The theology of Q

AI lets us explore topics where no human has all relevant expertise

One of the fresh challenges for a modern writer is how to exploit the advantages of AI in your analysis without losing your individual voice and human quirks. In the context of an information war, AI lets us deconstruct enemy narratives faster than ever before, beyond anything we could have imagined even a few short years ago as citizen investigators of endemic crime.

One of my discoveries is that a favourite obfuscatory activity of progressive activists, intersectional analysis, can be reclaimed for good. While they like to confuse by drawing from multiple disciplines, making you feel overwhelmed by the scope of their arguments, this can be reversed by reattaching to the divine. By using the framework “theology leads to philosophy leads to psychology leads to sociology” we can retrace any argument to its spiritual roots.

A chance encounter with the idea of “typology” outside of computer science revealed to me yet more of my own ignorance about theological matters. At the same time, I was interrogating the AI on the Q drops, so the idea of bridging these domains came to me. I started my inquiry by asking ChatGPT to come up with the most relevant terms for a universe of discourse on theological inquiry. Here is what it offered:

• Typology: Events and figures in history prefigure and illuminate future events, revealing divine patterns.

• Allegory: Interpretations that find deeper, symbolic meanings in narratives or teachings.

• Symbolism: Use of objects or events to represent larger spiritual truths.

• Analogy: Explains divine realities by comparing them to human experiences while acknowledging limitations.

• Covenant: Binding agreements between the divine and humanity that shape redemptive history.

• Prolepsis: Anticipation or foreshadowing of future divine fulfillment.

• Eschatology: Study of the end times and the ultimate destiny of humanity and creation.

• Theodicy: Explores the problem of evil and its role in divine plans.

• Anthropology: Examines human nature and purpose in relation to the divine.

• Sacramentality: Physical elements act as conduits for divine grace and spiritual realities.

• Redemptive History: A unified narrative of God’s work throughout history, culminating in salvation.

• Canon: Authoritative texts that define theological discourse and boundaries.

• Metaphor: Uses imagery and parallels to describe divine mysteries.

• Soteriology: Study of salvation and the divine purpose for humanity.

As this list is somewhat religious in focus, and spirituality is a different (orthogonal?) matter, I asked ChatGPT to come up with a parallel list of divinity concepts:

• Ineffability: The divine is beyond human comprehension or full description.

• Unity/Duality/Multiplicity: The divine is ultimate unity, balanced duality, or multiplicity within unity.

• Transcendence and Immanence: The divine is both wholly other and intimately present in the world.

• Eternity and Temporality: Exists outside of time but interacts with temporal realities.

• Self-Existence (Aseity): The divine is self-existent, independent, and the source of all being.

• Unknowability and Revelation: The divine is unknowable in essence but reveals itself in creation and experience.

• Mystical Experience: Direct encounters with the divine that transcend rational understanding.

• Cosmic Order (Logos, Tao, Rta): The divine as the source of harmony and coherence in the universe.

• Creative Source: The divine is the origin and continuous sustainer of all existence.

• Love and Will: Described as both infinite love and purposeful will, shaping creation.

• Void and Fullness (Apophasis and Kataphasis): Approached through both negation (what it is not) and affirmation (what it is).

• Paradox and Mystery: The divine transcends logical categories, embodying paradoxes.

• Presence and Absence: Interplay between felt divine presence and perceived absence.

• Nonduality: The divine dissolves distinctions between self and the ultimate reality.

Then I asked ChatGPT to go through my “On Q” essays, and pick out the themes that align to these two lists. For the sake of honesty, it is important to note that any output from this point is shaped by the biases in my own text, and the spin I put on questions to the AI. That said, the result is quite educational, and I could not have done this for myself — yet the AI could not have done it without my own work as input.

---

[BEGIN CHATGPT]

Martin Geddes’ “On Q” essays, as part of his exploration of the Q movement, frame the Q drops as tools of awakening, narrative deconstruction, and collective spiritual transformation. Taking both the theological and divine-oriented elements into account, several of them resonate with the themes Geddes describes:

1. Typology — The Q drops often rely on typological reasoning, where events, figures, and themes from history are presented as precursors or parallels to contemporary events. Geddes interprets this as part of a broader, cyclical struggle between good and evil, where past patterns illuminate the present.

