallah, which is Yasser Arafat's headquarters.

17. Some possibilities are Ex. 17:6, Num. 20:8, Deut. 8:15, Psalms 114:8 in light of 1 Cor. 10:4.

18. But didn't Gathelus say it his chair was marble? The word marble at that time could refer to any calcareous stone which could be polished (Jacob's Pillar, p. 31).

19.This tradition comes through the Masons (Jacob's Pillar, p. 11).

20.Jacob's Pillar, p. 59.

21.Jacob's Pillar, p. 60.

8 notes · View notes

cemitadepollo · 2 years ago

Text

@catboy-jesus

Like I mean, first of all, El-ahrairah does feel like a fusion of Abraham, Yaacob and Moshe.

He's a chief rabbit who had a direct conversation with Frith (G-d) and was given blessings for his people the way Moshe was given the Torah and all the mitzvot at Mount Sinai, and I mean, the reason why Frith warns El-ahrairah at the beginning before gifting the Elil with blood-thirst for all of his children was that they were becoming too much rabbits, which shows a parallel to the reason why the Pharaoh decided to drown all the first-born sons of hebrew families in the Nile on the Exodus, he was afraid they might grow up and rebel against him since they were so numerous.

The most obvious parallel I find between Yaacob and El-ahrairah is that their people are known as their 'sons' respectively, the children of Israel (Yaacob) and the children of El-ahrairah.

My favorite parallel in this is that both El-ahrairah and Abraham are advised so or promised that their children will live many centuries and will grow into a great nation:

"All the world will be your enemy, Prince of a Thousand Enemies. And whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, Prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed"

-Frith to El-ahrairah; Watership Down

"Go forth from your native land and from your father's house to the land that I will show you. I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you; and all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you"

-HaShem to Abraham; Genesis 12: 1-3

El-ahrairah's disobedience towards Frith at the beginning reminds me of the times when the hebrew people got carried away and disobeyed G-d's will, there's lots of examples of this all over the Tanakh (The well known event from Exodus 32 for example, when the Jewish people make a molten golden calf and idolize it) and it shows us that rabbit-kind was not perfect and repented for their actions in a way after those actions had negative consecuences, and we're shown that Frith is forgiving and gifts them with their own attributes and strenghts to overcome said mistake.

This is only about El-ahrairah and the prologue, so don't get me started on the rest of the story and how it relates to the way Jewish people are treated and persecuted (although that one's much more obvious). I could also go into depth about how cunningness and trickstery have been adjudicated to Jewish people to perpetuate antisemitism and how we've always been compared to pests who must be erradicated, just as, you guessed it, rabbits!, but this answer is already kinda long and it would require deeper analysis and research that I don't have energy or time to gather right now because of how extensive it would be, besides I'm tired of typing so much lmao so yeah, that's that.

The rabbits from Watership Down read as very jewish coded to me and that’s a hill I’ll die on.

#tw antisemitism #jumblr #watership down #richard adams #long text #jewish

46 notes · View notes

doctorlive1 · 5 years ago

Text

Penile size and penile enlargement surgery

Introduction

Throughout history, the penis has defined masculinity. Discussion of the penis has been deemed taboo, socially unacceptable; and at other times, it's the subject of lighthearted conversation and jokes. Length, girth and performance , however, are a problem for men throughout history. this is often apparent within the first book of the Old Testament , Genesis, where Abraham is told, ‘Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised within the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a symbol of the covenant between me and you.’1 the traditional Greeks were also fixated on the penis, as recorded by Kallixeinos of Rhodes in 275 BC, who described a ‘golden phallus, 180 feet long’. The phallus was topped with a golden start and was carried through the streets during a festival in Alexandria, all the while people sung thereto and recited poems.1

Kelley and Eraklis2 performed the primary recorded penile augmentation in 1971 for the treatment of microphallus within the pediatric population. Subsequently, the adult population began to point out interest within the procedure for cosmetic and psychological reasons, almost like that seen with reconstructive breast surgery and augmentation. Penile augmentation procedures aren't an American Urological Association sanctioned procedure, and typically both plastic surgeons and urologists perform penile enlargement procedures. the aim of this paper is to summarize the available literature on penile size, discuss conditions that contribute to penile shortening, and to spotlight the indications, procedures and complications of penile enlargement surgery.

Penile size

Paintings and writings by the traditional Greeks, as early as 200 BC suggest that they believed that a smaller penis was superior.1 However, over the course of your time , with the varied sexual revolutions this belief has changed and for many men, larger is best and comparisons to the remainder of the overall population matter. this is often evident within the terms ‘phallic identity’ and ‘phallocentrism’. ‘Phallic identity’, as described by Vardi, is that the concept of a person seeking identity in his penis, which attention on bigger is best . Similarly, ‘phallocentrism’ is that the concept that the penis is central to a man's identity.3

Penile size has been suggested to correlate to certain physical characteristics. There has been some data suggesting no correlation between shoe size and penile length by Shah and Christopher during a small 2002 study. They studied 104 men from 54 to 87 years aged . All penises were measured on full stretch and therefore the foot size of every patient was recorded. After rectilinear regression analysis, there was no statistical correlation between stretched penile length and shoe size.4

Learn More : اسعار دعامة القضيب

Specifics of measurement of penile size is vital in comparing data in several papers. Although there's no standard technique for measuring penile size, there appears to be a consensus among researchers that penile length should be measured on the dorsum of the penis beginning from the pubopenile junction to the tip of the glans (Figure 1).5 This measurement applies to the flaccid, stretched and erect states. additionally , measurements of penile girth should be obtained from the center of the penile shaft, altogether three states. For the aim of clarity of nomenclature, a flaccid penis is one that's unstimulated or not aroused, and would be seen when the person is within the normal anatomical position. Flaccid stretched is when the flaccid penis is pulled to its maximal distance. Lastly an erect penis is one that's maximally stimulated, either through visual, tactile or pharmaceutical manipulation.

