Phoenix vs. Galactus

Fact is Marvel doesn't want to get religious.

And just because a character is based off of another existing idea, does that mean it'll operate the same way? Ideas have to come from somewhere; it still doesn't mean the clone will operate or rank in its own universe the same way as the original.

No where has Marvel said LT is Metatron, or Warlock is Jesus, or Shuma Gorath is Cthuthul. They just copied a good ideal; it doesn't mean their character ranks or operates the same way as the original.

Serously GalacticStorm, you cant incorporate beliefs from our real world into the comics world, because the comics does NOT entirely follow it.

Continuing my reference to mythology earlier, even in the ancient world, the same characters were included in different works by different authors in different cultures in different periods. The Elektra of Euripides is essentially the same as the Elektra of Sophocles, who is essentially the same Elektra of Aeschylus. All of these authors shared their insights into a character of legend. What is wrong with the same happening in comics?

It would be different if the references to Kaballah were obscure. They aren't obscure in the least. If Marvel wanted to skirt the issue, they could have just gone with Phoenix symbolism and that's it. Claremont DIRECTLY mentioned Phoenix being Tiphareth, and Morrison referred to Kether. There wasn't an avoidance on Marvel's part. They obviously wanted the association.

There's all this carrying on about Marvel avoiding religion and characters not being true to the original. What do you have to support these assumptions in the case of Phoenix? The stories show exactly the opposite: not only religious symbolism and imagery, but terms and direct references in the text. How do you explain that?

I'm tired of hearing (seeing) people wanting textual evidence in reference to Phoenix, but want to ignore what's explicitly stated in the text when it doesn't suit their purpose. People say that GS can't prove what he says is true, but I have yet to see someone set out something that explicitly states that he's wrong. Show me textual evidence that the power of the Phoenix is NOT second to that of the TOAA.

Originally posted by Cosmic Flame
That's ludicrous. Did you read the Spiral arc in Thor?

There's nothing to say that they don't function that way either. Do you make this argument for the Asgardians and the Olympians? They seem to function in quite similar capacities as their ancient world counterparts. What about the abstracts?

Asgardians and Olympians? Who really believes in them any more? And it says Thor, Odin, Asgard.

The judge of the Marvel Universe is Living Tribunal. Where the hell does it say METATRON? Tell me, where does it say Metatron. Tell me where it says the guy that was crucified himself to save counter-earth from evil was Jesus? Where? His name is ADAM WARLOCK! Not JESUS!

Even Asgardians and Olympians DON'T operate the same or RANK the same way as the original. Tell me when the Viking Thor can do GODBLAST, open star gates, traveled space & fight space beings, has a bother in arm named Beta Ray Bill. When did Viking Odin grow giant size, transverse time, teleported people, etc. And what about Loki being the son of Frost Giants?

Hercules strength rivaling or less than Hulk, Thor, Thing, Colossus, Juggernaut?

Even characters taken directly from existing characters don't act, operate, or rank the same way.

And when did Viking mythology have a Destroyer Armor, Mangog, Dark Gods, Enchanters, etc. in them? Since when in mythology did Asgardian gods share the Earth with Olympians, Eternals, Deviants, Egyptians gods?

Marvel Thor has a half brother named Atum the God Eater. Ever heard of him? He's also got an uncle named Set and another named Chthon.

Originally posted by Beyonder
Asgardians and Olympians? Who really believes in them any more? And it says Thor, Odin, Asgard.

The judge of the Marvel Universe is Living Tribunal. Where the hell does it say METATRON? Tell me, where does it say Metatron. Tell me where it says the guy that was crucified himself to save counter-earth from evil was Jesus? Where? His name is ADAM WARLOCK! Not JESUS!

Even Asgardians and Olympians DON'T operate the same or RANK the same way as the original. Tell me when the Viking Thor can do GODBLAST, open star gates, traveled space & fight space beings, has a bother in arm named Beta Ray Bill. When did Viking Odin grow giant size, transverse time, teleported people, etc. And what about Loki being the son of Frost Giants?

Hercules strength rivaling or less than Hulk, Thor, Thing, Colossus, Juggernaut?

Even characters taken directly from existing characters don't act, operate, or rank the same way.

And when did Viking mythology have a Destroyer Armor, Mangog, Dark Gods, Enchanters, etc. in them? Since when in mythology did Asgardian gods share the Earth with Olympians, Eternals, Deviants, Egyptians gods?

Marvel Thor has a half brother named Atum the God Eater. Ever heard of him? He's also got an uncle named Set and another named Chthon.

