IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
"zeitgeist's" Interpretation Of Christianity

lunk
post Nov 17 2007, 06:50 PM
Post #21



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



QUOTE (painter @ Nov 2 2007, 06:01 PM)
Yeah, but have you ever been . . . beautiful spin.gif

Do you mean the fundamental inter-connectedness
of everything that happens after the blinding flash
followed by the icky black nothingness?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post Nov 17 2007, 07:01 PM
Post #22


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (lunk @ Nov 17 2007, 03:50 PM)
QUOTE (painter @ Nov 2 2007, 06:01 PM)

Yeah, but have you ever been . . . beautiful spin.gif

Do you mean the fundamental inter-connectedness
of everything that happens after the blinding flash
followed by the icky black nothingness?

I guess you could say that. However, the 'icky black nothingness' part is a bit problematic. Indicates to my mind something other than nothingness, specifically a negative projection into its misapprehension. Nothingness is neither black nor icky -- any more than it is either empty or void.

"Refreshing" might be a better word. trip.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post Nov 17 2007, 10:59 PM
Post #23



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



Yes, the void, where nothing and no one exists,
and you think yourself truly alone.

It felt/seemed like icky black nothingness to me.

A humbling experience...
lunk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Philadelphia
post Nov 24 2007, 11:31 AM
Post #24





Group: Newbie
Posts: 71
Joined: 23-November 07
Member No.: 2,505



Ideas that claim to 'debunk Christianity' but which list, for example, similarities between its articles of faith and the beliefs of various ancient mystery religions) are irrelevant, since similarities between the two are not disputed, even by Christians. It's because similarities exist and because there was a global expectation of Christ coming in to the world that is one of the chief reasons for the amazing and widespread acceptance of the Christian religion. Never was a global truth more keenly anticipated by mankind.

But the difference between paganism and Christianity is that Christianity is NOT A MYSTERY RELIGION. It's a REVEALED RELIGION. And that's the whole point. Christianity marks the end of mystery religion by the arrival of revealed truth. This arrival of a revealed religion also explains the decline and fall of paganism, the collapse of useless philosophies and the arrival of the freedoms and liberties we today take for granted. All of these are products of the widespread acceptance of Christianity as a revealed religion.

Finally, there is of course a huge difference between the CHURCH and CHRISTIANITY. Not to recognise this fact and not to distinguish between these two is to remain grossly ignorant of what Christianity is and what it is not.

This post has been edited by Philadelphia: Nov 24 2007, 04:44 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Nov 24 2007, 12:15 PM
Post #25



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



While I'm not religious, I found your (Philadelphia's) post pretty profound. You have been doing your homework IMO thumbsup.gif .

I hesitate to criticize the film Zeitgeist, because I agree with it's basic premise (perceived reality is built on a bed of lies), and I feel it was made with pure intentions and a lot of heart. I love the film. But, unfortunately, it bases some of it's conclusions on bad info. The whole Horus/Jesus connection is simply not factual. Google "Horus" and "resurection", or "Isis" and "virgin", or any number of other supposed correlations and you won't find anything except posts and pages about Zeitgeist refuting his claims. Isis wasn't a virgin, she concieved Horus by screwing Osiris, who's body she had just re-constituted from 14 pieces that Set had ripped apart and strewn all over Egypt. If necrophilia counts as divine conception, than I guess you could go along with Peter's notion - but only if you ignore Horus' siblings as well. The December 25 thing doesn't wash either, it's not mentioned in Egyptology, nor is the date even set forth in the bible as the date Jesus' birth - forget about if those calenders correspond with ours or not - so, this is very misleading. I almost forgive it, since I do find the 3 day death/resurection - winter solstice connection interesting and compelling, but Zeitgeist weaves a tale that, while seductive and seemingly authoritative, isn't based on solid research - a lot of the stated factoids in part one are, I hate to say it, seemingly made up.

QUOTE
Christianity marks the end of mystery religion


This is our big problem - I know what you are saying, and in one breath nod my head in agreement, but then I think about it for a second and realise, that, no, actually Christianity (or Jeudaism for that matter) didn't mark the end of mystery religion - rather, "mystery religion" became truly mysterious and went underground, and is still with us. (& If one's breeding permits, they might even be able to get in to Bohemian Grove in the summer to watch the show!)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Philadelphia
post Nov 24 2007, 04:50 PM
Post #26





Group: Newbie
Posts: 71
Joined: 23-November 07
Member No.: 2,505



Yes, Sanders, but your reference to Bohemia Grove only makes the distinction between paganism and Christianity clearer. The beliefs of those who go there are hidden, kept away from public access or accountability, resting on mysticism and things that are not revealed. But there's nothing hidden in Christianity. All is revealed. All is accessible. There is no veil between you and truth itself. That's the difference between truth and error, between night and day, and between good and evil. The wonderful thing is 'these things were not done in a corner but were done openly, and in the light of day'. So one is hidden behind mysticism and the other is revealed. It's precisely this which is the greatest feature of Christianity. Its hallmark.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Nov 24 2007, 11:52 PM
Post #27



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



Possibly I didn't communicate well enough, I agree completely with you Philadelphia (in general terms - I quantify my statement only because I know the Catholic Church keeps all kinds of stuff hidden - but I also understand that that's not what you're talking about).

salute.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Philadelphia
post Nov 25 2007, 06:04 AM
Post #28





Group: Newbie
Posts: 71
Joined: 23-November 07
Member No.: 2,505



There is the argument the different church denominations share so much in common that consistency in matters of faith is to be found in only one of them, the ancient creeds of the Roman Catholic Church. This is known as the ecumenical argument. A rather similar argument is used by the makers of'Zeitgeist'. They tell us there are such striking similarities in different beliefs from pagan antiquity onwards there's nothing really distinctive in Christianity.

