It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Christianity is based on Egyptian Myths - Jesus Christ is Horus

page: 7
49
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: atheistempire.wordpress.com...


Could it be that a site that calls itself "The Atheist Empire Of Liverpool" could be a tad biased?

I don't see any links in the atheistempire post to where this information was derived? Are we to just take the authors word for all of this? How do you explain the Roman records? Did the Romans actually fake records to help create a fake Christ? Why would they do that? There is a reason that all the worlds Religions believe that Jesus existed.

The debate is over who he was. A Deity, a Prophet or just a charismatic Teacher and Leader? Considering the huge quantity of evidence you must admit he had an more profound impact on the Human Race than any other person in history. Remove religion from the equation and take a look at the man known as Jesus Christ. You will find that all evidence points to the fact that he did live and he had a huge impact on the world. In fact I've never met an Atheist who denied he was a real man. Until you pointed out this site.

I find it interesting that the Atheists now feel they have to hide the fact that Jesus was a real person and feel compelled to invent a story that he did not exist. I took the time to read through other material on that site and everything has one thing in common. The author expects the readers to take their word for what they have published.

Regarding your other topic. The lost tribes has been the subject of much debate. There seems to be lots of opinion but no evidence as to what happened to these people. Some feel they ended up here in the America's. Since no records seem to exist, we may never know.


Which 'roman records' are these? To my knowledge there is only one contempory mention of a 'Jesus' in Israel at this point in history - and there is much confusion about even this report. 'Jesus' was a very common name in ancient Israel - akin to 'Tom', 'John', or 'Steve' today. Sure there were many people called' Jesus' in ancient Israel - but they were most likely all average, normal guys...

There is however, plenty of evidence to suggest the 'Jesus' myth is largely based on various pre-christian religeous cults of the day. Virgin births, baptisims, 'son's' of God', crusifiction/murder of said god, rising from the dead of said god etc...are ALL common themes in many pre-christian belief systems. Strange co-incidence huh?


J.




posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by thesun
There is a lot of geographical and archeological evidence that the accounts in the bible about jesus christ is real and accurate. There is consistancy about the character and personality of jesus, this in itself is a strong factor to consider, when you think about it, it is hard for people to be consistant about anything unless they have absolute conviction


Hmmm...I disagree. There is very little, if any, archeological evidence for the reality of 'Jesus Christ'. Show me one single shred please...

The new testement is actually completely inconsistent re: the man's personality, deeds, locations, speeches etc....almost every apostle (Mathew, Mark, Luke, John..) contradict each other on every salient incident/speech/location.....

J.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leyla
This is the utter nonsense that the Bible warns about. The devil wants us confused and turn away from God.


Heheh! Yep - right....'The Devil' huh? Santa Claus also want's us to be good little children if we want to get what we want for Chritmas too...but I don't worry too much about him either...



J.


J.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Ah, hell, I'll bite. Why, Byrd, do you not feel Jesus was a historical figure? Do you really believe that you could write detailed fictional stories one maybe two generations after they supposedly happened and credibly pass them off as true?


Why not? Every religeon in history has done the same thing? Why would chritianity be any different?

J.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarkMile77
There is an author that goes by the name of Stephen King, some of you may have heard of him.

Every know and then he would write stories that would take place in a town called Castle Rock. Even tho the stories are a work of fiction, Castle Rock is a town in the real world. You see the people and the situations in the stories would be fake, but the town was real.

Another example of this is Spider-Man. Spider-Man is another fictional character that lives in a real would place called New York City.

Does any one see my point yet ?

There are numerous examples in literature of fictional people living in the real world places. There are also examples of fictional characters interacting with real life people. Example; Superman (fake) once fought against Mohamed Ali (real) in a comic book.

So to all the Christens out there. Please stop using the " If the bible talks about a real world town that Jesus went and visited, then the bible must be true. " argument. It is week and full of holes. And you do your faith a dis-service when you rely on such a week debating point to prove your religion is real.

