Search FAQ

Login | Register


All times are UTC [ DST ]


It is currently 15 Nov 2019




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 191 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 10  Next
Author Message

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 29 Jun 2009
Notes left: 2301
^
She isn't born from god. Alessa is the mother of god. I don't see how she is the daughter of god.
Since when is Alessa born from god? Ever?

_________________
[img]http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee419/silentfog/signature.jpg[/img]


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
I think there's a couple things we all agree on... both the lady in white and the incubus, at the time you are fighting them, are god (just like the article says.) But whether the lady in white is meant to be seen as god *after* you kill the incubus is the part I'm not convinced on. It feels like the intentions of the writer were that this is Cheryl/Alessa's spirit after they were released from god when you kill it... (after all, you did kill god, so it logically shouldn't be god) and the reason why they still look like a form of god is because that's the only form they have left, after being combined with god. This is also why it reverts to looking like Alessa's manifestation of god (Cheryl probably didn't have a manifestation.) Though I think the baby is coming primarily from Cheryl's will, as it doesn't really make sense with Alessa's motivations to give you the baby.

Although, if you ignore SH3 and simply look at SH1 as a game where a sequel was not necessarily planned, that baby can make sense even with Alessa's motivations, because that baby may not have been planned to have another seed in it. If it didn't, there's no conflict with Alessa's interests.

The other theory that the lady in white is god all along and is tricking Harry also works, and I can understand why some people want to stick with it since it doesn't contradict SH3, but I just don't feel that was truly the writer's intention with SH1.

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Moderator
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Apr 2004
Notes left: 11052
Last seen at: In the anals of forum history
SHF wrote:
^
She isn't born from god. Alessa is the mother of god. I don't see how she is the daughter of god.
Since when is Alessa born from god? Ever?


Image

You really, really need to start doing a little bit of research one of these days. You embarrass yourself pretty much every day because you don't ever do any.

Quote:
It feels like the intentions of the writer were that this is Cheryl/Alessa's spirit after they were released from god when you kill it... (after all, you did kill god, so it logically shouldn't be god) and the reason why they still look like a form of god is because that's the only form they have left, after being combined with god.


That makes the assumption that God dies the moment the Incubus falls to the ground. And, why assume that Alessa or Cheryl should take on the form of God? Why would they not take on one of their own real appearances, given that the God is supposedly dead and the whole place is falling apart?

Whatever the intentions were before this became a series, only one theory holds up with there being an official sequel and an extension of events. Alessa would never have taken even the slightest chance of events repeating if she could affect matters in any way, and Cheryl no longer existed to do anything by the time the babymaking took place. She was willing to destroy the whole town, and herself, to prevent God from being born. She even, quite pointedly, attempts a retroactive abortion on Heather in the third game, and expresses surprise that Heather would resist her efforts because it would be logical for Heather to realize how dangerous she was and submit. That doesn't sound like someone who would risk everything out of a moment of sentimentality.

Besides, for the Alessa theory to have any credence, those putting it forth have to, you know, prove that it's her making the baby, since pretty much all evidence points to that not being the case. You have to account for that, and all you're doing is ignoring it.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
alone in the town wrote:
That makes the assumption that God dies the moment the Incubus falls to the ground.


Yes, it's an assumption... I'm not claiming my viewpoint is canonical truth. But it makes sense to me.

alone in the town wrote:
And, why assume that Alessa or Cheryl should take on the form of God? Why would they not take on one of their own real appearances, given that the God is supposedly dead and the whole place is falling apart?


Hard to say, but since they were already a part of god, it makes a certain amount of sense.

alone in the town wrote:
Whatever the intentions were before this became a series, only one theory holds up with there being an official sequel and an extension of events.


My theory just pertains to the original writer's intentions. If we're talking about the whole series, I acknowledge that there could be retconning going on, and that the official explanation *might* be that the god ploy theory is true. (Though that article on page 1 doesn't convince me of that.)

alone in the town wrote:
Alessa would never have taken even the slightest chance of events repeating if she could affect matters in any way, and Cheryl no longer existed to do anything by the time the babymaking took place.


