Video on the origins of Christian mythology

I saw this video years ago but it came up during one of the video search threads. It's funny how the author reacts to the information he presents. I see his data points and come to a completely opposite conclusion. The author claims the data points confirm his atheism and contempt for Christian mythology. I think all the references and connections to previously existing mythologies only strengthens ones faith and convictions.

I think too many Christians are threaten by material like this because their faith is weak. And I think atheists are too enthusiastic over material like this because it really is not as significant as they claim it is in supporting their way of thinking.



How we experience reality and God is purely subjective. Although I liked much of the content of the video I see no reason to accept the authors subjective judgements as being any better than my own.

a reply to: dfnj2015

If i recall, there are a few inaccuracies in the vid, but i also remember there being some solid facts that i bet you don’t have the ability to dismiss. Since it’s your thread, i suggest you start with the first claim in the vid and follow on through to the last and see where you stand at the end.

Do you accept that the christian mythos is pieced together from various earlier iterations? From many different cultures?


The Bible is the best evidence against the validity of the stories it contains.

a reply to: dfnj2015

We could start with this list of questions that need answers.

danielmiessler.com...

a reply to: dfnj2015

Who is the protagonist in the flood myth?

a reply to: dfnj2015

Let me find out Jesus never existed!! This would be by far the biggest deception of mankind! Think about it

a reply to: dfnj2015

Abraham and his wife Sara?

Or Brahma and saraswati?

a reply to: hunterTheory

the Sun exists. it defeats darkness each night and provides warmth and living energy to the planet.

a reply to: dfnj2015

interesting video...

Though the video says that Jesus was the solar deity for a "Gnostic Christian sect"... but the gnostic writers and their followers were wiped out... and their writings destroyed

And they didn't consider him God...

a reply to: dfnj2015

Do you really think this video, your video is the first video I have seen. That you are revealing something nobody has ever shown me. That I havnt questioned or doubted Christianity, that your words and these works are all never before seen arguments to Christians

The bible with all its stories, arguments is the best evidence it's true
The bible doesn't resend to be a good story book, it's a book with all its good and bad, mostly bad on display
If it was a feel good story then people would be attracted to it, because it's not, well it's not a feel good story

a reply to: Woodcarver

Typical Woodie, you believe anything you read on the net

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Woodcarver

Typical Woodie, you believe anything you read on the net

Go ahead and debunk the claims in the vid.

a reply to: Woodcarver

I've heard the claims made in the video made before by other researchers.

I just thought the way the author was claiming the content of the video somehow confirmed or supported his atheists beliefs was overreaching. I've watched the video several times. I just have a different conclusion than the author about the information. For me, I think the content of the video creates a deeper context for appreciating the Christian mythology.

In terms of whether Jesus really existed, or if Jesus is or is not the son of God, or accepting Jesus IS God in my mind is a question of faith. People choose to based their belief system on a set of assumptions around the authenticity of Jesus. I have no problem with anyone's belief system or the assumptions they use to build it. Since I can't objectively rationalize my own belief system and the assumptions I hold as absolute truths how can I criticize other people's belief systems.

That's my basic problem with the author of the video. I believe the author thinks his own belief system is objective when it's really subjective.

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Woodcarver

Typical Woodie, you believe anything you read on the net

Go ahead and debunk the claims in the vid.

No I am not wasting my time
A child could debunk what you believe, it's moronic

a reply to: dfnj2015

Do you think all belief systems are subjective? Do you think All beliefs are subjective? Can some beliefs be proven valid?

Can some beliefs be proven invalid?

You keep saying that beliefs are subjective, and some of them can be. But some are based on real observations and not just subjective emotions.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Woodcarver

Typical Woodie, you believe anything you read on the net

Go ahead and debunk the claims in the vid.

No I am not wasting my time
A child could debunk what you believe, it's moronic

I’ll let you off the hook. I know you don’t have the ability to think about this kind of stuff.

a reply to: dfnj2015

The video was skillfully presented but I don't agree with all the conclusions. Someone wrote a book about how there were 12 crucified saviors the predated Christ and had the same mythology. That has pretty well been debunked. The stories match in some aspects but not others. For example, Mithra was not born from a virgin, he was born out of a rock. Some of them do match pretty well. I have read about Christianity being derived from Slavic, Turkish, Egyptian, and Indian sources. One said John the Baptist was really John the Buddhist

There's no denying that Christianity has absorbed many pagan influences. Jesus didn't claim to invent all of this stuff. Rather, he fulfilled the prophesies that already existed. Just because there was a legend about Horus is not grounds to say he never existed. People have been trying to disprove Christianity since before the Jews crucified him.

Christianity is based on the concept of good vs evil. Let's either get back to basics or declare jihad. God is no Goldilocks he appreciates the xtremes and spits out the rest.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Woodcarver

I've heard the claims made in the video made before by other researchers.

Hmmm, and where would that be? It's not like the video in the OP was taken directly from the Zeitgeist documentary and those involved (Jordan Maxwell, Zecharia Sitchin, etc.) in that piece of marvelous propaganda filled with ridiculous lies and half-truths, twisted logic and probably the most refuted and debunked history documentary ever made? Or was it?

Sigh...

Really, come on! You can do better. I recognized that voice right away.

It's all a nice distraction from the actual Pagan origins of specific doctrines within Christendom though. Trinitarians fight the claims of the Zeitgeist documentary and they end up feeling like Don Quijote as if achieving some great victory and rescuing their damsels in distress (the doctrine of the Trinity, the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, literal hellfire, Jesus is God incarnate, a God-man, etc.). And there is this other covenient* potential that they will classify any mention of Pagan connections to their teachings and beliefs by anyone else (even when honest and accurate), under the same category: BS, crap. Nice and convenient so they don't have to think too long about it. Nicely conditioned behaviour again. A set-up. Like a WWE bozo getting set-up to lose to a WWE hero, 'oh how good the hero is for defeating the bozo'. Zeigeist's claims being the bozo in this metaphor, Christendom's unbiblical teachings being the hero (Christendom, not Christianity).

*: convenient for the god of this system of things who is misleading the entire inhabited earth.

The whole God's Sun, God's Son spiel at the start of the video in the OP, i.e. the start of the Zeitgeist documentary (minus the title introduction and Jordan Maxwell's introduction), is always good for a laugh though. Do not watch beyond 3:45:

Here's the Don Quijote effect Zeitgeist type of arguing has: