Zeitgeist 1 Oddities
FaceBook note: https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=206379666082796
I watched Zeitgeist not long after it first came out - it had many interesting and true facts. They quoted that they don't know what God is, but they know what he is not (war monger behind the politicians responsible for the war in the Middle East and other crazy atrocities).
As usual, I am merely presenting facts to consider - any debunkers / skeptics are welcome as long as it is constructive with reference and data.
They nailed the 9/11 conspiracy and the banking fraud on the head. But the research into religious figureheads how they all had the same backgrounds was a bit screwy - screwier than I thought :s
Was it poorly researched? Or was it a deliberate attack to impede and distract people away from finding the truth? Ask those who have had a near death experience, or a demonic attack (also comes in the form of a terrifying and / or invasive alien abduction)!
Here's another cruncher - you can go research for yourself: Jesus wasn't born on December 25! It could have been another Jesus they're talking about? I know there's some wackos claiming to be Jesus these days but their entrance isn't as grand as what the Bible makes out regarding the second coming of the real deal. I don't know everything but I have a sketchy clue that something fishy is up.
A more detailed Bible study on why Jesus' birth is not December 25:
www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=467
Or a video Bible study:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vetl5s4B0_o
If you've ever watched the original release of Zeitgeist, the following is copied from a website that is no longer available, and are some challenges to think about.
The following is from http://mitchblog.com/?p=6 (currently a dead link)
I was directed by a friend to watch a film, mainly due to it’s discussion of a conspiracy behind 9/11. Some of you may have heard of, or already seen it before it is called Zeitgeist and located at www.zeitgeistmovie.com. I invite you to watch the film for yourselves, of course, but I still want to present my findings.
Tied into the notion of ignorance by the author, religion (specifically Judeo-Christianity) is discussed in Part I. As I said before I invite you to watch it for yourself first, but here are my findings;
1. Horus was the SKY GOD in Egyptian mythology, NOT the SUN GOD. Ra was the sun god. Horus means “Falcon”. Eventually, yes, Horus did become associated with the Sun through his eyes. One eye was the sun, the other the moon - so he was not conquered by Set at night.
2. None of those were born of a virgin birth:
(A). Horus was the son of Osiris (a male god of the underworld) and Isis (a female god). As time progresses we see that the Hellenic Greeks got Horus confused with Osiris, which would make Horus his own father… still not a virgin birth, as there was a father - himself, according to Greeks.
(B). Attis was the son of Cybele… well he sort of had a virgin birth - His mother was impregnated by a tree that was inseminated by a creature called Agdistis who was the son of the mountain which was inseminated by Zeus.
(C). Krishnawas the eighth son born to the princess Devaki, and her husband Vasudeva, born on July 19th 3228 BC
(D). Dionysus’ mother was a mortal Semele and his father was the god Zeus. Zeus had intercourse with his mother - so sorry, not a virgin.
(E). Mithra was born from a rock. Do rocks count as virgins?
(F). In fact, most ‘virgin births’ in mythology were things like “coming from the semen of poseidon and the sea” or “coming from Zeus’ head” or a rock, like Mithra!
3. It should be noted that the Romans invented Crucifixion, it did not exist prior the later half of the first millennium BC
4. Historically speaking, Mithraism was actually influenced by Christianity - though it can be traced to 2000 years before Christ, we do not start seeing parallels to Christianity until the second century AD, 200 years after the birth of Christianity, and 120 years after the last New Testament document was written.
5. Though traditionally Jesus is said to have been born on Dec. 25th, it is actually believed he was born in August. It is well known facts that Christians celebrated His birth on Dec. 25th to purposely compete with the Pagan (worldly, man inspired) faiths.
6. As for them all being dead for 3 days and resurrecting - I’ve found no evidence of this from a reliable source.
7. The “Three Kings” in Orion’s Belt did not appear until the Middle Ages, long after the appearance of Christianity - Scientists have yet to confirm what the Magi saw that brought them to Bethlehem, all we know is that there was Zoroastrian prophecy saying that a ’star’ would appear in the ‘West’ and lead them to the King of Israel, and savior of mankind.
8. Notice, the documentary claims that a star in the ‘East’ - Sirius - aligns with Orion’s belt and becomes brighter…
The Three Wise Men or Kings specifically came from the East, traveling WEST to Bethlehem. Why would they follow an eastern star to go west if they’re coming from the East? Furthermore, Jesus was born in the West of the three kings and not the East.
