The Cross is a Satanic Symbol Used by the Illuminati to Control You!

No one has brought up Part I of zeitgiest yet... just thought I'd throw it out there. Watch it where it takes about the cross. Or just watch the whole thing

Google Video Link

Are you talking about the Illuminati or Christianity? Again, many, if not most, people doubt the Illuminati survived its disbanding. If you are talking about Christianity then who exactly is running around killing anyone other than the occasional lunatic abortion clinic bomber or others of that ilk?

The Goverment. The losers who chose to not think but follow a group of headphones. The walking ignorant. The people who know that this is a bunch of BS however would rather have a safe way out..

this is who is running the world man. The nwo, the illuminati and dang near every other government BS story we been feed, wake up!

absolutely agree... watch the movie then, only then.. post your bs.

Folks time is running out.. watch it (the movie) and then lay down your line in the sand!

reply to post by aaaauroraaaaa


To understand and grasp things (even just the subject of this thread title) is similar to pealing an onion one layer at a time. For me, as well as others perhaps, beginning the discussion within the context of present day religion is helpful, but I wonder how many arrive at the conclusion that I have, that much of the gods simply did not and do not exist, but are simply personifications of natural observations made at the time in lieu of other explanations for what was seen. However, it may also be entirely true that advanced beings have interacted with humanity throughout history...keeping an open mind leaves open possibilities. And of course another possibility remains still available that there may well indeed be some supreme spiritual being of some sort, but I for one highly doubt it's anything like what most organized religions tend to portrait and promote, but that's just me, and my intentions are not to insult anyone...besides whatever really is or is not, is what is, and whether we believe it or not does not change whatever the actual reality is.

I just watched the whole thing. Excellent!!! Long, but worth it. Part I of III deals with this topic here and of course other threads exist for parts II and III here at the ATS site.

Thank you for posting that.
Sky...





[edit on 29-1-2008 by skyshow]

[edit on 29-1-2008 by skyshow]

Does anyone not realize how many times Zeitgeist has been debunked? Possibly dozens of times after the movie came out and the information itself the movie is based on had been debunked literally hundreds of times before the movie was even created. It all started over 100 years ago in the works of Kersey Graves. But it keeps resurfacing year after year in one form or another. To me, that is the walking ignorant. It has been demolished from top to bottom yet people still believe they are enlightened after watching it. It's enough to drive the pope insane in the membrane.

The Cross can also be a symbol of a star. In the bible a star can represent an angelic being. Job 38:7 says, "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy."

Some angels in the bible would make themselves visible and appear as brilliant humaniod beings. They would look like beings of light.

It has been suggested that the star that lead the wise men (or astrologers), from the east, to the baby Jesus was a bad angel trying to get Jesus killed. Remember King Herod was jealous of the prophecy and was not going to have a new heir usurp his kingdom.

The star led the strangers to jealous King Herod. The easterners knew of the kingly prophecy from their homeland and informed Herod. Then Herod pretended to be happy about the birth and said he would worship the child too, when they found him. He only wanted the child killed from the start. When the wise men left Herod the star contiued to lead them to the location of Jesus. In a dream God warned the wise men not to see Herod again because of his evil plot to kill the child.

This may be proof that the fallen angels can at times energize themselves into balls of light. They could be observed as UFOs. There is one UFO era that really fascinates me and that was during World War II. Balls of fire were reported chasing the fighter planes of both the Nazis and the Allied forces. What makes this case so interesting is the fact that Hilter made his national symbol the Swastika, which is a twisted star. These fire balls were called Foo Fighters.

Originally posted by lostinspace
The Cross can also be a symbol of a star. In the bible a star can represent an angelic being. Job 38:7 says, "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy." Foo Fighters.

And this book was written and translated by who...? The vatican... no, couldn't be the vatican? just throwin it out there. The vatican is the LARGEST holder of gold in the world... the KJ and NRSV versions for the most part are 99% the same...

reply to post by AshleyD


It has not been universally debunked. Perhaps a few Christians and groups of faithful followers have decided to believe in a position that it is debunked. I, however, found it rather consistent with my research and historical texts. But to say it has been debunked, as though the entire world and all of academia sides with you on that false statement is intellectually dishonest.

