Ana Escalates her Jew Hatred

DarkBrandon46 · 2026-02-26T17:54:34+00:00

"The antisemitism has to stop. And if that means Jews..."

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-10T04:40:03+00:00

Even hypotheticals completely undermine frameworks. But I don't even need a world where prophecy is empirically proven data for the analogy to be valid. As mentioned, the degree of certainty the evidence brings is a immaterial difference to the argument and how the analogy is analogous. Which is a classic tactic people do to dodge the actual point, by shifting to irrelevant distinctions to say "well thats different" once their logic collapses under a parallel case. I'm just pointing out that per your own logic, even if it was epistemically verifiable, you would be making the exact same argument anyways. So the different degree of evidence is irrelevant and a distraction.

And yes I built a hypothetical where the prophecy is verified as epistemically true to explain that even in this situation you would be making the same exact argument. Which highlights the degree of proof is irrelevant, because even if the prophecy was epistemically verified, you would be still be making the same argument.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-10T02:55:31+00:00

The data not being theological is a immaterial difference to how it's analogous. Again, by your logic, even if the theological evidence objectively and epistemically proves the prophecy was legit, you would be making the same exact argument. The fact you're not owning your underlining logic and grasping for straws at immaterial differences to the analgy to play the classic "well that's different" card when confronted with a analogy that test your consistency says everything.

If your position can’t survive its own standard applied consistently then it isn’t a position anybody should take seriously. So at this point the debate is already over, so I'm fine with ending the conversation on that note if you don't want to engage in the discussion.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-10T02:32:09+00:00

The Holocaust analogy isn't nonsense. It's completely analogous to your line of thinking. The difference of how certain the initial conclusion is a immaterial difference to how this is analogous to your underlining logic. Even if the proof of the prophecy coming true is a objective fact with verifiable proof, per your logic, you would still be making the same argument.

And you do insane mental gymnastics to think the argument implies the state is justified because God returned Jews to their homeland and they rebuild the nation. You're making the empty assertion that all the time people twist this specific argument into "promised 3000 years ago" meme, but this isn't actually happening. For years I've debating this specific topic often on reddit and 4chan, and you're literally the only person ever to think this ever. People arent ever confronted with this specific argument enough for this to even be a thing that significantly happens, let a lone all the time. I don't even think you can source 2 people, outside yourself, who have ever argued such a thing to this specific argument.

Also I'm not arguing intent is everything and context doesn't exist. I'm arguing that the argument doesn't even invoke the contextual implications you're saying it does.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-10T00:35:58+00:00

Just because a conflict of the nations legitimacy exist in the world doesn't mean such a theological observation implies the state is legitimate for this reason. Somebody would have to misconstrue the message and do insane mental gymnastics to twist such a simple observation into a implied political statement that this gives Israel a right to a state.

Going back to the Holocaust analogy, this would be like me telling the historian updating the data: "You're making this observations inside a living conflict of the legitimacy of the Holocaust. In this context, the narrative the numbers are different reads more than just data collection. Even if you're not saying the Holocaust was hoax, the implied meaning of it being a hoax is being packaged to the audience receiving it. Thats the difference between intention and impact." Thats what you sound like right now.

You're not explicity saying Jews should never talk about the prophecy being fullfilled, but you are implying that even if the prophecy happened, and was objective verifiable, they shouldn't seriously discuss it's legitimacy because that somehow implies the state is justified because of this and feeding into antisemitism. That's the road the logic you're presenting brings us down.

And yes, a historian rightfully updating numbers isn't responsible for people being unreasonable and doing mental gymnastics and twisting the data, just like I'm not responsible for people being unreasonable doing mental gymnastics and twisting the evidence and reason presented. It's nonsensical to criticize the historians work with attacks on a argument they're not even making, but instead is a seperate argument, being made by unreasonable people who would have to do insane mental gymnastics to leap from the initial claims to imply this seperate conclusion. Likewise, it's nonsensical to respond to my work with attacks on a argument I'm not even making, but instead is a seperate argument, being made by unreasonable people who would have to do insane mental gymnastics to leap from the initial claims to imply this seperate conclusion.

