I originally posted this on the Zeitgeist Movement forums but was told that the movement has nothing to do with the first movie, then I got a link here. This topic has probably been made before but keyword searching didn't do much good. So the thing I'd like to know is; has anyone here taken the zeitgeist challenge? Has anyone actually attempted to shut Keith Truth up yet? I know it's impossible simply because one of the requirements is that you have to prove jesus was born on dec. 25, which he most obviously wasn't, but in reality, all you'd really need to prove that jesus was fake is proof that any one of the other deities had all or most of the traits mentioned. Also, I'd like to know if anyone has any primary pictures, documents, etc to prove some of Zeitgeist's claims? I've searched for a long time and found a couple minor things. For example, proof that Isis was referred to as Meri, Mithra's killing of a bull, and probably a hundred crosses pre-dating christianity. I've seen a lot of books and stuff that make the same claims and they hold water but what I need is some concrete evidence to put the nail in the coffin. I understand that it's been said a million times that primary sources are near impossible to find but any little bit will suffice. Thanks in advance
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:24 pm Posts: 4333 Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Welcome to the party
I'll move your post to the section titled:
Quote:
ZEITGEIST Part 1 & The Supportive Evidence
Discuss the OFFICIAL version of ZG 1, the supportive evidence & Companion Guide E-Book & other related works (Acharya has nothing to do with parts 2, 3, the Addendum or TZG movement).
Everything you mention has been discussed in that section of the forum.
The Gospel of John 3:30 (KJV) "He must increase, but I must decrease."
John is the one who must decrease just as the sun decreases from the summer solstice to the winter solstice. Jesus, according to John, must increase just as the sun increases from the winter solstice to the summer solstice. Let's look a little closer at this issue:
Quote:
The birth of John the Baptist is detailed in Luke chapter 1.
The Catholic Encyclopedia claims that the CONCEPTION of John the Baptist was September 24th.
While the Roman Catholic feast celebrating his birth, known as St. John's Day, is June 24th - 3 days after the summer solstice.
This puts Jesus' birthday, which the bible says is 6 months after John the Baptists' at Christmas.
Luke 1:36 (KJV) "And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren."
This scripture is talking to Mary, Jesus' mom, Elisabeth is John the Baptists mom while the 6th month refers to her pregnancy with him. Mary conceived Jesus shortly after this conversation. So, we have John the Baptist born at the summer solstice and 6 months later we have Jesus born at the winter solstice.
Then of course there's the imagery of Orion, Sirius, and Virgo in the nativity scene of Matthew which further shows that the bible itself places the nativity at the winter solstice time of year. When you realize this, then you can see that when you start from the winter solstice in Capricorn the entire life story corresponds precisely, sign by sign, to one zodiacal year of the sun. You might want to read through this very carefully:
So as you can see the Bible itself provides the proof Keith is seeking. Maybe he ought to read it some time.
_________________ The Jesus Mythicist Creed: The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.
Why Dec. 25? Here are excerpts from an article by Dr. Bill Jones in the December 2001 issue of the Zion's Fire magazine that offer a biblical perspective on why early Christians chose Dec. 25 to commemorate the birth of Christ.
Even though many link the choice of Dec. 25 with the pagan Roman celebration of Saturnalia, it is far more likely the date was chosen because of the Jewish festival of Hanukkah. The festival commemorates the cleansing and rededication of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem in 165 B.C. on the 25th of Chislev, or Dec. 25. It is referred to in the Bible as "the feast of dedication" (John 10:22).
The temple was to be the dwelling place of God on earth. The incarnate Jesus, too, was the dwelling place of God. The relationship between the temple and the body of Jesus was so close that when pressed for a sign to authenticate his life and ministry, He compared his body to the temple (John 2:19).
Therefore, when the church needed a date to designate the time for observing Christ's birth, it could find no better one than Dec. 25.
— David Bacon, Keizer
Time for the rabid Christian nutters to find this Bacon fellow and harass him obsessively for daring to claim that Jesus was born on December 25th - indeed, these foaming-at-the-mouth loonies need to be sure to inform the hundreds of millions worldwide who this very day are celebrating Christ's birth that Jesus is not the reason for the season. If they do that, they will have done a great deal of work on behalf of the mythicist camp.
My book Christ in Egypt, for example, provides many pages of evidence of Isis being called Meri. Mithra killing the bull is a well-known motif demonstrated on many ancient monuments, so I can't imagine who would making claims otherwise.
Let's not forget this article/ebook I put together:
"I've searched for a long time and found a couple minor things."
As you can see from the massive amount of evidence I and others have compiled, you apparently have not been looking in the right places. Good luck - but you will actually have to read the links we've provided here!
_________________ Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:
Thanks a lot, I had no idea there was such a wealth of evidence but it seems my searching has paid off. I posted a link to the supportive evidence on the Zeitgeist Challenge about a week ago and no reply as you could've guessed. It is genuinely sad how so many people dismiss Zeitgeist as full of lies because there are so many stupid sites saying they are false and saying no one has ever claimed their money and so on. Lets see how long it takes for me to get that money...
