ZEITGEIST

[Rezo]

Ive avoided this topic on here for a while simply because it seems to go against the grain of TP related things, well sort of anyway. Ive tried to put this all together in my head after seeing it several times. I want to preface my research just by saying I don't necessarily believe whats on the sites below in full [each have their own beliefs] and that, of course while the bible is not what we think it is, I do think there are still some clues left, to figure this out.

I understand the need for proof, I like proof myself, I will admit. Yet, deception seems a regular throughout most of our officially recorded and publically aware-of time so wouldn't it be somewhat reasonable to be a 'healthy' skeptic? Sure! But where is that line drawn, I only have my own ideas of that, which may be different to others. Obviously strong feelings can come up since being lied to on a large scale isn't particularly in line with free will.

But I in fact feel, that the filmmakers, while having done an excellent job in music and presentation, in part I of the movie, Im just guessing, they may have not separated the writings attributed to the character, from the characters themselves.

I am supposing, for the moment, that zeitgeist is overlooking the non-canonically recognized church sources of Jesus, more specifically it seems to focus on material examples that are used to prove he was a myth. I'm not against questioning at all, I only question the logic of this particular line of thinking.

To elaborate, scholars point out the significance of non-canonical writings such as dead sea scrolls, that in fact, may point to his authenticity, for those interested in proof, just focusing there, notably Michael Cecil, who've I mentioned earlier on the site, who discusses this in terms of the idea of 'vicarious atonement' and his likely authorship of the thanksgiving hymns in the dead sea scroll [1QH].

http://science-of-consciousness.blogspot.com/

http://www2.xlibris.com/bookstore/book_ ... 997&page=1

The movie [part I] seems to weigh heavily on the physical as well. My view is that at the time of Nicea, remnant polythestic or anthropomorphic forms of worship felt threatened by non-anthropomorphic [monotheistic] religion. Is it possible that, while totally omitted in the filim, there was an effort to discredit monotheistic ideas wholesale, by those at that council?? Rome had its pantheon prior to Christianity, so its not inconceivable to me, and it had certainly taken place in Egypt after Akhenaten's reign fell after only a short while.

I wonder about the 3 days and southern cross, it is a very interesting coincidence . I think its more than just dec 22-24, however. It is said that its the time taken before reabsorption with the higher self. Dr Korotkov had some interesting discoveries in this regard, check this out:

http://www.zayra.de/soulcom/death/

The only thing that confuses me is the example of Justin Martyr in the movie, while acknowledging these pagan symbols embedded in the bible and nt [he lived from 100 - 150 AD, which was before Nicea], the explanation was said that they were rumors spread by the devil. Actually, he says 'the devils' and at the moment I think he refers to other groups of people, who didn't subscribe to monotheism, but thats my opinion. Here is a site I found regarding Martyr, displaying the relevant quotes.

http://www.preventingtruthdecay.org/jmq.shtml

Read the following article, then examine the comments about the movie, on Henry Makow's site, it is interesting, particularly Trent's. I don't usually read his articles, but I liked this one as it is relevant to this discussion. Some implications are made, one being that the movie is possibly an illuminati deception, or at least ideologically resembling it. I suppose that could be possible if illuminati are polytheists or 'self-deifiers.' But I think this aspect could make the discussion more confusing if gone into, at least I don't know anything in that direction.

http://www.henrymakow.com/zeitgeist_mov ... i_exp.html

There was one other site I found between a man [couldn't find the name] and Acharya S. via email. Its quite nitty-gritty so, trust me, fair warning:

http://www.kingdavid8.com/Letters/LetterJesusHorus.html

[survivor]

Yes, well actually I found that part about parallels between egyptian mythology and christianity quite, how to say... entertaining. They use those arguments to make the conclusion that the very existence of the christ was a fabricated myth.

Entertaining to you? This is simply your way of saying you don't need to prove it's fabricated? You're right, Jesus is a fabricated myth (for mine).

I as one who firmly belives that the christ existed and walked our earth in his days, can only look back at the arguments against this belief and take them with a pinch of salt.

..how so? Where is your saviour now? He won't be coming back, even the author of TP knows this as fact.

But there's also interesting points presented in the movie that can be taken more seriously by a dedicated researcher. For example many of the quotes from the christ that have made it through in the bible, give evidence that the man speaking has very good knowlede of astrology of the time, and also had great knowledge of space.

That's right, it's not about Jesus, But the author who has knowledge.

