alex jones- first part of Zeitgeist is rat poison

[energy]

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeuynmS_F9k

and says it's been disproven ,man this guy's talking out of his arse
:mad:

[chris]

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeuynmS_F9k
and says it's been disproven ,man this guy's talking out of his arse
:mad:

The Link doesn't work...

Still he's right, the first part of Zeitgeist is pretty poorly researched...

Here's a small critique I made of the film and I can never usually be bothered doing this...

We’ve been through this before so I can’t really be bothered to be that detailed but pretty much every fact was tainted with a counter. The stuff on Krishna was totally wrong, he was not crucified, most Hindu sects believe he either disappeared or was shot by an arrow.

I’m no expert on astronomy but the info here was so misleading it is worse than the no planers…

Here I shot a picture of daybreak on the 24th of December using the respected planetary software ‘Stellarium’ just to point out the obvious place where you might expect to see the Southern Crux, the south.

http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/9307/southencrossad2.png

I would have shot a picture of Sirius aligning up with the belt of Orion pointing to daybreak but the astronomical alignments were so bad it would have took a photoshop to fit them together and people would call me out for simply trying to show how badly they don’t line up because it would have too two screen grabs.

I’m not knitpicking at it, the first third stunk

I think he should have used Osirus as a comparison to Jesus and gone for a much more in-depth look into the sacrificial diety which has occurred throughout history.

All in all, the first part is completely rubbish and I’m surprised that Christians have not called him on it yet; I guess they fell for it too which I find rather amusing:)

I think if your going to make a film that’s gonna cause strife in the truth movement then at least it should be filled with facts and not half truths. I think the Christians are cool even though most of them are filled to the brim with disinfo about my theology, I sure want them around when the time comes.

[kblood]

I think I have to watch Zeitgeist again. Alot of things in it made me think it seemed a bit strange, but since I usually do not take anything as fact I did not think much about it. It is known Jesus was not born in December, or at least it is a theory which have its foundation in ancient texts, and maybe even the bible as well.

I like to watch/research everything, and when I know enough to be somewhat certain if something is true or not, then say so.

Zeitgeist probably cannot be totally discarded. I do believe it is somewhat on the right track anyway.

[bario]

The Link doesn't work...

Still he's right, the first part of Zeitgeist is pretty poorly researched...

Here's a small critique I made of the film and I can never usually be bothered doing this...

The problem with your method of debunking is that you don't know where the observer was at the time or what year they were observing in.

[chris]

The problem with your method of debunking is that you don't know where the observer was at the time or what year they were observing in.

Well that's not true, I went all the way back to observe from Egypt at the times of his supposed birth. The Southern Crux was never in the East nor will it ever be in the East. Nor did the three kings align with Sirius to point at the rising of the sun on the 25th. Never Ever.

But that's not the point, everything in that first part was bad info. I'm not saying it was completely wrong, I do know that there is a lot of truth to the astrotheological diety theory. Yet the guy who made this decided to Jazz up the info in practically every part from Horus to Krishna, nothing was left undebased. Even if there was a tiny bit of truth in it, he shouldn't be trying to Jazz it up because it will discredit his whole thing. The second and third parts were extremely good though. The first part was quite amusing to think of all those Christians he managed to seriously piss off but in the end of the day, the Christians are the most anti-nwo group out there so we really don't want to create an internal argument within us.

[lennart]

Alex on the Internet Doco Zeitgeist - YouTube

[chris]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeuynmS_F9k

Pretty good analogy.

[otto vollov]

I down loaded the vid and burned it onto DVD's for people in my clan. I also thought the first part was off centered and goofy so I deleted it in the DVD version. The 9/11 and Bankster fraud was well worth the effort, as it helps to get the sheepiest eyes opened. Good success with this one.

[drakul]

Here's the thing, I like many viewers who would watch a movie like Zeitgeist are pretty open-minded. I'm prepared to accept the fact that the concepts behind Christianity have been around for a long time - thousands of years in fact. Jesus Christ didn't come out of a void, he espoused and probably improved on a philosophy which was passed on to him. No question that Buddhism for example had an influence on Christianity.

But PULEEZE don't insult my intelligence. Don't tell me Horus was CRUCIFIED. There is not one picture in ancient Egyptian art that shows a crucified Horus. Don't tell me the Buddha was born on Dec 25 of a virgin and Krishna was born on Dec 25 of a virgin etc, etc. just so these anonymous filmakers can hammer in their agenda that Jesus Christ never existed because all the world's `crucified saviors' have the same `plagerized story'.

If you have facts then give me the facts, I'll think about it objectively but don't LIE to me. Zeitgeist offers up such a glaring falsifications concerning the god stories of different religions, it's stunning. I mean why would you even DO that??! Do they think people are THAT naive,that ignorant? I guess so.

[lizzy]

I down loaded the vid and burned it onto DVD's for people in my clan. I also thought the first part was off centered and goofy so I deleted it in the DVD version. The 9/11 and Bankster fraud was well worth the effort, as it helps to get the sheepiest eyes opened. Good success with this one.

I think that was a good idea. Cut out the quasi ancient histroy, true or not, and straight to the meat.

[esse]

But PULEEZE don't insult my intelligence. Don't tell me Horus was CRUCIFIED. There is not one picture in ancient Egyptian art that shows a crucified Horus. Don't tell me the Buddha was born on Dec 25 of a virgin and Krishna was born on Dec 25 of a virgin etc, etc. just so these anonymous filmakers can hammer in their agenda that Jesus Christ never existed because all the world's `crucified saviors' have the same `plagerized story'.

Interestingly David Icke said the same thing about Buddha in Children of the Matrix and I have been searching and have not been able to come up with any info that speaks of Buddha being born on this day - In all the Buddhist traditions I'm aware of he is born on what they call Wesak day or some equivalent, much closer to easter (but not syncing up with it) Anyone have any comment on this? I wondered why David was comparing Buddhism to other religions in this way and saying it was another facet of the Agenda Propogated Religions. I would need to see a lot more on this topic to be convinced, so far it's a mouthful without any info I can find any validation for. He doesn't talk a great deal about it - but so far it is one of the only times I feel I've caught him out on a topic - and am suprised for one his usually spot on research was so shonky and also so brief?

[/COLOR]

[chris]

But PULEEZE don't insult my intelligence. Don't tell me Horus was CRUCIFIED. There is not one picture in ancient Egyptian art that shows a crucified Horus. Don't tell me the Buddha was born on Dec 25 of a virgin and Krishna was born on Dec 25 of a virgin etc, etc. just so these anonymous filmakers can hammer in their agenda that Jesus Christ never existed because all the world's `crucified saviors' have the same `plagerized story'.

Interestingly David Icke said the same thing about Buddha in Children of the Matrix and I have been searching and have not been able to come up with any info that speaks of Buddha being born on this day - In all the Buddhist traditions I'm aware of he is born on what they call Wesak day or some equivalent, much closer to easter (but not syncing up with it) Anyone have any comment on this? I wondered why David was comparing Buddhism to other religions in this way and saying it was another facet of the Agenda Propogated Religions. I would need to see a lot more on this topic to be convinced, so far it's a mouthful without any info I can find any validation for. He doesn't talk a great deal about it - but so far it is one of the only times I feel I've caught him out on a topic - and am suprised for one his usually spot on research was so shonky and also so brief?

[/COLOR]

He's getting his info from the book called "16 crucified saviours before Christ" which is total disinfo. David Icke is more a compiler of research, a lot of the time you hear one thing in one book and then the complete opposite in another because he's done more research since but he never retracts his previous theories.

[esse]

Thanks Chris - true he is more a compiler of info - some have made the complaint that he doesn't give enough credit to other researchers --- but I love Icke - think he is a great man at any rate doing a great thing. Have lots of respect for him, but yeah - he should address this issue thoroughly if he is going to address it.
Peace

[fremmenwarrior]

Nicklas Arthur (crosstheborder.org) has done an anti-Zeitgeist video
on YouTube in which he researches and exposes part one of the Zeitgeist video as being lies.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

The full version is found on Google videos.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2271258041201877163&q=anti-zeitgeist&total=2&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

[mightiswrong]

Wasn't It Alex Jones in his End Game video that claimed that Texas was big enough for every person on earth to live there with an acre of land each? I seem to remember this was in endgame. Needless to say, that is utter bullshit.

[revolutionary_jam]

Alex Jones is a bit of a religious twat at times though

[thirdwave]

Its worth remembering that for many years the hoax that the movie claims to expose has been well covered up and pushed for a pretty long time and the research that has gone into it is from info and text stretching back to 5000 years....

I'm sure there is enough scattered around out there for people to stick a couple pieces together and re enforce the fact the movie is dis info... But I find that all the info in the movie does come from genuine research even though there maybe be alternative info as well, but their is no smoke without fire......

But of course there will be alternative info... are we expecting to see a movie come out like this and simply expose it with no questions asked? ...

Religion has been around for a long time... and not because of its honesty.

My advice is take in what makes the most sense to you....

[thirdwave]

here is a book with some good info in it on the subject....

you only need to see that that are several rumours on how this one died and how long this one done that... which only highlights that some of it is not true.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=HgQnqzvgHEUC&dq=Gerald+Massey:+Ancient+Egypt+Light+of+the+World .&pg=PA537&ots=Y7Vt8etlaU&sig=YAi14TtE3ibbUZdtCMBW0x1brUM&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Gerald+Massey:+Ancient+Egypt+Light+of+the +World.&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail

[adramelech]

Alex Jones calling someone or something else rat poison is pure hilarity. This from a guy who has told people to pray to God to save them from the NWO, that the world was ending on New Year's Eve 1999, you could fit the population of the world in Texas and a whole slew of other moonbat nonsense while dodging real issues.

Zeitgeist's oversimplified approach to astrotheology may be flawed, but anything a religious zealot like Jones points out as "rat poison" must have a redeeming quality.

[sidlittle]

One or two errors aside, many of the concepts in part 1 are right.
By the way Chris, what is it with you and your dropped little remarks about no-planes? You can't seem to resist it yet I never see you engaged in any debate. Come on over to 911movement.org and honestly discuss it there without the threat of being bullied or banned. Your little off-topic digs are weird.

