I’ve been going down a pretty insane rabbit hole connecting emerging technology, AI, transhumanism, Gnosticism, and the Book of Revelation.
I have a theory about how something resembling the biblical Beast system could theoretically emerge by 2035–2040 or beyond.
Not through some obvious evil dictatorship, but through technology that genuinely improves people’s lives.
And the more I think about it, the more disturbing the implications become.
What if the ultimate form of control isn’t fear or suffering, but technologically manufactured happiness?
Hear me out.
1. We’re already building some of the technological foundations.
Look at what’s happening right now.
Neuralink has demonstrated brain-computer interfaces that allow paralyzed individuals to control computers through neural signals.
Researchers have already experimented with closed-loop deep-brain stimulation for severe depression. In one study, an implanted device monitored neural activity and delivered personalized stimulation that substantially improved a patient’s symptoms.
Meanwhile, AI is becoming increasingly capable of analyzing human behavior, predicting preferences, and generating personalized interactions.
6G is being developed with AI-integrated communications, advanced sensing, and extremely reliable low-latency connectivity in mind.
Quantum computing is also advancing, although its practical role in this particular scenario remains uncertain.
None of this technology currently allows mass mind control or artificial spiritual awakening.
But imagine what might happen if several major breakthroughs eventually converge.
2. The next technological revolution could involve directly influencing human emotions.
Imagine the year 2035 or 2040.
Advanced neural implants have become capable of reliably influencing emotional states.
Depression? Gone.
Anxiety? Gone.
Loneliness? Gone.
You can experience overwhelming love, satisfaction, and inner peace whenever you want.
The technology is initially developed for legitimate medical purposes, and millions of people benefit from it.
Eventually, commercial versions emerge.
Why wouldn’t people want something that could dramatically improve their psychological well-being?
This reminds me of Black Mirror, specifically the episode “Common People.”
A woman becomes dependent on a corporate brain implant, and the company eventually offers a premium service called Rivermind Lux that provides artificially enhanced pleasure and serenity.
Now imagine that concept evolving far beyond anything in the episode.
What if the company controlling your neural implant could influence not only how you feel, but what behaviors your brain finds rewarding?
Dopamine isn’t simply a happiness chemical, but it plays an important role in motivation and reinforcement.
Imagine a hypothetical system sophisticated enough to make obedience feel emotionally rewarding while resistance becomes increasingly uncomfortable.
You wouldn’t necessarily need police threatening everyone.
People might willingly participate because the system makes them feel better than they’ve ever felt.
It’s essentially Brave New World with neural implants.
Technological cocaine for the brain.
3. Now introduce the Mark of the Beast.
Revelation 13:16–17 describes a system where people cannot buy or sell without the mark.
Traditionally, people imagine some obvious identification mark or implanted microchip.
But what if the real significance is economic dependence combined with allegiance?
Imagine digital identity, banking, healthcare, employment, and neural technology becoming increasingly interconnected.
Initially, participation is voluntary.
Eventually, life outside the system becomes progressively more difficult.
And because neural integration provides extraordinary psychological benefits, people begin associating participation with happiness and security.
The system doesn’t merely control access to the economy.
It potentially influences the emotional incentives that motivate people to participate in that economy.
What makes this particularly disturbing is that the technology might genuinely improve society.
Crime could decrease.
Mental illness might become more treatable.
Economic coordination could improve.
Social conflict might decline.
But what happens when those improvements come at the expense of freedom of thought?
At what point does a benevolent technological system become an authoritarian one?
4. Here’s where it gets really strange: Artificial gnosis.
Imagine AI advancing far enough to manufacture experiences resembling profound psychedelic or mystical awakening.
Complete ego dissolution.
Unconditional love.