That was so lame. You havent really addressed CF's points at all. You did that in the other phoenix thread as well. Seems you've run out of steam cos your last few posts on these phoenix threads have changed nothing to be honest. 🙁

Its bed time for me anyway but when i come on here tomorrow evening i'll gladly pick holes in your post. Nite nite 😱

Originally posted by Cosmic Flame
So we should include science in this as well, right? Everyone knows that comics science is only loosely based on real world science. People don't have a problem with science being included. Some have a problem when it isn't based enough in fact. Why should religion be any different?

Sorry, but I fail to see your point in here. Comics science does not entirely follow Real World Science, well... you realize that it only supports my argument, right? because thats also what Im trying to say about Religion. I mean do you see people incorporating Real World Science into Comic world science, unlike you people do to Religion?

Originally posted by Cosmic Flame
It would be different if the references to Kaballah were obscure. They aren't obscure in the least. If Marvel wanted to skirt the issue, they could have just gone with Phoenix symbolism and that's it. Claremont DIRECTLY mentioned Phoenix being Tiphareth, and Morrison referred to Kether. There wasn't an avoidance on Marvel's part. They obviously wanted the association.

There's all this carrying on about Marvel avoiding religion and characters not being true to the original. What do you have to support these assumptions in the case of Phoenix? The stories show exactly the opposite: not only religious symbolism and imagery, but terms and direct references in the text. How do you explain that?

Direct references in the text? Claremont directly mentioning Phoenix being Tiphereth and references about Keter? Sorry but this doesnt say much. The Archangel Michael was based off a REAL Archangel Michael and Carey DIRECTLY mentions him as a vessel for God's divine power, which he also directly referenced from the texts. But even with all of this, can we really consider the comic character Michael COMPLETELY similar to the real Michael? Because as far as Im concerned comic Michael, even with God's power, only stalemates Satan, while real Michael, as was said in the scriptures, fought Satan 1 on 1 before and emerged victorious.

You want another example? Direct references from the texts in our real world, huh? Well Lucifer is also based off the REAL Lucifer(Satan), and Carey also DIRECTLY mentioned him as the greatest and most beautiful of the archangels and rebelled against God. Both of which he also directly referenced, NOT only from other scriptures, but also from the Bible itself. But even with that, comic Lucifer is still not completely similar to real Lucifer, because real Lucifer should never be above the Holy Spirit and should never be the 2nd most powerful being in creation, which comic Lucifer is. Comic Lucifer also abandoned Hell, which real Lucifer didnt.

Sorry, but you can link a comic character's origin into the origin of a real world character. But linking their strength/powers and who's above who, is a totally different case.

Originally posted by Cosmic Flame
I'm tired of hearing (seeing) people wanting textual evidence in reference to Phoenix, but want to ignore what's explicitly stated in the text when it doesn't suit their purpose. People say that GS can't prove what he says is true, but I have yet to see someone set out something that explicitly states that he's wrong. Show me textual evidence that the power of the Phoenix is NOT second to that of the TOAA.

Do you see me contesting GalacticStorm's statements in this thread and other Phoenix thread(except for the Lucifer vs Phoenix Force thread)? Heck, do you even see me participating at all? Ive already admitted in another thread that GS's and markolin's arguments about the ranking of Phoenix in the Marvel Hierarchy cant be completely overlooked because they did make some good points about it. I still dont completely agree with everything they say, but they did made some convincing points. Im open for convincing here.

But if he or someone starts bringing up concepts and beliefs in our real into the comic world and regards it as the absolute truth when the comics shows it otherwise, I dont think I would just sit idly and let it pass. I mean, no offense to you, GS and other Phoenix Fans, but incorporating real world beliefs and concepts into the comics world, makes me think that you dont have what it takes to keep convincing people of whats shown in the comics(this is a comics forum, right?). Instead you need to bring external sources to help prove your point.

Sorry, but I fail to see your point in here. Comics science does not entirely follow Real World Science, well... you realize that it only supports my argument, right? because thats also what Im trying to say about Religion. I mean do you see people incorporating Real World Science into Comic world science, unlike you people do to Religion?

Direct references in the text? Claremont directly mentioning Phoenix being Tiphereth and references about Keter? Sorry but this doesnt say much.

The Archangel Michael was based off a REAL Archangel Michael and Carey DIRECTLY mentions him as a vessel for God's divine power, which he also directly referenced from the texts. But even with all of this, can we really consider the comic character Michael COMPLETELY similar to the real Michael? Because as far as Im concerned comic Michael, even with God's power, only stalemates Satan, while real Michael, as was said in the scriptures, fought Satan 1 on 1 before and emerged victorious.

