Pain, Pessimism, Metaphysics & the Biblical Doctrine of Suffering: A Critical Examination of 4chan /x/ Thread No. 42961855

UPDATED BY VCG ON 9/17/2026 @ 21:21 EST#

Anyone can do this, but most won't.#

ChatGPT - Library of Rickandria

Reader’s Note#

This paper examines an anonymous 4chan /x/ discussion about:

• pain
• pessimism
• suicide
• consciousness
• Buddhist cosmology
• esoteric metaphysics
• Schopenhauer
• Christian teaching

The thread is treated as a case study in how serious existential questions can become entangled with:

• anonymous testimony
• philosophy
• internet rhetoric
• theology

The goal is not to diagnose anonymous users, identify them, or infer hidden motives.

/x/ - Are humans made to suffer? I'm not a cynical/edgy - Paranormal - 4chan

Where posters report:

• homelessness
• illness
• occult practice

or suicidal thinking, those statements are treated as reports of experience.

They are not treated as proof of the poster’s proposed causal explanation.

Likewise, a theological correction is identified as theological interpretation unless the claim is directly stated in the biblical text.

/x/ - Are humans made to suffer? I'm not a cynical/edgy - Paranormal - 4chan

Primary-source note:

4chan threads are ephemeral.

Post numbers and timestamps are therefore used as stable internal identifiers within the live thread as accessed on September 17, 2026.

Only very short phrases are quoted from the thread; the analysis otherwise paraphrases the posts to preserve context without reproducing the discussion wholesale.

Biblical text: Scripture quotations are from the user-supplied Authorized King James Version, Pure Cambridge Edition.

The distinction between the biblical text and later Christian interpretation is maintained throughout.

Abstract#

A September 2026 thread on 4chan’s /x/ board begins with a deceptively simple question:

whether human beings are:

“made to suffer.”

From there the discussion expands into:

• pain science
• philosophical pessimism
• spiritual growth
• Buddhist cosmology
• consciousness
• self-hypnosis
• Gnostic-like anti-cosmic themes
• personal testimony
• suicide
• moral responsibility
• Schopenhauer

This paper audits those claims using five separate lenses:

• primary-source reading
• empirical evidence
• logical analysis
• psychological research
• biblical exegesis

The central methodological finding is that the thread repeatedly crosses categories without acknowledging the move.

An empirical premise such as:

“pain can be adaptive,”

a personal premise such as:

“suffering changed me,”

or a phenomenological premise such as:

“meditation altered my experience”

is frequently converted into a metaphysical conclusion about the purpose or nature of existence.

Those conclusions require additional arguments that the thread generally does not supply.

The scientific literature supports a complex biopsychosocial account of pain:

• pain is not identical with nociception
• acute pain often has protective value
• chronic pain can become disabling and cognitively burdensome

and the prevalence of chronic pain increases with age without making severe pain inevitable for every older person.

Evidence on post-traumatic growth does not support the simple rule that suffering reliably produces genuine growth, and evidence on hypnosis does not support claims that ordinary self-hypnosis makes severe pain easy to abolish.

Research on online disinhibition and just-world reasoning helps explain certain interaction patterns, but does not license clinical diagnosis of anonymous posters.

The biblical analysis finds that the thread’s shorthand:

“Christianity says pain is good”

is inadequate.

• Genesis presents creation as good
• Romans links death and corruption to sin
• Romans 8 describes creation as groaning under corruption
• Paul can ask repeatedly for affliction to be removed while also testifying that God works through weakness
• death is called an enemy

and Revelation’s final horizon removes:

• death
• sorrow
• crying
• pain

Scripture therefore permits a doctrine of redemptive use of suffering without requiring the conclusion that suffering is intrinsically good or humanity’s created purpose.

The paper closes by reconstructing the strongest objections, identifying what remains unresolved, and offering a more disciplined answer to the thread’s original question.

Thesis and Scope#

This paper does not argue that Christianity is proven merely because anonymous internet arguments fail.

Nor does it treat scientific findings as if they could adjudicate every metaphysical question.

Its narrower thesis is that the thread’s central question becomes confused because participants repeatedly collapse distinct kinds of claims.

Once those claims are separated, several conclusions become possible with much greater confidence.

Pain science can describe:

• mechanisms
• prevalence
• impairment
• treatment evidence

it cannot by itself establish a cosmic purpose for suffering.

Personal experience can establish that a person reports having suffered or changed; it cannot by itself establish a universal metaphysics.

Psychological research can illuminate interaction patterns at a population level; it cannot diagnose an anonymous individual from a thread.

Philosophical arguments can test whether conclusions follow from premises; they still depend on the truth or defensibility of those premises.

Scripture can be examined for what it actually says; later theological systems should not be silently substituted for the biblical text.

Refuting a caricature of Christianity is not the same as solving the problem of evil; the strongest form of that problem deserves to be stated fairly.

How to Read the Labels#

Contents#

1. Methodology: How the Claims Were Audited#

2. Thread Map: From Pain Science to Metaphysics#

3. The Opening Question: Are Humans Made to Suffer?#

4. Walking Through the Thread, Phase by Phase#

5. Pain Science: What the Empirical Evidence Can and Cannot Show#

6. Psychology and Rhetoric: How the Conversation Escalates#

7. The Strongest Philosophical Objection: Horrendous and Apparently Gratuitous Suffering#

8. Comparative Metaphysics: Christianity, Buddhism, Schopenhauer, and Gnostic-Like Themes#

9. A Biblical Theology of Suffering#

10. Bad Theology the Bible Itself Rebukes#

11. Historical Christian Interpretations: Scripture and Tradition Kept Distinct#

12. When Metaphysics Becomes Dangerous: Suicide, Shame, and the Ethics of Response#

13. What the Thread Gets Right#

14. Claims We Cannot Resolve from the Thread#

15. Reconstructing an Answer to the Original Poster#

16. Conclusion#

Appendix A. Claim Audit#

Appendix B. Rhetorical and Logical Patterns#

Appendix C. Scripture Index: What Each Passage Establishes—and Does Not#

Bibliography#

1. Methodology: How the Claims Were Audited#

The thread was read as a chain of claims rather than as a single ideology.

That choice matters.

Different posters advocate incompatible positions:

some treat pain as a developmental tool, others as evidence against the value of existence; some invoke Buddhist detachment, others a receiver theory of consciousness, others Schopenhauer, and still others Christian moral language.

