I saw this retweeted by Sunny(the Caliph of that Kaliacc group) and it reminded me that I had some comments on degeneracy to make. I had held off on posting them before. May as well do it now. https://twitter.com/CringenXpilled/status/1290736961712304130

I have never seen degeneracy well defined. It is a term people throw at whoever they don't like. I have seen it aimed at the alt-right and literal Nazis. I have seen it aimed liberals and commies too. People that have children out of wedlock, whole genres of music and modern art.

When we describe something as degenerating, we mean that it is getting weaker. Degenerating bones means they are getting thin and brittle. Degenerating mental powers mean that focus and memory are getting harder to maintain. I think this should be kept in mind for my point here.

Christians tend to change the meaning of degeneracy to conform to the Judaic way of thinking. Degeneracy to them is not that which weakens the group and corrupts tradition. Instead, it has a religious definition from Jewish law and Christian abrogations and additions to that.

One might just as easily assert that a return to pre-Islamic Jahiliyyah is the essence of degeneracy. Or a return to distorted versions of Islam. For their shirk and refusal to accept the final and true revelation in the Quran, Christians are by definition degenerate.

These views often take on a moralistic tone. Judaic religion(whichever one is promoted) represents moral progress over the pagan, gentile, Jahiliyyah, whatever you prefer to call it. Progress can't go backwards, so a return is made into a bad thing by definition.

What I think of as degeneracy is a bit different. For one, the following is something I consider degenerate. It would have horrified even the Jews, who excluded eunuchs from civic and religious status. The teaching of Jesus to make yourself a eunuch from Matthew 19.

It goes right along with numerous places where Jesus teaches against family. He tells the man that wants to finish doing funeral rites for his father "let the dead bury their dead". He praises people leaving behind social and familial bonds to follow him as beggars and vagabonds.

This is blasphemy in a healthy society, and moreso among pagans. Nor is it good on a practical level. Christians know that following Jesus would result in the collapse of society. If everyone were to give all their wealth away, there'd be no one for beggars to get handouts from.

It would also result in demographic collapse. Putting aside the more extreme views of many early Christians, the canonical texts alone discourage marriage. Jesus says to leave that behind. Paul says that it is better not to be married. Why have children when the world is ending?

Christianity also teaches that getting killed and tortured by unbelievers is a good thing. Gets you a ticket out of this world. It also teaches you to resist not, and to ask for another if you get hit. This would result quickly in the elimination of any people.

Another thing that is overlooked is the Christianity enshrines stories about Jesus arguing with religious authorities and making up new interpretations of the religious laws, and outright flouting others. Adulterers are to be stoned, for example, Jewish law is clear on that.

This appeals to some people, but it presents a problem. Every Christian reformer, sectarian, prophet, heretic, and etc. thinks he is a little Jesus. The religious authorities are in the wrong, because he is the brave underdog challenging them. Christians often don't see this.

Apocalypticism is part of the Christian package. What that amounts to is a rejection of the order of things as they are. It is all bad and wrong. Instead, some imaginary future state is supposed to one day replace it forever. Revolutionary ideas on a cosmic scale. The New Age.

Another kind of inversion I want to bring up is this. Christianity and Jewish prophetism invert morality when it comes to the gods. Any ancient source, including the Old Testament itself, will tell you that it is NOT for mortals to pass judgment on the gods. Nor fully understand.

I say this because Christian apologetics very often bring up things about other gods, or historical religious practices(even if merely slander). It usually amounts to "your gods are mean, our god is nicer". As if they, mortals that they are, have the ability to decide this.

This is not a recent trend, early Christian tracts are full of it. They try to paint(one sidedly) the pagan gods as cruel, lustful, immoral, or violent. Taking every myth literally, digging up obscure history, and ignoring Yahweh's character(anger issues, cruelty, lying).

In just about any culture you can think of, worshiping various gods didn't have a lot to do with them always being nice or omnibenevolent. Think the plague god Resheph was considered nice? Or Set? Or Ares? And who decides what is right? Humans are not at the top of the chain.

This method has worked against them. Plenty of people have read the Bible and found the Jewish/Christian god to be evil. They find other things to be nicer, kinder. They have progressed beyond such barbarism as the mass sacrifice of enemies, subjection of women, and slavery.

I can't think of anything on modern moralistic or humanistic grounds that Christianity does better than dedicated secular humanists. It was secular modernity that made many reforms that Christians now take for granted, as Western.

And if you like pacifism, quietism, and puritanical attitudes about sex, Jainism and Buddhism are far superior. They don't have Old Testament luggage to carry around. And they give a detailed system of karma to explain and enforce right actions, no arbitrary god required.

Christians, even the trad ones, argue using a progressive mindset, with Christianity as progress. But they don't want more progress to smash them too, so they say "this far and no further". As if that will stop it once it gets rolling.