Date: August 14th, 2026 4:02 PM Author: Fiercely-loyal space
non-redemption is actually to remove the anger at god for being an asshole, it is an act of increased self-sufficiency, otherwise you're always waiting for Daddy God to save you
Date: August 14th, 2026 4:05 PM Author: Fiercely-loyal space
how do you not understand basic terms even after months of this, dude? we are discussing a god of *totality* which contains evil within the godhead, also good, we are not discussing a malevolent demiurge
Date: August 14th, 2026 4:10 PM Author: fear-inspiring antidepressant drug
"non-redemptive evil god" most straightforwardly reads as an evil deity that offers no path to redemption. your reading requires a specialized definition that you wouldn’t infer from the words themselves.
Date: August 14th, 2026 4:10 PM Author: Metaphysics Is Solved
he's repressing his anger and calling it a resolution. but jungians don't believe in repression so they create elaborate projective structures where "God" contains the evil they unconsciously harbor. it's all quite simple once you see it.
the move is literally "I am morally superior to the evil God"
we really don't have to solve this. deciding whether the problem of evil is incompatible with an omnipotent, benevolent god depends on us grappling with the immutable characteristics of the universe in a way we don't understand. i.e. maybe the good parts of humanity require that we have optionality to choose evil
Date: August 14th, 2026 9:10 PM Author: Fiercely-loyal space
it depends if your god image is in sync enough with your lived reality to function. if it is, you don't have to worry about it. my contention is that as redemptive narratives continue to fail as we descend into neoliberal feudal hell, the discrepancy between the redemptive god image and lived reality will continue to grow for many, causing increasing psychosomatic pressure. because both secular and religious institutional authority has been lost (and continues to lose whatever vestige remains), institutions can no longer carry the crucifixion of opposites for us, so we increasingly have to carry it on our own or suffer catastrophic mental breakdown like NSAM, nyuug and the incest pedophile goy superstar
fair enough! and, i'm not glibly dismissing the issue, as somebody corrected me on here 2-3 weeks ago and pointed out that many top scholars have spent time on it, eg leibniz, kant, st augustine, etc. but, that's my view