[thirdwave]

One or two errors aside, many of the concepts in part 1 are right.
By the way Chris, what is it with you and your dropped little remarks about no-planes? You can't seem to resist it yet I never see you engaged in any debate. Come on over to 911movement.org and honestly discuss it there without the threat of being bullied or banned. Your little off-topic digs are weird.

this is true... and I feel the parts that "are not" can actually be argued with more/alternative research...

http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/zeitgeist.html

[daveybpl]

i see the 'geist' is still in google video's top ten views for the uk and ireland.

errors aside, it's a heck of a popular movie at the moment, i personaly recommended to some people i work with on the advice not to believe everything in the doc as the final truth, by that i mostly meant part1. at least it's got people who would normaly stay clear from 'info' into thinking and talking about things more, i've seen this personally with friends and friends of friends all starting to see through crap more and more. about 5/6 years ago when i first started talking to people about what i considered to be 'the big lie' nobody seemed interested or they found it intresting but not enough to really care to look into it themselves.

so, if it wakes folks up from their sleep and gets them active in reasearching for themselves then it gets the thumbs up from me:)

[greenleaf]

But PULEEZE don't insult my intelligence. Don't tell me Horus was CRUCIFIED.

I don't know enough about any one particular subject to know what is truth or not, but I was under the impression when they stated Horus was crucified it was symbolised as a cross with a circle in the middle #(representing the SUN)... like the cross on most churches nowadays.

http://www.fairlieparish.co.uk/cross.jpg

and the Celtic Cross:

http://z.about.com/d/minneapolis/1/7/m/4/1/CelticCross.JPGhttp://www.megalithicireland.com/High%20Crosses/A%20Cross%20Home/Cross%20Home%20Montage.jpg

Precessional Cycle of the Holy Cross
The Movie (http://www.lunarplanner.com/HCmovies/HCmovie.html)

http://www.lunarplanner.com/HCmovies/HolyCross2.jpg

Go To above link to see whole movie.

[drakul]

I don't know enough about any one particular subject to know what is truth or not, but I was under the impression when they stated Horus was crucified it was symbolised as a cross with a circle in the middle #(representing the SUN)... like the cross on most churches nowadays.

http://www.fairlieparish.co.uk/cross.jpg

and the Celtic Cross:

http://z.about.com/d/minneapolis/1/7/m/4/1/CelticCross.JPGhttp://www.megalithicireland.com/High%20Crosses/A%20Cross%20Home/Cross%20Home%20Montage.jpg

Precessional Cycle of the Holy Cross
The Movie (http://www.lunarplanner.com/HCmovies/HCmovie.html)

http://www.lunarplanner.com/HCmovies/HolyCross2.jpg

Go To above link to see whole movie.


You are showing CHRISTIAN crosses not Egypian Ankhs. Pls show us an ancient Egyptian ankh that portrays a CRUCIFIED Horus. The discussion is not about - did Egyptian theism have an influence on Christianity? It did. The discussion is about FALSIFYING FACTS to fit an agenda - i.e. presenting some truth coupled with lies to convince an audience. Zeitgeist claims `Horus was crucified' among other easily proveable blatant religious falsities.

So show us a crucified Horus. It shouldn't be difficult. (Zeitgeist couldn't do it though).

[drakul]

Egyptian ankh


http://www.egyptianmyths.net/ankh.htm

[greenleaf]

so even though it was illegal to depict the image of Horus, you want someone to find a symbol crucified?.. as an athiest, I find looking too deeply into this stuff slightly on the rediculous side... humans do find it hard to see how stories are repeated over and over with the only difference being the time scales.... all because one man had a zit and the other a boil!


Some say Horus was killed by his uncle Seth, as was his father, Osirus.

However, in legend, Horus joined his father in the underworld and and with the help of Isis returned to fight and defeat Set at Edfu. He fought in his corporal form that was resurected from the Duat and in the form of a winged sun disc

In historical Egypt, as the King was always identified with Osirus, the Prince who was to suceed him was called "Horus in the Nest".

[mr jones]

Here's the thing, I like many viewers who would watch a movie like Zeitgeist are pretty open-minded. I'm prepared to accept the fact that the concepts behind Christianity have been around for a long time - thousands of years in fact. Jesus Christ didn't come out of a void, he espoused and probably improved on a philosophy which was passed on to him. No question that Buddhism for example had an influence on Christianity.

But PULEEZE don't insult my intelligence. Don't tell me Horus was CRUCIFIED. There is not one picture in ancient Egyptian art that shows a crucified Horus. Don't tell me the Buddha was born on Dec 25 of a virgin and Krishna was born on Dec 25 of a virgin etc, etc. just so these anonymous filmakers can hammer in their agenda that Jesus Christ never existed because all the world's `crucified saviors' have the same `plagerized story'.

If you have facts then give me the facts, I'll think about it objectively but don't LIE to me. Zeitgeist offers up such a glaring falsifications concerning the god stories of different religions, it's stunning. I mean why would you even DO that??! Do they think people are THAT naive,that ignorant? I guess so.

its a fact that the SUN of god is born on the 25th of december.
at the winter solstice the sun is at the most southern point in the sky, the next day the sun doesnt move north by 1 degree and he appears to be dead.
then on the 3rd day he is re-born on the 25th of december and starts his journey towards the most northern point in the sky at the summer solstice.
half way from the 25th of december to the summer solstice is easter/passover when the sun crosses the equator

[chris]

Wasn't It Alex Jones in his End Game video that claimed that Texas was big enough for every person on earth to live there with an acre of land each? I seem to remember this was in endgame. Needless to say, that is utter bullshit.

Yeah lol, I remember hearing that and quickly looked up the size of Texas and then divided it by 6 billion…He should sometimes think before he opens his mouth.

One or two errors aside, many of the concepts in part 1 are right.

Many concepts might have a basis in fact but he doesn’t even speak about them. I would be all for him doing a very good discussion on crucified deities which are everywhere even in small tribes that praise a person as god and then cook him but no, Zeitgeist part1 was like a guy in a midlife crisis, the commentary was great, the graphics were great, the sardonic jests were great but the substance backing it up was weak.


By the way Chris, what is it with you and your dropped little remarks about no-planes? You can't seem to resist it yet I never see you engaged in any debate. Come on over to 911movement.org and honestly discuss it there without the threat of being bullied or banned. Your little off-topic digs are weird.

Well I'm sorry if I'm weirding you out however if I'm supposed to act normal and be careful not to give anyone the willies then I'll keep a note to not mess with the no planers because of their prowess of nitpicking. Still, I don’t recall dropping remarks about the no planers hardly at all but you make it sound like I do it in every sentence, even though I hope you didn’t feel victimised.

I just used it here as an analogy to show that stupid info can blow the whole argument. Just like I say the same with the holocaust, I agree with a lot of things some of the revisionists say but I call them stupid to ponder on a point that they are never going to win in their lifetimes especially when even their own people are trying to distance themselves away from that info, you are fighting two battles and making a mess.

I’d rather wake people up by using the most cutting edge info available rather than piddle about with stupid info that will never be potent info because just like UFO sightings they are too easily faked.

[drakul]

its a fact that the SUN of god is born on the 25th of december.
at the winter solstice the sun is at the most southern point in the sky, the next day the sun doesnt move north by 1 degree and he appears to be dead.
then on the 3rd day he is re-born on the 25th of december and starts his journey towards the most northern point in the sky at the summer solstice.
half way from the 25th of december to the summer solstice is easter/passover when the sun crosses the equator

What does that have to do with Zeitgeist's allegation that Krishna was born on Dec 25?

[guyblokeman]

. Don't tell me Krishna was born on Dec 25 of a virgin .

Krishna was born of a virgin though.

ASk any Hindu.

Although there are definately errors in Zeitgeist, the main point is actually very relevent.

The story of Christ is remarkably similar to that of Buddha and Krishna, and in fact many others....

[mr jones]

What does that have to do with Zeitgeist's allegation that Krishna was born on Dec 25?
i havent seen zeitgeist, but krishna being born on the 25th of december is from the suns yearly cycle, its why they say krishna and jesus et al are born at christmas

i wasnt having a go at you if thats what you think :D

[drakul]

i havent seen zeitgeist, but krishna being born on the 25th of december is from the suns yearly cycle, its why they say krishna and jesus et al are born at christmas

i wasnt having a go at you if thats what you think :D


You still don't get it - Krishna was NOT born on Dec. 25 (ala Jesus Christ as Zeitgeist claims). Krishna's birthday is celebrated in India on July 21 and has been for over 3,000 years.

And don't worry I don't take argument personally.

[drakul]

Krishna was born of a virgin though.

ASk any Hindu.

Although there are definately errors in Zeitgeist, the main point is actually very relevent.

The story of Christ is remarkably similar to that of Buddha and Krishna, and in fact many others....


Pls supply relevant links (I already have). Krishna was the EIGHTH child of his mother Devaki.

[guyblokeman]

Pls supply relevant links (I already have). Krishna was the EIGHTH child of his mother Devaki.

Yes he was the 8th son, but my understanding of the Virgin birth is that of "Divine Conception" I.e No human father, the same as Jesus




http://www.truthbeknown.com/virgin.htm

[weston white]

I think Alex Jones meant or was referring to every person in the United States of America could have 1 acre in Texas, I did the math and that seems to be true, though if he in fact did mean every person in the world, he would be way, way, way off. But that does not make sense to use such an example, especially considering how anal Alex is about our Nations borders.

[marmadukehussy]

You still don't get it - Krishna was NOT born on Dec. 25 (ala Jesus Christ as Zeitgeist claims). Krishna's birthday is celebrated in India on July 21 and has been for over 3,000 years.

And don't worry I don't take argument personally.

what about if krishna was a mushroom that has been anthropomorphised?

[mr jones]

You still don't get it - Krishna was NOT born on Dec. 25 (ala Jesus Christ as Zeitgeist claims). Krishna's birthday is celebrated in India on July 21 and has been for over 3,000 years.

