"ZEITGEIST, Part 1" - Debunked or Refuted? A Video Response
The intriguing internet movie "ZEITGEIST" has been an astounding hit, with over 15 million views worldwide in English and several other languages. In the past several months, there have been many claims on websites and in forums and videos all over the internet that the first part of ZEITGEIST has been "refuted" and "debunked." Contrary to these claims, the facts continue to demonstrate otherwise.First of all, let me clarify that I was not involved in the creation of ZEITGEIST, other than providing a few images and consulting on Part 1 at the last minute, the result of which was the final, "Official" version. However, my work did serve as a significant inspiration for Part 1. I had no involvement in Parts 2 and 3, and make no comment thereupon in this article.
Because of my work's influence on Part 1 of ZEITGEIST, a number of the debunking sites have been directed largely at me and my contentions formulated over the past 15 years. While we would expect a debate as to the facts, the vitriolic and bilious nature of these refutations reflects a severe weakness of intelligent argument. Moreover, the detractors - whether theists or atheists and other freethinkers - quite often HAVE NOT ACTUALLY STUDIED MY WORK, and there has not been one "refutation" site to our knowledge that has proceeded from an informed and unbiased perspective, accurately presenting facts based on serious research. Despite pretending to be experts on the subject in general and my work in particular, none of these individuals has given any indication that he or she has read my Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1, which already deals with a number of the facts purportedly "debunked" and which sets the tone for further discussion of the claims in ZEITGEIST. Because such individuals are not aware of the facts and evidence in my books, they apparently feel the need to attack me personally, demonstrating a lack of substance and objectivity on their part, despite their pretenses to the contrary.
It should be noted that I am not and have never been adverse to reading Christian material or factual rebuttals to my work or that of anyone else. Over the years, I have continually factored such information into my work. In reality, I was born and raised a Christian, from a family of Christians dating back many hundreds of years. My mother's family landed in America in 1630, as Puritans, and my mother was the longtime secretary, choir director and soloist of our Protestant Congregationalist church. I was also briefly a born-again Christian - I know the material very well. Who could miss Christian proselytizing? In America, it is available all over the place - in our books, newspapers, magazines, radio, TV, movies - we are inundated with Christianity. But if anyone dares to raise their small voice of objection or alternative perspective, they are beaten down with disparagement and vituperation. (Such vitriol, by the way, continues, as several people have attempted to post vicious and insulting comments here - be advised that such posts will not be passed through, but they do prove my point about religious fanaticism causing hatred and incivility towards other human beings.)
In this regard, what I am adverse to is going to a website or video and seeing or hearing libel and defamation against me, as well as the inaccurate portrayal of my work - and so far, none of the Zeitgeist-debunking material we have encountered has been free of this type of invective and abuse.
Unlike my detractors in their refutations, I do not engage in vitriol and calumny in this work. Instead, I provide FACTUAL MATERIAL from primary sources and the work of highly credentialed and qualified scholars. While it is true that ZEITGEIST does not thoroughly identify the various primary-source images it uses in its claims, the important point is that such sources do exist. Furthermore, ZG's creator, Peter Joseph, did not set out to present a scholarly documentary on the topic in the 25 minutes that comprise Part 1. Of course, those who think they can adequately cover the last 5,000 years of religious history in under 25 minutes are free to make their own video.
Despite all the efforts to refute the information and sources in Part 1 of ZEITGEIST, the bottom line will remain the same:
When the subject matter is examined scientifically and in depth, there continues to be no credible evidence for the existence of the gospel character named Jesus Christ, and the preponderance of scientific evidence points to him being as mythical a character as the Greek god Hercules and the many other deities of the Roman Empire of the time.
While people who take such a position are widely subjected to ridicule and derision, based on all the evidence this conclusion is demonstrably the most reasonable and logical. Furthermore, in a truthful world where we should not be compelled to reside in BLIND BELIEF, this perspective should be allowed to exist without its holders being derogated and abused, as well as dunned with impossibly high standards of proof, while claims in the religious arena require little to no proof at all! In addition, rather than attacking living, breathing human beings, in my work I tackle deleterious ideologies that have caused the deaths of hundreds of millions of people.
To demonstrate the utter lack of quality in the assaults on my credibility and character that somehow "prove" the existence of Jesus Christ, I have been labeled not only a "liar," "fraud" and "poor scholar," but also a "Freemason," an "Illuminati," a "CIA agent," a "Mossad agent" and a "Zionist" - utterly ridiculous notions so undeserving of dignifying that I have hitherto not addressed them. Nor am I a member of any Theosophical Society or any organization having to do with Luciferians, etc., ad absurdum - other silliness slung my way. These claims are entirely laughable, needless to say. Not to mention that these folks are BEARING FALSE WITNESS AGAINST ME, which breaks one of the 10 Commandments!
"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." (Exodus 20:16; Matthew 19:18)
Rather than providing credible, scientifically valid evidence and proof for their assertions, detractors thus continually engage in an endless stream of ad homs and other fallacies to distract away from the issues raised in "ZEITGEIST, Part 1." One of the contentions constantly bandied about as if it constitutes some great triumph is the notion that Jesus Christ was not born on December 25th or the winter solstice; therefore, the comparisons with other gods are inapt. The fact will remain that many millions of people over the centuries have been taught to believe that a Jewish son of God named Jesus Christ not only existed but was born on December 25th. This straw-man argument merely serves to prove our point that Jesus is not the "reason for the season." This and the equally fallacious "three kings" argument are addressed in my Companion Guide, along with much else.
