Zeitgeist The Movie helps the New World Order

Originally posted by II HAL II
Ok lets see YOUR research to bunk it then... seriously I'm interested, espesially if you dont use websites for your information you must be very dedicated to this subject.

There is nothing to show. That's the point. There is absolutely no historical text - meaning a book or reference more than a century old that makes any of these claims. Absolutely none. Not one ancient book makes the claims that are seen in Zeitgeist The Movie. Thus, the reason that there are now websites devoted to exposing this literary hoax and offering cash to anyone who can sight a real historical source for any of the claims. It isn't my job to prove that there are no books that contain these claims. It is the job of the person who makes these claims to back them up with solid evidence to support said claim. There was an old saying made popular by the astronomer Carl Sagan: extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

This is not even a difficult request. If these things were written in an ancient text just point us to them so we can read them for ourselves. But there in lies the problem. There are no ancient texts making these claims so no one can sight them. These claims are little more than Internet Urban Legends, misinformation and flat out lies.


[edit on 22-2-2008 by zerotime]

Originally posted by zerotime


Thus, the reason that there are now websites devoted to exposing this literary hoax

Originally posted by zerotime

It is just general amateur laziness that we see in all forms these days that did not allow for better research. But lets face it, whoever, made the movie probably got all of their information off of websites

Ok you fell for it.....lol




[edit on 22-2-2008 by II HAL II]

Originally posted by zerotime
I have had major problems with this movie since the day I saw it and not from a religious perspective but strictly from the factual errors in the ancient history parts of the movie, which is what it starts with.

The success of Zeitgeist the movie comes from one human aspect - tell someone what he or she want to believe and he or she will believe it without question. Example: If you tell someone who does not like Christianity that the God HORUS was Born of a virgin on December 25th and his birth was accompanied by a star in the east, etc. and this story all occurred before the story of Jesus then that person is almost guaranteed to believe the entire claim without challenging any part of it.

But lets face it, whoever, made the movie probably got all of their information off of websites and because that information fit their own personal way of thinking they did not bother going to any great lengths to research the history behind the claims.
[edit on 22-2-2008 by zerotime]

Zerotime, you obviously did not do your research. I've read about all this stuff before seeing Zeitgeist. See Manly P. Hall's Secret Teachings of All Ages. Horus was originally the Sun god, and yes he was born of Isis, who was famously the Virgin who birthed the Sun. The following was famously inscribed in front of her temple in her city: "I, Isis, am all that has been, that is or shall be; no mortal Man hath ever me unveiled." testifying again to her virginity. It was later on that Horus became associated with the sky with both the Sun and the Moon.

The reason the first part of the film takes more than just a google search is that it is mainly based upon esoteric information. This means you have to really do some research and read books concerning the esoteric nature of ancient religions. As mentioned before, Hall's Secret Teachings of All Ages is a good place to start. Or his Lectures on Ancient Philosophy. Or Blatvatsky's The Secret Doctrine, which is essentially the history of the world through the lens of ancient esotericism. Or Santillana and Dechend's Hamlet's Mill.

In fact, you can find an online version of The Secret Teachings of All Ages here:

www.sacred-texts.com...

It is not a huge leap to say that Jesus is indeed a symbolic representation of the sun. The Sun was the most important aspect of everyone's life and it had been indeed personified many, many times before Jesus, and yes those deities did share a lot of those common traits, especially the Dec 25th birthday. Imagine the sun to be personified, being born on Dec 25th (the new sun of the year), experiencing youth until the Spring Equinox, where upon that reaches adolescence as its powers grow to match the powers of darkness. After that maturing into adulthood and is in it's prime during the Summer Solstice, and slowly deteriorating, reaching old age after the Fall Equinox, as its powers slowly diminish until it is finally at its weakest on Dec 21-22nd where it "dies" for 3 days until the 25th and begins a new life.