But I disagree. Imagine a forger who makes banknotes. His aim is not to make 9 dollar notes. He makes 10 dollar notes. He aims to make them so close to real ones there's really little difference between the two. On paper. And yet we cannot accept forgeries. Can we ? It's clear that forgers make products that are hard to distinguish from real ones. So the fact that things can sound very similar at a superficial level is not good reason to be bound by the ecumenical movement. Truth and error are often so close to one another by design that we do well NOT to be deceived.

The true test, of course, is that the Christian faith is not static. It's not identified by creeds or tradition. It faithfully bears record to the day in which we live. Not to an age that is passed. It's dynamic and it resists oppression. It is not enforced by secular governments. It's an attitude we take as individuals, and it is liberty. The churches are (or have become) a form of bondage. That's why their history is very different from that of Christianity.

But that's why the most deceiving of them all claims to be the TRUTH itself. It isn't. No church is the truth. But let others bind themselves together. That's churchianity.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post Nov 26 2007, 03:08 AM
Post #29



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



Myth is good if it's known to be a fiction.
History is good if it's known to be fact.

Myth parading as actual history is
very disastrous,
and proving to be so.

imo, lunk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nunyabiz
post Mar 5 2008, 03:54 PM
Post #30





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 233
Joined: 8-February 08
Member No.: 2,727



Don't even know where to begin on this.
I guess first I should say that I myself have studied various religions though mostly the big 3 because they are all related and the most prevalent for over 32 years now.
I first started this in order to solidify in my mind to MY satisfaction whether or not religion in any of its many forms has any basis in factual reality which is where I reside and wish to stay.
To date I have found nothing whatsoever to change my perception of any & all religions.
In fact what I have discovered through out the last 32 years have only 100% cemented my convictions concerning religious "belief".

I will start with Painters post, in general BOTH Painter & Cary are correct in what they are saying depending on how one interprets it.

Cary is correct in that "Jesus is basically just yet another version of the Sun god" "the writings were bastardized by the Council of Nicaea" "and that the Bible is an Astrological drama with the Sun as a central figure" these are all true and easily proven by mountains of Archaeological evidence.

Painter is correct in that the Bible along with many other religious text are just "esoteric ideas" and have "many levels of meaning and interpretation" (this one being one of the main reasons why religion in all its forms has caused so much death, hatred, wars, genocide etc.) I believe what Painter is alluding to is what was known as the "Inner & Outer Mystery Schools" which was THE main reason for virtually all religious text prior to Christian orthodoxy squashing Gnosticism which was basically around the time of the Nicene Creed (325CE).
In fact that was pretty much one of the main reasons that Constantine commissioned the first canonized Bible through the Council of Nicaea.
Constantine wanted control of the masses and every where he went in every church in every pagan temple etc the masses were 'interpreting" all of these many text in hundreds of different ways. There were I believe at least 56 main "Gospels" plus numerous other texts and most all were highly contradictory and most all interpreted the "divine being" whether it be Baalam, Yeshu, The Teacher of Richeousness, and in later text "Iesous" (AKA Jesus, the actual name Jesus did not even exist until about 500 years ago) as just a "spirit" not a REAL being.

Iesous was without any doubt just a continuation of the many previous "Sun Gods", all of these religions were based in Astrology, Numerology and so forth.
There was never any such "real" person as any "Jesus of Nazareth" this is without any question a purely fictional character.
The NT is clearly an Astrological Drama written in the old Pagan Passion Play style, that is why the bible is written in these verses because it is a piece meal of various text that pretty much all come from what many consider the "gospel of Q". The Gospel "according to" Mark pretty much copied "Q" which no longer exist probably burned in the Library of Alexandria or some other ritual destruction of allegedly heretic text. Anyway Mark, Matthew, Luke are all pretty much the same probably written some 10-30 years apart with Mark being the first and simplest written sometime between 70-75CE then Matthew probably between 80-85CE, Luke most likely around 85-95CE these were known and the "Synoptic Gospels" because they were all basically alike the only difference being that each one in succession just magically got MORE intricate and more fanciful adding miracles and tall tales attributed to the main character as is usually the case in Oral Tradition and when the author wanted to one up the previous version.
Then of course John comes along decades later probably around 110-125CE with his even more fantastical version just chock full of miracles and magic and quite a bit different than the other 3.

Now nobody has a clue to whom these "authors" really were, these were all Pseudo anonymous writings which was extremely common place back then, even today it still is, Mark Twain for instance was Samuel Clemens and there are hundreds of others.
These Gospels which were hand picked by the Council of Nicaea while burning all the many others was meant to get everyone "on the same page" so to speak and Constantine in essence made Iesous "real" by declaring him divine and denouncing Arianism and making "this version" of Christianity the State religion.
Thus over the course of a few hundred years this purely fictitious character which originally was just an allegory in an Astrological Drama meant to be acted out on a stage, a "Personification of the SUN" was slowly but surely transformed from allegorical into a historical figure.