This is where I have a problem with the arguments here. You say that what's stated in text doesn't necessarily mean anything, but yet you refer to another source, and apparently that is accurate. What is the standard as to the accuracy and verity of what one reads?

As far as Michael and Lucifer being represented in DC as well as the Bible, there don't really seem to be as many inconsistencies as you think. I'm basing this on what you've stated. For example, you reference the fight where Michael is victorious over Lucifer. According to the Bible, that hasn't happened yet, as it's in Revelation. How can the comics conflict with something that hasn't taken place? Not to mention the fact that we see in the Bible where people read one thing and interpret it a certain way, but it ends up being fulfilled in another way. The idea of the Messiah is an example.

Sorry, but you can link a comic character's origin into the origin of a real world character. But linking their strength/powers and who's above who, is a totally different case.

But if he or someone starts bringing up concepts and beliefs in our real into the comic world and regards it as the absolute truth when the comics shows it otherwise, I dont think I would just sit idly and let it pass. I mean, no offense to you, GS and other Phoenix Fans, but incorporating real world beliefs and concepts into the comics world, makes me think that you dont have what it takes to keep convincing people of whats shown in the comics(this is a comics forum, right?). Instead you need to bring external sources to help prove your point.

This is some of the worst circular logic I've ever seen. I can't reference religion in comics, yet you reference Lucifer and Michael. If a religious character appears in comics, that doesn't mean that there power is the same, although you mention that Michael is still a vessel for the power of God. Direct references to the text mean nothing, yet you commonly referred to to the power of the characters and what transferred to comics.

I referred to Elektra, Thor and others for a reason. Characters are often used by multiple authors. Each author interprets a character in their own way. So what? Whether written by Sophocles, Aeschylus or Euripides, Elektra is still Elektra. Some details of her story may vary, but she is essentially the same character. That's what literature is all about. It's never been about taking a character from one work, and inserting them in another work with no change. It's about ideas, concepts. Those are what move from work to work. The character is only a vehicle. That's the case with Phoenix and Kaballah in the MU. References and direct statements by the writers establish what is canon. Whether you like something or not has no effect on what is printed. Unless there is something else that's printed to say that Phoenix and Kaballah have no meaning in the context of Marvel, what is written stands. Of course, that brings us back to whatever is stated in the text not meaning anything...unless it says what we want it to
🙄

Originally posted by Cosmic Flame
You're right-you totally miss the point. I'm not quite sure how I can help you understand. Real world science does exist in comics. Let's see mutations, radiation...any number of the numerous aspects of science appear in comics. They exist. If you don't see that, then I don't know what to say. What is a mutation but biology? Do I really need to address this any further. It's there. YES, I see real world science incorporated in comic science. You'd have to be blind not to.

And you seem to miss the point as well. Yes , real world science does exist in comics world. BUT do all of it really exist or is relevant to a world where NORMAL human beings gets to have superpowers and can destroys cities and such with it?

Mutation? Do you seriously think that the mutations in the comics world will happen in our world? Oh yeah, we will have superpowers as well, right? :rolleyes

Originally posted by Cosmic Flame Did you even think about this statement before you wrote it? So I guess that anything that is written in comics, anything that is stated about a character or a situation doesn't mean anything.

This argument is based on a supposition that one considers what the Bible says to be true. How can that be proven? What about earlier source material for these characters? Can we be sure that the concepts of Satan and Lucifer conform to their near Eastern counterparts in the original material.

This is where I have a problem with the arguments here. You say that what's stated in text doesn't necessarily mean anything, but yet you refer to another source, and apparently that is accurate. What is the standard as to the accuracy and verity of what one reads?

As far as Michael and Lucifer being represented in DC as well as the Bible, there don't really seem to be as many inconsistencies as you think. I'm basing this on what you've stated. For example, you reference the fight where Michael is victorious over Lucifer. According to the Bible, that hasn't happened yet, as it's in Revelation. How can the comics conflict with something that hasn't taken place? Not to mention the fact that we see in the Bible where people read one thing and interpret it a certain way, but it ends up being fulfilled in another way. The idea of the Messiah is an example.

Of course it's different. There characters don't exist in a vacuum, however. The problem is that you are not willing to see what is there. If DC writes Lucifer and Michael in a certain way, and states that there powers are such and such and this is their function, that's fine. If they want to tweak what a character does and how they function in the cosmology of the DC universe, that's fine as well. There's nothing wrong with that. The problem is that Marvel has set out that a certain character is based on this religion, and fulfills this particular role and exhibits these powers. There's nothing wrong with that either. You're comparing apples and oranges. Perhaps certain characters don't conform to earlier representation. Perhaps some do. What's the problem?