And don't worry I don't take argument personally.

zeitgeist is chatting shit :D

[mightiswrong]

Hey Chris you attributed a quote to me that wasn't mine.

[chris]

Hey Chris you attributed a quote to me that wasn't mine.

LOL sorry dude, I just copied and pasted the top name without thinking. Fixed

[bigus_dickus]

i think that the meaning of the word "virgin" in the New Testament, is one of the most misunderstood words of all time.

here is the closest to the truth, according to me:

the word "virgin" in the Greek text is "parthenos" (παρθένος).

this word means "virgin", but it does not only mean virgin. virginity is only implied, hence the word "parthenos" was also used to indicate virginity (no sex) and evolved to exclusively mean virgin in modern Greek. but let's take it into the proper context.

the time that these books were written, the word "virgin" means "young woman, pure, unmarried" and not "woman who hasn't had any sex". but because "no sex" is implied since the woman is not married, virginity is implied. but in our times, it is not illegal or unmoral to have sex before marriage, so what happens to this word, it gets to mean virgin and nothing else!

it is quite possible that the gospel meant that Mary was virgin before she met Joseph and she was a pure, bright young woman.

so, every Christian or non Christian right now believes that Mary was a virgin, or that what the bible actually says is that Mary was a virgin and that she had an Immaculate Conception.

everyone, except me.

Bethulah and `almah

Of the two Hebrew words בתולה (bethulah) and עלמה (`almah), most commentators interpret betulah as meaning a virgin,[21] and `almah as meaning a nubile young woman.[22] In regular narrative, `almah denotes youth explicitly, virginity is suggested only loosely and implicitly. Hence, some have argued that, strictly speaking, the youth of a mother, not virginity, was all that was suggested by Isaiah.

Some have argued, on the contrary, that bethulah does not necessarily indicate virginity and that `almah does mean a virgin.[23] While in modern Hebrew usage bethulah is used to mean a virgin, in Biblical Hebrew it is found in Genesis 24:16 followed by the statement "and no man had known her", which, it is claimed, would be unnecessary if the word bethulah itself conveyed this information. Another argument is based on Joel 1:8, where bethulah is used of a widow; but it is not certain that here it referred to a woman who had had sexual relations, since marriage was considered to begin with betrothal, some time time before cohabitation began. As for the word `almah, this same minority view holds that the young women to whom it was applied in the Old Testament were all in fact virgins.

In an Ugaritic tablet, the words in that language cognate to bethulah and `almah are both used in relation to the goddess Anath who by union with the male lunar deity was to bear a son.[24]. The Aramaic counterpart of bethûlah was used of married women. The same holds for other cognate languages, "there is in fact no word for 'virgin' in Sumerian or Akkadian."[25]

Parthenos

The Septuagint's Greek term παρθένος (parthenos) is considered by many to be an inexact rendering of the Hebrew word `almah in the text of Isaiah.[1]

The Greek word παρθένος, from which terms such as parthenogenesis are derived, normally means "virgin", though there are four instances in classical Greek where it is used to mean unmarried women who are not virgins.[26] The Septuagint uses the word to translate three different Hebrew words: bethulah, "maiden/virgin"; `almah, "maiden/virgin"; and נערה, na`arah, "maiden, young woman, servant", as seen in the following examples:

Genesis 24:16 And the damsel [parthenos = Hebrew na`arah] was very fair to look upon, a virgin [parthenos = Hebrew bethulah], neither had any man known her: and she went down to the well, and filled her pitcher, and came up.
Judges 21:12 And they found among the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead four hundred young virgins [parthenous = Hebrew bethulah], that had known no man by lying with any male: and they brought them unto the camp to Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan.

Archaeological evidence is claimed to show that Jewish speakers of Greek used the word parthenos elastically, in that Jewish catacombs in Rome identify married men and women as "virgins".[citation needed] It has been suggested that in this case the word was used to call attention to the fact that the deceased was someone's first spouse.

As Christianity spread, Greek-speaking Jews stopped using the word παρθένος as a translation of עלמה, replacing it with νεᾶνις (neanis), meaning a "young (juvenile) woman".

Virgin birth of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Name

The origin of the Parthenon's name is unclear. According to Jeffrey M. Hurwit, the term "Parthenon" means "of the virgin" or "of the virgins", and seems to have originally referred only to a particular room of the Parthenon; it is debated which room this is, and how the room acquired its name. One theory holds that the "parthenon" was the room in which the peplos presented to Athena at the Panathenaic Festival was woven by the arrephoroi, a group of four young girls chosen to serve Athena each year.[20] Christopher Pelling asserts that Athena Parthenos may have constituted a discrete cult of Athena, intimately connected with, but not identical to that of Athena Polias.[21] According to this theory, the name of Parthenon means the "temple of the virgin goddess", and refers to the cult of Athena Parthenos that was associated with the temple.[22] The epithet parthénos (Greek: παρθένος), whose the origin is also unclear,[23] meant "virgin, unmarried woman", and was especially used for Artemis, the goddess of wild animals, the hunt, and vegetation, and for Athena, the goddess of war, handicraft, and practical reason.[24] It has also been suggested that the name of the temple alludes to the virgins (parthenoi), whose supreme sacrifice guaranteed the safety of the city.[25]

In any case, the first instance in which Parthenon definitely refers to the entire building is in the 4th century BC orator Demosthenes. In the 5th century building accounts, the structure is simply called ho neos ("the temple"). The architects Mnesikles and Kallikrates are said to have called the building Hekatompedos ("the hundred footer") in their lost treatise on Athenian architecture,[26] and in the 4th century and later the building was referred to as the Hekatompedos or the Hekatompedon as well as the Parthenon; the 1st century AD writer Plutarch refers to the building as the Hekatompedon Parthenon.[27]

Parthenon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[guyblokeman]

So if I get you right, your just saying that the word "Virgin", when used in the OT times, asically means Young woman?

[cloudgazer]

The first part of Zeitgeist I think will just cause a lot of people to turn away from the movie. Christians, muslims and everyone else should know about 9/11 and the NWO. But as soon as christians and muslims (because remember Jesus is a prophet to the muslims too, even though they don't worship him) turn on this movie to the first part, it will only anger them and make them either turn it off, or discredit the entire movie simply because the first part is against their religion. If the makers of Zeitgeist goal was to show ALL viewers the truth about 9/11 and the NWO, then they failed. It's not a very persuasive movie, considering the first part.

[cloudgazer]

And also, many many myths from ALL over the world have some great hero figure who was born of a virgin. There are sooo so many hero figures born of a virgin from different Native American myths. The Iriquois have PeaceMaker who was born of a virgin. That one reminds me of Jesus because he also teaches peace. It has been suggested that Jesus, Buddha and other figures are all the same spirit, just visiting mankind in different times and places.

[titan]

Perhaps the start of the Zeitgeist is to make those who believe the bible story is rot and they are actually worshipping the sun.


Sound familiar?

[thirdwave]

The Link doesn't work...

Still he's right, the first part of Zeitgeist is pretty poorly researched...

Here's a small critique I made of the film and I can never usually be bothered doing this...


Why don't you contact then with this info.... what you sent us... they might offer you some some answers... only takes an email...

in some cases these people like to update the movies... to might welcome this stuff...

P

[razed1]

there NOTHING incorrect with the first part of zeitgeist

the ppl who deny it,, havent done the proper research or are still clinging on to their 5 sense prison religion paradigm


the fact that ppl can overlook all the similarities
between all the 'saviors' of the human race, and their similar lifestories, but rather focus in on a couple of disimilarities is beyond normal logical thought processes


and the reason why astrotheology seemed 'oversimplified' in the movie, is cause it IS simple

its not a complex phd paper on astrophysics, that ppl expect out of these things

god is simple, and thus astro theology is gonna be simple

only simple to your linear thinking, but opens up an infinite universe to the non linear thinker




so try to understand things, instead of 'ninnying' over trivial points


zeitgeist is 100% true

[trumansho]

Well that's not true, I went all the way back to observe from Egypt at the times of his supposed birth. The Southern Crux was never in the East nor will it ever be in the East. Nor did the three kings align with Sirius to point at the rising of the sun on the 25th. Never Ever.

But that's not the point, everything in that first part was bad info. I'm not saying it was completely wrong, I do know that there is a lot of truth to the astrotheological diety theory. Yet the guy who made this decided to Jazz up the info in practically every part from Horus to Krishna, nothing was left undebased. Even if there was a tiny bit of truth in it, he shouldn't be trying to Jazz it up because it will discredit his whole thing. The second and third parts were extremely good though. The first part was quite amusing to think of all those Christians he managed to seriously piss off but in the end of the day, the Christians are the most anti-nwo group out there so we really don't want to create an internal argument within us.white folks say Egypt black folks call it by it's real name KEMET.

[trumansho]

The first part of Zeitgeist I think will just cause a lot of people to turn away from the movie. Christians, muslims and everyone else should know about 9/11 and the NWO. But as soon as christians and muslims (because remember Jesus is a prophet to the muslims too, even though they don't worship him) turn on this movie to the first part, it will only anger them and make them either turn it off, or discredit the entire movie simply because the first part is against their religion. If the makers of Zeitgeist goal was to show ALL viewers the truth about 9/11 and the NWO, then they failed. It's not a very persuasive movie, considering the first part.

If they are that dam close-mined then they deserve not to watch it. Heru= jesus and I don't need to watch zeitgesit to figure that out.

[trumansho]

there NOTHING incorrect with the first part of zeitgeist

the ppl who deny it,, havent done the proper research or are still clinging on to their 5 sense prison religion paradigm


the fact that ppl can overlook all the similarities
between all the 'saviors' of the human race, and their similar lifestories, but rather focus in on a couple of disimilarities is beyond normal logical thought processes


and the reason why astrotheology seemed 'oversimplified' in the movie, is cause it IS simple

its not a complex phd paper on astrophysics, that ppl expect out of these things

god is simple, and thus astro theology is gonna be simple

only simple to your linear thinking, but opens up an infinite universe to the non linear thinker




so try to understand things, instead of 'ninnying' over trivial points


zeitgeist is 100% true
exactly! People would do anything to discredit one of the best documentary out so they can clinge on to their religions as a crutch.

