Zeitgeist - Remastered

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » General Discussion
  3. » Zeitgeist - Remastered

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Justin
 
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 03:19 pm
For those of you who haven't seen this, I thought I'd post it up for discussion. This is quite a long movie but I'm sure many of you will find it very interesting as well as somewhat educational. Please post your comments, discussion and opinions. The trailer to the movie is the second one.

Zeitgeist, The Movie - Remastered / Final Edition
[CENTER]Trailer:
[/CENTER]
Zeitgeist - Addendum [ Zeitgeist II ] Trailer.
 
Dustin phil
 
Reply Thu 27 Mar, 2008 06:06 pm
@Justin,
I haven't watched Zeitgeist yet, but I did get a chance to read about it on Wikipedia. There are three parts to the movie, and I wanted to make a few comments about it.

Quote:
Wikipedia:

StructureInner World of the Occult, criticizing religious institutions, governments, and the banking cartels who "have misled [the people] away from the true and divine presence in the universe."

Part I: The Greatest Story Ever Told

Part I evaluates Christian beliefs established in the Bible and critiques the historicity of the Bible. In furtherance of the Jesus myth hypothesis, this part argues that the historical Jesus is a literary and astrological hybrid, and that the Bible is based on astrological principles documented by many ancient civilizations, especially pertaining to the movement of the sun through the sky and stars. The film explains how and why early civilizations personified the Sun as the "representative of the unseen Creator or God" and how stars were linked into constellations, the 12 constellations being a place of travel for "God's Sun" and representing "elements of nature that happened during that period of time." This section is also used by the film to show the Pagan origins of the symbol of the Cross.

Horus, the Ancient Egyptian Sun God, is introduced as having a number of attributes in common with Jesus. The relationship between Horus and Set is also discussed. According to the film every morning Horus would "win the battle against Set" and every evening Set would conquer Horus and banish him to the underworld, metaphorically speaking. The movie describes this conflict as "one of the most ubiquitous mythological dualities ever known and it's still expressed at many levels at this day." According to the movie, religion and myths in general can be used to motivate people to be good or remember important astrological occurrences, but ultimately if the majority of people believe in something that is not true, then they are in danger of being controlled or oppressed.
To say, "Jesus is a literary and astrological hybrid, and that the Bible is based on astrological principles documented by many ancient civilizations," is in no way proof of anything. It is safe to say that most all of the Bible has spiritual significance, so trying to debunk the historical accuracy of the book, is to entirely miss the point. History itself has no importance in spiritual growth, none. If we look hard enough, we can find similarities in all religions-and we can also see that the path to God is just becoming more clearly defined in each generation.

The symbol of the cross can be easily compared to something like the Buddha statue, and anything, anything can be made an idol, not just something so obvious. Those who do idolize the cross are missing the point; they idolize it, because they are spiritual babies and BLIND. Is it their fault? No! Nearly everyone, at some point in their life, has been blind. So, wood and rock statues are not the problem-people are the problem. And they will grow out of it!

The cross is symbolic for the crucifixion of self. People mostly idolize something when they are without understanding; no person in their right mind would intentionally carve an idol, would they? By dictionary definition, an "idol," is an image or statue worshiped as a god. Most are blind to their subtle idols, and I don't think anyone would consciously worship a statue or piece of wood . . . or, would they!?!

Quote:
Wikipedia:

Part II: All the World's a Stage

Part II of the documentary explores some of the major conspiracy theories surrounding the U.S. government and September 11th, 2001. These theories include that the United States was warned about the impending September 11, 2001 attacks, that NORAD was purposely confused through wargames to allow the planes to reach their targets, and that the World Trade Center buildings underwent a controlled demolition. The film also explores the theory that six of the named hijackers are still alive, that Hani Hanjour could not have flown Flight 77 into the Pentagon, that the Bush Administration covered up the truth in the 9/11 Commission Report, and that the mainstream media has failed to ask important questions about the official account. The movie claims 9/11 was engineered to generate mass fear, justify going to war with Afghanistan and Iraq, to remove civil liberties from the general public, and to make more money for the people in power.
It's said that more than 30% of the U.S. believes September 11th was an inside job, and the number keeps growing.