Even though during the time of this so called Jesus alleged existence which was one of the most documented centuries in history, there were numerous well known and very prolific historians that wrote about virtually anything and everything under the sun, common everyday life sometimes in excruciating detail.
However this infamous Jesus known throughout the land far & wide with great multitudes of people that followed him everywhere he went, he performed many miracles, healed the sick, cured the blind, walked on water, upon his alleged death there was a enormous Earthquake all though out the land, the entire Earth shrouded in darkness for 3 hours and the bodies of saints rising from the dead in Jerusalem showing themselves to many people and on & on yet not a single historian of the day bothers to mention such a spectacle?
Absolutely impossible.
As a matter of fact not a single word written about this alleged Jesus by anybody of any kind until at least 70CE some 40 years or so later?
On face value the existence of this godman going on empirical evidence is not even worthy of discussion.

Then when one takes into account the clear & obvious similarities between this mythical figure Vs various other Sun Gods then the whole concept of Christianity just becomes silly.

The NT ONLY makes sense when one places an Astrological Template over it. I have read the bible cover to cover 3X, only on the 3rd and final time did it make even the slightest bit of sense and that was when I had learned of the Astrological beginnings & meanings, that the entire NT is just an Astrological Drama with the characters allegorical for various cosmic deities.

Jesus the main character in this little tale is the personification of the SUN, he first meets "John the Baptist" which is allegorical for "Aquarius" the water bearer.
Next on the suns journey he meets "the 2 fishermen" this is Pisces and so on.
The Suns birth and death on Dec 25th Winter Solstice, the rebirth of life in spring the Vernal Equinox, the Sun is "most high" in Summer.
Jesus (the SUN) rides both an "Ass & a Foal" into Jerusalem one might ask well just how the hell could he do that? Well its easy when what you are really taking about is the SUN going through the Constellation of Cancer of which the 2 stars making up part of the head are today called Asellus Borealis and Asellus Australis which means the Northern & Southern Ass.
In older star charts such as from the Chaldean's these 2 stars were known as "The Ass & the Foal"
Thus Jesus (The SUN) rides both the Ass & the Foal into Jerusalem, piece O cake once you realize that what you are reading is part of that inner & outer mystery school "secrets" that Painter was alluding to in the first post.

The few parts of the Bible that are non fiction are simply just a few places such as Jerusalem, Rome, Babylon, various geographical areas as the setting of this Astrological drama indeed are real, the authors did not claim it was taking place on some fictional planet.
There were a few well known real people mentioned to give minor credence to the story such as Julius Caesar, Nebuchadnezzar, Judas Maccabees (actually Judas Hasmonaeans) the name "Maccabee" was a surname or nickname that meant "Battle hammer", anyway there were of course some real people in these stories but by far the vast majority are "allegorical" characters that were meant to be used as a vehicle to transmit ideas, & in parables to get profound meanings across in an imaginative way.
Hercules for instance is a classic example, Same with Samson, they were not real historical people, they were allegorical figures brought to life as vivid personalities to spread the ideas the authors were hoping to transmit to the reader or really back then the "Orator" as these tales were exactly that, oral tradition passed down & around, these tales were the Theater/TV of their day & the Orators were the actors & rock stars of the time.

In order to claim open mindedness towards Biblical narratives one MUST ask, what is true, what isn't, where do these stories originate?

To find that out take what is known fact within reasonable doubt which is the beginnings of this story originate with the Jewish/Hebrew culture sometime around 600BCE.

Ok, what do we know about the Jewish people in that time in history which is collaborated by several sources? They were in exile in Babylon.

Who were the Babylonians in c.600BCE, what did they believe, who were their gods, their religion/rituals? What do we know about the "mystery schools"? Aware that words over 2 millennia ago sometimes meant something completely different than their common usage today? for instance the word "Wisdom" more than 2000 years ago meant "Knowledge of Astrology" the word "Truth" which you see both of these words all though out the Bible usually was referring to "Secrets".



This verse which is just one out many takes on a new meaning when you actually know what it is you are reading because many times words back then had a completely different meaning than they do today.

"If we continue in His teachings then we shall know the truth (the secrets) and these truths (secrets) will liberate us and make us free, with the ability and power to make others free." (John 8:31,32)

Well "secrets" referred to the "secret doctrines" of the Inner & Outer Mystery schools.



What do we know about the various stories and where they originate? I'll name just one, see if you can tell me the related story. Between the twenty-first and twenty-fourth of December the nights are the darkest and longest of the entire year and were known to ancient astrologers as the Whale's Belly, this has reference to the winter constellation Cetus, the Whale. Now what story in the Bible was derived from this Chaldean Astrological text?

What about the Chaldean king, Sargon? ever heard of him? probably not but I bet you have heard of his story. At Sargon's birth, his mother the queen placed him in a bitumen-lined basket and laid it among the river bulrushes where a water-carrier found him and took him home and brought him up as her own. Sound familiar? Well this was written over 1000 years prior to the Biblical version.

Ever read the "Chaldean Book of Numbers"?

If you "really" want to know anything about the Bible then you need to read about Sumerian/Kemetic/Babylonian religion, stop reading the Bible itself .

