Anonymous
6/25/2025, 10:26:45 PM No.24496107
>God send Jesus to be sacrificed not for the sins of humanity, but in repentance for God's own sins.
Is he right?
Is he right?
Replies:
Thread 24496107 - /lit/ [Archived: 866 hours ago]
Anonymous
6/25/2025, 10:29:31 PM No.24496109
>>24496107 (OP)
No way he actually meant that. Is that a quote? That sounds insane
I know Jung claimed that he doesnt believe but that he knows God exists, but i wonder which kind of God would that be?
What you wrote is completely incompatible wirh Christianity
No way he actually meant that. Is that a quote? That sounds insane
I know Jung claimed that he doesnt believe but that he knows God exists, but i wonder which kind of God would that be?
What you wrote is completely incompatible wirh Christianity
Replies:
Anonymous
6/25/2025, 10:35:27 PM No.24496122
>>24496107 (OP)
Nah. He's not. He's into symbolism and syncretism, he's not even able to understand Christianity. It takes a giant brain to think as retardedly as Jung did.
Nah. He's not. He's into symbolism and syncretism, he's not even able to understand Christianity. It takes a giant brain to think as retardedly as Jung did.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/25/2025, 10:45:18 PM No.24496142
>>24496109
idk i just read wikipedia summary and wanted to know other anons opinions on this book before i read it
idk i just read wikipedia summary and wanted to know other anons opinions on this book before i read it
Anonymous
6/25/2025, 10:48:24 PM No.24496154
>>24496122
It is pretty funny that sometimes genuinely smart people will just use their intelligence to become extra-retarded.
It is pretty funny that sometimes genuinely smart people will just use their intelligence to become extra-retarded.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/25/2025, 11:04:26 PM No.24496194
His premise fundamentally misunderstands the nature of God.
God is eternally good, just, all-knowing, and unchanging.. He possesses no "unconscious shadow" nd does not "evolve"..
Jung's approach reduces the Bible from the literal, authoritative Word of God to merely a collection of symbolic stories or psychological archetypes, failing to take its divine revelation for what it is. The Incarnation of Christ was for humanity's redemption and the revelation of God's unchanging character, not for God's self-correction. Humans, as fallen creatures, cannot be morally superior to, or 'teach,' a perfect, transcendent God.
God is eternally good, just, all-knowing, and unchanging.. He possesses no "unconscious shadow" nd does not "evolve"..
Jung's approach reduces the Bible from the literal, authoritative Word of God to merely a collection of symbolic stories or psychological archetypes, failing to take its divine revelation for what it is. The Incarnation of Christ was for humanity's redemption and the revelation of God's unchanging character, not for God's self-correction. Humans, as fallen creatures, cannot be morally superior to, or 'teach,' a perfect, transcendent God.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/25/2025, 11:26:04 PM No.24496237
>>24496154
Be thankful for your immunity in that respect.
Be thankful for your immunity in that respect.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/25/2025, 11:27:42 PM No.24496241
Jung is a midwit
Replies:
Anonymous
6/25/2025, 11:43:33 PM No.24496272
ITT: christcucks seething
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 12:09:59 AM No.24496321
>>24496107 (OP)
No, Jung was a pseudo-spiritual larper who reduced religion and mythology down to his retarded psychoanalytic framework. Everybody who is interested in Jung should read about the nonsense he wrote in his Red Book, it'll dispel any admiration for him in an instant. He tried to be both a theologian and a psychoanalyst and he failed in both regards.
No, Jung was a pseudo-spiritual larper who reduced religion and mythology down to his retarded psychoanalytic framework. Everybody who is interested in Jung should read about the nonsense he wrote in his Red Book, it'll dispel any admiration for him in an instant. He tried to be both a theologian and a psychoanalyst and he failed in both regards.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 12:15:47 AM No.24496333
>>24496321
He was a midwit, and I don't mean this as an insult. People praising his genius are less than midwits, however.
He was a midwit, and I don't mean this as an insult. People praising his genius are less than midwits, however.
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 12:42:59 AM No.24496374
>>24496194
>all-knowing
Then how could Adam and Eve hide from him? And why didn't he know when they ate of the forbidden fruit?
>all-knowing
Then how could Adam and Eve hide from him? And why didn't he know when they ate of the forbidden fruit?
Replies:
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 12:45:45 AM No.24496378
>>24496321
The Red Book was a purely personal tract, never intended for publication. It's impossible to understand completely unless you are literally Jung.
And he was a psychoanalyst for 40 years. If he was a failure, people sure kept on asking him for help ...
The Red Book was a purely personal tract, never intended for publication. It's impossible to understand completely unless you are literally Jung.
And he was a psychoanalyst for 40 years. If he was a failure, people sure kept on asking him for help ...
Replies:
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 12:46:48 AM No.24496381
>>24496241
Yet he was exponentially more intelligent than you.
You might want to reflect on that, but I doubt you're capable.
Yet he was exponentially more intelligent than you.
