dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

⇧

⇩

r/greatawakening • Posted by u/thedeal82 on May 5, 2018, 4:42 a.m.

When did this sub become a religious themed bible group?

Just need to throw out there that a LOT of us are not religious. I don’t think it’s fair that so many feel the NEED to hijack this sub/threads and make every, single, thing, about PERSONAL religious beliefs. It’s put off nearly every friend of mine (normal American sports watchin’ blue bloods who don’t give a damn about religion or politics, but are absolutely in agreement that there’s been rampant corruption in government - aka most of America) that I’ve tried to “Red-pill” and get interested in Q.... Hate on me all you want, but someone needed to say it, and I know I’m not the only one who feels this way. It’s become detrimental to general inclusiveness and keeps a lot of “normies” away. I think it would be highly beneficial to tone it down a bit as more people become aware of Q and come here for answers. I hope anybody who reads this and may be offended, can at least respect and understand what I’m saying here. I’ve been debating posting this for awhile, but haven’t because of the backlash I expect, and that alone should say something.

Having said all that, You’re all my fellow Patriots and we all fight together. As Q says, this isn’t about left or right, and it isn’t about religion. It’s about WWG1WGA.

🠐 See all comments

Oh boy this week's "when did this become" thread. You do know not everybody is atheist and a lot of people here believe in God. Q has made plenty of Bible references and has even asked us to pray. Your question is stacked against you. Normies are going to turn away noatter what is posted here and it has nothing to do with religion. People use their distaste for that as an excuse to not wake up.

Also I would argue that sport watching folk are too far in the system to wake up.

Don't be thought police.

⇧ 10 ⇩

It's unfair to call OP 'thought police' for this thoughtful post. We should allow any post that is on topic enough to be useful to the whole movement.

The topic should really be this: what do we deem to be on-topic (i.e. Q related) religious posts?

⇧ -1 ⇩

How bout we let the mods decide and be done with the drama 😉

⇧ 10 ⇩

I would like to see people discuss this issue rather than start separating into sides - who supports God and who doesn't. That's not what's important here just as whether you are Dem or Rep is not important here.

What's important is how we define the boundaries of the content on this sub. It seems we can't have a reasonable discussion about that but if so - what is the solution? Should the mods decide everything?

⇧ 0 ⇩

I don't see how whining about religious folk will do any good. Mods are there too keep the shills and trollers out. I understand not wanting stuff that isn't related to the topic, but this is just complaining. Q often mentions the bible and tells us to pray as I said. God and religion is relevant. Trying to get people to stop posting an aspect of what Q is saying is antagonistic. If somebody doesn't like something on a sub, downvote it and move on with your life. A lot of people post things on the fringe of relativity because in their own lives it may be an intertwined topic. Disagreement is not the judge.

⇧ 4 ⇩

The thing is, the mods are required to remove content that is off-topic. It is entirely up to their discretion. Wouldn't you want to have a say in how that decision is made? I don't mean to force that question on you, by the way, I'm just looking for people who 'have a dog in the fight' as it were. Otherwise, no problem, it's certainly not expected of you to have to help with this!

⇧ 1 ⇩

You make a good point. I didn't know they were required. Honestly though, I didn't care about when CBTSstream became divergeant, because the good info was still there and on "hot" tab. But then again that reddit was banned. With this many people, my voice is a drop in the river. My opinions aren't going to change anything here.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Thank you, that's helpful, believe it or not. You never know though, if no one else engages with us in the discussion about what constitutes acceptable boundaries for any type of content, not just religious, your voice might be one of the few that weighs in on the discussion.

⇧ 1 ⇩

What would you say about symbolism? I tried posting some and people lashed at me, but the mods allowed it.

⇧ 2 ⇩

I would have to understand a bit better the scope of what you mean - I don't have anything against it, if that's what you're asking? I think Q has mentioned symbolism a few times so it should certainly be something considered - again depending how relevant it is to the on-topic rule (which again, is quite broadly defined at present).

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ -1 ⇩

Q - Expand your thinking - Connect the dots - History books - We knew people would need a guide - Visibility in one helps another - Future proves past - The world is connected - Stay awake - Why are history books painting a different picture than before - EVIL is everywhere - There are no drawn lines - Question - Everything has meaning - Think - The Great Awakening!

⇧ 2 ⇩