Treating the whole thread as one worldview would therefore create a straw man.

1.1 Primary-source procedure#

The live /x/ thread was accessed on September 17, 2026.

Each substantive post was identified by post number, placed in its reply context, and paraphrased.

A post’s autobiographical report was separated from the interpretation attached to that report.

For example,

“I have suffered for years”

and

“therefore my condition was caused by a curse”

are two different propositions requiring two different evidentiary standards.

1.2 Evidence hierarchy#

For empirical claims, priority was given to:

• professional definitions
• government surveillance
• systematic reviews
• meta-analyses
• peer-reviewed reviews

For philosophy and intellectual history, standard reference works and primary philosophical texts were used to establish what a tradition actually teaches.

For Scripture, the supplied KJV text was treated as the primary source; historical theologians were cited as historical interpreters, not as substitutes for Scripture.

1.3 Logic test#

Each major inference was tested for validity or at least argumentative adequacy.

Several recurring problems emerged:

quantifier shifts (“some” becomes “all”)

category shifts (empirical evidence becomes metaphysical purpose)

analogy inflation (a metaphor is treated as a mechanism)

self-sealing claims (disagreement is itself interpreted as proof of the theory)

and genetic fallacies (a claim is dismissed because of the kind of person thought to hold it).

1.4 Psychological restraint#

Psychology is used here to describe mechanisms that have empirical support—such as online disinhibition, just-world reasoning, cognitive bias in perceived growth, and the cognitive burden associated with chronic pain.

It is not used to diagnose:

• narcissistic personality disorder
• psychosis
• trauma disorders

or any other condition in anonymous participants.

Anonymous text is not a clinical assessment.

1.5 Biblical procedure#

Biblical analysis follows a simple discipline:

first establish the wording and literary context of a passage; then state the minimum proposition that passage supports; only after that move to theological synthesis.

Where Christians disagree about broader systems—

• providence
• theodicy
• soul-making
• free will

or the exact intermediate state—the disagreement is identified rather than concealed.

1.6 Limitations#

The thread is anonymous;

• identity
• biography
• sincerity
• clinical status

cannot be independently verified.

4chan is ephemeral; the live URL may later disappear, so post numbers and the present audit should be treated as the documentary index.

The scientific sources describe populations and study samples, not the medical status of particular posters.

The empirical literature cannot by itself prove or disprove:

• God
• reincarnation
• a soul
• idealism
• physicalism

or a receiver model of consciousness.

The biblical analysis establishes what the cited text says and how a coherent synthesis can be argued; it does not erase longstanding theological disagreements.

A successful rebuttal of a weak anti-Christian claim does not automatically prove a Christian doctrine. Positive claims need positive support.

2. Thread Map: From Pain Science to Metaphysics#

The easiest way to understand the discussion is as a series of shifts in the question being asked.

The thread starts with biology, but it does not stay there.

3. The Opening Question: Are Humans Made to Suffer?#

The opening post is stronger than many of the replies because it begins with uncertainty.

The poster is not merely declaring that life is meaningless;

he is trying to understand why a nervous system capable of:

• beauty
• pleasure
• attachment
• thought

is also capable of devastating pain.

He points to:

• illness
• aging
• unequal burdens
• religious explanations that have not satisfied him

and the moral question of suicide.

Trauma, Agency & the Soul: A Psychological, Methodological & Biblical Critique of Online Discourse Surrounding Abuse & Suicidal Despair – Library of Rickandria

The central ambiguity appears immediately, however:

“made to suffer”

can mean at least three different things.

Made capable of pain:

a biological proposition about nervous systems.

Likely to encounter suffering: a statistical proposition about human life.

Made for the purpose of suffering: a teleological or theological proposition about why humans exist.

These propositions are not interchangeable.

A nervous system can have pain pathways without suffering being the purpose of the organism.

A population can show increasing chronic-pain prevalence with age without every older person being destined for extreme pain.

And a world containing suffering does not, without further argument, tell us whether suffering is:

• intended
• permitted
• emergent
• disordered
• redemptively used

or metaphysically ultimate.

Christ, Buddha & the Meaning of Suffering: A Biblical, Historical, Psychological & Methodological Critique of a 4chan Religious Debate – Library of Rickandria

EMPIRICAL#

The International Association for the Study of Pain defines pain as an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with, or resembling that associated with, actual or potential tissue damage.

Its explanatory notes stress that pain is personal, influenced by biological, psychological, and social factors, and not identical with nociception.

The same source notes that pain usually serves an adaptive role but may also adversely affect function and well-being (Raja et al. 2020; IASP 2020).

SCRIPTURE#

Genesis opens with creation repeatedly called good and climaxes with “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Genesis 3 then introduces sorrow, cursed ground, toil, and return to dust within the narrative of transgression.

Whatever larger theological system one adopts, the text’s sequence is not

“humanity created for pain”

it is good creation followed by corruption, sorrow, and death.

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. — Genesis 1:31, KJV

4. Walking Through the Thread, Phase by Phase#

What follows is intentionally chronological.

The aim is not to “win” against anonymous posters but to show, at each turn, what is being claimed, what kind of evidence would be needed, and where Scripture is being represented accurately or inaccurately.

4.1 Posts 42961864–42962133: pain, growth, and the temptation to universalize#

The first replies quickly split between two intuitions.

One poster says suffering is bad but pain can be a natural stage in growth.

Another reduces nearly all human action to pain avoidance and describes the neutral state as a kind of bliss obscured by pain.

A later reply objects that some pain is so intense that it compromises thought itself.

Another poster answers that humans can still help one another and find joy in the presence of suffering, while a different user describes human life as a larval stage whose postmortem successor will scarcely remember it.

EMPIRICAL#

The objection about cognition is not trivial.

A systematic review of 53 clinical studies found chronic pain associated with abnormalities particularly in memory, attention, and processing speed, while evidence for executive-function effects was mixed (Higgins et al. 2018).

This does not mean every sufferer is cognitively impaired, but it does undercut moral rhetoric that assumes severe pain leaves deliberation untouched.

PSYCHOLOGICAL#

“Pain can lead to growth”

must not be inflated into:

“pain reliably causes growth.”