You have to remember, the Ancients took astrology extremely seriously, as to them it is what dictates their lives. It is a part of everyone's life as it is the Grand Calendar, and their celebrations and holidays had great astrological significance. It would be foolish to think otherwise for Christianity.

The fact that in Luke 22:7-10 is self referential astrologically fits the astrotheology theory perfectly:

7 Then came the Day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover must be killed. 8 And He sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat.”
9 So they said to Him, “Where do You want us to prepare?”
10 And He said to them, “Behold, when you have entered the city, a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; follow him into the house which he enters.

The man carrying a pitcher of water is obviously Aquarius, whose age we are entering right now.

Oh and there are ancient books on those subjects too, but they were closely guarded, as they were the protected esoteric doctrines. Few fragments have survived. Pythagoras taught secrets of the world for decades and there are almost no texts to show for it, does that mean that he didn't teach anything? I mean come on. What about that period of book-burnings conducted by the Christians? The traditions live on through knowledge of mystics passed down from generations, but also any serious researcher of ancient religion would be able to tell you that yes, Dionysus did share those traits with Jesus. Yes, Balder the Beautiful did share those traits with Jesus. Yes Mithra did share those traits with Jesus. and Yes, Horus did also.

By the way, the Dionysian cult and its esoteric meaning is extremely interesting if anyone is interested in reading up on it.

Of course, one should remember not to confuse Mithra with Mithras, and also the Horus born of Isis the Virgin with the later reinvention of Horus.


Also at the end of Secret Teachings of All Ages, Hall provides a 20 or so page bibliography which includes some very ancient texts. It's not on the online version though, only the book version.l

[edit on 22-2-2008 by italkyoulisten]

Originally posted by italkyoulisten


Zerotime, you obviously did not do your research. I've read about all this stuff before seeing Zeitgeist. See Manly P. Hall's Secret Teachings of All Ages. Horus was originally the Sun god, and yes he was born of Isis, who was famously the Virgin who birthed the Sun. The following was famously inscribed in front of her temple in her city: "I, Isis, am all that has been, that is or shall be; no mortal Man hath ever me unveiled." testifying again to her virginity. It was later on that Horus became associated with the sky with both the Sun and the Moon.

You are not sighting an historical source. You are sighting a book from 1928 that does not say where it gets any of this information or how to comes to the conclusion that unveiled means virgin. The author is writing an opinion.

reply to post by zerotime


Actually Isis was most famous for her Virgin characteristics, and also for birthing the Sun.

Here read the chapter devoted to her:
www.sacred-texts.com...

And it is not merely opinion, as I have stated before, he's got a huge bibliography, and in writing the book, actually traveled around the world to learn from the mystics of the regions and did actual research. It is mostly facts from other books and research while he interjects some of his own claims based upon those facts every once in and again.

jesus wasn't born on december 25th. he was born in september, based on the events transpiring at the time of his birth. he also wasn't born in 1 AD. the gregorian calendar is messed up. you can't even gauge the 2012 event by it because the solstice events on the gregorian calendar would not match the accuracy of the mayan calendar, in other words.

there's lots of things that are similar but are not the same.
an example: a babylonian god was a shepherd. therefore, jesus is based on the babylonian god? not necessarily, no. a grecian god was depicted on the lap of his mother, therefore, jesus was based on the grecian god? not necessarily, no.

on top of that, i've found evidence that the red disk surmounted by horns that egyptologists have said was the sun, may in fact be mars in some or all cases.
that's not to say that horus didn't represent the sun and the moon, but it was actually his eyes that did - one eye was the sun, one was the moon.

anu had 2 sons, enki and enlil. if these are references to the sun, where's the other sun? cause i see 2 sons there.

if horus was also the moon, where's that reference in jesus is horus examples to jesus being the moon? have you ever seen jesus represented by a falcon or hawk?
did he have 4 sons? does this mean there are 4 suns?

and what of set? set was in the story ya know? is he the sun too? he's a major player so ya can't just relegate him to an outer planet or something. he'd need a front row seat right along with horus and osiris.