[drakul]

there NOTHING incorrect with the first part of zeitgeist

the ppl who deny it,, havent done the proper research or are still clinging on to their 5 sense prison religion paradigm

the fact that ppl can overlook all the similarities
between all the 'saviors' of the human race, and their similar lifestories, but rather focus in on a couple of disimilarities is beyond normal logical thought processes

and the reason why astrotheology seemed 'oversimplified' in the movie, is cause it IS simple

its not a complex phd paper on astrophysics, that ppl expect out of these things

god is simple, and thus astro theology is gonna be simple

only simple to your linear thinking, but opens up an infinite universe to the non linear thinker

so try to understand things, instead of 'ninnying' over trivial points

zeitgeist is 100% true


OK give us some links to PRIMARY SOURCES (know what a primary source is???) and prove it. Zeitgeist certainly doesnt.

*Horus was CRUCIFIED.
*Krishna was born on Dec 25 of a VIRGIN.
*Attis was CRUCIFIED.

Go ahead. I'm waiting

[razed1]

lol

the wieght is not on us to prove were right, the weight is on u to prove were wrong

[weston white]

It would be nice if somebody that has access to all major religions or who knows somebody else that is familiar was a major religion to compile a document together that cites each related part within each major religion. That way we don't have to argue over what at this point is speculation.

[drakul]

lol

the wieght is not on us to prove were right, the weight is on u to prove were wrong

You wish. I've already provided the links on this and other threads proving Zeitgeist claims are wrong. Maybe you should read some of the critical posts. You see, the Hindus have a 5,000 year history regarding Krishna and they say he was born July 21 (not Dec. 25). Krishna was the 8th child of his mother Princess Devaki and his father Prince Vasudeva. So there is no way his mother was a virgin the victim of immaculate conception. And that's why YOU need to find some first hand primary PROOF to refute 5,000 years of Indian history and religion.

And that's just for starters. There is a huge written record with the Egyptians and the Greeks as well that refute Zeitgeist. :D

[razed1]

no way man



just listen to something a wiseman once said

'as long as you view the stars as being the ones above your head, you WILL lack the eye of knowledge'

no doubt about that


to put 'godliness' or divinity in another person/humanoid/alien
is right there corrupted from teh truth

you think the real god of the universe cares less for a single blade of grass than an entire galaxy of civilizations???



theres some fundamental things that ppl have to learn, and your not gonna find it linked on some website, or carved in a 'silver platter' type fashion for you on some cathedral walls

use your own knowledge and discernment when researching great subjects like this


this isnt some popularity contest

"oh the hindoos have their krishna, and we khristian have our khrist"

no man, theres much deeper study to this

[drakul]

So realizing he's caught and being too lazy to do any real research because then he might actually LEARN something he falls back on the usual circular argument - `blaha blaha a wise man once said....'

KRISHNA in Hindu means Blue or Black-skinned One and Krishna is always portrayed as blue or black.

CHRISTOS is Greek for The Annointed.

[energy]

a much more in depth video Pharmacratic Inquisition “Astrotheology & Shamanism”
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8700041490363244845&hl=en

[razed1]

youre the one who is in the dark

[e7304]

Interesting observations.There is no doubt that the council of Nicea decided on the 25th December as Christ's birthday. It does play into pagan beliefs just like so many churches being positioned on sacred groves all over Europe.

The problem is , for me, is who wrote the bible and was it contemporary of the "so called" life of Christ or was it written 2 or 3 centuries later, to come closer to the Nicean Creed. Can you imagine someone today writing a "first" person account of someone who lived in the year 1708? How accurate would that be. Or was it pure propaganda? . Other accounts of Jesus has him as a hardlined Essene TERRORIST...others have him with a brother, which James Cameron tried to exploit last year with the discovery of Jesus's "brother" James tomb.

I dont know because I am not a Christian and have not read the bible.

Did he exist at all??? or was he the creation of the Church as we know it.Bits and pieces of minor gods/prophets used to create a "sun of god".

The movie just reaffirms the fact that deities are and have been used by the ruling powers to control the masses from the beginning. THATS not to say at some point some sort of "super" men were considered god like and caused pure obedience at a time long ago.

The problem is that archaeology and anthropology tend to worship the church of science...ie they tend to ignore anything that goes against the "creed" of the "high priests" of science. In this situation we are not going to get ANY truth about what happened 2000 years ago.

Anyway, thats just my opinion.

Peoples belief in a "god" is universal. It appears programmed in us. Atheists also believe in something but what I am not sure.But they do believe in something. If you can get the majority of people to accept your "god" then the ability to control the population is enhanced many fold.

This "enlightened" 21 st century may well be a time of religious beliefs that define war or peace. I , having read much, can see how and why this may happen. So can you people. To accept in blind faith that some document, that has been revised so many times over the centuries, not to "enlighten" us, but the opposite, can be considered as "truth" is stupid. But it highlights the fact that the PTB never intended us to be more intelligent or advanced in the 20-21st century. We are being dumbed down and the fact we argue about religion on this forum shows it.

What do you think?

[kasalt]

Check out this related thread:

Krishna, Jesus, and the conspiracy of religion...
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16462

[chris]

white folks say Egypt black folks call it by it's real name KEMET.

And old ladies smoking weed and channelling Saint Germaine call it Khem. What's your point?

exactly! People would do anything to discredit one of the best documentary out so they can clinge on to their religions as a crutch.

We don't have to do very much to discredit it, it does that for us. I don't think there are many of us here that are bashing part1 are Christians, I certainly am not. I agree it's a very good documentary but the first part was hideous as far as research goes.

Someone said that they give out copies of part 2&3, that's an excellent idea, I might start doing that.

[dave52]

a much more in depth video Pharmacratic Inquisition “Astrotheology & Shamanism”
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8700041490363244845&hl=en

Saw this ages ago and even bought their book. It is very interesting stuff.

As for this whole thread, I am in no doubt that religion is based on the sun, stars, moon and fear of the dark. Zietgiest may not have got it all spot on, but that doesn't distract from the main message of the movie. Jesus never existed, Religion is based on lies and is all about control, a few rich and powerful individuals run the world and are attempting to bring about a one-world govenment and it doesn't matter how many people die on the way.

[chris]

Why don't you contact then with this info.... what you sent us... they might offer you some some answers... only takes an email...

in some cases these people like to update the movies... to might welcome this stuff...

P

I'm sure they would know this stuff by now. Still it's a good idea, I hate to procrastinate but I can't be bothered right now.

[john white]

If a true christian really understood, they should embrace part one: astro theology is NOT in conflict with their faith if they work to understand hard enough, in fact it validates Jesus's ministry

[chris]

I dunno about embracing. The tone of part1 was like "Hey, look at what these stupid Christians don't even know." Then he proceeds to astonish the average viewer with a jazzed up history which only will take the smallest amount of research to discredit. He is in fact going to make the Christians even more paranoid that Satan is after them and they are the only ones with the real truth and to hell with the occult.

[thirdwave]

I'm sure they would know this stuff by now. Still it's a good idea, I hate to procrastinate but I can't be bothered right now.

the key is to not come across like you are attacking and trying to discredit them.. but more get to the bottom of it and help them.....

They will either give an explanation to the wrong info... or provide some more info that may bring it to light...

[chris]

the key is to not come across like you are attacking and trying to discredit them.. but more get to the bottom of it and help them.....

Don't worry, I know. I'm not 2tuff:)

[drakul]

I think that was a good idea. Cut out the quasi ancient histroy, true or not, and straight to the meat.

Part One, the religion section, IS the `MEAT'. THAT'S the part the anonymous producers want you to get. The rest is thrown in because they know their target audience are conspiracy buffs who have disbelieved the official story of 911, questioned the hidden hands, manipulators of wars, etc for years now.

Why these blatant attacks on Christianity? Because it plays right into the NWO hands - `they' have been trying to destroy Christianity for 2,000 years - DIVIDE ET EMPERA.

Look at Bolsheviks who took over Russia - `Religion is the opiate of the people' was their battlecry. And what did the Bolsheviks do as soon as they got into power? Destroy thousands of churches and execute thousands of priests. And then with no moral sacred ground - how many millions did they starve, torture and shoot in the name of STATE SECURITY?

An `astro-theologist' named Jordan Maxwell narrates a significant section of Part One of Zeitgeist. Maxwell is a member of an almost invisible group called TRUTHSEEKERS which was formed in 1875. They call themselves `free thinkers' which in those days was an alias for atheists. Since the 1870's Truthseekers has been pushing an agenda typified by a book which they have used as their main source for 125 years - `The World's 16 Crucified Saviors'. All the world's saviors were crucified, etc. And they are still using it as you can see from Zeitgeist. Even though it's composed of the most blatant, easily provable lies and halftruths, do you think they care??? They know that, but they are still using this book as the foundation for their agenda.

Why? Because the bigger the lie or the more often it is repeated the more people will believe it? Because their target market is naive, ignorant people who want to be in the know, to be superior - `We're not brainwashed, we're not sheeple, oh nooooo. You don't know Jesus Christ never existed? You ignorant dummies'!

Zeitgeist's target market are people who won't research using primary sources, even though the info is just a few flicks of the google finger away.
People who will be satisfied with a video or books like `16 Crucified Saviors', written in 1871 by Kersey Graves, a `self-educated' atheist who lived all his life in the Midwest.

As D. Icke said - `Some people crawl out of one mindbox only to shut themselves up in another'.

[thirdwave]

Don't worry, I know. I'm not 2tuff:)

:)

[razed1]

If a true christian really understood, they should embrace part one: astro theology is NOT in conflict with their faith if they work to understand hard enough, in fact it validates Jesus's ministry

yea thats correct

if these morons actually paid attention to this subject of astro-theology, instead of looking to be SAVED by another man, ( how gay is that)

theyd see and really appreciate the richness of true christian teachings


but no, theyre like children who are not ready to grow up spiritually

[razed1]

Part One, the religion section, IS the `MEAT'. THAT'S the part the anonymous producers want you to get. The rest is thrown in because they know their target audience are conspiracy buffs who have disbelieved the official story of 911, questioned the hidden hands, manipulators of wars, etc for years now.

