A Scholarly Response to The Movie Zeitgeist

[Cogburn]

Yes, it's from an evangelical pastor, but he's got the credentials, the research is solid, and the logic is sound (with certain exceptions, see below).

The pastor doesn't tell the whole truth, however.

* In the first 6 minutes of the video, when he does not acknowledge that the adoption of December 25th as the birth date of Christ was deliberately picked to coincide with Saturnalia
* @ 15 minutes when logic is pushed to its breaking point in order to deny the "virgin" birth of Attis. I don't buy the argument. Your mileage may vary.
* @ 27 minutes, the distinction between the 12 Disciples and the Mithraic religion is misrepresented. There are numerous accounts relating the 12 Disciples to the 12 Houses of the Zodiac.
* @ 29 minutes, liberties are taken when debunking the assertion that Mithras role of "mediator" between good and evil gods does not relate to Jesus being the "mediator" of sin.
* @ 37 minutes, the denial of Luke 22:12 relating to the Age of Aquarius is so thin as to be practically transparent.
* @ 39 minutes, his support of Testimonium Flavium completely ignores the context of Constantine's commission of the translation of the piece in question during the switch over of the Roman Empire to Christianity.


If your a Z-Movie fan or if you share some beliefs in common with the film, it's worth an hour of your time to hear the other side directly rebut the "facts" asserted by Peter Josheph... and just how completely unsupported some of his assertions truly are.

1197058230586803890

With the exceptions listed above, I think this video does a pretty good job of debunking a large portion of the associations made by Z-Movie.

I'm interested to see if anyone has anything to refute the refutation.

[Lexion]

I'm interested to see if anyone has anything to refute the refutation.

They're both full of shit and
seek attention ?

[Ducky]

It seems that this Christian speaker hasn't done much of his homework at all. He mentions about 'primary sources' - direct contact with source material itself, instead of repeating heresay.

Fine and dandy, however, he failed to mention the real reasonings behind the Dec.25 birth date for Christ.

I'm sure if he dug deeper, he'd see that the supposed Christian Emperor Constantine 'integrated' the Mithra birthdate of Dec.25 (celebrated around the time of the winter solstice?) to appease the pagans and bring them into the fold as well. Whether he truely 'became Christian' is a matter of scrutiny.

[offsite:209fjlvm]December 25th was particularly important in the cult of Mithras, a popular deity in the Old Roman Empire. Robert Myers (a proponent for celebrating Christmas) in his book Celebrations, says:

"Prior to the celebration of Christmas, December 25th in the Roman world was the Natalis Solis Invicti, the Birthday of the Unconquerable Sun. This feast, which took place just after the winter solstice of the Julian calendar, was in honor of the Sun God, Mithras, originally a Persian deity whose cult penetrated the Roman world in the first century B.C. ... Besides the Mithraic influence, other pagan forces were at work. From the seventeenth of December until the twenty-third, Romans celebrated the ancient feast of the Saturnalia. ... It was commemorative of the Golden Age of Saturn, the god of sowing and husbandry."
http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/xmas/celeb.htm[/offsite:209fjlvm]

Edit to add:

[offsite:209fjlvm]In order to make Christianity palatable to the heathen, the Roman Church simply took Saturnalia, adopted it into Christianity, and then eventually many of the associated pagan symbols, forms, customs, and traditions were reinterpreted (i.e., "Christianized") in ways "acceptable" to Christian faith and practice. (In fact, in 375 A.D., the Church of Rome under Pope Julius I merely announced that the birth date of Christ had been "discovered" to be December 25th, and was accepted as such by the "faithful." The festival of Saturnalia and the birthday of Mithras could now be celebrated as the birthday of Christ!) The pagans flocked into the Catholic places of worship, because they were still able to worship their old gods, but merely under different names. It mattered not to them whether they worshiped the Egyptian goddess mother and her child under the old names (Isis and Horus), or under the names of the "Virgin Mary" and the "Christ-child." Either way, it was the same old idol-religion (cf. 1 Thes. 1:8-10; 5:22 -- Paul says to turn from idols, not rename them and Christianize them). Roman Catholicism's Christmas Day is nothing but "baptized" paganism, having come along much too late to be part of "the faith once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3).[/offsite:209fjlvm]

[boycotteverything]

i rather doubt that the original christmas had anything to do with either the birth of christ, the cult of mithras or any other pagan celebration. according to johannine tradition it was on the first day of the festival of lights (chanukkah) that jesus chose to reveal his divinity to the tribe of judah- i.e. the day he became the christ. so in a sense, for his judaic followers, it was the very day that he was reborn as the son of god. from that day on the festival of lights, which for judah was the celebration of the defeat of paganism under the maccabees 300 years earlier, became for the followers of jesus forever identified with the revelation of ha moshiach and the celebration of the new redemption and rebirth of judaism.