Nevertheless thanks you for reading all the posts, and watching the film...assuming you have watched it.

Sky...

[edit on 29-1-2008 by skyshow]

Originally posted by AshleyD
Does anyone not realize how many times Zeitgeist has been debunked? Possibly dozens of times after the movie came out and the information itself the movie is based on had been debunked literally hundreds of times before the movie was even created. It all started over 100 years ago in the works of Kersey Graves. But it keeps resurfacing year after year in one form or another. To me, that is the walking ignorant. It has been demolished from top to bottom yet people still believe they are enlightened after watching it. It's enough to drive the pope insane in the membrane.

care to provide a debunking link? or an older version of the "100 year story"???

what exactly about zietgiest is "bunk"? the entire movie?

Let me put it this way. what is historically inaccurate within zietgiest?






[edit on 30-1-2008 by aaaauroraaaaa]

reply to post by skyshow


Zeitgeist itself is intellectually dishonest, in my opinion. It is based on forced evidence, false evidence, anecdotal evidence, long since debunked evidence, poor sourcing, false sourcing, misquotes, and "archaeological evidence" that postdates the life of Jesus. It has also been discussed int the realm of "academia," scholarship, and secular media (what little attention it has received) and has been found severely wanting. The scholarship of the project is along the lines of Acharya S.'s work.

They'll show a quote of a church father. You'll look it up to see it either doesn't even exist or that it is grossly taken out of context. They see a cross, fish, or number 12 in paganism and search to find a cross, fish, and number 12 in Christianity. It's silliness. There's a reason why no serious theologian pays such things an ounce of attention.

reply to post by aaaauroraaaaa


An ATS link on the same subject: www.abovetopsecret.com...

A breakdown of figures and crucified gods claimed to be an inspiration for Jesus (with cites to actual religious texts): www.thedevineevidence.com...

A Massive index of "inspiration" figures: www.tektonics.org...

A website specifically dedicated to refuting the movie: www.preventingtruthdecay.org...

An index of sites that have already refuted the claim (scroll down past the C.S. Lewis photo): www.conspiracyclothes.com...

It's enough to at least make one doubt. Then, if you are still curious, start resources what little sources Zeitgeist actually offers for yourself. It simply isn't there.

Edit: And it all started over 100 years ago with Kersey Grave's work, "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors," to answer your question. His work has been practically laughed out of the scholarly community today.
en.wikipedia.org...
www.spirithistory.com...

[edit on 1/30/2008 by AshleyD]

Originally posted by AshleyD
reply to post by skyshow

 

Zeitgeist itself is intellectually dishonest, in my opinion. It is based on forced evidence, false evidence, anecdotal evidence, long since debunked evidence, poor sourcing, false sourcing, misquotes, and "archaeological evidence" that postdates the life of Jesus. It has also been discussed int the realm of "academia," scholarship, and secular media (what little attention it has received) and has been found severely wanting. The scholarship of the project is along the lines of Acharya S.'s work.

Okay. But what parts of Zeitgiest are inaccurate?

Originally posted by AshleyD
They'll show a quote of a church father. You'll look it up to see it either doesn't even exist or that it is grossly taken out of context. They see a cross, fish, or number 12 in paganism and search to find a cross, fish, and number 12 in Christianity. It's silliness. There's a reason why no serious theologian pays such things an ounce of attention.

Where is the quote of the church father (minutes/seconds of movie). Which is it? It doesn't exist or it is taken out of context... Do u know this urself even?

The #12!!!????!?!?!?!??!?! in paganism??? that is the entire "as we move into Aquarius?" if a person talks about moving into Aquarius but yet doesn't believe in the pagan round calander thing....? Not saying you (ashley D) believe in the ages... but w/e. Saying that two things are not able to be relative to each other is like saying,
"The sun doesn't grow the trees, it's God. It just so happens the sun is in the sky when the trees grow."

Zietgiest Source List:
zeitgeistmovie.com...