What it comes down to is this - who has reason, logic and common sense on their side? The people who claim that there is an invisible Jewish guy floating all over the sky, or those who assert that this implausible figure is a myth based on previous myths? And if this story is based on myth - which logic and reason suggest it is - what were the myths? That is all I am doing with my work. No CIA, Illuminati or Mossad is necessary for an individual to have such an understanding and to attempt to share it with others. It is sheer common sense, period.
Not a few of the debunking sites rely on shallow "encyclopedia surfing" that will not reveal pertinent facts because of a well-oiled censorship machine that has been in place since long before the Inquisition and that remains to this day to a large extent - as we can see from these frantic and hysterical attempts at debunking, which rely almost entirely on ignorance based on censorial behavior by authorities over the centuries and millennia. Such censorship is responsible for a massive amount of destruction of primary sources - this shameful, deliberate devastation is what we should recall every time a debunker cries out for "primary sources!" Meanwhile, detractors themselves provide NO primary-source evidence for their own extraordinary claims. Furthermore, much of the pertinent data I provide in my books cannot be found in English but appears in other languages, such as Greek, Latin, German, French, as well as Hebrew and Egyptian, of course. Unless someone can work within these languages, he or she may never encounter this important information.
In addition, scholars in relevant fields operating within mainstream institutions themselves are frequently hemmed in by a variety of factors that will not allow them even to contemplate the data discovered through intensive research into comparative religion and mythology. In previous eras not long ago, one could not only lose one's occupation for delving deeply into the issues and having the audacity to broadcast such discoveries, but one could also be subjected to imprisonment on charges of heresy and blasphemy, among other even less savory situations. Mainstream scholars have also been urged not to "rock the boat," as well as to preserve the status quo - and their livelihoods frequently depend on conformity. Moreover, many scholars these days are so specialized that they do not cover the broad diversity of subjects involved in this particular field of research. Scholars in past eras were less specialized - and they did in fact make these connections within comparative religion, as my research demonstrates.
The Horus-Jesus Connection
Rather than relying on the typical shallow "encyclopedia surfing" of the debunking sites, or scholarship that skims the surface because of prejudices and occupational concerns, if you would like to get a taste of deeper and fascinating research on the subject that BACKS UP THE HORUS CLAIMS OF ZEITGEIST, you will want to read my ebook:
The Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1
In this 49-page ebook, I use mostly primary sources and the work of individuals highly credentialed in their relevant fields. This ebook shows exactly where some of the most well-known claims regarding the Egyptian god Horus can be found in ancient testimonies and texts.
If you go to my Zeitgeist page, you will find a series of excerpts that reveal the quality of the material I am presenting in the Guide.
We are also working on a short video on the subject, likewise addressing whether or not ZG, Part 1 has been "refuted" or "debunked." Again, I can assure you that it has not.
In addition, I am also close to finishing a much larger work on the subject that I’ve been diligently laboring upon - Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection. Thoroughly covering every contention found in ZEITGEIST regarding Horus, Christ in Egypt will be well over 400 pages, with dozens of illustrations and, again, mostly primary sources and the work of highly credentialed scholars, comprising a bibliography with over 500 entries. Again, I have managed to dig up some incredibly exciting and important research!
Many of us are delighted by the amazing success of ZEITGEIST, for the major reason that it has generated tremendous interest in what I consider to be some of the most intriguing subjects on the planet - comparative religion, mythology and astrotheology - but what has unfortunately been swept under the carpet for too long, in favor of biased, ethnocentric fallacies reducing the grandeur of the cosmos to petty fish tales.
If you have an interest in the direction humanity is going, you might want to know that I believe and hope it is towards a reawakening of the HIDDEN KNOWLEDGE I and others are bringing to light regarding religion and mythology - and this new development is another major step in that direction.
The Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1
Thanks - and enjoy!
Acharya S aka D.M. Murdock
P.S. If you would like to receive news about the forthcoming video on ZEITGEIST or about my book Christ in Egypt, please join my mailing list:
225 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 225 of 225Historical findings have substantiated the traditional cross. One finding is a graffito1 dating to shortly after 200 A.D., taken from the walls of the Roman Palatine. It is a drawing of a crucified ass; a mockery of a Christian prisoner who worships Christ. The Romans were no doubt amused that Christians worshiped this Jesus whom they had crucified on a cross.
How can you be so sure that was not Mithra or even Horus?
The tombs prove nothing, even a religious scholar would tell you this. You see, crucifixion was a popular punishment and the names Mary (Mara, Mariam, etc), Joseph (and derivities), Jesus, James, etc were popular family names. Still are for that matter, in fact, my family, both immediate and relatives, looks like a virtual group of deciples and followers.
It's a shame I have to go to work or I could continue with this, but the point is, that tomb thing and alike proves nothing.
Part 1 deals with Christian religion, telling us it is fake, and that Jesus never existed. Well who cares whether Jesus never existed. Christian religion had profound positive effects on the development of western civilization.
And doesn't that tip you off concerning something strange going on with all of this? Didn't the study of State religious control (ie Rome/Papacy/Dark Ages) say something to you? It is a form of mind control, a means to control the masses.
