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.

 

Zeitgeist must be truthful...

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2009 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Butter Cookie
 
Butter Cookie, remember in another thread you asked was there anymore references to mk_ultra or "sharping"( I'm not sure that was the term)? Well, you're seeing it here with all those who are trying to debunk stuff without any proof. This technique is called "Redirecting of The Illusion". I don't know if it's an official term or not, but I heard both alex jones and ron paul I think it was use this term in a radio interview a while back. I have already noticed what I believe is at least the presence of 3 agents here at ats. The reason I say this is that I have seen this kind of behavior at some other forums I am a member of, and their arguments are almost verbatum.




posted on Apr, 18 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by dreaken1993
 
First of all I must ask, are you an athiest? Do you believe in God at all? From your replies I am assuming that you're an athiest, but if you're not, then please accept my humble apology. You say there is no proof, and that the bible is just written by a bunch of different people? You're right on one account, the bible was written by more than one person, but you have to remember is that the bible was "invented" by man, not God, nor Jesus. Do you understand this? When Jesus taught his Fathers' Ways (God's), he never used a book of any kind, thus, the bible is a formal structured teaching of God's laws, his rules for living, gov't, morals, worshipping, and just so much more than I can put down at this time. Before Jerusalem was sacked by rome in 70ad, there were over 6000 scrolls in the library. Only about 600 or so were saved, and the rest burnt by order of the roman emporer at that time. The apostle Paul was cited as the first to teach organized christianity also. You have to think of the bible like this in order to understand it. When any author writes a book, does he or she just start penning down what they think or have heard from somebody else? No, they don't, they do research! Then they write their book, unless it's some sort of a fable or fiction for entertainment only purposes. The bible is the same way, there were many authors of many different teachings that were recorded biblical history that were penned down in order to teach man the ways of the Lord Thy God after the death of Jesus. The teachings of the bible are forever true, but it was man who corrupted this sacred book!



posted on Apr, 19 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Zeitgeist defintiely leads us towards truth; religion is the last bastion of deception not yet broken in this age of Pisces -- so, of course, calling it into light will be met with great vehemence; Zeitgeist has had tremendous pentration into the mass consciousness, therefore naysayers will come out guns blazing against it to protect their silly little irrelevent mythologies..

the irony, of course, is that Zeitgeist, and Zeitgeist Addendum are about so much more than religion -- so sad that so many people can't get past that one issue..

..bottom line.. organized religious institutions as have been perpetrated upon the people of this globe for the last 2000 years are fraudulent and irrelevant, and the creator of Zeitgeist understood this, whereby calling upon this issue in his movie (namely, in this case, Christianity, which is the most subersive religious institution in his nation of residence, U.S., and in many other countries); this was an important issue to deal with, in order to build a theses for the understanding of population control by the power elite..

now, to the subject at hand; no doubt, this measly attempt at diversionary tactics by the MSM is pure propaganda... who is that dufus anyway? give me a break.. another hole punched in the veil... nice work..



posted on Apr, 19 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
But in most cases it was purely business, by buying out members of the religion. Not actually controlling it (like the crusades, where greedy Italian states wanted the silk trade from the arabs.)

And then there's the major fact of innocence by generation. How and why are this generation's religious leaders responsible for the wrongs of past generation leaders? On what grounds can you blame someone one something that they weren't even around to be related to.

Then of course there's the fact that a lot of religious leaders have told the US to stop being retards in war. Now wait a second, if these wars are nothing more than modern repeats of what the greedy Italian states of old wanted, and this time around religion is not favoring the crusaders, how exactly is it that the religion is controlled?

And wait a second. If the powers that be want control, why would you even want religion when you could make yourself a religion with your secret organization at the forefront. Make a "family that you must follow to get to heaven.

And finally, in the modern era religion has fueled most anti-NWO movements. So how is it bad then?

Now you can think you can eliminate religion, and it's had a lot of bads, the majority in fact being bad, but then you have to eliminate imagination. And sorry, but it is human to be imaginative. It is the same imagination which allows us to envision traveling to other worlds that also gives us the right to imagine an afterlife. And most people would rather believe in that because if you are a common person, you're likely never to do anything spectacular in life, and your only motivation is a better afterlife.

Now if you fall in into the lines that if everyone was equal we would all be motivated by our neighbors and there would be no elites or higher ups, that's a fallacy. For whenever you have a group of people, someone amongst them will become a leader spontaneously. It is simply the way of people to make gods out of their best and brightest.

So returning to the now, how would you go about removing religion? Because there will always be someone who hold onto child-like beliefs in spirits and unicorns. And no force can stop that. And there's also a chance that eventually that person will become some higher up that people will follow. Well, if he believes in an afterlife, why shouldn't I? It seems dumb, but hey, most people are.