Why these blatant attacks on Christianity? Because it plays right into the NWO hands - `they' have been trying to destroy Christianity for 2,000 years - DIVIDE ET EMPERA.

Look at Bolsheviks who took over Russia - `Religion is the opiate of the people' was their battlecry. And what did the Bolsheviks do as soon as they got into power? Destroy thousands of churches and execute thousands of priests. And then with no moral sacred ground - how many millions did they starve, torture and shoot in the name of STATE SECURITY?

An `astro-theologist' named Jordan Maxwell narrates a significant section of Part One of Zeitgeist. Maxwell is a member of an almost invisible group called TRUTHSEEKERS which was formed in 1875. They call themselves `free thinkers' which in those days was an alias for atheists. Since the 1870's Truthseekers has been pushing an agenda typified by a book which they have used as their main source for 125 years - `The World's 16 Crucified Saviors'. All the world's saviors were crucified, etc. And they are still using it as you can see from Zeitgeist. Even though it's composed of the most blatant, easily provable lies and halftruths, do you think they care??? They know that, but they are still using this book as the foundation for their agenda.

Why? Because the bigger the lie or the more often it is repeated the more people will believe it? Because their target market is naive, ignorant people who want to be in the know, to be superior - `We're not brainwashed, we're not sheeple, oh nooooo. You don't know Jesus Christ never existed? You ignorant dummies'!

Zeitgeist's target market are people who won't research using primary sources, even though the info is just a few flicks of the google finger away.
People who will be satisfied with a video or books like `16 Crucified Saviors', written in 1871 by Kersey Graves, a `self-educated' atheist who lived all his life in the Midwest.

As D. Icke said - `Some people crawl out of one mindbox only to shut themselves up in another'.

shut up stop talkin out yer ass

[mightiswrong]

http://www.jesus-on-taxes.com/

[horus21]

Iv seen Zeitgeist... theres nothing at all wrong with it.
Once again its a movie to be looked upon with 'educated' eyes, not the ones you stole from the OP.

The whole movie supports what you all claim to believe in so I cant understand how you can come here bashing it all of the sudden.

Why doesn't somebody EXPLAIN in POINT FORM what they DISAGREE with and we can take it from there solely for the skeptics piece of mind....

Or is that too much to ask from a skeptic?

[razed1]

Iv seen Zeitgeist... theres nothing at all wrong with it.
Once again its a movie to be looked upon with 'educated' eyes, not the ones you stole from the OP.

The whole movie supports what you all claim to believe in so I cant understand how you can come here bashing it all of the sudden.

Why doesn't somebody EXPLAIN in POINT FORM what they DISAGREE with and we can take it from there solely for the skeptics piece of mind....

Or is that too much to ask from a skeptic?

i see you abandoned your yuppy ways, congrats :D

[kasalt]

Why doesn't somebody EXPLAIN in POINT FORM what they DISAGREE with and we can take it from there solely for the skeptics piece of mind....


To begin with, Krishna was NOT born on 25 December. According to scriptural sources, astrological indications, and traditional belief, Krishna was born in the month of July. From the Wikipedia entry on Krishna, we read:

"Birth - Traditional belief based on scriptural details and astrological calculations gives Krishna's birth date (Janmashtami) as 19th or 21st July 3228 BCE. Krishna was of the royal family of Mathura, and was the eighth son born to the princess Devaki, and her husband Vasudeva." - Krishna - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Furthermore, the religious festival celebrating the birthday of Krishna, known as Janmashtami, is celebrated "sometime in the months of August/September of the Gregorian calendar." ( Krishna Janmashtami - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )

...In other words, nowhere near December 25th.

Claim: Jesus' and Krishna's mothers had similar names: Miriam (Mary) and Maia
Reality: Krishna's mother may have been referred to as Maia, but only because this is the Hindi word for "mother." His mother's actual name was Devaki; his foster mother's name was Yashoda. - http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr1.htm

"Skeptics sometimes cite Kersey Graves in Sixteen Crucified Saviors or Godfrey Higgins' Anacalypsis (which Graves drew from) in asserting that Krishna was a crucified deity. No such event occurred in the Gita or in any recognized Hindu scripture. Given the pronounced syncretic tendency of Hinduism, it is safe to assume that any odd tales of Krishna's being crucified arose only after the existence of Christian proselytism, in imitation of the Christian narrative. It is neither authentic to Hinduism nor is Hinduism the source of that portion of the Christian narrative. The same may be said for most of the purported nativity stories. In my opinion, both Higgins and Graves are highly unreliable sources..." - http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/krishna02.html

"One final note: I'd like to compliment Van Eck on his criticism of the assertions made by some authors about the similarities between Krishna and Jesus. For example, some have said Krishna was "crucified," but the Upanishads say he "disappeared" and is waiting for us in a spiritual abode that appears as boring as heaven. I'd like to add my criticism to those writers who perpetuate the myth that Krishna was born on December 25th. This is not Krishna's birthday according to scripture, nor is it when Hindus celebrate Krishna's "appearance." This is the birthday that Christians stole from the Persian sun god, Mythra, and adopted for Jesus! It seems that some authors, in their attempt to show a common origin for religious myths, tenaciously adopt misinformation to make their case. We must remember to be critical and always check our sources." - http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1996/1/1hindu96.html

See also: Kersey Graves and The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors - Infidels.org book review
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/graves.html

[john white]

yea thats correct

if these morons actually paid attention to this subject of astro-theology, instead of looking to be SAVED by another man, ( how gay is that)

theyd see and really appreciate the richness of true christian teachings


but no, theyre like children who are not ready to grow up spiritually

It reminds me of the flap over "last temptation of Christ"

Awesome film, the love for Jesus just flows out of it, and a brilliant premise, that Jesus was tempted with being able to come down off the cross and have the life of an ordinary man and had to beat that temptation to fulfill his role as God's messenger in the act of sacrifice. I can hardly think of something that more powerfully goes to the heart of christianity

what happened? Mass protests outside cinemas, even threats of violence etc

On the other hand, Mel Gibson simply shows the guy getting systimatically beaten into a bloody ruin and gets applauded

[adimon]

I think that was a good idea. Cut out the quasi ancient histroy, true or not, and straight to the meat.

I disagree. Whether or not the filmmakers took liberties with some of the facts, what cannot be denied is that all religions originally come from sun worship, and that most of the modern world religions have elements they have lifted from previous, now-extinct religions. Also, the filmmakers are right that there is no proof of Jesus' existence. As a historian of sorts I know that categorically.

I guess what I'm saying is I think it's important that people wake up to the con of religion.

[drakul]

I disagree. Whether or not the filmmakers took liberties with some of the facts, what cannot be denied is that all religions originally come from sun worship, and that most of the modern world religions have elements they have lifted from previous, now-extinct religions. Also, the filmmakers are right that there is no proof of Jesus' existence. As a historian of sorts I know that categorically.

I guess what I'm saying is I think it's important that people wake up to the con of religion.

Is BUDDHISM an `extinct' religion?

Is HINDUISM (Krishna) an `extinct' religion?

Some `historian of sorts'.

[drakul]

Iv seen Zeitgeist... theres nothing at all wrong with it.
Once again its a movie to be looked upon with 'educated' eyes, not the ones you stole from the OP.

The whole movie supports what you all claim to believe in so I cant understand how you can come here bashing it all of the sudden.

Why doesn't somebody EXPLAIN in POINT FORM what they DISAGREE with and we can take it from there solely for the skeptics piece of mind....

Or is that too much to ask from a skeptic?

OK `Horus21' where is the primary/original Egyptian source showing that -

* Horus was CRUCIFIED???

Other claims Zeitgeist makes about Horus -

*Horus had 12 disciples.
*Horus began teaching at age 12.
*Horus walked on water.

There are literally MILES of Egyptian inscriptions and painting of Horus. You should be able to find something.

While you're at it - another Zeitgeist claim -

*Greek god ATTIS was CRUCIFIED.

Greeks left a profound literary tradition, you should be able to find direct evidence of this claim.

[danielg]

It reminds me of the flap over "last temptation of Christ"

Awesome film, the love for Jesus just flows out of it, and a brilliant premise, that Jesus was tempted with being able to come down off the cross and have the life of an ordinary man and had to beat that temptation to fulfill his role as God's messenger in the act of sacrifice. I can hardly think of something that more powerfully goes to the heart of christianity

what happened? Mass protests outside cinemas, even threats of violence etc

On the other hand, Mel Gibson simply shows the guy getting systimatically beaten into a bloody ruin and gets applauded

I really should broaden my horizons past larouchepub, but he says a similar thing here, as the loonatic "salvation" fringe is a British empire agenda to get people dissasociating from Christs life and message, and into the morbid obsession with his death and their quest for eternal afterlife salvation. Why bother building heaven on earth, when we can suffer for 70 years then live in eternal heaven, goes their crazy reasoning :rolleyes:
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2005/3205fundamentalism.html

[adimon]

Is BUDDHISM an `extinct' religion?

Is HINDUISM (Krishna) an `extinct' religion?

Some `historian of sorts'.

Can you even read? I didn't say either of those was extinct. Neither did I say that Zeitgeist only focuses on extinct religions. Both however have elements of older religions. Learn to read, mate. :)

[eternal_spirit]

Is it based on faith that astronomy, astrology and calenders can be traced back to when Jesus Krishna etc where born. I'm no mathematician it's beyond me. I think they where born at different times and in different countries.

[drakul]

Can you even read? I didn't say either of those was extinct. Neither did I say that Zeitgeist only focuses on extinct religions. Both however have elements of older religions. Learn to read, mate. :)

Hinduism may be the world's oldest religion. One billion plus Hindus think so. And you're going to contradict 4,000+ years of WRITTEN history and tell the Hindus the Bagavad Gita and the Vedas are all wrong? That Krishna was actually born on Dec 25 of a Virgin and was crucified?

Why because you saw it in some quickie, anonymously produced little internet hit piece which offers not one shred of proof?