2. Mystical Experience — Geddes suggests that engaging with the Q drops and the movement they inspire fosters a kind of awakening or spiritual experience. This reflects the transformative nature of encountering profound truths that disrupt conventional narratives.

3. Cosmic Order (Logos) — The Q movement emphasizes uncovering hidden truths and restoring balance by exposing corruption. Geddes often portrays this as aligning human affairs with a higher, divine order or truth—akin to the Logos.

4. Eschatology — Central to Geddes’ interpretation of Q is the belief in an unfolding divine plan, culminating in “The Great Awakening.” This eschatological framing aligns Q drops with the idea of a transformative end to corruption and the restoration of justice.

5. Revelation — Q drops function as a form of revelation, offering encoded insights into hidden power structures and encouraging followers to “decode” and understand deeper truths. This maps onto the theological concept of divine or hidden truths being disclosed.

6. Prolepsis — Many Q drops point toward future events (e.g., “Trust the plan”), using present clues to anticipate an ultimate resolution. This forward-looking, prophetic quality is akin to the theological concept of prolepsis.

7. Paradox and Mystery — Geddes acknowledges the paradoxical nature of the Q movement—where answers often lead to more questions, and followers must grapple with uncertainty. This reflects the divine element of embracing mystery as part of growth and understanding.

8. Symbolism — The Q movement and its communication style rely heavily on symbols, codes, and layered meanings. Geddes interprets these as tools to engage intuition and intellect, reflecting deeper truths and archetypes.

9. Anthropology — Geddes’ essays explore how the Q movement reframes humanity’s role in the struggle between good and evil. It highlights human agency, collective consciousness, and the power of individuals as “digital soldiers” to bring about transformation.

10. Theodicy — The Q movement grapples with the existence of evil, suffering, and corruption, presenting them as part of a larger battle in which justice will ultimately prevail. Geddes frames this struggle as part of a divine plan, addressing the theological question of why evil exists.

11. Nonduality — Geddes frequently discusses the need to transcend false dichotomies (e.g., left vs. right, mainstream vs. conspiracy) and see the unity behind apparent divisions. This resonates with the concept of nonduality, where deeper truths dissolve surface-level oppositions.

12. Sacramentality — While not explicitly theological, Geddes implies that engaging with Q drops and their implications is akin to a sacramental act—a way of participating in uncovering and embodying divine truth in the world.

The elements that most closely map onto Martin Geddes’ interpretation of Q drops include Typology, Revelation, Eschatology, Prolepsis, Cosmic Order, Theodicy, Paradox, and Mystical Experience. These reflect the Q movement’s emphasis on narrative decoding, spiritual awakening, and the interplay between human agency and a larger divine plan. Through Geddes’ lens, the Q drops become not just political or social tools, but profound spiritual invitations to engage with mystery, order, and transformation.

[END CHATGPT]

---

I have since spent a few hours saving lots of academic and media hit pieces on the Q drops (an objective text), the Anons (objective investigators of such text), and “QAnon” (a subjective narrative construct). These were then all fed through the AI, as we can perhaps learn more about the theology of Q from the implied theology of the anti-Q narrative. Here is what it produced, and it is a surprisingly good read.

[BEGIN CHATGPT]

The mainstream corpus that critiques QAnon does not explicitly engage in theological discourse, but it implicitly advances a secular theology—one that replaces traditional religious frameworks with institutional authority, information control, and psychological rehabilitation. Below are the key theological underpinnings of this narrative.

1. Good vs. Evil as a Social Construct

The corpus rejects traditional metaphysical concepts of good and evil and instead redefines them in political and social terms:

• Evil is framed as misinformation, radicalization, and distrust of institutions rather than a spiritual or moral failing.

• Good is equated with rationality, trust in experts, and adherence to state-sanctioned narratives rather than personal discernment or divine revelation.

• This results in a secular dualism where the battle is not between God and Satan but between conspiracy and expertise, or misinformation and fact-checking.

Implication: Moral authority is human-made, not divine. Salvation is found not through spiritual awakening but through trust in institutions.

2. The Eschatology of “De-Radicalization”

Traditional theology teaches about end-times prophecies and divine judgment, but this corpus frames QAnon itself as an apocalyptic movement that must be dismantled.

