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

page: 52
76
<< 49  50  51    53  54 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by The GUT
 


that thought has crossed my mind too.
and the more i read the more i think it is.




posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by all2human
 


never had a doubt about it. more and more every day, well maybe not everyday. archeologist are finding that the bible is historically accurate. there's far more to the bible than you think.

now i do have some problems with the spiritual aspects, but you know what the bible even said that would happen too.

edit on 19-8-2012 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by all2human
My two cents..zeitgeist was more factually true than the bible ever was..

Can you add a nickel to those two pennies and explain why you feel that way? Have you read the thread and checked the sources?



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Show me some proof Jesus actually existed and i will be a believer..



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by all2human
Show me some proof Jesus actually existed and i will be a believer..

Really? 'Cause that would be awesome and I would be willing to bring some pretty convincing evidence to the table.

What would you consider "proof?"



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   
hounddoghowlie "Scholars generally consider Tacitus's reference to the execution of Jesus by Pontius Pilate to be both authentic, and of historical value"

LOL, some very selective reading you've got going on there as even Christian New Testament scholars disagree with you:

"The only definite account of his life and teachings is contained in the four Gospels of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. All other historical records of the time are silent about him. The brief mentions of Jesus in the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius have been generally regarded as not genuine and as Christian interpolations; in Jewish writings there is no report about Jesus that has historical value. Some scholars have even gone so far as to hold that the entire Jesus story is a myth…"

- The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia

hounddoghowlie "i went back and looked at about 15 or 20 of your posts. and what i found was every link or source you have provided, is a blog. a self promoting/blog book selling site, or a atheist/ non believer"

That's just a cheap hand-waving dismissal - the fact remains that in those blogs or whatever are posted credible evidence from primary sources and scholar commentary on them - you obviously didn't actually read anything you merely skimmed for something to compalin about to dismiss it all, which further demonstrates your severe biases and lack of objectivity.

hounddoghowlie "went back looking at your links, and found out that d.m. murdock (acharya s.), did start www.freethoughtnation.com so every thing the site admin says is suspect"

hounddoghowlie "as for me every one of your posts that use that link or any associated with her are null and void"

Thanks for that inadvertent admission of just how biased your really are. If Acharya S isn't allowed to defend her own work then, you are just another anti-Acharya bigot with zero interest in fairness or objectivity or the truth of the matter whatever that may be. So, we can obviously ignore you as you are not any sort of reliable source to take seriously.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
tinfoilman "Freethoughtnation is just Acharya's website and its whois goes back to Stellar publishing. Her own publishing company.

It's just a bunch of Zeitgeist supporters sourcing their own posts to prove that their own posts are true. "

LOL, more lies from a pathological liar - this has already been addressed; it's an absolute lie every single time you make the claim that they're only citing themselves - it's laughable to all those who've actually read her work, which in fact, does include primary sources and highly respected scholar commentary on them - this has been proven repeatedly so, you can stop LYING about it now. You only further prove that you have not read any of the work and you prove what low integrity you have. You obviously have an agenda to shore up your faith at all costs even if it means being dishonest. You simply are not to be trusted at all on this issue.

Accusing me of being Acharya just shows how utterly pathetic some of you here are. It's really absurd. I just happen to be a former saved, baptized Christian of many, many years who had the integrity, character and objectivity to actually read her work and her sources - LONG BEFORE ZEITGEIST EVER CAME OUT - and she makes the absolute very best case I've ever seen. You wouldn't know anything about that because you've never seriously studied it.

Her mythicist position video is spot on:




posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by The GUT

Originally posted by all2human
Show me some proof Jesus actually existed and i will be a believer..

Really? 'Cause that would be awesome and I would be willing to bring some pretty convincing evidence to the table.

What would you consider "proof?"

Proof would be CREDIBLE EVIDENCE that actually exists. After many years of being a Christian there's one thing that is for sure, there exists no credible evidence for the existence of the New Testament Jesus. If you think you have it please share it because it would be the very first time in all history it has ever been shared. So, please share it because I'm sure you'd win a prize, probably get on the evening news and I bet anything that Jesus would be happy for doing what he and god could not - provide credible evidence.

