ZeitGeist

First of all I want to remark that Zeitgeist is by no means a completely accurate film or something that should be used as any form of reference. However it is certainly a very effective catalyst for more indepth research on the subjects discussed. The movie's main website reiterates that the movie should not be taken at face value and watchers should go and research. I think that is its sole purpose.Having said that I want to make a couple of my own points on the ideas presented and the response by arach.1. There are too many similarities between the story of Horus/Isis/Osiris and Jesus/Mary/God to ignore their parallelism, especially considering the time span between when the 2 supposed stories came to be. The fact that they are not exactly the same or for the most part similar is irrelevant, the real point is myths change based on knowledge or need. They evolve.2. The accuracy of Jesus' birth should not be questioned since there is no proof that the person Jesus ever existed. The point was what is the significance of the re-occurance of that particular date in history, which leads me to question why you haven't mentioned any of the other historical figures that have the same attributes, ie. Mithra/Dionysus/Krishna etc.3. Crucifixion was NOT a Roman invention. Its in fact an ancient practice that started with just basic impaling of the victim and evolved to the more complex form in Roman times until it was abolished. It was practiced by many ancient civilizations and the term 'crucifixtion' itself was not how the practice was known by because the act took many forms ie. every execution was done differently.I hear alot of people say that the film was poorly made. This of course is justified by the fact that the man had no real budget and it was more important to visualize the summary of all of the research he made and present it in the manner he did.Now as far as the 911 and Banking sections, I'll say this: In order to find the middle of something you have to travel all the way to the other side, come back and repeat the process until you hit the middle.I found the video remarkable and very thought/research provoking, which I am thankful for.

Well I agree with you for the most part, except for the history of crucifixion part. As I said in my post the movie should not be taken at face value. The reason I thought it was good was because it provokes you to go out and research these things.Also, the whole Saturn thing...Zeitgeist is a shorter version of a Jordan Maxwell video I watched and he delves into the whole Saturn thing. I thought his video is more complete and thorough than Zeitgiest. My interest stops when people start talking about UFO's however lol.Its very interesting to see all the points of view about the 911 part though...I'll wait till you get to it.Alot of people have a general distaste for 'conspiracy theories', but I sort of like them because they wake up the layman.Also, the whole Saturn thing...Zeitgeist is a shorter version of a Jordan Maxwell video I watched recently, and he delves into the whole Saturn thing. I thought his video is more complete and thorough than Zeitgiest. My interest stops when people start talking about UFO's however lol.

Given the following assumptions or parameters, please answer the following questions:If the world population is comprised strictly of the following groups of people:1. Christians or theists who have believed in God or a god for their entire lives.2. People who are superficial and are constantly consumed with their own image and really could care less whether there is a god or not.3. Self-thinkers or skeptics who are atheists and constantly question things or trust in the scientific approach to the unknown.4. People who have some kind of emotional or traumatic psychological issues in their lives and have some kind of addiction that alleviates the pains associated with these issues.Who do you think holds the highest percentage of the population?How do you think each group would react to watching Zeitgeist?PS. my name is SPEKTICAL...NOT SKEPTICAL!!!!!also if it wasn't for these 'crockpots' as you so label them, the world would be dead!...no balance. Just like if space was white instead of black, the sun would be usless.

I could care less about the film...I got what I wanted out of it and that is all. I'm not the kind of person who goes to purchase a dvd when a friend can probably download it for me off a torrent site.Anyways, the point I am trying to make with my questions is that people are not as stupid as we may think they are. There are thousands of people who have watched this movie and have reacted differently.Anarch hates this movie because HE thinks its nonsense and that's his choosing...so I'll just say that its a fact that arachnophillia did not like the movie zeitgeist and leave it at that.The reason I like the movie is because its perfect for religous fanatics or people who have never given thought to the dogmas they unconsciously subscribe to or digest.To bring the pH level of an acidic solution to 7, you have to add an equal amount of a very basic solution.

I also want to add this after reading through most of the debate between Phat and TrueChristian. The idea of a relationship with 'God' comes up alot during their discussion and it made me start thinking of how this relationship superimposes itself on relationships humans have with each other.If we are brought up to believe in a SUPREME being who is always right and never wrong, but we must FEAR his punishment or suffer endless trips to the dentist and dermatologist (if they have those in Hell), then we become conditioned to think that love is based on Fear which is a fallacy and the true evil that we are really trying to extricate from our psyches.It is not that man was created in God's image, but rather the opposite...God was created in Man's image.

Good answer...water it is then woohoo!

Do you have any substantial linkable evidence that crucifixtion WAS a Roman invention? And I'll ask the same about the parallels between Horus and Jesus.Also, what about the fact that Judiasm is completely based on the ancient Egyptian religion?I'll tell you what, you find me linkable evidance for your claims and I'll do the same for mine.