In the end, like it or not, the majority will always believe in a religion. It simply cannot change. And as humanity spreads out through the stars, you can be guaranteed that things will be worshiped, from a dolphin and face shaped rock on Mars to a square planet out in the great unknown.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 03:33 AM
link   
ALL "religion" is ABSOLUTE BS. All the answers we seek are within us. Look to man = FAIL. Look to writings = FAIL.

"God made man in his own image" Sleep on that one.

I learned early on the Bible was crap. Just read it from start to finish, and keep an open heart. It's BS. It says man is of sin, of lies. Go ahead, place your faith in "man".

If you open your heart, you will see that all man made religions are "for profit".

Look to God, one on one, for answers. God did not write ANYTHING.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 04:00 AM
link   
I am a member of the Zeitgeist Movement, and understand the idea being proposed.

The movie was the opinion of the maker, and most of us in the movie do not think the religious part was necessary or desirable. It just turned off a lot of folks who really don't have any reason to fear the ZM. We don't care what religion someone is. or if they have any religion. It's irrelevant to the idea of the ZM we propose.

The ZM has no 'hierarchy' ruling it. It is a movement, not an organization. There is no 'Plan', rigid and unchangeable, to be implemented. It's an idea whose time has come, not a 'ism' or ideology in the usual sense of the word. It is inherent in the ZM concept that no coercion or intimidation shall be used in the ZM effort. It is not a political system. Nobody will lose anything or have anything taken away from them. Only a good means can create a good end. And it will not restrict anyone's freedom, it will add a level of freedom most people cannot even imagine.

Especially it will give us all the freedom from fear that now grips and destroys the world.

It will not be a utopia. Utopias are impossible. Human seem to love making problems to solve. But such problems don't have to destroy the environment or kill so many children through starvation and preventable diseases as is happening now. The ZM is about self-education and resources, not about politics or currency. Yes, it hopes to get rid of many existing systems that have obviously not worked and we think will never work, which, if retained by the Human Species, will doom us on this planet.

I will be happy to answer any questions about the ZM to the best of my knowledge, but I will not argue with anyone or provide 'proof', since ideas unimplemented cannot be 'proved'. The ZM is a work in progress, not a fixed idea. But I will correct statements which others make which are deliberate BS yelled out into this public venue. The ZM is not about pointing out negative stuff. It's about find positive answers to the existing insanity on this planet.

questionszeitgeist.blogspot.com...

[edit on 20-4-2009 by Worldmind]

[edit on 20-4-2009 by Worldmind]



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by knows_but_doesnt
ALL "religion" is ABSOLUTE BS. All the answers we seek are within us. Look to man = FAIL. Look to writings = FAIL.

"God made man in his own image" Sleep on that one.

I learned early on the Bible was crap. Just read it from start to finish, and keep an open heart. It's BS. It says man is of sin, of lies. Go ahead, place your faith in "man".

If you open your heart, you will see that all man made religions are "for profit".

Look to God, one on one, for answers. God did not write ANYTHING.


Im not a religious nut...but the bible isnt supposed to be read as a text book with straight facts...its a mixture of fact and fiction to teach people life lessons...to make people "better"...hence the recycled stories...its a power trip written to make people act good...



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 11:08 PM
link   
thank you i dont see why people see it as a actual book i think its suppose to be seen as a guide



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by finestbeast
 
Wow, the bible is all fiction? Hmm, then explain the rise and fall of rome, cesaer, nero, constantine, alexander the great, nebuchadnezzar, nimrod, the now rising one world gov't, the one world church, the invasion of jerusalem in 70ad, the rising of the EU, and just too much other historical info that's recorded in history books for all to read! If the bible is a fake, explain all the above please? Thankyou.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 04:22 AM
link   
i havent read the bible so i wouldnt know much about the things said in it, but werent thos said in there in a loose way idk



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by thewind
reply to post by finestbeast
 
Wow, the bible is all fiction? Hmm, then explain the rise and fall of rome, cesaer, nero, constantine, alexander the great, nebuchadnezzar, nimrod, the now rising one world gov't, the one world church, the invasion of jerusalem in 70ad, the rising of the EU, and just too much other historical info that's recorded in history books for all to read! If the bible is a fake, explain all the above please? Thankyou.


Nowhere in the bible does all that exist. Read your bible. The words used are symbolic/variables, which mean you can assign anything to them. Therefor they could apply as much to Roman times as they do to modern history or to nothing at all.