We celebrate Christmas on Dec. 25 each year, but is that really Jesus’ birthday?
Probably not. We celebrate Christmas on that day because Constantine, the first Christian Roman emperor, declared it in the year A.D. 320. Scholars believe he did this because Christians were already celebrating Christ’s birthday on that date, the Roman holiday Saturnalia, to avoid persecution.
In fact, the Bible may teach that Jesus was born on the first day of the Jewish festival called The Feast of Tabernacles (or Booths). John 1:14 says Jesus came and “tabernacled” with us – literally “pitched his tent with us”. The Feast of Tabernacles was a Jewish holiday that celebrated “God coming and dwelling with us”. It begins on the Jewish date Tishri 15. It celebrates Moses’ building God a tent in the desert.
During this joyous, seven-day celebration, the Jews go outside and live in tents (booths) to remind them that God is with us and that this earth is not our true home.
The Feast of Tabernacles holiday is called the “Season of our Joy” and the Angel told the shepherds, “Behold I bring you good tidings of great joy that will be to all people.” The holiday is also called “The Feast of Nations”, because it was to be celebrated by all peoples after the Messiah came.
In his book, The Birth of Yeshua During Sukkot, writer Eddie Chumney says the swaddling cloths that Mary wrapped Jesus in even give a clue. During the Feast of Tabernacles, strips of cloths were used to light the 16 vats of oil in the court of women. Even the word “manger” is the same word used for “booth” in the Old Testament. (Genesis 33:17)
The Bible says Jesus was circumcised on the “eighth day”. This was Jesus’ eighth day, yes, but it is also the name of a day on the calendar, called Shemini Atzeret, which is the day after the seven-day Feast of Tabernacles. That’s why Chumney believes Jesus was born on the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles.
But that’s not all. The Magi were probably Jews from Babylon who had remained there since Nebuchadnezzar captured them. They continued the Jewish traditions and during the Feast of Tabernacles would have stayed out in tents. The tents had a hole in the ceiling so you could see the star of the Messiah!
There’s even more evidence. The Bible says John the Baptist was six months older than Jesus. Zecheriah, John the Baptist’s father, was in the division of Abijah. Chumney says they were in the temple in the 10th week of each Jewish year. You can add nine months from then and see that John the Baptist was born in the spring – during Passover. To this day, the Jews put a plate out for Elijah during their Passover dinner because he is prophesied to return before the Messiah. Jesus said John was the return of Elijah and fulfilled that prophecy when he was born.
Also, shepherds slept out with their sheep during lambing season – spring and fall, not winter.
If all of this is true, Jesus was born on Tishri 15, 1 B.C. Why the year 1 B.C.? Because Luke says Jesus turned 30 15 years after the Coronation of Tiberius Caesar which was on August 19, of A.D. 14 (Luke 3:1). Further, new evidence has proven that Quirinus was governor in Syria until 1 B.C. When Ukranian Monk Dionysius Exignus set the calendar we still use, he used the January after Jesus’ birth as 1 A.D. (There is no year zero.)
Scholars have long stated that Jesus must have been born between 6 and 4 B.C. because of writings from Jewish historian Josephus stating that an eclipse occurred shortly before the death of Herod the Great. Now we know that another eclipse occurred on Dec. 29 of 1 B.C. Many scholars now believe Herod died sometime in 1 or 2 A.D.
When, then, is Jesus’ real birthday? According to a Jewish calendar conversion program, he was born on Saturday, Sept. 30, 1 B.C
Well, Anon, you are onto something there, but you only have half it.
You can find this info in John Shelby Spong's book A New Christianity for a New World. I also hear it is in his book Jesus for the Non-religiou too.
You see, the gospels were written according the Hebrew liturgical calendar. I've referred to this so many times that it is driving me nuts, but here goes again...
Bishop Spong starts on page 92 of his book with this info and it goes at least to page 107. "The story of Jesus' transfiguration (Mark 9:2-8), for example, is placed by Mark at that point in the liturgical year of the Jews when they are observing the Festival of Dedication. In that Festival Jews celebrated the time when the light of God was restored to the temple." Even though Mark then states the temple was at this point destroyed. Instead, "as Mark tells it, the light of God is said to have been poured out not upon the Temple, but upon Jesus..." (9:2-8).
I realize you don't see the relationship yet with what Acharya says and what Bishop Spong is saying, but as we read it on, it becomes more obvious, even though Spong doesn't say it.
Spong works backwards in the liturgical year, with the 8-day feast of Tabernacles, the Jewish harvest festival (4:1-41). Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement is next. Jesus is healing the sick and all. Mark of course begins the story with the Jewish New Year, Rosh Hashanah. Here, Mark makes John the Baptist "the human shofar, the trumpet of God, blown at Rosh Hashanah". This is where it sort of touches on what Acharya says, although Bishop Spong does not come right out and says it. John is shouting about the kingdom of God at hand, urging them to prepare for it with repentance. In reality, and Spong gets to this, John is allegory for the ram about to hand over the new year to pisces. Even Spong states "That is what later readers of Mark's gospel, who did not understand his (Mark's) use of Jewish symbols, literalized." It is not literal, but rather astrotheological symbolism. So the human shofar later becomes Aquarius, "baptizing" pisces. It shows three astrotheological symbols here, which have been buried with the Dark Ages and many other insidents, like the Inquisitions.