Quote:
Wikipedia:

Part III: Don't Mind the Men Behind the Curtain

According to Part III, powerful bankers have been conspiring for world domination and increased power while the rich of society have been using their wealth to increase financial panic and foster a consolidation of independent competing banks. The film details the Theory of Electronic Conspiracy and claims that the Federal Reserve System, the central bank of the United States, was created in order to steal the wealth of the nation. It explores war profiteering by banking cartels and defense and military contractors. It describes the goal of these bankers as world power over a controllable public. This section also explores the possibility that there is a clandestine movement, promoted by the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, to usurp the American constitution and US dollar, by merging the United States, Canada and Mexico into a North American Union that uses a single currency, the Amero, without the ratification of Congress. This currency union would create a super-state similar to the European Union, which together with the African Union and the proposed Asian Union would gradually be merged into a One World government. The movie concludes that under such a government, every human being will be implanted with a RFID microchip which will be used to monitor individuals and suppress dissent. It also claims that the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Federal Income Tax are unconstitutional and there are no laws which state that citizens must pay the tax. The movie ends, however, on an optimistic note, expressing confidence in the possibility of overthrowing oppressive forces and the ultimate triumph of revolution.
Perhaps all of this is inevitable, and the most we can do is stay informed. Do we really think we would be able to stop something like this if it were true?

Quote:
Wikipedia:

Criticism

In addition to attracting significant public interest, it has been criticized for relying too heavily on anecdotal evidence[8] and for using unidentified, undated, and unsourced video news clips, voice-overs, quotes, and book citations without page numbers. In a piece entitled Internet idiocy: the latest pandemic, the Arizona Daily Wildcat refers to the film as "internet bull****" saying that "witty sayings, fear tactics and a cool, assertive air all enable them to convince the unwitting public of their points". The Irish Times called it "unhinged" and accused it of offering nothing but "surreal perversions of genuine issues and debates".

Jordyn Marcellus of The Gauntlet felt it ironic that the film's viewers "have blindly followed the documentary without doing their own research." He states that, though the film is "well-edited and is truly compelling", it "glosses over inconvenient facts," uses "deceptive filmmaking" and that "for a film that rails against deception, there's a lot of deception implicit in its creation."

On March 10 2008, director Peter Joseph removed the 'Clarifications' section from the Film's official site, which The Guardian believed "alluded to dishonest filmmaking tactics that would otherwise help to discredit the film." It was replaced by a 'Q&A Section'. The new section responds to the film's critics stating that "All Part 1 "debunkers" do one or more of the following: (1) They attack/marginalize the messengers. (2) They do no real research. (3) They blindly ask "Where are the 'Primary Sources'?" (4) They projected their own subjective interpretation of a piece of information by using "semantic manipulation""
Justin, I spent most all of my evening yesterday watching Google Video and YouTube thanks to your post!

I started at Google and watched the #1 video called Dark Secrets Inside Bohemian Grove.

Short description:
[INDENT]Inside Bohemian Grove, Jones and his assistant infiltrated the annual secret gathering of the Bohemian Club. While Grove, Jones used a hidden camera to record-among other things-the Cremation of Care ritual, in which some of the most powerful men in the world gather before a 40-foot stone resembling a huge owl (Moloch), and burn a human-like dummy in effigy of "dull care." They then proceed to "read the sign" within its ashes.

[/INDENT]DARK SECRETS: INSIDE BOHEMIAN GROVE

It was quite entertaining, but
I have to say, it was also very strange...

Then of course, (anyone who has ever spent time on YouTube or Google Video would know this) I was lead to watch related material. Specifically, some videos by someone named Mark Dice.

These had me sort of laughing...
YouTube - Mark Dice visits Beverly Hills

YouTube - Mark Dice visits Hollywood

- MOD edited and updated videos as they were all not working -
 
astrotheological
 
Reply Mon 8 Sep, 2008 02:46 pm
@Justin,
What are your views based on what you have seen from this documentary. It will change the way you look at religion, humanity, and society.

www.zeitgeistthemovie.com Its amazing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Mon 8 Sep, 2008 04:53 pm
@astrotheological,
And the arguments presented gloss over inconvenient facts.