You keep saying that "Cheryl no longer existed," but that doesn't make sense according to how the game presents it:

1. Dahlia seems to only be talking about Cheryl's physical body when she say "that person no longer exists."
2. You hear "Daddy" right after killing god. Seems pretty obvious that this is the game writer's way of expressing that Cheryl's spirit has been released.
3. You see Alessa/Cheryl combining and becoming the lady in white, which as we all know is god. Logically it makes sense to assume that Cheryl is a part of god at this point.

alone in the town wrote:
Besides, for the Alessa theory to have any credence, those putting it forth have to, you know, prove that it's her making the baby,


I don't have to prove anything because I'm not claiming my viewpoint is fact. All I am saying is that this theory makes the most sense to me, and I have backed that up with logic. Now let me ask you to do the same... is your reason for thinking that Cheryl no longer existed based *solely* on that quote from Dahlia? Are there any other reasons, and if so would you please enlighten me?

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Moderator
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Apr 2004
Notes left: 11052
Last seen at: In the anals of forum history
Tillerman wrote:
Hard to say, but since they were already a part of god, it makes a certain amount of sense.


Since when were they a part of God?

Quote:
1. Dahlia seems to only be talking about Cheryl's physical body when she say "that person no longer exists."


Because Harry is clearly trying to talk to Cheryl's physical body, rather than the person. Now you really are being ridiculous.

Quote:
2. You hear "Daddy" right after killing god. Seems pretty obvious that this is the game writer's way of expressing that Cheryl's spirit has been released.


Except for the fact that God is very obviously not dead when this happens. Seems that you're just being ridiculous again.

Quote:
3. You see Alessa/Cheryl combining and becoming the lady in white, which as we all know is god. Logically it makes sense to assume that Cheryl is a part of god at this point.


You see Alessa and Cheryl combine in the opening movie when Harry collides with the apparition on the highway. Neither is a part of god any more than Claudia is in the third game.

Quote:
I don't have to prove anything because I'm not claiming my viewpoint is fact. All I am saying is that this theory makes the most sense to me, and I have backed that up with logic.


I thought you actually believed the theory most of us are going with but were playing devil's advocate.

What you're doing is being a contrarian. Not a single point of yours stands against scrutiny. You've admitted as much. You believe it only because you want to believe it. The critical flaws in the theory don't matter to you.

Quote:
Now let me ask you to do the same... is your reason for thinking that Cheryl no longer existed based *solely* on that quote from Dahlia? Are there any other reasons, and if so would you please enlighten me?


It's based mostly on the fact that no indication exists, whatsoever, in literature or in any of the games, that the person who was Cheryl existed after that point except as a scattering of vague memories Heather reveals later in the game. Dahlia only serves to verify it, and though she has lied to Harry, there's no reason for her to do so at this point, where she's being forthcoming about pretty much everything. After that point in the game, she's always referred to as Alessa, and no duality is ever mentioned.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
Let's just focus on this point for now, because this is really starting to bug me:

alone in the town wrote:
Because Harry is clearly trying to talk to Cheryl's physical body, rather than the person. Now you really are being ridiculous.


Could you explain how this statement makes sense please: "Because Harry is clearly trying to talk to Cheryl's physical body." What do you mean by that? Harry is obviously still confused at this point in the story. He's still just trying to find Cheryl, or understand what has happened to her. Dahlia's statement "That person no longer exists" is a vague statement. It can mean one of several things:

1. Cheryl's body and soul are destroyed, so "that person no longer exists." (Which, we know is not true from SH3, right? Although I hate to use evidence from SH3 since I am only talking about the writer's intention from SH1, but clearly by the time of SH3 they still intended for Heather to have Cheryl's memories along with Alessa's. So she has a part of Cheryl's soul, so Cheryl's soul was not destroyed. Well, I suppose you could argue that Cheryl was reincarnated as a part of Alessa when god reincarnated Alessa, but that seems like a bit of a stretch, doesn't it?)

