Does Armageddon really sound that bad though? Why does it have to involve destruction of "positive" things? Why can't it just be an erosion of bad things, presuming "positive" forces preside over "negative" ones by the end?
Does Armageddon really sound that bad though?
Why does it have to involve destruction of "positive" things? Why can't it just be an erosion of bad things, presuming "positive" forces preside over "negative" ones by the end?
It is always better to have gradual change instead of apocalyptic change. However, it is very frustrating for those who have to endure it. If you look back in history at the French Revolution, the English revolt under Cromwell, even the American Revolution, those were not pleasant times for the average person. If such horrors can be averted, that is good, even if individuals must postpone instant gratification.
It is always better to have gradual change instead of apocalyptic change. However, it is very frustrating for those who have to endure it. If you look back in history at the French Revolution, the English revolt under Cromwell, even the American Revolution, those were not pleasant times for the average person. If such horrors can be averted, that is good, even if individuals must postpone instant gratification.
I think we'll find beauty, inspiration, even reverence in the pending upheaval.
I think we'll find beauty, inspiration, even reverence in the pending upheaval.
(post is archived)