A large systematic review and meta-analysis covering 154 independent samples and 98,436 participants found no general warrant for the simplistic rule that negative events uniquely produce genuine positive growth.

The literature also distinguishes self-perceived growth from independently demonstrable change (Mangelsdorf, Eid, and Luhmann 2019).

METAPHYSICAL#

The larval-stage analogy is imaginative but evidentially idle.

Caterpillars establish facts about caterpillars.

They do not establish postmortem transformation, memory erasure, or reincarnational identity in human beings.

To become an argument, the analogy needs an independent account of what survives death and why.

SCRIPTURE#

The Christian text does not frame hope as becoming a different creature that forgets human existence.

The New Testament’s dominant final hope is resurrection (1 Corinthians 15), and Hebrews 9:27 presents one death followed by judgment.

Those texts do not by themselves answer every question about the intermediate state, but they do conflict with a cycle of repeated lives or a postmortem species-change with amnesia.

4.2 Post 42962232: self-hypnosis and “full anesthesia”#

A poster recommends self-hypnosis and suggests that pain can be fully anesthetized fairly easily, while also connecting pain with the seeker’s path and a disciplined movement beyond attachment to pleasure.

The philosophical counsel about equanimity is one thing; the clinical claim about pain control is another.

EMPIRICAL#

The strongest contemporary evidence does not justify:

“easy full anesthesia”

as a general claim.

A 2024 systematic review and meta-analysis of adjunctive hypnosis found small additional analgesic effects in several clinical contexts and some medium effects in narrower comparisons, but rated the overall certainty of evidence very low.

The authors therefore emphasize uncertainty rather than effortless abolition of pain (Jones et al. 2024).

This is a useful example of why category labels matter.

“Nonattachment may help me live differently with pain”

is a personal or philosophical claim.

“Self-hypnosis can fully anesthetize severe pain fairly easily”

is a medical-effectiveness claim.

The second needs controlled evidence.

4.3 Posts 42962420–42963096: reality, gurus, samadhi, and the brain-as-receiver model#

The conversation then pivots.

Posters accuse one another of denying reality or behaving like would-be gurus.

Samadhi is invoked as evidence that humans cannot have been made to suffer.

Another user proposes that the brain is better understood as a receiver than as a generator of consciousness;

a reply asks why such a:

“receiver factory”

yields coherent personal streams rather than informational cacophony.

PHILOSOPHICAL#

Questioning physicalism is not pathology.

Philosophy of mind contains live debates among:

• physicalist
• dualist
• idealist
• panpsychist

and other views.

What is not warranted is the move from:

“physicalism is philosophically disputed”

to

“therefore the receiver model is established.”

A receiver theory must explain what is received, how it is individuated, how personal continuity works, and how systematic changes in brain state alter conscious experience.

EMPIRICAL#

Contemporary neuroscience strongly investigates the dependence of conscious states on brain activity, including the effects of:

• lesions
• stimulation
• sleep
• anesthesia

That dependence constrains theories of mind, but correlation/dependence data do not by themselves settle every metaphysical question about consciousness.

The careful conclusion is therefore neither:

“neuroscience proves reductive materialism”

nor

“mystery proves the brain is a radio.”

SCRIPTURE#

Second Corinthians 12 is sometimes recruited into:

“consciousness outside the brain”

arguments because Paul says he cannot tell whether his extraordinary experience occurred

“in the body”

or

“out of the body.”

But Paul’s point is precisely epistemic restraint:

“God knoweth.”

Converting his uncertainty into a neurological receiver mechanism reverses the force of the passage.

whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth; — 2 Corinthians 12:2, KJV

4.4 Posts 42964724–42968813: entropy, Buddhist realms, extinction, and the “uncreated eternal self”#

The next phase widens the metaphysical field.

One poster uses warmth and entropy as an image for suffering; another summarizes Buddhist cosmology as a hierarchy of realms with different balances of pleasure and pain.

A pessimistic thought experiment asks whether eliminating all sentient life could be considered merciful if suffering were the supreme evil.

Then a poster asserts that the real self is not human, body, or mind, but eternal and never created.

RHETORICAL#

Entropy can be a powerful metaphor, but thermodynamic entropy is a technical physical concept.

A metaphorical movement from entropy to psychological pain to spiritual destiny does not become a causal explanation merely because the same word “disorder” feels appropriate at all three levels.

HISTORY OF RELIGIONS#

The broad outline of the Buddhist six-realm cosmology is recognizable:

traditions describe:

• gods/devas
• humans
• animals
• hungry ghosts
• hell beings

and sometimes jealous gods, with different characteristic mixtures of pleasure and suffering.

But the thread’s:

“half pleasure, half suffering”

formulation should be treated as shorthand, not a measured canonical ratio.

Samadhi, likewise, refers to states of concentration or meditative absorption; the existence of such states does not itself settle the teleology of human suffering.

PHILOSOPHICAL#

The:

“benevolent world-destruction”

thought experiment is a real pressure point for strongly suffering-focused consequentialisms.

Contemporary philosophical literature refers to versions of a world-destruction objection to negative utilitarianism.

What the argument exposes is the importance of the hidden axiom:

if reducing suffering is literally the sole final value, annihilation may appear attractive.

Competing moral theories deny that suffering is the only value and therefore resist the inference.

SCRIPTURE#

The claim that the human self:

“was never made”

directly conflicts with the Creator-creature distinction in the biblical text.

Genesis 2:7 depicts the LORD God forming man from dust and man becoming a living soul.

The verse does not depict an eternally preexistent human self descending into a disposable body. Christian resurrection teaching further resists a simple:

“body as prison”

anthropology.

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground ... and man became a living soul. — Genesis 2:7, KJV

4.5 Posts 42970150–42970876: when the argument becomes autobiographical#

At this point the discussion becomes more ethically serious.

Participants describe:

• parental rejection
• homelessness
• chronic affliction
• failed attempts at relief
• occult practices

THE PHYSICAL AILMENTS OF OCCULTISTS: A line-by-line critical analysis – Library of Rickandria

One poster concludes from prolonged suffering that the world itself is suffering and wonders whether an esoteric framework best explains it.

Another participant expresses explicit suicidal thinking and a desire to exit life.

Responses fracture into two camps:

one emphasizes personal autonomy;

another attacks the suicidal participant as:

• cowardly
• burdensome,
• spiritually rotten

and deserving of condemnation.