There is virtually nothing in the Bible that can not be traced back to much older Pagan religions & rituals.

Painter.

If I remember correctly the book "The Temple of Man" was not actually written by Isha Schwaller but in fact Rene Schwaller her husband.
I have that book in my library was given to me by one of my professors at Stanford back in the 80s.
I found the book to be quite hard to follow although had some interesting interpretations the main thing I garnered from it was the connection between mathematics like the "Golden Ratio" which was also used in Greek and Roman architecture as well.

This post has been edited by Nunyabiz: Mar 5 2008, 04:54 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post Mar 6 2008, 09:35 AM
Post #31



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



Zeitgeist gave me a better understanding of the Bible than
any priest, minister, or church.

If the Bible could be seen as ancient metaphor and myth, it would be better.

On the surface, to me, it reads as a horror story.

Who would want to live their life literally believing this?

imo,
the non-religious
lunk.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post Mar 6 2008, 01:23 PM
Post #32


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (Nunyabiz @ Mar 5 2008, 12:54 PM) *
<s>
Painter.

If I remember correctly the book "The Temple of Man" was not actually written by Isha Schwaller but in fact Rene Schwaller her husband.
I have that book in my library was given to me by one of my professors at Stanford back in the 80s.
I found the book to be quite hard to follow although had some interesting interpretations the main thing I garnered from it was the connection between mathematics like the "Golden Ratio" which was also used in Greek and Roman architecture as well.


That is correct, my bad.

You've said a lot above the snip that I don't have time at the moment to reply to. Very interesting post, though. Thanks for the contribution! cheers.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
THE_DECIDER
post Mar 28 2008, 03:53 AM
Post #33





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 432
Joined: 14-August 06
From: california
Member No.: 3



anyone interested in taking a critical look at religion...might wanna learn from the best..

http://www.jordanmaxwell.com/

This post has been edited by THE_DECIDER: Mar 28 2008, 03:53 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dirknb
post Jun 6 2008, 02:22 PM
Post #34





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 3
Joined: 4-June 08
Member No.: 3,507



QUOTE (Zapzarap @ Aug 28 2007, 04:06 AM) *
I still think, it doesn't add to the credibility of the movie, when they start it by highlightening the religious aspect. And I can't really see a reason, why they did it. It will however turn off religious people like Natasha.


I thought the same thing when I first saw Zeitgeist. However, later it occured to me that not only is it important, but it's more important than the political aspect of how the world really works. We can expose 9/11 and totally win the political battle, but as long as people remain in the dark about religion we will continue to be divided and conquered.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Jun 6 2008, 02:57 PM
Post #35



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



For the record,

I dig Jordan Maxwell, and have learned a lot from his lectures. Despite that I think he's kind of a kook.

I also love Zeitgeist - a great movie IMO. But I really think he misses the mark somewhat in part 1. Factually, Isis was no virgin, Horus was never killed (or resurected), as he alleges, except in the way that Set kills Horus and Horus kills Set daily and nightly as the sun rises and sets. Those parallels between Egyptian legends and the Christ story are really pushing it, I don't know where he got that stuff from (just ask any Egyptologist). Furthermore, he makes kind of a bunder, IMO, by focusing on Egypt in the first place. Mesopotamia is where the roots of what he's talking about were. Sumer, Chaldea, the origins of Pagan worship, of western civilization for that matter - all there, not in Egypt - Egypt was a stop along the way, furthermore, those influences bypassed Egypt completely in some cases and expanded directly from Mesopotamia into Phoenicia, modern Turkey, the Caucasus and the Indus valley independently. The "dragon blood-line", which is the course of the rulers who led these forages into the (French) Merovingian and Viking lands and finally manifested as the royalty of Europe, Scandinavia and finally England; along with the tribe of Dan, who's mark was the serpent and left their name all over the rivers and towns of Europe along similar routes (and were the Pagan black-sheep of the Israel tribes) are intimately connected. Zeitgeist fails to connect these dots, and since this Mesopotamian root is the source of the astrological knowlege and legends that Zeitgeist (part 1) is all about, I found this to be a disappointing flaw.

EDIT: I don't want to sound like a fuddy-duddy (to quote my grandmother). I really like Jordan Maxwell, I really like Zeitgeist, and recommend both. (I just think that a grain of salt is needed in both cases.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Jun 6 2008, 04:36 PM
Post #36



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



Numbers 12 & 13

I live in Japan. Things are bunched up in "10's" here. Not a surprise, we all have 10 fingers and toes, and base 10 is conveinient math-wize.

But in the West, or in America anyway (and I assume to great extent in England), 12 is a sort of "base" number. 13 also pops up a lot. In Japanese culture, which evolved totally independent of western influence until the late 19th century, there is no word for a "dozen". Not to mention a "baker's dozen" (13).

There are lots of examples of extra weight given to the numbers 12 and 13 in the West:

12 donuts in a dozen.

12 inches in a foot.

12 months in a year. (This correlates with lunar cycles of course, but that is not unrelated here so I'll include it.)

12 banks in the Federal Reserve.

13 American colonies.

13 stripes on the flag, 13 arrows, 13 leaved olive branch in the eagle's claws, 13 rows in the pyramid (admittedly connected with the numbr of colonies, but was it all an accident?).

