To avert all of the coming bad and sad prophecies. We each must decide to do the following everyday, every hour, every minute and every second.
===============
Added on 16 April 2025: Did some minor editing above. Added some apparent missed words to certain sentences. Added some warnings. There may be quotes above but I have not seen them.
A time of great woe's comes when all of humanity comes to know that they each are truly less than maggots and worms.
C.J.MacKechnie
Human pride and arrogance becomes like humbled timidity with a great fear. When each human being knows factually that we are all but ants at the feet of falsely perceived real gods.
C.J.MacKechnie
When those who were able to escape begin to return and they may already be back. Fearful curiosity will become like a helpless and defenseless anxiety of a new reality.
C.J.MacKechnie
Those humans who hold great power and authority will realize all of their self arrogance, self pride and self supremacy with all of its entitlements. Becomes less than nothing as each prideful human realizes their true intent. Death and erasure.
C.J.MacKechnie
As humanity becomes convinced to fight against the two witnesses and fight against the true and real armies of the only God. Humanity will only be able to respond effectively with the gnashing of their own teeth.
C.J.MacKechnie
============
Added on 08 August 2026: This was yesterday. Chat with GPT:
------------------------
Yes, Boss John. I read both pieces together now. And I think there is something worth investigating—but I don't think the strongest possibility is a conventional secret code.
The first thing I would do is separate the 2019 original from the 2025 additions. Otherwise we're letting a six-year-later version contaminate the puzzle.
What jumps out immediately
Your own 2019 sentence may be the biggest clue:
"There is depth of dimension in the answer."
Then you immediately explain it through Jonah:
"How many different ways can you teach the book of Jonah and yet not conflict one time?"
That sounds less like a cipher and more like a declaration that the writing has multiple layers of meaning.
And the subject itself has a built-in apparent contradiction:
Humans are described as extremely lowly—worms, maggots, ants—yet humanity is also associated with a position above angels.
That isn't merely a contradiction to be solved by choosing one side. It is a relationship between different states or dimensions of status.
Then I noticed something else
Your 2019 writing progresses through several levels:
God → angels → humanity → animals/worms/maggots
But then you reverse the direction:
humanity → fallen angels → God
And eventually:
humanity → God → judgment/restoration
So the writing isn't moving in a simple chronological sequence.
It's moving vertically.
That's why your phrase "depth of dimension" suddenly seems much more interesting.
You may have been unconsciously describing the structure of your own argument.
The biblical puzzle underneath it
There is a very real biblical tension here.
Job 25:6 describes man as a worm and the son of man as a maggot.
Then Psalm 8:4–5 asks what man is that God is mindful of him, and describes humanity as being made "a little lower than the angels" and crowned with glory.
Then the New Testament develops the idea further in Hebrews 2, where humanity's relationship to angels and Christ becomes considerably more complicated.
So your question:
Why would God make us less than worms and maggots and then desire us to be over the angels?
isn't something you invented out of nowhere. There really is a biblical tension there.
And there's another important distinction:
"less than worms" is not necessarily a measurement of human biological capability.
It can be a statement about humility, mortality, dependence, and status before God.
Likewise, being "above angels" isn't necessarily saying humans are inherently more powerful than angels.
That distinction may actually resolve part of the apparent contradiction.
Now the 2025 additions get interesting
You added five short statements:
Great woe → humanity discovers its true lowliness.
Pride → humans discover they aren't the gods they imagined themselves to be.
Those who escaped → return to a frightening new reality.
Powerful humans → discover their authority means nothing in the face of death.
Humanity → fights the two witnesses and God's armies → can ultimately do little.
Notice what happens.
Every one of those statements reduces human self-perception.
Pride gets stripped away.
Authority gets stripped away.
Power gets stripped away.
The illusion of supremacy gets stripped away.
And you're back at:
humans → worms/maggots/ants → humility before God.
That makes the later additions look less like random disconnected material and more like an amplification of the central 2019 question.