And for the record I'm not an atheist trying to mock Christianity. But it does bother me that so many Christens either don't know or don't care to learn the history of there own religion, let a lone the history of the other religions that came before them.

Has no Christen or Jew ever asked why does God ( Jehovah ) and Mosses look like Zeus ?


Very good point. A story in a book - even the bible - does NOT constitute 'evidence'.

J.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk
I'm sorry to disappoint the OP more than Byrd has already but Christianity is not based on an older religion
it is based on Judaism which is based on older religions


Christiany IS indeed based on Judaism - but a very extreme and fundementalist version that, according to many historians at least, was practiced by the same sect that wrote the dead sea scrolls - who themselves were trying to 'purify' what they saw as the 'corruption' of the jewish faith by 'gentiles' (the Romans & Greeks). Their answer was to revert back to a very old form of Judaism - a form closely associated with Egytian belief systems....and we come full circle


J.

(edited to fix J's quotes so we can see what it is he's saying)

[edit on 9-7-2007 by Byrd]



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by cpdaman
so let me understand this

jesus is different physically speaking from horus but they both fill the same ROLE in religious mythology and the story's of the bible (the majority at leat) is simply a newer slightly different repacked bunch of story's and fable's for a different millenium?which can be found in different cultures thoughtout the last 4000 or so years of recorded history





[edit on 8-7-2007 by cpdaman]


Yep - that's about right...


J.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 08:28 PM
link   
I'm sorry, but hasn't the life of Jesus already been proven by scholars? It's hard to say a religion would grow so large if nobody knew of a Jesus. Whether he was savior or not, he did exist.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ironside
I'm sorry, but hasn't the life of Jesus already been proven by scholars? It's hard to say a religion would grow so large if nobody knew of a Jesus. Whether he was savior or not, he did exist.


Nope...sorry. It's never been 'proven' at all - any more than the lives of 'Zeus' , 'Horus' or 'Odin' have been proven either.
At least not in any serious scientific circles - maybe by a few religeous crackpots here and there...but otherwise, no...

J.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 08:42 PM
link   
jimbo999: I don't think scientists know much for history ((at a professional level)), wouldn't it be historians who would have this information?



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimbo999

Originally posted by Marduk
I'm sorry to disappoint the OP more than Byrd has already but Christianity is not based on an older religion
it is based on Judaism which is based on older religions
lol

there are several very easy to see points that prove this beyond the ability of peple of faith to even attempt to refute it without seeming uninformed and ignorant
the main one is comparing the stories that appear in Genesis with the stories of the Mesopotamian civilisations
i'll give you one example by comparing the flood account contained in the Epic of Gilgamesh with the flood story of Noah from the Bible

Christiany IS indeed based on Judaism - but a very extreme and fundementalist version that, according to many historians at least, was practiced by the same sect that wrote the dead sea scrolls - who themselves were trying to 'purify' what they saw as the 'corruption' of the jewish faith by 'gentiles' (the Romans & Greeks). Their answer was to revert back to a very old form of Judaism - a form closely associated with Egytian belief systems....and we come full circle


J.



actually judaism came from whatever the mesopatamians believed in....abraham who had many sons....
many sons had father abraham...

sorry got carried away...abraham was a mesopatamian....however he heard the voice of God, which called him away...then he settles in the lands....and with his many sons....thereby telling them all that the god he heard that day is the one true living God...and all the lands are his to inheret...after seperating from his son lot...he gets lonely wants another kid...God gives him one which he almost sacrifices back...isaac has two sons....jacob and esau...the younger jacob stole the elder's inheritance...and they have been at conflict ever since....the families became hebrew and early islam respectivly....
religions branch from each other....

abram's wife also gave the pharoh herpes:
17 But the LORD inflicted serious diseases on Pharaoh and his household because of Abram's wife Sarai. 18 So Pharaoh summoned Abram. "What have you done to me?" he said.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rhain


What are you selling here?? I don't think ATS wants you vending your wares here.