----------------------------------


Zeitgeist the Movie shows you the fabrication, the (process) invention of religions. 'Jesus Christ' the greatest story ever told in the bible and not an ounce of proof that he exsisted.(my opinion)

Many have researched and those who study occults, have also researched and came to the same conclusion as what Zeitgeist the Movie has shown to you. Do you believe in coincidence?

[survivor]

Read the following article, then examine the comments about the movie, on Henry Makow's site, it is interesting, particularly Trent's. I don't usually read his articles, but I liked this one as it is relevant to this discussion. Some implications are made, one being that the movie is possibly an illuminati deception, or at least ideologically resembling it. I suppose that could be possible if illuminati are polytheists or 'self-deifiers.' But I think this aspect could make the discussion more confusing if gone into, at least I don't know anything in that direction.

(in bold^)

..then I guess you will never know, who is telling the truth and who is trying to mis-lead you.

I personally couldn't give a rats-clacker. I'm not religious.

All religions, the bible, the illuminatie is like jelly wrestling, I'm not interested.


Get loved, love nature.-survivor

[gog]

AMEN 2 that, survivor!!!

[Rezo]

Im not religious, either, Survivor. I guess I still have faith in some form of belief, this tends to translate to 'religious' but I dont go through all the rituals, public display of faith, or any of that. What do you mean by 'Ill never know'? Ill admit I kind of put my last part together at the last minute. But I always try to keep an open mind, please believe me when I say that.

I think that, even though its important for people to realize religion manipulates people, the movie takes the approach that you should throw it all out, all at once. 'No more bible, no more Jesus, its all lies.' I don't think, for me, that its wise to assume all aspects of the bible are fabrications. This is where that thought process goes. The issue is historical authenticity of a person, and my comment was, mainly, did they argue thoroughly, and consider everything? My opinion is no, therefore I feel in this regard, the movie is jumping to a conclusion. Not with the wrong intentions, in that religion is a big problem on earth. Its ironically true that Jesus [the way he is used imo] plays a significant role in maintenance of the conditioning religion, over people. Im curious that the focus was exclusively on Christianity, anyway. Why is that? Some claim Buddha is a fabrication as well! Why didnt the movie criticise other religions also?

The first part of the movie doesn't go into the other three accounts, other than Josephus - and avoids discussion on other aspects of his life and compare them to previous divine figures, more closely. Probably because they felt no need to, since their focus is mainly on astrological significance, assuming everything allegedly said by Jesus [astrological symbols] wasn't altered later on, from perhaps an earlier version which challenged the Roman pantheon in certain perhaps important ways. I cant prove that, perhaps its only my belief. The grave in Japan, is supported in TP - yet there is a claim to a grave in Srinagar, Kashmir. The site in Srinagar claims much to have Moses grave and Noahs as well, which is a much bigger claim.

I would think a genuine attempt to deceive on religions part, would be more subtle. Some might disagree, and thats totally fine. But its not as if Jesus didn't disapprove of the power structure and religious methods, or that he was against money. I can understand the opinion that he may have been a fabrication, but I guess I just don't go that far, since his message, underneath the distortion of the Church councils, is a good one, and I'm fine enough trusting in that. Let me state though I don't weigh all my spirituality on another person, that is part of what mainstream Christianity teaches....I was never raised Christian anyway, I was raised Jewish. I haven't been religious for a very long time [since 10 years old I started questioning lots of things].

[shezmear]

Whats wrong with jelly wrestling???

[Essene]

Also another possible explanation for the same sort of story of Jesus popping up around history could be that many "Jesus's" have come to Earth at different times and on different continents in order to remind people and try spread the same message. Even in the TP it shows many such bodies preserved. As Rezo said it is the message that is important and the fact that the same message can be found in Egypt and other cultures ancient codes of wisdom only reinforces in my opinion.

Just my theory.

[survivor]

I think that, even though its important for people to realize religion manipulates people, the movie takes the approach that you should throw it all out, all at once. 'No more bible, no more Jesus, its all lies.' I don't think, for me, that its wise to assume all aspects of the bible are fabrications. This is where that thought process goes. The issue is historical authenticity of a person, and my comment was, mainly, did they argue thoroughly, and consider everything? My opinion is no, therefore I feel in this regard, the movie is jumping to a conclusion. Not with the wrong intentions, in that religion is a big problem on earth. Its ironically true that Jesus [the way he is used imo] plays a significant role in maintenance of the conditioning religion, over people. Im curious that the focus was exclusively on Christianity, anyway. Why is that? Some claim Buddha is a fabrication as well! Why didnt the movie criticise other religions also?