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:24 pm Posts: 4333 Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Hey sum_peeps,
As you've probably learned by now, Zeitgeist part 1 is only 25 minutes long and was never created to serve as a scholarly documentary.
LOL, the apologists claiming ZG1 is false seem oblivious to the fact that they have no CREDIBLE evidence to point to in order to substantiate their own religion's supernatural or even many historical claims. I guess their religion is suppose to be true just because they say so and they have a book. Notice how none of those books were actually written by any god - it's always by men. Where are the footnotes and what are the credentials of these writers? Sometimes they attempt to claim that those books were written by men under the influence of or inspired by their god but, that's just another way of saying "channeling" which is paganism, again.
If I were you I wouldn't expect to get any money from any of those apologists challenges. They have no intention of paying up. Still, if they're so confident why can't they get all the churches throughout the world to chip into the pot? If they were so sure, they could put up $10 million. No, no they started with $100 & raised it to $250. The other site offers $1000 but it's the same story:
1) They have no intention of paying
2) They will find any reason to dismiss the evidence
The standards for evidence is far, far higher than they subject their own belief systems to - which has no credible evidence at all. So there's a hypocritical double-standard right out of the gate. Their only goal is to shore up their faith at all costs - even if it means smearing and libeling living breathing humans.
It's an embarrassment to a so-called 'enlightened society' to continue on rigidly adhering to bronze age beliefs with no valid evidence. It's just one more example of how religion holds humanity back from its full potential. If Jesus really existed, he would kick the living shit out of all those fanatics. They would be forced to wear the spiritual dunce cap and sit in the corner like misbehaved juveniles for all to see.
Rather than apologists spending so much of their time launching smear campaigns against a female author because she challenges their beliefs, all they have to do is prove Jesus (or whatever messiah or god) existed with credible evidence.
Acharya S has been quite the target for a decade now so, it's a compliment, really. Hate her work or love it, she has had an impact. Now, we are seeing Archaeoastronomy as a science that did not exist and was not accepted 20 years ago. More and more colleges and universities are creating room for Archaeoastronomy courses.
Bye, bye Christianity as its on its way out. Soon it will be appreciated as the mythology that it really is ... just like all the others. I find the astrotheological view of all of this far more fascinating and marvelous than what the religious would have us believe anyway. We are all better off for it. Fanaticism should never be allowed to trump credible evidence.
What substantial evidence do they really have to say things like this?
Quote:
I would refer you to my Zeitgeist Thread and tell you to READ THE SOURCES OF THE LINKS I GAVE, this author is Exposed for what she is a liar with no creditability she is a part of the cycle of people regurgitating this lie and then quoting each other to make it credible but you wont do that now will you...
Quote:
The woman you referenced stated this exact concept and was referenced and then promoted a video to debunk the debunking of Jesus being the Sun of God vs the Son of God or ASTROTHEOLOGY as spoken about in Zeitgiest. Watch that video it is HER speaking DEFENDING THIS POINT AND ZEITGIEST at the same exact time, while getting pwnd and showing you how everything she states comes from NO SOURCES WHAT SO EVER...
So plz Flix give us the Primary Sources that show that all these things about Jesus being the Sun God are jacked from Ancient Writings. If you actually BOTHER TO RESEARCH IT, you will find that there is NO CORRELATIONS between Ancient Dying and Rising Sun God and Jesus Christ that come from Primary Sources, all of the Similiarties that she cites come from AFTER JESUS DIED hundreds of years...
Its been debunked so incredibly much why do people insist on bringing it up over and over on this site?
^Complete and utter delusional LIES. This has clearly come from someone who has not completely read even one of her books, let alone all of them. Granted, I haven't either, I've only read CC and CIE, but CIE alone contains more than enough primary sources to overwhelm any naysayer.
Basically, the history of this backforth, in my observation, goes as follows:
Comparative mythicists like Acharya, Freke & Gandy, etc., present their case in the late 90s.
Apologists claim the case is not good enough, needs primary pre-christian sources.
Com. Mythicists present primary sources.
Apologists claim the case is not good enough, needs MORE primary pre-christian sources.
Com. Myth. present more primary sources.
Apologists ignore them and act as though their demands for primary pre-christian sources have never been met.
They have been repeating that same line ever since.
From JP Holding, to Matt Slick, to Keith Truth, to Chris White, etc., etc., THEY are the ones who just keep quoting each other in a circular fashion. THEY are the ones who need to update their argument. But of course, they never will, because it is wrong.
IF you can actually pin them down and get them to respond to an actual pre-christian primary source, they will typically respond with the bullshit excuse "no, that's too different, that is nothing like the _____ in the bible." Which is why I addressed that excuse FIRST, went ahead and nipped it in the bud.
So, the point is, even if they acknowledge that the source is primary, and pre-christian, and supports the claim you are making, they will still harden their hearts and pull excuses out of their ass in order to preserve their apriori bias.