This is where a methodological distinction becomes morally important.

A person’s testimony can establish the seriousness of the reported suffering.

It does not automatically validate the proposed metaphysics.

At the same time, failure to validate a metaphysical explanation does not entitle an observer to minimize the suffering.

PSYCHOLOGICAL#

The thread repeatedly slips into just-world reasoning:

if a person remains stuck, perhaps the person failed to try, grow, transcend, or take responsibility.

Research on belief in a just world has examined how threats posed by innocent suffering can contribute to victim-blaming responses.

That research does not diagnose these posters, but it describes a mechanism worth guarding against (van den Bos and Maas 2009).

SCRIPTURE#

Job is a sustained warning against simplistic reverse engineering of suffering into guilt.

John 9:1–3 rejects the disciples’ proposed inference that congenital blindness must be traced to the man’s sin or his parents’ sin.

Luke 13:1–5 similarly rejects the assumption that victims of violence or disaster were worse sinners than others.

These passages do not deny moral consequences; they deny the right to infer a sufferer’s special guilt merely from the severity of the suffering.

4.6 Post 42971387: the strongest epistemic point in the argument#

Late in the conflict, one of the harsher posters makes a point worth preserving:

reality does not owe us beliefs that feel good.

An unpleasant proposition can be true, and a comforting proposition can be false.

As an epistemic principle, this is sound.

Its weakness in the thread is asymmetry:

the principle is mostly applied to opponents rather than to the speaker’s own preferred worldview.

4.7 Posts 42971546–42972125: pain as signal, the rope and snake, civilization, and Schopenhauer#

The thread closes its substantive phase with several compressed theses.

Pain is described as a signal telling the organism to move away from harm; the Indian rope-and-snake analogy is invoked to suggest that ordinary perception may misidentify reality; civilization is accused of taming nature by domesticating human beings; and Schopenhauer is offered as the most sophisticated case for the proposition that blind striving makes suffering fundamental.

EMPIRICAL#

The “signal” description is broadly useful for acute protective pain, but not sufficient for chronic pain.

Pain can persist after tissue healing or arise through mechanisms for which:

“move away from the damaging object”

is no longer a complete model.

That is one reason modern definitions distinguish pain from nociception.

PHILOSOPHICAL#

The rope-and-snake illustration demonstrates the possibility of misperception; it does not tell us which worldview is the rope and which is the imagined snake.

• Christians
• Buddhists
• Advaitins
• idealists
• physicalists

could all accuse one another of mistaking appearance for reality.

The analogy needs an independent criterion of correction.

HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY#

The Schopenhauer reference is substantially grounded.

Schopenhauer’s system describes the world as manifestation of a blind, purposeless striving or will; living beings repeatedly strive, satisfy wants only temporarily, and suffer.

His aesthetics, compassion, and ascetic resignation offer partial release from servitude to willing.

But:

“biological drives are powerful”

still does not entail:

“humans were intentionally made for suffering.”

The latter is a teleological conclusion, and Schopenhauer’s own metaphysics is what supplies the larger claim.

4.8 The last stage: status warfare replaces inquiry#

By the end, posters repeatedly attack one another through:

• age
• class
• privilege
• masculinity
• spiritual maturity

and alleged lack of real suffering.

The remaining valid point is thin but important:

a rude or unserious person can occasionally state something true, and a polite person can state something false.

Character matters ethically, but it cannot substitute for testing propositions.

The thread began with a question about suffering and ended, in large part, with competition over who had earned the right to speak about it.

5. Pain Science: What the Empirical Evidence Can and Cannot Show#

5.1 Pain is not one thing#

The thread repeatedly talks as though “pain” were a single uniform signal.

Contemporary pain science is more careful.

Nociception is the neural process of encoding noxious stimuli; pain is the conscious sensory and emotional experience.

Acute pain often has a protective relationship to injury.

Chronic pain may persist beyond normal healing, be maintained by ongoing disease, involve neuropathic mechanisms, or become a condition in its own right.

Emotional suffering can accompany physical pain without being reducible to it.

5.2 Aging increases risk; it does not establish destiny#

The OP is directionally correct that chronic pain becomes more common with age, but the phrase:

“we age, therefore the nervous system will endure lots and lots of pain”

turns a population gradient into individual destiny. In the U.S. National Health Interview Survey for 2023, 24.3% of adults reported chronic pain and 8.5% high-impact chronic pain.

Prevalence increased with age; the report found substantially higher rates among adults 65 and older than among adults 18–29 (Lucas and Sohi 2024).

This supports increased risk, not inevitability.

5.3 Severe pain can impair cognition#

The thread’s challenge—what about pain so severe that a person cannot think normally?—should be taken seriously.

The systematic review by Higgins and colleagues found evidence of abnormal performance in memory, attention, and processing speed among chronic-pain samples, while also emphasizing confounding factors and uneven methodology.

A moral theory of suffering that assumes every sufferer has undiminished cognitive bandwidth is therefore unrealistic.

5.4 Hypnosis: possible adjunct, not magic off-switch#

Hypnosis has a legitimate research literature.

That makes overstatement more—not less—important to correct.

Jones and colleagues’ 2024 meta-analysis found some additional analgesic benefit when hypnosis was added to usual care or certain interventions, yet judged overall evidence certainty very low.

The honest conclusion is:

“there may be clinically useful adjunctive effects in some contexts,”

not

“pain can generally be fully anesthetized with ease.”

5.5 What science cannot conclude#

No pain study can move directly from nociceptive function to cosmic intent.

• Natural selection
• neurobiology
• epidemiology

address mechanisms and patterns.

“Why is there something like pain in organisms?”

may have evolutionary answers.

“Why does God permit this instance of agony?”

or

“Was consciousness placed in matter to learn through pain?”

are different questions.

They require philosophical or theological premises.

6. Psychology and Rhetoric: How the Conversation Escalates#

The psychological analysis is most useful when it describes conditions of interaction rather than personalities.

The medium matters: anonymous imageboards reduce ordinary social cues, encourage rapid identity shifts, and reward memorable provocation.

But:

“anonymous behavior reveals the true self”

is too simple.

6.1 Online disinhibition#

John Suler’s classic account of the online disinhibition effect identifies several contributors—including:

• dissociative anonymity
• invisibility
• asynchronicity
• solipsistic introjection
• dissociative imagination

and minimization of authority.

