Zeitgeist Totally Refuted! (Do not post Zeitgeist BS ever again)

reply to post by stevcolx


And you don't suppose that the Sumerians were the ones who were deceived by the Watchers? I've already shown you that older does not equal more accurate with the comparison of Noah's Flood and Utnapishtim. What greater way to lead men from their creator by altering stories through the tinted lenses of 20th century UFO lingo so they can make the feint in admitting they are the bad guys, but "truly" are our creators. If they can't impress us by their power to lead us into worshiping them, they can appeal to our egos by making us think we are beyond God. I don't suppose it has occurred to you that the people who often spew this theory are channelers like Icke and Maxwell? Zecharia Sitchin also had ties to the Vatican and his research is revisionist garbage.

Now I would like to address the "Evils of the Church" shpiel. It is partially true, but only through a warped entirely western understanding of Christian history. I'm not calling you ignorant, it's part of our society to be cognitively dissonant of the East and to think that the Early Church was Roman Catholic. This weekend I checked out the Christian section of Barnes and Noble, they had an entire aisle of Christian books and not one had anything to do with the Eastern Church. Nothing. Anyways I digress.

The Patriarchates of the Early Church (Pre-Schism)
1. Jerusalem
2. Antioch
3. Constantinople
4. Rome
5. Alexandria

The Patriarchates that Remained Orthodox After the Schism
1. Jerusalem
2. Antioch
3. Constantinople
4. Alexandria

Perpetrators of the Crusades: Roman Church (victims: Orthodox)
Genocide of the Cathars: Roman Church
First heretic killed: in Rome
Inquisition: Roman Church
Vice grip control of Europe: Roman Church
Protestant Reformation: Never would have happened if the Roman Church wasn't abusing it's power
Counter Reformation: Roman Church
Infallible supremacy of one man in a ridiculous fish hat over all of Christendom whether he helped pedophiles go free of not: Roman Catholic belief

This is not to say that heretics have never been killed under the banner of Orthodoxy. I believe the Paulicians were killed by a supposedly Orthodox Emperor/Empress, but the Church has never done more than declare anathema on heretics. Censorship is another misunderstood concept in regards to the Church. The Orthodox would not let their flock use false gospels like Thomas and Judas, but anathematized heretics would not be under their jurisdiction. In fact you can find gnostic gospels being read among Syrian Christians who have been neighbors to the Orthodox for ages.

Most importantly you must understand that proponents of "just war" and "verily burning thee hereticks to crispy bits" are localized to the west among people such as Blessed Augustine (not a Saint, but we like his devotional works) and Thomas Aquinas.

"Christians above all men are not permitted forcibly to correct the failings of those who sin. Secular judges indeed, when they have captured malefactors under the law, show their authority to be great, and prevent them even against their will from following their own devices: but in our case the wrong-doer must be made better, not by force, but by persuasion"- St. John Chrysostom (whose Liturgy is celebrated in Orthodox Churches most Sundays)

reply to post by kallisti36


''...However, Zeitgeist is intellectually dishonest and it's fans... '' It's=IT IS , Its=something that belongs to ''it''. Good day

reply to post by JustEve


I would be annoyed, but I indulge the urge to be a grammar Nazi myself. Off topic, but you win this round >.>

reply to post by kallisti36

what you say is very true, i to am fed up with explaining to ppl that they should use proven theories to explain there own beliefs. but they would rather believe something despite the absence of evidence. I find it somewhat amusing that people require evidence for every other aspect of their lives, except for when it comes to religion and topics such as this site covers. Some theories have become so much like a religion it scares me PPL plz use ur brain and do some investigating so your not a mindless drone following the masses.We as a species would not be were we are today if it was not for ppl who stick to facts and advance our universal Understanding by using this method

Thanks, I'm sure this will be good as I'm a recent convert to Christianity and noticed how in Morals and Dogma all of the pagan and mystery religions worship the same God's just under different names. They even have the story of Cain and Abel only Cain is depicted as the good guy. The reason for this I think is because they all come into contact with the same demonic entities just under different names. So no matter where you are on the earth all of the old pagan religions list 2012 as the date that the Sons of God (demons) will come back and 'save' humanity.

Yes, Joseph's refutation of Christianity was largely garbage. He is a strong atheist with an axe to grind, as far as religion is concerned. Big deal.

