Talk:Living Tribunal

"Usually" most powerful?

I'll probably regret asking this, but... how is an "omnipotent entity" usually the most powerful being? I can't help feeling that some explanation of how omnipotence is sometimes insufficient might be in order. -FZ 00:52, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well, at various times other characters in the Marvel Universe have also achieved omnipotence. For example, Thanos during the Infinity Gauntlet storyline. —Lowellian (talk) 09:53, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

Though in other issues the Tribunnal was able to overrule that. It depends heavily on whoever's actually writing the book. Timrollpickering 7 July 2005 19:23 (UTC)

I agree. I remember an issue where an alternate universe's Earth was corrupted so much that the Living Tribunal passed his greatest punishment: causing the Sun to go super nova. The Earth survived the explosion, surrouned by an enormous force field. As such, the Living Tribunal sealed off that universe to protect the other universes from its corruption. If he was truely omnipotent, he would have detonated the Earth, thereby restoring that universe's integrity.

AlGorup 14:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

You have to remember that in Comics everything is relevant. The Infinity Gems were enough to give the LT pause, but in the end he was able to neurtralize them. Whether or not he could defeat a user of the gems is unknowable. In "The End" Thanos again found some omnipotent source which enabled him to actually defeat the LT along with Eternity. Therefore, omnipotence in Marvel, is dependent on who the writer is. MPA 2 October 2006

Response There are relative "levels" to onmipotence; that is to say, some beings may look "omnipotent" to other observers, and sometimes even themselves (as was the case with the Beyonder), but there may be Beings above even them -and, yes, cases of laziness by the Writers and Editors at the time.

Thus, Surfer is "omnipotent" to humans, but in turn Galactus is "omnipotent" to him, and Eternity and the other Great Powers of the Universe are in turn "omnipotent" to him.

And of course, the Living Tribunal is omnipotent to them all (except for that which becomes the Heart of the Unverse, of course).

Everywhere.

Even the Beyonders. Thanos777 18:41, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I was on board until your final caveat. The "Beyonders" aren't powerful when weighed against Galactus or even, by implication, the powers you hold higher than him -- Eternity and the Living Tribunal.

I think the spirit of this question lies in defining omnipotence as an absolute term versus the relativistic approach of qualifying omnipotence as an extension of one's limited perception. (Or, just because one can't understand omnipotence within the parameters of one's mind does not weaken said omnipotence...)

Absolute omnipotence is beyond judgment and is therefore above subjective analysis.

As an easy equation, if 1 = omnipotent, and 0 = mortal, 1 will always be greater (more powerful than) 0. It will not; however, ever exceed 1. Therefore omnipotent will always counterbalance omnipotence.

Connection to Triglav?

I`m purely speculating here, but I wonder if this character was based on the Slavic deity of Triglav (mythology) Compare the Veil, and 3 faces. I`m not saying the character was based on Triglav, but there is certainly a connection, and Upon reading about Triglav, the living tribunal was the first thing that rushed into My mind.

It is possible that's the mytholigical entity the creators of LT were thinking of when they created him. Dr Archeville 19:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Citations needed

I would like to know where it has ever been implied that there was a One Above All, other than its mentioning once in an obscure issue of Gaurdians of the Galaxy? Furthermore, where has this being whome the LT represents, ever been implied to be God? Such nonsense is propagated on comicboards.com discussion boards, but no where in Marvel. MPA 2 October 2006

In some of the early 1990s Jim Starlin books, particularly Warlock and the Infinity Watch #1 and (I think) Infinity War the Tribunal was explicitly referred to as being just the representative of one who was above all this. I don't think the term "God" has been used, but that's been the implication. Timrollpickering 05:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Dan Jurgens's Thor run also included at least one reference that I can recall off the top of my head, when Odin noted that there was a being who was "above" even him, as he commited Jake Olson's soul to his care. The whole *point* of the One-Above-All is that they NEVER openly use the word "God" to refer to him, but the implication is blatant. - Chris McFeely 00:52, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually it goes back all the way to Thor Vol. 1 #330, when Thor battled The Crusader and eventually admitted the existence of "one above Odin". Luis Dantas 01:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Stranger

The Living Tribunal once possessed a fourth face, which was occupied by the Stranger, but the Stranger eventually grew disenchanted with his task and role, and chose to experience being a unique being, instead of being part of a collective.