[Lexion]

All about the Jews, huh ?

[boycotteverything]

yep. it was. the announcement, according to John, took place at the temple in jerusalem. the cult of jesus was originally a judean cult.

[Cogburn]

I only counted six points in the entire presentation, Ducky's point being the first, that were dubious in the presenter's honest application of known history and/or logic. The sum total of the errors, however, leads one to believe that it was done purposefully in order to drive the point home to the intended audience, and not for general consumption by those with working brains. Upon further reflection, the net result is a piece that utilizes the same tactic of half-truths and lies of omission that Z-Movie employs.

Still tough to throw the baby out with the bathwater given the sheer number of exact, contextually applicable references provided, and especially given that it sometimes contradicts the narrative itself. Removing the questionable bits completely, there is still ample ammunition to destroy the key points upon which the Z-Movie mythology is derived.


i rather doubt that the original christmas had anything to do with either the birth of christ, the cult of mithras or any other pagan celebration. according to johannine tradition it was on the first day of the festival of lights (chanukkah) that jesus chose to reveal his divinity to the tribe of judah- i.e. the day he became the christ. so in a sense, for his judaic followers, it was the very day that he was reborn as the son of god. from that day on the festival of lights, which for judah was the celebration of the defeat of paganism under the maccabees 300 years earlier, became for the followers of jesus forever identified with the revelation of ha moshiach and the celebration of the new redemption and rebirth of judaism.BE, do you not refer to what, in modern Christian tradition, is called the Feast of the Epiphany? That's celebrated January 6th (or 19th, for Orthodox). Why would johannine tradition place the revelation of Christ at different point in Jesus's life? For that matter... why utilize their timeline at all?

[skunk]

Christmas is Saturnalia/Sol Invictus. I thought we were over this shit?

Remember Constantine?

[Cogburn]

BE has a valid point... I just can't see a reason to make the connection. Johannine teachings already disagree from mainstream Christianity as it exists today. I'm not sure why one further deviation is significant.

[boycotteverything]

i'm not concerned here with modern christian tradition but rather with the roots of christmas. epiphany is in fact a celebration of the accession of jesus but ignores the johannine tradition of jesus' own pronouncement- at the temple- on kislev 25, the first day of chanukkah. this holds significance for me. while the festival of lights was not a Tanakh tradition it was the most important celebration for the judeans at that time. probably second only to pesach in significance- which was also a celebration of redemption. you might see it as similar to independence day for americans. redemption, rebirth, independence was for the judeans of jesus' times, as it is for the jews of these times, of over-riding importance. for the jewish christians, when associated with the godliness of jesus, it was profound. there are few coincidences in the gospels. john intended the conflation of rebirth and messianism in the being of jesus. and therefore christmas was the original celebration- not of the birth of jesus- but the rebirth.

[Cogburn]

...

You just restated what you said before without answering the question... so I'll restate the question.

Why consider the johannine at all within the context of the birth of Jesus given their historical insignificance on Christian practices post-Constantine?

They were relegated to a footnote.

[boycotteverything]

because the gospels predate constantine by 300 years.

[boycotteverything]

post constantine christianity is a different religion from the early cult.

[Cogburn]

... and post-Constantine Christianity is the perspective from which the video is presented.

So ... your commentary is either completely meaningless and you just wanted to sound like a smarty pants, or you've yet to actually make your point so my tiny mind can comprehend it.

[boycotteverything]

i didn't watch the video. my only point was in demonstrating the roots of christmas in the original jewish christian cult. i'll never suffer through a sermon by an evangelical pastor. but i'll gladly share my own original thoughts concerning the relationship between early christianity and its judaic roots. in fact my response was to ducky. i really know nothing about this 'move zeitgeist.' the words themselves don't even make sense to me.

[Cogburn]

Hahaha... I'm thinking that's a good thing.

It would probably reduce your belief in the capacity for rational thought inherent in your fellow man.

They show that stupid movie in art houses and college campuses. Frightening.

[boycotteverything]

evangelicals give me gas.