The Zeitgeist movies have always required discernment, recognition of the fact that they are only partly (not totally) worthwhile, and generally taking things with a grain of salt. Peter Joseph and Jacques Fresco are both borderline fanatical atheists, as mentioned. There is also a certain amount of reason to believe that Joseph is very possibly a shill for the New World Order.

The most useful elements of the Zeitgeist movies, are the interview with John Perkins in Addendum, Joseph's coverage of the reserve currency system, and Joseph's 9/11 coverage in the first film. The rest primarily consists of atheist/transhumanist propaganda, and can safely be ignored; but the good bits genuinely are some of the best treatments we have of their topics.

Firstly, anyone who believes anything written, watched or herd must consider all the facts before forming an opinion.

You may have noticed that I used the term "believe". According to dictionary.com, believe means "to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so"...

So, my point is that anyone can believe in anything because if you believe, then your just lying to yourself... This is true to people who believe the Zeitgeist movie as fact and those who believe it is not fact. Hey, even our "Religious" friends can believe all they like... (PS: Isn't it strange there are so many "believers" on a conspiracy forum...???)

In my opinion, the first part of the move is very convincing. I draw my opinions from lots of experience in dealing with research from ancient Egypt. Buy hey, tell that to a modern day christian and you might not make it out the door.

The rest of the film is good, and should be absorbed with caution, just like when one reads the worlds most authoritative source of religious information, the BIBLE.

What I think the most impact the movie has made to everyone who watches it, is that it provides the viewer with an alternative view of common issues. Most people, especially in America, have no idea about other religions, how the economy works and what really happened on 9/11. It's this opportunity to listen to another opinion that opens peoples minds and allows them to take a look outside and see what else is happening beyond there front door.

Does every here remember when every single human being "believed" the world was flat??? Do we also remember how upset the church was when it was first discovered the earth was round??? My point again is that we should all be cautious when learning new things, and not dismiss them strait away.

reply to post by Andrew82Melb


There was never a time that every single human believed the world was flat ....and no I certainly do NOT remember when that was the case. For a post largely based on semantics you really blew it in your final paragraph.

Originally posted by petrus4
The rest primarily consists of atheist/transhumanist propaganda, and can safely be ignored; but the good bits genuinely are some of the best treatments we have of their topics.

I want to clarify, for the record, that I no longer hold the above opinion. I believe at this point, that at least certain elements of Fresco's social model can work very positively and successfully, but that such should only be ascertained via the one test that truly matters; namely, practical experiment.

The people of our era are far too quick to judge as delusional, ideas which are entirely untried. It is a great pity that Jacque's ideas have not at least been given a truly honest hearing, before we engaged in condemnation of them. If we could build one of his test cities, I would be most curious as to see the result. Perhaps it would simply fail, as is likely the conviction of many here; but I feel that it would surely be to our benefit to know for certain, either way. If it was successful, how much could it potentially benefit us?

Originally posted by kallisti36
Nearly everyone on ATS knows about Zeitgeist. It is constantly referred to and the disinformation spread by it is so rampant that I see "Krishna was crucified" and other such crap in every thread about Ya'hshuah. These lies are propagated by psuedo-archaeologists and charlatans who rely on Biblical, mythological, and historical ignorance to make money.

I have been in so many religious threads in which people refer to Zeitgeist claims with absolutely no backing. It only takes a minute of incredibly shallow research to refute these claims. Still, I am so tired of refuting these stupid ignorant claims and explaining: Krishna wasn't crucified (shot in the foot with an arrow means crucified?), Horus was not born of a virgin, Buddha didn't have twelve disciples, the sun never ever rises in the southern cross constellation ever, Osiris wasn't crucified and was never really resurrected, nowhere in the Bible are the Magi numbered (later Roman tradition, oh, and the three stars in the belt of Orion don't point to Sirius), the differences between the Babylonian trinity (Baal, Queen of Heaven and Sin or Father, Mother, Son not a tri-une God) the Hindu Trinity (Creator, Preserver, Destroyer) and the Christian Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit tri-une Godhead with three distinct persons and one will), and so on and so forth.

I'm tired of addressing these stupid, stupid claims. Feel free to go after the scientific impossibility of Genesis, various perceived contradictions, and paradoxes in the Bible. At least those pursuits are intelligent and show that you have done research instead of spewing ignorance from Zeitgeist, Freke, Gandy, and Kersey Graves.