Jesus Christ Never Existed
truth-saves.com...

edit on 20-8-2012 by GoldenKnight because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by all2human
Show me some proof Jesus actually existed and i will be a believer..

The info is contained in the thread linked in my signature, with the Day of the Cross being the highlight, although how Jesus managed this feat in terms of it's timing, is rather astounding to say the least.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by GoldenKnight
 

null and void
null and void.
you have failed to provide a single link that is not a blog, or a self promting a book selling web site.


LOL, some very selective reading you've got going on there as even Christian New Testament scholars disagree with you:

name them, for every one you name i will name one christian or non christian that agrees. and at the end the tally would come up in favor of a historical Jesus.i'll even start, here is the first scholar i'll name
here's some more " selective reading"
Q and A: Who Was the Historical Jesus?
Rachel Havrelock
this from dn site above.

DN: For Christian believers, there is no doubt that Jesus existed. Is there a strong argument for an historical Jesus, though, having lived sometime around the first century A.D.?
RH: Yes, I think there is. The evidence comes from the Bible itself, but not in the way you might suppose.

and just one more of the questions, you'll have to go tread the rest yourself.

DN: Please explain.
RH: Certain details of Jesus' life simply don't fit with idealized notions of a Messiah. He's baptized by John the Baptist, a lesser figure according to the Gospels. He addresses women in his teachings and through his actions. He's from a backwater. These are aspects that seem to speak to the historical figure of Jesus of Nazareth.

well just one more.

DN: But Jesus is said to have been born of a poor family in Nazareth, and he conducted much of his ministry at the Sea of Galilee?
RH: Precisely. There is no reason why Jesus should have come from Nazareth, which was never mentioned in the prophecies, or that he should have begun his work at the Sea of Galilee. These are just two of the incongruities that did not conform to the preexisting beliefs about the Messiah. It is therefore likely that Jesus actually did exist, since there is no reason for these mismatches.

can your girl say that she was invited to host a broadcasted documentary, on a international television network?
my first post i provided two links, one biased, pro sept birth. one wiki link non biased, i think every one who uses or ever reads a wiki link would agree that wikipedia shows every side. for and against.
here i provided yet another link that is not self promoting.
i can keep on pulling more up, both christian and non christian. but i'm not going to. i told you that i'm not gonna do the work for you. you can lead a horse to water, but.


That's just a cheap hand-waving dismissal - the fact remains that in those blogs or whatever are posted credible evidence from primary sources and scholar commentary on them - you obviously didn't actually read anything you merely skimmed for something to compalin about to dismiss it all, which further demonstrates your severe biases and lack of objectivity.

no it's not it's her blog defending her self. show me one link in those blogs that doesn't include her or someone promoting her.
every link leads back to one of her sites in one from or the other, or some other "scholar" salesman promoting her and her books or their own. show us some other links that do not lead back to her. sales pages don't count


Thanks for that inadvertent admission of just how biased your really are. If Acharya S isn't allowed to defend her own work then, you are just another anti-Acharya bigot with zero interest in fairness or objectivity or the truth of the matter whatever that may be. So, we can obviously ignore you as you are not any sort of reliable source to take seriously.
.
as are you my good friend. of course i'm biased with my belief, just as you are biased in yours.
Bias
from the wiki.

Bias is an inclination to present or hold a partial perspective at the expense of (possibly equally valid) alternatives. Anything biased generally is one-sided, and therefore lacks a neutral point of view. Bias can come in many forms.

she can defend her own work, just not doing it with her own work.
it's just circular reasoning.
your posts sounds just like a ex. what i mean by that is, ex smoker, ex drinker, ex drug user, ex satanist or ex christian or ex what ever. they seem to try and talk the loudest and preach using the same sources, over and over again. and resorts to name calling, when called to put up or shut up.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by GoldenKnight
 


i just had to look at your members profile. talk about the pot calling the kettle black. not bias much hunh?
GoldenKnight Member Profile
you have been a member for a year and a half.
98 posts and all of them are on threads about zeitgeist.
not another post on any other subject, not a one, except the one you authored. and even in it you are going on and on about zeitgeist.
now looking through the one you authored and the other threads, you even use the same old tired freethoufghtnation links. and the same rhetoric as you do on this thread.

i especially like this one.it's from your thread
GolednKnights post in The Mythcist Position
here you seem to think dawkins has let you and your fellow atheists down.
and on this thread pg 51 thrid post down you seem to be trying to use this as support of your position. that seems to be the way it reads. go back and look at your post.