Spong even says, "It is my belief that these healing stories, as Mark used them, were not miracle narratives, as Western people have traditionally interpreted them to be, but only Mark's theological way of claiming for Jesus' life the signs of presence of the kingdom of God." People have literalize the stories too much.
The last supper and the crucifixion are symbolisms for Passover. The lamb's blood, through theophagy, was placed on the 12 and here, Jesus is the [shudders] sacrificial lamb.
Bishop Spong continues, using all the gospels before he is finished, how all the Hebrew liturgical celebrations are in the stories. He explains the symbolisms behind them and ends with Pentecost/Shavuot in Acts. This is not new, for if someone attends a high church, like an Episcopal Church or Catholic Church, that is not a mission church, the various seasons are set to a liturgical calendar. In the Episcopal Church, one learns they are "seasons". Even Easter is set to the Spring Equinox. Once you understand this, you will hopefully see it all fall into place. The calendar we use today is a solar calendar, but the Hebrew one was (and still is) a lunar one. It is set by the movements of our solar system and the Christian holidays (along with the Hebrew ones) are set by these movements to this day. This last is one of the first things I learned in the Episcopal Church.
Ironcally, Spong hides very little, says much, but does not say it all directly. Further research and questioning, helps to combine what he says, directly and indirectly, and fit the pieces together. It is "tribalism", as Spong calls it, at its finest, but covered with desception over the years. The astrotheology is hidden from the Vulgar, but the liturgical calendar is not. Why hide the astrotheology, but not the calendar? Good question, but those who have questioned that and took a peak under the curtain, only to discover the truth, have been charged with heresy and killed for it, esp when they attempted to tell people.
It is time we ALL took a peak behind the curtain and the little box that the rabbis and priests keep so secret. What was it Acharya said in one of her interviews with Abraxas? Something like, "if you looked in the box, they'd have to kill you, because there is nothing in it", that's why it was said one died if they looked in it. The truth is, all the Christian holidays are set by the seasons, relates back to tribalism, when people celebrated furtility and harvest rituals and worshipped the sun and the moon. Sinai, means Sin- the moon, ai mountain. It was moon and volcano worshipping in the story of Moses, but he had to get rid of the "golden calf" worship to do it. Yes, originally the Hebrews were polytheistic, not monotheistic. He was moving them from the bull to the ram (taraus to aries) and the Jesus story moved us from the ram to the fish (taraus to pisces).
You can say I'm full of it too, but the truth is, it is all right there, if one just questions it all, does their research, and thinks outside the confines of what today's waterdown version of the gospels teaches. The majority of churches don't want you to question it because of what has been hidden from the Vulgar. The Vulgate was not interpreted for the masses for them to know exactly what the Greek and Hebrew versions said, but a means of telling those who could read, what they wanted them to know. Vulgar, means common, for the masses. It is not for the elite or those who are privilaged to learn the esoteric, but for the common people as they are spoon fed what the Church wants them to know about theology. Spong only points to it all, but does not come directly out with it, because he more than likely knows he would get even more death threats for saying so.
Acharya, I'm just a little curious about your opinions on Zeitgeist parts 2 and 3. I doubt I'll even find this page again so if you or anyone else has a response you can send it to evilpiratethief@gmail.com
Thanks.
Acharya’s work is very much based on the works of Manly Hall and the Theosophical Society. Nothing new under the sun.
Anonymous said...
Acharya’s work is very much based on the works of Manly Hall and the Theosophical Society. Nothing new under the sun.
I already answered this utter falsehood on HollywoodJesus.com I have used NONE of Manly Hall's works in any of my writings. And I have scarcely quoted anyone who was involved with the Theosophical Society.
Yes, there is nothing new under the SUN, including Jesus - and his followers who frequently present inaccuracies.
Try debunking Confucianism. It can't be done.
Anonymous said...
Try debunking Confucianism. It can't be done.
There's no god in Confucianism nor is there any superstitious mumbo jumbo, so what would be the purpose?
p said:
Why don't you answer the Zeitgeist Challenge?
In the first place, I am under no obligation to answer anyone's "challenge." Secondly, the individuals involved in this particular endeavor, along with their followers, have been very impolite and obnoxious, libeling me with all manner of vile epithets and proving themselves entirely unworthy of response. Thirdly, these individuals are biased Christians who are not experts in comparative religion and mythology, know very little about the subject and know almost nothing about my work, but are nonetheless dishonestly presenting themselves as "experts" on me and my work. These are not credible and credentialed individuals upon whose endeavors I need to waste my own time and efforts. I am not inclined to trust the integrity of such dishonest characters who are going against their own religion by bearing false witness against me, which they have repeatedly done with their libelous, slanderous and hateful comments.
Moreover, in reality I have repeatedly addressed these ZG debunkers, in this blog as well as in my video on the subject. Their response has been to slander and libel me further as well as to spend more time demonstrating that they know very little about the subject matter and even less about my work. Again, these are not credible people with integrity. I understand that people whose feelings are hurt by the information I disclose will lash out and grasp anything they can to cling to discredited beliefs, but desperately following such characters who are being mendacious about their credentials and expertise, and who continually slander and libel decent and honest human beings, is really not the answer.