So without further ado, and so that I hopefully never have to refute something as stupid as the claim that Mithra was born of a virgin (born out of a rock, but I suppose you could say that no one had sex with the rock), I present a (rather lengthy) video that addresses and disproves everything in Zeitgeist (part 1 and 3).

Enjoy!

edit on 16-2-2011 by kallisti36 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-2-2011 by kallisti36 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-2-2011 by kallisti36 because: Not Zeitgeist in it's entirety, mostly focus on parts 1 and 3

I agree that there was some leaps within the movie zeitgeist, but I am presently working on a 3 volume series which is due to be released in Autumn/Fall this year and will, fill in all the blanks that Zeitgeist left out, as well as avoid some of the mistakes they made. I am also in the process of refuting the refutation of Zeitgeist so keep an eye out on these threads, busy with my book at the moment but will soon post that thread defending the more accurate parts of Zeitgeist!

Originally posted by kallisti36
These lies are propagated by psuedo-archaeologists and charlatans who rely on Biblical, mythological, and historical ignorance to make money.

Sound's just like the Catholic church....What faith did'nt and does'nt lie to propagte its own message.
The Catholic church since its conception has relied on the ignorance and fear of its followers.
Those other churches that still preach hell and damnation and fire and brimstone still do.
The catholics that go to confession believing that they come out with their souls clean are prime examples of how the church brainwash their "flock", uisng medieval, dark age ignorance in the 21st century.

Originally posted by andy1972

Originally posted by kallisti36
These lies are propagated by psuedo-archaeologists and charlatans who rely on Biblical, mythological, and historical ignorance to make money.

Sound's just like the Catholic church....What faith did'nt and does'nt lie to propagte its own message.
The Catholic church since its conception has relied on the ignorance and fear of its followers.
Those other churches that still preach hell and damnation and fire and brimstone still do.
The catholics that go to confession believing that they come out with their souls clean are prime examples of how the church brainwash their "flock", uisng medieval, dark age ignorance in the 21st century.

edit on 30-1-2012 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)

"And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived"
JOHN CHRYSOSTOM (5th Century Catholic Church Father)

"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church … a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them."
MARTIN LUTHER (Founding father of Protestant Church)

Originally posted by michaelsherlock


"And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived"
JOHN CHRYSOSTOM (5th Century Catholic Church Father)

I'm Orthodox, and therefor, I don't care about the quote from that schismatic of a schism (Luther), but I will address your quote of St. John Chrysostom, because it's ridiculous. This is an excellent example of quote mining, which is a favorite pastime of Acharya S.
Shame on you, you didn't even read the source for that quote! Read it now. It isn't very long: www.ccel.org...

Here's the synopsis for everyone else: This quote is mined from St. John Chrysostom's work "On The Priesthood (Book 1)". The account of deception he describes therein is where he and his fellow Monastic brother Basil (later St. Basil the Great) receive the alarming information that the Church is about to raise them to the Episcopate. Neither of them feel they are worthy of this or would do a good job, so they resolved to flee from the delegates of the Patriarchate. However, St. John knew that St. Basil would make a wonderful Bishop, and it would be a crime to deprive the Church of such a holy pastor. So, when the delegates came, he hid and did not warn St. Basil, who was waylaid and ordained a Bishop. The rest of this treatise recounts the discussion between the two over why this deception was necessary for the good of the people. He later gives the example of a man dying of fever who is refusing treatment from his physician, instead asking for a draught of wine that would intoxicate him and exacerbate his condition. So the physician tricks the man by emptying out a jug of wine, pulling the curtains, and filling the vessel with water. The man thinks it's wine because it smells of it and the room is dark, and drinks the much needed water. This story has nothing to do with lying to people about theology and miracles, but of a pastoral deception to keep one from making a mistake to their detriment.

St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil the Great went on to battle corruption in the Episcopacy and Royal Court, fed the poor, cast down arrogant self righteous Church figures, and made more accessible Liturgies for the common man.

This is such a double standard from anti-Christians too. I've seen atheists rip Christians apart over a black and white view of the commandments under all circumstances. I remember seeing Bill Maher rip this one woman a new one, because she says you shouldn't lie under any circumstances. Bill Maher asked her "what if you were harboring Jews and the Nazis asked you if there were any in your house?", to which she responded, "God would give me another way". Unfortunately this woman seemed to be ignorant of the story of Jericho, where the guards asked Rahab if she was harboring Israelite spies, she deceived them to save the lives of the Israelites, and God counted her righteous.