Show me where the comics state or demonstrate that Phoenix and Kaballah have no connection in the MU. You keep saying that you can't bring religion in. Why? It's stated in black and white. You have yet to disprove in this particular instance that there the connection referenced in the comics doesn't exist.

This is some of the worst circular logic I've ever seen. I can't reference religion in comics, yet you reference Lucifer and Michael. If a religious character appears in comics, that doesn't mean that there power is the same, although you mention that Michael is still a vessel for the power of God. Direct references to the text mean nothing, yet you commonly referred to to the power of the characters and what transferred to comics.

Stop putting words on my mouth. I didnt said that direct references to the text doesnt mean ANYTHING. I just said that it doesnt mean MUCH. Read my post again.

Lol! Some of the worst circular logic youve ever seen? Or you just didnt bother to really understand what Im saying? I made that examples about Michael and Lucifer to show you that even if some characters is based off a real character, concept, symbology, it doesnt necessarily mean that EVERYTHING about it should be incorporated to that comic character. Comic Lucifer, like real Lucifer, was said to have been the greatest and most beautiful of the angels. It is the same about Phoenix being referred to as Tipereth, like the real Tipereth. BUT the point I was trying to make is, does everything about the real Tipereth included in the comic Tipereth? Just like, does everything about the real Lucifer is included in the comic Lucifer?

I mean you can talk about their origins and link it and stuff, but can you seriously assure me that EVERYTHING, and I mean EVERYTHING about the real Tipereth is included in the comic Tipereth? How about their strength/powers? Because Lucifer and Michael's origins are the same as the real ones, but their strength is different.

Does MU DIRECTLY states that because of Jean being Tipereth and because of her being based off the Kaballah Symbology, she should be stronger than everyone in the MU, when 98% of the characters is not based off this Kaballah symbology, much less Religion itself? kinda unfair, isnt it?

And about Michael fighting Satan. If you thoroughly read the Bible, you'll see it. Its in "Jude 1:9"

Originally posted by Cosmic Flame I referred to Elektra, Thor and others for a reason. Characters are often used by multiple authors. Each author interprets a character in their own way. So what? Whether written by Sophocles, Aeschylus or Euripides, Elektra is still Elektra. Some details of her story may vary, but she is essentially the same character. That's what literature is all about. It's never been about taking a character from one work, and inserting them in another work with no change. It's about ideas, concepts. Those are what move from work to work. The character is only a vehicle. That's the case with Phoenix and Kaballah in the MU. References and direct statements by the writers establish what is canon. Whether you like something or not has no effect on what is printed. Unless there is something else that's printed to say that Phoenix and Kaballah have no meaning in the context of Marvel, what is written stands. Of course, that brings us back to whatever is stated in the text not meaning anything...unless it says what we want it to
🙄

Lol!! your basically agreeing with me in here. Yes, a certain character is interpreted by different authors in their own different ways. Yes, some details in a certain character may vary. Yes, literature has never been about taking a character from one work, and inserting them in another work with no change. EXACTLY, thats basically my point all along. A character can be base off another character, cool. But it does not mean that everything about the original character is in the new character. Phoenix was based off the Kaballah Symbology, but it does not mean that everything about the symbology is in Phoenix.

See, I have no problem with you guys referencing The Watcher who said that Phoenix is second only to the Creator, but then you guys started bringing up this symbology from our real world into the comics just to prove that Phoenix is the strongest in MU? Damn, why dont you just rely on what the Watcher has said? Because that was in the comics which happens to be what were discussing in this entire forum and he atleast didnt based off his claims on some symbology.

forget the theological talk Phoenix wins

Lets get this straight. The reason we started bringing up symbology from the real world is because as you've seen the comics are using symbology from the real world. Nothing ive said about kaballah hasnt not already been mentioned or directly referred to in the comics. By that i mean terms are used in the comics which i have provided definitions of and parallels between the role and actions of phoenix and the roles and actions of seraphim and higher beings in kaballah have been quite blatantly drawn and ive alerted posters who might not be as well read on the subject. I have introduced nothing new. Ive just explained terms and parallels the writers have used and drawn. There is nothing wrong with that at all. Comics arent just about pretty pictures, theyre a form of literature believe it or not.

"Lol!! your basically agreeing with me in here. Yes, a certain character is interpreted by different authors in their own different ways. Yes, some details in a certain character may vary. Yes, literature has never been about taking a character from one work, and inserting them in another work with no change. EXACTLY, thats basically my point all along. A character can be base off another character, cool. But it does not mean that everything about the original character is in the new character. Phoenix was based off the Kaballah Symbology, but it does not mean that everything about the symbology is in Phoenix. "

No it doesnt in general but everything ive typed in about kaballah has been phoenix related and ive shown quotes and/or scans showing the symbology and parallels being actually carried out in the comics. I havent typed in any kaballah stuff that hasnt been shown to be the case in the comics. Type in something ive said about kaballah and i'll happily provide you a scan or a quote along with the comic issue which shows that the comic follows that particular kaballah statement.