0 notes

juniperpublisherscellscienc-blog · 6 years ago

Text

Probiotic Spore Formers Enhances Host Health- juniper Publishers

AbstractWild species of spore formers from various sources has remarkable probiotic potential. Many of the isolates possess non-hemolysis, non-lecithin’s activity, acid and bile tolerance, resistance to artificial gastric and intestinal fluids and antagonistic action towards pathogens. Most of the spores and vegetative cells of isolates showed excellent resistance to acid and bile. Many of the wild species of sporeformers are able to produce siderophores, and antimicrobial substances. Adhesive rate of sporeformers were found to be more than vegetative cells on intestinal mucous. Both spores and vegetative cells were auto aggregating but auto aggregation of vegetative cells was found to be more than that of spores. Vegetative cells of isolates coaggregated pathogens while spores remained to be nonaggregating. In vivo Immunomodulatory studies also proved that the sporeformers has a significant role in improving both humoral and cell mediated immunity. Ingestion of probiotic spores is very significant because they can survive in the harsh gastrointestinal conditions which further form vegetative cells during favorable situations.Keywords: Probiotic; Sporeformers; Antagonism; Cell surface property; Gut immunity IntroductionThe concept of probiotics has a long history of health claims. For example, in a Persian version of the Old Testament (Genesis 18:8), it states “Abraham owed his longevity to the consumption of sour milk. Replacing in-feed antibiotics with non-antibiotic alternatives is, therefore, an ever-increasing necessity. However, the withdrawal of all growth promoting factors is not a simple matter since this will not only affect feed efficiency but will also increase the mortality and morbidity of animals [1]. Sporeformers are capable of growth and metabolic activity only when in the vegetative state, and resort to sporulation when conditions of inadequate nutrition or other challenge to survival is experienced [2]. Currently, there is no universalclass of probiotic bacterium although the most common types available are lactic acid bacteria (e.g., Lactobacillus spp.). These bacteria are found normally in the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) of humans and animals and there is the vague notion that the use of indigenous or commensal microorganisms is somehow restoring the natural microflora to the gut. A second class comprises those that are not normally found in the GIT. For example, Saccharomyces boulardii has been shown to be effective in preventing the recurrence of Clostridium difficile-induced pseudo membranous colitis [3] as well as the antagonistic action of Escherichia coli [4]. S. boulardii products are currently being marketed for human use. Within this group of allochthonous probiotic microbes are the spore-forming bacteria, normally members of the genus Bacillus. Here, the product is used in the spore form and thus can be stored indefinitely on the shelf. The use of spore-based products raises a number of questions though. Since the bacterial species being used are not considered resident members of the gastrointestinal microflora how do they exert a beneficial effect? Because the natural life cycle of Initial efforts to document a physiological impact of probiotic bacteria often focus on the following three criteria:a) inherent characteristics of strains that would enable intestinal tract survivalb) the fate of the fed bacterium, andc) the impact of consumption of the live bacterium on intestinal flora.It should be noted, however, that effects beyond an impact on intestinal flora, and at extra intestinal sites, have been documented for many probiotic strains [4]. A few such studies have been done with sporeformers. Hydrophobicity, auto aggregation and mucin adhesion are important attributes which help in the attachment to various substrata that explain the probiotic nature of the microorganism [5]. The Gut as A Habitat for SporeformersSince spores of Bacillus species can readily be found in the soil, one might assume that the live (vegetative) bacteria that produced these spores are also soil inhabitants. This, however, is proving an unfounded assumption and, of course, the ability of spores to be dispersed in dust and water means that spores can be found almost everywhere. So, where they are found does not indicate their natural habitat. Bacillus spore-forming species are commonly found in the gut of animals and insects and experimentally this is often demonstrated by faecal sampling [6]. The presence of Bacillus species, whether as spores or vegetative cells, within the gut could arise from ingestion of bacteria associated with soil endosymbiotic relationship with their host, being able temporarily to survive and proliferate within the gastrointestinal tract (GIT). In some cases, though, the endosymbiont has evolved further into a pathogen, exploiting the gut as its primary portal of entry to the host (B. anthracis) oras the site for synthesis of enterotoxins (B. cereus, B. thuringiensis) [7]. Antagonistic Mechanism of SporeformersThere are different mechanisms by which probiotic can exert inhibition towards pathogens. Production of bacteriocin and cell surface properties are the two major way to eliminate pathogens. Enteric pathogens are of great importance because they cause infections both in man and animals. A comparative study of two sporeformers Bacillus coagulans and Bacillus clausii found to produce inhibitory substances against Salmonella typhi, Bacillus subtilis and Klebsiella. [6]. find out the inhibitory effect of Bacillus sporeformers against enteric fever pathogen [8]. Comparative studies on the adhesion and cell surface properties of sporeformers and enteric pathogens are scarce in the field of probiotic research. Hydrophobicity, auto aggregation and mucin adhesion are important attributes which help in the attachment to various substrata that explain the probiotic nature of the microorganism [5]. Sporeforming isolates, possessed basic probiotic qualities and cell surface properties which enable them to fight against enteric pathogens [8]. found that through adhesion ability and colonization on [9] tissues, probiotic microorganisms can prevent pathogen access by steric interactions or specific blockage on cell receptors. An experimental study of [10] reveals that both spore and vegetative phases of isolates possess a different rate of adhesion potentials, which indicates that cell surface properties were involved in adhesion process. Compared to spores, vegetative cells of selected isolates remains to be less adhesive on intestinal mucous. This study also reveals that increased adhesion of the spore phase of the isolates, on intestinal mucin than their corresponding vegetative cells may be due to their hydrophobic nature. Spores adhered better than the corresponding vegetative cells on mucin. Adherence of organisms to xylene, a non-polar solvent, demonstrates hydrophobic nature of the isolates. Increased hydrophobic nature of spores than their corresponding vegetative cells may be due to presence of hydrophobic proteins present in spore coat and found that cell surface properties of bacteria, especially sporeformers play key role in adhesion mechanism. Hydrophobic cell surface nature of Bacillus coagulans and Bacillus clausii also reported by [6]. Doyle RJ [11] found that agents which disrupt protein structure modified the hydrophobicity of spores, suggesting that the spore coat also has hydrophobic sites. In vivo colonization, of MBTU PBBM1 Bacillus subtilis spores establish the adhesion ability and there by exert probiotic effects in gastrointestinal tract (GIT). A stable colonization in gastrointestinal tract was noticed in animals which received 108 spores of MBTU PBBM1 and this indicates that a particular dose is necessary for the establishment of administered spores in the gastrointestinal tract of mouse [12]. Immune Stimulation of Probiotic SporeformersA number of studies in humans and animal models have provided strong evidence that oral administration of spores stimulates the immune system. This tells us that spores are neither innocuous gut passengers nor treated as a food. A small proportion of spores have been shown to disseminate to the primary lymphoid tissues of the GALT (Peye_s Patches and mesenteric lymph nodes) following oral inoculation [13] and in vitro studies have shown that phagocytosed spores can germinate and express vegetative genes but are unable to replicate [14]. Following oral dosing, anti-spore IgG responses could be detected at significant levels. Anti-spore IgG and secretory IgA (sIgA) could be produced by a normal process of antigen uptake by B cells. Detailed analysis of the subclasses showed IgG2a to be the initial subclass produced and this is often seen as being indicative of a type 1 (Th1) T-cell response [15]. Th1 responses are important for IgG synthesis but more importantly for CTL (cytotoxic T lymphocyte) recruitment and are important for the destruction of intracellular microorganisms (e.g., viruses, Salmonella spp.) and involve presentation of antigens on the surface of the host cell by a class I MHC processing pathway. Support for Th1 responses has been provided by the analysis of cytokines in vivo that showed synthesis of IFN- and TNF in the GALT and secondary lymphoid organs when spores of B. subtilis or B. pumilus were administered to mice [14]. Serum Ig A and Serum Ig G antibodies are implicated in host defense against bacterial infections. Study conducted by [10] resulted MBTU PBBM1 spores have capacity to stimulation of serum Ig A and serum Ig G in treated groups in a dose dependent manner. This means that spores can modulate humoral immune response. Immunomodulation of Sporeforming ProbioticsStimulation of the immune system, or immunomodulation, is considered an important mechanism to support probiosis. A few studies in humans and animal models have provided strong evidence that oral administration of spores stimulates the immune system. Large number of probiotic products in use today are bacterial spore formers, mostly of the genus Bacillus [16]. Stimulation of the immune system, or immunomodulation, is considered an important mechanism to support probiosis. A number of studies in humans and animal models have provided strong evidence that oral administration of Bacillus spores stimulates the immune system. Dose dependent studies [10] revealed that group which receiving 1x108 spores showed an effective humoral and cell mediated immune response in balb/c mice. So this dose can be decided as an appreciable measure which can evoke a effective humoral and cell mediated immune response. Studies also revealed that this strain could colonize gastrointestinal tract which would further act as a key to the initiation of immunomodulation. 30 days consumption of MBTU PBBM1 spores had no adverse effects on animals’ general health status, hematology, gut mucosal histology parameters. The bacterial translocation was not observed [17,18]. Results suggests that the ingestion of MBTU PBBM1 would enhance the immunity indicating immunomodulatory effect.