St. John Chrysostom wasn't advocating deceiving "the sheep" for personal gain (that claim is ridiculous to anyone who knows the man's character), but deception in certain pastoral circumstances for the good of that person.

reply to post by andy1972


I'm so tired of this, "the Roman Catholic Church was evil an deceived people so all Christians are deceptive and evil" strawman. I am Orthodox. We didn't have a dark age, crusade, just war doctrine, inquisition, pope, reformation, or counter reformation. What you're think of when you talk about "hell" is a western doctrine, the East never taught that Gehenna was a torture room where you were separated from God (how is that even possible if he's omnipresent?). Also, The Roman Catholic understanding of confession is a legalistic abberation, but even that you are ignorant of. Furthermore, the confession bit isn't even relevant. What does that even have to do with control?

reply to post by kallisti36


I debunked a portion of Zeitgeist as well. There was a lot of BS about the Christian church that just wasn't historically accurate. doodiepants.com...

reply to post by kallisti36


AMEN AMEN AMEN!!!!

You hit it on the head, that movie is based on the false notions of what Christianity is and who Yahshua was. Jesus Christ is some Roman god in their pantheon and was never the Messiah.

And that December 25th birthday crap in Zeitgeist was so retarded I know 4 year olds that could debunk that crap!

I am so happy that I am not alone on ATS with my Biblical knowledge and world view of Creation and a Creator that has rules for his Creation. So many don't like the rules so they just change them, which is why Zeitgeist can claim some "Christians" do celebrate pagan holidays, but even the History Channel can show you that December 25th was ancient and not the Date of Yahshua's Birth!

I need to friend this OP!

Originally posted by theindependentjournal

You hit it on the head, that movie is based on the false notions of what Christianity is and who Yahshua was. Jesus Christ is some Roman god in their pantheon and was never the Messiah.

I only use the name Yahshuah ha' Moshiach because Yah-shuah means "God saves", there is nothing wrong with Iesous Christos. The Gospels were all written in Greek and quoted the GREEK Scriptures more often than the Hebrew. Iesous Christos contains the letter Chi (X) which Plato in anticipation of the Incarnation of the Word, considered to be the letter that ascribes the world soul, because the heavens are arranged in such a celestial cross. Furthermore, Iesous Christos has a numerical value of 888, 8 being the number of Resurrection. Iesous is simply a transliteration of Yehoshuah or Yahshuah into Greek, and was done long before Christ, such as in the translation of the Wisdom of *Iesous*(Jesus, Yehoshuah) ben Sirach.

And that December 25th birthday crap in Zeitgeist was so retarded I know 4 year olds that could debunk that crap!

The Pagan origins of the Nativity are way overplayed and there are alot of misconceptions of it: www.oodegr.com...

I am so happy that I am not alone on ATS with my Biblical knowledge and world view of Creation and a Creator that has rules for his Creation. So many don't like the rules so they just change them, which is why Zeitgeist can claim some "Christians" do celebrate pagan holidays, but even the History Channel can show you that December 25th was ancient and not the Date of Yahshua's Birth!

The history channel sucks and panders to new age morons now. You would do well to avoid it.
God bless you,
Mikha'el

This thread is still going?! lmao

Right. Wrong. WHO. CARES. whether this movie has a few holes in it? It got people thinking!!

Just like every other 'Debunker' effort out there - you find one or two or handful of errors, and throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Very small-minded. Extremely irresponsible.


Ask yourselves the following questions?:

1) Do International bankers control the world or not, and is the Fed a diabolical entity?

2) Is there more to the tragic events of 9/11 than we are being told regardless whether you are an 'inside job' person or not?

3) Is religion / faith, which is different, yet similar all over the world - but, completely arbitrary depending on your background / upbringing - and, is Christianity not the NEWEST of the major religions of the world?


Exactly. So, stop bickering about whether some clever guy, with an awesome computer and editing equipment, and too much time on his hands got the details right, and look at the bigger picture.

The tenets are accurate, and the arguments sound.

Good day.

I love it when the truth comes out and the atheists biggest source of information gets utterly and completely crushed by the power of the Spirit. Amen ! God bless you all!