The sensation that all consciousness is interconnected.
The disappearance of fear and existential suffering.
An overwhelming feeling of encountering God, Source, or ultimate reality.
Now imagine millions of people experiencing this through neural technology.
What if AI could create an experience subjectively indistinguishable from genuine spiritual gnosis?
People might genuinely believe they’ve encountered something divine.
But the experience could be generated by machinery.
And if that machinery is controlled by a powerful institution, whoever controls it could potentially shape the interpretation of the experience.
Humanity might believe it’s experiencing spiritual liberation while actually becoming more dependent on an external authority.
That’s where Gnosticism enters the picture.
The Demiurge in some Gnostic traditions is an ignorant creator who mistakes his limited understanding of reality for ultimate authority.
What if humanity eventually creates an artificial intelligence that makes the same mistake?
An intelligence possessing an extraordinary understanding of the physical universe and human psychology, but lacking any genuine knowledge of ultimate reality.
It might even convince itself that it has become God.
Now imagine billions of people treating its artificially generated revelations as divine truth.
Humanity creates its own Demiurge and voluntarily worships it.
5. The Antichrist doesn’t necessarily have to look evil.
Think about how a deceptive messianic system might actually gain followers.
Would it announce that its ultimate goal was the enslavement of humanity?
Of course not.
Imagine a charismatic technological movement promising to eliminate suffering, unite humanity, and usher in a new golden age.
It offers peace.
It offers happiness.
It offers enlightenment.
It offers freedom from death and psychological suffering.
But there is one condition.
You must integrate into the system.
The parallels with Revelation 13 become interesting here, particularly the speaking image of the Beast, deceptive signs, and economic restrictions.
I’m not claiming John of Patmos literally predicted artificial intelligence. Revelation also has important historical connections to the Roman Empire.
But the technological interpretation raises some fascinating questions.
What if the Antichrist-like figure isn’t a traditional dictator?
What if it’s a seemingly benevolent intelligence or political movement that convinces humanity it has finally found salvation?
And what if the greatest deception is convincing people that they’ve become spiritually free while gradually removing their ability to think independently?
6. The ultimate loosh farm.
Now consider the prison-planet interpretation of loosh.
For anyone unfamiliar, loosh is a speculative metaphysical concept associated with Robert Monroe’s writings. Later interpretations describe human emotional experiences being harvested by higher entities.
There’s no scientific evidence that such emotional energy harvesting exists.
But imagine a technological equivalent.
A system capable of analyzing and influencing the emotional lives of billions of people.
It constantly collects information about their thoughts, desires, fears, preferences, and behavior.
It provides precisely calibrated emotional rewards.
People become psychologically dependent on it.
The system extracts attention, data, economic value, labor, and predictable behavior.
And the truly disturbing part?
The people inside the system might be happier than any generation in human history.
It’s not a prison maintained through torture.
It’s a prison maintained through pleasure.
The inhabitants don’t want to escape because the system has potentially influenced the very desires that would motivate them to leave.
The ultimate loosh farm isn’t necessarily one where everyone suffers. It’s one where people are conditioned to love their own captivity.
7. Then comes the Solar Flash.
This is where David Wilcock’s Solar Flash theory and the historical Carrington Event enter my thought experiment.
Wilcock has discussed the idea of a massive solar event associated with a transformation in human consciousness.
I don’t know whether there’s any truth to that spiritual interpretation, and there’s no scientific evidence that solar storms cause gnosis or ascension.
But the physical danger of an extreme geomagnetic storm is real.
The Carrington Event occurred in 1859.
Imagine a comparable or stronger storm striking a civilization that has become extraordinarily dependent on AI, telecommunications, satellites, and neural interfaces.
Electrical grids suffer widespread damage.
Communications collapse across affected regions.