2. Cheryl's body is destroyed, so "that person no longer exists." If her body doesn't exist, it's safe to say she doesn't exist as a person.

3. Cheryl has been combined with someone else into a new being, so "that person no longer exists." If she is combined into a new being, the Cheryl Harry knows is gone, so it's accurate to say "that person no longer exists."

Now, please try to explain to me in detail why Dahlia could not have meant choices 2 or 3. What is your evidence?

And also explain why, if Cheryl no longer exists in body or soul, her memories still exist in Heather in SH3. Was her soul reincarnated?

alone in the town wrote:
I thought you actually believed the theory most of us are going with but were playing devil's advocate.


That's a fair complaint. To be honest, I did start out believing that until I read the article closer and gave it some thought. But the more we discuss it the less I believe it. To be fair, I still think it's a perfectly viable theory, and may be right. But I also think this alternative "Cheryl" theory for which I am now arguing is just as viable. So I'm not playing devil's advocate or being contrarian, these are all things I actually believe. I don't actually like arguing about things like this... but at the same time when someone tries to convince me I'm wrong with faulty logic, I don't like to back down either. If you want to say "hey, you're welcome to your opinion" then that's fine with me, I will absolutely extend you the same courtesy. But if you want to continue arguing with me about how I'm "wrong," then I will argue back, and quite frankly a lot of your points don't make sense. Especially the one above.

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 29 Jun 2009
Notes left: 2301
alone in the town wrote:
SHF wrote:
^
She isn't born from god. Alessa is the mother of god. I don't see how she is the daughter of god.
Since when is Alessa born from god? Ever?


Image

You really, really need to start doing a little bit of research one of these days. You embarrass yourself pretty much every day because you don't ever do any.

^
You just showed me a picture that states that she is the daughter of god.
I have asked WHY she is the daughter of god.

By the way, I actually own silent hill 3. So I know about the painting in the belfry.
If you don't believe I have the game, I can easily post up a picture of me holding it up, with me smiling in the background.

_________________
[img]http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee419/silentfog/signature.jpg[/img]


Top
   
 

Moderator
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Apr 2004
Notes left: 11052
Last seen at: In the anals of forum history
Quote:
Now, please try to explain to me in detail why Dahlia could not have meant choices 2 or 3. What is your evidence?


What, you're putting up theories and I have to disprove them? How does that work? I think it's up to you to prove your own theories.

I think you should have to prove that Dahlia is playing games of semantics with Harry, which would have to be true for 2 and 3 to be valid. Further, there is never any indication, here or afterward, as noted already, that 2 or 3 are valid. They are theories without a basis. May as well ask me to prove that Dahlia isn't an alien robot.

Quote:
And also explain why, if Cheryl no longer exists in body or soul, her memories still exist in Heather in SH3. Was her soul reincarnated?


Alessa absorbed Cheryl. Heather retains Alessa's memories.

Quote:
You just showed me a picture that states that she is the daughter of god.
I have asked WHY she is the daughter of god.


No. You asked when, not why. You even quoted yourself asking when, and not why.

I'd rather you actually play the game than pose with it.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
alone in the town wrote:
What, you're putting up theories and I have to disprove them? How does that work? I think it's up to you to prove your own theories.


Hell no. Again, you don't understand the nature of my argument. I'm not trying to *prove* anything here, I'm simply stating that my theory is *viable.* My point is simply that any of those 3 are reasonable explanations for what she means. Dahlia doesn't put her statement into any kind of context, so this is a correct statement. Unless *you* can prove that she doesn't mean 2 or 3, any theory which makes that assumption is *viable.*

alone in the town wrote:
I think you should have to prove that Dahlia is playing games of semantics with Harry, which would have to be true for 2 and 3 to be valid. Further, there is never any indication, here or afterward, as noted already, that 2 or 3 are valid. They are theories without a basis.