Furthermore, I answered whatever facts among their abundant non-facts and mistruths this so-called challenge may have produced before it was even issued, in my previous books, especially in Suns of God as well as Who Was Jesus? I also have hundreds of articles and other writings on my websites, in my groups and on my forums. These individuals would not know that fact because, even though they dishonestly pretend otherwise, they do not know my work at all.
These individuals need to be challenged themselves to admit to their many mistakes, as well as their vicious campaign of hatred, calumny, slander and libel, which is a mark of a truly low character and which is nothing new but has plagued Christianity from the very beginning. In the meantime, my latest book Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection thoroughly addresses all of the Horus commentary in the ZG movie. I would not expect these individuals to be honest enough to admit that their challenge is met, however. One would hope, nevertheless, that someone in the believing corner has more class, integrity and honesty to deal maturely and with common decency than do these particular individuals. It is frankly appalling and dismaying to consider that there are others who actually give credence to these individuals, but such is religious indoctrination that it creates disturbed and unbalanced people - as we see abundantly all over the internet, unfortunately.
In any event, my book Christ in Egypt is my main response to all criticisms concerning the Horus-Jesus connection in Zeitgeist, and, once it comes out, unless detractors have read it and can offer a mature critique devoid of dishonesty, libel and personal attacks, we should not be concerned with their opinions.
Hi there. Been a while since I posted on here, mainly because most of this is basic reiteration of that which has been said before.
For myself, I remain convinced that all religions inc Christian, Egyptian, Greek etc etc are simply evolved control mechanisms, used by people high up in their "order", to control the ones lower down, and used by the lower ones as a way to displace responsibility for their actions (ie. we are failed beings needing to be saved, rather than we are Ourselves, and if we do something wrong it is through our own choosing, rather than the "evil "in the world which seeks forever to tarnish us!).
However... I am intrigued. I've read much about Jesus, and the various other chars in the story, and one of the interesting things being bandied about is the idea that Moses was actually an Egypian Pharaoh. Now... correct me if i'm wrong here, but Pharaohs were believed to be God incarnate, anthropomorphized if you will. The logical and indeed general God associated with this, is Ra, the jolly old Sun God... Hmm.. interesting. So ostensibly, another leading figure in the jewish mythos, can be said to be (in certain circles) thought of as the same entity as Ra. Sounds familiar?
Another curiosity.. and this is purely a question for Acharya and Mriana, have you read any of Barbara Thiering's books (Jesus The Man, and Jesus of the Apocalypse). What these do is, explore the possibility that the scriptures are written in a style of code whereby the main protagonist names are not names of people, but are names of positions in hierarchy within their orders, which is why you can have a "Gabriel" "Michael" etc who pertains to be the same person to the uninformed, while actually the name refers to status's etc. An obvious example of this still happening today is the Pope.
What this opens up is, the possibility that "Jesus" could quite easily not have been called by his titular name by the people of their time/sect, (eg we know again the title "messiah" has been bestowed/attributed which would make him the "David"), ergo historians would have a bugger of a time actually correlating who the real person was.
I actually quite like that idea. It would provide a fair few answers, still holds the nice parallel with the Pope etc, while at least giving people something tangible to grip on to. It wouldn't alter the fact that the whole thing is a mythos, but it would at least make the story rather more fulfilling!
Acharya,
Will you be posting anything about the book Shattering the Christ Myth on your website? It mentions you a lot here and there, and the chapter on Zeitgeist even cites your companion guide a couple times.
Thanks for you time.
I'm not sure Acharya needs to address Holding's 'SCM' as he & his cult followers tend to use an assortment of fallacies and bad research with which to make giant leaps of faith to make their arguments. One can understand why when one realizes Holding has no biblical credentials to speak of whatsoever. So, often his opinion is irrelevant.
Although, I haven't seen the book yet. I understand Holding had others write chapters for him so, I wonder who wrote what about Acharya. I wonder if the info in SCM is another libelous smear against Acharya's work mis-representing her work by setting it up as fallacies in order to knock it down.
What are the "profiles" in SCM anyway? So, I wonder if SCM goes too far & if Holding needs to be sued for any dishonest defamation against Acharya.
22
Anonymous said...
Acharya,
Will you be posting anything about the book Shattering the Christ Myth on your website? It mentions you a lot here and there, and the chapter on Zeitgeist even cites your companion guide a couple times.
Thanks for you time.
I've heard about it, of course, but I don't anticipate spending much time rebutting it, as I have already refuted the unscientific arguments of Holding & Gang in my books, which, it has been my experience, they never address honestly.
For example, Suns of God addresses the criticisms of Christ Con - but that's too inconvenient for these "debunkers," so they ignore SOG.
They also ignore all the arguments in Who Was Jesus?, which thoroughly refute their claims that "there's a lot of evidence for Jesus."
While these debunkers may continue to falsely pretend that they have "refuted" Zeitgeist and my Companion Guide, they have not, and no amount of sophistry - which is essentially what they rely on - will refute the massive body of research I've been putting together in Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection.
In fact, there is SO much material here demonstrating that Christianity is a rehash of the Egyptian religion - from primary sources and the works of highly credentialed scholars in relevant fields - that I can hardly stop putting it into the book, which is swelling to unwieldy proportions.
All of these efforts on the part of Christian apologists will continue to be revealed as futile in the face of the research in CIE.