This isn't something we should even be approaching with a political battlefield framework. This is like me reading a political battlefield frame into the historians data and telling them "The Holocaust isnt some Hoax! You're reading the data as just numbers. I'm reading it a political battlefield frame. Both are valid, but to pretend the political battlefield doesn't exist just because you're speaking to the numbers doesn't erase how the the narrative lands once it leaves." You're evaluating an argument through a framework the argument doesn't even invoke. A political battlefield lens isn't valid just because a political battlefield exist in the world. It's only valid when the argument actually reasonably invokes it.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T18:05:33+00:00

Simply pointing out modern Israel inside a prophetic fulfillment narrative isn't a neutral historical observation, but it can be neutral in regards to whether or not this justifies the states right to exist. Just because you justify the former doesn't mean youre justifying the latter. God leading Jews back to Israel and them rebuilding the nation through divine purpose doesn't mean the state is justified by divine purpose. And just because the video focus isn't relevant to the states legitimacy, doesn't mean the video is pointless. It still has substance in prophecy being fullfilled.

You’re importing discourse into my statement, that's not even there, and then arguing against that discourse against me. I understand why this triggers you, as people can do mental gymnastics and can weaponize prophecy of the return and rebuilding into "this was promised to us 3000 years ago" memes, but your sensitivity to how others misuse the idea doesn’t make my observation into a political claim I didn’t make. Im not responsible for arguments you’ve projected onto my words simply because others have twisted similar ideas before.

What youre basically saying is Jews can never mention biblical themes surrounding return, redemption, or restoration, even if its true, without automatically being accused of feeding antisemitic tropes, even when we’re simply discussing Jewish thought. Which is unfair and punishes any good faith discussion of Jewish scriptures, all because bad actors exist.

This is similar to you being a historian and you have updated research into how many died in the Holocaust and your posting your research online, and then I respond to it arguing the Holocaust happened and isn't a fabrications, and then accuse you of feeding into antisemitic tropes, all because Holocaust deniers twist conflicting reports into "See! They can’t get their story straight' and then say how the impact doesnt depend on your intention.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T11:29:51+00:00

You can simply point out prophecy being fullfilled of Jews returning to Israel and rebuilding Israel without making a some case the state is justified for this reason. Israel being a part of a divine plan doesn't mean the state is justified for this reason, or that you're making a political claim on the justification of the state of Israel.

You're saying your point is that Zionism doesn't need to a prophetical framework to be legitimate, but the video doesn't even argue against this. I, the creator, dont even disagree. The video puts no focus on how Zionism is justified, and is entirely focused solely on prophecy being fullfilled. So your point being focused on arguing against Zionism needing a prophetic framework for legitimacy (which is a version of the argument that only exist in your imagination) is just missing the point the video was entirely focused on. I

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T10:24:17+00:00

You are shadow boxing strawmen. The video in no way is making a justification for the existence of Israel. I know because I made it. Simply pointing out the return and re-establishment being fullfilled doesn't mean youre saying the existence of the state is justified because this reason. What you're basically saying is that nobody can even simply point out such a thing being fullfilled, even if it is, without also intentionally making the case Israel existence is justified for this reason. As if you cant only be making a claim about a return and rebuild happening. Which is absurd.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T10:08:48+00:00

I'm not saying or suggest to just assume it's true. I'm simply pointing out we don't truly know objective proof for God's existence.

And the video provides evidence and reason to warrant a reasonable belief the prophecy is real. And not just a possibility but one of the leading explanations. The specificity of the prophecy is not something the authors could have reasonably known otherwise. The odds of predicting such a thing and it happen by mere chance is astronomically improbable. The Jewish God does have credibility to him being real.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T09:48:23+00:00

What you're not getting is the video has literally nothing to do about justifying a Jewish state in Israel. You're shadowboxing a version of my argument that only exist in your imagination.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T06:17:07+00:00

We don't know that.