My recollection of that Silver Surfer issue is that the fourth side of the head is a void and that the Tribunal said something like "that could have been the face of the Stranger", not that the Stranger was once part of the Tribunal. Timrollpickering 08:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Having now found the issue the Tribunnal has just explained the nature of trinity and says:

Everything, in the realms of duality, is the presence of trinity... And yet there could be even more:

I could have had another face... here behind equity on the fourth side of the stellar skull... here, where there is nothing there could have been the face of the Stranger

(Stranger: "Curse you, Trinity.")

It's vague but doesn't say to me that the Stranger was a fourth face. I'm reverting the article accordingly. Timrollpickering 14:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Digging out the original OHOTMU to prove a point....

It'll take me some time to access my Comics in another state and in storage, but the original OHOTMU clearly states that EVERY Universe has a Living Tribunal in one form or another....even the Universes of other Comic Companies.

I am posting this notice here because I added this fact to the "Living Tribunal" Article, but it was thereafter removed.

When I can cite you the specific Page of the specific Issue of the specific volume of the OHOTMU, I'll repost the addendum...and hopefully won't see it get removed.

Just a heads up, folks.

By the way, whoever you were that performed the edit, please sign your work in the future.

Thanos777 18:46, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

OHOTMU not sourced?? what the blazes is this?!?

Could SOMEBODY please tell me why the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe -OHOTMU -is not sourced in Wiki.....even though we have an article on them in Wiki?? Thanos777 00:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the possible limitations of the Living Tribunal

There is a point of contention going on about the Tribunal: namely, there is disagreement between myself and another Member, wherein I assert that the Living Tribunal cannot act before a Universe-unbalancing "crime" ahs been committed, and the other Member asserts that he has.

Could anyone provide us with specific references that settl this one way or the other?? Personally, I don't remember any instances of this, and I don;t think that when the LT does such things as offer the Stranger a place within him, or toys around with the (non-canon?) She-Hulk, counts as the being interfering in the affairs of the Universe.

Also, I don't think that it counts when one of the Cosmic Powers requests a hearing and asks the Tribunal to make a ruling.

I am about to re-intoduce a Paragraph into this Article that brings this "limitation" of the LT to light if I do not recieve specific references to the opposite.

Thanos777 03:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

She hulk is canon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.173.224.32 (talk) 21:29, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Magistrati

I don't follow the logic that was used to remove _all_ the pictures on the Magistrati. To the best of my knowledge there aren't any others anywhere else in Wikipedia, and this article is the natural place for them anyway. Luis Dantas 01:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

What or Who is the strongest???

So What is the strongest entity or thing in the Marvel Universe????

I mean i really am interested in all these entities and things but what is the strongest. Is it like a God that no one knows about or is the Heart of the Universe, or the Infinity gems or what????!!! Someone try to explain? It sounds like the Heart of the universe is, but I dont know anymore!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infinitygem2010 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The highest power is the one above all which is basically God in generic form so it can be identified with any religion if one so chooses under the one above all is the living tribunal then debatable eternity and death 65.183.214.150 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC).

Fair use rationale for Image:Silver Surfer 031 21.jpg

Image:Silver Surfer 031 21.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Latest Edit

This comment, while well meant, is unfortunately invalid:

"The Living Tribunal's power is apparently limitless, as the entity prevents the Infinity Gems from being used in unison, but previously made the statement that it was "determining if I have the power to..." "wrest the gauntlet from me" (the user of the Infinity Gauntlet finishes the sentence), initially expressing the necessity for evaluation, but then rises/apparently concludes that it would likely succeed, but states that the confrontation would likely cause multiversal destruction and should be avoided for ethical reasons."

It is contradictory, and is followed by an overly long and subjective rationale that is also out of universe. It really is unnecessary.