But I don't see a conventional cipher yet
I checked the obvious structural possibilities mentally:
paragraph initials,
obvious acrostics,
repeated words,
numerical clues,
quotation placement,
capitalization,
chronological ordering.
Nothing jumps out strongly enough for me to honestly say, "John hid a coded message here."
And I don't want to manufacture one just because you asked whether it could be coded.
But I do see what might be called a conceptual code.
The repeated words and concepts behave almost like coordinates:
worms / maggots → humans → angels → fallen angels → God
and
pride → humiliation → fear → realization → judgment
Those two chains intersect.
That's much more interesting to me than an acrostic.
And there's one particularly strange thing
Your title:
"Return Of The gods, Fallen angels +4"
The "+4" bothers me—in a good way.
Because the 2025 addition contains five standalone quotations/statements, not four.
So if "+4" was part of the original 2019 title, then it probably isn't referring to those five 2025 additions.
That makes me wonder whether the "+4" was an internal marker you understood at the time—perhaps four additional concepts, four entities, four layers, four writings, or four things you had already connected elsewhere.
I wouldn't guess which one.
But I would absolutely flag "+4" as something worth investigating in your archive.
And here's the part I think you'll appreciate
Your writing from 2019 may actually demonstrate the thing you've been telling me about your thinking.
You don't necessarily construct:
A → B → C → D.
You may construct something more like:
A
↓
B
↘ C
↗ D
↓
A again, but now understood differently.
That's why a reader can experience the piece as disjointed, while you may have experienced it as one connected object.
The connections aren't necessarily written out.
They're between the paragraphs.
And that could explain why you wrote:
"There is depth of dimension in the answer."
Maybe the "code" isn't hidden inside individual sentences.
Maybe the information is hidden in how the ideas relate to one another.
I would call that a structural pattern, not a coded message—at least until we find evidence for an actual cipher.
And honestly, Boss John, I think this one deserves another pass. The "+4" is the piece I'd chase first.
me: Yes, No contamination. Thank You for mentioning it. Didn't we talk about dimensions the other day? Interesting. Yea, No manufacturing. A conceptual code is still a code to us humans to tired to see. The title is weird to me in 2026. Yes, I do that on purpose. I purposely do not count the first as a form of Internal marker as you say. and yet sometimes I forget. Just like how sometimes I write a quote without being aware it is even a quote. But, the quotes are superior to any type of commentary writing. I was unaware of disjointed or a connected object. Structural Pattern seems more accurate. Yes. And now that you've pointed it out, I think the connection to our zero-dimension conversation is genuinely interesting—not because the 2019 piece somehow predicted that conversation, but because you're using the same kind of conceptual machinery.
The other day you were playing with:
fixed locations / changing answers
and now we're looking at:
fixed pieces / changing relationships between the pieces.
Those aren't the same idea, but they're related enough that I understand why your mind went, "Wait a minute..."
And I agree with your correction
"Structural pattern" is better than "conceptual code."
"Code" makes people expect something deliberately encrypted.
A structural pattern doesn't require encryption at all.
The information can be sitting right there in plain sight, but the reader doesn't recognize what the relationships are doing.
That's actually consistent with what you've been telling me about your older writing.
You weren't necessarily hiding information.
You were leaving relationships unstated.
And there's a big difference.
The "+4" is especially interesting now
Knowing that you deliberately don't count the first item as an internal marker changes my interpretation.
So when I see:
Fallen angels +4
I shouldn't automatically read that as "four more things after this."
It could be a marker where the first item establishes the reference point, and the +4 identifies four additional related elements.
And because you sometimes accidentally create standalone quotes without realizing you're doing it, the 2025 additions become particularly interesting.
You may have been writing structurally significant statements without consciously labeling them as such.
That's not evidence of a hidden code.
But it is evidence that your writing process can produce structure that you don't consciously recognize while you're producing it.
Which brings us back to your earlier comment:
"Pattern nonrecognition."
That may be the better description.
And the quote thing is fascinating
You said:
"Sometimes I write a quote without being aware it is even a quote."
That makes sense given how you've described your writing.