You might want to reflect on that, but I doubt you're capable.
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 1:09:47 AM No.24496426
I was going to ask whomst god sinned against but the answer will probably be "against himself."
I never understood why people would be attracted to hearing this type of meaningless trash.
I never understood why people would be attracted to hearing this type of meaningless trash.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 1:16:02 AM No.24496433
>>24496378
>The Red Book was a purely personal tract, never intended for publication. It's impossible to understand completely unless you are literally Jung.
It was never intended for publication because it's a pseudo-Gnostic fanfic that reduces the spiritual to the human mind.
>And he was a psychoanalyst for 40 years. If he was a failure, people sure kept on asking him for help ...
Millions of people turn to pop psychology and vulgar behavioralism for help, that doesn't mean it's worthwhile.
>The Red Book was a purely personal tract, never intended for publication. It's impossible to understand completely unless you are literally Jung.
It was never intended for publication because it's a pseudo-Gnostic fanfic that reduces the spiritual to the human mind.
>And he was a psychoanalyst for 40 years. If he was a failure, people sure kept on asking him for help ...
Millions of people turn to pop psychology and vulgar behavioralism for help, that doesn't mean it's worthwhile.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 1:17:54 AM No.24496437
>>24496194
>God is eternally good
No he isn't, because he allows evil to manifest in the world.
Specifically, he allows Satan to torture Job.
>God is eternally good
No he isn't, because he allows evil to manifest in the world.
Specifically, he allows Satan to torture Job.
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 1:22:44 AM No.24496443
>>24496433
>it's a pseudo-Gnostic fanfic that reduces the spiritual to the human mind
No, it was an account of Jung's own individuatory journey, which is about as personal as it gets. The only person who needed to make sense of it was Jung himself.
And who are you to pass judgment on Jung's competence as a psychoanalyst, or more correctly, psychotherapist?
>it's a pseudo-Gnostic fanfic that reduces the spiritual to the human mind
No, it was an account of Jung's own individuatory journey, which is about as personal as it gets. The only person who needed to make sense of it was Jung himself.
And who are you to pass judgment on Jung's competence as a psychoanalyst, or more correctly, psychotherapist?
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 1:28:50 AM No.24496451
>>24496426
Against the largely innocent people of Egypt whose sons he took.
Against the largely innocent people of Egypt whose sons he took.
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 2:11:31 AM No.24496526
well yeah. when your children break something you pay for it
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 2:12:10 AM No.24496529
>>24496426
i think the answer may be in his book "answer to Job"
i think the answer may be in his book "answer to Job"
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 5:08:45 PM No.24497786
>>24496107 (OP)
Neither God nor Jesus exist as commonly understood so no. They're Jewish control programs.
Neither God nor Jesus exist as commonly understood so no. They're Jewish control programs.
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 5:11:31 PM No.24497794
>>24496433
>it's a pseudo-Gnostic fanfic that reduces the spiritual to the human mind.
Later in his career with the development of the concept of synchronicities Jung didn't have any materialist (only in the mind) view but saw archetypes as existing also outside the individual.
>it's a pseudo-Gnostic fanfic that reduces the spiritual to the human mind.
Later in his career with the development of the concept of synchronicities Jung didn't have any materialist (only in the mind) view but saw archetypes as existing also outside the individual.
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 5:12:35 PM No.24497797
>>24496426
>the answer will probably be "against himself."
He sinned against literally everything and everyone as he still does by not lifting his all powerful finger to fix the world he created and destroy evil.
>the answer will probably be "against himself."
He sinned against literally everything and everyone as he still does by not lifting his all powerful finger to fix the world he created and destroy evil.
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 5:19:06 PM No.24497815
>>24496374
I personally read the fall of man as metaphorical, but even if one wants to take it literally there are explanations for this.
Firstly God comes down right after they ate it specifically because he knew. Secondly (and this happens a few times in the bible) God feigns ignorance just to test them. He already knows what they did. He wants to confront them to see if they'll repent or fall further. Think of it like a parent who knows their child has done something wrong but confronts them as if they don't know just to see what the kid will do. To see if the kid will lie or to see how far they'll dig their own hole. That's what was happening.
I personally read the fall of man as metaphorical, but even if one wants to take it literally there are explanations for this.
Firstly God comes down right after they ate it specifically because he knew. Secondly (and this happens a few times in the bible) God feigns ignorance just to test them. He already knows what they did. He wants to confront them to see if they'll repent or fall further. Think of it like a parent who knows their child has done something wrong but confronts them as if they don't know just to see what the kid will do. To see if the kid will lie or to see how far they'll dig their own hole. That's what was happening.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 5:20:29 PM No.24497820
>>24497815
>God feigns ignorance just to test them. He already knows what they did. He wants to confront them to see if they'll repent or fall further.
So he is not all knowing. Gotcha.
>God feigns ignorance just to test them. He already knows what they did. He wants to confront them to see if they'll repent or fall further.