I believe this discussion can probably be summed up thus:

Concerning the credibility of information in the first section of the film Zeitgeist, which claims Christianity is based on earlier Pagan belief:

- Christians generally find it to be inaccurate.
- Non-Christians generally find it compelling.

Quite predictable really.

Would I be right, zerotime, in guessing that you are a Christian? If I'm wrong, I apologise for my assumption and commend you on your ability to remain extremely objective on a given subject.

isis wasn't a virgin,
she was the sumerian-akkadian inana.
read about inana. same same. she was not the least
bit viriginal.
isis was a married woman when she gave birth to horus.

reply to post by undo


You are looking at the wrong version of Horus. Him being the sun and the moon is a later reinvention of him. But seriously, see Dionysus, Balder the Beautiful, Attis, or Mithra. They share many, many of Christ-traits.

reply to post by undo


She was known by many names, but:

IT is especially fitting that a study of Hermetic symbolism should begin with a discussion of the symbols and attributes of the Saitic Isis. This is the Isis of Sais, famous for the inscription concerning her which appeared on the front of her temple in that city: "I, Isis, am all that has been, that is or shall be; no mortal Man hath ever me unveiled."

This Egyptian deity under many names appears as the principle of natural fecundity among nearly all the religions of the ancient world. She was known as the goddess with ten thousand appellations and was metamorphosed by Christianity into the Virgin Mary, for Isis, although she gave birth to all living things--chief among them the Sun--still remained a virgin, according to the legendary accounts.

www.sacred-texts.com...

sorry to use the same source, but really, it has all that you need in it. And a bibliography whenever you feel skeptical.

Apuleius in the eleventh book of The Golden Ass ascribes to the goddess the following statement concerning her powers and attributes: "Behold, * *, I, moved by thy prayers, am present with thee; I, who am Nature, the parent of things, the queen of all the elements, the primordial progeny of ages, the supreme of Divinities, the sovereign of the spirits of the dead, the first of the celestials, and the uniform resemblance of Gods and Goddesses. I, who rule by my nod the luminous summits of the heavens, the salubrious breezes of the sea, and the deplorable silences of the realms beneath, and whose one divinity the whole orb of the earth venerates under a manifold form, by different rites and a variety of appellations. Hence the primogenial Phrygians call me Pessinuntica, the mother of the Gods, the Attic Aborigines, Cecropian Minerva; the floating Cyprians, Paphian Venus; the arrow-bearing Cretans, Diana Dictynna; the three-tongued Sicilians, Stygian Proserpine; and the Eleusinians, the ancient Goddess Ceres. Some also call me Juno, others Bellona, others Hecate, and others Rhamnusia. And those who are illuminated by the incipient rays of that divinity the Sun, when he rises, viz. the Ethiopians, the Arii, and the Egyptians skilled in ancient learning, worshipping me by ceremonies perfectly appropriate, call me by my true name, Queen Isis."

Notice "primordial progeny of ages", again referring to virginity.

[edit on 22-2-2008 by italkyoulisten]

Originally posted by Cythraul
Would I be right, zerotime, in guessing that you are a Christian? If I'm wrong, I apologise for my assumption and commend you on your ability to remain extremely objective on a given subject.

No, Not in any traditional sense. You can count on one hand how many times I have been in a church. I do believe in a God. I do follow the basic rule of Jesus, Do Unto Others...but I think that is just a good way to live.

I did however almost become a history major in college. I love history and you cannot really study history without studying ancient texts and religious history. They all go hand in hand.

I am not trying to prove or disprove Jesus. That part of the movie and all the NWO stuff in the movie is irrelevant to me. As I stated in my first post, my problems with the movie all come from the historical inaccuracies, which there is a huge list of in the opening sections of Zeitgeist The Movie.

Originally posted by zerotime

The author is writing an opinion.