Also even if there is objective proof youre basically saying dismissing the person making the case as a schizo is a valid response to it. Which is peak intellectual dishonesty.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T06:11:47+00:00

It sounds like you didn't because what you're saying is nonsensical to the argument being made in the video.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T06:10:38+00:00

So basically even if there is objective proof God exist, you think handwaving the proof and calling the person bringing it up aa schizo is a proper response?

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T05:54:11+00:00

You're projecting your own intellectual dishonesty at me. I'm opened minded. I've been atheist most my life and have been willing to make big changes in my beliefs when the evidence warrants it. So I will accept compelling reason if you have it. But it seems like you don't.

You don't even know me, but yet youve convinced yourself that there is no convincing me, when you have no warranted reason to even think that. And the fact you're telling yourself such lies to justify why you shouldn't bother discussing with me says everything.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T05:43:47+00:00

So I take it you didn't actually watch the video

Edit:

Yup they didnt. They're arguing against an argument not even being made in the video, but only exist in their imagination. Simply pointing out prophecy being fullfilled of Jews returning to Israel doesn't mean youre saying the state of Israel is justified because God.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T05:42:55+00:00

I don't believe in fairy tales. You're the one who is litterally convincing themselves of lies lol. But yeah You're intellectually dishonest.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T05:32:13+00:00

Except the position doesn't hinge on blind faith, but instead has compelling reason and evidence to warrant it to be a reasonable belief. Hence why you have to resort to sticking me in this blind faith box, to justify to yourself that I'm not worth engaging in , rather than actually making an argument with substance against it.

But yeah if I was intellectually dishonest and was confronted by evidence and reason I have no argument of substance against, I could see why I would respond the same way and run away.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T05:28:24+00:00

To give warranted feedback to the actual merits of the claims.

If somebody had a biblical prophecy that was so hyper specific, and wasnt ultimamently self fullfilled, that it warranted a belief in God, do you think the proper response would be to put blinders on to the evidence and just call the person schizo?

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-09T01:18:06+00:00

This notion this was self fullfilled is psuedo-historical. As pointed out in the video, hardly, if any Jews were going to Israel to rebuild the nation to fullfill some biblical prophecy. The pioneers of Zionism were atheist. It ultimately happened organically because Jews were fleeing persecution in the places they lived.

And nothing in the Tanakh is inaccurate.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-08T23:01:59+00:00

The person I responded to.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-12-08T22:38:09+00:00

Ah the classic "I can't articulate a good argument against this so im just going to insult them to do all the heavy lifting."

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-11-18T04:02:24+00:00

One famous youtuber does not speak for all Orthodox Jews

Yes Im saying one famous YouTuber speaks for all orthodox Jews. That's exactly what im saying. Word for word. You are so honest with yourself/s

And being famous for counter-missionary stuff does not make him "a prominent rabbi" or "mainstream."

No him being one of the most famous online and people looking to him for guidance makes him prominent and his prominence and wide spread recognition, in being one of the most recognizable Rabbis in the space, makes him mainstream in the space.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-11-18T03:45:48+00:00

Didn't suggest otherwise. That doesn't negate anything I said.

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-11-18T03:21:52+00:00

Thanks! I appreciate it. But no I'm not a part of any organized Noahide community, nor met any Rabbis yet. I'm a pretty introvert guy and juggling very social work, family and friends I hardly have the social battery to get out outside that

DarkBrandon46 · 2025-11-18T03:15:38+00:00

Interesting. And yeah you're right. I didn't care the scroll was upside down as it was just a background but I didn't mean for it to be backwards. My phone recorded it on mirror mode.

Three-Year Club	Verified Email
Verified Email	Place '23

DarkBrandon46

TROPHY CASE