- 14,956
- 1,831
- Thread starter
- #121
Yes and your analogy does not work.Xulrev said:That's why it's an analogy, it's not meant to be the precise same in every facet so that it's illustrated a different way.
He didn't create anything. It all existed. He simply infused portions of himself into it, and now says that he is it, in short, but only specifically in their specific part of the universe.
We are circling a singular issue as has this entire thread it seems. Wok still makes the most sense. You don't have a powerful argument here unfortunately.
Yeah he did not create it that does not influecne or impact my point because after he did what he did the world became him. He infused portions of himself in everything of the existing universe and provided all the energy it required to create the universe it is at the moment. A chain reaction only makes sense if he provided a few particles which weight and energy and then it did the rest, it is very clearlt not that
You can say what you want about me not having a powrful argument but you are wrong. Ultima seems to find the part where he explicitly states all of the world as a simple part of him as enough proof of High 3-A and I think that is all that is needed.