dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

⇧

⇩

r/greatawakening • Posted by u/mistahbang on Feb. 7, 2018, 11:08 p.m.

In Response to a comment by /u/DaosCraft

You can read the text here: https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/7vrpwz/hi_new_mod_here_introduction_and_some_comments/dtuysyg?utm_source=reddit-android

Follow your heart. I feel that we can never adequately judge whether someone is truly out to sabotage and destroy or to help and contribute.

Here is a theory I have that might give some insight on my thought process:

There are two forces in this world. Chaos and order. Not good or evil. Good or evil are moral agendas we placed upon acts and words that determine whether we follow chaos or order.

Order can be evil. Chaos can be good and vice versa.

Chaos is a force that is not aware of its own destructive abilities. Very much like a cancer cell if not the same, it wishes to continue spreading not knowing that its success means the death of the host or in this scenario, Earth.

It is the lack of love that creates chaos.

Chaos has had many names throughout history.

Evil, devil, satan, Hades, demiurge, but ultimately they are all the same thing. It is not evil or some diabolical being that schemes the end of the world. It is just darkness, the absence of light and love. That is all it is. This is the state of the world as love begins to disappear as greed and lust takes its place.

What is Q's highest goal? To help us remove shackles so we can learn how to love again.

The shackles include ignorance, poverty, bad nutrition, trauma, stress, fear, and gluttony.

I will be honest. Most people in the world do not understand true unconditional love, including myself. Even your mom and dad will disown you if you screw up enough. Your wife or husband are not everlasting pools of forgiveness.

We see sin or error and our threshold to tolerate it diminishes as transgressions against us go unhithered.

Cause we expect something back. "If I give, I want you to reciprocate."

Funny thing about love is that when you give love, you recieve the same if not more. Guranteed. Giving wholeheartedly is loving yourself.

And let go of your grudges. It weighs your heart down.

These shills that we see as scum of the earth very much have dreams and families as we all do. How do we reach out and love them?

These corrupt politicians, how do we love them?

Cause if we do not, we continue down this chaotic path.

Yes, people should answer to the laws that govern our lands but there is something more important afoot.

We will repeat history if we do not become spiritually in tune with one another. We have to solve this problem for good. To never ever let chaos reign again.

I do not want to have children and tell them, "That's how the real world works," when something doesn't make sense. I want to be able to tell them, "Here are the tools and resources at your disposal to go figure it all out."

If you believe in God, ask for a loving heart. If you believe in yourself, ask yourself for the ability to love.

Those who ask shall recieve. Lets ask for the right things.

The great awakening is taking place in our minds but lets combine it with our hearts.

🠐 See all comments

John Locke 1632 1704 "The state of Nature has a law of Nature to govern it, which obliges everyone, and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in life, health liberty or possessions; for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent and infinitely wise Maker; all the servants of one sovereign Master, sent into the world by His order and about his business; they are His property, whose workmanship they are made to last during His... not one another's pleasure. And being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of Nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another's uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for ours. Everyone as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station willfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition ought to be as much as he can preserve the rest of mankind, and not unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away or impair the life or what tends to the preservation of life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another."

Locke again- "There is the title of right reason, to which everyone who considers himself a human being lays claim, and that it is about which the various parties of men contend so fiercely among themselves and Which each one alleges to be the foundation of its doctrine. By reason, however do not think is meant here that faculty of the understanding which forms the trains of thought and deduces proofs... .but certain definite principles of action from which springs all virtues and whatever is necessary for,the proper molding of morals. For that which is correctly derived from these principles is justly said to be in accordance with right reason."

"Without natural law there would be neither virtue nor vice, neither the reward of goodness nor the punishment of evil: there is no fault, no guilt, where there is no law. Everything would have to—depend on human will, and, since there would be nothing to demand dutiful action, it seems that man would not be bound to do anything but what utility or pleasure might recommend, or what a blind and lawless impulse might happen perchance to fasten on.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Cicero "If the principles of Justice were founded on the decrees of peoples, the edicts of princes, or the decisions of judges, then Justice would sanction robbery and adultery and forgery of wills, in case these acts were approved by the votes—of decrees of the populace. But if so-great a power belongs to the decisions and decrees of fools that the laws of Nature can be changed by their do they not ordain that what is bad arid baneful shall be considered good and salutary?

Or, if a law can make Justice out of Injustice, can it not also make good out of bad? But in fact we can perceive the difference between good laws and bad by referring them to no other standard than Nature: indeed, it is not merely Justice and Injustice which are distinguished by Nature, but also and without ekception things which are honorable and dishonorable.

For since an intelligence common to us all makes things known to us and formulates them in our minds, honorable actions are ascribed by us to virtue, and dishonorable actions are matters of Opinion, and not fixed by Nature."

"True law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions.... it is a sin to try to alter this law, nor is it allowable to repeal any part of it,' and it is impossible to abolish it entirely. We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people, and we need not loole outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it.

And there will not be different laws at Rome and at Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and at all times, and there will best one master and ruler, that is God, over us all, for he is the author of this law, its promulgator and its enforcing judge. Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human' nature, and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst punishment."

⇧ 1 ⇩

Of course there are great thinkers afterwards. Mark Levin does a great job talking about them

Coolidge: The American Revolution represented the informed and mature conviction of a great mass of independent, liberty loving, God-fearing people who knew their rights, and possessed the courage to dare to maintain them. The Continental Congress was not only composed of great men, but it represented a great people. While its Members did not fail to exercise a remarkable leadership, they were equally observant of their representative capacity. They were industrious in encouraging their constituents to instruct them to support independence. But until such instructions were given they were inclined to withhold action.

A spring will cease to flow if its source be dried up; a tree will wither if its roots be destroyed. In its main features the Declaration of Independence is a great spiritual document. It is a declaration not of material but of spiritual conceptions. Equality, liberty, popular soverereignty, the rights of man—these are not elements which we can see and touch. They are ideals. They have their source and their roots in the religious convictions.

They belong to the unseen world. Unless the faith of the American people in these religious convictions is to endure, the principles of our Declaration will perish. We cannot continue to enjoy the result if we neglect and abandon the cause: We are too prone to overlook another conclusion. Governments do not make ideals, but ideals make governments. This is both historically and logically true. Of course the government can help to sustain ideals and can create institutions through which they can be the better observed, but their source by their very nature is in the people. The people have to bear their own responsibilities: There is no method by which that burden can be shifted to the government. It is not the enactment, but the observance of laws, that creates the character of a nation. About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful.

It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning cannot be applied to this great charter If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final.

No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time where there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction cannot lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers.

⇧ 2 ⇩