He distinguishes benign from toxic disinhibition and explicitly resists the simplistic idea that online behavior always reveals one hidden authentic self (Suler 2004).

This is a better fit to the thread than armchair diagnoses.

6.2 4chan’s design context#

Research on 4chan has documented unusually strong anonymity and ephemerality.

The frequently cited empirical study by Bernstein and colleagues examined /b/, not /x/, so its quantitative findings should not be transferred directly to this thread.

It is still useful for understanding a platform design in which persistent identity and long-term reputational costs are weak.

6.3 Just-world pressure and victim-blaming#

Some participants repeatedly interpret persistent suffering as evidence that the sufferer has failed to develop, take responsibility, or try the right combination of physical and spiritual methods.

Sometimes agency genuinely matters.

The error is moving from:

“some suffering is self-maintained”

to:

“continued suffering demonstrates moral or spiritual failure.”

Research on just-world reasoning helps explain why innocent suffering can create pressure to locate fault in the victim (van den Bos and Maas 2009).

6.4 Post-traumatic growth without romanticizing trauma#

The thread contains a psychologically understandable statement:

“pain shaped me.”

That may be true for the speaker.

The inference:

“therefore souls require pain”

is not.

Research on post-traumatic growth makes the distinction especially important.

People often report positive changes after adversity, but perceived growth and genuine longitudinal change are not identical, and negative events do not automatically outperform positive events as engines of growth.

A humane account can honor transformation without declaring the wound necessary.

6.5 Common rhetorical moves#

7. The Strongest Philosophical Objection: Horrendous and Apparently Gratuitous Suffering#

A careful Christian response should not spend all its energy defeating weak slogans.

The hardest version of the problem is not:

“pain exists, therefore God does not.”

It is the evidential weight of suffering that appears excessive, unevenly distributed, unrelated to free choices, or destructive rather than formative:

• infant disease
• animal suffering
• congenital disability
• disaster
• torture
• chronic pain
• dementia

and lives in which hardship seems to crush rather than build character.

7.1 Why “free will” is not a complete answer#

Free-will defenses address some moral evil:

if meaningful agency requires the possibility of wrongdoing, then some human-inflicted harms may be connected to the conditions of agency.

But the argument does not by itself explain:

• earthquakes
• genetic disease
• predation
• infant suffering

or why the intensity and distribution of pain take the forms they do.

Those questions remain.

7.2 Why “soul-making” is not a complete answer#

Soul-making approaches argue that:

• courage
• compassion
• endurance
• forgiveness

and mature agency may require a world containing difficulty.

The idea has a long philosophical-theological history and has been developed in modern form by John Hick among others.

But it faces a distribution problem:

some suffering seems to destroy agency, occurs before character can develop, or falls on animals.

The existence of virtues formed through adversity therefore cannot simply be universalized into:

“every instance of suffering was individually necessary for growth.”

7.3 The evidential problem should be stated, not caricatured#

Contemporary philosophy of religion distinguishes logical and evidential formulations of the problem of evil. =

The evidential problem asks whether the kinds, amounts, and distribution of suffering we observe count against the probability or plausibility of an all-good, all-knowing, all-powerful God.

“I Am God”: A Biblical, Philosophical, Psychological& Scientific Examination of Solipsism, Nonduality, Simulation Theory & Internet Metaphysics – Library of Rickandria

A Christian can answer with:

• providence
• limited human perspective
• the cross
• resurrection
• future judgment

an atheist can argue that these explanations are insufficient.

The intellectual obligation is to state the disagreement accurately rather than pretend a single verse makes the evidential problem disappear.

7.4 What the thread contributes#

The anonymous thread contributes something philosophers sometimes sanitize:

the first-person pressure of prolonged pain.

That pressure should not be confused with a deductive proof, but neither should it be dismissed.

Any theodicy that cannot speak without contempt to a person whose life has become almost unendurable is morally as well as rhetorically impoverished.

8. Comparative Metaphysics: Christianity, Buddhism, Schopenhauer, and Gnostic-Like Themes#

The thread often blends systems that diagnose suffering in very different ways.

The following comparison is deliberately schematic; each tradition contains internal diversity.

Its purpose is to prevent terms such as “detachment,” “escape,” “soul,” and “salvation” from being treated as though they meant the same thing everywhere.

8.1 Buddhism: where the thread is close and where it is loose#

The thread is broadly right that Buddhist cosmologies can rank modes of rebirth by characteristic pleasure and suffering and that the human realm is often presented as a particularly favorable place for practice because it combines opportunity with dissatisfaction.

It is looser when it turns this into a numerical:

“half-and-half”

formula.

More importantly, importing Buddhist vocabulary into a Christian argument without carrying over Buddhist doctrines of impermanence, non-self, karma, and liberation creates a hybrid worldview that neither tradition necessarily recognizes.

8.2 Schopenhauer: the strongest intellectual pessimist in the thread#

Schopenhauer deserves more than a meme.

In his philosophy, the world as representation expresses a deeper blind striving.

Desire arises from lack; satisfaction is temporary; boredom follows; striving restarts.

Nature appears as conflict among manifestations of the same will.

This is a serious metaphysical pessimism, not simply depression translated into prose.

Yet the thread often treats his diagnosis as if biology alone proved it.

It does not.

Schopenhauer’s conclusion depends on his metaphysics and value theory as well as observation.

8.3 Gnostic-like anti-cosmic claims#

The claim that the true self is eternal, never created, and essentially non-human resembles themes found in some ancient Gnostic and modern esoteric systems more than biblical creation theology.

“Gnosticism” is itself a loose scholarly label; Christopher Stead describes a family of movements involving saving gnosis and myths in which human spirit becomes trapped in an inferior material order.

The comparison therefore identifies a family resemblance, not proof that an anonymous poster belongs to any historical sect.

9. A Biblical Theology of Suffering#

The thread’s Christian shorthand can be corrected only by following the whole biblical arc. Isolated proof-texts are too easy to weaponize.

The relevant sequence is:

• creation
• rupture
• lament
• providence
• incarnation
• cross
• Christian affliction
• resurrectio
• new creation

9.1 Creation: good, embodied, creaturely

Genesis 1 repeatedly calls created realities good and concludes with the whole created order “very good” (Genesis 1:31).