But again, the Zeitgeist Movement is not about religion or getting rid of it. It's about using the leverage of technology to rid the world of the illusion of scarcity and save the environment. It's about improving the quality of life beyond anything most can now imagine and doing it in a sane ecological way.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   
It is true that the movie has flaws, esp. in the first part about religion. I would say this is because the bible and other religious books were interpeted by many people, over and over again, causing things to be changed, and so forth, so of course there are obvious non truths it has a lot of information that makes you connect others and to form your own opinion, which is what everyone should be doing. Forming their very own opinion about everything.
People shouldn't be trying to convince everyone that they are right, but giving other people information and facts you believe backup what you believe to give the new person a new look which is exactly what the movie does. It makes people question it, research it, and form their own believes based on what they believe to be right or wrong.



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 12:12 AM
link   
reply to post by volitionawareness
 


My problem with Zeitgeist is not that it attempts to point out flaws in religion, to the opposite, I've been reading and researching myths and legends for several years now.

My problem is, that having studied myths and legends for a few years, I can see where Zeitgeist made up facts in the first movie.

From there, I have yet to see the second movie simply because my background doesn't give me a standing as a basis to understand where the movie may be continuing on to further exaggeration or straight out lies.

Then, there is the way the movie is held to such regard, by people who claim the film is moving towards higher higher truth and enlightenment... when it's basis is a mixture of half truths and lies.

I am most certainly not a big fan of organized religion, and am not particularly religious. What I see here is, to me at least, another faith based movement that is itself formed on the same system it criticizes.



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 03:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Who Can Post

My problem with Zeitgeist is not that it attempts to point out flaws in religion, to the opposite, I've been reading and researching myths and legends for several years now.

My problem is, that having studied myths and legends for a few years, I can see where Zeitgeist made up facts in the first movie.


You mistake opinion for 'facts'. The Zeitgeist Movement is not a monolithic organization. It is a lot of people working and writing and making movies independently. That's why it's called a 'movement'. Secondly, the myths and legends are irrelevant to the goals of the group. Many people in the ZM don't like that part of the first movie, and have said so, because religion and it's roots are irrelevant.


Originally posted by Who Can Post
From there, I have yet to see the second movie simply because my background doesn't give me a standing as a basis to understand where the movie may be continuing on to further exaggeration or straight out lies.

Then, there is the way the movie is held to such regard, by people who claim the film is moving towards higher higher truth and enlightenment... when it's basis is a mixture of half truths and lies.


The religious stuff was opinion. The monetary info is far more factual and admitted by top people in the economic structure. But even that is irrelevant to the goal of the ZM. The goal of the ZM is to use technology to eliminate scarcity on a global level and do so without coercion, to make all people freer than they are now, and clean up the environment.


Originally posted by Who Can Post
I am most certainly not a big fan of organized religion, and am not particularly religious. What I see here is, to me at least, another faith based movement that is itself formed on the same system it criticizes.


It's faith based only because it's a vision for the future, but it does have science to support it. The second video, Zeitgeist Addendum, does not have the religious opinion in it. Since you haven't seen it, your last sentence above is purely negative speculation. That kind of negative speculation however, is common among those who do not understand what the ZM is all about. If and when the ZM vision is produced in reality, the 'mythic' quality of belief will fall away quickly. Please ask any questions you wish. I will be happy to answer them.



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Worldmind
 


Personally, and again, I've no particular care for the Zeitgeist movement, it's another movement of several, and I've no doubt it'll have it's time in prominence like any other.



It is a lot of people working and writing and making movies independently.

Fine and dandy.
However, I often see the original part of the film mentioned, either in passing, or in essence when religion is brought up.
Personally, I find the study and discussion of religion to be a fascinating and interesting subject.
However, I've seen a large number of people dismiss religion out of hand completely.
Religion, and it's roots are very relevant. In a broad sense, they reveal something of the psyche of the people who practice the religion, and asking someone about their religion can be a inoffensive way of finding out about the person.
Historically, understanding religion of a place and time can help you understand a people's or person's actions.


I understand that the financial video is much more truthful, and that's well and good.
However, I do not have the information in my background to judge for myself, and despite many top economists well informed opinions, I must therefore plead ignorance to the video.



If and when the ZM vision is produced in reality, the 'mythic' quality of belief will fall away quickly.


So, basically, if everyone believes the same principles we do, the world will be a better place.

I understand your opinions and beliefs, however, I deem them both futile in practice, and possibly harmful if put into full scale practice.



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by RuneSpider
However, I often see the original part of the film mentioned, either in passing, or in essence when religion is brought up.
Personally, I find the study and discussion of religion to be a fascinating and interesting subject.
However, I've seen a large number of people dismiss religion out of hand completely.


And that's OK also. I also find the study of religion fascinating, but I see nothing in it that is good beyond the teachings of the original teachers and a few followers later who 'got' those teachings and practiced them honestly. I have respect only for a few small religious groups, like the Quakers and Amish, who practice what they preach. The rest seem to do far more harm than good.


