top of page
Search
  • Writer's picture738

Προφητεία (85)



You’ve gone completely mad again, mate, because the Union Jack is not Celtic—let alone is it from “Atlantis” or “Hyperborea”—because it was only adopted in 1707 and only goes back to 1606 at most; so, once again, your schizoid conspiracy theories and unscientific and irrational nonsense have been disproved.


Well, yes, I agree that in literal terms the Union Jack can only be traced to 1606 and was only adopted in 1707—and in its current form, with the St. Patrick’s cross, is even more recent than that. But you must remember Dante’s four means by which to read a text: the literal, the allegoric, the moral, and the anagogic.


So, yes, in literal terms the Union Jack only dates back to 1707—but, for example, in the allegorical sense the symbol was found on the shield of a kneeling figure in Finisterre; and that Celtic figure with its 8 rays was analogous to Britannia or Albion—she kneels or sits with her shield, surrounded by lions. And that allegorical symbol was found in a cave filled with graffiti and sacred stones that related to the Druids and Atlantis.


You see, to think magically, to think religiously, we don’t think in terms of cause-and-effect—so the Union Jack today could as well have “caused” those symbols in the cave, or those symbols could have “caused”, after a gap, the Union Jack to appear.


To grasp how this functions, consider that we do not know where our ideas come from. Yes we do—they come from the brain; we can see it on an MRI scan, different areas of the brain light up and that’s how a thought happens; and you can’t have thought of a Union Jack as a symbol from Atlantis in 1707 if you’ve never seen one before. Yet, as many have noted, the MRI scan does not show you the thought—let alone how the thought comes to be. It shows you the areas of the brain that light up when you have a thought—and, per the old chestnut, “correlation is not causation”.


Blood moves to that part of the brain, electrical activity is detected—did that “cause the thought”? Certainly, no thoughts without these biological activities—but the activites are not the thought. You cannot cut up open a brain and “show me the thought”.


It’s when the neurones activate in a certain sequence. It’s the same—and perhaps you can predict that such sequences pertain to particular thoughts, perhaps you can stimulate thought about an orange when you put in certain stimuli; but not “the orange-as-itself” (in other words, you provoke “an orange” but not the quality of the orange; and that particularity within the orange has considerable significance).


So, yes, from a purely materialistic and literal take on the Union Jack the flag was adopted in 1707 and first used in 1606. It has no connection to the Celts, the Druids, to Atlantis—it is not related to a sacred precinct from the Temple of Poseidon in the central Atlantean city; it is not, in its anagogic sense (that which symbolically points to something higher), a symbol for the initiatory centre and Mount Meru. How could it be? These events are separated in time, the minds of the men who developed the flag had no such conception—and Atlantis doesn’t even exist (or, we should say, we have no evidence for its existence).


Yet you still don’t know where your thoughts come from—from another realm, I suggest. The Jungians would say it’s the archetypes, in the collective unconscious—in the blood (yet not seen under any microscope). Others would say that your thoughts come from straight out daemonic activity—rythmic patterns beamed into the brain from another dimension. Meanwhile, the sceptic says, It’s perfectly easy to see they just decided to run all the national flags for the countries together—that’s why they made the Union Jack.


But, of course, there were so many other combinations they could have gone for—so many other elements of heraldry that could have been used; and used for good reasons, it could have been said that the flag put the Scottish flag at a disadvantage, being behind the English flag—and so on. And yet they settled on a flag that just so happened to coincide with the Celtic-Atlantean inscriptions in a Druidic cave at “land’s end” (the French version).


To detect the significance you have to think about the topic in terms that are synchronistic and Dantean—in other words, you have to inject a particular quality into events; and that is how you will see that you are surrounded by signs, portents, and miracles—just as Nigel Farage was delivered from a terrible plane crash so he could save Britain with Brexit. This was the hand of Providence—just as it was providential that at the close of the cycle, when the circle squares, that Britain would adopt the “Druidic square” as a national flag.


Surely it could be no coincidence that this powerful flag was planted in so many countries around the world—and still forms a part of many national flags down to this day? Was this not the power of “justice” and “equilibrium” so instantiated in the 8 sacred rays that emanate from the flag? Do not the regnant demonic forces do everything they can to break up this United Kingdom? Scotland must leave, Northern Ireland must return to the republic—even Cornwall must leave…


I detect a Satanic plot to break up the power of this Hyperborean symbol—to dissolve its powerful influence for justice and equilibrium. It is the desire to conduct a national “analysis”—and that means, in literal terms, to untie the symbols. The flag must be dissolved, the Hyperborean power ebb away…The symbol means “with throw”, it unites—just as the Union Jack represents the United Kingdom, it is the quintessence of a symbol and hence the left wants to dissolve it.

117 views

Recent Posts

See All

Dream (VII)

I walk up a steep mountain path, very rocky, and eventually I come to the top—at the top I see two trees filled with blossoms, perhaps cherry blossoms, and the blossoms fall to the ground. I think, “C

Runic power

Yesterday, I posted the Gar rune to X as a video—surrounded by a playing card triangle. The video I uploaded spontaneously changed to the unedited version—and, even now, it refuses to play properly (o

Gods and men

There was once a man who was Odin—just like, in more recent times, there were men called Jesus, Muhammad, and Buddha. The latter three, being better known to us, are clearly men—they face the dilemmas

Comentarios


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page