[boycotteverything]

Christmas is Saturnalia/Sol Invictus. I thought we were over this shit?

Remember Constantine?
just when you think an issue is settled the floor disappears beneath your feet. life's a bitch sometimes.

[pack3tg0st]

Jews lol

ok...

Lets disregard the stone age celebrations for the Winter solstice.. which typically happens around the 23-25th of december...

The time of year was already a celebration...

The adoption of a calander just put a date to the festivals...

Before the Romans, The Christians and the Jews.... we had the pagans...

[skunk]

Christmas is Saturnalia/Sol Invictus. I thought we were over this shit?

Remember Constantine?
just when you think an issue is settled the floor disappears beneath your feet. life's a bitch sometimes.

My footing is fine thanks. I don't really give a shit if I'm wrong, which is all the time. How's yours?

[boycotteverything]

Jews lol

ok...

Lets disregard the stone age celebrations for the Winter solstice.. which typically happens around the 23-25th of december...

The time of year was already a celebration...

The adoption of a calander just put a date to the festivals...

Before the Romans, The Christians and the Jews.... we had the pagans...and who did we have before the pagans?

[boycotteverything]

Christmas is Saturnalia/Sol Invictus. I thought we were over this shit?

Remember Constantine?
just when you think an issue is settled the floor disappears beneath your feet. life's a bitch sometimes.

My footing is fine thanks. I don't really give a shit if I'm wrong, which is all the time. How's yours?for me the floor is an illusion.

[pack3tg0st]

and who did we have before the pagans?

?

The term Pagans is typically understood to mean all non-abrahamic religions.

I'm sure there's a semantics argument coming up...

but eventually ya gotta face the facts... the Jews didn't invent the world.

[boycotteverything]

nor did the pagans

[pack3tg0st]

No... but they invented religion

[skunk]

Oh, snap!

[boycotteverything]

well- that depends on both your definition of religion and of pagan. to lump all non judeo/christian/islamic peoples together into one shared worldview seems a bit on the lite side of cultural history. but i'm not surprised that you do it. it's a popular position to take.

[Foxtrot Oscar]

This is one of those quaility arguments where it would just be a whole lot easier to bang your head against a blunt object.

OI BE... Shouldn't you be on Facebook becomming a friend of Auschwitz?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8307162.stm

Christmas was invented by the marketing people at the coca-cola corp. Before then Jesus and Mickey Mouse didn't even come in to it!

Although I think Chip N Dale may have had a planned frolicking around that time of the year.

Fox

[boycotteverything]

sure it is. but if you don't exercise your brain it tends to wither like an autumn leaf.

[pack3tg0st]

BE: Pagan was a title given by the abrahamic religions to all of those who were not of the abrahamic religions...

Kinda like If you're not Muslim, you're an infidel...

so given that... what religions are you counting as "pagan" and which religions don't make the cut?

Like I said... The Jews didn't invent everything...

get off that high horse and climb down the pedestal...

Yah, I know... I'm an anti-semetic jew hater now...

[boycotteverything]

we've been gifted with the inheritance of the most beautiful language on earth. it has a vast and dynamic lexicon that lends itself to precise critical thinking on the one hand and poetry on the other. too often it's abused and misused and drifts darkly into trivial culs des sacs of the mind. but what the hell- it's our greatest possibility for access to truth both rational and absurd. it ought to be taught to the young.

[boycotteverything]

BE: Pagan was a title given by the abrahamic religions to all of those who were not of the abrahamic religions...

Kinda like If you're not Muslim, you're an infidel...

so given that... what religions are you counting as "pagan" and which religions don't make the cut?

Like I said... The Jews didn't invent everything...

get off that high horse and climb down the pedestal...

Yah, I know... I'm an anti-semetic jew hater now...i never said that jews invented everything- or anything for that matter. but no discussion of early christianity makes sense without reference to the progenitors of that cult- in this case the jewish cult. you jumped into the middle of a discussion on early christian beliefs without even attempting to understand the premises- for what reason, i don't know. i do know this though. you're essentially obtuse.

[pack3tg0st]

So what you meant to say here:


i'm not concerned here with modern christian tradition but rather with the roots of christmas.

Was that you intend to pretend like the roots of christmas come from the jewish faith/peoples...

You said roots... I talked roots... If I had known you didn't really have any interest in the actual roots of the holiday, this conversation woudl have been different.