An opinion based on facts that were researched, your OPINION is based on what? thats why I asked where your research is.... to come to the conclusions you do. I very much doubt you know more than authors of researched books but if you do tell me and show me and I will accept it.

mithra was not jesus.
jesus was a jewish guy from israel.
his name was yeshua (joshua).
he likened himself to a shepherd.
david was a shepherd. david is depicted holding a lamb.
does that mean david is jesus?
heck there was an entire civ of shepherds (the hyskos).
does that mean jesus is an entire tribe?
that the catholic artists depicted jesus holding a lamb
is reminscent of mithra holding a lamb, does not mean
that mithra was jesus. these are artists representations.
the catholic empire was trying to tie jesus in to all the
ancient belief systems in an effort to make the pagan
transition easier, but it doesn't mean jesus is any of those
people. jesus was simply jesus. kinda like you are simply
you, even if you have a picture of yourself driving a car,
just like that other guy has a picture of himself driving
a car.

Originally posted by II HAL II
An opinion based on facts that were researched, your OPINION is based on what? thats why I asked where your research is.... to come to the conclusions you do. I very much doubt you know more than authors of researched books but if you do tell me and show me and I will accept it.

My opinion is based on the fact that no one can show these inscriptions except the guy who wrote this occult book. There are also no citations on who translated the temple or scholarly opinions on that translation. Why can’t someone show us a picture of this temple statement? How do we know unveil means virgin? Why doesn't it mean hidden as the word suggests? How about my theory that those who unveil Isis will unlock great mysteries and secrets of hidden knowledge?


[edit on 22-2-2008 by zerotime]

reply to post by undo


I think you are making a leap in logic here. We are not talking about slight similarities such as being a shepherd or something, or Jesus literally being a different deity. I am saying that the attributes of Jesus are likely copied from earlier sun-deities who also share the Virgin birth, Dec 25th celebration of birthday, and are also called the Light of the World, with 12 disciples, or teachers, or a council of 12 or whatever.

What you are saying is just a ridiculous mocking of legitimate synchronicities between Jesus and other Sun Deities of the past.

natural fecundity

fecundity is a reference to being fruitful.

the shabaka stone references osiris' death.
it describes him being rescued from his water
where he had drowned
by horus as well as isis and her sisters.

horus is already born when osiris dies. that
stone was turned into a millstone and almost destroyed.
probably because it didn't project the same story
that had been accepted in the mainstream, that isis
had given birth to horus after osiris was dead.

there are several versions of the story, as well.

Originally posted by italkyoulisten
reply to post by undo

 

I think you are making a leap in logic here. We are not talking about slight similarities such as being a shepherd or something, or Jesus literally being a different deity. I am saying that the attributes of Jesus are likely copied from earlier sun-deities who also share the Virgin birth, Dec 25th celebration of birthday, and are also called the Light of the World, with 12 disciples, or teachers, or a council of 12 or whatever.

What you are saying is just a ridiculous mocking of legitimate synchronicities between Jesus and other Sun Deities of the past.

the hebrews kept a lunar calendar, not a solar one.
i think the leap of logic is assuming a bunch of roman pagans would have any clue whatsoever about the depth of jewish heritage necessary to falsify jesus.

reply to post by undo


Please show me where it says this in this translation of the Shakaba Stone:

www.touregypt.net...

reply to post by undo



Even in keeping a lunar calendar they would still look at the moon's position in relation the the zodiac constellations. Is it not unlikely that the Romans later on changed documents? And plus yes, the Jewish heritage is extremely deep and full of philosophical concepts and ideals such as the Tetragrammaton and whatnot but it is not too difficult to create a character based upon prophecies. But i mean, history is so muddled at that point in time that this argument is going to be completely pointless. I think instead of calling it historically inaccurate, we have to acknowledge that the historical accounts of these events are ambiguous at best. I am just saying that there is indeed a version of Isis that was a Virgin who birthed the Sun and this idea came thousands of years before Christ. I must go to class now, and I will maybe argue later, but I'm heading up to the mountains for the weekend, though I will have internet. I look forward to debating more.