I just finished watching Zeitgeist and am leaning toward this film heavily. It made so much sense to me. Early humans basing their lives on the environment.


I also enjoyed Zeitgeist very much! Part 1 is very similar to Jan and Andrew's work.

I'm not selling anything!? And these are not my "wares"? Their work pertains to Astrotheology, Shamanism and exposing the myths of christianity and other religions throughout antiquity. Astrotheology IS what this thread is about.

If this kind of thing interests you, you can certainly click on the link and order it if you like.

You can also watch the Pharmacratic Inquisition demo version online for free.

Did you at least watch the trailers or just decided to accuse me of selling something? I was actually trying to offer another source of info re: this topic.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xerimethius


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.


I don't know how many times I have to tell you this,
but dear sir/ma'am, I didn't concoct the 24 hour thing,
Zeitgeist did.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 10:54 PM
link   
This "exposing the myths of religion" thing has been going on since the supposed fall of the Holy Roman Empire, during the days of German Higher Criticism. It's not some new, cutting edge concept. It's in all our science and history books in the public school system. We get it beat into our heads from the time we are young enough to indoctrinate -

we came from monkeys
god doesn't exist
religion is a pain in the keister
people died because of religion
wars were fought because of religion
religion is bad

What they don't tell you is, that the beliefs they support are all based originally on mistakes made by German Higher Criticism and the subsequent texts and decisions they made as a result. Such as the timeline, which is terribly messed up right now. Theories that were spawned on the concept that only white people were human and blacks were like seventy percent human and part monkey. Seriously folks, you're banging a drum for all your worth that is probably the singlemost prejudice belief system on the planet.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 02:12 AM
link   
ok as for Harpur's sources, I have searched online to provide some until I receive the book from my Mum in the post.


Harpur claims as one of his formative influences for understanding this mythological Jesus the Canadian, Northrup Frye (1912-1991). In Frye's book The Double Vision the great literary critic who taught for decades at the University of Toronto, states that when the Bible is historically accurate, it is only accidentally so. Reporting was not of the slightest interest to its writers. They had a story to tell which only could be told by myth and metaphor. What they wrote became a source of vision, not doctrine.

I have emphasised 'metaphor' as this relates to undo's point


Three virtually unknown authorities used in this book are Godfrey Higgins (1771-1834), an early English mythologist who, through groundbreaking studies of ancient writings, sought freedom from the exclusivism and dogmatism of Christianity; Gerald Massey (1828-1907) an American, who studied Egyptian mythology and there discovered antecedents to images and themes appearing in the Hebrew Bible and New Testament; and Alvin Boyd Kuhn (1880-1963) another American, who pursued extensive academic research into the origins of religious symbols and meanings. His work, though esoteric to untrained eyes, convinced Harpur of the validity of Egyptian sources for much of what appears in the Jewish and Christian scriptures.



The Pagan Christ draws upon the research of such scholars as Alvin Boyd Kuhn to argue that Christianity's central myths were formulated in Egypt many thousands of years before the Gospels were written.



...By deconstructing the evidence for the historical Jesus, Harpur backs up his assertion that the Jesus narrative is simply one more variation on this archetypal theme.


All from here

Apologetics Ministeries are very critical of Harpur's sources:


Start with the bibliography, and it reads like a Rogue's Gallery of Scholastic Incompetence: Freke and Gandy, Acharya S, Tim Leedom, T. W. Doane, Earl Doherty, Helen Ellerbe, Kersey Graves, John Shelby Spong, Godfrey Higgins, Gerald Massey, Alvin Boyd Kuhn. These last three (in reverse order) are Harpur's most favored sources; throughout Harpur expresses bewilderment that these three "scholars" (the word he applies liberally to just about anyone, regardless of credentials), especially Kuhn, have been so vastly ignored. The very idea that they have been ignored because of their incompetence and inability somehow never manages to cross Harpur's uncritical mind.