[edit on 30-1-2008 by aaaauroraaaaa]

what is it going to..or how long is it going to take you guys to get that everything is the opposite?

reply to post by AshleyD


Do you by chance have anything other than conjecture and Christian based faith groups doing the "debunking" here? The movie is pretty clear in how it draws it's parallels to the zodiac and previous pagan gods...it appears to do just what it sets out do despite these Christian faith based responses that rely on the very text that the movie sets out to charge as being "suspect" in the first place. We need some harder more definitive proof than this Ashley. Are you aware of the concept referred to in science as the notion of falsifiability? Unless I"m missing something amongst those links in the writings, these refutes strongly appear to violate this important notion.

So it appears that wet pavement causes rain storms?



[edit on 30-1-2008 by skyshow]

One other thing, you do realize that Wikipedia is not permissible as a research source in scholarly work right, for obvious reasons...although a great concept it isn't always accurate and has been interfered with by multiple sources with an iron in the fire...

[edit on 30-1-2008 by skyshow]

Originally posted by AshleyD

It's enough to at least make one doubt. Then, if you are still curious, start resources what little sources Zeitgeist actually offers for yourself. It simply isn't there.

zeitgeistmovie.com...

Those sources?


Also Read the interactive Transcript on the website for where the specific source is meant for.







[edit on 30-1-2008 by aaaauroraaaaa]

Originally posted by chinabean
what is it going to..or how long is it going to take you guys to get that everything is the opposite?

who is you guys...?

1 Timothy 4:1 "Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons"

Originally posted by defcon365
1 Timothy 4:1 "Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons"

that's me.
God have mercy on my soul.


but then I realize who the book was written/translated by. As stated previously in this thread by me.

Not to mention, talk about taking sources out of context lol, isn't this the same book that says women are lesser than men? and that being gay is not "Gods way"? But wait... "we don't use those parts." I reply: oh sorry.





[edit on 30-1-2008 by aaaauroraaaaa]

reply to post by defcon365


How profoundly convenient! "Timothy" was thinking ahead eh. how brilliant of him (of someone)? I wish drivers would do that out on the highways more often, sometimes I think they feel the same way, after the fact...

reply to post by skyshow


Hi skyshow/

The Cross of Christ is a symbol of His Victory over conquering DEATH!
'the sting of death' is sin....in order to fullfill prophecy, Jesus Christ the Son of God took upon Himself the cruelest death.
The Old Testament saw the Cross as being a cruel and horrible way of putting someone to death.
God chose this way because man needed a Saviour for all mankind....(read Genesis)
The Son of God(LOGOS)was also prophesied by many Old Testament prophets...how He would come and Save Mankind from the sin of DEATH.(Again, Genesis)
The Cross of Christ is what Christianity is about.
It reminds one of what a Christian is......to suffer in a way that the Son of God did, is to suffer a horrible death.
In remembrance Christians Hold their Cross(not worship it)and it reminds them of Christ bearing man's sin of the world.
Let's say I have a picture of my dog, it's not because I want to worship the dog....it brings back memories,like all pictures of all things does.
The Gold and Silver you speak of?
If you read The APOCALYPSE you will find symbolism of the end of times Church.....it is built with Gold and all precious jewels!
1/Sanctuary Holy place set aside to worship...Exodus 25-8
2/An arc overlaid with Gold,that contains the Word of God..Exodus 25:10-11And the Word became flesh,and dwelt among us...John 1:14
there's more...read Exodus on why the Church is as it is!
Why do Christians wear a Cross?
Jesus Christ carried His Cross on His shoulders during Passion week.....and so in memory, Christians also wear a Cross in memory.

“Thy rod and Thy staff, they have comforted me” (Psalm 23:4)? Answer: The rod is the Cross, afflictions and the staff is the Jesus Prayer. The rod is the active part of virtue, and the staff is the noetic part REF:St. Ambrose of Optina (+1891)

the Saviour's sufferings, the Cross became the sign of the Son of Man, that is, the Cross signifies the Lord Himself, incarnate and suffering for our salvation. (St. John of Kronstadt, My Life in Christ)

Many more teachings on the Cross and why all Christians are asked to bear their Cross.
"Whosoever will come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me" (Mark 8:34)

IX
helen