Genesis 2:7 describes the LORD God forming man from dust and breathing life into him, so that man:

“became a living soul.”

Two corrections follow.

First, the text does not begin with bodily existence as a punishment.

Second, it does not present the human self as eternally uncreated.

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. — Genesis 1:31, KJV

and man became a living soul. — Genesis 2:7, KJV

9.2 Genesis 3: sorrow and death enter the human condition#

Genesis 3 narrates disobedience followed by:

• shame
• alienation
• multiplied sorrow
• cursed ground
• painful toil
• return to dust

Christians differ over the precise relation between this:

• text
• original sin
• evolutionary history
• natural evil

But within the narrative itself suffering is not introduced as the goal for which the garden was made.

It appears within a story of rupture and judgment.

9.3 Romans 5 and 8: death, corruption, and groaning#

Romans 5:12 links the entrance of sin with death.

Romans 8:20–23 describes creation as subject to vanity, bound to corruption, and groaning and travailing in pain while believers await:

“the redemption of our body.”

That is an anti-Gnostic note of considerable importance: the hope is not simply escape from embodiment but bodily redemption.

the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. — Romans 8:22, KJV

9.4 Lament and wisdom: Scripture does not require fake optimism#

• Job
• many Psalms
• Ecclesiastes
• Lamentations

and Jeremiah all make room for bewilderment and grief.

Biblical faith does not require a sufferer to call agony pleasant.

Psalm 88 is particularly important because it does not resolve into a neat emotional victory before it ends.

The existence of lament within Scripture is itself a rebuke to religious speech that demands immediate positivity from sufferers.

9.5 Providence: good through evil is not evil renamed good#

Genesis 50:20 gives one of Scripture’s clearest patterns:

Joseph can name what his brothers intended as evil while also confessing that God intended good through the same history.

The categories are not collapsed.

This distinction matters throughout the paper.

A Christian may claim that God can bring good through suffering without being committed to the proposition that cruelty, disease, or death are intrinsically good.

9.6 The incarnation and cross: God is not portrayed as distant from suffering#

The New Testament’s central answer to suffering is not merely a theory.

John 1:14 says the Word became flesh; the Gospel narratives culminate in:

• rejection
• anguish
• crucifixion
• death

Christian theology then interprets the cross as redemptive rather than meaningless.

Proof That Life Is Infinite? A Line-by-Line Examination of a 4chan Argument on Death, Consciousness, Identity & Resurrection – Library of Rickandria

This does not by itself answer why every particular tragedy is permitted, but it matters for the claim that Christianity simply depicts God demanding pain from a safe distance.

9.7 Christian affliction: Scripture permits relief-seeking#

Second Corinthians 12 is especially useful because it prevents a sentimental reading of suffering.

Paul says he asked the Lord three times for his:

“thorn in the flesh”

to depart.

Only after the request for relief does he describe grace as sufficient and divine strength as perfected in weakness.

The structure is not:

“pain is good, therefore never ask for relief.”

It is:

“relief was sought; relief was not granted; grace can still work here.”

For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. — 2 Corinthians 12:8, KJV

9.8 Death is an enemy, not the final teacher#

First Corinthians 15:26 calls death:

“the last enemy”

to be destroyed.

Whatever pedagogical role suffering may play in a fallen world, this text resists making death itself a permanent divine good.

The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. — 1 Corinthians 15:26, KJV

9.9 New creation: the biblical horizon removes pain#

Revelation 21:4 is the decisive endpoint for the paper’s narrow thesis.

The promised state removes:

• death
• sorrow
• crying
• pain

If pain were humanity’s created telos—if people existed in order to suffer—the biblical consummation would abolish the very purpose for which humanity was made.

The text therefore fits much better with suffering as a feature of the present broken order that God can redeem but will finally overcome.

there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: — Revelation 21:4, KJV

10. Bad Theology the Bible Itself Rebukes#

One of the most valuable correctives to internet moralizing is that Scripture contains arguments very much like the ones Christians are tempted to make—and then rebukes them.

10.1 Job’s friends#

Job’s friends repeatedly try to protect a morally intelligible universe by finding fault proportionate to Job’s catastrophe.

Their speeches contain many true generalizations about God and morality, but they misapply them to Job.

At the end, the LORD tells Eliphaz that he and his friends have not spoken rightly about Him as Job has (Job 42:7).

The lesson is not that actions never have consequences.

It is that observers do not possess a license to infer hidden guilt from the magnitude of another person’s suffering.

10.2 The man born blind#

In John 9 the disciples ask whether the man’s blindness is due to his own sin or his parents’. Jesus rejects the proposed causal frame.

The passage is especially relevant when the thread implies that persistent suffering proves a failure of effort, faith, spiritual development, or self-mastery.

10.3 Pilate’s victims and the tower of Siloam#

Luke 13:1–5 names victims of political violence and accidental disaster and rejects the inference that they were greater sinners than others.

Jesus uses the events to summon all hearers to repentance, not to create a hierarchy in which greater earthly misery reveals greater personal guilt.

11. Historical Christian Interpretations: Scripture and Tradition Kept Distinct#

The biblical text is primary in this paper, but the thread also caricatures “Christianity” as though Christians have historically taught only one crude slogan about pain.

CHRISTIANITY – Library of Rickandria

A brief historical survey shows a more differentiated tradition.

These are interpretations, not additional Scripture.

11.1 Why the distinction matters#

Historical theology can help clarify categories, but it can also become an authority shortcut.

The reader should be able to tell when this paper says:

“Genesis says,”

when it says:

“Paul says,”

and when it says:

“Augustine interpreted evil as privation.”

Conflating those levels would reproduce the same category confusion criticized in the thread.

12. When Metaphysics Becomes Dangerous: Suicide, Shame, and the Ethics of Response#

The suicide exchange is the point at which argumentative quality becomes secondary to immediate ethical responsibility.

One participant reports active suicidal thinking and describes self-destruction as an escape route if conditions worsen.

A reply attempts to deter suicide by attacking the person as cowardly, burdensome, and spiritually condemned.

Other posters counter with an autonomy-centered defense of the right to exit.

12.1 What current suicide-prevention guidance emphasizes#

The National Institute of Mental Health recommends a sequence that is nearly the opposite of humiliation:

ask directly about suicide, be present and listen without judgment, help keep the person safe by reducing access to lethal means, help the person connect to support, and follow up.

