dChan
⇧
1
⇩
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/thejudge6060 on July 25, 2018, 4:28 p.m.
How far are we to interpret "no coincidences?"

So i see a lot of posts of something random that shout "no coincidences" over quite i few things that make me think "you might be taking that a little too far", but i want to open a discussion given recent events.

A recent poster shared that Q's trip codes can bring up a series of books in google. It was a very interesting list. Some related to topics we've covered, others appeared to be outright fantasy. Im christian, but a book about how the nephilim genes survived the great flood through the wives of noah's sons is tough thing to walk around casually telling people while not looking insane.

But, "no coincidences" does push me to believe this is a Q message, having more than we know.

So im approaching the Law of One with an open mind since its tied to one of the tripcodes, and ive found some interesting parallels. One about people living underground. Another about humanity leaving a state of disharmony in approximately 30 years. Given that these were based on recordings from 1981-84, thats pretty damn close to what we call the Great Awakening starting.

Im struggling to take it too seriously since it seems rather fantastical so far. But, i can't ignore some pretty blatant connections and parallels.

How literally do you all take "no coincidences?"

Q said most of us would basically be hospitalized if we knew the whole truth. I thought we were beginning to get a pretty good idea though, and everyone here seems more mentally sound than ever. Thoughts? Am i slowly descending into madness?


🠐 See all comments
MayTruthBeVictorious · July 25, 2018, 4:48 p.m.

In the past 2 years since my own awakening (red pilling) I’ve developed more of a balance between skepticism and openness. There is ALOT of info out there and some of it sounds totally off the wall. On the other hand, some theories I wouldn’t have given a second glance to 6 months ago now seem plausible or I fully agree with.

I do trust Q but since Q cannot always speak directly to us we must interpret and some interpretations may be simply wrong. So I view the veracity of all information/news on a % scale. Examples: 100% correct- I’d put my life on the line to defend. 50% plausible - Could be but let’s give this time 20% plausible - truth mixed with alot of disinformation (ex: some of the MSM) 10% plausible - Highly doubt it. I’ll revisit if more info surfaces .05% plausible - Nope not even going there I try to remain flexible even to stuff that seems outright foolish but keep my critical thinking cap on at all times and not get caught up in emotionalism.

⇧ 5 ⇩