Search Results
6/23/2025, 7:18:06 PM
>>22857227
So now “king” means deserves to rule, not actually rules. That’s not kingship, that’s celestial fan fiction. You admit evil runs wild, the world ignores him, and nothing happens—but somehow that’s still “rule” because you feel he’s worthy. That’s not theology, that’s a desperate rebrand. If your god’s power needs to be defended by essays on metaphysics and “zero time delay logic,” then he’s not ruling anything—he’s just the guy you insist is in charge while reality steamrolls your beliefs.
And calling it “cope” isn’t deflection—it’s description. You’re literally spiritualizing absence, narrativizing divine silence, and calling it patience to avoid the fact that your king doesn’t act. A real king doesn’t need his followers to do verbal gymnastics to explain why the kingdom is invisible, ineffective, and ignored. You’re not defending God—you’re filling in for him. That’s why you’re angry: deep down, you know it.
So now “king” means deserves to rule, not actually rules. That’s not kingship, that’s celestial fan fiction. You admit evil runs wild, the world ignores him, and nothing happens—but somehow that’s still “rule” because you feel he’s worthy. That’s not theology, that’s a desperate rebrand. If your god’s power needs to be defended by essays on metaphysics and “zero time delay logic,” then he’s not ruling anything—he’s just the guy you insist is in charge while reality steamrolls your beliefs.
And calling it “cope” isn’t deflection—it’s description. You’re literally spiritualizing absence, narrativizing divine silence, and calling it patience to avoid the fact that your king doesn’t act. A real king doesn’t need his followers to do verbal gymnastics to explain why the kingdom is invisible, ineffective, and ignored. You’re not defending God—you’re filling in for him. That’s why you’re angry: deep down, you know it.
Page 1