zeitgeist debunked and we still dont care

What I like is the way the debunkers of this movie completely avoid the astrological evidence presented.

It seems clear to me that the Christian myth is literally an astrological take on things - but why is that a problem to Christians? Isn't the Sun worthy of veneration to them?

I personally can't fathom the concept of worship, but if you have to worship something, you could do worse than the Sun.

I guess we don't worship the sun or have faith in the Aten sun god because we fully understand the Chemistry and Physics of the fusioning ball of hydrogen and helium
in the sky before us.....

Secondly, Zeitgeist fails completly in it's mission to 'convert' Republican voters who give the current status quo their power by this whole anti religion diatribe.. More likely to turn people away who we need to foster change.

Finally, I found the whole science piece shoddy, we'll build complex Maglev trains with exotic superconducting magnets given that the worlds 'easily extractable' mineral resources
are depleted ??? Come on, give me a break!

Personally I think we're screwed UNLESS we are sitting on some withheld technology of a massive quantum jump in knowledge/power.

I think someone else said it, all at the expense of a massive human cull, eugenics, enforced euthenasia and so on is probably the hidden agenda of the Venus Project. Certainly 7 billion people can't live in a Logans Run environment.

They dont site examples out of the orignal religious texts because they have not been properly translated....

www.youtube.com...

YouTube Link

NO IT HAS NOT. Blatant lie number 1.

You assume that the entire documentary is based around the religious aspect, when in fact 2/3rds of the movie is about 9/11 and the ruling elite yet you claim the movie has been 'thoroughly debunked'? You have successfully made a complete ass of yourself before I even read past the 2nd line of your post.

I believe ModernDystopia summed up the rest of your post quite effectively when he said



I rest my case.

Sorry for the anonymous post, but I was trying to do some research on the Zeitgeist films when I ran across this thread. I do wish to respond to a few points.

1. Something that is beginning to annoy me considerably is this "all or nothing", "black and white", "us vs them" absolutist mentality that is becoming ever more prevalent in this society. The question that should be asked is whether or not the movies have inaccuracies, does it still present a valid MESSAGE? Personally I think it does.

2. I don't think that Zeitgeist or Addendum were ever intended to be "scholarly" works to begin with. For those who have watched films like America: Freedom to Fascism or some of the Alex Jones material, it is obviously clear that Peter Joseph is building upon existing works and information, and he gives credit to those sources at the end of the film. Nothing wrong with that, and that the Zeitgeist movies should be taken for what they are... an overview. If anybody disagrees with points made in the film, look at the sources that Peter Joseph is drawing from, and then find out where THOSE sources are getting their info. That's how research is done.

3. I'm sorry, but some of these sites that claim to debunk Zeitgeist, especially the site www.conspiracyscience.com... are laughable. My personal observation is that this particular site makes too many straw men and appeal to ridicule arguments to give it a real credibility problem IMO. The whole "Hate Mail" section was just childish again in my opinion. Personally I switched off when that particular site was attempting to link Zeitgeist Pt III to antisemitism in the conclusion, or where the author is implying that Peter Joseph is trying to profiteer off of his film. GEEZ! Of course this is just one example.

For very similar reasons, I really don't pay much attention to Christian sites either any longer. I will be honest and say that I haven't looked that closely at what the Christians have had to say about the Zeitgeist movies (I generally just scan it over), but there is a reason for this. In the past, I have looked over many Christian sites/talked with other Christians/gone to church on other subjects, ranging from the war in Iraq, satanic conspiracy, Mormonism, heavy metal music, Conversations with God, evolution, etc. In the end, it really comes down to one underlying theme, and that there is an assumption on their part that their core beliefs (or most organized religions for that matter) are the correct ones despite any and all evidence to the contrary, and that the religion in question will fall back on this assumption. This assumption is EXACTLY what this film along with others like "The God Who Wasn't There" is trying to challenge. Generally when this happens, one of three things will follow. First, they will focus in and nitpick certain details in an attempt to discredit while ignoring the overall picture. For example, the concept of a transposed deity is only ONE argument out of MANY, nor is it a new one. Second, many of their counter-arguments end up being little more than appeals to faith, ridicule, or ad-hominem attacks usually with little supporting evidence. Third, if all else fails, then it is a matter that the person challenging their beliefs is either not a True Believer, satanically inspired, or some other such nonsense. Thing is what commentary that I have run across regarding the Zeitgeist movies gives me little reason to think it is going to be any different this time around. Again, my personal experience... the reader's mileage may vary! LOL!

