From the cover of the current issue of The Economist - Why? What are they signalling?
Is the world going to end soon - with the annihilation of life, maybe the planet itself?
Some people think so; maybe including The Economist, who are the house-magazine of the Global Establishment (who are, I think we agree, already and increasingly demonically-controlled).
What could possibly count as 'evidence' for such an assertion? Well, there isn't any at all - not what we would usually call evidence; i.e. based on observation, measurements, predictive models etc.
How could we ever have 'scientific' evidence to predict an unprecedented, one-off event (assuming the annihilation of earth is indeed one-off, assuming the situation of earth is unique)? If our prediction was an extrapolation of what we already know, then this isn't much; and predictive models only include what are put-into-them, only include the assumptions; they can only predict what is predicted...
How could The Economist know, or at least think it knows, that this is a possibility worth mentioning, or that something is about to happen? Well, only by some kind of 'supernatural' knowledge - by drawing upon the knowledge of spiritual beings, perhaps. They might know that something was going to happen (e.g. that it was planned, or that the causal factors were already operating), or they might strongly suspect it, anyway.
How could You know what was coming, if anything? Perhaps by prayer, from the guidance of the Holy Ghost. But if you did know by such means; then you could not convince other people, and would be unwise even to try.
Each person would need to discover for himself. And that would mean asking, which would mean at least enetrtaining the possibility. And this is exactly what The Economist is doing.
So - since the visible representatives of Satanic evil are currently considering this possibility, maybe you ought to be considering it too?
There's always been speculation that The Economist knows things we don't. At the end of each year they put out a special 'looking forward to the next year' edition, the covers of which - they often have the same crowded galley of people in the Sgt. Pepper's style - have been suggested to flag up events before they happen. I've always felt there was something deeply sinister about The Economist. It wouldn't surprise me at all if this is what they're doing. 'We told you firtst,' etc. 'Don't say you weren't warned. We were fair to you.' The whatever's scheduled to happen can happen. I didn't pick up on any chit chat about their 2020 cover by the way. Seems unlike them to miss an opportunity like this!
ReplyDelete"So - since the visible representatives of Satanic evil are currently considering this possibility, maybe you ought to be considering it too?"
ReplyDeleteWell, no. Not for that reason, anyway. Isn't that playing their game? Would that not mean I should consider whether sexual promiscuity is a good thing? Or that men can turn into women if they feel like it and all other such nonsense they like to spout?
This is an important topic. I have dreamt about the world ending (a solar plume like that one in the frame on the wall) but I am not being indicated that the world is going to end, in the short run.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I believe it will change.. and a lot, over the next few years. And this change is top-down (Godly), not due to material cause and effect chains. This might be behind the "sensations" of cataclysm which all those spiritually attuned (to either side) are sensing.
@TYM - We need to recognise that there are always a limitless number of explanations (hypotheses) for any observation; so there is never any unambiguous evidence about anything. The fact that I point out this cover, is Not *my* reason for mentioning this topic - I don't look at The Economist very often; there can be months or years in-between visits.
ReplyDeleteNonetheless, in context of the extraordinary and obvious 'acute' things going on in the world at present; and the very different headlines in the main stream media - I found the subject matter of this Economist cover quite... surprising. Therefore possibly significant.
Not least because I have been actively thinking about such things for more than two months ago;during which time I watched a very good 2009 Alex Proyas movie called Knowing (starring Nicolas Cage) - the scenerio of which would exactly fit with the furthest right-hand picture on the wall behind the family in The Economist picture.
@John - Terry Boardman often says that we should pay special attention to The Economist, above all other newspapers. I don't really follow this advice myself, but Terry has good reasons for saying this.
ReplyDeleteOf course, reading any medium to uncover The Truth requires a fair bit of decoding (one can't always take things at face value, and the intended audience will not do so) at which I am not necessarily expert! Let's just say, when The Economist gives prominence to a particular story, there will be A Reason; and that reason will be to do with the perspective and interests of the Global Establishment.