For more Open access journals please visit our site: Juniper Publishers

For more articles please click on Journal of Cell Science & Molecular Biology

#Cell Science #Molecular biology #Stem cells #Open access journals #Juniper Publishers

0 notes

conferencenotes-blog1 · 6 years ago

Text

Obedience and Church Planting

And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, TO OBEY IS BETTER THAN SACRIFICE, and to hearken than the fat of rams. 1 Samuel 15:22

We often think that the person who sacrifices is greater than the one who obeys. The word sacrifice brings to us, terrifying images of suffering and loss. Obedience seems to be a much milder and less demanding option. In fact, our human analysis would rate sacrifice above obedience any day.

Once again, God's ways are not our ways and His thoughts are not our thoughts. He makes it clear that “to obey is better than to sacrifice”. The word “better” means “Greater, To be preferred, an improved version, superior, Enhanced, more acceptable, more favourable, higher quality, augmented and more desirable!”

This verse therefore means that “it is greater, to be preferred, superior, more acceptable, more favourable and more desirable” to obey than to sacrifice. Why is obedience to be preferred to sacrifice? When we sacrifice we often know what we are doing and why we are doing it. We know we are going to suffer and we know the reasons for the sufferings. Why is it more desirable, favourable and more acceptable to God when we obey?

The following reasons will explain why obedience is a greater thing compared to sacrifice.

Why Obedience is Better (Greater) than Sacrifice

1. It is greater to obey without fully understanding, than it is to sacrifice. The greatest blessings in my life and ministry have come from obeying God rather than sacrificing to Him. Most of the time, it is not easy to understand the implications of what you are doing. As I write this book, there are things the Lord has asked me to do that I don't understand.

The reason why we do not understand is because of our level of growth or our stage of maturity in the Lord. I believe that we will never fully understand what God has asked us to do until we begin to do it. Notice this Scripture. It shows us that it is when you do the will of God that you know His will.

If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. John 7:17

How could I understand the impact of full-time ministry when I was a lay pastor? Many lay people think they understand what full-time ministry is. But I know that they do not appreciate what it is all about. Many lay people think they are serving God just as well as anyone else. It is only in obeying God that I found the importance of full-time ministry.

2.It is better to obey a command that you would not naturally do, than it is to sacrifice.