I still say that both movies are definitely worth watching, but as always the viewer should do their own research and form their own opinion.

reply to post by amenti

---

I don't think you can truly clam "fact" unless you witnessed it first hand.

So I think I will believe in what the guy says because it makes perfect common sense.

You seem to be on the defense. Are your beliefs so fragile? You won't change my mind for only I can do that.

The true aim of this Zeitgeist the movie is not to debunk the Christian Religion, it is using it as an example of a form of control that it claims is used by the elite. Past that, more importantly, the aim is to underline the failure of our current monetary system in dealing with the needs of the majority of the earths population. It then goes on to introduce a proposed solution. There is nothing wrong with this film in the slightest, except it may be offensive to those who practice Christianity.

Put it this way... Would you rather wait for Jesus to return from the dead to solve our populations social problems or would you rather start considering a social system that provides for all of our population on a fundamentally equal level?

jeepers folks, hehe. i watched these 2 films today, and believed them. It's quite compelling stuff. There's eye-witness accounts from fire-fighters from 9/11, and accounts from folks that were in the twin towers. Film footage of the weird way the planes vaporised, etc. Along with scientific stuff on molten steel, thermite, etc.

A person could not be blamed for believing that.

I'm surprised at you folks though. You watch a film, under the umbrella of a documentary, and from the looks of the participants stance on this thread, so many automatically beleive it? Tell me why? Why have you all not went and automatically begun your own research? The answer is because you are already biased, and the whole film fits in with your views. I'm speaking bout part 1 here. And no, i follow no religion, but believe in a creative force. I don't need any pseudo-political religion to tell ME how to expereince God.

What i do like, is to research things. What the OP is alluding to is correct. Horus wasn't crucified either. A star never followed his birth. Isis isn't regarded as Isis-miri (Mary). However, the birth of Horus was a miracle (see below), although there is no evidence Isis was a virgin, like Mary. And this is what Zietgeist is alluding to, as it is comparing Isis/Horus to Mary/Jesus.

The three wise men. The bible never mentions the number 3 in regard to this, so that attempted correlation is inaccurate.

Horus did not have 12 disciples. He had 4 demi-god followers.

It's early days, but i can find no record of Horus walking on water.

Isis was impreganted by the severed penis of Osiris. a miracle by anyones standards.

Just research Egyptian mythology, you'll see for yourselves.

A lot of the source in Zeitgeist attacking christianity comes from 'The Christ Conspiracy by a New Age author, named Acharya S'. she provides so little sources, it is next to impossible to verify. Just like it is next to impossible to verify the credentials she says she possess academically.

Ok, so why the heck is this thread important some of you ask? You must know, else why are you even writing in it, hehe. This site is supposed to bhe about seeking the truth. So, when a conspiracy film comes along passing it's contents as fact, and this site in particular tends to beleive it, without even researching it, then this thread definitely deserves to be here, imo.

I watched Zeitgeist earlier. It's 2.22 am now, and i've only been researching part 1 for approx 8 hours. And already it is very plain to see to me, that there are serious errors in the veracity of part 1.

This matters because it is lumped in with stuff that is very compelling, part 2 precisely. I have to ask, as i have researched and initially came to a decision that Peter Joseph is either deliberately telling lies in part 1, or incompetant. Any good researcher (as he should be) should check sources well. I wonder what the motive is (if any) , of why he has made claims so easily found out.

Christianity is surely a political platform for sure. To try to show it as some kinda big lie, by giving examples that are untrue themselves, is curious to me.

Anyhow. Paganism & christianity. Blame that on Emporer constantine & the council of Nicea. He brought into play the pagan stuff when he made ti the state religion in Rome. He had to, to appease the pagans. This was some 300 years after the purported death of Jesus.

speaking of which...hehe. There are approx. 44 individual pieces of ancient text, some by historians, that have been wrote within 150 years of Jesus death, that mention him.

There are only 10 individual pieces of text that mention Julius Ceaser.

Yet, more folks believe Ceaser existed, than Jesus. that's interesting.

Like i said, i'm not religious, i don't need it to know God. The historical 'facts' in part 1 are wrong though. This goes to the veracity, objectiveness, and competence of Peter. check Zeitgeist's sources for part 1, they are mostly anti-christian books. Wayne

I'll chat with you about some of that. For reference my own views, i was the anonymous post @ 'posted on 18-12-2008 @ 08:37 PM'.




Will you explain what you're basing this on? did you're view of the Christian myth come before or after you viewed this evidence? no offence.