12 stars on the EU flag. (Even though the number of member countries has almost always been different.)

12 tribes of Isreal - or, 13, depending on how you count. In the bible, someone is always left out - Levin, because they were the preists and didn't receive land, or Dan, because they were Pagans, or Rueben, for incestual conduct (Reuben is described as having shared a bed with Bilhah, Rachel's maid, like his father, Joseph & Bilhah begot Dan and Naphtali.) Actually, there were 13 tribes.

12 disciples ... add Jesus and you get 13.

12 astrological signs. ... plus the sun, you get 13. Or the 12 astological signs plus the dragon and you get 13.

The dragon??? The dragon is the constellation at true north. The earth wobbles - thousands of years ago, the north star was not Polaris - it was Thuban. The north star changes as the earth slowly wobbles - it takes about 25,000 years to complete the circle as it passes through the ages (we are now in the age of Pieces). In the middle of that circle, at true theoretical north is the constellation Draco, the Dragon.

(Draco rules the heavens, the dragon blood-line is, as per this rational which is embraced to this day by certain powerful people in England and elsewhere apparently, rules on earth. The tribe of Dan, pagan outcasts of the old testament, the "addler on the path", who carried the mark of the serpent, are intimately connected to this "dragon-stuff" IMO, as are the Spartans, born from dragon teeth, as were the Merovingian kings, descended from a sea-serpent, as were the Chinese even, with their Dragon-throne, which they inherited along with civilization itself from the Indus valley. ...Maybe. It's awfully interesting at least. )
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post Jun 10 2008, 04:38 AM
Post #37



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



QUOTE (Sanders @ Jun 6 2008, 02:36 PM) *
Numbers 12 & 13


More to do about the number 12,
harmonics and frequencies:

http://rexresearch.com/articles/roffe.htm

the fundamental, lunk

P.S. Watch Zeitgeist
good movie!

This post has been edited by lunk: Jun 10 2008, 04:40 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nunyabiz
post Jun 13 2008, 08:37 AM
Post #38





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 233
Joined: 8-February 08
Member No.: 2,727



" Factually, Isis was no virgin, Horus was never killed (or resurrected), as he alleges, except in the way that Set kills Horus and Horus kills Set daily and nightly as the sun rises and sets."

"Factually" Isis was pretty much whatever the believer wanted her to be, she didn't exist. Also like most all Egyptian gods Isis represented 100s of different things.
Isis was generally viewed as the "Virgin of the World" basically what today you might call "Mother Nature" she represented the 4 elements of Life, Light, Heat, Force thus the beginning of all things. One must remember what we are talking about here, all of these solar & vegetative religions are all allegorical.
Isis which was the model for the Christian "Mary" was the constellation "VIRGO" the VIRGIN. Horus was the SUN as was the mythical Jesus.

So what Maxwell "alleges" is absolutely correct, ALL of these celestial Queen of Heavens, Mother Natures, Goddess of take your pick were ALL VIRGINS.

http://paganizingfaithofyeshua.netfirms.co...th_sun_myth.htm

QUOTE
"Maia, mother of Sakia and Yasoda of Chrishna; Celestine, mother of the crucified Zunis; Chimalman, mother of Quexalcote; Semele, mother of the Egyptian Bacchus, and Minerva, mother of the Grecian Bacchus; Prudence, mother of Hercules; Alcmene, mother of Alcides; Shing- Mon, mother of Yu, and Mayence, mother of Hesus, were all as confidently believed to be pure, holy and chaste virgins, while giving birth to these Gods, sons of God, Saviors and sin-atoning Mediators, as was Mary, mother of Jesus, and long before her time."


You are treating these fictional deities as if they were real, they were all allegorical for celestial bodies.

Horus died and was resurrected because he was an allegory for the SUN! ALL sun gods died and were resurrected.
Hell even every single Egyptian believed that THEY would be resurrected that is why they were mummified so you really cant be saying that they didn't believe that their GOD didn't die and get resurrected, are you? DOH!


"Those parallels between Egyptian legends and the Christ story are really pushing it"

Me thinks you need to do a bit more research as those parallels are dead on. The mythical Jesus is virtually an exact copy of Horus and his mother Mary is clearly another version of the usual Goddess of Nature and allegory for the constellation VIRGO the Virgin. The exact same story line can be seen all though out history from the Sumerians to the Babylonians the Greeks the Romans even the Aztecs and so on.
The NT is an astrological drama not a historical account.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Jun 13 2008, 11:00 PM
Post #39



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



By "factually", I meant as per the original Egyptian myths.

Anyway, although I do concede that there are some parallels between various religious narratives and earlier pagan myths, a lot of the claims in Zeitgeist appear to be just plain wrong. There's no point in arguing about it, but I assure you I didn't come to this conclusion out of any lack of research.

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/HORUS.htm#BOGUS

QUOTE
Summary of the Osiris-Isis-Horus Myth

In ancient Egyptian tradition, at least as preserved to us, the Osiris-Isis-Horus myth was never recounted as a coherent whole; rather, it served as a source of allusions for a large number of religious texts. It was a sequence of scenes that was unmistakably rooted in the mortuary cult. The only texts that furnish us with a continuous narrative are written in Greek, by Diodorus (1st century BC) and especially by Plutarch (c. 46 - 120 AD). But in their care about a single, meaningful, stimulating story these authors seem to have strayed from the Egyptian form of the myth. The myth has both a prehistory and a starting point. The prehistory is not narrated in the Egyptian texts, yet it is necessary for all that follows (see Jan Assman, Death and Salvation in Ancient Egypt, p. 23).