A couple responses to critics:
Rebuttal to Dr. Chris Forbes concerning 'Zeitgeist, Part 1' truthbeknown.com...
Richard Dawkins on Zeitgeist, Part 1 www.freethoughtnation.com...

and then a few post later on, the 10th one down on the same page51 you call tinfoilman a lair. for calling you on dawkins. when clearly it reads like your trying to use it as a support link.


Humm, are you really that daft or are you pathologically dishonest? All you needed to do was actually read everything else below that comment, which is what that post was all about, which you either didn't read or are lying about it. Richard Dawkins on Zeitgeist, Part 1 www.freethoughtnation.com... Is that what religion has done to you - made you pathologically dishonest? Sure seems like it.


from all i have read and seen in this thread, your profile and your rhetoric. something smells fishy, and it isn't tuna.


Accusing me of being Acharya just shows how utterly pathetic some of you here are.


i suspect gut and myself are on to something, if your not acharya or someone that had a stake in the hatchet job of a piece zg1, i fail to see why you defend it so admently.

that being said, i'm done with you. and to use your words.



So, we can obviously ignore you as you are not any sort of reliable source to take seriously.


don't you wish they still had the ignore button here.

eta: just read your reply to tinfoilman, remember i said you sound like a ex in my last post


I just happen to be a former saved, baptized Christian of many, many years who had the integrity, character and objectivity to actually read her work and her sources

man i'm good, you are a ex. i sure called that one.
but you don't show much integrity, character or objectivity. with all your name calling and the rhetoric you use

.
edit on 20-8-2012 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 

They just liked the sound of the narrator's calm, seething contempt towards Christianity, and want to relive those memories when they writhed in glee at what they percieved to be the annihilataion of a cherished Christian icon, one who I purport was quite well aware that he was summing up in himself something by far greater even than the Jewish prophecies, and ancient moon/sun god/godess worship, as a type of capstone placed atop all the ancient spiritual and mystical-wisdom traditions and philosophies/metaphysics and what's more, it can be proven, right down to the very HOUR he was on the cross. If only they were to "grok" the double-bind Jesus placed on wicked powers and principalities in low and high places, and on the devil within us all, then they would be overjoyed and filled with a similar but wholly authentic glee, even awe, at the magnificent splendour of his very triumph on behalf of us all, as the historical passover lamb of God.

OMG that's FUNNY!

edit on 20-8-2012 by NewAgeMan because: lol



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 07:52 PM
link   
hounddoghowlie "you have failed to provide a single link that is not a blog, or a self promting a book selling web site. "

LOL, just another dishonest tactic to dismiss & deny. I will not apologize as most people who are honest understand that there are more details and sources in the books that they are discussing, which you've obviously never read - perhaps it's about time you did because your utter ignorance on this subject is as transparent as glass.

hounddoghowlie "name them, for every one you name i will name one christian or non christian that agrees"

LOL, what they've *EVER* been able to do is provide CREDIBLE evidence to substantiate the claims. The 'burden of proof' rests in their hands and they've failed miserably.

hounddoghowlie "RH: Yes, I think there is. The evidence comes from the Bible itself"

Baaahahaha, how hypocritical of you to use to bible to prove the bible, which is precisely what you accused me of previously - which I'm not actually doing at all. They're always selling the bible and proselytizing Christianity based on no credible evidence to support the claims. There's no credible evidence to back up the claims by Rachel Havrelock. Typical.

hounddoghowlie "can your girl say that she was invited to host a broadcasted documentary, on a international television network? "

First of all, she's not "my girl" and second, she did much better by having her work viewed by over 200 million people worldwide in over 30 languages all without even trying to do so, it just happened and went viral. Plus, it was free and still is so, there goes your dishonest hypocritical theory about selling & promotions.