Some critical work backing this up was done for us by W. Ward Gasque, a Canadian Biblical scholar, who reports that he emailed 20 Egyptologists to get their view of these last three writers. Of the 10 who responded to Gasque, only one had ever heard of any of them. I think it worth reporting much of what Gasque reports, in full:

Harpur refers to Kuhn, Massey and Higgins as 'Egyptologists'; but he does not quote any contemporary Egyptologist or recognized academic authority on world religions, nor does he appeal to any of the standard reference books, such as the magisterial three volume Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (2001) or any primary sources.

He is especially dependent on Kuhn, whom he describes as "one of the single greatest geniuses of the 20th century" -- [one who] "towers above all others of recent memory in intellect and his understanding of the world's religions." Further, "Kuhn has more to offer the Church than all the scholars of the Jesus Seminar together. More than John Spong, C. S. Lewis, Joseph Campbell or Matthew Fox." Harpur declares himself "stunned at the silence with which [Kuhn's] writings have been greeted by scholars."

...

I emailed 20 leading international Egyptologists, regarding the contributions made to the field by Kuhn, Higgins and Massey. I also asked their opinion of the following claims by Kuhn (and hence Harpur):

* That the name of Jesus was derived from the Egyptian Iusa, which means "the coming divine Son who heals or saves."

* That the god Horus is "an Egyptian Christos, or Christ . . . He and his mother, Isis, were the forerunners of the Christian Madonna and Child, and together they constituted a leading image in Egyptian religion for millennia prior to the Gospels."

* That Horus also "had a virgin birth, and that in one of his roles, he was 'a fisher of men with 12 followers.'"

* That "the letters KRST appear on Egyptian mummy coffins many centuries BCE, and . . . this word, when the vowels are filled in . . . is really Karast or Krist, signifying Christ."

* That the doctrine of the incarnation "is in fact the oldest, most universal mythos known to religion. It was current in the Osirian religion in Egypt at least 4,000 years BCE."

Only one of the 10 experts who responded to my questions had ever heard of Kuhn, Higgins or Massey! Professor Kenneth A. Kitchen of the University of Liverpool pointed out that not one of these men is mentioned in M.L. Bierbrier's Who Was Who in Egyptology (3rd ed, 1995); nor are any of their works listed in Ida B. Pratt's very extensive bibliography on Ancient Egypt (1925/1942).

Since he died in 1834, Kitchen noted, "nothing by Higgins could be of any value whatsoever, because decipherment of the Egyptian hieroglyphs was still being finalized, very few texts were translated, and certainly not the vast mass of first-hand religious data."

Another scholar responded: "Egyptology has the unenviable distinction of being one of those disciplines that almost anyone can lay claim to, and the unfortunate distinction of being probably the one most beleaguered by false prophets." He dismissed Kuhn's work as "fringe nonsense."

These scholars were unanimous in dismissing the suggested etymologies for 'Jesus' and 'Christ.'


Much more can be read here A Critical Look at Tom Harpur's "The Pagan Christ"
James Patrick Holding


This is an exellent critique so would recommend checking it out. It goes into a lot of detail, not just the sources but analyses the claims made in the book.

Another review discussing Frye - Metaphors


Now, in response to the u2u I received regarding this thread. I haven't rejected Harpur just because Bryd, Super Moderator said it was fabricated. I do, however, respect the information provided and consider it, as I do with all responses. I also acknowledge my own lack of knowledge about certain issues and value the imput by others who know more than I do.

I read the book and I wanted to discuss it.