You're the one playing a semantic game. You are *automatically assuming* that Dahlia's sentence has to be taken as literally as possible, for no other reason than the convenience of your argument.

alone in the town wrote:
Alessa absorbed Cheryl. Heather retains Alessa's memories.


Did Alessa absorb Cheryl's memories, or her soul? Because I would say soul, as in it still exists inside of Alessa, then god, and is finally set free when you kill god. I can't prove this to you, but apparently you have no way to contradict this theory, do you? It also fits perfectly with how the game portrays events. Therefore, this is a viable theory, isn't it?

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 09 Jun 2010
Notes left: 494
SHF wrote:
^
She isn't born from god. Alessa is the mother of god. I don't see how she is the daughter of god.
Since when is Alessa born from god? Ever?

God handed Harry a new baby so that it could have the chance to be born again. That story on the SH3 soundtrack was just a posh way of retelling the events of Silent Hill 1. "God breathed her last breah, promising to come again" (or something to that extent. The painting is talking about Alessa in her current form if i'm correct (Heather). The mother of god implies her reincarnation at the end of SH1.

So. Heather=Both the daughter and the mother of god, since Claudia is trying to birth god again (the mother), and she is also the baby that harry was given (the daughter)... Make sense now? Someone let me know if I'm wrong on this one but so far it makes sense to me.


Top
   
 

Woodside Apartments Janitor
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 30 Mar 2009
Notes left: 1081
Last seen at: North of The Wall
Put simpler, Alessa is the mother of god, Heather is the daughter of god, Heather is Alessa.

So Alessa is both mother and daughter of god.

_________________
Too cold to start a fire
I'm burning diesel, burning dinosaur bones
I'll take the river down to still water
And ride a pack of dogs


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 09 Jun 2010
Notes left: 494
Exactly... Thanks for putting into simpler terms!


Top
   
 

Moderator
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Apr 2004
Notes left: 11052
Last seen at: In the anals of forum history
Tillerman wrote:
Hell no. Again, you don't understand the nature of my argument. I'm not trying to *prove* anything here, I'm simply stating that my theory is *viable.* My point is simply that any of those 3 are reasonable explanations for what she means. Dahlia doesn't put her statement into any kind of context, so this is a correct statement. Unless *you* can prove that she doesn't mean 2 or 3, any theory which makes that assumption is *viable.*


There is context. Harry is attempting to communicate with Cheryl, even though it's plain to see that, physically, there's no evidence of her presence. Her physical body is not there. It, therefore, makes no sense for Dahlia to be telling him that her physical body no longer exists--it's already quite obvious that it doesn't. She knows that Harry is attempting to reach Cheryl through Alessa, and she's telling him that it's a waste of time, because the person he knew as Cheryl no longer exists. And, as far as any evidence seen then or later can show, she's telling the truth.

Quote:
You're the one playing a semantic game. You are *automatically assuming* that Dahlia's sentence has to be taken as literally as possible, for no other reason than the convenience of your argument.


Do you even know what 'arguing semantics' means?

Quote:
Did Alessa absorb Cheryl's memories, or her soul? Because I would say soul, as in it still exists inside of Alessa, then god, and is finally set free when you kill god. I can't prove this to you, but apparently you have no way to contradict this theory, do you? It also fits perfectly with how the game portrays events. Therefore, this is a viable theory, isn't it?


It's not even a theory. It's conjecture. Theories require evidence. If you can't support it with evidence, you're just propping up Alien Robot Dahlias.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
alone in the town wrote:
There is context. Harry is attempting to communicate with Cheryl, even though it's plain to see that, physically, there's no evidence of her presence.


So... you're implying that Harry knows the truth about Cheryl and is trying to speak to her spirit. Let's look again at what Harry actually says:

Harry: "Cheryl!"

That's it. After that, Dahlia responds with the line we've been talking about for the last page. So from this word, you are deriving that Harry understands that Cheryl's body is gone, and is trying to contact her spirit, is that correct? Well, forgive me for diagreeing with you, because I think it's quite a stretch to derive all of that from a single word.