Me: "That's just a cheap hand-waving dismissal - the fact remains that in those blogs or whatever are posted credible evidence from primary sources and scholar commentary on them - you obviously didn't actually read anything you merely skimmed for something to complain about to dismiss it all, which further demonstrates your severe biases and lack of objectivity. "

hounddoghowlie "no it's not it's her blog defending her self. show me one link in those blogs that doesn't include her or someone promoting her.
every link leads back to one of her sites in one from or the other, or some other "scholar" salesman promoting her and her books or their own. show us some other links that do not lead back to her. sales pages don't count "

Baaahaha, how absurd can you be? Are you home-schooled? You have no clue how ridiculous you sound right now claiming she's not allowed to defend her work from critics or promote or sell her work. Do you tell your boss not to pay you? If you don't like the promotion & books simply over-look them like anybody else would do. The fact remains there's a mountain more information throughout her books, which you've never read, so, just get over it. It's not ANY kind of argument. It's just a dishonest way to dismiss her entire body of work without ever having to actually study the subject at all.

hounddoghowlie "of course i'm biased with my belief, just as you are biased in yours. "

LOL, not so but, nice try. I'm a former saved, baptized Christian of many years who rigorously studied the bible so, I am far from "one-sided" as I've also actually read many, many works including all of Acharya's and many of her sources. So, this line of crap will absolutely not work on me.

Acharya now has 5 books totaling over 2,100 pages of text with over 5,700 footnotes/citations to primary sources, references & scholar/expert commentary on them from a wide variety of backgrounds, including Christian, specifically because the subject is so contentious, utilizing over 1,600 bibliographical sources by respected authors/ publishers and peer-reviewed scholarly journals and over 300 illustrations.

hounddoghowlie "she can defend her own work, just not doing it with her own work."

Baahaha, think about how stupid you sound right there. you have no clue what you're talking about at all. Your claim that she defends her work with her own work is inaccurate, misleading and a total distortion of the facts. Most all of the time when she cites her own books it's to primary sources and/or scholar commentary on them so, you sir, are completely full of # because you just don't know what the hell you're talking about because you've never read a single book of hers.

Now, just stop lying or Jesus will make sure your burn in hell for all eternity.

hounddoghowlie "i just had to look at your members profile. talk about the pot calling the kettle black. not bias much hunh?
GoldenKnight Member Profile
you have been a member for a year and a half.
98 posts and all of them are on threads about zeitgeist. "

Care factor = 0.

It happens to be a subject that I study and find interesting.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 07:56 PM
link   
hounddoghowlie "page51 you call tinfoilman a lair. for calling you on dawkins. when clearly it reads like your trying to use it as a support link."

Yeah, that link completely debunks Dawkins comment, which neither of you obviously actually read.

hounddoghowlie "i suspect gut and myself are on to something, if your not acharya or someone that had a stake in the hatchet job of a piece zg1, i fail to see why you defend it so admittedly."

You would just be living in yet another fantasy world. I just get sick and tired of all the LIES. People like you hold humanity back from true progress.

hounddoghowlie "man i'm good, you are a ex. i sure called that one"

Baaahaha, no you're not good at all in fact, you're quite bad since I had already posted that and now you're going to pretend you've got some divine skills nobody else has when I already said I was a former Xian. You're just dishonestly looking for anything, any reason at all to dismiss and deny so that you may remain as ignorant as you possibly can. I, on the other hand, have actually studied many sides of these issues. So, we won't be entrusting you to decide who does or does not have integrity, character and objectivity since you've displayed the complete opposite thus far.




posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by GoldenKnight
 

What if you were presented with incontrovertible evidence, which could be verified let us say from a whole host of angles and perspectives, what WOULD you do then..? Let's just say, hypothetically, that not only can the historical Jesus be proven a real person (as encountered in the Gospels), but the framing of his life and work, laid down in history in such a way that there are actual vectors by which it can be verified and authenticated when winding the tape back from now to then? Would anything convince you? Or are you on a holy terror born of hatred.?