Harpur writes not in a vacuum of ignorance but out of a lifetime of study, research and questioning. An Anglican priest who was never content to remain complacent with what he had learned and preached, Harpur dismissed his own early questions as nonsense. He also dismissed other thinkers who spoke out including Sigmund Freud whose dictum was that the Bible was a “total plagiarism” of the Sumerian and Egyptian mythologies.
ref 2nd link aboven

























[edit on 9-7-2007 by NJE777]



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
NJE777,
Whether I agree with the premise of the OP


Hi
I am the OP, but I didn't make the claims, Harpur did, I posted it to discuss it. My eyes popped out of my head when I read the book. It was news to me. I had never heard of it so was pretty


And yes, I took what he offered up to be true or at least contain some truth. It is quite disappointing. As I say that, I am not writing all of it off completely. I can from the discussion now acknowledge the parallels between religion and Egyptian/Sumerian myths.

The biggest question I had after reading the book was and I don't think anyone has addressed it as yet, was where did the Egyptians go? Did they experience a rapture? I have read that the Minioans experienced an endemic flood and they were closely affiliated with the Egyptians. (*I believe after the starseed research I did, this is not conclusively accepted)

The myths indicate to me that humanity is in a cycle. Then I ask what for?

cheers



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 03:03 AM
link   
I just found a link that shows some parallels with Jesus and some pagan deities> www.religioustolerance.org...
Either way....portrayals of god(s) as mortal men, virgin births and reincarnation or 'returning from the dead' and so forth isn't nothing new...it's in just about every cult on the planet. I mean if you are not dead after dying then...you're obviously a zombie.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by calcoastseeker
The historical Jesus believed in re-incarnation and he believed he was the re-incarnation of Horus!


I was going to ask where is the ancient writings and can I be forwarded to them? But you I think have answered that one underneath?


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.


This just frustrates me insomuch that this is nothing but heresay. I am not rejecting it but where is the ancient texts for everyone to read?
A part of me feels, yeah, the truth is kept from us and why wouldn't there be ancient texts in the Himalayan Mountains? Do you know of any links to support this?
--------------------------------------------------------

I am planning to sit and watch the movie tonight... thanks for the link. I will no doubt comment on it later



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 04:29 AM
link   
Wow, this thread went a long way since I last posted merely a day ago...

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
...we know what Jewish Law was and this tends to prove the fact that they believed that he was born of a virgin whereas the Horus is mythical crap with no laws and or witnesses.
--------------
...You also have the possibilit that the Egyptians got their Horus/Osirus from the JEWS as the great Pyramid was probably Noah or his sons building...

Ummm...Not likely. The Set/Osiris/Isis/Horus Cycle of Egyptian religion predates the First Dynasty...Perhaps even before the Egyptians developed their Hieroglyphic writing (in-use at least since 3150 BC). The Pyramids of Giza weren't built until the 4th Dynasty. I've posted quite a bit about the history of Egypt from its prehistory up until the Pyramid Age & even provide my sources. Even the historical evidence places Moses before Jesus & Moses is (historically speaking) tied near to or at the time of Seti I or Ramses II (Literally centuries after the Giza Pyramids were built). So I very seriously doubt that the Egyptians used Jesus as the source-material for Horus...


Originally posted by Souljah
Jesus Christ is not Horus - Jesus Christ is the SUN GOD.

I wouldn't think so...I'll explain why, point-by-point.

Originally posted by Souljah
Horus for Egyptians was the SUN and the similarities between J.C. and Horus are all connected with simple rules of Astronomy.

Actually, Horus was associated with the sky (not the sun) but commonly called "The Avenger," due to his battles with his uncle Set (the murderer of Horus' father, Osiris).

Originally posted by Souljah
On the 25th of December something special happens - it is called the WINTER SOLSTICE...

I have yet to find any real biblical canon that names Jesus' birthday as December 25th...Jesus was born before the adoption of the Georgian (or was it the Julian? I never could keep those two calendars straight
) Calendar system. The Winter Solstice was celebrated by the Keltoi (Celts) & was considered to be the beginning of the New Year, as the sun began to renew itself (when the daytime started getting longer, as you pointed out).

Originally posted by Souljah
What's up with those 3 kings? The 3 kings are simply 3 stars in Orion's belt, which point exactly to the place, where the sun shall rise on the morning of 25th of December.