These fellows really just need to give up their useless endeavors in attempting to compel the rational and thinking segment of the population into believing in their imaginary Jewish lover in the sky. It is quite unbecoming - and they are simply tools of the megalomaniacs who determined that their tribal scribblings were "God's Word" and that they were the "chosen people," etc., ad nauseam.
Holding's book? LOL! I just checked, Acharya, and it's at like 425,000 on Amazon. Yeah, that's gonna make a big splash.
LMAO!
Hey look, Acharya, you know what they say about useful idiots and publicity!
Peter Joseph, the creator of Zeitgeist, said on "Coast to Coast" that the Zeitgeist Movie has now been viewed around *50 MILLION* times.
This would of course, include views worldwide in several languages. Listen to it at 3:45 in part 1, on youtube titled, "Peter Joseph Interview Nov. 15th '08"
Peter Joseph Interview Nov. 15th '08
That is absolutely fantastic!!!
I come at this discussion from the following beliefs, based on much study over many years:
1) Human beings (of various "sub-species") have been on this planet for much longer than standard archaeology / anthropology / geology would have us believe. And these peoples had a variety of "technologies", some of which were more advanced than modern scientists can accept or fathom.
2) Sumerian culture was not the start of human civilisation, but rather a re-start and a relatively tame one at that despite them having incredible information and knowledge (especially astrological), some of which is still being proven true in modern times.
3) Sumer gave rise to Babylon and Egypt etc, but there was many other related pockets of survivors all over the globe, as there really was a sort of global economy / culture prior to Sumer. Call it "Atlantis" if you will, but it existed and there is more physical proof / artifacts than the Smithsonian will ever say. The amount and quality of "hidden" or "alternative" of "anomalous" archaeological finds are astonishing on the one hand, but sickening on the other, as they have been systematically kept from us.
4) Researchers such as Velikovsky and others have proven the cyclical nature of catastrophic astrological events, and the relative dynamic nature of our solar system that would have been witnessed and survived by various types of people over a long period of time. Comets, asteroids, planetary disruptions and possible explosions, electromagnetic discharges and other phenomena would have made big impacts (parden the pun) on surviving peoples and become central to their religion, mythology, beliefs, fears, and actual / literal warnings for future generations.
5) So, the pre-deluvian ancients were intelligent, savy, technological World-wide peoples who understood a great many things about the cosmos, the origins of "human beings", and the natural order of things. Energies, frequencies, and vibrations were well understood and used. They understood we are the same, albeit wrapped in a "suit of flesh".
6) At some point long prior to Sumer and the most recent major Earth cataclysm, these technological societies became very stratified and hierarchical, with development of "priest classes" and Kings / nobility. As knowledge has always been power, the truth was kept from the people and actually used against them for reasons of control. Thus, we have Religion being born.
7) By the time Sumer was re-born, there was already a wide gap between those in the know, and the mere minions who toiled as workers and coiled in fear. The real knowledge of the power of the Universe being in all of us, the soul matrix intertwined within the flesh, the immortality of our spirit, the existence of other dimensions, became well hidden (occult) and used by the few (esoteric) to maintain their positions of control and power. Certain bloodlines were protected and certain "secret societies" were used to initiate and pass down the knowledge to their brethren.
8) There have been many written documents (on paper or in granite or on cave walls or on pyramids, etc) over thousands of years that have stated various truths / observations / wisdom / warnings / technical info / predictions and many other things. All of this is fascinating and would be very "illuminating" to all of us so-called moderns.
In more modern times we have the written Bible, probably put together sometime bewteen 300-400AD by a variety of men (and maybe some women) that discussed a great many things, including many topics getting close to the sacred occult / esoteric knowledge that had been passed down for thousands of years. That "first edition" might have been a fascinating historical book, with lots of insights and keys to self-empowerment, and very motivational due to the various decent, moral, righteous people who felt compelled to write things down. Fine. Great even. But, to think that any relatively modern Bible has any resemblance to that first edition is completely naive and ridiculous. There have been numerous priests, Popes, Kings, scribes, and other elite members of secret societies who have edited, erased, re-written, misdirected, and mistranslated to such an extent, for a variety of self serving agendas, that we are reading nearly pure propaganda mixed with plagerism mixed with mythology mixed with distorted historical accounts when we open up that bedside table at a cheap motel when we are bored because the TV is on the fritz.
If the modern Bible was about the truth, and about good, and about being saved and becoming powerful, do you really think that the Elite of our society would allow it to be in said bedside table in every cheap motel??!! We live in very controlled and distorted times, where the Elite have more power, "money", control, and technology than perhaps they ever did. Religion and the Bible are their tools, not our tools.
Whether a man named "Jesus Christ" lived 2000 years ago does not really concern me. I have no doubt that many good people did, and were passionate, and were good public motivational speakers, and tried to awaken the people to the truth of their slavery. They most likely were hunted down and killed, as so many have over thousands of years. Those people exist today too, regardless of name, and are just trying to help people understand this crazy place. Just imagine what our society would be like if we all realised what the ancients were trying to tell us:
a) We are much more than our physical.
b) Our non-physical (spirit / soul) is immortal and part of a "god-force" or Universal creative force. We are all gods.
c) We are thus all one energy, every person, every animal, every plant, every atom.
d) Death is part of a wonderful cycle which should not be feared, but embraced. Death is not the end.
e) Life on Earth is about experiences, lessons, karma, and knowledge that can only be gained in this 3rd dimension, and is just a small part of a Great Cycle involving other dimensions.