The basic Egyptian myth goes like this: Osiris became ruler of the land, but was tricked and slain by his jealous brother, Seth. According to the Greek version of the story, Typhon (Seth) had a beautiful coffin made to Osiris' exact measurements, and with 72 conspirators at a banquet, promised it to the one who would fit it. Each guest tried it for size, and Osiris was the one to fit exactly. Immediately Seth and the conspirators nailed the lid shut, sealed the coffin in lead, and threw it into the Nile. The coffin was eventually borne across the sea to Byblos, where Isis, who had been continually searching for her husband, finally located it. She returns the body to Egypt where Seth discovers it, cuts the corpse into pieces, and scatters them throughout the country. Isis transforms herself into a kite, and with her sister Nephthys, searches for and finds all the pieces (except the male member, which she replicates), reconstitutes the body, and before embalming to give Osiris eternal life, she revivifies it, couples with it, and thus conceives Horus.

"Of the parts of Osiris's body the only one which Isis did not find was the male member, for the reason that this had been at once tossed into the river, and the lepidotus, the sea-bream, and the pike had fed upon it; and it is from these very fishes the Egyptians are most scrupulous in abstaining. But Isis made a replica of the member to take its place, and consecrated the phallus, in honour of which the Egyptians even at the present day celebrate a festival." (Plutarch, Moralia V, On Isis and Osiris, 18)

According to the principal version of the story cited by Plutarch, Isis had already given birth to her son, but according to the Egyptian Hymn to Osiris, she conceived him by the revivified corpse of her husband.


QUOTE
The Birth and Flight of Horus

The slaying and dismemberment of Osiris, and his re-joining and rejuvenation by his wife Isis, is a common theme of a large corpus of texts, which do not actually describe it but rather presuppose it as the trigger for various actions whose aim is to cope with this catastrophe. Just as it was Osiris' undoing that he was the first of the divine rulers to have a brother and thus a rival for the throne, so his sisters became his "salvation." Isis, his sister-wife, was the first to take action by traversing the land to collect his scattered body parts.

...Isis' activities with regard to the corpse of Osiris culminate in the posthumous conception of Horus. In the accounts of Greek historians Diodorus and Plutarch, Isis recovers all the body parts of the slain god except for his virile member, which had been swallowed by a fish. She was thus obliged to replace this member with an artificial one that she uses as an instrument for her posthumous insemination to produce Horus....

...Here is some commentary on the "conception of Horus" from various Egyptian scholars:

"...drawings on contemporary funerary papyri show her as a kite hovering above Osiris, who is revived enough to have an erection and impregnate his wife." (Lesko, Great Goddesses of Egypt, p. 162)
"After having sexual intercourse, in the form of a bird, with the dead god she restored to life, she gave birth to a posthumous son, Horus." (Dunand / Zivie-Coche, Gods and Men in Egypt, p. 39)
"Through her magic Isis revivified the sexual member of Osiris and became pregnant by him, eventually giving birth to their child, Horus." (Richard Wilkinson, Complete gods and goddesses of Ancient Egypt, p. 146)
"Isis already knows that she is destined to bear a child who will be king. In order to bring this about, she has to revive the sexual powers of Osiris, just as the Hand Goddess aroused the penis of the creator to create the first life." (Pinch, Handbook of Egyptian Mythology, p. 80)
In short, this was NO "virgin birth" as is clear also from repeated references to Osiris' "seed." A "miraculous birth" perhaps because it involves a dead and then revived husband, but not a virginal conception (sometimes wrongly called an "immaculate conception" -- that has to do in Catholic theology with Mary's conception without Original Sin, not Jesus' conception) nor a virgin birth as contained in the Bible...


http://stupidevilbastard.com/index/seb/com..._of_horus/P325/

QUOTE
...Upon further research, I’ve concluded that this theory originated with Gerald Massey, an English poet, born 1828, died 1927. He published primarily poems, but had an interest in Egypt. He parlayed that interest in Egypt into several books and lectures in which he set forth the proposition that Horus was in essence the first Jesus, and Jesus was a cheap imitation. The primary basis for his writing is the Egyptian Book of the Dead. This is available on-line and you can easily look it up to read it yourself...

...Since Massey, there is a dearth of anybody with any credentials that has adopted a straight Horus=Jesus theory. There is a one individual that has adopted some of Massey’s thoughts and incorporated them into a book-The Christ Conspiracy. This appears to be the basis for the claims that I see. The author is Acharya S. Her website is http://www.truthbeknown.com I note that Richard Price, a noted Christ Myther, and one that I take much more seriously then Acharya, said the following:

“Those of use who uphold any version of the controversial Christ Myth theory find ourselves immediately the object not just of criticism, but even of ridicule. And it causes us chagrin to be lumped together with certain writers with whom we share the Christ Myth butt little else...

His other criticism, like mine, is that she uses very dated sources (19th Century) who were in Price’s words “eccentrics, freethinkers, and theosophists.”
Les, I am using your post from 1/3/05 as an example of the claims because you carry more credibility than most. That said here are the claims and what I have found:

Claim #1-Horus and Jesus are born from a virgin.