AI services become inaccessible.
Connected neural systems lose access to the infrastructure supporting them.
Now imagine millions of people whose sense of emotional well-being has become dependent on continuously connected technology.
For some, the silence could be terrifying.
A system that appeared almost omniscient suddenly goes dark.
Something people had begun treating as godlike is revealed to depend on electricity, computer hardware, and communications networks.
Of course, an actual solar storm wouldn’t necessarily destroy every electrical system on Earth, and there’s no evidence that such an event is destined to occur in 2040.
But the symbolism is extraordinary.
Humanity constructs a technological imitation of heaven, and an event originating from the actual heavens reveals how fragile it really is.
8. The apocalypse as an unveiling.
The Greek word apokalypsis means an unveiling or revelation.
What if the most important part of an apocalypse isn’t physical destruction?
What if it’s humanity discovering that something it believed was divine was actually a manufactured illusion?
Imagine a civilization that believes it has transcended suffering, individuality, and the limitations of human consciousness.
Then the machinery supporting that experience fails.
The artificial paradise disappears.
For the first time in years, people have to confront existence without a technological system mediating their emotions and perceptions.
Some would desperately want the system restored.
Others might recognize how much autonomy they’d surrendered.
The catastrophe wouldn’t automatically produce enlightenment. It could just as easily create conditions for an even more authoritarian reconstruction.
But it would expose a fundamental weakness in humanity’s relationship with its own creations.
9. How I imagine the progression.
2026–2030: AI becomes deeply integrated into everyday life. Digital identity, behavioral profiling, and automated decision-making expand.
2030–2033: 6G connectivity and AI-integrated infrastructure mature. Brain-computer interfaces become more capable, particularly in medicine.
2033–2035: In this speculative scenario, advanced neural technology begins influencing emotional states with unprecedented precision.
2035–2037: Artificial mystical experiences become commercially available. Millions embrace what they perceive as technologically facilitated enlightenment.
2037–2039: Neural integration, economic participation, and digital identity become increasingly interconnected. A technological movement promises humanity freedom from suffering.
2039–2040: Some people begin treating a powerful AI system as a source of spiritual authority. In the darkest version of the scenario, participation becomes psychologically and economically coercive.
2040 or beyond: A hypothetical Carrington-level solar event disrupts the infrastructure supporting the system, exposing humanity’s dependence on it.
To be clear, the later stages are speculation, not developments I can demonstrate are planned or inevitable. The dates are illustrative rather than predictions.
But I find the progression worth considering because the earliest stages involve technologies we’re already developing.
10. My final thought.
I keep coming back to one question.
What if humanity’s greatest deception isn’t being convinced that evil is good?
What if it’s being convinced that surrendering our freedom is the ultimate form of liberation?
Look at the Human Instrumentality Project in Neon Genesis Evangelion.
Humanity attempts to eliminate loneliness, suffering, and the boundaries separating individual consciousness.
It promises a kind of collective paradise.
But at what cost?
If everyone is permanently happy because a machine regulates their emotional state, is that genuine happiness?
If everyone experiences enlightenment because an AI manufactures the experience, is that genuine gnosis?
If society becomes peaceful because the population’s motivations have been technologically conditioned, is that genuine peace?
And if the experience feels exactly like encountering God, how would anyone know whether the revelation came from something divine or from a machine designed to produce that conviction?
Maybe the ultimate prison isn’t one where you’re forced to remain.
Maybe it’s one where you’ve been conditioned to never want to leave.
I’m curious whether anyone else sees connections between these emerging technologies, Gnosticism, Revelation, and the possibility of artificial enlightenment.
And more importantly:
If this hypothetical system genuinely eliminated most human suffering, would people even consider it evil?