Originally posted by RuneSpider
Religion, and it's roots are very relevant. In a broad sense, they reveal something of the psyche of the people who practice the religion, and asking someone about their religion can be a inoffensive way of finding out about the person.
Historically, understanding religion of a place and time can help you understand a people's or person's actions.


I agree. ...for the same reasons.


Originally posted by RuneSpider
I understand that the financial video is much more truthful, and that's well and good.
However, I do not have the information in my background to judge for myself, and despite many top economists well informed opinions, I must therefore plead ignorance to the video.


Noted.


Originally posted by RuneSpider
So, basically, if everyone believes the same principles we do, the world will be a better place.


I think principles must be judged by their immediate and long term results. Certainly, Nazi principles, if believed by everyone, would not create a better world. Since there are no historical results to study, the principles of the ZM cannot be judged with any real honesty by either of us. They fall into the realm of speculation, and we agree to disagree about them. I think the ZM principles will create a world a ecologically survivable world of peace and freedom, and you don't. no problem.


Originally posted by RuneSpider
I understand your opinions and beliefs, however, I deem them both futile in practice, and possibly harmful if put into full scale practice.


Since you already plead ignorance, this last statement is inexplicable. You say do not understand our opinions or beliefs, then say you do. If you don't, deeming them either futile or harmful is dishonest. If you do, where did you get the information to have an opinion? I would like to know why you think them futile in practice and possibly harmful if put into full scale practice. For the sake of the conversation and my education, would you please inform me of your reasoning?



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by RuneSpider
 


as I said, Zeitgeist helps to LEAD us to truth; I didn't say it was true; I don't know; but I know it jives with a lot of other legitimate research on its many subjects..

watch the 'addendum' and get back to me... it's quite tremendous..



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Worldmind
 
If you knew as much about the bible as you lay claim to, then you'd know that it covers "all" history. The romans, assyrians, the 12 tribes, and in particular, the book of daniel goes into great detail of rome and it's "future" leaders before they were even born! If you're gonna discuss the bible, pack a lunch cause you're in for a long, long day!



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 12:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by thewind
If you knew as much about the bible as you lay claim to, then you'd know that it covers "all" history. The romans, assyrians, the 12 tribes, and in particular, the book of daniel goes into great detail of rome and it's "future" leaders before they were even born! If you're gonna discuss the bible, pack a lunch cause you're in for a long, long day!


I'm not going to argue with you about the bible. I find everything but what is taught specifically by and about Jesus to be essentially nonsense, or at best the history of the beliefs of a group of tribes long ago.

I don't think the bible says all that you are claiming. nor do I care. I don't share your beliefs in the bible. I have read it cover to cover more than once, back when I was looking to religion for answers, but in all that reading, all I read about prophecy was symbols/variables that could be interpreted in a million ways. I know there are people who look back at history and assign empires and historical stories to those variables, and I think it's a real waste of time. Bible worship seems like a noxious practice to me. Just another idol.

But I don't care if other people want to do that. fine. It's their freedom to do that. It does bother me that so many bible worshipers want horror in the world, hate other people for being different or having ideas not approved by them, or want the end of the world so they can 'go to heaven' while everyone else not exactly like them go to hell, justifying it all with their interpretation of the bible. I think Jesus would puke.

He said he would not know many who claimed him, who even did 'miracles' in his name. Boy did he have it right! As a child, I lived in the South before civil rights... I listened to teachers in my all white school teach that blacks should be slaves, using the bible to support their claims. 'By their love you shall know them?' indeed. by their lack of love, you shall know the fanatics also.

And none of this has anything to do with the Zeitgeist Movement.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Worldmind
 




Since you already plead ignorance, this last statement is inexplicable. You say do not understand our opinions or beliefs, then say you do.


Though I am still reading up, I will still say that I do not fully understand the movement. However, I can understand your personal reasoning behind the support of the principals I understand so far.
However, at the same time I disagree with the idea that widespread acceptance of the movement would create any better an environment than those that preceded it.
It is a personal moral artifice, and as such is based more on the mind of the person.
If you attempt to supplant someone's faith, and even if you do it successfully, you still are left with the same person, who will interpret the statements of their beliefs in the same way.

While I personally may agree with you on some points, those same points can be interpreted in a way that I would not agree with.
The best example I can think of off hand would be Gandhi's statement that he liked Jesus, he simply didn't like the people who followed Jesus.



I think principles must be judged by their immediate and long term results. Certainly, Nazi principles, if believed by everyone, would not create a better world.


That is a matter of opinion, if everyone believed that way, then the world in and off itself could be considered more at peace than it has ever been.
It is mine and your moral views that place the Nazi principles as being at fault.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join