Horus’s mother is Isis. Isis was married to Osiris. We do not know for what length of time, but presumably the marriage was consummated. Whether it was or wasn’t doesn’t matter though. After Osiris is killed, Isis puts him back together again (he was hacked into 14 pieces) except for his penis which was tossed in a river or a lake. Iris fashions a substitute penis for him, humps him and here comes Horus. There is nothing virginal about that.

....Claim#8-Both came of age at 12, were baptized and their baptizers were executed.

There is no indication that Horus was preaching in a temple when he was 12. In fact, Massey indicates that Hours the child was depicted as a “weakling.” That doesn’t jive with story of Jesus preaching in the temple. Again this appears to have been a confabulation from Acharya and repeated by others.

Horus was never baptized in any of the Horus stories. In addition, Acharya mentions that John the Baptist is actually Anup the Baptizer. This individual is never mentioned anywhere in any Horus account. There is not even a footnote in Archaya’s on-line work The Origins of Christianity to support this. There is nothing.

Claim #9-Both had 12 disciples.

According to the Horus accounts, Horus had four semi-gods that were followers. There is some indication of 16 human followers and an unknown number of blacksmiths that went into battle with him. Horus did not have 12 disciples. Jesus reportedly did. Acharya failed to give a footnote to support this.

...In short, of the claims outlined in this entry, I find the comparison between Horus and Jesus to consist of the following: they were of royal descent, they allegedly worked miracles and there were murder plots against them.



http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/relig...ristianity.html

QUOTE
In the case of Adonis, there is no trace of a resurrection in pictorial representations or in any texts prior to the beginning of the Christian era.2 In fact, the only four witnesses that refer to the resurrection of Adonis date from the second to the fourth century (Lucian,3 Origen,4 Jerome5 (who depends upon Origen), and Cyril of Alexandria6) and none of these mentions the triduum.

The attempt to link the Adonis and Attis cults to the worship of Tammuz and his alleged resurrection7 rests, as Kramer put it, on "nothing but inference and surmise, guess and conjecture."8 Still more remote from the rise of Christianity is the Sumerian epic involving Ianna’s descent to the Nether World.9


http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ric...ier/graves.html

QUOTE
The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors: Or Christianity Before Christ is unreliable, but no comprehensive critique exists. Most scholars immediately recognize many of his findings as unsupported and dismiss Graves as useless .... In general, even when the evidence is real, it often only appears many years after Christianity began, and thus might be evidence of diffusion in the other direction. Another typical problem is that Graves draws far too much from what often amounts to rather vague evidence....

...All this is not to say Graves didn't have some things right. But you will never be able to tell what he has right from what he has wrong without totally redoing all his research and beyond, which makes him utterly useless to historians as a source. For example, almost all his sources on Krishna long postdate Christian-Nestorian influence on India. No pre-Christian texts on Krishna contain the details crucial to his case, apart from those few that were common among many gods everywhere. Can you tell from Graves which details are attested by early evidence, and which by late? That's a problem.

...Although I have not exhaustively investigated this matter, I have confirmed only two real "resurrected" deities with some uncanny similarity to Jesus which are actually reported before Christian times, Zalmoxis and Inanna, neither of which is mentioned by Graves or John G. Jackson (another Gravesian author--though both mention Tammuz, for whom Inanna was mistaken in their day). This is apart from the obvious pre-Christian myths of Demeter, Dionysos, Persephone, Castor and Pollux, Isis and Osiris, and Cybele and Attis, which do indeed carry a theme of metaphorical resurrection, usually in the terms of a return or escape from the Underworld, explaining the shifting seasons. But these myths are not quite the same thing as a pre-Christian passion story. It only goes to show the pervasiveness in antiquity of an agricultural resurrection theme, and the Jesus story has more to it than that, although the cultural influence can certainly be acknowledged.

The only pre-Christian man to be buried and resurrected and deified in his own lifetime, that I know of, is the Thracian god Zalmoxis (also called Salmoxis or Gebele'izis), who is described in the mid-5th-century B.C.E. by Herodotus (4.94-96), and also mentioned in Plato's Charmides (156d-158b) in the early-4th-century B.C.E. According to the hostile account of Greek informants, Zalmoxis buried himself alive, telling his followers he would be resurrected in three years, but he merely resided in a hidden dwelling all that time. His inevitable "resurrection" led to his deification, and a religion surrounding him, which preached heavenly immortality for believers, persisted for centuries.