So he is not all knowing. Gotcha.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 5:30:48 PM No.24497842
>>24497820
Okay smartass, yes if you want to be pedantic I can rephrase it this way: God already knows how they will react as he is all knowing, but he is still allowing them the opportunity to exercise their free will to repent or lie further.
Milton has a great explanation of this in Paradise Lost in relation to Gods omnipotence versus free will. He might know what people do before they do it, how they will react before an event has happened to them but in those moments individuals are still exercising free will and choosing for themselves.
Okay smartass, yes if you want to be pedantic I can rephrase it this way: God already knows how they will react as he is all knowing, but he is still allowing them the opportunity to exercise their free will to repent or lie further.
Milton has a great explanation of this in Paradise Lost in relation to Gods omnipotence versus free will. He might know what people do before they do it, how they will react before an event has happened to them but in those moments individuals are still exercising free will and choosing for themselves.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 5:43:13 PM No.24497875
>>24496109
> Jung claimed that he doesnt believe but that he knows God exists, but i wonder which kind of God would that be?
The God all smart people refer to.
>incompatible with Christianity
Correct.
But don’t feel too sad christcuck your church fathers were busy adopting all the Greek ideas of monotheism and brute forcing it into the stupid desert storm God of the heebs. It’s why all refined arguments for God are incompatible with the moronic tribal one in the Bible. And why most Christians simply ignore everything in the OT (that also makes it far easier to swallow the blatant lies about “predictions” for Jesus in passages that have fuckall to do with him or even predicting anything at all).
> Jung claimed that he doesnt believe but that he knows God exists, but i wonder which kind of God would that be?
The God all smart people refer to.
>incompatible with Christianity
Correct.
But don’t feel too sad christcuck your church fathers were busy adopting all the Greek ideas of monotheism and brute forcing it into the stupid desert storm God of the heebs. It’s why all refined arguments for God are incompatible with the moronic tribal one in the Bible. And why most Christians simply ignore everything in the OT (that also makes it far easier to swallow the blatant lies about “predictions” for Jesus in passages that have fuckall to do with him or even predicting anything at all).
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 5:43:56 PM No.24497879
>>24497842
>Okay smartass, yes if you want to be pedantic
I'm not pedantic, I am showing your fallacious statement.
>I can rephrase it this way: God already knows how they will react as he is all knowing, but he is still allowing them the opportunity to exercise their free will to repent or lie further
Which serves nothing, they don't learn anything. They go to sin as God already knows and become cursed, as do their descendants because God is evil, in that same chapter God also lied btw.
>exercising free will and choosing for themselves.
All an illusion btw, determinism has debunked this lie long ago.
>Okay smartass, yes if you want to be pedantic
I'm not pedantic, I am showing your fallacious statement.
>I can rephrase it this way: God already knows how they will react as he is all knowing, but he is still allowing them the opportunity to exercise their free will to repent or lie further
Which serves nothing, they don't learn anything. They go to sin as God already knows and become cursed, as do their descendants because God is evil, in that same chapter God also lied btw.
>exercising free will and choosing for themselves.
All an illusion btw, determinism has debunked this lie long ago.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 7:48:20 PM No.24498184
>>24496109
Jung began with psychology, in which pain is an existent. Thus he disliked the privatio boni formulation of evil as incompatible with God being the highest Being, and thought God was both good and evil. He gives the privatio boni an attack in one of his late books but his metaphysics are clearly subservient to intuitions of divine evil from his childhood on (cf Memories Dreams Reflections). A strong psychologist; a dangerous and mistaken theologian.
Jung began with psychology, in which pain is an existent. Thus he disliked the privatio boni formulation of evil as incompatible with God being the highest Being, and thought God was both good and evil. He gives the privatio boni an attack in one of his late books but his metaphysics are clearly subservient to intuitions of divine evil from his childhood on (cf Memories Dreams Reflections). A strong psychologist; a dangerous and mistaken theologian.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 7:50:42 PM No.24498190
>>24498184
(To expand, for Jung the term "God" is effectively "the Self", the totality of psychically potential experience; and pain is aming the totality of psychic potential.)
(To expand, for Jung the term "God" is effectively "the Self", the totality of psychically potential experience; and pain is aming the totality of psychic potential.)
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 7:51:28 PM No.24498191
>>24498090
Free will is fake and gay. Show me an action that is free from cause and effect, not hypothetical but something you can do.
Free will is fake and gay. Show me an action that is free from cause and effect, not hypothetical but something you can do.
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 8:55:51 PM No.24498331
>>24498090
Either your will is contingent on something, and thus determined by it or it is contingent on nothing and is definitionally random. In either case, you do not have "Free Will". There is no alternative.
Either your will is contingent on something, and thus determined by it or it is contingent on nothing and is definitionally random. In either case, you do not have "Free Will". There is no alternative.
Anonymous
6/26/2025, 9:16:16 PM No.24498384
>>24496237
Lmao
Lmao
