• Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 1:04 AM GMT
    Hello found a great movie called Zeitgeist it is based in the US. If you are a hardcore bush fan, or hardcore christain you will not like it. It talks about how the gov't is slowly taking control of every thing and how this has happend before(Hitler).The movie is a doc, non-fiction. Go to google type in Zeitgeist and their it is, it is free. While it does not talk about homosexuiality it is still an important movie about the US people. I just wanted other peoples views about it. Please don't yell at me becouse it is not about homosexuiality becouse i know but i still think it is intressting to see.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 1:38 AM GMT
    A few weeks ago, I watched the first part, on the origins of Christianity, and I found it very interesting.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 2:13 AM GMT

    It is very interesting, unfortunately they - like so many others - start out with great facts, but then inject their opinions; generally opinions which they can not substantiate.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 2:23 AM GMT
    Even if some stuff is opinions it is still very interesting. Also what are you calling opinions?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 3:15 AM GMT

    For example - In just the first part:

    While all of their comparative religious data, and their zodiac data is accurate as far as it goes; they try to make that into an argument that the figure of Christ never existed.

    That theory flys directly against serious archeological evidence developed over the past 50 years that he was in fact a living, breathing, historical person.

    I am not denying the comparative religious aspects of the film - they are mostly true - the early church 'borrowed' shamelessly from other religions in order to gain socio economic and political power; to the point that the real core of the religious teaching was almost buried.

    And of course the Judeo Christian tradition borrows heavily from the Ancient Egyptian - any course in Comparative Religions 101 will teach you that: the majority of Jews were captive slaves there for a very long time and of course adopted many of their overcultures beliefs.

    Hell - not even the Roman or Orthodox Catholics contend that the Old Testament should be taken literally, but rather as a source of parables set in an ancient time to teach social and moral lessons.

    The presentation would have been much stronger if they had stuck with comparative issues and not tried to inject their belief that this made a good case for denying the existance of Christ.

    One major mistake they make is their use of license to translate the attic greek word 'Christ' to mean simply 'the annointed'; it is a vast oversimplification taken out of cultural context.

    Translator's License means that the Translator chooses the English translation for a Hebrew or Greek word each time it appears. A usage search for many Hebrew and Greek words reveals that the KING JAMES Translators frequently selected a variety of English translations for the same Hebrew or Greek word for example.

    A good translator will use Amplification to include unstated words and ideas, or accounts of events which have not been related in the Hebrew, Greek or English language translation.

    In the same way the word 'Christ' in Attic Greek is a license translation of a Hebrew word; with all the inaccuracies that such translation across culture/language can bring.

    That single word could imply any or all of the following for instance: annointed, admitted, baptised, appointed, put in charge, teacher, admitted, called, cleansed, leader, nominated, entitled, immersed, named, purified, regenerated, termed, or titled.

    I think a much better translation based on the earliest Essene and Classical Hebreww scrolls would perhaps be:


    Yes I do read way too much; Yes, I do read Attic and Koine Greek and Latin: Blame the Jesuits. No, unfortunately I do not read Classical or Biblical Hebrew, although a very good friend of mine - a Rabbi - does. Yes, the discussions are very long and we generally bore the hell out of our respective partners.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 3:19 AM GMT

    YOU ASKED!!!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 3:20 AM GMT
    ... I said that is you wear going to be offended by christain debate them you should not view it. Also there is three parts that is only one and the smallest part
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 3:26 AM GMT

    I am not offended at all.

    And I am aware of the fact that the movie is much longer.

    At the beginning I stated that I used what I wrote simply as a 'quick example'. (I could go on if you really want - but that would probably require quite a long essay).

    I thought the presentation over all was decent, if a little over simplified.

  • Thriller83

    Posts: 71

    Aug 31, 2007 4:23 AM GMT
    I enjoyed the first half of the movie where it discussed the origins of Christianity. The second half, however, completely ruined an otherwise enlightening film. How the hell can anyone try to prove that 9/11 was an inside job? My respect the makers of this film went out the window when the started talking about 9/11 conspiracies. Personally, I think people that believe that kinda bullshit are morons who deserve to be pushed down a large flight of stairs. For more info look up the Penn and Teller episode of “Bullshit” about 9/11 conspiracy theories. Debunked! It can be found on youtube.com
  • OptimusMatt

    Posts: 1124

    Aug 31, 2007 5:57 AM GMT
    The idea behind the movie was that it provoked critical thought; blindly accepting what society in general says to be true is folly. Not everything is as cut and dried as we would prefer it.

    Life is always messy; the idea is to learn from it.

    I enjoyed the movie.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 6:29 AM GMT
    This film was refered to me by a friend about a week ago, I watched it, i was fascinated! I took all that it had to offer with an open mind. The most interesting part (for me) was the banking situation and how we all will be swallowed up only to eventualy become slaves (as if we are not already).

    Great film, makes you think.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 7:42 AM GMT

    At the risk of hijacking the thread - and I'm sorry LJ if it does...

    Here is a much more interesting and factual presentation to me:


    Months after I first saw it, it still blows my mind that a high school kid created this.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 2:28 PM GMT
    "That theory flys directly against serious archeological evidence developed over the past 50 years that he was in fact a living, breathing, historical person."

    What evidence? That "James Ossuary" hoax?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 2:54 PM GMT

    I am not going to hijack this thread to the point where it becomes a debate over comparative religions.