[boycotteverything]

the first christians were a judaic cult. look at the synoptics. every central figure was a judean. the mother and father of jesus, his brothers, including james, all of the apostles including john patmos (st. john) and saul tarsus (st. paul). you can't understand early christianity without an understanding of judaism. period. the roots are there- and go back 3800 years to the times of abram. further, you cant understand first century judaism without an understanding of pre-first century greek philosophy because it subsumed so many of the ideas of 1st century judea. that's one of the reasons for the importance of joannine tradition- he was the most 'greek' of all the early christian writers. the concept of christian logos, alpha/ omega and the ascension itself- things you may or may not be familiar with- are owing to john. that's the reason that i trace the conflation of the festival lights and jesus' assumption of messianism to john. it is what he tells us first hand. all of this predates the political usurpation of christianity by constantine by more than 300 years. understand? do you have the capacity to get over your fairy tales and listen? i rather doubt it. but maybe some day.

[pack3tg0st]

LOL and all this has to do with the roots of christmas how?

If a celebration was already taking place around that time of year... we're talking about just a "re-labeling".

BTW be... those Greek philosophers... were pagans...

Its hard to accuse me of anythign with fairy tales when parts of your argument through this thread included "the gospels".

[boycotteverything]

if you responded this fast you never considered nor understood what i said. fuck you and stay outa my face. vaya con carne.

[pack3tg0st]

I don't need to go meditate on a hilltop to understand anthropology.

[Cogburn]

The discussion was about the "floor" of history within the context of modern Christianity and Z-Movie.

The point of delineation of any import for 99.99% conspiracy theory is Constantine. It was Constantine and his doctrine that caused the inclusion of pagan holidays as the Church came across new cultures, as pack is suggesting.

However, prior to Constantine, BE is completely correct.

The fact you keep arguing over nothing makes you both retarded.

[pack3tg0st]

Tell that to the guy who stormed outta here in a tizzy lol

[Snow Crash]

So er...

Did everyone miss the overall point of the first section of Zeitgeist? Or were they too busy being offended that someone had offended their god/prophet/religious institution/cult/imaginary friend/higher power/interdimensional counseller/control agent?

I only ask, because I have seen a few "OMG ZEITGEIST DEBUNKEDZORZ!!!!!!!111" style efforts, and I go in there looking to see if someones got a decent argument about 9/11, the media, the War On Terror, Iraq, NWO etc, and instead find Christians whining because Peter Joseph (in error or otherwise) 'blasphemed' by comparing the object of their fucking fixations with a few past fixations of bygone civilisations.

[boycotteverything]

Did everyone miss the overall point of the first section of Zeitgeist? mea culpa, tovarish. i never did have the stomach required for watching any evangelical preacherman spew his load of bullshit.

[guinnessford]

All about the Jews, huh ?


Isnt it all?

[guinnessford]

So er...

Did everyone miss the overall point of the first section of Zeitgeist? Or were they too busy being offended that someone had offended their god/prophet/religious institution/cult/imaginary friend/higher power/interdimensional counseller/control agent?

I only ask, because I have seen a few "OMG ZEITGEIST DEBUNKEDZORZ!!!!!!!111" style efforts, and I go in there looking to see if someones got a decent argument about 9/11, the media, the War On Terror, Iraq, NWO etc, and instead find Christians whining because Peter Joseph (in error or otherwise) 'blasphemed' by comparing the object of their fucking fixations with a few past fixations of bygone civilisations.


I tried not to take any religious issues from the movie, rather a vast overlook of the whole story itself.

Moral: The wool is dark, and its over your freakin eyes.

[Cogburn]

Moral: The wool is dark, and its over your freakin eyes.
Smite.

[guinnessford]

Why thank you.

[guinnessford]

Im guessing any movie or documentary you watch is gonna have points that are opinion, and someone will disagre with them

Any conspiracy movie, or documentary Ive watched Ive gotten something from.

Cant always hold every idea too closeley, because some mens proven fact or theory is always another mans pile of bullshit.

I got alot of things from Z, Loose Change, In Plane site, and a few others.

Not 100pct of any of them became my whole ideology, though.

[skunk]

As long as you don't watch them and take them as dogmatic truth you'll be fine :).

[guinnessford]

Thats what i mean, even I , being kinda new to all this wont take it all has fact.

Everyones got different ideas, and just cuz they have a camers on them dont mean theyre right.

[GeneralStriker]

spoken like a true woostah boy!

[guinnessford]

I knew Id do somethin right today.

yesterday sucked.