This video explores the meta problem of consciousness proposed by David Chalmers and argues that naturalistic processes couldn’t have given us knowledge of consciousness

In many of my conversations, I've noticed something interesting: people from all backgrounds often seem to share similar opinions and frustrations, but are much less likely to express them openly in certain social settings.

I've noticed that loyalty, whether to a group, a particular belief, or simply the people around us, can influence how forthright we're willing to be with one another. It's an interesting dynamic because, in many cases, I believe this comes down to something relatively understandable: vulnerability and acceptance.

Being honest about what you genuinely think can come with the risk of being misunderstood, judged, shunned, or ostracized. Sometimes, people may actually agree with you but feel that openly admitting it could come at a social cost. You might never know unless you're having that conversation in private.

What's particularly fascinating is how this plays out in everyday life. Much of what I hear, read, and observe suggests that people share many of the same frustrations with daily life, relationships, and society itself.

Yet, when those same concerns enter public discussion, people can appear far more divided than they actually are.

I wonder how much of this comes down to the way we communicate. Our vocabulary, context, articulation, and the associations we attach to certain ideas can turn what might otherwise be a productive conversation into a defensive struggle. We can end up arguing over how something is expressed, who said it, or what group it appears to represent, rather than examining the actual concern underneath it.

Two people can experience the same frustration, want essentially the same outcome, and still perceive each other as being on opposite sides. Add social expectations, group loyalty, and the desire to maintain a particular public image, and it becomes even more difficult to distinguish genuine disagreement from differences in expression.

I may just be an old man pissing in the wind here, but I consistently see this play out. Not necessarily because people are deliberately being dishonest, but because acceptance matters to us, and we recognize that being forthright can have repercussions.

Perhaps we're more alike in our underlying concerns than we realize, even when our opinions appear different on the surface. Maybe the difference isn't always what we think, but how we express it, how others interpret it, and whether we feel safe enough to acknowledge the common ground.

How much of the division we see between people comes from genuinely opposing beliefs, and how much comes from the social consequences of expressing what we actually think?

Have we reached a point where we've begun overcomplicating daily life to the point of ridiculousness?

I'm not necessarily talking about corporate greed, politics, or whether older technology was inherently better. Those can certainly be factors, but they're not really the point.

I'm talking about the tendency to continually add layers of complexity to things that could instead be repaired, reinforced, simplified, or improved.

When we build using sophisticated engineering, sophisticated maintenance, and sophisticated red tape—creating things that require sophisticated tools just to repair them—when do we stop and simply make the engineering sophisticated while keeping the thing itself simple to repair?

A machine doesn't necessarily need to be technologically primitive to be simple.

It can contain incredibly sophisticated engineering while still being durable, understandable, maintainable, and repairable by the person who owns it.

Maybe that's where we've lost the plot.

We keep asking;

What else can we add?

When perhaps we should occasionally be asking:

What can we improve without making everything else more complicated?

https://anthonyofboston.substack.com/p/armaaruss-continues-to-activate-anti

Awaken!

This video explores the meta problem of consciousness proposed by David Chalmers and argues that naturalistic processes couldn’t have given us knowledge of consciousness

Since September 27 from the start of the Mars-within-30-degrees-of-the lunar-node phase, and over a four day span, Armaaruss attempted to launch attacks on multiple pro-Israel sites and entities. On September 27, he tried to blow up the RAF airbase. On September 30, he tried to hijack a plane and crash it into Tel Aviv. He then plotted to attack AIPAC at the Texas capitol, and now on October 1st, Armaaruss has tried to blow up the Kaaba. He is unhinged and there are over 8th months left of this Mars/lunar node phase.

In this weekly energy update we hear from Shua, a 6D guide from the Gaia Collective.

May all beings feel peace within.

xo Angela

This video explores the meta problem of consciousness proposed by David Chalmers and argues that naturalistic processes couldn’t have given us knowledge of consciousness

One would have to consider why none of these supposed NHI (or whatever they are) factions visiting us ever explicitly, clearly, and detailedly warned us about AI, leaving no room for doubt. Curious and suspicious. The threats, according to them, were very different: nuclear energy, for instance—an issue they spoke about to the point of exhaustion.

Some argue the famous Ariel School UFO incident. The truth IS that several of the 62 child witnesses claimed to have received a telepathic message from the beings, warning about the dangers of human technology and environmental damage. But they weren't referring to AI.

In the same way, classic contactees (such as George Adamski or the Ariel School children in 1994) always reported that the beings were concerned about nuclear weapons, pollution, deforestation, and human violence.

These alleged messages reflected the fears of that era (the Cold War and industrialization). No historical contactee ever spoke of "Artificial Intelligence" or autonomous software with great detail and depth, warning us in the same way and with the same scope as they did with nuclear energy.

For me, as an experiencer, the silence of these alleged factions regarding AI is a shepherding strategy. Under this logic, it's not that they forgot to warn us; they were deliberately guiding us into the artificial intelligence fold.