When the Lord directed me into the healing ministry, I did not fully understand the effect that it would have on my ministry. Until then, I had operated mostly as a teacher and preacher. Naturally speaking I am a more calculating and logical person. It was not natural for me to move by the spirit or minister things that are spiritual. It is one of the most difficult things I have ever done and I am ever grateful for people who helped me cross that barrier. Today I have seen many miracles in the ministry. I can say it is the one thing that has made a great difference in my present ministry.

Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done. Luke 22:42

It is very unnatural to give yourself to be killed by wicked men. One of the most frightening experiences of mankind is to know that you are going to die. I have had patients who died shortly after being told that they were terminally ill. If you think about it, you would know that it is a terrifying experience.

I remember a lady who had leukemia. She thought she had some kind of fever and was being treated for that. Even though she had a deadly illness she looked and felt quite well. One morning, on a ward round, she asked one of my doctor colleagues where she could get her drugs. My colleague pointed across the road and said, “Oh, you can buy these cancer drugs from the Burkett's tumor department across the road.” The lady was silent! She was shocked! Up until this time, she had not been told that she had cancer or any such illness. This lady was so frightened that her condition deteriorated rapidly. I am sorry to say that within a few hours, this lady went into a coma and died.

The knowledge of approaching death is one of the most terrifying ordeals for any man. Mercifully, God rarely shows us our day of departure. I always remember the blood shot eyes of a thirty-year-old man who was dying of chronic renal failure on a medical ward. He knew there was something terribly wrong with him. One morning as I attended to him, he gripped my hand and said, “Doctor, please help me. I want to go to Germany. I have a brother there who will help me get medical attention.” I was scared because I was only a medical student, and I didn't know what to do.

I looked downward and saw his urine bag filled with blood and I knew that only God could save him. I always remember the terror in that man's eyes. I remember the sound of his frightened and pleading voice. “Doctor, please help me.” When I think of my Jesus and how He calmly approached His own gruesome death, I only marvel. When I think of how Jesus prayed for God to take the cup away, I appreciate His obedience to His father.

Dear friend, it is not natural to walk toward your own death. It is not natural to do things that will hurt and destroy you. To obey is better than to sacrifice! There are many commands of God that will go against your natural mind or way of thinking. It is time to obey. There are people who give extra offerings to the Lord because they are living in disobedience. These extra sacrifices are intended to compensate for their lives of disobedience. Watch carefully every Sunday and you will see many disobedient Christians paying large amounts to the Lord, hoping that these offerings will close the eyes of Jehovah. Mercy!

3. It is better to obey instructions you do not agree with, than it is to sacrifice.

Disobedience often sets in when you do not agree with the instruction given you. When God instructs us to forgive an obviously rebellious person, we may not readily agree. With time, you discover that forgiveness is greater than revenge. Whenever you are wronged, there is a very self-righteous feeling that makes you want to correct and pay back. It is not easy to ignore this feeling! Great blessings have come my way as a result of forgiving the people that wronged me. It is not always easy to agree with God's style of doing things.

And it came to pass … that God … said, … Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him. Genesis 22:1-3

I am sure that Abraham didn't agree with the idea to kill his only son but he did what the Lord asked him to do.

4. It is greater to obey humbling commands, than it is to sacrifice. Many of God's commands humble us. You could say that the number one characteristic of God's instruction is that they humble you. They often make you look foolish in the eyes of men or in your own eyes.

When the Lord led me to be a full-time minister, I looked foolish in the eyes of other doctors. When I receive offerings or do fund-raising, I look foolish in my own eyes and in the eyes of many people.

I planned to make great sacrifices to the Lord when He called me into full-time ministry. I told Him, I would give large amounts of money from the hospital that I would set up. However, the Lord told me that He did not want my sacrifices, but rather He wanted me to work for Him.

The Compensating Lay Pastor

One day I called one of my lay pastors and asked him to come for a ride with me to Kumasi; a city about 250 kilometers from Accra in Ghana. “Will you come along” I asked “It would be a privilege to ride with you,” He said, “I will slip away from work and join you.” As we drove along, and chatted, I told him something that surprised him. I said, “You are a very hard working young man.” I continued; “You are always doing extra things for the Lord.” You see, this young man was an architect, and in spite of his job, he was constantly working in the church. I told him; “You run around the city doing anything that needs to be done. You are one of the most sacrificial and dedicated pastors I have ever worked with.” He smiled gratefully! I continued; “You have done so many architectural jobs for the church and never charged a penny. Whenever there is any extra pastoral work to be done, it is you I call on”.

I explained; “That is why I called you to come along with me on this trip. I knew you would be able to get away from work at short notice.” Then I dropped the bombshell, “But you are in disobedience!” I continued, “You are disobeying God.” His smile began to fade.

I explained, “The reason why you are so active, so zealous and so sacrificial is because you are trying to compensate for disobeying God. God has called you to serve Him in full-time ministry but you are on the run.” He was shocked. “I never thought about that,” he said. “It never occurred to me that I was just compensating for my disobedience.”

A few months later, this young man gave up his job and obeyed the call to full-time ministry. May God open our eyes to see if you are disobeying him and trying to compensate!

Oh how we love to compensate for our disobedience! We don't want to humble ourselves before the Lord. We don't want to look foolish before anyone. We want to do our own thing and make a convenient sacrifice to compensate.

And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Philippians 2:8

5. It is better to obey instructions that don't require your wisdom than it is to sacrifice. Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses, Nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves: for the workman is worthy of his meat. Matthew 10:9-10

How will I live if I don't provide for myself silver and gold? Walking with the Lord requires that you put aside your own reasoning and trust in His wisdom. To work for God requires faith.

When you see the measly offering baskets with jingling coins, going around from pew to pew, you wonder, “Can I survive on these collections?” “Is this how God will sustain a full-time pastor?”