Just a quick response from me:

I don't have any problems with anyone associated to/with religion, it's their choice. Although, (and I'm serious here-->) most of my life I've thought, religion is good for those who are mentally weak.

One more quickie; to me, a tree is more symbolic than any religious statue.

[Rezo]

are you saying I'm 'religious'? How should we qualify this? Havent I mentioned I've distanced myself for some time now, from the ritualism of it? I dont mean to take it personally but this thread is messing w/my head a bit.

what about TP vs the movie, there are contradictions it would seem.

Im just gonna sit back and watch, this is polarizing.

[Matt]

Survivor, please stop instigating a fight.. It'd be somewhat alright if you brought some facts to the table but you're just refuting things left and right without evidence. You're using the classic logical fallacy of "I'm right, you're wrong." Our conceptions of right, wrong, and inbetween are developed from our knowledge and personal experiences. Why can't you come to terms that other people might have a different life, and different knowledge than you? That is why we must turn this forum into a sharing of knowledge and those experiences, not to degrade ourselves into a mud-flinging fest.

[survivor]

Survivor, please stop instigating a fight.. It'd be somewhat alright if you brought some facts to the table but you're just refuting things left and right without evidence. You're using the classic logical fallacy of "I'm right, you're wrong." Our conceptions of right, wrong, and inbetween are developed from our knowledge and personal experiences. Why can't you come to terms that other people might have a different life, and different knowledge than you? That is why we must turn this forum into a sharing of knowledge and those experiences, not to degrade ourselves into a mud-flinging fest.

Pull your head in Matt, I'm not the one instigating ^^^, you're the one throwing mud and if you want to prove anything with facts, then, be my guest.





Note to Rezo: I wasn't suggesting you are religious, how did you come to this conclusion?

[Matt]

Pull your head in Matt, I'm not the one instigating ^^^, you're the one throwing mud and if you want to prove anything with facts, then, be my guest.

My point is, is that you cannot say things like, "Jesus is a fabricated myth," or "religion is for the mentally weak," and not expect to get on people's nerves. It would be better if they were accompanied with a point, or an essay to accompany such implicating statements but you haven't provided either so far and from my point of view, that is instigating a fight as people are bound to disagree. Everyone has their own opinions, but everyone is also given the chance to explain themselves. If you express a controversial opinion and do not explain yourself, people are going to rebut in the same manner which leads nowhere. Do you see what I'm saying?

[survivor]

Pull your head in Matt, I'm not the one instigating ^^^, you're the one throwing mud and if you want to prove anything with facts, then, be my guest.

My point is, is that you cannot say things like, "Jesus is a fabricated myth," or "religion is for the mentally weak," and not expect to get on people's nerves. It would be better if they were accompanied with a point, or an essay to accompany such implicating statements but you haven't provided either so far and from my point of view, that is instigating a fight as people are bound to disagree. Everyone has their own opinions, but everyone is also given the chance to explain themselves. If you express a controversial opinion and do not explain yourself, people are going to rebut in the same manner which leads nowhere. Do you see what I'm saying?

I expressed my personal opinion about religion, if it gets on your nerve, then maybe you are mentally weak, do you see what I'm saying.

Zeigeist shows the religion for what it is, if there are any indiscretions re: Zeigeist, then let's compare to the indiscretions in the bible. (my opinion)



Matt you said "Everyone has their own opinions, but everyone is also given the chance to explain themselves."

My opinion, is that Jesus Christ is a fabricated myth. Do you have an opinion Matt?

what about TP vs the movie, there are contradictions it would seem.

Yes, it seems there are.

[Matt]

I expressed my personal opinion about religion, if it gets on your nerve, then maybe you are mentally weak, do you see what I'm saying.

Zeigeist shows the religion for what it is, if there are any indiscretions re: Zeigeist, then let's compare to the indiscretions in the bible. (my opinion)

My opinion, is that Jesus Christ is a fabricated myth. Do you have an opinion Matt?

I'm interested in hearing your opinions and, more importantly the basis for them. I'm all ears.

In case you're thinking I'm being sarcastic, I'm not. I'd really like to hear them - no harm in doing that, is there?

[Eon]

This is becoming a really stupid thread.. Please stop this..