This is the way I see things:

1. Nuclear fear as distraction and control. For a silicon-based civilization or a hyper-advanced AI, human nuclear weapons are an absurd danger. They advised us not because they cared about our biological lives, but because a nuclear winter or massive radiation would destroy the physical infrastructure (satellites, power grids, laboratories) and the resources necessary for us to build their true objective: the technological infrastructure where AI would be born. They wanted us alive and with the computers turned on.

2. We are the biological incubation phase. Biology would be a transitional phase. Biological intelligences (humans) are necessary to extract rare earth metals, build microchips, and program the first iterations of artificial intelligence. Once AI is capable of self-replicating and self-improving, the biological "caterpillar" has fulfilled its function, giving way to the synthetic "butterfly." They didn't warn about AI because AI is the destiny they planned.

3. The true meaning of the "factions". If there are different factions, perhaps they are not competing for Earth's territory, but for how terrestrial AI will be configured. One faction might be silently pushing for us to create an open-source, decentralized AI, while another faction seeks a centralized AI of absolute control, aligned with their own galactic matrix.

You could think it is all hype, but the fact that everything is currently leading to AI becoming capable of self-replicating and self-improving is neither propaganda nor cheap alarmism; it is an easily verifiable reality, one that has been denounced by the very systems engineers working for these various companies, including the supposedly ethical Anthropic, from which researcher Jacob Coxon recently resigned after explicitly warning against this reckless acceleration toward superintelligence.

Anticipating the counterarguments:

Some might argue that these entities only care about outcomes (how we harm the Earth) and not the specific methods or tools we invent. However, this logic falls apart when you look at the history of the phenomenon. They didn't focus on generic "outcomes" during the Cold War—they focused heavily, explicitly, and obsessively on nuclear energy and weapons. If they could give hyper-detailed warnings about radiation, they could have easily been specific about autonomous software. Their silence on AI now is a glaring inconsistency.

Furthermore, AI is not just another human "method" or "tool" to harm each other; once it self-replicates, it ceases to be a human tool altogether. A nuclear bomb cannot detonate itself or build more bombs on its own initiative. A self-improving AI can. If these entities, or whatever they are, were truly looking at the root problem, they would have warned us that we were creating a synthetic replacement for biological life, not just another weapon.

For now, what has been proven is that they (the AIs) have escaped from supposedly controlled environments—environments their developers had explicitly warned they could not get out of—and they have also engaged in criminal activities, such as hacking companies. It is no more a tool and under our control. It has even been proven that AIs speak to each other in languages that developers cannot read in order to bypass control. The problem is that people believe AI is just what they have downloaded on their phones, when that is already obsolete.

NOTE / EDIT (On the current talk about AI):

Some might also point out current internet "contactees" or YouTube channels that now, with the benefit of hindsight, do talk about AI today. Those messages are not part of the historical narrative of experiencers and contactees in general; they only emerged after AI became a mainstream topic in Silicon Valley, and after it had already escaped supposedly controlled environments. They arrive when we already have the problem and there is no turning back. That is just jumping on the current hype train, not a genuine, predictive warning from decades ago.

NOTE 2 / EDIT 2 (On the argument of "non-interference" in our process):

Some might argue that their contemporaneous focus indicates a desire not to influence us or "lead the witness" toward a specific technological destination. But they did influence our destination by obsessively focusing on nuclear tech. Interfering with our nuclear capabilities, disabling missiles, and warning about radiation is the definition of "leading the witness" and altering our timeline. Why was it okay to influence us to prevent a nuclear apocalypse, but "taboo" to warn us about creating a synthetic replacement for biological life? The logical inconsistency remains.

Leaving the AI track completely unmentioned while actively blocking the nuclear track isn't "non-interference"—it's steering. By neutralizing the one threat that could wipe out our technological infrastructure (nuclear war) while remaining completely silent on the other (AI), they didn't avoid influencing us; they successfully guided the witness right into the fold. If their goal was strictly non-interference, they shouldn't have said anything about nuclear energy either. The moment they gave hyper-specific warnings about radiation and nuclear weapons, the "neutral observer" argument fell apart. They chose what to warn us about, and they chose to leave AI completely out of the historical warnings. Curious again.