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   
And just for the record, most if not all of us started out atheist, and in the final analysis, we've ALL been punk'd by God, so this isn't just about the need to be right relative to another's wrong, since the humility born of such a discovery is upon me, as much as it will be you, so no worries as they say.. it's all good, this isn't a LUST to pounce on anyone and jump up and down in glee in triumph, that's not the spirit of Christ nor the nature of the inquiry at hand, I hope..



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 08:54 PM
link   
His darkest, and brightest, hour.



It was a celestial cosmic dirge, a love song (made to both bring you to tears and then laughter) sent to us, to our generation, from the beginning of time.


You can run the ancient historical tape back both in terms of the the prophetic framework of ancient Biblical history (now verified by archeology) and from something, a process which, from our perspective, we tend to rely upon a little more confidently let us say, and that's the movement of material causation, but in this case we see and are given to see, the divine order at work as well, in the fullfillment and completion of basically, the whole kit and caboodle to to very end of the entire Book, all the way to the very last page when the spirit and the bride say "come let all who thirst, and let all who hear say "come and freely drink the living water (which is the water of eternal life)."

Oh no, what are we going to do NOW?!


It's a heck of a predicament, the one that God places us into, terribly funny and amuzing that is when all is said and done.

edit on 20-8-2012 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Think I'm crazy?

Check it! Read it and weap, but don't forget to laugh at the end.

The Day of the Cross

He restores us not only to life, but to joy and good humor, as the Justice at the end of the line where all evil is relative, to the victim.

He put a double bind on all evil, and transcended it with the ultimate act of love, to the very hour of a blood red moon. How did he do THAT?

Never mind how his life could have been framed by a wedge of both prophecy and.. startalk I don't know what you want to call it! I call it a "Superdeterministic, Cosmological, Magnum Opus" only because I couldn't think of anything else, but words, mere words they don't even begin to describe it, the multifacted jewel at the heart of it all, the keystone in the royal arch across which we shall begin to pass into everlasting life and freedom, joy and happiness (hey that was a good metaphor!).

Best Regards,

your brother, in Christ,

NAM aka Bob.

edit on 20-8-2012 by NewAgeMan because: edit



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenKnight

She's a nice and well meaning person who makes a fair point about the weight of evidence, but the weight of the evidence resides in two areas she's completely unaware of, one, the Old Testament prophetic framework, and now two, the astronomical model intersecting the hour of the cross during passover, the day of the meal I believe it was (which was why he and the others were taken down early, or that was the excuse made, that you can't have or ought not to have a crufixion and TOO much horrific killing on such a blessed day),



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by GoldenKnight
 

What if you were presented with incontrovertible evidence, which could be verified let us say from a whole host of angles and perspectives, what WOULD you do then..? Let's just say, hypothetically, that not only can the historical Jesus be proven a real person (as encountered in the Gospels), but the framing of his life and work, laid down in history in such a way that there are actual vectors by which it can be verified and authenticated when winding the tape back from now to then? Would anything convince you? Or are you on a holy terror born of hatred.?


Yawn, I won't be wasting my time on you as I've been studying the subject for 30 years and there exists no credible evidence for the New Testament Jesus. The 'burden of proof' is all yours so, feel free to start your own thread and maybe I'll show up to have some fun.

Even Christian New Testament scholars disagree with you:

"...there are very few sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus beyond the four canonical Gospels. Paul and Josephus offer little more than tidbits. Claims that later apocryphal Gospels and the Nag Hammadi material supply independent and reliable historical information about Jesus are largely fantasy."

John P. Meier

- Who Was Jesus? 86

NewAgeMan "...but the weight of the evidence resides in two areas she's completely unaware of, one, the Old Testament prophetic framework..."

That's just another false claim same as some of the other posters here who haven't read a single book of hers. Acharya is fully aware of "the Old Testament prophetic framework" since she discusses it throughout her books, which you've never read, obviously. The writters of the New Testament simply used the Old Testament as a blueprint to make the prophecies work. It's that simple; and an Occam's razor explanation that makes far more sense, especially when you learn that the gospels, as we have them today, didn't exist until the mid to late 2nd century as the historic and literary records prove.

The Gospel Dates: A 2nd Century Composition?
stellarhousepublishing.com/gospel-dates.html





top topics
 
76
<< 49  50  51    53  54 >>

log in

join