Once again, like I said, all I see is a bunch of people trying to validate their own personal beliefs. It's amuzing to watch, it really is.

it's got be the basic psychology of the human condition

but is that all there is in this thread? seems some people have beliefs that evolve and have from this very thread

are you simplifying it to stay in your comfort zone

No, I find it humorous that both sides argue vehemently against that which doesn't conform to what they believe. Thay are scared to death that there is a possibility they are wrong. I find it all amusing,really.

Zeitgeist is 2 hours long? I'll just gather up a group of like mined individuals and we'll edit that down to 90 minutes and we will cut out all the crap we don't believe in. Just like the Bible has been edited. The historical Jesus believed in re-incarnation and he believed he was the re-incarnation of Horus! How weird is that.He spent a period of time living in the Indian,Tibet/Nepal region (the missing years of his life) studying the ways of Buddha. The three Magi or wise men form the East took him back with them where he learned all about the true mysteries of the universe.This is all documented in ancient writings held in monastery's high in the Himalayan mountains. Of course again the western world does not know any of this because we are basically ignorant of the truth of the world and our Judeo-Christian beliefs get in the way of an open mind.

undo your statements refuting zeitgeist are biased and one sided. you are not even acknowledging the facts about the astrological explanation. this in initself should be proof enough. Your other statements are in no way detrimental to zeitgeists credibility, i read nothing in your statement that is hard evidance, you provided us with your opinion. who knows maybe 2 thousand years from now people will believe spiderman was a real person and worship him to. people will believe anything.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
No, I find it humorous that both sides argue vehemently against that which doesn't conform to what they believe. Thay are scared to death that there is a possibility they are wrong. I find it all amusing,really.

so if we disagree we are scared to death? this is a forum, you share ideas, thoughts, opinions and views. maybe you think a forum is something else. i dont come to ats to agree with everyone, i come here to think, see others peoples thoughts and learn and alot of the time the people on here change my mind on how i view certain things.

Originally posted by truthwillneverberevealed
undo your statements refuting zeitgeist are biased and one sided. you are not even acknowledging the facts about the astrological explanation. this in initself should be proof enough. Your other statements are in no way detrimental to zeitgeists credibility, i read nothing in your statement that is hard evidance, you provided us with your opinion. who knows maybe 2 thousand years from now people will believe spiderman was a real person and worship him to. people will believe anything.

It's logic. Logic dictates that if the story is a metaphor for a real planetary movement, that the planetary movement must be real. It can't be real FAKE planetary movement. If Horus' rose from the dead 3 days later, and Horus is just a metaphor, then the planet had to have stood still for 3 days or the sun vacated the solar system for 3 days or something REALLY big, got between the sun and the earth so that the sun could not be seen to rise. It's not opinion, it's common sense and logic.

I've also demonstrated how the everything ancient is a metaphor for the sun moon and stars, is inaccurate, with the Gilgamesh example.

Ever read the Epic of Gilgamesh? The historians said Gilgamesh was a metaphor for a constellation moving through the universe in the typical Epic Hero adventure (see Joseph Campbell). Turns out the guy was REAL! He was not a metaphor for a constellation. This is not opinion, it's a fact!

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by truthwillneverberevealed
undo your statements refuting zeitgeist are biased and one sided. you are not even acknowledging the facts about the astrological explanation. this in initself should be proof enough. Your other statements are in no way detrimental to zeitgeists credibility, i read nothing in your statement that is hard evidance, you provided us with your opinion. who knows maybe 2 thousand years from now people will believe spiderman was a real person and worship him to. people will believe anything.

It's logic. Logic dictates that if the story is a metaphor for a real planetary movement, that the planetary movement must be real. It can't be real FAKE planetary movement. If Horus' rose from the dead 3 days later, and Horus is just a metaphor, then the planet had to have stood still for 3 days or the sun vacated the solar system for 3 days or something REALLY big, got between the sun and the earth so that the sun could not be seen to rise. It's not opinion, it's common sense and logic.

I've also demonstrated how the everything ancient is a metaphor for the sun moon and stars, is inaccurate, with the Gilgamesh example.

Ever read the Epic of Gilgamesh? The historians said Gilgamesh was a metaphor for a constellation moving through the universe in the typical Epic Hero adventure (see Joseph Campbell). Turns out the guy was REAL! He was not a metaphor for a constellation. This is not opinion, it's a fact!

so you are taking the 3 days think literaly, it doesnt matter if the world stood still for 3 days or not, you are still not debunking the astroloigical explanation. im not sure where you are going with your last paragrapgh, is it to get me belive that christ was the son of god or something? becuase its really not working.

