Based Anon | MGTOW

[–][deleted] 61 points62 points63 points 6 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]Charlamagme29 points30 points31 points 6 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]RememberGoliad18362 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RememberGoliad18360 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Grumpysavonianguy0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Charlamagme0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Grumpysavonianguy0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]debanked20 points21 points22 points 6 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 6 years ago* (14 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]martynhare -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 6 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]xXx420VTECxXx0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 6 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]DarthCallidous0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

Yes He did. Whether or not you believe He was divine is up to you, but He most certainly existed:

https://historyforatheists.com/about-history-for-atheists/

That link states, word for word:

What is “History for Atheists”?

This blog is for articles, book reviews and critiques relating to “New Atheist Bad History” – the misuse of history and the use of biased, erroneous or distorted pseudo history by anti-theistic atheists. The author is an atheist himself so no, this is not some theist apologetics blog. It is simply an attempt to call out and correct the misuse of history, because rationalists should not base their arguments on errors and distortions. Among the myths and pseudo historical theories that this blog tackles are:

That there was no historical Jesus at all and that Christianity arose out of a belief in a purely mythic/celestial being, not a historical Jewish preacher

That Christianity caused the “Dark Ages” by systematically destroying almost all ancient Greco-Roman learning,

That Christians burned down the Great Library of Alexandria and that Hypatia of Alexandria was murdered because of a Christian hatred of science

That pagan Greco_Roman society was rational and scientific and fairly non-religious and was on the brink of a scientific and technological revolution

That Constantine was a crypto-pagan who adopted Christianity as a cynical political ploy (and he personally created the Bible)

That Christianity somehow held back technology and we’d all be living on Mars by now if it wasn’t for the “Dark Ages”

That Medieval Europe was a theocracy ruled by the Church, which wielded supreme power and killed anyone who questioned any aspect of its teachings

That scientists were oppressed during the Middle Ages and science stagnated completely until “the Renaissance”

That “the Inquisition” was a kind of Europe-wide medieval Gestapo and that the medieval Church was an all-powerful totalitarian theocracy

That Giordano Bruno was a wise and brave astronomer and cosmologist who was burned at the stake because the Church hated science

That the Galileo Affair was a straightforward case of religion ignoring evidence and trying to suppress scientific advancement

That Pope Pius XII was a friend and ally of the Nazis who turned a blind eye to the Holocaust and helped Nazis escape justice

Despite being an atheist website, this article rejects the Christ Myth Theory presented by RationalWiki (another atheist website) nearly word for word, intentionally or not, specifically in regards to Tacitus: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tacitus

HistoryforAtheists.com https://historyforatheists.com/2017/09/jesus-mythicism-1-the-tacitus-reference-to-jesus/

Here is what Tacitus said about Jesus: "But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the Bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements Which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero From the infamy of being believed to have ordered the Conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he Falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were Hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was Put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign Of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time Broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief Originated, but through the city of Rome also, where all things Hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their Center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first Made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an Immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of Firing the city, as of hatred against mankind."

Here Tacitus confirms not only that Christ existed, but that Christianity started in Judea.

The Christ Myth Theory does not work.

Here's another HistoryForAtheists article: https://historyforatheists.com/2017/05/did-jesus-exist-the-jesus-myth-theory-again/

And He was most certainly baptized and crucified.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

"The only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate."

[+][deleted] 6 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]DarthCallidous0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

So because we haven't found anything Jesus personally wrote, you're going to ignore everything I just linked to you.

Got it.

Oh, and that link I sent you earlier, this one https://historyforatheists.com/2017/05/did-jesus-exist-the-jesus-myth-theory-again/ says this: Unconvincing Arguments for a Mythic Origin for Jesus

Many of the arguments for a Mythic Jesus that some laypeople think sound highly convincing are exactly the same ones that scholars consider laughably weak, even though they sound plausible to those without a sound background in the study of the first century. For example:

1. “There are no contemporary accounts or mentions of Jesus. There should be, so clearly no Jesus existed.”

This seems a good argument to many, since modern people tend to leave behind them a lot of evidence they existed (birth certificates, financial documents, school records) and prominent modern people have their lives documented by the media almost daily. So it sounds suspicious to people that there are no contemporary records at all detailing or even mentioning Jesus.

But our sources for anyone in the ancient world are scarce and rarely are they contemporaneous – they are usually written decades or even centuries after the fact. Worse still, the more obscure and humble in origin the person is, the less likely that there will be any documentation about them or even a fleeting reference to them at all.