BTW: From the snippet available without subscription, the article linked to the cover picture Seems to be about how the Global Establishment can keep control over the masses when a catastrophe hits the earth and chaos ensues - i.e. that's how it seems to me, but of course it isn't For me.
@Gary - As a thought experiment, let's suppose the world was indeed going to end soon by some kind of solar event, as in your dream, the Knowing movie (2009), and the Economist picture.
ReplyDeleteThis would not be known about, until 'the last minute', by scientists; because they (essentially, apart from 11 year sunspot cycles) cannot predict the sun.
So, if it Was going to happen, and science is useless; how might you or I get to know about it?
How might such warnings come? Maybe by visionary dreams such as yours, or waking visions? By some kind of valid system of divination? Maybe by Just Knowing intutively - by the guidance of the Holy Ghost? But it would have to be something working at an individual level, and it would have to be 'supernaturally' conveyed.
Therefore, however the information was communicated to you or me, it would be easy to deny or explain-away such warnings because it would be subjective; the information would Not be confirmed by science, nor anything else 'objective'.
We would then be in the situation of 'knowing' that the end was soon - but not being sure about it (because we would doubt our own interpretation of the warning, and doubt the validity of our own feelings), and not being able to persuade anybody else.
It would only be after it happened, or did not happen, that we would be sure; and by then it would be too late.
'Too late' for what? Well, too late to live in the light of the fact that (this time) 'the end really is nigh'; whatever that might mean for each individual person.
The Economist thinks it knows everything. That's why I stopped reading it decades ago.
ReplyDeleteThat makes sense. Which is precisely why it ought to be a fundamental goal, to live as though even if the end of the world were to come in the next 10 minutes, you would be in peace.
ReplyDeleteIdeally, we should aim to be living daily (in thought, action and belief) in such a way that even if you (or your loved ones) were going to die tomorrow, in two minutes, or in 60 years' time, you wouldn´t feel "regret" or the wish to have "done things differently".
PS The above presupposes we are talking about Christians.
@d - Agreed. It takes smugness to a cosmic level.
ReplyDelete@G - True, but easier said than done.
For example, a lot of what we do is 'planning' and 'investing' for (sometimes vague) future benefit - and quite of bit of our future orientation is at the cost of the spiritual here and now.
If someone Really believed in a fairly imminent extinction, he would not tolerate the level of meaninglessness and distraction (filling in forms, attending long soul-crushing meetings, sitting in traffic jams etc) that is the norm for so many people, so much of the time.
Maybe, also, we would (as happened in the Knowing movie) also try to make sure we were with our loved ones (or in easy reach) when the end came; not geographically dispersed from them.
The solar flare is the largest and most eye drawing picture. I think that's what they're suggesting.
ReplyDeleteMy intuition is that there will be a sign from God in the Heavens. The media will warn everyone to stay inside or at home and not look up because it is too dangerous, but those who disobey will have some sort of strong revelation or experience. It wont be a brief event, but somewhat extended and experienced globally. Those who reject it will have to do so very purposefully.
The most sinister of the wall hangings is the pig.
ReplyDelete@Mr A - That's an interesting perspective, which is well worth considering -- in case some similar situaion arises, it is useful to have thought about it in advance.
ReplyDeleteMatthew T:
ReplyDeleteCan you explain why the pig is most sinister?
Does anyone else have thoughts on that idea? Bruce?
@MT - My main idea is that Not every thing has symbolic meaning.
ReplyDeleteThe point is, it's creepy because none of us even know what it means. Quelle horrwur!
ReplyDeleteThe pig brought to mind Orwell's Animal Farm for me. A literary situation they're striving for?
ReplyDeleteOne of the bird "decorations" is detached from the wall and dive-bombing toward the father. Pig and birds seem to imply a revolt of nature or sources of food.
I don't think it is healthy to spend *too much* time decoding demonic symbolism - once one has recognised that it is going-on.
ReplyDeleteThat is one of the snares laid for us.
So - comments are closed.
The pig head may represent the pig head from Lord of the Flies symbolizing worship at the altar of an uncaring god who through silence blesses animalistic killing.
ReplyDelete