Yes, I'm taking it to mean, that if Horus was a metaphor for a planetary movement, that the planetary movement must be the basis for the story. What was the story? That he died and rose again, 3 days later (which, by the way, I've never found written anywhere). Based on Zeitgeist, if it's an analogy for Horus (as the sun) being killed by Set (as the night) every night, EVERY time Horus dies, there must be three nights in a row where the sun doesn't rise again. So we get one day with sun, three days with darkness. Because if the story of him being the literal sun and the story of him rising from the dead 3 days later is true, the sun would have to be out of sight for three days, and in sight for one day, then out of sight for three days. You see, the problem with making it a pure metaphor for real planetary movement is that you also have to then explain the metaphor's analogies. They can't, so they make it up on the fly.

The Gilgamesh example is to show you that the cover up about our ancient past is not that these things were astrological symbols and so forth, but that they actually existed. I'd like it if you believed Christ existed but I'm also interested that you realize our ancient past is not a metaphor.

Originally posted by undo
Yes, I'm taking it to mean, that if Horus was a metaphor for a planetary movement, that the planetary movement must be the basis for the story. What was the story? That he died and rose again, 3 days later (which, by the way, I've never found written anywhere). Based on Zeitgeist, if it's an analogy for Horus (as the sun) being killed by Set (as the night) every night, EVERY time Horus dies, there must be three nights in a row where the sun doesn't rise again. So we get one day with sun, three days with darkness. Because if the story of him being the literal sun and the story of him rising from the dead 3 days later is true, the sun would have to be out of sight for three days, and in sight for one day, then out of sight for three days. You see, the problem with making it a pure metaphor for real planetary movement is that you also have to then explain the metaphor's analogies. They can't, so they make it up on the fly.

The Gilgamesh example is to show you that the cover up about our ancient past is not that these things were astrological symbols and so forth, but that they actually existed. I'd like it if you believed Christ existed but I'm also interested that you realize our ancient past is not a metaphor.

Actually, you're completely wrong about the Sun thing. The whole "it took me 3 days to come back to life!" thing is actually the Sun reaching its lowest point during the winter solstice (it doesn't get higher or lower than it's lowest point for 3 days), and then gets higher and higher in the sky after that point, which could be considered a resurrection.

It has nothing to do with the Sun rising and setting every single day. It's a solstice thing.

Christ probably did exist, and probably tried to rise up against his brethren. Did he perform miracles? Maybe, maybe not. What can't be denied, however, are the similarities between his story and that of the other "gods" mentioned in the video. Is it possible they added those aspects to his life to build him up, to make him larger than life? To make him more than human, perhaps? Absolutely. In fact, that makes the most sense to me. After he was killed, they started exaggerating and adding events that never happened during his life to attract people to join their movement. It makes more sense to me than "God" sending some dude down to Earth to die for our sins.



[edit on 8-7-2007 by Xerimethius]

The beginning part of this video is interesting but the rest of it is compelling to say the least.

But it's the first part of this video that's relevant to the topic at hand so for now I'll focus on that part and leave the other part for a 9/11 thread.
I must say that I'm really impressed how the author/author's of that movie fit everything together like they did to support their argument that Jesus' life parallels in many ways to those other Son of God story's prior to Him. I've read up on this information several times before in the past but I really enjoyed watching a video,like this one, that stacked one thing on top of the other to support their views on this. I also learned a few new things too about this perspective that I didn't know before.

But for them to them to conclude that Jesus never existed simply because some early members of Christianity beefed up the nativity story and some other general biographical information and so on about him is far too abrupt a conclusion where they are throwing out the baby with the bathwater leaving out the most important information about Jesus for their own purposes... which in this case, is their overall message they want to convey in this movie as a whole.

And that part where they were talking about Josephus and saying that that text in his Roman Antiquities book had been found fake... is simply not true either. Once again, they are leaving out the whole story on this one too in order to lend continuing support to what the movie is primarily about and the message that it's attempting to convey.

But all in all, this video, taken as a whole was very compelling and has left a real impression on me. I plan on watching it over a few more times because of this.


