I wanted to make a comment on the Terminator metaphor.

I posted a paragraph on that before and wanted to add to that post.

But basically the Terminator is the unfeeling unthinking machine that is following orders. It fits supernatural metaphor. Then Reese is supernatural side that is the pure servant that helps and protects.

It goes off the rails a bit because Reese has a child with Sara in that movie.

And that brings up the whole topic of Nephilim or Giants, offspring of angels.

That concept I think is a metaphor, in spiritual a 'child' is an idea or a way to think on something. So the 'giants' were groups of people that had influenced or taught some spiritual bad. Also why the comment son of evil is used often in writings.

So the Giants are groups of people imbued with some bad spiritual ideas. The thing is, making it interesting, is every religion has many concepts of better ideas given to people by better spiritual side.

So that completely changes the reason from the flood being the giving of thought concepts, to the giving of bad thought concepts. Basically it is a fascinating way to look at it if you think of the sharing of a thought concept as the idea of an angel having a 'child' not a literal biological thing.

From there the phrases like children of God used in many religion, speaking of everyone's better parts makes more sense. And the concepts of forgiveness knowing everyone has some good and some bad makes sense.

But anyways, in Terminator it shows that concept where the pure servant Reese gave Sara the child of the resistance, which was the idea that something needs to be corrected. So it is the story of Sara's awakening, or more likely when the writer of that story realized that the world needed to change and get better. And he was given an idea of how he could help with that and many people would see that in his writings, and think on concept of thought and feeling, even if life is tough like Reese, or thoughts of drone machine type actions.




Side note, within that metaphor everyone has both good and bad, so saying someone has some flaw, or son of some bad, is mostly people smearing or judging and not seeing the good. And sometimes people say they are some son of good to defend themselves, instead of asking if there actions match that same spirit. I remember text about people saying they were the sons of Abraham, that is how I see that concept, where it is about how someone learns, and how they express that spirit in their lives that makes the comment of 'spiritual sons'. Which makes alot of sense why it is not about blood lines.

It just makes sense.


And if you think my comments on metaphor are nuts, then you have to think and feel on it. Do my comments make much more sense about the meaning of the text. And if they do then calling me nuts, means you would have to call those writers nuts for being able to talk about those topics in that way.

The exact effect that occurs when an 'idea' or 'thought concept' gets into a story is when it is part of the feeling of a writer, and from that makes its way into the subtext of a story, but many other ideas of a person, like wanting a story to be interesting and fit into some social structure puts alot of other stuff around that concept. If you see past those blockers you can see some basic concept in a story.

Terminator movie could be told. Person wrongly 'targeted', gets help, learns how to help everyone fight those things targeting people. And that happens to many people, and is in many stories.



Still don't like that metaphor?
That explains how her son, the idea she was given, was able to send someone back to help people. Since it is part of the same thing.


The writer was sending the message back after he had gone through an experience, before you had. It was from the future, by is 'age' in experience. The time machine was him writing that movie, and not in temporal years, but in relative learning age.



This thought is reply to some article posted on grandfather paradox posted a few days ago.

So the idea created by Reese John Conners, sent Reese back, could even be someone not leaving the people behind. Great thought in that. Making the movie Reese, and the writer John Conners. But still part of the same concept, allowing for self creation, since both concepts are actually the same spirit.

It is also the opposite of the Sith Lord training of killing your parents in a few stories, and instead is saving your parents.


Side note, if some writer guy has many opinions on different topics in life, everyone has some good and some bad, and the writer could be the muse that is also a little part of him, if he didn't realize that concept.

There is a huge problem to think if someone of some group writes something, then the good stuff in it came from them and defines them as the source. That is way simplistic, and is used to then back the bad stuff they think in life. Some guy writes a story, has a small hidden great message, and some other stuff, could be same with there life. So someone that writes something, that does not mean all there other views are correct. Each comment has its own credibility.

So if I make a comment that does not make all my comments correct. And if some right winger makes a movie that does not mean his ideas are correct, it could be that he was just in a place to get that thought out, and that might not even be for best reasons, so the bottom gave the top person that thought to get it out, the idea of the bottom watching the top.


So when I say writer, it might not be the actual writer but the muse.