>>14879657 (lb)

>"Satan" is just God when He's drunk"?

That depends on what you want to believe.

>>14879661 (lb)

That's not what my post says, though. I personally think the biggest issue is with how people view (internalize vs externalize) God/Satan. It's become very apparent, though, that those that are willing to embrace worshiping something that even their own tools (religion) say will ultimately perish in the end, are as sharp as a puddle of piss water.

>>14879638 (lb)

Mmm Hmm. Some need iconography for adherence to principles that keep the foundations of civilization firmly in pace. When these institutions are subverted, what happens to civilization? What if they were made that way from the outset? From one system of control to the next, to the next, etc. Wouldn't a real awakening shatter conditioning that separates humanity from its true God-given potential and seek to expose institutions of trust for the nefarious ones they really are? Ever wonder just how tongue-in-cheek it must be for some of the big names to get on a kick about "the cloth" while ranting on twitter?

People drop hints all over the place, but some crumbs are very small, or perhaps wear a specific camouflage that most eyes aren't able to pick up on.

Dark to Light:

Good v Evil

Freedom v Communism

God v Satan

Where is psychological warfare fought?

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

We're called to rally around an ideology (or set of ideologies) that are unifying. When people finally wake to the fact their icons have been subverted, there's going to need to be a safety net to keep people from rejecting truth. Why do you think Papi is so focused on being so positive and loving day in and day out over twitter? We're really going to need to be there for our fellow man/woman/child.

>>14879868

>but sex was not intended to be practiced like animals.

Meh… I don't disagree with you in as much as it pertains to the interest of the continuance and preservation of a cooperative society. However, I am very much a dolphin fan, and given their level of intellect, I'm inclined to say there's a distinct difference between living a life of fornication and carefree debauchery, and people giving each other the chance to take a test drive before putting their name on the dotted line for a long term commitment to a particular make/model.

God isn't going to sentence society to eternal of hellfire and damnation because a few single adults choose to knowingly engage in the occasional tryst, and quite frankly, it's nobody else's fucking business. It's when we prioritize eclectic romantic encounters over solid and meaningful long-term relationships is when things start to go downhill for society and the individual (whether they realize it at the time or not). Does that make sense?

The point I was trying to make, though, is perhaps taking such a literal view of the "Good Book" might continue causing some or a great amount of consternation as this awakening proceeds forward.

>>14879954

The world's fastest implementers always test in production. It's like banging strippers without condoms or driving as fast as possible through the ATL during Freaknik without a gun. Yeah, it's risky, but you're bound to have a shit load of fun for at least a minute or two.

>>14879913

Oh you know they are.

>>14879981

>Neo-feudalism is sooooo much more better than neo-colonial capitalism

It's always about control. Always.

>>14880000

>>14880044

Ob-stacles are merely a projection of one's own insecurities.

>>14880244

>>14880284

Everyone forgets that Assange had a movie made, too. Q was quiet as possible outcomes re: Assange, and even reminded anons that "our enemies are watching this board, too". With Snowden, Q seemed to have a dialogue where Snowden was leveraging information to sell to Russia, took over JPB's position at the 4am roundtable, and was warned repeatedly the he was just an expendable asset at some point. Also seemed to offer Snowden at choice near the end:

As far as Assange, he was rubbing elbows with celebs, and was even accused of being buddy buddy with Soros. We'll figure out his real role in all this in due time. Did WL ever expose pedophilia in the DS? HRC sure wanted him dead. Many Americans also seem to forget that USA was essentially the iron golem for the DS (Babylon) system of the Old Guard. That's a painful one to admit, but as Q put it "… if certain intel is released it would cause a WW/mass suffering." I wonder if Assange had his hand on such intel. I wonder if Assange is just the real wild card in this whole thing that could wreck all the progress Q has made, and was simultaneously irritating to the DS. I also wonder just how much funding Soros had invested in WL through his various funds/outfits.

>>14880431

True. He did denounce the film.

>>14880434

For whatever reason, we don't know the fullness of his role just yet. I've often said that we'll know we're near the end of this shit show when he's able to speak publicly about what he knows. As far as his treatment, we don't know what all's real or fake. Just what we're told to believe/fed.

>>14880459

>PREPARING FOR LIFT OFF!!

40k feet, ILS approach, preparing for liftoff… You guys are making my head spin.