"It is the same about Phoenix being referred to as Tipereth, like the real Tipereth. BUT the point I was trying to make is, does everything about the real Tipereth included in the comic Tipereth?"

Tiphereth is the heart and soul of creation in Kaballah. Phoenix is said by various sources in the comics dozens upon dozens of times to be 'the sum and substance of all that is'.

Tiphereth is said to be the highest point that mortal existence can reach in this life. Jean as Phoenix became tiphereth and reached her 'ultimate potential as a psi'

In Kaballah Tiphereth in the sphere of the Mind”.Its color is gold.
Phoenix is jeans ultimate expression as a psi. Jeans psionic phoenix form is either that of the golden woman or the golden firebird.

in the physical world it is represented by the Sun, in the microcosm of the human body corresponds to the heart. Its prime symbol is the Phoenix. NUFF SAID.

"Damn, why dont you just rely on what the Watcher has said?"

I did in the beginning and still I would if i was allowed to. Why dont you say that to Beyonder and the like.

Again, so what? If youve read my last 2 posts, Ive basically agreed with the both of you that basing off a certain character to another character is alright. The only problem I have with you is, although you have brought proof about Phoeinix paralleling Tipereth and the Kaballah Symbology, you havent bought any proof that says that because of this relation, it means that the Phoenix is above anyone in MU.

You posted the quotes, the scans, etc on this thread and other threads about Phoenix's relation to the Kaballah symbology, you have linked Phoenix's origins, functions, and even her appearance to the Tipereth of the Kaballah Symbology, that's cool. But that is the farthest we can go. Paralleling Phoenix's strength/powers to the real Tipereth is ENTIRELY ANOTHER case, and you'll have to bring NEW proof of that, which you have yet to offer.

The comics basically agrees with that. Prime examples of that are Michael and Lucifer. Michael, like the real Michael, was said to be the champion of God and the vessel for God's power. Heck, even their appearance, if we base it on other scriptures, are the same. Real Michael was said to have long hair whose color is Gold that shines very brightly, Comic Michael's appearance are also like that, if you read the Lucifer series.

Lucifer, like the real Lucifer, was said to be the greatest and most beautiful of the angels before his fall. He rebelled against God and was cast down to hell to rule it.

In terms of origins and functions, Michael and Lucifer, just like your Phoenix's linkage to the Tipereth of the Kaballah Symbology, were also based off the real Michael and Lucifer.

But as the comics shows us so far, paralleling their strengths/powers are a totally different case(their personalities are also one, but its irrelevant to the topic at hand). The comic Michael can only at best stalemate Lucifer, while real Michael has defeated Lucifer before. Comic Lucifer, was said to be the most powerful being next to the creator, while the real Lucifer should never be even close to that.

You see my point? A character may be based off a certain character but its not ENTIRELY based off it (and it just so happens that Phoenix's powers are one of the things that wasnt based off the real Tipereth, atleast until you can give us proof of that). You and Cosmic Flame have agreed with me on that.

The Word in comics is also a prime example. Comic Word's origins are the same as real Word, in that they came into existence when God spoke his first words. But Comic Word's strength are obviously very different than the real Word. Comic Word was beaten by a mere Earth Elemental in the Swamp Thing series. He was beaten by an Earthling. NUFF SAID.

Originally posted by GalacticStorm
I did in the beginning and still I would if i was allowed to. Why dont you say that to Beyonder and the like.

I dont need to reprimand Beyonder, kgkg and etc. Thats your job. I mean your the one whose discussing it with them, not me. If they still dont believe you, then thats theyre choice. What matters is that youve made your point and based it off strictly in the comics, thats it. I also had a discussion with Beyonder about who's stronger between LT and Lucifer, but do you see him and others completely agreeing with me afterwards? No. Am I dissapointed because of that? Hell NO!!!. Ive made my case about Lucifer in a relevant manner by basing all my arguments strictly in the comics. That alone Im contented with. I dont need to discuss it with them every single time Lucifer and/or LT are mentioned.

i agree about using relative power levels...after all, outside of creation, god's most impressive biblical feats are ABSOLUTLEY PUNY. any decent magician could have pulled them off.

and synchro, why should biblical lucifer not be second to the creator? i certainly can't think of any beings that would be stronger (referenced in the bible).