NIMH also notes that asking directly about suicide does not increase suicidal behavior or thoughts.

The 988 Lifeline similarly advises direct, nonjudgmental listening and cautions against debating the moral rightness of suicide or lecturing the person.

The World Health Organization’s August 2026 fact sheet emphasizes that suicide is multifactorial and identifies crises involving:

• financial problems
• relationship disputes
• chronic pain and illness
• violence
• abuse
• loss

and isolation among relevant contexts.

WHO also notes that stigma can keep people from seeking help.

These sources do not prove what caused the anonymous participant’s suicidal thinking.

They do show why shame-based certainty is a poor crisis-response model.

12.2 The biblical contrast: Acts 16#

Acts 16 contains one of the New Testament’s clearest moments of imminent self-harm.

The jailer draws his sword, supposing the prisoners have escaped.

Paul’s first recorded response is not a theory of damnation or an attack on his character.

Do thyself no harm: for we are all here. — Acts 16:28, KJV

The narrative then moves toward:

• presence
• conversation
• washed wounds
• food
• household fellowship

One should not turn a single episode into a modern clinical protocol.

Yet the moral contrast with the thread is stark:

preserve life first; do not use a person’s crisis as a stage for status and condemnation.

12.3 Does the Bible say every suicide automatically damns?#

The Bible records several suicides and condemns murder, treats human life as belonging to God, and repeatedly frames life and death within divine authority.

But it does not contain the sentence:

“suicide is the unforgivable sin,”

nor a verse declaring that every person who dies by suicide is automatically damned.

Christians can construct a serious moral case against self-killing without inventing a biblical formula that is not present.

12.4 Autonomy is not the whole moral field either#

The opposing claim—

“my life is mine, therefore I alone determine whether it continues”

—also assumes a moral theory.

Autonomy matters, but the conclusion that every self-regarding choice is thereby right does not follow.

Biblical anthropology is relational and theocentric:

Romans 14:7 says none of us lives or dies merely to himself, and 1 Corinthians 6 describes believers as not being their own.

That is a different framework from absolute individual sovereignty.

13. What the Thread Gets Right#

A credible critique should preserve every point that survives scrutiny.

The thread contains several observations worth keeping.

Human suffering is radically unequal.

Some people bear burdens that others never approach.

Acute pain can have adaptive and protective functions.

Severe or chronic pain can overwhelm ordinary coping and impair attention or cognition.

Pleasure and the absence of pain are not identical with a meaningful or flourishing life.

Some people report genuine moral, relational, or spiritual growth after adversity.

Religious clichés can become cruel when they are used to explain another person’s suffering too quickly.

Human institutions and individual choices create a great deal of preventable suffering.

Comfort is not a truth criterion; a comforting belief can be false.

Harshness is not a truth criterion either; a painful belief can also be false.

Buddhism really does put suffering/unsatisfactoriness and liberation from samsaric bondage near the center of its analysis.

Schopenhauer really does offer a philosophically serious pessimism built around blind striving and recurrent dissatisfaction.

The nature of consciousness remains philosophically contested even as neuroscience establishes powerful dependencies between conscious states and brain states.

These concessions are not weaknesses in the rebuttal.

They are the conditions of a fair one.

14. Claims We Cannot Resolve from the Thread#

Some claims should end with:

“not established,”

not with a counterfeit certainty in the opposite direction.

15. Reconstructing an Answer to the Original Poster#

After the:

• philosophy
• psychology
• neuroscience
• theology

are separated, the original question can be answered more clearly.

Humans are biologically capable of severe pain.

Acute pain often has a protective relationship to injury, while chronic pain can become disabling, cognitively burdensome, and no longer adequately described as a useful alarm.

Chronic pain becomes more common with age at the population level, but extreme pain is not every person’s inevitable aging trajectory.

These are empirical conclusions.

Whether humans were:

“made to suffer”

is not an empirical conclusion.

It is a claim about purpose.

The thread offers several metaphysical candidates—

• growth through pain
• Buddhist samsara
• an eternal uncreated self
• receiver consciousness
• extinction-oriented pessimism

and Schopenhauerian will—but observation of pain alone does not establish any of them.

The biblical narrative gives a different answer.

Human beings are created by God within a creation pronounced good; sorrow, corruption, and death appear within the rupture narrated in Genesis and interpreted in Romans; creation presently groans;

suffering can become an occasion of:

• patience
• compassion
• faith

or divine strength without being renamed intrinsically good; Paul seeks relief from affliction; death remains an enemy; the Christian hope is bodily resurrection; and the final biblical vision removes death and pain.

That conclusion does not solve every philosophical form of the problem of evil.

It does, however, correct the thread’s recurring caricature that Christianity simply says:

“pain is good.”

16. Conclusion#

Thread No. 42961855 is most interesting not because it contains a secret doctrine of suffering but because it shows how quickly different kinds of explanation collapse into one another when people are in pain.

Biology becomes metaphysics.

Testimony becomes cosmology.

Metaphor becomes mechanism.

Spiritual advice becomes medical advice.

Personal responsibility becomes victim-blame.

Moral opposition to suicide becomes humiliation.

And justified suspicion of comforting beliefs becomes a preference for harshness as though severity itself were evidence.

The better method is slower.

Ask what kind of claim is being made.

Ask what evidence could support it.

Ask whether the conclusion is stronger than the premise.

Ask whether an analogy is doing the work of an argument.

Ask whether a psychological label is being used in place of evidence.

Ask whether Scripture actually says what is attributed to it.

And, when the subject is a person in crisis, remember that epistemic rigor does not require cruelty.

The paper’s central distinction can therefore be stated one last time.

A Christian doctrine in which God can redeem suffering is not the same as a doctrine in which suffering is intrinsically good.

Genesis calls creation good before the narrative of curse and death.

Paul can pray for suffering to depart while learning grace within what remains.

Romans pictures creation groaning toward redemption.

First Corinthians calls death an enemy.

Revelation ends with pain abolished.

Those texts form a coherent arc: not creation for pain, but:

• creation
• corruption
• redemption
• resurrection

and restoration.

Soli Deo Gloria.

Appendix A. Claim Audit#

This audit records the substantive claims in the thread by post number.

Claims are paraphrased. “Assessment” states only what the cited evidence or reasoning warrants; it is not a score of the poster.