    If you would like to discuss the topic further in a scholarly manner, I will be happy to correspond with you privately:


    I will state that although I am a Christian, I do not conform to the teachings of the Catholic or Coptic Churches; my background in comparative religions (and Christianity) in particular is more from an archeological and sociological perspective.

    Write if you wish, I will be happy to provide you with a list of primary and secondary reference materials where you can begin your studies.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 6:44 PM GMT
    I just watched the 1st part. I'm very skeptical; there are too many convenient conceits. It is frustrating to see thoughtful questions distorted by fiddling with facts to make things look good in a presentation. The style reeks of "not only that, but there's more..." infomercials. (Watching this clip I have the constant urge to stop and verify every statement.)

    The whole business of new/conquering religions usurping old ideas as part of the conversion process is a true pattern of human imperialist behaviour in history. I don't dispute that part...

    But I really question the sweeping linkages between the western zodiac and Egyptian theology and Christianity. Very clever, but definitely requires serious critical examination. I used to be into astronomy and so the use of scientific facts that I recognize about the night sky, and earth's relationship with the sun, to fuel their arguments makes things appear very persuasive - but I'm not buying it at face value - no way. Too many leaps in logic. Too many convenient patterns.

    I went to the actual zeitgeistmovie.com site. There's a lack of identifying information on whom and who he/she/they represent. Perhaps the site is only a few days old - I couldn't tell for sure. (View source on some pages showed a Nic Wolfe and TimelapseProductions.com.) It's certainly interesting. But looks can be deceiving - it doesn't help a cause if one practices the arts of deception (the mixing of fact with fiction) and propaganda if one's cause is a just one...

    But I am encouraged by the following statement I got off the site:

    "That being said, It is my hope that people will not take what is said in the film as the truth, but find out for themselves, for truth is not told, it is realized."

    That is perhaps the wisest words I've seen in a while. Any work that encourages people to do some of their own investigation is a work of worth! If only that quote was the first thing after the title in the movie! Such wise words should be front and center and not hidden like small legal print like an insurance clause.

    If this flick inspires critical thinking, I'm all for it. The question is if Zeitgeist will actually get people to think, to explore ideas and make their own decisions - or will it become a victim of its own slick presentation?

    I haven't watched Part II on 9/11 yet, but I get where that's going (the website alludes to what I've seen before at other sites and board discussions). I'm not persuaded by conspiracy theories. Certainly there are questions, and I do believe VP Dick Cheney and his pals to be vile men. (Cheney comes off as "the Evil Grandfather". Man does he know how to play the puppetmaster or what!)

    But I know what I saw that morning when the towers fell - there is no way those 2 buildings could have survived that level of damage for long (especially the tower stuck in the middle). I do have a feeling that something is amiss about that day. For example: even if the FAA shut down airspace, the US military did have the time, permission and resources to rescue, or direct civilian rescue, of some people with lots of helicopters off the roof tops as best as possible - but didn't! Something else: how come US media had such limited footage of what happened? What of all the hundreds of people with cameras of one kind or other in town that day? (I'll concede there's more film/photo coverage locally than online or the international media.) I imagine there's some images too tragic for most people's sensibilities - but what about other footage from sources other than off of the roof of the Empire State building and those few overplayed street clips of dust clouds with people running in them? Why do I have the feeling that someone is hiding something?

    My suspicion: a few days/weeks before 9/11 happened, Dick Cheney and his gang were made aware by CIA or NSA or FBI of the coming attack. Instead of acting to thwart it, they actually saw an opportunity. Bush was deliberately kept out of the loop, because he is their pawn, and that would make everything appear more convincing. Other powerful people not part of the plan (to permit the terrorists to follow-through) were kept in the dark or stalled by various administrative orders and secret/security procedures. There may have been deliberate inteference with channels of communications between those who needed to know and could have acted to help prevent or reduce disaster. That awful day has awful questions that need answering - but is one popular conspiracy theory on the Internet being exploited to hide a real more plausible one? The feeding false of info to those who question and protest is an art form done by professionals - misinformation is rampant and many good-hearted folks get fooled! I remember the day after 9/11 an American official interviewed on CNN admitted that the first causality of war is the truth and that it was inevitable in a post-9/11 world. I never forgot that and took it as a warning of thin
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2007 6:57 PM GMT
    (continued, post cut-off, didn't know there's a max post size. I'll try to repeat what I lost)

    ... gs to come. (How creepy where I was cut off on that sentence! lol) I guess that guy was muzzled, fired, or quit and retired.

    I'm going to watch the rest of Zeitgeist and think about the total presentation.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2008 1:26 AM GMT
    Thriller83 -- By what I am going to say, don't think I buy totally that 911 was an inside job. But look up the site globalresearch.ca and look into their archives and read about the different "False Flag" (allowing or instigating a horrendous or war provocing event to push an issue of war or force to reach another goal often unrelated) When you read what our government has done via the CIA it is startling to learn that the Muslims have very good justification to hate. I'm just mentioning these things so you can get the idea that you don't give blanket trust to your or my government, this is why the founding father set up the seperation of powers so no one branch could take over. We are in danger as we speak of losing our freedoms if we do not stay alert and question what our government is doing. They have greatly erroding our freedoms already based on fear having to do with and starting with 911. and drumming the fear of the terrorist, when in acturality we have done far more terrorising in the middle east by far than any 911 situarion. Read from that site and you will understand more of what I'm saying. If not for the CIA we would not be in this situation, these things are why someone made this film as a warning and wake up call, even though there are questionable things about it, it is valuable to be distrustful of this current government particularly !!!