Do you see how these ideas really threaten the Controlling Elite? Do you see how any ancient texts (perhaps even including the first edition Bible) must be edited or destroyed or hidden from the people at all costs?
The Bible is just a book, and we must look to save ourselves, then our families, then our communities by understanding the real forces behind our slavery, and calling a spade a spade. No need for "evil" or "angels" or "Jesus" or even "reptiles" to be part of it initially; simply get off the couch, turn off the TV, dump out your pills, and DO SOMETHING GOOD AND MEANINGFUL.
great post
Greetings miss Acharya.
I'm a young (non-english) man who constantly thrives to flush out his urge to 'believe', and to use common sense and logic in arguments against the superstitions of others and his own. Zeitgeist I and II were very intriguing movies which have led me out of a state of ignorance. I do not think of them as some kind of 'salvation' though, and I'm quite baffled at the semi-religious zeal of some supporters (as well as the self appointed debunkers and critiques, but you should know about them already). Still, I'm very confident about the role these educational movies will play in the coming societal change, and I will most likely support the movement with all my strength in the near future. But before I take anything stated there as fact, I thought that I'd rather investigate the matter. I must confess, the first part of the original movie has influenced me the least - simply, because I regard any religious institution as the remains of a dark age, a world full of superstitions and lack of knowledge. This doesn't mean that I don't posess any knowledge on the matter, however, but it shouldn't be enough to dive into an infowar with you or some theologist for that matter.
My questions are very practical in nature and adress the - arguably - only part of your expedition into the Christ-Mythos which can be answered scientifically. These are as follows:
1. "WINTER SOLSTICE: Here a curious thing occurs: the Sun stops moving south, at least perceivably, for 3 days. During this 3 day pause, the Sun resides in the vicinity of the Southern Cross, or Crux, constellation.
Question: From where exactly? I've used the same program found in the transcript sources (time: 1AD and around 30BC), and tried several locations. First of all, Egypt of course - because, just as you said, there are many undeniable similarities between some egyptian deities and biblical persons (and it is also very likely that they were merged into one-another to hegemonize the great cults of Constantine's time). After that, I've tried Jerusalem, Acre and even Athens and Rome. Not an instance for the described constellation. As far as I know, Crux was part of the Centauri up to the late renaissance as well, so...it's strange actually.
2. "The star in the east is Sirius, the brightest star in the night sky, which, on December 24th, aligns with the 3 brightest stars in Orion's Belt. These 3 bright stars are called today what they were called in ancient times: The Three Kings. The Three Kings and the brightest star, Sirius, all point to the place of the sunrise on December 25th."
This is actually true, at least as far as astronomy is concerned. My question is: Why this constellation?
Because, despite being a nice lineup, there is nothing all too special about it, because Orion's belt and Sirius are always in a near-straight line, and were pointing at the sunrise for 1-2 weeks each December for decades. Is it only that important because of the winter solstice? I'm not quite sure what to think about that, but as Saturnalia was around that time and the Julfest was moved to the 25th of December, I find it more likely that the birthday of Jesus was simply altered from a dull late spring day to a significant pagan holiday, just to annex these traditions in order to help the conversion. The full story of the "star in the east", which lead the 3 kings to Herodes at first, seems to support this. Additionally, I've found out that in the morning of the 25th December 33BC (loc. Betlehem), the planets Mars, Venus and Jupiter formed a nearly straight line which has pointed at the sunrise - a far more likely inspiration in my opinion. But as your claims on Orion's Belt as being analogueous the 3 Kings is presently only backed up by a source which was written in French (thus unaccessible for me), I'd like to know your point of view.
I would be very thankful if you could provide some short, astounding facts/thoughts on these questions - these might help deter the irrational and violent resistance of uneducated people in the future.
Greetings miss Acharya.
I'm a young (non-english) man who constantly thrives to flush out his urge to 'believe', and to use common sense and logic in arguments against the superstitions of others and his own. Zeitgeist I and II were very intriguing movies which have led me out of a state of ignorance. I do not think of them as some kind of 'salvation' though, and I'm quite baffled at the semi-religious zeal of some supporters (as well as the self appointed debunkers and critiques, but you should know about them already). Still, I'm very confident about the role these educational movies will play in the coming societal change, and I will most likely support the movement with all my strength in the near future. But before I take anything stated there as fact, I thought that I'd rather investigate the matter. I must confess, the first part of the original movie has influenced me the least - simply, because I regard any religious institution as the remains of a dark age, a world full of superstitions and lack of knowledge. This doesn't mean that I don't posess any knowledge on the matter, however, but it shouldn't be enough to dive into an infowar with you or some theologist for that matter.
My questions are very practical in nature and adress the - arguably - only part of your expedition into the Christ-Mythos which can be answered scientifically. These are as follows:
1. "WINTER SOLSTICE: Here a curious thing occurs: the Sun stops moving south, at least perceivably, for 3 days. During this 3 day pause, the Sun resides in the vicinity of the Southern Cross, or Crux, constellation.
Question: From where exactly? I've used the same program found in the transcript sources (time: 1AD and around 30BC), and tried several locations. First of all, Egypt of course - because, just as you said, there are many undeniable similarities between some egyptian deities and biblical persons (and it is also very likely that they were merged into one-another to hegemonize the great cults of Constantine's time). After that, I've tried Jerusalem, Acre and even Athens and Rome. Not an instance for the described constellation. As far as I know, Crux was part of the Centauri up to the late renaissance as well, so...it's strange actually.