[GeneralStriker]

what happened?

[guinnessford]

Set up a timing belt wrong in the morning, bent all the valves in the car.

started it tue nite and forgot what i did wed am...

[GeneralStriker]

Cheer up man. At least Skunk got the Nobel overturned.


Nobel Committee rescinds Obama Award

Oslo, Norway October 15, 2009

In a shocking reversal, the Nobel Prize Committee this morning voted unanimously to rescind the award of the Peace Prize to Kenyan presidential impostor Barry Hussein O'bama. A committee spokesman said that the decision was made after assessing the outraged response of the American online community and in particular from the well known eccentric web site Amkon.net and that site's senior janitor Mr. Birther-Truther Skunk. "That boy is not only a lazy bastard but a Kenyan spy planted to disrupt our long and hard-won traditions of white superiority and patriotism," said Mr. Skunk in an exclusive BE News interview.

More on this story as it develops. Please stay tooned.

[guinnessford]

good job, Skunk!

And B.E./Toon newswire, too

[GeneralStriker]

skunk da man!

[Martian Exile]

started it tue nite and forgot what i did wed

That's because Friday the thirteenth fell on a Tuesday this month.

[guinnessford]

Why, yes it did.

Dammit

[boycotteverything]

nah. i vote for early onset dementia. it's a result of all that coal dust breathed in during childhood.

[guinnessford]

I remember the coal towers on the side of 395... used to sled there as a kid.

Could be...

[Cogburn]

It seems that this Christian speaker hasn't done much of his homework at all. He mentions about 'primary sources' - direct contact with source material itself, instead of repeating heresay.

Fine and dandy, however, he failed to mention the real reasonings behind the Dec.25 birth date for Christ.

I'm sure if he dug deeper, he'd see that the supposed Christian Emperor Constantine 'integrated' the Mithra birthdate of Dec.25 (celebrated around the time of the winter solstice?) to appease the pagans and bring them into the fold as well. Whether he truely 'became Christian' is a matter of scrutiny.

December 25th was particularly important in the cult of Mithras, a popular deity in the Old Roman Empire. Robert Myers (a proponent for celebrating Christmas) in his book Celebrations, says:

"Prior to the celebration of Christmas, December 25th in the Roman world was the Natalis Solis Invicti, the Birthday of the Unconquerable Sun. This feast, which took place just after the winter solstice of the Julian calendar, was in honor of the Sun God, Mithras, originally a Persian deity whose cult penetrated the Roman world in the first century B.C. ... Besides the Mithraic influence, other pagan forces were at work. From the seventeenth of December until the twenty-third, Romans celebrated the ancient feast of the Saturnalia. ... It was commemorative of the Golden Age of Saturn, the god of sowing and husbandry."
http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/xmas/celeb.htm

Edit to add:

In order to make Christianity palatable to the heathen, the Roman Church simply took Saturnalia, adopted it into Christianity, and then eventually many of the associated pagan symbols, forms, customs, and traditions were reinterpreted (i.e., "Christianized") in ways "acceptable" to Christian faith and practice. (In fact, in 375 A.D., the Church of Rome under Pope Julius I merely announced that the birth date of Christ had been "discovered" to be December 25th, and was accepted as such by the "faithful." The festival of Saturnalia and the birthday of Mithras could now be celebrated as the birthday of Christ!) The pagans flocked into the Catholic places of worship, because they were still able to worship their old gods, but merely under different names. It mattered not to them whether they worshiped the Egyptian goddess mother and her child under the old names (Isis and Horus), or under the names of the "Virgin Mary" and the "Christ-child." Either way, it was the same old idol-religion (cf. 1 Thes. 1:8-10; 5:22 -- Paul says to turn from idols, not rename them and Christianize them). Roman Catholicism's Christmas Day is nothing but "baptized" paganism, having come along much too late to be part of "the faith once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3).

[Cogburn]

Bumping some of my threads from the past.

[century]

Retarded response to the film::rolleyes:

-fv16-DftRE

[guinnessford]

like most ct movies i watch, ill take the eye opening aspect of them, and come to my own coclusions.

i really take nothing drawn by any movie/show/book as 100% fact.

the best you could hope for from any of them is just peeling back the eyelids to see theres something wrong.

zeitgeist, loose change, in plane site, blah blah, the usual suspects.

take a little from each, toss it in a blender with your own harsh reality and make your own shit sandwich to eat.