[edit on 8-7-2007 by Palasheea]

Originally posted by calcoastseeker
Zeitgeist is 2 hours long? I'll just gather up a group of like mined individuals and we'll edit that down to 90 minutes and we will cut out all the crap we don't believe in. Just like the Bible has been edited. The historical Jesus believed in re-incarnation and he believed he was the re-incarnation of Horus! How weird is that.He spent a period of time living in the Indian,Tibet/Nepal region (the missing years of his life) studying the ways of Buddha. The three Magi or wise men form the East took him back with them where he learned all about the true mysteries of the universe.This is all documented in ancient writings held in monastery's high in the Himalayan mountains. Of course again the western world does not know any of this because we are basically ignorant of the truth of the world and our Judeo-Christian beliefs get in the way of an open mind.

actually, "back in the day" children went to learn their fathers trade....they worked until they were twelve...(unless they were going to become a priest)...at 12 or thirteen they became a man and started working with thier fathers....
priests ended up studying the torah until they were 20-some y/o

from jesus being between 2-6 he was in egypt escaping king herods decree that all infants under a certain age were to be killed....when he came back he became a carpenter...minus the story where he stays behind at the temple...the only thing we know is that he was a carpenter with joseph....

also somebody said that minor things had been changed...and they have...such as the time of year of christ's birth..it was originally summertime...with the support of the sheppards in their fields....but was later moved when some romans started adopting christianity...it was moved because the winter solstice is/was a major event for pagans...and changing the date helped them be more accepting...

how satan looks was later changed by catholics trying to convert celtics.... they saw a statue of the celtic horned god Cernunnos...and was like...that's satan!!...he's evil...CONVERT!!

[edit on 8-7-2007 by wenfieldsecret]

Originally posted by Xerimethius


Actually, you're completely wrong about the Sun thing. The whole "it took me 3 days to come back to life!" thing is actually the Sun reaching its lowest point during the winter solstice (it doesn't get higher or lower than it's lowest point for 3 days), and then gets higher and higher in the sky after that point, which could be considered a resurrection.

Funny thing is, it wasn't my analolgy. It was Zeitgeist who said Horus was the sun and Set was the night, and every night, Set would kill Horus and he'd rise again the next day.

So there you go, truthwillneverberevealed. Yet another reason to assume he was incorrect on his analogy of the 3 days meaning literal planetary bodies, rising and setting every 24 hours. I still haven't examined X's theory, so before I can comment on its accuracy, I'll have to check it for myself.

Originally posted by undo
Funny thing is, it wasn't my analolgy. It was Zeitgeist who said Horus was the sun and Set was the night, and every night, Set would kill Horus and he'd rise again the next day.

So there you go, truthwillneverberevealed. Yet another reason to assume he was incorrect on his analogy of the 3 days meaning literal planetary bodies, rising and setting every 24 hours. I still haven't examined X's theory, so before I can comment on its accuracy, I'll have to check it for myself.

See, what you're doing is twisting what was said. The 3 day revival thing isn't the same as the day and night cycle. The 3 days had to do with the Sun reaching its lowest point in the night sky. The Sun wouldn't get any high or lower than that point for 3 days. After the 3 days had past, the Sun would get higher and higher in the sky.

Originally posted by Karilla
Here's a link to Zeitgeist - the movie.

The first third of the film deals with this subject, and the rest is pretty informative too!

It certainly is compelling, and I have yet to see anybody refute the connection. And if it does all come down to sun-worship, then why have the establishment gone to such lengths to "demonise" the sun? Most people I know actually fear the sun in a slight way.

Where's the link?

Thanks

J

Originally posted by mrbocci
Wow, this looks very intriguing, how comes no one has made this connection previously though? (assuming they haven't that is).

Well i'm off to aquire zeitergeist! Sounds too good to miss

There are actually many books that show the clear connection between ancient egyptian theoology and christianity.

J.

Originally posted by BugZyZuncle
You mean horus, the god of the sky to ancient Egyptians?
The one who was half man and half falcon?

To compare horus to Christ is simply laughable, and some of you will believe anything rather than believe the truth.

HOw can anyone, in their right mind, compare horus with Christ, really?

The reality is, Christ was the Son of God, and horus was a myth made up by the Egyptians which constantly changed throughout the years. There is plenty of evidence to support Christ if people would actually take the time to investigate his life on earth.

However, most people don't want to admit the existance of Christ because they would then be required to adjust their life accordingly.

I've read some crap here on ATS but this has got to be the most laughable subject matter yet.


The Hebrews descendend from Abraham 28 generations from Adam. They were enslaved by Egypt for four hundred years and did pick up some of their religious practices. However, after the exodus, they were purified and were allowed to enter into the promised land where Christ was ultimately born 2000 years later.

Sorry - but what you're ranting about is a huge fairytale my friend. All you are doing is quoting the biblical story... The whole point here being that much of the jewish & christian theological beleif system is based on ancient egyptian religeous belief. If you don't like this - that's too bad - but most knowledgeable biblical scholars agree with this point. The archeological evidence is overwhelming - and everywhere. The Dead Sea Scrolls are just a small part of the evidence. There is much, much more out there.
Do yourself a big favour and search out the evidence, read the books, do the research - then come and tell us what you think afterwards.

J.