By Larry White08-07-07
"Much that once was is lost - for none now live who remember it."
[J. R. R. Tolkien]
In regard to the claims in the movie Zeitgeist Part 1 that you can view on Google Video:
1. The movie says that Jehovah and Jesus represent the Sun that ancient people worshipped.
This beginning of lies and misrepresentation in the movie is but one of scores of outrageous and puerile slanders of God and his revelation to man. Nothing in all of Hebrew thought throughout history has equated Jehovah or Jesus with the Sun. Rather, Jehovah forbade worship of the Sun, Moon and stars, including wandering stars (Planets).
2. The movie states that the three kings that visited Jesus at his birth represent three stars in Orion.
In fact Alnitak, Alnilam and Mintaka, the three stars of the belt of Orion, are never mentioned in Hebrew nor in New Covenant scriptures. There is not even a mention of there being three kings during the birth of Christ in the synoptic gospels. The Encyclopedia Britannica discloses their ignorance with the statement: "In the Bible, the stars were referred to as Jacob's Staff, Peter's Staff, the Three Magi, and the Three Kings in the Bible." http://www.britannica.com/ebc/article-9309791 That was obviously embarrassing to Britannica. They have since removed the page that I had linked. Of course there is no such reference in all of the Bible.
3. The movie claims that Jesus was born on Dec 25th.
Rather, given the circumstances of the shepherds with their flocks in the field by night and the edict for the census during that time, his birth was probably in the spring sometime around late March or early April.
4. Zeitgeist says that Set (Seth) was the god of the darkness.
He was not. Set
5. The movie claims that Horus was the god of the Sun.
Horus was not the god of the Sun, Ra was. Horus was a new born deity as was Vishnu and Pallas Athene (Venus), and probably appearing at about the same time. There is much confusion over the identification of Horus-Isis-Orsiris in the Egyptian cultus. Please refer to Worlds in Collision, by Immanuel Velikovsky for more information. The tall tale in the movie Zeitgeist is just that.
6. There is a mythological equivocation of Horus, Attis and Krishna.
This again is just wrong. Krishna was of the royal family of Mathura, and was the eighth son born to the princess Devaki and her husband Vasudeva (no virgin birth there!). Dionysus was probably Venus again being born twice, the later being from the side of Jupiter. Mithra has the same misrepresentation.
The unwarranted generalization that most of the ancient gods of the East all conform to the virgin birth on Dec 25th, having 12 disciples, dying and resurrection is simply not true and a complete fabrication in this movie.
7. The fable that Jesus was born on Dec 25th is of Catholic origin when they wanted to incorporate Pagan solstice rituals into the worship of Christ. This is typical carnal will-worship that these anti-god authors attribute to the Bible, and of which is absent from it and from all the spiritual teachings of Christ and his apostles.
8. The movie claims the constellation Virgo was called Mary.
The constellation Virgo, as far as I know, was never called Mary. She is called Baaltis, Kanya, Kannae, Khosha, Secdeidos de Darzama, Ceres, Demeter, Justitia, Erigone, Astraea, Isis, and "Kennel Corner of the Barking Dogs" - but never "Mary". [Sourcebook of Astronomy, Paul E. Trejo]
9. The movie states that the Sun sets on Dec 22, 23, and 24 in the constellation Crux.
This is a physical impossibility seeing that Crux is at -60º Declination which the ecliptic never crosses. So it has nothing to do with the resurrection of Christ and even so, the resurrection took place in late March or early April in the Spring of the year which is when the Passover was celebrated.
10. The movie says that the golden calf in the age of Moses represented the Zodiacal sign Taurus the bull.
The golden calf in the age of Moses was not Taurus but Apis and Isis, Egyptian gods who represented Venus. Any Sunday school teacher today would know this.
11. All of the "staggering" correspondences between Christianity and the Egyptian cultus as it zips by in the movie is just that; staggering, as in not being able to stand up to the light of a simple perusal by the viewer, which he is not allowed to do. Is it any wonder why the movie runs it by so fast for it to be unreadable?
12. The movie says that the bible story of Noah's flood is plagiarism from other cultures.
The "plagiarism" that the writer refers to as continuing is his own. The fact that other cultures around the world all have traditions of a world-wide flood is one of the proofs that it actually happened, which he of course does not believe.
13. The movie says that Moses is equal to Sargon, Minos and Mises.
With a good time line Moses predates Sargon of Akkadia and Minos of Crete; Velikovsky proves this in his work, "Ages in Chaos". The movie's author is in confusion because he would rather believe an Egyptian than a Hebrew historian.
In regard to Mises, he was a mythical character not a human.
14. The movie claims that all that is distinctive about the religion of ancient Israel had its source in Egyptian culture.
This echoes the slander of Apion in the first century that Josephus dispenses with in his treatise "Against Apion". The Egyptian cultus being the source of Hebrew theology is just a stupid idea. Each one of the 10 plagues in the book of Exodus was aimed at an Egyptian deity to show the world that they could not match Jehovah, the God who actually does something for his people.
15. Josephus' mention of Christ has not been proven to be a forgery at all as the movie claims. Since Jesus was an obscure Jew who did not claim any earthly title or raise an army or overthrow any government or even lead any insurrection, the fact that we have four ancient public figures who mention him is rather amazing. Of course the spiritual aspect of Jesus is completely missed by Zeitgeist. Typical atheist.
16. In the words of the movie: "I don't want to be unkind but factual and I want to be academically correct, not cause hurt feelings" -- but this film is really stupid. And notice that the last quote as this is being heard is just at the last fraction of a second attributed to Thomas Paine, the early American atheist. The author probably hoped you would miss that.
17. The movie says that the council of Nicaea was a political rewrite and codification of doctrine.
The Nicaean Creed was an unfortunate and unnecessary codification of doctrine, but I would not call it political. No real Christian today follows the Nicaean creed. Bringing the Catholic church forward as a representative of Christianity is not worthy of being called research or scholarship. It is an insult.
18. What the author of the movie has written about he may very well call "religion" but that is not the truth of the gospel of Christ. There are very view people who really understand the message of Christ simply because they have not studied or even bothered to read the actual New Covenant scriptures.
All of this baloney from Peter Joseph is only confused, topsy-turvy rants against Christianity that is just a juvenile and sometimes puerile mockery of real scholarship.
Part II and III look to me like they are simply ripped off from other fine exposes of the 9/11 Demolition and of the Federal Reserve System that others have already posted on the web.Here are some links to other more thorough articles refuting the movie:
http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/pagint.html
http://www.tektonics.org/af/achy01.html
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/HORUS.htm#ZEITGEIST
http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/2007/12/zeitgeist-of-zeitgeist-...LW