9. The “M” argument is just plain stupid! What are the Greeks and Chinese/Indians doing using Latin glyphs and Roman mythology and astrology? (many Greek myths were modified by the Romans)
10. The solstice bit shows a misunderstanding of the sun’s movement. The Solstice does not always occur on the 21st, it can occur between the 21st and 23rd. The sun does not just sit idly by for 3 days, waiting for us to make legends about it. It will appear to rise the following day.
11. The astrology account is not very reliable. According to most astrologists, the age of Pisces began 200 years before Christ, and ended in the year 2000. It’s still rather confusing, and I don’t think they know what age we’re in now, but most sources agree that Pisces started hundreds of years before the birth of Christ. So sorry, close but no cigar.
12. It should also be noted that Hebrew culture did not embrace the Zodiac, and that Moses never used a ram’s horn – that was mentioned once in the Old testament to signify the coming of the Egyptians. It should be noted that the Gregorian calendar (which our modern day one is largely based on) and Jewish calendar do not follow the Zodiac in anyway shape and or form, and that the Zodiac is not a Jewish symbol, and to Christians, has always been regarded as pagan.
13. The Symbols of Jesus coming from the Zodiac, while an impressive find, are not really based off the Zodiac. He uses one Zodiac illustration throughout the documentary; it should be noted that not all, in fact, most did not have the axis. The circular symbol around the center of the cross is a simplification of statues which show a halo/crown of thorns around Christ.
14. I’ve tried looking up this “Nemo” from Babylon – I’ve found no mention outside of a very bias archaeological report (by Murdock). In fact, Manou is the only one I’ve found, and he was an Indian law god around 1000 BC, 1000 years after Moses. Minos was king of Crete, who supposedly got laws from Zeus to impose on his subjects every 9 years. As for Moses… once again, nothing.
In fact, the only mention of ‘nemo’ in a lawgiver sense outside of sources based off of this documentary is in the Latin Vulgate Bible, the Book of John, chapter 7, verse 19:
“Nonne Moses dedit vobis legem et nemo ex vobis facit legem”
Translates:
Did not Moses give you the Law, and [yet] none of you carries out the Law? Why do you seek to kill Me?
- “Nemo” translates to “none”. This is the only mention of Nemo coming close to a lawgiver outside of the research in Zeitgeist.
In Zeitgeist, the narrator claims that there is no historical proof for Christ, and gives 40 historians who he says do not mention Christ.
- Josephus does mention Jesus Christ.
- So does Pliny the Younger and
- Tacitus, if I recall correctly.
- Tiberius does too.
His claim of Christ being the sun god of Gnostics is rather an idiotic claim;
- The Gnostics believed Christ similarly to the same way Christians do now – except they believe he was a man, had babies, etc, and came after the first book of the New Testament was believed to have been written.
Not only that, but he claims that the Romans used Christianity for control – this is not so, they had been persecuting Christians for 300 years.
- In fact, Constantine used the Edict of Milan as a method of control – not Christianity.
- He was not interested in uniting the Empire under one faith, but ending the blood shed – which he did by legalizing ALL religions, not just Christianity.
- And the narrator also forgets that the Vatican contributed vastly to the Renascence, perhaps more so than they did the Dark Ages,
- and that the Christian Greeks of the Byzantine Empire were the most technologically advanced people of all time until the 1700’s.
He points out the similarities of Jesus and Joseph, and yet, fails to realize that everything recorded in the New Testament is recorded to show Jesus’ fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies.
He also does not name the differences between Jesus and Joseph – Joseph was not born of a virgin birth, but of a mother in old age - is one example.
Overall, Part I of this movie is VERY interesting, but not very factual. I find it ironic that he accuses religion of taking advantage of using the common person for their own underlying purpose (in his case, world domination), when thanks to this video, atheism would fit more into that description. This movie is such that any person uneducated about Judeo-Christian faith would simply fall into believing this series of fallacious premises. Is the author not doing the same thing he accuses organized religion of doing? I’m all for criticism of religion, even my own. However, criticism such as this is unfounded and simply idiotic.
More on alleged similarities between Jesus and pagan deities:
www.thedevineevidence.com/jesus_similarities.html