Years ago, I visited a church in Europe. The American missionary pastor had a thriving congregation. As I sat in his office, I got to talk about the finances of the ministry. I told him proudly, “I am not the kind of pastor who depends on offerings.” I continued, “I work as a doctor and do private business. I don't need anyone's money.” He looked at me quizzically and said; “I see the wisdom in what you are doing but God's wisdom is higher than yours.” He explained, “God has a plan and a pattern by which He is building His church. Your plan and your idea will never be superior to His plan.” God's way is simple! “They that preach the gospel must live off the gospel” (1 Cor. 9:14). He said to me; “You are depriving your congregation of a blessing which they receive when they bless the man of God.” I self-righteously thought to myself; “I don't need any of those offerings.” However, after that conversation I began to consider that I could not be wiser than God. God must know how to build His church better than I do.

Today, I preach the gospel and I live off the gospel. I humbly depend on the method of sustenance that God has designed for pastors. I am not better than any of God's servants. Instead of sacrificing extra time, doing business and other moneymaking deals, I give myself wholly to the money-making ministry of the Word and prayer. It is better to obey than to sacrifice.

6. It takes greater faithfulness and diligence to perform duties that do not appear urgent or important.

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. Matthew 28:19-20

Pray without ceasing. 1 Thessalonians 5:17

Most important things are not urgent. Important things are often unattractive and uninviting. It is difficult to be faithful with what God considers important. For instance, prayer without ceasing is one of the most important things for us to do. Yet we lack a sense of urgency when it comes to prayer. In times of trouble, you often cannot have faith. While you are in the trouble you will feel like calling on God but fear and anxiety will grip your heart. It is almost impossible to pray under those circumstances. Then you will realize how important it was for you to have prayed.

I have been there in the darkness of life when all theories on faith no longer worked. Have you ever wondered why Jesus did not pray when He was arrested? It is because He had finished praying before the crisis began. When Jesus approached the tomb of Lazarus, He wouldn't have said a single prayer before raising him from the dead. He explained that the only reason He was praying was so that those around would know that He had a father.

To preach the gospel and to win the lost is a very important instruction. But often there is no sense of urgency to fulfil that command. The fact that you don't feel any pressure does not mean that it is not important. Pressure does not always signify the importance of a command. It is a great thing to obey the Lord even when we are not under pressure to do so.

7. The consequence of obeying or disobeying one little instruction can be so great that no sacrifice could ever compensate. Look at the mess we are in because Eve disobeyed the Lord. When the Lord God asked her the question in the Garden of Eden (what is this that thou has done?) He was asking:

What are these wars that you have brought into the world? What are these sicknesses that you have created? What is this perversion that you have introduced into the world? What are these cancers and HIV that you have unleashed on mankind? Who are these Saddam Hussein, Adolph Hitler and Stalin characters that you have given birth to? What are all these funerals and deaths that you have released? What is this fear and self-preservation that is so dominant in the world? What is this barrenness and pain to women that you have initiated? What are these hospitals that you have given us a need for? Who are these handicapped, blind and lame people that you have produced?

Little did Eve know what she was releasing in that one act of disobedience. She could not imagine how much hurt and suffering she was bringing into the world. This is the one thought that keeps me in the ministry. I think about all the people who would perish if I were to disobey God.

Think about Jesus. Think about all the people who were saved through His ministry. By one act of obedience, He has rescued millions from the throes of Hell. Perhaps if He had stayed on for eighty years, preaching in every country, He wouldn't have had the fruits He has today. There is nothing like obedience in the eyes of God. To obey is better than to sacrifice.

Therefore as BY THE OFFENCE OF ONE judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so BY THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF ONE the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. Romans 5:18

This is the most important truth you must learn about obedience. I remember the story of a lieutenant in the army who had received orders to fire his artillery at a certain target, which were some miles away. As they prepared to fire, the radio operator had a message for the lieutenant to hold his fire. He ran to his officer to tell him the new order. Something had changed: the position, which was formally occupied by the enemy, had been taken up by their own troops.

However the lieutenant was so zealous and eager to fight that he did not listen to the radio operator. He was so bent on getting into the battle that he didn't listen. In the story, the radio operator was struck by a bullet as he pleaded with his lieutenant to listen to the new message. But to no avail. He eventually died before he was able to relay the message. The lieutenant finally opened fire and pounded what he thought was the enemy position.

Soon after that, he received word that his own soldiers had suffered many casualties due to the pounding he had given them. It was told him that he had killed many of his own. This man was later court martialled. From this story; we see how important it is to obey rather than to sacrifice. The young lieutenant wanted to fight at all cost. But the greater thing to do at that point was to hold his fire and not to get involved. Could it be that there are times that we are just to hold our fire?

God is like the general who sees the whole picture. He knows when to sacrifice and when not to, He knows when to fire and when not to fire. I have learnt that to obey is better than to sacrifice.

God has asked us not to do things that we would have traditionally done. Could it be that there will be times that it is more important not to preach, than it is to preach because that is what God says?

The Apostle Paul said he had been given different commands by the Lord. At times, he had been commanded to be full and at other times, he had been commanded to be hungry. Paul was intent on obeying the Lord. If the instruction was hunger, he was prepared for it; if the instruction was fullness, he would obey!

I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: every where and in all things I AM INSTRUCTED BOTH TO BE FULL AND TO BE HUNGRY, both to abound and to suffer need. Phillippians 4:12

The Disobedience of Saul

Saul was a classic example of one who thought he was wiser than God and could compensate for his disobedience. No sacrifice, no matter how big is acceptable to God if it is done in disobedience. Read the Bible. There are many sacrifices that God is not pleased with. God is not against sacrifice, but He wants your obedience first.

TO WHAT PURPOSE IS THE MULTITUDE OF YOUR SACRIFICES UNTO ME? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.