For example, the argument that Christianity is disguised pagan sun worship. What the authors of the movie miss is that religion evolves over time - of course Christianity is influenced by earlier pagan faith traditions. But this influence does not even suggest that Christianity is sun worship. It's quite clear that the neither early Jewish God, or God of Moses, were sun deities. Further, New Testament, and even apocrypha, do not suggest sun worship. Instead, the faith presented is an egalitarian action based tradition - not a tradition relying on praise or sacrifice to the primary body of our solar system.
 
astrotheological
 
Reply Mon 8 Sep, 2008 05:11 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Technically the modern Christian is actually worshipping the sun. Look at the evidence that they showed. Its obvious. Thats probably what Christians meant the religion to be based upon was that god is the sun in the first place. Its just that over time either people misinterpreted the bible or someone thought hey we could make a lot of money off this idea. Besides religion sells.

Also I've done a course in Egyptology and actually I've always wondered whether the Egyptian faith and the Christian faith were similar.
 
astrotheological
 
Reply Mon 8 Sep, 2008 05:18 pm
@astrotheological,
What happened to the thread Justin?:perplexed::listening:
 
Justin
 
Reply Mon 8 Sep, 2008 06:23 pm
@astrotheological,
astrotheological;24118 wrote:
What happened to the thread Justin?:perplexed::listening:

The thread has been merged with this thread so that it's not redundant. It's part of administering a forum. I did however leave a link that will expire in a week. Carry on with the conversation as it pertains to the original post with the attached movie.
 
astrotheological
 
Reply Mon 8 Sep, 2008 06:26 pm
@Justin,
Justin wrote:
The thread has been merged with this thread so that it's not redundant. It's part of administering a forum. I did however leave a link that will expire in a week. Carry on with the conversation as it pertains to the original post with the attached movie.


Oh I never knew you already had the zeitgeist on here. One of my friends showed it to me.
 
Holiday20310401
 
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2008 09:31 pm
@astrotheological,
They came out with the second one Oct 4th too.

Zeitgeist - The Movie

Its the first video with the eye. Used to be a trailer but nows its the real thing.
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2008 09:50 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Quote:
Technically the modern Christian is actually worshipping the sun. Look at the evidence that they showed. Its obvious. Thats probably what Christians meant the religion to be based upon was that god is the sun in the first place. Its just that over time either people misinterpreted the bible or someone thought hey we could make a lot of money off this idea. Besides religion sells.


No, it's really not so obvious. I'd contend, as I do above, that this idea that Christianity is sun worship is absurd.

What evidence is there that Christians initially meant their religion to be based upon a sun God? Zilch. Nada. Among the earliest Christians, I know of not a single case of sun worship.

Misinterpretation of the Bible is not uncommon. Some would say I misinterpret the text. However, there is not a single interpretation of the Bible of which I am familiar, presented by practicing Christians, that promotes worship of the sun as a deity. I know of no sun worship by historical or modern Christians. Unless Christians actually worship the sun, Christianity is not sun worship.

Quote:
Also I've done a course in Egyptology and actually I've always wondered whether the Egyptian faith and the Christian faith were similar.


All faith traditions have similarities. Among Egyptian religion, the story of Horace and Jesus are similar, the earlier certainly influencing the development of the later mythology. Also, Egypt gave birth to the first monotheism. The people of Moses who brought their War God from Egypt, a God who would have no other Gods before him (early monotheism), joined with the Jews already in Palestine worshiping the god of Abraham (who was one of many tribal deities). After the people of Moses arive with their war God, the two Gods (of Abraham and of Moses) merge to serve the needs of the merged group. This God, now imbibed with monotheistic tendencies, does away with the other tribal gods (one of which was being worshiped alongside the Jewish god in the Jewish temple), thus leaving the one "true" god of the Jews.

The God of Moses, a concept influenced by the failed monotheistic theology of Ahkenaten, brought monotheism to the Jews, and therefore, to the Christians.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » General Discussion
  3. » Zeitgeist - Remastered
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 05:29:12