You are completely wrong about what you think I think.The only person who emphasized Horus was Arach..he didn't mention any of the other examples. And since he only used Horus, I don't understand why he didn't comment about the Egyptian book of the dead and the derivation of the ten commandments from it.Lastly, it was anarch who made the original claim that 'crucifixion was a Roman invention'...which is historically false....and to end your rediculous claims otherwise I will do some hard research tonight and post it. I suggest you do the same.

Here's something I found about Crucifixion:http://www.joezias.com/CrucifixionAntiquity.htmlCrucifixion was certainly NOT a Roman invention. I also looked up the Egyptian book of the dead and its amazing the similarities between it and the Bible. You should read the raw version of it for ultimate factuality.I'm going to do more research about the other guys...Attis/Dionysus/Mithra.

So are you implying that Jesus Christ was a real person and in fact 'the son of God' whatever that is?If that's the case, please explain to me what Christian symbolism or the stories mean to you.

Answer my question Dr Adequate...do you have proof fro jesus' existance?
Please present evidence so I can at least not waste my time typing.

I'll give you a little background information on me. I was born to a catholic/orthodox Egyptian family and was raised Catholic. My father was orthodox but not a religious man, so catholicism won.Since I was a child, I loved fantastical kind of stories and watched Jesus of Nazareth at the age of 7. By the age of 12 I had read the entire Bible, and had a decent understanding of the Muslim 'faith' as well, being born in Egypt.Of course at that age I understood nothing..it was mostly done to please my elders around me. However, I started to try to imagine what kind of person Jesus was...I mean the conceptualization that every human attempts when confronted with the figure of Jesus CHrist. I also thought about God.I remember my mother and I used to have all these conversations about the psychology of God and why (he?) did the things (he?) did and why was it necessary for Jesus to be born. Nothing that she uttered made a single iota of sense..nothing. What I got was that God is a paradoxical existence that has a maniacally selfish personality who created lesser beings in (his?) image so (he?) can indulge in (his?) narcissism. However, God, with all (his?) omniscience? and omnipresence? starts feeling sorry for what (he's?) done to humankind...this is the interesting part...and sends (his?) (only?) begotten (son?) Jesus to die an earthly death. Meaning he superimposed himself to the human form so he can experience the worst kind of human death?What the hell kind of divine soap opera is this? To me God seems to be a either very irresponsible being or a drama queen...I tend to go for the latter since he's Omnipresent Omniscient etc.So my point is this. What is more highly believable? A story about an insignificant man who was psychologically distraught regarding his own faith and decided to express to humanity that god is fake, grew a cult of followers and was crucified because he went too far? Or that Jesus was in fact the son of 'God' who was born of a Virgin, (btw the word virgin is contested in the bible as a possible misinterpretation) and was in fact God himself?Maybe the reasons the Jews had Jesus killed was not blasphemy but upon realizing he was truly God, decided to avenge all the bullshit they went through in the old Testament....lol!This is why Zeitgeist is more important to me than the non-sense spewed by any believers. Whether it is completely accurate or not doesn't matter to me. It invoked all the old questions I had about my beliefs when I used to believe, and it makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint. So since watching it I have been researching everything I could get my hands on to try to understand the true mystery of our existence and the metaphysics behind it.It is more likely to believe that there is no external being that controls the universe, and that what has been written in all religious books is really a testament to the creativity of the human mind. A creativity that was a crucial social catalyst in helping us evolve and continue to evolve.

Btw I love Alex Grey

Ok to brenna...I don't think you're an idiot and honestly I was gonna mention that I agreed with you in the other thread when you mentioned that we should just look at things from a scientific perspective period. This I completely encourage and by no means was it my intention to bring Zeitgeist into this to obscure minds.To Jugger...I do not BELIEVE in Zeitgeist. See the problem with believers is they project how they feel and think onto others because religion encourages egocentricity. It stops the mind from thinking or questioning things. I believe in NOTHING...meaning I don't have any beliefs period. You should also understand that language itself has been tainted by religious superstition.You mentioned why are there no other options besides the ones I mentioned. My retort to you is why haven't YOU provided an option yourself.You also mention that Jesus exposed the Jews and exposes us. Have you read the description of crucifixion? Have you any idea how that would feel for any human to experience. We should be mourning and gasping at what humans do to each other rather than dream a god up and feel guilty or morally responsible to him because 'he went through that'. We should be praising the thousands of innocent souls who were crucified for petty reasons like theft or adultery. We should also worry about the real issues in life like how unbalanced it is. Poverty, the middle east crisis (which is completely clouded by religious beliefs). Stem cell research, abortion. I could go on forever naming things that need to be addressed and changed in this world. But of course that wouldn't matter to a person who believes that Jesus is coming back to take all who believe in him with him to heaven.Believing IS the original sin.Also, why the hell is God a he? Does that not strike you as strange?
I mean forget Zeitgeist and all its claims. The fact that God is a HE should explain that the whole thing is a tool for the social structure.

So why not feminine?