Originally posted by Inedian
It seems it was.He did it with snap of his fingers.
Originally posted by Inedian
''I represent forces that dwarf even your might''.
"Mighty and jealous Eternity had him called before the Living Tribunal, the representative of the one who is above all."
Originally posted by Sin I AM
It seems as if AW doubted LTs words
Originally posted by Astner
Adam Warlock killed the host by raising his fist and the Living Tribunal brought them back with the snap of a finger. It's not like Adam couldn't kill them again if he wanted to.He represented Above-All-Others.
"Mighty and jealous Eternity had him called before the Living Tribunal, the representative of the one who is above all."
There is nothing in the series that suggests that the Infinity Gems are beneath the Living Tribunal, let alone a "joke" to him. In fact it was left ambiguous for quite some time.
You think they are equals?
Originally posted by Sin I AM
You think they are equals?
But in the Infinity arc—Infinity Gauntlet, Infinity War, and Infinity Watch; in particular—the comparison between the two was left ambiguous.
So when Inedian posts part of the scene from Infinity Watch and then implies that the Living Tribunal was portrayed as being well beyond the power of the Infinity Gems he is wrong.
In fact it's very clear from this scene:
Originally posted by Astner
"Such a confrontation would lay waste to this reality," is heavily indicative of that a confrontation would be more than just a snap of a finger.
Originally posted by Astner
So when Inedian posts part of the scene from Infinity Watch and then implies that the Living Tribunal was portrayed as being well beyond the power of the Infinity Gems he is wrong.
No I am not, because it was clear LT being beyond IG, easily beyond. And Adam Warlock was just some child with immense power, immature mind to the core extremely unworthy of such power. Of course a child like that likes to contradict.
Of course it would waste a reality, already a wave of such powers between the two would do that.
When others were destroyed, LT wasn't even phased and when IG destroyed Eternity and others... he already wasted a reality, since Eternity is that reality and whom LT brought back easily and AW was in awe when he did that.
The whole scene wasn't even about LT stopping AW (there wasn't doubt or worry about that, but why fight, when there is no need and LT knew that), it was more about if AW was worthy of such power... and of course he was from it.
Originally posted by Inedian
No I am not, because it was clear LT being beyond IG, easily beyond.
Originally posted by Inedian
When others were destroyed, LT wasn't even phased and when IG destroyed Eternity and others... he already wasted a reality, since Eternity is that reality
Originally posted by Inedian
and whom LT brought back easily and AW was in awe when he did that.
Originally posted by Inedian
The whole scene wasn't even about LT stopping AW (there wasn't doubt or worry about that, but why fight, when there is no need and LT knew that), it was more about if AW was worthy of such power... and of course he was from it.
Originally posted by TheHulkster
And no one said that that was Spectre.
I'm not of the opinion that the Spectre is a peer to LT (except perhaps in COIE), but come on. If you're talking about the "hooded, spectral ally", then of course it's the Spectre. To say otherwise could not be more senselessly obtuse. In a Marvel-only book they can't use his name or image for copyright reasons, so they paint a painfully obvious picture.
You seem to do this a lot - claiming vagueness when meaning is obvious. It's annoying, and you should stop it. 😐
Originally posted by Cogito
I'm not of the opinion that the Spectre is a peer to LT (except perhaps in COIE), but come on. If you're talking about the "hooded, spectral ally", then of course it's the Spectre. To say otherwise could not be more senselessly obtuse. In a Marvel-only book they can't use his name or image for copyright reasons, so they paint a painfully obvious picture.You seem to do this a lot - claiming vagueness when meaning is obvious. It's annoying, and you should stop it. 😐
What are you talking about? I was speaking of the other being pictured in the panel. You need to get a grip and address the person who made the original assertion if you believe that he is referring to the hooded ally and take your target off of me.