The only case, that I know, of a pre-Christian god actually being crucified and then resurrected is Inanna (also known as Ishtar), a Sumerian goddess whose crucifixion, resurrection and escape from the underworld is told in cuneiform tablets inscribed c. 1500 B.C.E., attesting to a very old tradition. The best account and translation of the text is to be found in Samuel Kramer's History Begins at Sumer, pp. 154ff., but be sure to use the third revised edition (1981), since the text was significantly revised after new discoveries were made. For instance, the tablet was once believed to describe the resurrection of Inanna's lover, Tammuz (also known as Dumuzi). Graves thus mistakenly lists Tammuz as one of his "Sixteen Crucified Saviors." Of course, Graves cannot be discredited for this particular error, since in his day scholars still thought the tablet referred to that god (Kramer explains how this mistake happened)...


http://www.atsadgrab.com/forum/single/3335000.html

QUOTE
Start with the bibliography, and it reads like a Rogue's Gallery of Scholastic Incompetence: Freke and Gandy, Acharya S, Tim Leedom, T. W. Doane, Earl Doherty, Helen Ellerbe, Kersey Graves, John Shelby Spong, Godfrey Higgins, Gerald Massey, Alvin Boyd Kuhn. These last three (in reverse order) are Harpur's most favored sources; throughout Harpur expresses bewilderment that these three "scholars" (the word he applies liberally to just about anyone, regardless of credentials), especially Kuhn, have been so vastly ignored. The very idea that they have been ignored because of their incompetence and inability somehow never manages to cross Harpur's uncritical mind.

Some critical work backing this up was done for us by W. Ward Gasque, a Canadian Biblical scholar, who reports that he emailed 20 Egyptologists to get their view of these last three writers. Of the 10 who responded to Gasque, only one had ever heard of any of them. I think it worth reporting much of what Gasque reports, in full:

Harpur refers to Kuhn, Massey and Higgins as 'Egyptologists'; but he does not quote any contemporary Egyptologist or recognized academic authority on world religions, nor does he appeal to any of the standard reference books, such as the magisterial three volume Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (2001) or any primary sources.

He is especially dependent on Kuhn, whom he describes as "one of the single greatest geniuses of the 20th century" -- [one who] "towers above all others of recent memory in intellect and his understanding of the world's religions." Further, "Kuhn has more to offer the Church than all the scholars of the Jesus Seminar together. More than John Spong, C. S. Lewis, Joseph Campbell or Matthew Fox." Harpur declares himself "stunned at the silence with which [Kuhn's] writings have been greeted by scholars."

...I emailed 20 leading international Egyptologists, regarding the contributions made to the field by Kuhn, Higgins and Massey. I also asked their opinion of the following claims by Kuhn (and hence Harpur):

* That the name of Jesus was derived from the Egyptian Iusa, which means "the coming divine Son who heals or saves."

* That the god Horus is "an Egyptian Christos, or Christ . . . He and his mother, Isis, were the forerunners of the Christian Madonna and Child, and together they constituted a leading image in Egyptian religion for millennia prior to the Gospels."

* That Horus also "had a virgin birth, and that in one of his roles, he was 'a fisher of men with 12 followers.'"

* That "the letters KRST appear on Egyptian mummy coffins many centuries BCE, and . . . this word, when the vowels are filled in . . . is really Karast or Krist, signifying Christ."

* That the doctrine of the incarnation "is in fact the oldest, most universal mythos known to religion. It was current in the Osirian religion in Egypt at least 4,000 years BCE."

Only one of the 10 experts who responded to my questions had ever heard of Kuhn, Higgins or Massey! Professor Kenneth A. Kitchen of the University of Liverpool pointed out that not one of these men is mentioned in M.L. Bierbrier's Who Was Who in Egyptology (3rd ed, 1995); nor are any of their works listed in Ida B. Pratt's very extensive bibliography on Ancient Egypt (1925/1942).

Since he died in 1834, Kitchen noted, "nothing by Higgins could be of any value whatsoever, because decipherment of the Egyptian hieroglyphs was still being finalized, very few texts were translated, and certainly not the vast mass of first-hand religious data."

Another scholar responded: "Egyptology has the unenviable distinction of being one of those disciplines that almost anyone can lay claim to, and the unfortunate distinction of being probably the one most beleaguered by false prophets." He dismissed Kuhn's work as "fringe nonsense."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nunyabiz
post Jun 15 2008, 12:58 PM
Post #40





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 233
Joined: 8-February 08
Member No.: 2,727



well your first 2 sources are just "interpretations" of what a self proclaimed "Evangelical biblical scholar Ben Witherington" has to say about defending his delusions. Cant say as I particularly care what some insanely bias interpretation is. Christian apologist are masters of denial.
Take a Young Earth Creationist for example, I defy you to convince any YEC that the Earth is not 6000 years old, ga-head, you will witness blatant denial of ABSOLUTE FACT to the extent that only come from full blown delusional psychosis.

Strangely enough source #3 was actually ME eviscerating "Consigliere" (again a full blown Christian apologist) back in 2005 on the Stupid evil Bastard site.

#4 is from "Reverend Bruce M. Metzger" which like all staunch Christian apologist refuses to accept anything that doesn't fit into his very narrow world view.

#5. I agree with on some things, however Richard Carrier is one of those that are inclined to say that you can not prove right now the YOU EXIST type of people.
His interpretations of some things are bit skewed because of it.
I can re post a rather lengthy old post I have archived somewhere if I can find it but I think these articles by Earl Doherty do a better job of explaining this position anyway.
In it he mentions Metzger, Carrier and several others.

http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/supp13D.htm

http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/supp13B.htm

The last source is just some ding a ling again linking pure crap from "Apologetics Ministries" website.

I have researched religion for about 32+ years now, I have yet to find a single "Christian" whether he/she is an accredited Egyptologist, Archaeologist etc or not that will accept any evidence that goes against their religious viewpoint, thus to me their interpretation of evidence is suspect at best, in most cases is actually outright laughable.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th December 2014 - 03:48 PM