For example, few people in the ancient world were as prominent, influential, significant and famous as the Carthaginian general Hannibal. He came close to crushing the Roman Republic, was one of the greatest generals of all time and was famed throughout the ancient world for centuries after his death down to today. Yet how many contemporary mentions of Hannibal do we have? Zero. We have none. So if someone as famous and significant as Hannibal has no surviving contemporary references to him in our sources, does it really make sense to base an argument about the existence or non-existence of a Galilean peasant preacher on the lack of contemporary references to him? Clearly it does not.

So while this seems like a good argument, a better knowledge of the ancient world and the nature of our evidence and sources shows that it’s actually extremely weak.

2. “The ancient writer X should have mentioned this Jesus, yet he doesn’t do so. This silence shows that no Jesus existed.”

An “argument from silence” is a tricky thing to use effectively. To do so, it’s not enough to show that a writer, account or source is silent on a given point – you also have to show that it shouldn’t be before this silence can be given any significance. So if someone claims their grandfather met Winston Churchill yet a thorough search of the grandfather’s letters and diaries of the time shows no mention of this meeting, a solid argument from silence could be presented to say that the meeting never happened. This is because we could expect such a meeting to be mentioned in those documents.

Some “Jesus Mythicists” have tried to argue that certain ancient writers “should” have mentioned Jesus and did not and so tried to make an argument from silence on this basis. In 1909 the American “freethinker” John Remsberg came up with a list of 42 ancient writers that he claimed “should” have mentioned Jesus and concluded their silence suggested Jesus may never have existed. But the list has been widely criticised for being contrived and fanciful. Why exactly, for example, Lucanus – a writer whose works consist of a single poem and a history of the civil war between Caesar and Pompey (in the century before Jesus’ time) “should” have mentioned Jesus is hard to see. And the same can be said for most of the other writers on Remsberg’s list.

Some others, however, are more reasonable at first glance. Philo Judaeus was a Jew in Alexandria who wrote philosophy and theology and who was a contemporary of Jesus who also mentions events in Judea and makes reference to other figures we know from the gospel accounts, such as Pontius Pilate. So it makes far more sense that he “should” mention Jesus than some poets in far off Rome. But it is hard to see why even Philo would be interested in mentioning someone like Jesus, given that he also makes no mentions of any of the other Jewish preachers, prophets, faith healers and Messianic claimants of the time, of which there were many. If Philo had mentioned Anthronges and Theudas, or Hillel and Honi or John the Baptist and the “Samaritan Prophet” but didn’t mention Jesus, then a solid argument from silence could be made. But given that Philo seems to have had no interest at all in any of the various people like Jesus, the fact that he doesn’t mention Jesus either carries little or no weight.

In fact, there is only one writer of the time who had any interest in such figures, who also had little interest for Roman and Greek writers. He was the Jewish historian Josephus, who is our sole source for virtually all of the Jewish preachers, prophets, faith healers and Messianic claimants of this time. If there is any writer who should mention Jesus, it’s Josephus. The problem for the “Jesus Mythicists” is … he does. Twice, in fact. He does do so in Antiquities XVIII.63-64 and again in Antiquities XX.200. Mythicists take comfort in the fact that the first of these references has been added to by later Christian scribes, so they dismiss it as a wholesale interpolation. But the majority of modern scholars disagree, arguing there is solid evidence to believe that Josephus did make a mention of Jesus here and that it was added to by Christians to help bolster their arguments against Jewish opponents. That debate aside, the Antiquities XX.200 mention of Jesus is universally considered genuine by Josephus scholars and that alone sinks the Mythicist case.

no mention of a historical Jesus and clearly worshipped a purely heavenly, mythic-style being. There are no references to an earthly Jesus in any of the earliest New Testament texts, the letters of Paul.”

Since many people who read Mythicist arguments have never actually read the letters of Paul, this one sounds convincing as well. Except it simply isn’t true. While Paul was writing letters about matters of doctrine and disputes and so wasn’t giving a basic lesson in who Jesus was in any of this letters, he does make references to Jesus’ earthly life in many places. He says Jesus was born as a human, of a human mother and born a Jew (Galatians 4:4). He repeats that he had a “human nature” and that he was a human descendant of King David (Romans 1:3) of of Abraham (Gal 3:16), of Israelites (Romans 9:4-5) and of Jesse (Romans 15:12). He refers to teachings Jesus made during his earthly ministry on divorce (1Cor. 7:10), on preachers (1Cor. 9:14) and on the coming apocalypse (1Thess. 4:15). He mentions how he was executed by earthly rulers (1Cor. 2:8) that he was crucified (1 Cor 1:23, 2:2, 2:8, 2 Cor 13:4) and that he died and was buried (1Cor 15:3-4).And he says he had an earthly, physical brother called James who Paul himself had met (Galatians 1:19).