Any corellation here is sketchy at best...Using the stars of the nighttime is more common among the societies that used a lunar-based calendar, rather than a sun-based calendar.

Originally posted by Rhain
Early humans basing their lives on the environment.

Exactly. Many of the similarities between various religions pre-Christian era were based upon the natural world & the seasonal cycles that agrarian cultures needed to track if they were to survive.

Horus did not come from a "virgin birth." In the Osiris Cycle, Set had killed Osiris & cut his body into pieces, scattering the pieces over the breadth of the Delta Region of the Nile River. Using her power with the Natural Earth, Isis summoned birds to search for & recover the pieces of her husband, but his phallus was never found. Isis had been the first to create the process of mummification & resurrected Osiris and, somehow, became pregnant from Osiris...After which, she gave birth to Horus. Not exactly the "standard description" of a virgin birth, huh?


IMO, Jesus would be more reasonably linked with the pagan "Wood God." His mother representing the Gaia-concept of "Mother Earth," & his father representative of the "Sun God." The Son, being born from the uniting of Sun & Earth, would die (with the Summer Solstice) & be reborn/resurrected (at the Winter Solstice) as a representation of the seasonal cycles. This type of religious concept was most common with agrarian cultures (which were later supplanted by the Christian religion) who used a lunar-based calendar to track the growing seasons. Basically, this "pagan trinity" represented the gods of Nature & the endless cycles of nature.

In Egyptian religion Osiris was the God of Agricultural Fertility (most Egyptian pictures of Osiris had him being green in color) as well as being the Ruler of the Underworld Paradise; Isis was a Goddess of Fertility as being the Earth Mother; Horus was never said to have been dead & reborn again at any time...It was only his father, Osiris, who died (at least twice!). Any link between Horus & Jesus does not have any really definitive correllation with Horus as the Egyptian religion has been accounted...Any "resemblences" are only superficial, not substantial.


Originally posted by truthwillneverberevealed
As i said earlier you and many others seem to be religous zealots clinging to something you thought was concrete slowly turning to dust.

Well, I don't claimn to speak for Byrd or any others that you seem to be referring to, but in my case, I consider my posts here to be more Theology than zealotry. This comes from researching from many sources & comparing the differences with the similarities.



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).

Which I've never found in any version of the Osiris Cycle that I've read either...I'm something of a long-time "expert" on the subject of Egyptology & I think an "old-timer" like Byrd could confirm my claim on that...



Originally posted by undo
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.

This sounds more like a confusion between Horus & Set being compared to Ra's journey through the Underworld at night...Ra's journey is detailed in the Book of Coming Forth by Day (Common name: Egyptian Book of the Dead). Willaim Budge wrote all about it & you should be able to find it in any sizable public library.


Originally posted by cpdaman
it's got be the basic psychology of the human condition

This is a good way to explain what I consider to be the major difference between Religion & Science: Science tries to explain how we got the way we are, while Religion tries to explain why we are the way we are.


Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
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.

In case you may be wondering about my religious proclivities, I'm not an atheist. I have nothing against any religion...I'm merely against organized religion, as it has always been used as a tool by religious institutions to institute control over the masses.

In ATS, the general policy is to make the conspiracy in the topic implied or explained clearly: In BTS, there doesn't have to be any conspiracy involved. If I were to post my beliefs I'd do so in BTS, not here in ATS. I have not been posting anything according to my own beliefs, but all based upon what I've researched over the course of the past couple of decades or so. In the case of this thread, I have already implied the conspiracy by explaining the difference between Religion & Organized Religion; It being the organization that supplies the conspiracy.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 05:46 AM
link   
Oh WOW I have just watched part 1 of the movie, Zeitgeist...just fantastic !!! If you haven't seen it, it is a must see.

Thanks so much for posting about it!




[edit on 9-7-2007 by NJE777]



new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join