Perpetua vs The One Above All

Started by AlbertoJohnAvil7 pages
Originally posted by Galan007
A canon Starlin book. 🙂

Starlin has sort of his own ongoing canon.

And different depictions are not retcons.

Perpetua loses this. Even if this battle is based on Starlin's depiction, the OP makes no reference to an a disfunctioning system.

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
Starlin has sort of his own ongoing canon.
It's still a canon series, and its events have been referenced in other canon material: like Annihilation, for example.

Originally posted by TheHulkster
Perpetua loses this. Even if this battle is based on Starlin's depiction, the OP makes no reference to an a disfunctioning system.
Perpetua won’t try to mess with it?

Originally posted by Galan007
It's still a canon series, and its events have been referenced in other canon material: like Annihilation, for example.
they’ll never acknowledge it lol.

Originally posted by TheHulkster
And different depictions are not retcons.

Pretty sure 2 different authors depictions of the same thing that contradicts each other are retcons.

Originally posted by Galan007
Lol.

Brevoort is an absolute dipshit.

Yes, he works for Above All Others, who is "the supreme being and ruler of all realities." aka. TOAA / aka. God.

That is how LT has always been depicted. God=#1, LT=#2 in the cosmological hierarchy.

But lots of characters claim omnipotence and AAO proved that to not be the case. Has TOAA ever been forcefully overridden?

Originally posted by Galan007
It's still a canon series, and its events have been referenced in other canon material: like Annihilation, for example.

Yeah, I'm aware. I dont buy the "Marvel The End -> Thanos (2003) -> Annihilation event" to canonize The End.

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
Yeah, I'm aware. I dont buy the "Marvel The End -> Thanos (2003) -> Annihilation event" to canonize The End.
So the Thanos mini is canon, but "The End" isn't... Even though its events were explicitly referenced/shown in the Thanos mini as part of Thanos' backstory?

Lol, okay...

Originally posted by lft4ded
But lots of characters claim omnipotence and AAO proved that to not be the case. Has TOAA ever been forcefully overridden?
Are you suggesting that there is more than one "supreme being and ruler of all realities" in Marvel..?

Also, Thanos referred to OAA as "the source of all there is, was, and ever will be":
https://i.imgur.com/3A7ocyY.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/E0xhac9.jpg

Is there more than one of those as well, or is it possible that maybe...just maybe... "The One Above All", and "Above All Others" are the exact same being, like the story suggests?

Galan, There's more evidence towards Presence not being omnipotent. JUST saying

That is a different discussion that has no bearing on anything I've mentioned here.

Originally posted by Galan007
Are you suggesting that there is more than one "supreme being and ruler of all realities" in Marvel..?

Also, Thanos referred to OAA as "the source of all there is, was, and ever will be":
https://i.imgur.com/3A7ocyY.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/E0xhac9.jpg

Is there more than one of those as well, or is it possible that maybe...just maybe... "The One Above All", and "Above All Others" are the exact same being, like the story suggests?

There is also this:

https://imgur.com/a/6WLsZdi

Which goes back to this:

Originally posted by Galan007
In short: TOAA is only omnipotent within a well-functioning system. Imbalances in the Marvel continuum weaken him.

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
Galan, There's more evidence towards Presence not being omnipotent. JUST saying

Bringing in the Presence which has no relevance in this discussion is you telling us you can’t back your claims.

If you want to discuss the Presence lack of Omnipotent, make a thread.

Edit

Yeahhhh I KNOW, GALAN already said that. WHY don't you learn how to read instead of repeating something that was already said

Why did you need Galan to say it to have it pointed out to you?

Squall, don't quote me 😂

Originally posted by Galan007
Which goes back to this:

None of that is true. at all