So Mythicist theorists then have to tie themselves in knots to “explain” how, in fact, a clear reference to Jesus being “born of a woman” actually means he wasn’t born of a woman and how when Paul says Jesus was “according to the flesh, a descendant of King David” this doesn’t mean he was a human and the human descendant of a human king. These contrived arguments are so weak they tend to only convince the already convinced. It’s this kind of contrivance that consigns this thesis to the fringe.

[–]PipBoyTInkerer32 points33 points34 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]FeedMeMore2277853422 points23 points24 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]wassaaaap-1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[removed]

[–]FeedMeMore227785340 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]VOLK91P1118 points19 points20 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]RememberGoliad183610 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GoingCamaro -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]xeroxe14 points15 points16 points 6 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]AlsoColuphid[🍰] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]paneracist3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Except for Ashkenazi Jews

Source

Tay Sachs is the most deadly.

Source

But there are one or two others:

Favism
Bloom syndrome, Autosomal recessive, BLM 1/100
Breast cancer and ovarian cancer, Autosomal dominant BRCA1 or BRCA2, 1/100 and 1/75, respectively
Canavan disease Autosomal recessive ASPA 1/60
Congenital deafness Autosomal recessive GJB2 or GJB6 1/25
Cystic fibrosis Autosomal recessive CFTR 1/25
Haemophilia C Autosomal recessive F11 1/12
Familial dysautonomia Autosomal recessive IKBKAP 1/30
Familial hypercholesterolemia Autosomal dominant LDLR 1/69
Familial hyperinsulinism Autosomal recessive ABCC8 1/125–1/160
Fanconi anemia C Autosomal recessive FACC 1/100
Gaucher disease Autosomal recessive GBA 1/7–1/18
Glycogen Storage Disease type 1a Autosomal recessive G6PC 1/71
Mucolipidosis IV Autosomal recessive MCOLN1 1/110
Niemann–Pick (type A) Autosomal recessive SMPD1 1/90
Nonclassical 21 OHase deficiency Autosomal recessive CPY21 1/6
Parkinson's disease Autosomal dominant LRRK2 1/42[18]
Tay–Sachs Autosomal recessive HEXA 1/25–1/30
Torsion dystonia Autosomal dominant DYT1 1/4000
Usher syndrome Autosomal recessive PCDH15 1/72
Gaucher's disease, in which lipids accumulate in inappropriate locations, occurs most frequently among Ashkenazi Jews;[22] the mutation is carried by roughly one in every 15 Ashkenazi Jews, compared to one in 100 of the general American population.[23] Gaucher's disease can cause brain damage and seizures, but these effects are not usually present in the form manifested among Ashkenazi Jews; while sufferers still bruise easily, and it can still potentially rupture the spleen, it generally has only a minor impact on life expectancy.
Ashkenazi Jews are also highly affected by other lysosomal storage diseases, particularly in the form of lipid storage disorders. Compared to other ethnic groups, they more frequently act as carriers of mucolipidosis[24] and Niemann–Pick disease,[25] the latter of which can prove fatal.
Familial dysautonomia (Riley–Day syndrome), which causes vomiting, speech problems, an inability to cry, and false sensory perception, is almost exclusive to Ashkenazi Jews;[28] Ashkenazi Jews are almost 100 times more likely to carry the disease than anyone else.[29]
Colorectal cancer due to hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer[30]
Congenital adrenal hyperplasia (nonclassical form) [31]
Congenital insensitivity to pain with anhidrosis[32]
Crohn's disease (the NOD2/CARD15 locus appears to be implicated)[33]
Joubert syndrome type 2 is disproportionately frequent among people of Jewish descent; this has been attributed to the resistance to intermarriage of this population.[34]
Kaposi's sarcoma[35]
Maple syrup urine disease [36]
Mucolipidosis IV [37]
Myeloproliferative Neoplasms
Polycythemia Vera
Essential Thrombocythemia [38]
Nonsyndromic hearing loss and deafness, DFNB1 (connexin 26) [39]
Parkinson's disease (G2019S/LRRK2 mutation;[40]
Pemphigus vulgaris[43]
Schizophrenia (DNST3 gene variation)[44]
Von Gierke disease[45]
Zellweger syndrome[46]
Oculocutaneous albinism Autosomal recessive TYR 1/30
Ataxia telangiectasia Autosomal recessive ATM 1/80
Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease Autosomal dominant PRNP 1/24,000
Cerebrotendinous xanthomatosis Autosomal recessive CYP27A1 1/70
Cystinuria Autosomal recessive SLC7A9 1/25
Familial Mediterranean fever Autosomal recessive MEFV 1/5–7
Glycogen storage disease III Autosomal recessive AGL 1/35
Limb girdle muscular dystrophy Autosomal recessive DYSF 1/10
Tay–Sachs Autosomal recessive HEXA 1/110
11-β-hydroxylase deficiency
Beta-thalassemia Autosomal recessive HBB 1/6
Factor VII deficiency Autosomal recessive F7 1/40
Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency X-linked G6PD 1/4
Inclusion body myopathy Autosomal recessive GNE 1/12
Metachromatic leukodystrophy Autosomal recessive ARSA 1/50
Oculopharyngeal muscular dystrophy Autosomal, recessive or dominant PABPN1 1/7
Phenylketonuria