Meanwhile Adimon makes no effort to justify his claim of Zeitgeist's accuracy.

[adimon]

Hinduism may be the world's oldest religion. One billion plus Hindus think so. And you're going to contradict 4,000+ years of WRITTEN history and tell the Hindus the Bagavad Gita and the Vedas are all wrong? That Krishna was actually born on Dec 25 of a Virgin and was crucified?

No. I never said that. But Hinduism is not the world's oldest religion.

Meanwhile Adimon makes no effort to justify his claim of Zeitgeist's accuracy.

I didn't say it's 100% accurate. I said that I like the fact that it exposes the fact that all religion comes from sun worship. As an atheist I couldn't care less about which details are true, and which have been juggled for convenience.

There are no gods, and historiographical analysis of theology can only tell yu when the lie started and where it came from. How that lie has been presented since is unimportant IMO.

Get off your high horse drakul...or is it a cow?

Mooooooo. :D

[chris]

Moooooooooooo lol.

I'm not taking sides, I just wanted to moo.

[adimon]

Why take 'sides' on an issue that isn't black or white, and in a debate that appears to be dominated by theocrats?

Oink.

[drakul]

No. I never said that. But Hinduism is not the world's oldest religion.



I didn't say it's 100% accurate. I said that I like the fact that it exposes the fact that all religion comes from sun worship. As an atheist I couldn't care less about which details are true, and which have been juggled for convenience.

There are no gods, and historiographical analysis of theology can only tell yu when the lie started and where it came from. How that lie has been presented since is unimportant IMO.

Get off your high horse drakul...or is it a cow?



So you don't like the `LIE' concerning the existence of God and Jesus Christ, but you have no problem with LIES to prove Zeitgeist's atheist viewpoint?

Is that REALLY the best you can do?

I'm asking for evidence. Where the BEEF? Prove Zeitgeist's claims concerning Krishna, Horus, Attis, etc. You claim to be a `historian of sorts', right? Show your stuff. If you have any that is.

[greenleaf]

Moooooooooooo lol.

I'm not taking sides, I just wanted to moo.



Oink.


My Turn....Baaaaar!

Is this a new animal game?...out of one box, into another.
:D

[chris]

Why take 'sides' on an issue that isn't black or white, and in a debate that appears to be dominated by theocrats?

Oink.

Theocrats? So your saying that anyone that thinks ZeitGeist did a crummy research job want a theocratic society?

Anyway, untll then; as I said, I wasn't taking sides. I just wanted to do some animal noises,

Quack Quack.

[adimon]

So you don't like the `LIE' concerning the existence of God and Jesus Christ, but you have no problem with LIES to prove Zeitgeist's atheist viewpoint?

I'll answer your question in a moment. But first answer me this - what do YOU believe? Are you religious?


My Turn....Baaaaar!

Is this a new animal game?...out of one box, into another.
:D

Woof.

[greenleaf]

Anyway, untll then; as I said, I wasn't taking sides. I just wanted to do some animal noises,

Quack Quack.

Neyyyy!
As I am a 'Duckworth' I take that very personally.. :D .. but as you are Pai Mei (spelling)... I don't want to lose an eye...so i'll let it pass...;)

[drakul]

I'll answer your question in a moment. But first answer me this - what do YOU believe? Are you religious?

Woof.

I am a SPIRITUAL SEEKER not `religious' - I don't even attend church. I call myself a CHRISTIAN (first) - SUFI/BUDDHIST.

However this discussion is not personal. It's not about you are me - our personal views. It's about the need for historical ACCURACY. Right?

[adimon]

Theocrats? So your saying that anyone that thinks ZeitGeist did a crummy research job want a theocratic society?

No. I am saying that religion is bullshit and has dominated society for a LONG time, and that more people realising this is a good thing, and therefore if a person has their eyes opened to this by Zeitgeist, then I am happy, regardless of any errors in the detail.

Anyway, untll then; as I said, I wasn't taking sides. I just wanted to do some animal noises,

Quack Quack.

Roar.

[drakul]

No. I am saying that religion is bullshit and has dominated society for a LONG time, and that more people realising this is a good thing, and therefore if a person has their eyes opened to this by Zeitgeist, then I am happy, regardless of any errors in the detail.

Roar.

Read - Lying is fine by me as long as it supports MY Viewpoint.

Didn't you just make this statement -

`I will use this opportunity to stress that generalisation, in any form, is stupidity, and nothing else'.

What Zeitgeist generalizes that Christ never existed and goes one step further - Zeitgeist bases this generalization on a foundation of easily provable LIES. You're a historian `of sorts' alright.

[adimon]

I am a SPIRITUAL SEEKER not `religious' - I don't even attend church. I call myself a CHRISTIAN (first) - SUFI/BUDDHIST.

However this discussion is not personal. It's not about you are me - our personal views. It's about the need for historical ACCURACY. Right?

OK, I'm gonna turn this on it's head. Tell me why you believe that JC existed please. What evidence is there outside of the Bible?

Read - Lying is fine by me as long as it supports MY Viewpoint.

Read - I will twist other people's posts rather than letting them stand on their own. ;)

What Zeitgeist generalizes that Christ never existed and goes one step further - Zeitgeist bases this generalization on a foundation of easily provable LIES. You're a historian `of sorts' alright.

So tell me what evidence is there for the existence of JC?

Perhaps you could answer the question that titurel was unable to, on the '101 Contradictions in the Bible' thread?

Why, in book of Mark, does Jesus have the right to trash the traders tables in the temple?

[adramelech]

I am a SPIRITUAL SEEKER not `religious' - I don't even attend church. I call myself a CHRISTIAN (first) - SUFI/BUDDHIST.

However this discussion is not personal. It's not about you are me - our personal views. It's about the need for historical ACCURACY. Right?

Your personal views have everything do with the sort of stuff you've been posting in this thread. Your mind is admittedly a part of a belief system. That belief system, no matter how "personal" you may think it is to you, is filtering your information, determining what you deem valid or invalid, right or wrong.

Before I engage in any kind of religious debate, the first thing I ask is "Are you (of this religion)?" If the answer is "yes", I walk away, as a true debate is then impossible. The Christian cult meme has been around for nearly two thousand years, thriving, pulsating through the minds of now over a billion people. I can find a "Christian" scholar, historian or scientist to support virtually any Christian viewpoint. Christians were forging documents and editing texts in favor of their belief system over a thousand years ago, and they haven't stopped. Not ever.

Every other major world religion does exactly the same.

Your faith in a physical, flesh and blood "Jesus Christ" figure is tainting your thought process, and you will go on the attack whenever you see something criticizing your faith-based position, scouring for contrary (religious) sources to point and loudly say "SEE I TOLD YOU!"

[adimon]

Your personal views have everything do with the sort of stuff you've been posting in this thread. Your mind is admittedly a part of a belief system. That belief system, no matter how "personal" you may think it is to you, is filtering your information, determining what you deem valid or invalid, right or wrong.

Before I engage in any kind of religious debate, the first thing I ask is "Are you (of this religion)?" If the answer is "yes", I walk away, as a true debate is then impossible. The Christian cult meme has been around for nearly two thousand years, thriving, pulsating through the minds of now over a billion people. I can find a "Christian" scholar, historian or scientist to support virtually any Christian viewpoint. Christians were forging documents and editing texts in favor of their belief system over a thousand years ago, and they haven't stopped. Not ever.

Every other major world religion does exactly the same.

Your faith in a physical, flesh and blood "Jesus Christ" figure is tainting your thought process, and you will go on the attack whenever you see something criticizing your faith-based position, scouring for contrary (religious) sources to point and loudly say "SEE I TOLD YOU!"

A superb summary IMO. Thanks, I couldn't have said it better myself. :)

[drakul]

Your personal views have everything do with the sort of stuff you've been posting in this thread. Your mind is admittedly a part of a belief system. That belief system, no matter how "personal" you may think it is to you, is filtering your information, determining what you deem valid or invalid, right or wrong.

Before I engage in any kind of religious debate, the first thing I ask is "Are you (of this religion)?" If the answer is "yes", I walk away, as a true debate is then impossible. The Christian cult meme has been around for nearly two thousand years, thriving, pulsating through the minds of now over a billion people. I can find a "Christian" scholar, historian or scientist to support virtually any Christian viewpoint. Christians were forging documents and editing texts in favor of their belief system over a thousand years ago, and they haven't stopped. Not ever.

Every other major world religion does exactly the same.

Your faith in a physical, flesh and blood "Jesus Christ" figure is tainting your thought process, and you will go on the attack whenever you see something criticizing your faith-based position, scouring for contrary (religious) sources to point and loudly say "SEE I TOLD YOU!"


And not one word about the need for historical accuracy in Zeitgeist. No effort to provide any evidence for Zeitgeist claims. Why?

Instead he/she falls back on - `No I can't talk to you....you fell into my little trap...you said you are a (hiss) Chrissssstian, ewwwww I don't discuss the need for historicial accuracy with Christianssssss....shuts mindbox - I only talk about historical evidence and proof with other atheisssstsss who will agree with me...see I can't hearrrr you....'


And that's the best you can do? That's all you've got?

(smiles)

[adimon]

So what about answering my questions on the historical evidence for JC?

sniggers

[drakul]

A superb summary IMO. Thanks, I couldn't have said it better myself. :)


Says the loudly proclaimed `historian of sorts' - `PROOF? We don't need no gawdammed PROOF'.

[celtic isis]

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeuynmS_F9k

and says it's been disproven ,man this guy's talking out of his arse
:mad:

it has not been disproven :rolleyes:

you're right defo talking out of his arse.

look folks, i keep saying it but here in france some stuff is more easily known with esotericism being more open in society, this stuff the sun worship stuff, it all coming out of babylon IS THE WAY IT IS. It can't be discredited.

All alex jones knows is causing fear, panic and chaos. :rolleyes:

[celtic isis]

And not one word about the need for historical accuracy in Zeitgeist. No effort to provide any evidence for Zeitgeist claims. Why?

Instead he/she falls back on - `No I can't talk to you....you fell into my little trap...you said you are a (hiss) Chrissssstian, ewwwww I don't discuss the need for historicial accuracy with Christianssssss....shuts mindbox - I only talk about historical evidence and proof with other atheisssstsss who will agree with me...see I can't hearrrr you....'


And that's the best you can do? That's all you've got?

(smiles)

you need historical evidence take a look at my serpent and the sun thread...it's all out of babylon people!!!!

[drakul]

Says the loudly proclaimed `historian of sorts' - `PROOF? We don't need no gawdammed PROOF'.


Oh forgot to add stinken - `We dont need no gawdamm STINKIN proof!'

(Read - WE can LIE all we want! Hell we aint got no sacred ground - we're ATHEISTS doncha know?)

[celtic isis]

I think I have to watch Zeitgeist again. Alot of things in it made me think it seemed a bit strange, but since I usually do not take anything as fact I did not think much about it. It is known Jesus was not born in December, or at least it is a theory which have its foundation in ancient texts, and maybe even the bible as well.

I like to watch/research everything, and when I know enough to be somewhat certain if something is true or not, then say so.

Zeitgeist probably cannot be totally discarded. I do believe it is somewhat on the right track anyway.

fooks sake they're trying to make US, US doubt everything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

ah christians, you just can't accept that you've been duped!!!! i was a catholic, i realised at the age of 12 that it was BS, that we weren't being told everything. And my mum was a nun so i know about this stuff.

[chris]

I don't think the debate is whether or not Jesus was based on Sun worship but more on the evidence the producer is using to back up his claim.

[drakul]

OK, I'm gonna turn this on it's head. Tell me why you believe that JC existed please. What evidence is there outside of the Bible?

Read - I will twist other people's posts rather than letting them stand on their own. ;)

So tell me what evidence is there for the existence of JC?

Perhaps you could answer the question that titurel was unable to, on the '101 Contradictions in the Bible' thread?

Why, in book of Mark, does Jesus have the right to trash the traders tables in the temple?

He/she pretends to address the subject of this thread by asking an off topic question.

Thread topic - the first, religion section of ZEITGEIST is `Ratpoison' - Why because it makes ludicrous claims concerning the `savior gods': Horus, Krishna, Attis and others but provides no proof for these claims. Nor do you make any effort to provide any first hand evidence. Why? If these Zeitgeist claims are TRUE? That Krishna was born of a virgin on the 25th of December etc, etc.

I'm still waiting oh `Historian of Sorts'.

[adramelech]

And not one word about the need for historical accuracy in Zeitgeist. No effort to provide any evidence for Zeitgeist claims. Why?

Instead he/she falls back on - `No I can't talk to you....you fell into my little trap...you said you are a (hiss) Chrissssstian, ewwwww I don't discuss the need for historicial accuracy with Christianssssss....shuts mindbox - I only talk about historical evidence and proof with other atheisssstsss who will agree with me...see I can't hearrrr you....'


And that's the best you can do? That's all you've got?

(smiles)

In case you didn't notice, I'm not the fellow you've been carrying on your faux-debate with. As someone who studies theology and astrotheology myself, I'd be the first to admit that Zeitgeist gets a lot of information wrong and sources outdated works. In fact, I'm not a fan of doc at all and I've never claimed to be. I didn't even mention Zeitgeist in my reply, but apparently you're on a mission. Good luck with that. Jesus saves.

[drakul]

Your personal views have everything do with the sort of stuff you've been posting in this thread. Your mind is admittedly a part of a belief system. That belief system, no matter how "personal" you may think it is to you, is filtering your information, determining what you deem valid or invalid, right or wrong.

Before I engage in any kind of religious debate, the first thing I ask is "Are you (of this religion)?" If the answer is "yes", I walk away, as a true debate is then impossible. The Christian cult meme has been around for nearly two thousand years, thriving, pulsating through the minds of now over a billion people. I can find a "Christian" scholar, historian or scientist to support virtually any Christian viewpoint. Christians were forging documents and editing texts in favor of their belief system over a thousand years ago, and they haven't stopped. Not ever.

Every other major world religion does exactly the same.

Your faith in a physical, flesh and blood "Jesus Christ" figure is tainting your thought process, and you will go on the attack whenever you see something criticizing your faith-based position, scouring for contrary (religious) sources to point and loudly say "SEE I TOLD YOU!"


Funny I thought your above statement was addressed directly to me. But now you say I shouldn't have responded to you because you're not part of the discussion???

[celtic isis]

ahh jeeez...sorry NIIIMMMRRROD lol

it's a waste of time, let them stay in their christian prisons lol

as long as you're a good christian then it doesn't matter drakul.

[drakul]

ahh jeeez...sorry NIIIMMMRRROD lol

it's a waste of time, let them stay in their christian prisons lol

as long as you're a good christian then it doesn't matter drakul.


What still no evidence that Krishna was born on Dec 25 of a virgin? Just some sort of fall back action with a vague ad hominem attack? That's the best you can do?

smiles

[chris]

Drakul they are obviously not going to provide any evidence so why bother waste your time?

[drakul]

Drakul they are obviously not going to provide any evidence so why bother waste your time?


You're right, but then why let them have the last word? That's what they want isn't it?

Let them expose their CORE - hippocritical, duplicitous, ignorant, naive, manipulative, all the things they claim to hate ...

[adramelech]

Funny I thought your above statement was addressed directly to me. But now you say I shouldn't have responded to you because you're not part of the discussion???

I said nothing of the sort and you're well aware of that. You're not a stupid person, despite the passive aggressive game you're playing in this thread. My reply was addressed to you, but it had nothing to do with Zeitgeist, I was making a statement regarding your belief system controlling your perception of acceptable and unacceptable "proof".

I don't even like Zeitgeist, "The Christ Conspiracy" or the literal crucified saviours argument, but you seem obsessed with it as you continually bring it up in reply to others who haven't mentioned it at all. Like I said, you're clearly on a holy crusade here, so more power to you. May all the heathens be crushed in your wake.

[tejas]

Your personal views have everything do with the sort of stuff you've been posting in this thread. Your mind is admittedly a part of a belief system. That belief system, no matter how "personal" you may think it is to you, is filtering your information, determining what you deem valid or invalid, right or wrong.

Before I engage in any kind of religious debate, the first thing I ask is "Are you (of this religion)?" If the answer is "yes", I walk away, as a true debate is then impossible. The Christian cult meme has been around for nearly two thousand years, thriving, pulsating through the minds of now over a billion people. I can find a "Christian" scholar, historian or scientist to support virtually any Christian viewpoint. Christians were forging documents and editing texts in favor of their belief system over a thousand years ago, and they haven't stopped. Not ever.

Every other major world religion does exactly the same.

Your faith in a physical, flesh and blood "Jesus Christ" figure is tainting your thought process, and you will go on the attack whenever you see something criticizing your faith-based position, scouring for contrary (religious) sources to point and loudly say "SEE I TOLD YOU!"

Very well put.

As a side note, I used to be a fundamentalist christian myself - if one really wishes to rock the boat in terms of there own religions memes then have a look at this website. Many references and sources come straight from the encycolpedia catholica itself!

http://paganizingfaithofyeshua.netfirms.com/

[drakul]

CHRIS - You asked about the shadowy org, of `free thinkers' called Truthseekers, behind `The World's 16 Crucified Saviors' pub 1871. I've been doing some research on that, have posted some of it on other threads here.

Kersey Graves, author of `16 Crucified Saviors' pub 1871.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kersey_Graves

As you said - Zeitgeist's claims are just a simple rehash of Kersey Graves book - `The World's 16 Crucified Saviors pub. 1871.

Truth Seekers org. 1875, have been active in promoting authors like Kersey Graves. Truthseekers seems to be the media function connected with Helena Blavatsky's Theosophical Society, also founded 1875.

Claims that the stories of ALL the `world's saviors' are the SAME may have been OK for Kersey Graves' basically untraveled, unsophisticaed audience of the 1870's but NOW? When authentication that Krishna was not born Dec 25 of a virgin, that Krishna was not crucified; that Buddha was not born Dec 25 of a virgin, that Buddha was not crucified are only a few google key strokes away?

We don't have to travel to India anymore to find these claims are pure falsifications right out of THIN AIR. We don't even have to go to the library.

Like I said, I'm willing to listen, I'm willing to question. IMO Jesus Christ didn't come out of a VOID. These ideas, these principles these core beliefs that Jesus preached have been around for a loooong time. But PULEEZE don't insult my intelligence in the process by making obviously false claims in order to push an agenda.

[marmadukehussy]

i think the 1st part of zeitgeist is very good even if people do question the birthday of some made up profit, if it shows religion to be what it is then im all for it as religion sucks!
religion has to prove that their so called fables are true but they can not.
its the first thing they tried to push in my head when you are at school, all that nativity and easter crap and even when i was 7 years old i realized what a load of crap it was. i mean come on..... how many religions are there for a start?
thats a lot of gods out there or is there one god to rule them all hehehehe
sod it i might as well make up my own religion its all tax free money!!!!!
god are you there please answer me and prove me wrong!...............

still no reply

[adimon]

I don't think the debate is whether or not Jesus was based on Sun worship but more on the evidence the producer is using to back up his claim.

Well the OP doesn't say that. The OP says it is poisonous. I'm arguing it isn't because it might wake some people from their theological delusions. (Not drakul)

He/she pretends to address the subject of this thread by asking an off topic question.

He, not she. My name is Chris. Full name Christopher. Christ-carrier 'ere.

Not off-topic. How can a film be poison if it gives insight into the true story behind other, genuinely-untrue stories? If Jesus never existed then saying he didn't isn't poison. But most Christians have hideous problems with logic. And brandish in return "It's only a parable." Yeah parables, those lovely little riddles Jesus told, in order to confuse people, so that they wouldn't get to heaven! LOL :D

Thread topic - the first, religion section of ZEITGEIST is `Ratpoison'

Saying one thing is another is madness. A film is not poison. You cannot die from watching a film. Humans are also not rats, BTW.

Why because it makes ludicrous claims concerning the `savior gods': Horus, Krishna, Attis and others but provides no proof for these claims.

It's a parable. It doesn't need proof.

