I didnt say there were flaws in your logic. You /must/ admit the possibility of flaws in your logic though... unless you are in denial or are superhuman.

1 - Foreshadowing can only be used as evidence "after the fact". Sure - some foreshadowing is blatantly obvious. Others not. You dont know for sure until the foreshadow is proven as such. You are relying on a lot of foreshadowing to get from point A to B. Then B to F. Then F to M. Then M to Z. Foreshadows that havent been proven as foreshadows yet.

2 - A lot of characters from the books are based of off familiar ledgends, myths or religious ideas. The "silver" assumption though... you lay it out as fact that this idea parallels Jesus and Judas. This argument is like saying "A peach is a fruit. Therefore a cookie is an animal." Well, not quite that durastic but this is also a falacy of logic.

I was simply stating that I am not on board but would like to see a list, if you're keeping one, of the "some details that are not so clear" that you mentioned above.