Looking at some of the things in Zeitgeist.... The Emperor Constantine in the Council of Nicea decided on Dec 25th. Nowhere in the Bible does it claim Dec 25th. He also decided on the day of worship being SUNday. The early christians worshiped Jesus EVERY day. Merely not working on Saturday.


both these are pagan things. (As incidentally, the Xmas tree is, but that's a side-issue).

The Cross with the circle in it is well known as a Celtic cross. Incidentally, the cross shown in Zeitgeist, in which it is alluded the sun connection is wrong. The Cross in which the arms come outside the circle (as in Zeitgeist) , is a celtic cross. A cross which the arms do NOT come out of the circle, is to do with the sun, and comes from the bronze age. they are 2 DIFFERENT symbols. :-).

What is alluded to re: Bethlehem is interesting. The present are of Bethlehem is known to have had humans there since the Iron age. The remains have been found. Bethlehem has been a settlement for millenia.

The 3 stars thing is also interesting. Nowhere in the Bible does it say there were THREE wise men. it says 'wise men'. This is a myth, albeit not even corrected by the present church.

Why do they not correct it? Cause the church today does not properly represent christ. how could it? In the Bible virtually the only time he got angry was with organised religion. These idiots in Christianity today have erroded the message.



You & I both know, that the basic tenets of Christianity do not permit them to worship the Sun, which is why christians would be upset. Your question is clever though. I happen to not give a damn about christianity, i only care about finding out the truth.

Folks need to go do their own research. Not you in particular, but others in general. Are concerned with invalidating folks sources. Energy is better spent in going doing our own research, it is easy to find. stay away from obviously biased sources too. And be aware of our own possible already biased views.

take care
Wayne

Now I do love the Zeitgeist movies, mostly, but I'm no fan of the Venus project. It's way to "out there" and I believe that we need to focus on our own communities before we go diving into this Venus Project scam, BUT I just wanted to say that before I had even watched Addendum, I happened to see a special on the Discovery channel about upcoming possible architectural wonders and guess what, there was a whole 1/2 hour bit on the Mag-Lev Train. Now the show never mentioned Zeitgeist or the Venus Project, but the Mag-Lev train is a legitimate possibility.

Why? you have contradicted yourself bro. if you can't claim anything as fact unless you have witnessed it first hand, why are you beleiving Peter in Zeitgeist when he uses modern sources, that are at best, questionable?

When is the last time you were in outer space? If you havn't been, how do you know the earth is round? You havn't witnessed it first hand. How do you know the sun is gas? You havn't witnessed it first hand.

It is really interesting (i enjoy sociology also, hehe) that conspiracy buffs here, are being open minded in so many things, yet blindly believing others things. :-) .

take care
Wayne



[edit on 19-12-2008 by reiki]

Change your title to:

Zeitgeist Part 1 debunked....Maybe

reply to post by ModernDystopia

---

If you fail to see that the connections made between Chirstianity and the "pagan sun worship" then I'd say that you are lacking in education and have a spiritual problem. I am a comparitive religions major (this includes mythology) and the "facts" stated in the "movie" are *outrageously* *in*correct, totally lacking intellectual integrity. Why don't you reread the initial post and check out some of the links the original poster offered!
-D

OP, you stated that this was NOT in defense of religion. Yet, all you are doing is defending the religious aspect of the film. To this I will say only one thing about your religion. (not to offend, but to put forth my opinion)

Why are all the ancient historians silent when it comes to Jesus?
Article

Yes it speaks of Josephus, and how his few lines of Jesus are obviously not his observations. The article does not post many sources. The reason for this is for you to research the listed historians on your own.

As for your short 'n' sweet astro-theology is BS vid, the only reference I saw was software. The software allows you to look into the past as to where the stars were and where the sun sits. All of the calculations they have done to show you the positions of the heavens is based on theory, or how it "should" look.

With all that said, there is some pretty damn convincing evidence that stories from the bible are true...

Google Video Link

If you don't have 44 minutes to watch this, I will paraphrase. These two guys, had an idea to find the real Mount Sinai. They found the path Moses took on the Exodus. They found a makeshift coral bridge across the Red Sea. They went a bit further and found seventy palm trees and twelve natural springs in the area that was once called Elim. They also found a split rock with water erosion in the middle of the desert. Also the altar at the base of the mountain, complete with egyptian hieroglyphs of bulls.

FYI I do not believe in God. I believe there's another explanation. A little bit more logical and plausible.