Furthermore, since it's a single word, it doesn't lend any context whatsoever to Dahlia's next statement: "That person no longer exists." It's not like Harry is yelling: "Cheryl! I know your body is gone, but where is your spirit? Are you here?" If he was, then there might be enough context to read Dahlia's line the way you are insisting. But there isn't.

alone in the town wrote:
Theories require evidence


You're using the wrong definiton of the word theory, and you know it. We're not talking about scientific theories, I'm not trying to prove anything to you. We're using the colloquial version, which essentially just means that I have an idea. I never claimed that my idea was fact, I only claimed that it works and that it doesn't contradict anything. You see, I don't need a lot of evidence because my claims are modest... I am simply claiming that something is possible. You are claiming that my idea is impossible, and that you can prove it is so. So obviously, the burden of proof is on you in this discussion... YOU'RE the one who made it so in the beginning when you claimed I was wrong.

That's why you brought up that quote from Dahlia in the first place, remember? You were trying to claim that this contradicts my idea. I explained to you that it depends on how you interpret the meaning of that quote. You insist that the way you interpret it is the *only* possible meaning. And your only justification for that is a fanciful story about how Harry's line "Cheryl" gives enough context to establish that he asking about her soul. That doesn't hold water.

And now you're trying to turn it around and say that *I* need to prove that what you think contradicts my theory is actually not a contradiction? You started out by trying to prove I was wrong, and now since you can't I need to prove I'm right? That's not how it works. Again, my claim is modest... I was never trying to prove I was right, my only point from the beginning was that this alternative theory works. Nothing more. It's ridiculous for you to start out trying to prove me wrong and then spin things around when you fail to do that.

Now, if you're truly serious about finding a contradiction with my theory, then please find one. Either explain why that quote *has* to have the specific meaning you are insisting, or find some other information in the game that contradicts my idea, or else admit that there is no contradiction.

If you can't do that, then you should understand perfectly well why I will be satisfied with my initial point: that multiple interpretations of SH1 exist. Now please, please, actually respond to my post next time with something substantive, instead of playing semantic games like this:

alone in the town wrote:
It's not even a theory. It's conjecture.

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 01 Aug 2006
Notes left: 11384
Last seen at: I'm here, and waiting for you
Quote:
So... you're implying that Harry knows the truth about Cheryl and is trying to speak to her spirit. Let's look again at what Harry actually says:

Harry: "Cheryl!"


This has nothing to do with Harry knowing the truth of anything. He pretty much saw Cheryl get merged into a larger being.

Quote:
That's it. After that, Dahlia responds with the line we've been talking about for the last page. So from this word, you are deriving that Harry understands that Cheryl's body is gone, and is trying to contact her spirit, is that correct? Well, forgive me for diagreeing with you, because I think it's quite a stretch to derive all of that from a single word.


Literally the only other option is that Harry is trying to communicate with Cheryl because she is there in body.

Quote:
Furthermore, since it's a single word, it doesn't lend any context whatsoever to Dahlia's next statement: "That person no longer exists." It's not like Harry is yelling: "Cheryl! I know your body is gone, but where is your spirit? Are you here?" If he was, then there might be enough context to read Dahlia's line the way you are insisting. But there isn't.


So why did Dahlia say it, then?

Quote:
You're using the wrong definiton of the word theory, and you know it. We're not talking about scientific theories, I'm not trying to prove anything to you. We're using the colloquial version, which essentially just means that I have an idea. I never claimed that my idea was fact, I only claimed that it works and that it doesn't contradict anything. You see, I don't need a lot of evidence because my claims are modest... I am simply claiming that something is possible. You are claiming that my idea is impossible, and that you can prove it is so. So obviously, the burden of proof is on you in this discussion... YOU'RE the one who made it so in the beginning when you claimed I was wrong.


Even colloquial theories need evidence, otherwise they're just guesses. Anyway, the fact that you're bitching in an entire paragraph about the definition of the word theory is evidence that you're the one making Semantic arguments. It's pathetic.