Regards

Asgardian (talk) 04:03, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

TheBalance stated "You are free to provide the actual quote in it's entirety" which I interpreted as doing just that and provide the exact context. The accuracy problem here is two-fold: 1) You insert that LT neutralized the gems, whereas it did not. It disrupted the link between them. They functioned fine afterwards, and the user did not resist. The last part may not be necessary to mention, but given the context that the LT had to evaluate whether or not it was powerful enough to overpower the IG, but eventually apparently reached the conclusion that it could, the power difference cannot have been considerable. This is something that must be clarified to not be misleading. I have however made another attempt to shorten it down, and would wlecome putting this minor matter to rest with keeping that. Dave (talk) 10:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Not too sure of that... with the Gauntlet being used at sufficient level to destroy/damage all of the other abstract entities, the LT seemed entirely unphased... I definitely perceived that scene differently (assuming we are talking about the same one involving Warlock and all of the abstract entities such as Eternity, Chaos, Order, etc).

I assumed he was deciding whether to act - not whether he would "win" if he did. Inotherwords, "does this warrant my intervention as a multiverse threatening situation, or should I simply decide not to act as the situation does not warrant my involvement?"

That is also based off how the LT was handled at that time... always "there" (everywhere?) and never bothers to act unless the situation is that severe. That was covered in a related (earlier) issue where he decided not to intervene (Thanos/gems I believe).

Best,

RobertMfromLI | User Talk STP2: Producer/Gaffer/Webmaster 09:39, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

The way I remember it, LT said outright that it was "gauging whether or not I have the power to..." "...wrest the gauntlet from me" (Warlock filled in), so I never see what's so unlcear about it. LT states outright that it considers the IG's full capabilities close in power, which I read literally. Nothing ambivalent or dubious about it whatsoever. Dave (talk) 09:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

The Tribunal's power exceeds that of the Gems; he is one to the Multiverse, while the Gems can be in nearly every reality. This is what was said, exactly, or, rather, thought, by Adam Warlock, at his trial: "My judge is a strange entity the others claim is a representative of a power above Eternity and myself. I find this hard to believe. I am omnipotence." After restoring the cosmic entities Warlock destroyed, with a gesture and a simple command, the Tribunal tells him that, "I represent forces that dwarf even your might. My task is to judge this reality's most pressing cosmic issues. My authority comes from on high."

[1]

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-201138.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.57.66.10 (talk) 16:35, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

The Tribunal also stated outright that it was actively evaluating whether or not it had the necessary power to wrest the gauntlet from Warlock, and eventuallu apparently reached the conclusion that it did, but stated that it would not be able to do so without the conflict destroying all of reality. If the relative power difference had been considerable, this had not been the case. Not to mention that the entire premise of the Infinity Gauntlet was that the original creator/god of the MU commited suicide which "created all of reality in all its myriad forms" along with the gems as the remnants of the entity. Hence, your quote is highly selective and taken out of context. Dave (talk) 15:30, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Its not out of context, its that writers have contradicted one another. And Im pretty sure that the suicide creation thing has been dropped from cannon. 65.183.214.150 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:23, 3 July 2011 (UTC).

Infinity Gauntlet Series

This article states that The Living Tribunal "had a significant role in the limited series Infinity Gauntlet #1-6". While Living Tribunal DOES appear in other stories involving the Infinity Gauntlet, it does not appear at any point in the original 6 issue series, so unless someone feels otherwise, I am going to edit this out.Spman (talk) 03:44, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

El ganado poseido Holandes y Suizo

recuerda hermano mandar a los padrotes para el cruce en minería y heredó hay una familia que logro prioridad junto con una Due si quieres algún adviso me meas cuánto es no me gusta el debo 2803:2D60:1105:117E:E06B:F7BE:DA80:27BE (talk) 19:49, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

carne de res UI

1,000.000 toneladas para Mongolia 28101123112410231124102 $4 billions dollars Due Alt Due Adie Airpark EEUU buendad cohibido cooperación Mongolia hay que ir a dejarlo a su frigorífico es un Due 2803:2D60:1105:117E:7587:4206:7253:B394 (talk) 21:33, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Mamá Ena Nea

Es un Ie 2803:2D60:1105:117E:201D:B4B1:3F9C:6E1 (talk) 19:15, 28 November 2023 (UTC)