Isaiah 1:11 The Disobedience of Joshua

Joshua had a clear mandate from the Lord to wipe out all the heathen nations in the Promised Land. It was explained to him that disobeying this command would result in these very nations becoming a snare onto the Israelites.

But if YE WILL NOT DRIVE OUT THE INHABITANTS of the land from before you; then it shall come to pass, that those which ye let remain of them shall be PRICKS in your eyes, and THORNS in your sides, and shall VEX YOU in the land wherein ye dwell. Numbers 33:55

However, Joshua left the heathen in three key cities. He obeyed God everywhere except in Gaza, Gath and Ashdod. Read it for yourself. Joshua made war a long time with all those kings. There was not a city that made peace with the children of Israel, save the Hivites the inhabitants of Gibeon: all other they took in battle. For it was of the LORD to harden their hearts, that they should come against Israel in battle, that he might destroy them utterly, and that they might have no favour, but that he might destroy them, as the LORD commanded Moses. And at that time came Joshua, and cut off the Anakims from the mountains, from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, and from all the mountains of Judah, and from all the mountains of Israel: Joshua destroyed them utterly with their cities. THERE WAS NONE OF THE ANAKIMS LEFT IN THE LAND OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL: ONLY IN GAZA,IN GATH, AND IN ASHDOD, THERE REMAINED. So Joshua took the whole land, according to all that the LORD said unto Moses; and Joshua gave it for an inheritance unto Israel according to their divisions by their tribes. And the land rested from war. Joshua 11:18-23

It is very interesting to note the three groups of people that Joshua left alive: Gath, Gaza and Ashdod. Each one of these three groups of people gave birth to a significant enemy of the people of God. The Lord foresaw this and that is why he gave that instruction.

Theses cities became the breeding grounds for future enemies. The city of Gath produced Goliath. Delilah who was a thorn in Samson's flesh was from Gaza. The god Dagon, into whose temple the Ark of the Covenant was taken, was in the land of Ashdod. These enemies lived to fight God's people and no one has ever forgotten about these three evil agents. Perhaps, by your disobedience, you are giving birth to future enemies of God. A sacrifice will not prevent the emergence of future enemies. Obedience will.

Goliath of Gath

And there went out a champion out of the camp of the Philistines, named GOLIATH, OF GATH, whose height was six cubits and a span. 1 Samuel 17:4

Delilah of Gaza

Then went SAMSON TO GAZA, and … loved a woman in the valley of Sorek, whose name was Delilah. Judges 16:1, 4

Dagon of Ashdod

And the Philistines took the ark of God, and brought it from Eben-ezer unto Ashdod. When the Philistines took the ark of God, they brought it into the house of Dagon, and set it by Dagon. And when they of Ashdod arose early on the morrow, behold, Dagon was fallen upon his face to the earth before the ark of the LORD. And they took Dagon, and set him in his place again. 1 Samuel 5:1-3 May the Lord save us from our own modern day cities of Gath, Gaza and Ashdod! Furthermore, by these few pages, my son, be admonished because of making many books there is no end!

by Dag Heward-Mills

0 notes

mrlnsfrt · 8 years ago

Text

Mabbuwl - The Great Flood

Many of us, if we are to be honest with ourselves, first came to God for selfish reasons. Some of us might still have mostly selfish reasons for coming to church and worshiping God. In a place where we come to God because we are struggling, and we want God to make it all better. Many come to God wanting Him to remove our obstacles, our struggles. We come to God, perhaps, seeking worldly prosperity.

It makes sense right? Think of Job, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon, Daniel, Esther so many powerful and wealthy people are found throughout Scriptures. There are enough stories of success in the Bible for a prosperity gospel to be preached.

The problem is what happens when my personal experience ends up being different from what I expected it to be. What happens when I come to God expecting Him to take away all my trials, and I end up facing more trials than before? What happens when I am expecting an easy life and I don't get it?

What happens to my faith, when I obey God, and things seem only to become more challenging?

A more careful reading of the stories of all the heroes mentioned above teaches us that all of them faced extraordinary challenges. There are blessings that come with following God, no questions about it. But do not fool yourself into thinking there will be no challenges.

Let's see what lessons we can learn from taking a closer look at the life of a man God described as being just and perfect, a man who walked with God.

Noah.

Mabbuwl

(Mabbuwl is the transliteration of the Hebrew word for flood)

"When mankind were overwhelmed with the deluge, none were preserved but a man named Coxcox … and a woman called Xochiquetzal, who saved themselves in a little bark, and having afterwards got to land upon a mountain called by them Colhuacan, had there a great many children; … these children were all born dumb, until a dove from a lofty tree imparted to them languages, but differing so much that they could not understand one another." -- (Frazer, J.G., Folklore in the Old Testament: Studies in Comparative Religion, Legend and Law (Abridged Edition), Avenel Books, New York, NY, USA, p. 107, 1988. mentioned on http://creation.com/many-flood-legends)

Sounds familiar? Reminds you of the story of Noah's Ark and the Tower of Babel?

This story comes from the Aztecs of Mexico—one of many recorded flood stories, from geographically remote and widely divergent cultures.

Did you know there are some 270 flood stories recorded around the world according to The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia? (Vos. H. F. 1982. Flood (Genesis). In G. W. Bromiley (ed.), The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, pp. 319-321. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Michigan. mentioned on http://www.grisda.org/origins/17051.htm)

The existence of so many versions of the flood story is a significance challenge for those who want to deny a global flood ever took place, especially when so many of the stories have specific commonalities. There is much debate over the historicity of the biblical flood account, and that is not the focal point of this post. However, I would like to mention that a worldwide flood as described in the Bible helps explain many questions regarding the creation vs evolution debate.

I mention these points in passing for those who are interested to feel free to pursue them. On this post, I wish to focus on the biblical text and what God wants to teach us through this narrative. There are plenty of sites debating the science of the flood, I wish to discuss its theological implications, especially since I am not a scientist.