_________________
BlackFire2 wrote:
I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1446
Last seen at: Chicago
AuraTwilight wrote:
Literally the only other option is that Harry is trying to communicate with Cheryl because she is there in body.


That's still a lot to read into a single word, but let's say you're right. That context backs up my point. If the context in question is *Cheryl's body,* then it is only logical to assume that when Dahlia says "that person no longer exists" she is talking about *Cheryl's body.* So there's no reason at all to assume Dahlia means *Cheryl's soul.* Therefore, Dahlia's statement is not evidence at all that Cheryl's soul doesn't exist.

And besides that, Dahlia has already proven herself untrustworthy as a source of information to the gamer, and although she has no reason to lie in this case, it's very credible that she would exaggerate.

To make myself clear, what I think is actually the case is that Cheryl and Alessa have merged into one person. Which seems to be a pretty obvious interpretation. So technically Cheryl doesn't exist as a singular person anymore but part of an entity... this is what I think Dahlia means when she says "that person no longer exists," she literally means that Cheryl no longer exists as a seperate person, but Cheryl *does* in fact still exist as a part of Alessa. I think it's not a stretch at all to think that some fragment of her will remains as well.

AuraTwilight wrote:
Even colloquial theories need evidence, otherwise they're just guesses. Anyway, the fact that you're bitching in an entire paragraph about the definition of the word theory is evidence that you're the one making Semantic arguments. It's pathetic.


Aura... I would be happy to discuss things with you if you could manage to do it in a civilized manner... but again you're being condescending and rude. Have you read the discussion between me and alone in the town? I disagree strongly with him, he disagrees strongly with me, and even though he is clearly becoming frustrated with me, not once does *he* resort to childish name calling. And yet, you call me "pathetic" in your second response. That is absolutely uncalled for. If you aren't capable of having a civilized discussion with me, then simply don't try.

_________________
www.flipsidecomics.com


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)

Missing since: 12 Feb 2009
Notes left: 8017
Quote:
So Alessa is both mother and daughter of god.

Just like Virgin Mary. . .


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 29 Jun 2009
Notes left: 2301
Trauma_ wrote:
SHF wrote:
^
She isn't born from god. Alessa is the mother of god. I don't see how she is the daughter of god.
Since when is Alessa born from god? Ever?

God handed Harry a new baby so that it could have the chance to be born again. That story on the SH3 soundtrack was just a posh way of retelling the events of Silent Hill 1. "God breathed her last breah, promising to come again" (or something to that extent. The painting is talking about Alessa in her current form if i'm correct (Heather). The mother of god implies her reincarnation at the end of SH1.

So. Heather=Both the daughter and the mother of god, since Claudia is trying to birth god again (the mother), and she is also the baby that harry was given (the daughter)... Make sense now? Someone let me know if I'm wrong on this one but so far it makes sense to me.


Thank you, this makes much more sense to me now. And I appreciate the maturity of you describing it to me :)

_________________
[img]http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee419/silentfog/signature.jpg[/img]


Top
   
 

RESPECT
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 19 Jul 2003
Notes left: 19401
Last seen at: #lfk
The St. Alessa painting even proves the developer's intent with the Woman in White: Alessa is the mother of god, thus Alessa birthed god, and Alessa (Heather) is the daughter of god, thus god birthed Alessa (Heather).

Mother of god, Daughter of god.

Alessa —> god —> Alessa (Heather)

Therefore the Woman in White is god.

_________________
This post is the property of its author and is not to be used elsewhere without explicit permission from the author.

. . . AND THAT'S THAT.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Confusion about the god (spoilers)
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 29 Jun 2009
Notes left: 2301
^
Yeah, I agree, but does that also mean the Incubus is god as well?
Just the look of god changes due to the persective of different people.

So Woman in White is god
Incubus is god
Is this correct to assume?

_________________
[img]http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee419/silentfog/signature.jpg[/img]


Top
   
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 191 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 10  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: