I am starting a sort of campaign to get this movie distributed and have as many people as possible get exposed to it. The documentary is in 3 parts. Part one deals with the pagan mythological origins of Bible myths, part 2 is about 9/11 and supports the theory that the towers were demolitioned and part 3 deals with the Federal reserve agressive take over in the 1920s by international bankers.
One flaw in the documentary is that it mixes 3 totally different subjects and tries to tie them together. So, I think it should be noted that one could easily accept one part of the film while rejecting the other two. The factualness of part one I have known about for years when I did some research about the origins of the Bible stories. All of that information is available and easy to find if you look for it. I imagine that part 2 will be the hardest part to swallow because it promotes the inside job theory. Part 3 is fascinbating and based on provable and verifiable facts of history.
I'll put up a link in a second.
Zeitgeist - anyone for a discussion?
by Shawn10538 46 Replies latest jw friends
-
Shawn10538
-
OnTheWayOut
I think there was alot to think about in Part 1, that much of it could be right on.
The other two parts, I just don't know. I don't see how the conspiracy could be
contained in part 2 or 3.It does give much to make you realize that you should doubt EVERYTHING.
-
-
-
jaguarbass
Yes on the Way out. Doubt everything. Question Authority.
-
rolling rock
I really liked the movie. It made me think about quite a few things.
-
What-A-Coincidence
Zeit
Freedom to Fascism
Endgame 1.5
Loose Change Final Cutare the Ray Franz type of material that 'opens our mind' to groups known as the Global Elitist\Bilderberg\CFR\Trilateral etc.
now where did I leave my tin foil hat???
-
Leolaia
Alright, I'll demur and say that the section on religion is horsepucky. I guess people would believe anything if it sounds good. Well, just because it sounds good doesn't mean it's correct. I would recommend anyone who thinks this is credible to do their own research. You could start with researching with sound scholarly resources the mythology of Horus in Egyptian religion. Try to see even if it faintly resembles what is described here. The bizarre astrotheology of the film is also far removed from any real scholarship. It's too bad that sound academic scholarship rarely gets as much attention as this.
-
Shawn10538
Just saying, or accusing the film of being "not scholarly" doesn't really address any of the issues does it? So, Leolaia is making an ad hominem argument, unless she is forthcoming with her "scholarship.
The book, a primary resource document, "Bible Myths and their Origins in Other Religions, by Doane, originally published in the late 1800's is a great place to start in presenting the scholarship of Part 1 of Zeitgeist. I know Bible apologists have sneered and guffawed at this information, but, that was to be expected wasn't it?
Also read "101 myths of the Bible" by (can't remember name) which supports the Doane documents and the Zeitgeist documentary.
The argument is a simple one though. I'll try to outline it here:
Fact one: Christ myths (with multiple similarities and common themes with the Jesus of Nazareth story) in fact were told up to thousands of years before the supposed Jesus of Nazareth was supposed to have walked the earth. See Doane for pre-Christian and PRE-SEMITIC! actual physical manuscripts and even stone tablets that contain nearly seemless, identical stories as the Jesus of Nazareth story. (I thought these documents were particularly damning of the Christ myth personally.)
Fact two: The similarities between the myriad of stories are AWFUL COINCIDENTAL and eerily familiar. The order of the details are also, AWFUL COINCIDENTAL and eerily familiar.
Fact three: The astrological connections are AWFUL COINCIDENTAL, consistent, verifiable and provable. At least it is about as reliable as any other history story (which I admit, it is impossible to prove conclusively either the existence of Jesus or the non-existence of Jesus. All history is ultimately a puzzle with lots of missing pieces!). For documents that verify the astrological origins of the Christ myth, see Doane, Muller and a few others that I can't remember. (If I feel like it later, I will post the documentary evidence a little more thoroughly.) Of course, no one here should take my word for it, but should wait for the evidence to come in from all sides before making up their minds, right?
Fact four: Nobody is making the claim that these stories didn't exist and pre-date not just Christian mythology, but some of them pre-date the Semitic peoples. In other words, some of the stories existed before there was such a thing as a Semite or Jew. The Semite people had not been amalgamated (formed?) (? possibly the wrong word - drawing a blank here) in the Arabian peninsula yet at the time these stories were told and written. See anthropologists like Lou Backs or really ANY anthropologist that isn't a Christian apologist to establish this fact. Also, there is a book called "Ishmael," by Daniel Quinn which while it is a fictional novel, it explains rather well exactly how we know the fact that these stories were indeed in existence before christianity. If it is true that nearly identical stories as the Jesus story existed BEFORE the Jesus story, one would have some "tall 'splainin' to do. How could it be that people thousands of years before Jesus JUST HAPPENED to tell his story? This is a question that will not go away, and unfortunately for Christian apologists, it is one that they have not sufficiently explained away. But, fear not, the apologists are working feverishly to explain away the Zeitgeist. And, they will convince ALL the independent/private apologists on the planet (because by definition, an apologist already has their minds made up on the conclusion of an investigation, even before the investigation has taken place.) True scholarship does not exist among apologists of any kind, from the little old lady in Georgia to the psedo-intellectual Bible scholar inm New York City. They will probably convince 90% of everybody, not on the merits of their arguments but because people aren't emotionally ready to consider that they may have been worshipping a myth all this time!
So, it comes down to some few possible conclusions:
1. Either, the science is wrong and all the tablets and manuscripts we think pre-dated Christianity actually came after Christianity (in which case a person making this claim would have an awful lot of explaining to do, like, how these tablets dug themselves into the ground and placed themselves in the geological layers alongside other objects that are thousands of years older than Christianity). In this case one could say that all these stories evolved out of the original Christ story, that of Jesus of Nazareth.
2. It is just an AMAZING COINCIDENCE that ancient peoples JUST HAPPENED to tell the EXACT story of Jesus of Nazareth thousands of years before it happened. This of course would make all these PAGAN nations TRUE PROPHETS of Jehovah! This is even before the word Jehovah, or Yahweh ever existed, since, as we stated above, many of these stories pre-dated the Semites, and their tribal gods.
3. Individual facts brought out in the Christ Myth Theory may be true, but the synthesis of the information is flawed and contrived. This is a hard one either to prove or disprove. We could debate this theory forever and never reach any conclusion. But, the only way to prove it (and it can't be proved OR disproved) or come close to proving it is to debate the merits of the logic and argument ad nauseum. But, to categorically dismiss the Christ myth theory is to make a huge mistake in your scholarship. It would make your arguments be based on a simple conjecture, and that is not a firm foundation for an argument. Saying, "your scholarship is bad" does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. One must methodically and scrupulously argue his point either for or against. After all of this, you still will not be able to prove the thing one way or another though you may sway some. It is impossible to prove or disprove. End of story. (Oh, I guess God could come down and explain it to us in plain English, that would be strong evidence. But still, it wouldn't be proof because there is such a thing as shared delusion.)
Gotta go for now! I hope this sparks some spirited argument! -
darth frosty
I thought it was a great film documentary or however you want to label it.
I Take information like this in and process it through my own logic and reasonings.
I believe that too often we get caught up in having to believe or accept the whole of what is presented to us. I now take an ala' carte approach to the various info that I receive.