2. "The star in the east is Sirius, the brightest star in the night sky, which, on December 24th, aligns with the 3 brightest stars in Orion's Belt. These 3 bright stars are called today what they were called in ancient times: The Three Kings. The Three Kings and the brightest star, Sirius, all point to the place of the sunrise on December 25th."
This is actually true, at least as far as astronomy is concerned. My question is: Why this constellation?
Because, despite being a nice lineup, there is nothing all too special about it, because Orion's belt and Sirius are always in a near-straight line, and were pointing at the sunrise for 1-2 weeks each December for decades. Is it only that important because of the winter solstice? I'm not quite sure what to think about that, but as Saturnalia was around that time and the Julfest was moved to the 25th of December, I find it more likely that the birthday of Jesus was simply altered from a dull late spring day to a significant pagan holiday, just to annex these traditions in order to help the conversion. The full story of the "star in the east", which lead the 3 kings to Herodes at first, seems to support this. Additionally, I've found out that in the morning of the 25th December 33BC (loc. Betlehem), the planets Mars, Venus and Jupiter formed a nearly straight line which has pointed at the sunrise - a far more likely inspiration in my opinion. But as your claims on Orion's Belt as being analogueous the 3 Kings is presently only backed up by a source which was written in French (thus unaccessible for me), I'd like to know your point of view.
I would be very thankful if you could provide some short, astounding facts/thoughts on these questions - these might help deter the irrational and violent resistance of uneducated people in the future.
Thank you. I can't answer your questions in detail because those parts of ZG1 are not based on my work. You would need to ask Peter Joseph or perhaps a member of his forum.
Try this video:
Southern Cross at the Winter Solstice
"This is actually true, at least as far as astronomy is concerned. My question is: Why this constellation?"
You would need to ask the ancients that question, but I can tell you that the Egyptians used this configuration to determine when the Nile would flood every year.
You can read the chapter in my book Christ in Egypt for more on the star Sirius and constellation Orion.
i have gone through your site information and it is the sae oppertunity that i was looking for thr facilities,
the process that what you are offering , are perfectely matched to my expection, very soon you will get
responce from my side
master degree in greece
I want to congratulate Acharya for her work.
We humans need to believe.
Jesus Christ is a clear example of this pehnomenon.
For me this man is a coward.
I was a Catholic , in catholic schools. I was told to understand the sacrifice of his blood.
He died and suffered for the sins of all mankind, past present and future.
Until I did a little investigation, I mean a simple task.
How long will a normal man or woman survive in the roman cross?
Jesus Christ died about 4 to 7 hours when he was in the cross.
And I found that a normal being can last 3.
3 hours? NO 3 days¡¡¡
60, 70,80 hours.
No¡¡ it can´t be , The Son of God , The lamb, did not want to suffer what a normal human suffers in a cross?
This is not logical , he should do more, way more in his divinity.
The Guinness book of records, should have him registered.
Jesus Christ :
The most famous person in the world that was crucified, and the one who endure the shortest time, therefore the one who had less suffering.
How many people suffered lashes?
Was he the only one?
No.
But he fell in his knees 3 times?
Yes, as a catholic boy they convinced me that this is a great sacrifice for human kind.
Now as an adult this is absurd.
Ooo , he also was thisty¡¡¡
No doubt , the pain is much greater that a human can stand.
But, we want to believe.
faith must no argue with reason.
You must not think.
I would have all my respect for the Jesus Christ if we would have spent not 7 or 8 hours.
But days
No human will stand 8 days.
But the Son of God , in human body with the love of divinity will, would have done it.
But he didnt
Zeitgeist makes you think.
In religion you must not think
In the Zeitgeist companion it says that Wallis E Budge says the following:
"It has often been said and written that the cult of Isis and Horus and the worship of Mary the Virgin and the Child are one and the same thing..."
That is out of context because what he actually says is this....
"It has often been said and written that the cult of Isis and Horus and the worship of Mary the Virgin and the Child are one and the same thing, but the above summary of facts has been prepared to show that such is not the case"
....... Talk about selective quotation!
In the Zeitgeist companion it says that Wallis E Budge says the following:
"It has often been said and written that the cult of Isis and Horus and the worship of Mary the Virgin and the Child are one and the same thing..."
That is out of context because what he actually says is this....
"It has often been said and written that the cult of Isis and Horus and the worship of Mary the Virgin and the Child are one and the same thing, but the above summary of facts has been prepared to show that such is not the case"
....... Talk about selective quotation!
It is not "out of context," because I have never said that the devout Christian Budge claimed Isis and Mary were the same thing. My use of his quotes was to show a general trend comparing these figures, with good reason.
What Budge is trying to do here is what any devout Christian would do: Highlight differences in order to make the two figures appear to be different. He does this by claiming Isis was a goddess, while Mary was a real person. The latter contention is a religious belief, not a fact, and it can be shown equally that Mary was not a real person. My use of Budge's work represents a starting point, which I then expand upon by using the original texts and the works of other scholars.
For further demonstration of the contentions in ZG1.1, without the need for Budge, please see my Sourcebook and Rebuttal to Chris Forbes.
Post a Comment