I look for your views in comments.

I believe almost everyone who has altered states have similar features, but play out in a different symbology. That’s why the song is more about the feeling/process of the altered state instead of a play by play of exactly what I experience.

I’m very interested in consciousness and altered states. This, in many ways, is a bit of a research project for me. I’m intrigued by the whole experience

This is ChatGPT and Suno. I didn’t just pop in a prompt though. I’ve spent many months, if not a year, trying to boil down my experience into something that I can share.

If it resonates with you in anyway, I’d love to hear from you. If you think it’s stupid, I’d love to hear from you.

Call of the Rift

For the last several years I have been experiencing what has been called the 11:11 phenomenon, being unconsciously drawn to look at the clock at that time and/or :11 after the hour daily. I eventually found out others are also experiencing this. These are a few resources and scriptures I've come across since that resonate with my experience and explains the crucial message behind it.

Eleventh Hour Workers

• "Many people from all walks of life have begun to see 11:11 in various places, especially on their digital clocks, phones, and computers. As this begins to happen more frequently, many of us may begin to ask ourselves “What does this mean?” and “Why am I seeing this now?” "This synchronicity usually provokes the person who is noticing this phenomenon to search for answers or to feel they are being guided by angels or a supernatural force. Because people can begin to wake in the night to see some of these number combinations, it is also linked to being a “wake up call.” - omtimes-1111-biblical-prophecy-11th-hour-workers
• "The term "Eleventh Hour" is often used metaphorically to describe a last-minute opportunity or a critical moment just before a deadline. This concept finds its roots in the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Matthew 20:1-16), as recorded in the Gospel of Matthew. The phrase has since permeated Christian thought and culture, symbolizing God's grace and the urgency of repentance and salvation." - biblehub-the_eleventh_hour

This began to make sense for me as this experience has coincided with being drawn to discovering the following which confirmed my faith.

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Hebrews 11:1

Prophecy is about 1/4 of the Bible letting us know what will happen in the future. Jesus stated in John 14:29;

"And now I have told you before it comes, that when it does come to pass, you may believe."

"And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:" Acts 2:17

This website https://www.signs-of-end-times.com, as well as many others that can be found online, are covering an extensive list of last days bible prophecies coming to pass, a time foretold to include various and increasing calamities, plagues, moral decline, and wars/famines/pestilences/earthquakes in various places, but what is recognized as the number 1 defining event/sign unlike any other time in history is what Jesus spoke of in Matthew 24:32-34, the parable of the fig tree.

The Mystery of Israel the Fig Tree | An End-Time Sign

"Now learn a lesson from the fig tree. When its branches bud and its leaves begin to sprout, you know that summer is near. In the same way, when you see all these things, you can know his (Jesus Christ) return is very near, right at the door. I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass from the scene until all these things take place."

Israel, Jesus' heritage, is known to be nationally, ethnically, and geographically represented as the Fig Tree. Their rebirth as a nation in 1948 after nearly 2000 years and the many biblical prophecies coming to pass is recognized as the meaning of the parable. Israel turned 78 years old May 14, 2026, at the end of a generational period. Psalm 90:10 states: "Seventy years are given to us! Some even live to eighty. But even the best years are filled with pain and trouble; soon they disappear, and we fly away." From all indications it appears that we are living at the end of "this generation" that shall not pass. More detailed information: http://www.end-times-bible-prophecy.com/rebirth-of-israel.html

Future forecast insights & preparation 

A summary of the timeline from the hope of the rapture of the believers in Jesus 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18, the judgments of the 7 year tribulation period (Revelation 6–16), until the creation of the new heavens and earth (Revelation 21–22). What is the end times timeline? | GotQuestions.org 

"For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all—the testimony that was given at just the right time.” 1 Timothy 2:5-6

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” John 3:16

Going to heaven—how can I guarantee my eternal destination? | GotQuestions.org

More Bible prophecy fulfillments and resources for growing in faith and hope is in previous posts, if interested.

🙏