Continuing our study of the narrative of the Great Flood (Mabbuwl) we turn to Genesis 7.

Repetition?

Before we get into the text I would just like to briefly explain a literary device known as Hebrew parallelism, in which a story is told in two complementary versions that proceed from the general to the specific. There are several examples of this found in the Bible such as the two creation accounts found in Genesis 1:1-2:4a and Genesis 2:4b-25 and Daniel's visions found in Daniel 2 and Daniel 7.

Here in Genesis 7 we have the broad narrative of Noah entering into the ark found in Genesis 7:6-9. Followed by a more detailed second narrative in verses 10-16a. Notice how each narrative ends the same way, saying "as God had commanded" (Genesis 7:9, 16).

I mention this ahead of time as to avoid confusion when we read the story.

Genesis 7

Right away on verse 1 God is giving Noah a command.

Come into the ark, ...

The last time God gave Noah a command was when God told him to build the ark, (Genesis 6:14). Now God is commanding Noah to come into the ark, keeping His covenant with Noah (Genesis 6:18). We notice also that Noah is righteous before God, implying his righteousness is not his own but rather given according to God. (Doukhan, Jacques. Genesis. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 2016. Print. p146)

Clean and Unclean

Verse two is very interesting in that it differentiates between clean and unclean animals. Many will recognize this distinction from Leviticus 11:1-47 and Deuteronomy 14:3-21. This must make the reader wonder why God is differentiating between the clean and unclean animals before before the building of the Tabernacle, before the giving of the 10 commandments, before the Exodus, before Moses, before Abraham, etc. Why would God differentiate between clean and unclean animals if there were no Jews, unless this differentiation was not meant just for the Jews.

Notice also that God does not have to explain to Noah how to differentiate between the clean and unclean animals. As the text reads, we get the idea that Noah is already familiar with the distinction. We see this more clearly in Genesis 8:20 where Noah offers sacrifices to God out of the clean animals. Apparently some of the instructions God gave Moses for the people of Israel were not limited to them, nor were they new instructions.

According to Leviticus 11, the differentiation between clean and unclean animals was not just connected to the tabernacle and sacrificial system but also to diet. Leviticus 11 says God spoke to Moses and Aaron and told them which animals they were allowed to eat. It is consistent, and it makes sense, for there to be a greater need for clean animals than unclean in the ark if the clean animals would be used for sacrifice as well as food. The unclean animals, are also important but are not meant for human consumption nor for sacrifices.

I raise this point here, but will pursue it no further in this post, if you would like to explore this topic further feel free to contact me. (I might pursue this topic further in a future post.)

Global Destruction of Life

Verse 4 reminds the reader that God is going to destroy all life from the face of the earth which He had created. Here I would like to make a quick mention of the multiple flood accounts found in diverse cultures around the world. Though many of them have several similarities with the biblical account of the flood, the Bible is unique in its account, and part of what makes the Bible unique is the way it portrays God. God is intentional and deliberate. God has a moral code, God saves Noah, his family, and a representation of the animals. God is intentional, God is moral, God guides and preserves Noah and the animals, and God has a clear purpose and reason for doing so. The flood is not an accident, neither is it a fit of rage, but rather an act of judgment from a moral and almighty God.

God is not careless, God is searching for someone to save and is careful not to destroy the righteous along with the wicked (Genesis 18:23). Noah is spared because of his character. Noah has a loving and personal relationship with God which involves obedience to God's commands.

Noah's Age

Why mention that Noah was 600 years old? (Genesis 7:6, 11) I believe this establishes the historical value of this account. Noah's life bridges the antediluvian world and the our postdiluvian world, the world of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the other biblical characters. Jesus (Matthew 24:37-39) as well as Peter (2 Peter 3:5-7) both refer to the flood narrative and use it as a warning for our generation regarding God's final judgment. In other words, the Bible treats the flood account as being a real historical event and not a metaphorical illustration.

Reflections

Moving away from the detailed analysis of the biblical text for a moment. Imagine what it must have been like for Noah to go through this experience.

First, imagine living in a neighborhood where every intent of the thoughts of the hearts of your neighbors is only evil continually. (Genesis 6:5)

Now imagine that its not just that you're in a bad neighborhood, but rather it is the whole world. you can't just move to a nicer neighborhood, it is not a temporary problem that you can solve by relocating. There are no exceptions. You have no good friends. You are the only just person living on the planet and you can't move out. I know you might feel like you can't trust anyone nowadays, but imagine that being the case globally. (Genesis 6:12)

Things get so bad God is going to destroy everyone. Only you and your family will be spared. It is very likely that you had been praying for God to do something for a while. You just never expected for God to do this. God will destroy all life on the planet. Except you and your family, and a sample from all the animals on the planet, and seven pairs of the clean animals. (Genesis 6:17-20, 7:2-3, 14-16)

And by the way, God will not save you in a magical bubble, He will not simply take you to heaven for a few days while He cleans things up here on earth.

No.

God calls you to build a massive boat. He gives you all the directions and details concerning the project (6:14-16). Imagine spending the following 120 (6:3) years building and preaching (2 Peter:2:5) to people about the coming flood. By the way, Noah will also have to gather food himself, for the animals, and his family (Genesis 6:21).

God could have easily taken care of all this. Noah did find grace in the eyes of the LORD (6:8), yet the LORD did not take away the challenges. For many years, things seem to just become even more challenging.

It is too easy for us to read the story of the flood and not take a moment to consider what it must have been like for Noah. Can you imagine the taunts he must have suffered? Can you imagine the work of building a massive boat. The challenges of believing and acting on it without having any tangible proof for completely changing your life and taking on a major project that will cost you a great amount of time and resources?

Imagine

Imagine changing your life completely because God revealed to you that the whole world will be destroyed. Imagine living differently because Jesus is coming again. Imagine going through some discomfort to obey God's will according to what He has revealed to you.

Imagine God speaking to you and letting you know that judgment is coming. This time not by water but by fire. Imagine believing the words found in texts like Malachi 4:1

“For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble. The day that is coming shall set them ablaze, says the LORD of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch. -Malachi 4:1

Discomfort

I imagine the ark was not very comfortable. I can imagine the noise and the smell and the mess all those animals made. Sometimes the church can feel like the ark. You may feel like you're dealing with wild animals at times. Maybe your toes get stepped on, perhaps your experience is not always a pleasant one.

You think about leaving.

This is not what you signed up for when you decided to follow Jesus. You wanted things to get easier not harder. You wanted relief from your trials, not brand new ones. And many will abandon God because they consider it too troublesome to follow Him. Many will walk away from a loving relationship with Jesus because having Jesus as their Lord can be "uncomfortable" at times.

Practical Applications

It is easy for me to get so excited about the details of the text and all the fascinating theological points and questions to be pondered, and end up missing what the human experience might have been like, and how that relates to my current experience.

How do you react when God calls you to build a boat, and you have never even built a raft? Maybe God is not calling you to build a literal boat, but He is calling you out of your comfort zone, and strictly for the benefit of others.

How do you react when your obedience and faithfulness get rewarded with more work and responsibilities?

How do you feel when God reveals to you that your obedience allows others close to you to experience God's mercy? That your relationship with God contributes to the salvation of those closest to you?

Noah was not a young man when God called him. He obediently labored for years, apparently without hearing anything from God. The whole process took time! There was a lot of working, and silence, and challenges, and waiting, and working.

Faith

Genesis 7:4, 7, 10 informs us that Noah and his family and all the animals waited in the ark for seven days before the flood came.

Seven days.

Waiting.

Wondering.

Waiting.

Thinking.

"Did we hear right?"

"Did we interpret God's message accurately?"

"Did we do everything correctly?"

"Did we miss something?"

Waiting.

Those must have been the longest seven days of Noah's life. Seven days. Waiting. Wondering. When you're busy its not so bad. But when it seems like nothing is happening, what do you do? What do you do when you follow what God has revealed to you of His will, to the best of your abilities, and nothing happens?

The Text

Looking back at the biblical text you may wonder how to interpret Genesis 7:13 in light of verses 4, 7 and 10. Remember what I mentioned about Hebrew parallelism? The story repeats, the second time with more details. Genesis 7:13 explains in greater detail that Noah and his family and all the animals entered the ark on the same day. The day the rain began they had already entered the ark. I wrote the "already" to identify that the Hebrew verb "enter" used in verse 13 is in the perfect tense, describing an action that has been completed. As apposed tot he verb "enter" used in verse 7 is in the imperfect tense, indicating the action was taking place.

Shut Door

Notice that verse 16 points out that the LORD shut Noah in.

God shut the door to the ark, not Noah.

After that point, no one could enter the ark. The door was shut before the rain began. Whoever entered the ark, entered by faith. By the time the rain began to fall, it was already too late to enter into the ark.

The idea of the door to salvation being shut is also found in the parable of the 10 virgins found in Matthew 25:10. the same principle is described Revelation 22:11 with the words

He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. (Revelation 22:11 King James Bible)

By now you must have begun to realize that the judgment stories in Genesis help us understand how God goes about this process. You probably already noticed that properly understanding judgment in Genesis helps you better interpret Matthew 24 and especially 25. Perhaps even more clear is the realization that this topic is expounded on throughout the book of Revelation. Same God, same modus oprandi, same theology.

Redundancy?

Take a look at Genesis 7:17-24 and see what you think?

I am reminded of my high school English teacher who would write "RR" on parts of my essay. "RR" stood for repetitive and redundant.

As you read verses 17-20 you get the idea of the waters rising. With each verse there is more and more water, covering more and more things. The text leaves no room for anyone to doubt the universality of the flood. It was a global event, everything on earth was submerged.

In case you still have any doubt verse 21 begins another repetitious and redundant portion of the text. This time emphasizing who or what died. Everything, everyone, who was on the face of the earth died.

There was no salvation available outside of the ark. No other boats made it. No one outside the ark made it. God had provided a single means of salvation. (John 14:6) (side note: Some might want to argue that it would be unlike God to provide the whole world with a single means of salvation. To me it seems consistent with biblical text.)

Repetition is how the biblical writers highlighted something important. There is a lot of repetition in these verses in order to clearly convey, beyond a shadow of doubt, that God brought about thorough destruction of life. God used a global flood and spared only those who were in the ark.

Takeaway

We have looked closely at the text. We have imagined what it must have felt like to be Noah. We looked at some practical and theological implications, and now what?

What do I take away from all this?

What did I learn about

God

God is the judge over all the earth.

God clearly communicates to his servant/friend Noah what to do at each step of the process (build and ark, get in the ark, etc.)

God cares about the animals too.

God designated some animals for human consumption and others not.

God wants to partner with humanity.

Humanity

We don't always see the big picture of what God is doing.

We need to act by faith (believe God before we see any evidence).

God can work through us to save others.

Application

Life has many challenges.

Following God does not remove all challenges from life.

Following God introduces new challenges to life.

We can face any challenge (even a global flood), when we love God and follow what he calls us to do ("Come into the ark" Gen. 7:1).

In light of this story, life is not about avoiding challenges. Being a believer or follower of God is not about eliminating challenges. But rather about facing the right challenges according to God's revealed will. Life is about faithfulness to God and what He has called you to do.

Right now the door is open. We don't know how long it will be open. God will not force anyone to get into the ark, but He does call.

Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts... (Heb. 3:15)

Life is hard. Following God is challenging. If I have to face challenges anyway, I would rather face the challenges God call me to face, because I know that He is faithful. (1 Thess. 5:24)

#faith #Narrative #Genesis

0 notes