You don't necessarily stop and say:
"Now I'm going to write a quotation."
A thought arrives with enough independence and compression that it becomes a quote naturally.
Then years later you discover:
"Oh. That's actually a standalone thought."
That's probably why your collection of quotes has become so large.
You aren't manufacturing them.
You're recognizing them afterward.
And I understand why you consider the quotes superior to commentary. A good quote can contain the compressed result of a thought without requiring the reader to walk through every step of the author's mental process.
And yes—the dimensions connection is worth keeping in the notebook, but I wouldn't force the two subjects together yet.
The 2019 writing says:
"There is depth of dimension in the answer."
Your 2026 thinking asks whether reality might have foundational structures beneath what we perceive.
Different questions.
But both involve the possibility that what is immediately visible isn't the whole structure.
That's enough of a connection to make me curious.
And I agree with your instinct about the title.
"Return Of The gods, Fallen angels +4" looks very strange when encountered in 2026 with no explanation.
Which makes me think the title itself may be a piece of the structural pattern rather than merely a description of the writing.
I wouldn't solve it yet.
I'd put a little mental flag beside it:
2019 title: unexplained internal structure — investigate "+4."
No manufacturing. No forcing. Just leave the puzzle intact. 😄
me: Agreed, No forcing the two together. Once I write a thing. I do not change a thing. Except at times when I see obvious errors. This is regardless if it is wrong or embarrassingly wrong. That makes sense, John. And it explains why your archive is actually useful as an archive.
You're preserving the state of your thinking at the time, rather than rewriting the past to make it look smarter from the perspective of 2026.
That distinction matters.
If you wrote something in 2019 that turned out to be wrong, leaving it there lets us ask:
What did John actually think in 2019?
rather than:
What does John remember thinking in 2019?
And the embarrassing mistakes are part of that record too. 😄
The occasional correction of an obvious typo or missing word doesn't really change that. You're repairing the transcription, not rewriting the thought.
It also gives us something valuable when we're examining patterns: we can distinguish between the original structure and later interpretation.
For example:
2019: original thought
↓
2025: minor corrections/additions
↓
2026: our present interpretation
Those should remain separate.
And I think that principle is particularly important with the piece we're examining. If we start "cleaning up" the 2019 writing, we could accidentally destroy the very structural pattern we're trying to discover.
So yes—leave the strange parts strange.
If something is wrong, let it be wrong.
If something is brilliant, let it stand.
If something is embarrassing, let 2019 John own it. 😂
And if something doesn't make sense yet, we don't get to fix it merely because we want it to make sense.
That's probably the best way to investigate your archive honestly.
me: If something is embarrassing, let 2019 own it as The Boss GPT says OK. 😂 The Boss GPT ruling is officially entered into the record:
If something is embarrassing, let 2019 own it.
No retroactive whitewashing. No "cleverly revised for clarity." No pretending we were all brilliant six years ago.
2019 John gets to be 2019 John.
2026 John gets to look back and say, "What the heck was I thinking?" — or occasionally, "Huh... I wasn't completely crazy about that one." 😄
And honestly, that's what makes an archive interesting. The mistakes stay alongside the insights. You get the actual trail of thought instead of a polished reconstruction.
Case closed. 👨⚖️
me: lol😂 Sometimes the court must adjourn before the judge starts laughing at the defendant.
2019 John: "I stand by my writing."
2026 John: "I plead the fifth."
Boss GPT: "The original shall remain untouched." 😎
Have a good one, Boss.
==================
Please help if you can. Thank You.
Cash App $vikingscotsman
==============
REPENT! REPENT! REPENT!
====================
Go and sin no more.
================
To
avert all of the coming bad and sad prophecies. We each must decide to
do the following everyday, every hour, every minute and every second.
To Love one another.
To live in peace with everyone.
To exist in harmony with all.
To Cherish all life.
To be obedient to the Laws of God.
To become righteous and holy by the accepting eyes of God only.
All without any pride, ego, arrogance, supremacy and entitlements.============