Sorry 57 and that's just from Wikipedia. I was going to format it into a table with Disease/Mode/Gene/Frequency, but it took me 10 minutes just to format this into reddit-friendly list. A table would've taken at least 30 mins.

[–]AlsoColuphid[🍰] -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 6 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

I am from a muslim country and i can confirm this, we see less and less of it nowadays, but cousins getting married isn't considered incest in my country, there is no social stigma to it, i don't approve of it, but it is all just because definitions of incest vary from one culture to another, and because in the not so far past, there were mostly small villages, with not that many people in them, so you were bound to get married to a cousin like a third of the time.

[–]AlsoColuphid[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 6 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Dude you're so into your little bullshit media stories you don't even know what you're talking about, have you ever visited any country or are you just generalizing from what you heard from the media by few individuals from 2-3 muslim countries, because there are 50 muslim countries out there and each one has its own culture and laws, you'd be surprised by what you might find out if you step outside your little bubble

[–]AlsoColuphid[🍰] -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]JihadNinjaCowboy2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]_n1codemus0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Shiva-The_Destroyer6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Rafique6784 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]GoingCamaro 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Rafique6781 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GoingCamaro 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]FightClubHamster694 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]GoingCamaro 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]FightClubHamster69-1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GoingCamaro 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bimbokimbo210 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SoranoV0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]xdrunkagainx0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jacklouis1360 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]pdiggs15000 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nuttyrunner-1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]biggy_sauce5 points 6 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]xeroxe0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]nuttyrunner4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]xeroxe0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Don't get me wrong, I agree. There's a reason why muslims are fleeing en masse from their Islamic countries and invading secular civilizations. The point is, I wasn't expecting that even most perverted religious ideologies such as Islam to also contain vital instructions that shield societies from chaos. Their absence, will leave a noticeable dent of chaos in a secular society, and probably not only noticeable but also catastrophic. Only time will tell.

My former understanding of this situation was a simplistic black and white picture, boiling down to as far as possible we run away from religion, the greater the quality of life and well-being will be. Unfortunately, real-world experiments forced me to change that opinion.

I live in a country where 98% of the population are moderate muslims, and there are no crazy stuff going on here, no behadings or throwing homosexuals off buildings, on the contrary they have the right to same-sex marriage. I am quite grateful for this healthy dosage of religion present in my country, for it has been the single most resistant force against the degeneration that western countries are pushing down our throats — feminism being one of them.

[–]Rafique678-1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]edgysecularist-1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]BlueMonie87-1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]edgysecularist0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BlueMonie870 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]slab_of_beef-1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Updownkys-1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Carnosauria4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rektyouphaggott-2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GoingCamaro 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GoingCamaro -5 points-4 points-3 points 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]jw20401-8 points-7 points-6 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GoingCamaro -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Based Anon
Author	henkaiofcourse
Upvotes	194
Comments	72
Date	August 20, 2019 4:29 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MGTOW
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/ct1p6j/based_anon/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MGTOW/based-anon.408229 https://theredarchive.com/post/408229

Comments