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:17 pm Posts: 2248 Location: Everywhere
Quote:
So plz Flix give us the Primary Sources that show that all these things about Jesus being the Sun God are jacked from Ancient Writings. If you actually BOTHER TO RESEARCH IT, you will find that there is NO CORRELATIONS between Ancient Dying and Rising Sun God and Jesus Christ that come from Primary Sources, all of the Similiarties that she cites come from AFTER JESUS DIED hundreds of years...
Youtube's "GreekOrthodoxy" came here trying to make this claim (no dying and rising God-Men in mythology before 150 CE) a few years ago. And here is Acharya taking his own source (Mettinger) and showing how it proves the very opposite in reality. It starts going down here on page 9:
Thank you, Dr. Mettinger, for proving OUR point. And he continues to do so throughout this book, in which he essentially shreds J.Z. Smith's rubbishy article in Eliade's Encyclopedia. I can also provide other quotes from this fascinating and thorough analysis, in which Mettinger handily demonstrates that significant gods such as Baal clearly DIED and ROSE.
Next time, it might be a good idea to actually read the book you are recommending and that you think proves your point. However, I submit that many of those who rattle their sabers the loudest are singularly incapable of making their way through such a scholarly and challenging text, and they definitely spend far too much time arguing above their station.
Let us continue with the dismantling of this bogus premise denying the theme of the dying-and-rising gods in the pre-Christian world by the very authority previously raised by our blind-believing cultic interloper.
The apologist you'e quoted here is standing on the very same sand foundation as GreekOrthodoxy and the apologists which he is simply following behind and "parroting". He didn't even read Mettinger's book in the first place to know what it uncovers, he simply heard some other apologist claim that Mettinger proves their point. Murdock includes summaries from Mettinger's "The Riddle of Resurrection" in CiE, which this idiot of yours obviously hasn't read or doesn't understand if he has read it. I've taken quotes with citations included and put them before apologists like this. They simply dodge the whole thing and look for some way of trying to raise the bar or they try and come up with some distraction fallacy in a hurry. GodAlmighty has the order of events pretty well nailed.
_________________ The Jesus Mythicist Creed: The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.
They have absolutely no intention of ever being honest about it or paying up. If they ever actually read Acharya's books they would realize that their challenge has already been met.
"ZEITGEIST, Part 1" Debunked/Refuted? Acharya Responds
Acharya's response:
Quote:
"In the first place, I am under no obligation to answer anyone's "challenge." Secondly, the individuals involved in this particular endeavor, along with their followers, have been very impolite and obnoxious, libeling me with all manner of vile epithets and proving themselves entirely unworthy of response. Thirdly, these individuals are biased Christians who are not experts in comparative religion and mythology, know very little about the subject and know almost nothing about my work, but are nonetheless dishonestly presenting themselves as "experts" on me and my work. These are not credible and credentialed individuals upon whose endeavors I need to waste my own time and efforts. I am not inclined to trust the integrity of such dishonest characters who are going against their own religion by bearing false witness against me, which they have repeatedly done with their libelous, slanderous and hateful comments.
Moreover, in reality I have repeatedly addressed these ZG debunkers, in this blog as well as in my video on the subject. Their response has been to slander and libel me further as well as to spend more time demonstrating that they know very little about the subject matter and even less about my work. Again, these are not credible people with integrity. I understand that people whose feelings are hurt by the information I disclose will lash out and grasp anything they can to cling to discredited beliefs, but desperately following such characters who are being mendacious about their credentials and expertise, and who continually slander and libel decent and honest human beings, is really not the answer.
Furthermore, I answered whatever facts among their abundant non-facts and mistruths this so-called challenge may have produced before it was even issued, in my previous books, especially in Suns of God as well as Who Was Jesus? I also have hundreds of articles and other writings on my websites, in my groups and on my forums. These individuals would not know that fact because, even though they dishonestly pretend otherwise, they do not know my work at all.
These individuals need to be challenged themselves to admit to their many mistakes, as well as their vicious campaign of hatred, calumny, slander and libel, which is a mark of a truly low character and which is nothing new but has plagued Christianity from the very beginning. In the meantime, my latest book Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection thoroughly addresses all of the Horus commentary in the ZG movie. I would not expect these individuals to be honest enough to admit that their challenge is met, however. One would hope, nevertheless, that someone in the believing corner has more class, integrity and honesty to deal maturely and with common decency than do these particular individuals. It is frankly appalling and dismaying to consider that there are others who actually give credence to these individuals, but such is religious indoctrination that it creates disturbed and unbalanced people - as we see abundantly all over the internet, unfortunately.
In any event, my book Christ in Egypt is my main response to all criticisms concerning the Horus-Jesus connection in Zeitgeist, and, once it comes out, unless detractors have read it and can offer a mature critique devoid of dishonesty, libel and personal attacks, we should not be concerned with their opinions."
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