Nor do you make any effort to provide any first hand evidence. Why? If these Zeitgeist claims are TRUE? That Krishna was born of a virgin on the 25th of December etc, etc.

I never said that. The film does indicate the origins of all religions though - sun worship. Why have you avoided this topic, and also not answered my questions.

I'm still waiting oh `Historian of Sorts'.

Ditto.

Good luck with that. Jesus saves.

Only if you're one of the chosen few. :D

What still no evidence that Krishna was born on Dec 25 of a virgin? Just some sort of fall back action with a vague ad hominem attack? That's the best you can do?

smiles

Stop asking me to provide evidence for things I haven't said, and maybe instead look at the answers I AM giving, and the questions I'm asking you back.

Drakul they are obviously not going to provide any evidence so why bother waste your time?

See above.

You're right, but then why let them have the last word? That's what they want isn't it?

Yes.

Let them expose their CORE

Won't that damage my internal organs?

hippocritical

There's nothing wrong with them. They're ugly, but they're still one of the Big 5.

duplicitous

And this claim that I am dishonest is based on...?

ignorant

Based on...?

naive

Is evian backwards.

manipulative

Only when I don't have a girlfriend.

all the things they claim to hate

I can't remember making any claims to hate anything...besides generalisation of course.

May all the heathens be crushed in your wake.

Is this before of after my core is exposed? I'd like to know my chances of surviving this terrible ordeal. :confused:

Claims that the stories of ALL the `world's saviors' are the SAME may have been OK for Kersey Graves' basically untraveled, unsophisticaed audience of the 1870's but NOW? When authentication that Krishna was not born Dec 25 of a virgin, that Krishna was not crucified; that Buddha was not born Dec 25 of a virgin, that Buddha was not crucified are only a few google key strokes away?

Who cares? The important thing is there is no proof that Jesus or Krishna ever existed. As for God, google Harlequin Icthyosis and explain why God permits such occurences.

Like I said, I'm willing to listen

What about reading what I actually write for a start, then.

I'm willing to question

So how about answering some of the ones I gave you?

IMO Jesus Christ didn't come out of a VOID. These ideas, these principles these core beliefs that Jesus preached have been around for a loooong time. But PULEEZE don't insult my intelligence in the process by making obviously false claims in order to push an agenda.

Agenda? I have no agenda.

agenda, n: an underlying often ideological plan or program

Hmmm.... :cool:

[adimon]

i think the 1st part of zeitgeist is very good even if people do question the birthday of some made up profit, if it shows religion to be what it is then im all for it as religion sucks!
religion has to prove that their so called fables are true but they can not.
its the first thing they tried to push in my head when you are at school, all that nativity and easter crap and even when i was 7 years old i realized what a load of crap it was. i mean come on..... how many religions are there for a start?
thats a lot of gods out there or is there one god to rule them all hehehehe
sod it i might as well make up my own religion its all tax free money!!!!!
god are you there please answer me and prove me wrong!...............

still no reply

*deep bassy voice*

"Marmaduke, this is the voice of God. You are very much mistaken in your recent post about me. I am real."

*slight pause*

"Gotta love that tax exemption though!"

Excellent post.

[drakul]

CHRIS - You asked about the shadowy org, of `free thinkers' called Truthseekers, behind `The World's 16 Crucified Saviors' pub 1871. I've been doing some research on that, have posted some of it on other threads here.

Kersey Graves, author of `16 Crucified Saviors' pub 1871.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kersey_Graves

As you said - Zeitgeist's claims are just a simple rehash of Kersey Graves book - `The World's 16 Crucified Saviors pub. 1871.

Truth Seekers org. 1875, have been active in promoting authors like Kersey Graves. Truthseekers seems to be the media function connected with Helena Blavatsky's Theosophical Society, also founded 1875.

Claims that the stories of ALL the `world's saviors' are the SAME may have been OK for Kersey Graves' basically untraveled, unsophisticaed audience of the 1870's but NOW? When authentication that Krishna was not born Dec 25 of a virgin, that Krishna was not crucified; that Buddha was not born Dec 25 of a virgin, that Buddha was not crucified are only a few google key strokes away?

We don't have to travel to India anymore to find these claims are pure falsifications right out of THIN AIR. We don't even have to go to the library.

Like I said, I'm willing to listen, I'm willing to question. IMO Jesus Christ didn't come out of a VOID. These ideas, these principles these core beliefs that Jesus preached have been around for a loooong time. But PULEEZE don't insult my intelligence in the process by making obviously false claims in order to push an agenda.

Blavatsky's theosophists - called themselves`TRUTHSEEKERS'. Jordan Maxwell, whose voice narrates part of Zeitgeist and who bills himself as the `Dean of Astro-Theology' is a former religion editor of Truthseeker magazine and has done (other?) videos for Truthseeker.

Blavatsky was actually an open LUCIFERIAN and founded the the `Lucifer Trust'. That name was changed to LUCIS TRUST by Annie Besant who took over from Blavatsky. The Lucis Trust has an address on Rockefeller Plaza and receives BILLIONS $$$$$ from the likes of Bill Gates, etc.
----------------------------
Article “Bill Gates: Satanist in Sheep’s Clothes?”

By Henry Makow Ph.D.When Warren Buffett gave $31 billion to Bill Gates’ Foundation last week, I assumed it would advance the New World Order. But when a reader showed me Gates’ connection with the pagan anti-Semitic Lucis (formerly Lucifer) Trust, I sat up and took notice.Established by Alice Bailey in 1922, the Lucifer Publishing Company changed its name the following year for obvious reasons. Based at 120 Wall Street, the “Lucis Trust” is a vital part of the satanic cult that controls the Western world. It started the New Age Movement to induct society into their Luciferian mindset. Apparently, Lucis is the official publisher of the United Nations and manages its “Meditation Room.” Bailey was the leader of the Theosophical Society started in 1875 by Helena Blavatsky. Theosophy is a branch of Freemasonry
-----------------------------

http://webglobe.wordpress.com/illuminati-masonic-symbols-and-number-of-beast/

[kblood]

If I remember correctly, Jesus was not even born on 25. december, that is another thing they changed when writing the bible, even though some parts of it seems to point out Jesus must have been born in the summer time, although I do not remember why that is. I think both Zeitgheist and David Icke is stretching it a bit when saying Jesus was a made up person. Yea, the bible known today might be based on text written 100 years or more after his death, but would they not still have to base it on someone that was already known to the public? Would they really just make up this person, and expect everyone to believe that he existed?

I do not believe the bible is anything but a way to control people with religion, but I do not believe all of Zeitgeist to be true either. As far as I know, winter solstice is why the biblical birth of Jesus was moved, to match another holy day of other popular religions, or beliefs, to make it easier to spread the bible. I think winter solstice is in fact a pagan event. I think Paganus might have some more info about that, since it should be a wiccan... special day. Not sure if it can be called a holiday.

[adramelech]

If I remember correctly, Jesus was not even born on 25. december, that is another thing they changed when writing the bible, even though some parts of it seems to point out Jesus must have been born in the summer time, although I do not remember why that is. I think both Zeitgheist and David Icke is stretching it a bit when saying Jesus was a made up person. Yea, the bible known today might be based on text written 100 years or more after his death, but would they not still have to base it on someone that was already known to the public? Would they really just make up this person, and expect everyone to believe that he existed?

The avatar of "Jesus Christ" is most certainly not "just made up". The character and his actions and techings contain symbolic and spiritual elements that have been around for ages. No one expected people to believe that a flesh and blood man named "Jesus Christ" literally walked the Earth, living out a sun myth, especially not the earliest Gnostic Christian sects. Even the early writings of Paul refer to a spiritual "Christ".

Early Christians ("The Way"), particularly those during the transion of Christianity as a distinct faith as opposed to a Jewish sect would sometimes identify Christ in physical form in a symbolic sense, as Jesus or Yeshua/Joshua was the archtypical Jewish hero figure. There are many Jesuses contemporary of the supposed "Christ", many of which are recorded by Josephus himself.

This all came hundreds of years later.

[marmadukehussy]

i would like to throw the cat among the pigeons as my research as led me to believe that jesus is a mushroom and the bible has its secret codes.
A DISTINGUISHED British scholar has written a sensational book that is certain to cause the greatest upheaval in orthodox Christian thinking since Charles Darwin said Man was descended from the ape

For he not only argues the non-existence of Jesus Christ and the Apostles, but claims that Christianity itself – as well as Judaism and other religions of the near and Middle East—are no more than hangovers from an ancient fertility cult.
The author of this remarkable book is 47-year-old John M. Allegro, lecturer in Old Testament and Inter-Testamental Studies at Manchester University, and a philologist—a student of words and language.

He is also one of the world’s greatest experts on the Dead Sea Scrolls.

“Thousands of years before Christianity, secret cults arose which worshipped the sacred mushroom—the Amanita Muscaria—which, for various reasons (including its shape and power as a drug) came to be regarded as a symbol of God on earth.

“When the secrets of the cult had to be written down, it was done in the form of codes hidden in folk tales.

“This is the basic origin of the stories in the New Testament. They are a literary device to spread the rites and rules of mushroom worship to the faithful.”
Not only-to use Mr. Allegro’s own words – “that the stories in the Gospels and Acts were a deliberate hoax,” but also that there is no God.

Mr. Allegro bases his claims on his researches into the oldest written language known to us—Sumerian “Cuneiform” text dating back to 3500 BC. From this ancient tongue he believes came the language of the Bible.

And so, he says, we no longer have to take the New Testament story at its face value. We can trace the proper names and words used in it back to their true and original meanings.

“It is this,” says Mr. Allegro, “That reveal the cult of the phallic mushroom.”

Mr. Allegro’s book, which is to be published throughout the world, is bound to lead to fierce arguments. He says: “I’ll doubtless be accused by some of blasphemy. But these conclusions are the result of purely scientific dispassionate research.

[greenleaf]

WoW...Jesus was Super Mario?... (I knew he had a brother!):D

[marmadukehussy]

jesus is a mushroom

[bigus_dickus]

jesus is a mushroom

and mushroom is a jesus