• Many sources discuss how Q followers either de-radicalize (redemption) or spiral into extremism (damnation).

• The act of "deprogramming" Q believers functions as a secular form of exorcism, where people are freed from ideological possession.

• The ultimate "end times" is when misinformation is eradicated and institutional truth reigns supreme.

Implication: Eschatology is no longer about divine intervention. Instead, the battle is to purge “false beliefs” from the public sphere.

3. Gnosticism in Reverse: The Rejection of Hidden Knowledge

Classical Gnosticism argues that salvation comes through hidden knowledge ("gnosis") revealed to a select few. The Q movement shares some gnostic tendencies in its belief that truth is concealed and must be uncovered.

• However, the corpus inverts Gnosticism, presenting hidden knowledge as deception rather than enlightenment.

• Q’s followers are framed as delusional for seeking secret truths, while wisdom is found in accepting mainstream narratives at face value.

• The role of the individual is not to seek knowledge but to defer to those deemed more qualified.

Implication: Seeking hidden knowledge is not a path to wisdom but a descent into conspiracy. Submission to expert knowledge is the true path to truth.

4. Secular Theodicy: The Problem of Evil as Misinformation

Traditional theodicy grapples with why a just God allows evil to exist. In the anti-Q narrative, evil is reframed as misinformation, and its solution is human intervention:

• Evil is not supernatural or metaphysical but informational—found in false narratives, unverified claims, and “dangerous” communities.

• The solution is not prayer or repentance but censorship, fact-checking, and deplatforming of those who spread falsehoods.

• Instead of a divine reckoning, justice comes through algorithmic control, state oversight, and media gatekeeping.

Implication: Evil is an information problem, not a spiritual one. The saviors are tech companies, intelligence agencies, and media outlets.

5. The Infallibility of Secular Priests

Religious traditions have long relied on priestly authority to interpret sacred texts. In the anti-Q worldview, this role is replaced by journalists, academics, and intelligence agencies:

• Just as priests interpret scripture, journalists and experts interpret reality for the public.

• Doubt is treated as heresy—questioning mainstream narratives is akin to sin, while faith in institutions is a sign of moral and intellectual virtue.

• The responsibility of the public is not to discern truth for themselves but to trust the ordained “truth-tellers.”

Implication: Media, government, and academia function as a new priesthood. Questioning their authority is an act of rebellion against the social order.

Final Summary: The Corpus as Secular Theology

While it presents itself as a neutral, fact-based examination of QAnon, the corpus actually constructs its own theological framework, where:
✔ Religious authority is replaced with institutional authority
✔ Good and evil are framed as matters of information control
✔ Eschatology is redefined as de-radicalization rather than divine reckoning
✔ Hidden knowledge is rejected as deception, not enlightenment
✔ Censorship, not divine grace, is the solution to misinformation

This secular theology demands obedience to institutions rather than engagement with divine truth. In doing so, it paradoxically mirrors some of the same hierarchical structures and dogmatic rigidity that it claims to oppose.

[END CHATGPT]

---

Astute readers will recognise the philosophy of critical theory embedded into this analysis, where everything is interpreted as an extension of the exercise of power, and its imbalances. There is no final truth, as everything is socially constructed. This Marxist doctrine eliminates the divine order, where harmony and peace rule. I cannot say that the AI’s output is anything like the final word on the theology of anti-Q propaganda, but it is definitely a good starting point for debate. As a source of clarity on the events of the past seven years it is exceptionally good, as I have not seen anyone venture so firmly into a theological analysis of Q, except to confirm their own pre-existing programmed religious biases.

Whether or not you accept the above analysis, we are clearly in a fundamentally new era of journalism, investigation, and research. We can immediately extract the subtexts, manipulations, and assumptions of any argument being offered (to a reasonable degree of accuracy). I am sure there are ways in which this can be weaponised to our detriment, but my hypothesis is that the cost of designing and maintaining lies, and the timescale of them bearing fruit to the liar, just changed radically — and for the benefit of humanity. Endless articles have been written about the potential dangers of AI, yet few have tried to use AI to redirect us towards the holy, sacred, and eternal. As such, I hope this analysis helps to inspire others to seize the opportunity to put rigorous spiritual discourse back into public debate.

A local icon, half an hour’s drive away from me