Appendix B. Rhetorical and Logical Patterns#

Appendix C. Scripture Index: What Each Passage Establishes—and Does Not#

Bibliography#

Primary Sources#

4chan. “/x/ - Paranormal, Thread No. 42961855.” Live thread accessed September 17, 2026. https://boards.4chan.org/x/thread/42961855.

The Holy Bible, Authorized King James Version, Pure Cambridge Edition. User-supplied PDF; Cambridge University Press edition as presented in the supplied file.

Schopenhauer, Arthur. The World as Will and Representation. References in this paper are contextualized through the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry listed below.

Pain Science, Psychology, and Public Health

Higgins, Diana M., Aaron M. Martin, Dewleen G. Baker, Jennifer J. Vasterling, and Victoria Risbrough. 2018. “The Relationship Between Chronic Pain and Neurocognitive Function: A Systematic Review.” Clinical Journal of Pain 34(3):262–275. doi:10.1097/AJP.0000000000000536. PMID 28719507.

Jones, Hannah G., Rodrigo R. N. Rizzo, Brian W. Pulling, et al. 2024. “Adjunctive Use of Hypnosis for Clinical Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.” Pain Reports 9(5):e1185. doi:10.1097/PR9.0000000000001185. PMID 39263007.

Lucas, Jacqueline W., and Inderbir Sohi. 2024. “Chronic Pain and High-impact Chronic Pain in U.S. Adults, 2023.” NCHS Data Brief No. 518. National Center for Health Statistics. doi:10.15620/cdc/169630.

Products - Data Briefs - Number 518 - November 2024

Mangelsdorf, Judith, Michael Eid, and Maike Luhmann. 2019. “Does Growth Require Suffering? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on Genuine Posttraumatic and Postecstatic Growth.” Psychological Bulletin 145(3):302–338. doi:10.1037/bul0000173. PMID 30589274.

National Institute of Mental Health. 2024. “5 Action Steps to Help Someone Having Thoughts of Suicide.” NIMH Identifier OM 24-4315.

5 Action Steps to Help Someone Having Thoughts of Suicide - National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)

Raja, Srinivasa N., Daniel B. Carr, Milton Cohen, et al. 2020. “The Revised International Association for the Study of Pain Definition of Pain: Concepts, Challenges, and Compromises.” Pain 161(9):1976–1982. doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001939. PMID 32694387.

International Association for the Study of Pain. 2020. “IASP Announces Revised Definition of Pain.”

IASP Announces Revised Definition of Pain - International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP)

Suler, John. 2004. “The Online Disinhibition Effect.” CyberPsychology & Behavior 7(3):321–326. doi:10.1089/1094931041291295. PMID 15257832.

van den Bos, Kees, and Marjolein Maas. 2009. “On the Psychology of the Belief in a Just World: Exploring Experiential and Rationalistic Paths to Victim Blaming.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 35(12):1567–1578. doi:10.1177/0146167209344628. PMID 19726809.

World Health Organization. 2026. “Suicide.” Fact sheet, August 28, 2026.

Suicide

988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline. “Help Someone Else.” Accessed September 2026.

Help Someone Else - 988 Lifeline

Internet Culture and Platform Context#

Bernstein, Michael S., Andrés Monroy-Hernández, Drew Harry, Paul André, Katrina Panovich, and Greg Vargas. 2011. “4chan and /b/: An Analysis of Anonymity and Ephemerality in a Large Online Community.” Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media 5(1). doi:10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14134. (Study concerns /b/, not /x/.)

Philosophy, Religion, and Intellectual History#

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. “The Problem of Evil.” Current online edition accessed September 2026.

The Problem of Evil (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. “Schopenhauer’s Aesthetics.” Substantive revision June 14, 2018.

Schopenhauer’s Aesthetics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. “The Neuroscience of Consciousness.” Revised April 3, 2024.

The Neuroscience of Consciousness (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Stead, Christopher. 1998. “Gnosticism.” Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. doi:10.4324/9780415249126-K028-1.

Gnosticism - Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Encyclopedia of Buddhism. “Buddhist Cosmology.” Accessed September 2026.

Buddhist cosmology - Encyclopedia of Buddhism

Knutsson, Simon. 2021. “The World Destruction Argument.” Inquiry 64(10):1004–1023. doi:10.1080/0020174X.2019.1658631.

Historical Christian Interpretation#

Augustine. Enchiridion (Handbook on Faith, Hope and Love), especially chapters 11–12. Public-domain translations available through New Advent and other collections.

Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologiae, First Part, Question 48, “The Distinction of Things in Particular” / treatment of evil as privation, and related questions.

Luther, Martin. “Heidelberg Disputation” (1518), especially theses 19–21 on the theology of the cross.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book I, chapter 17, on the use of the doctrine of providence.

Lewis, C. S. The Problem of Pain. Historical interpretive reference only; the paper paraphrases rather than reproduces extended copyrighted text.

Source-Use Notes#

The CDC prevalence estimates are for the U.S. civilian noninstitutionalized adult population surveyed in 2023; they are not global prevalence estimates.

The 4chan anonymity/ephemerality study cited above examined /b/. Its numerical findings are not asserted as measurements of /x/. It is used only as platform-context evidence.

The post-traumatic growth literature concerns populations and measurement constructs; it cannot determine whether a particular anonymous poster experienced genuine growth.

The NIMH, 988, and WHO materials are used to evaluate response principles, not to diagnose the suicidal participant.

Historical theologians are cited to represent traditions of interpretation.

Their claims are not labeled “Scripture” unless independently grounded in the biblical text.

The Buddhist and Gnostic summaries are schematic; neither tradition is treated as a single internally uniform system.

VCG NOTES: Pain, Pessimism, Metaphysics & the Biblical Doctrine of Suffering: A Critical Examination of 4chan /x/ Thread No. 42961855

4CHAN THREAD & POST BREAKDOWNS – Library of Rickandria

VCG PAPER PROJECTS – Library of Rickandria

Pain, Pessimism, Metaphysics & the Biblical Doctrine of Suffering: A Critical Examination of 4chan /x/ Thread No. 42961855

Pain, Pessimism, Metaphysics & the Biblical Doctrine of Suffering: A Critical Examination of 4chan /x/ Thread No. 42961855 – Library of Rickandria