Added: 3 years ago
From: ChelevSaRa
Views: 7,773
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (203)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Audio has been disabled by YouTube.

  • They're all vague if you cherry pick just one of them. It's all of them combined that is raising eyebrows.

  • Then what are we talking about. I thought you were saying that people can't provide pre 4 BC sources to validate the parallels they're talking about. I just listed some ancient temples where you can find some of these traits associated with the Jesus story. How does it not have anything to do with what we're talking about? Maybe instead of assuming I'm wrong you should look into the other side. Religious faith is close minded.

  • Really? That's funny you say that since not only is pre 4 BC still BC, but the temple in Sais is pre 4 BC. And so is the Abydos Temple of King Seti I, and so is Edfu and Luxor. Maybe you should stop taking on faith everything you hear from Christian apologists.

  • HAHA

    Even the sources you cite admit that Horus was the sexual son of Osiris and Isis, not born of a virgin.

  • My sources also say there's more than one version. That's one version, but then there's always the Isis statue in Sais who basically says she's never had sex and that the fruit she has produced is the Sun. And until someone goes to Sais and confirms that the Isis statue does not have that inscription; innocent until proven guilty. Zeitgeist Part 1 was never really debunked. Saying it has been is misinformation.

  • Zeitgeist is laughed at by almost all scholars.

    If Horus actually was born of a virgin, the credentialed Egyptologists don't know about it. Christian theologian Ward Gasque surveyed 20 Egyptologists, all who responded were unanimous in stating that Horus wasn't born of a virgin. You actually think that pseudo-scholars like Acharya S know more than credentialed Egyptologists? Even one of her sources, Dr. Budge admits that the translations of the hieroglyphics are outdated.

  • Name me one unreligious scholar that I can be seen laughing at Zeitgeist Part 1.

    Do you expect an atheist researcher who reads the Bible fairytales to trust in the survey taken by a Christian theologian? Which 20 Egyptologists did he survey, and which version of Horus were they talking about? Which translations are outdated?

  • Professors of the religions she claims influenced Christianity recognize her ignorance. A Budhist professor said, "The women you speak of(Acharya S) is totally ignorant of Budhism. It is very dangerous to spread misinformation like this. You should not honor her by engaging in a discussion, please ask her to take a basic course in world religion or Buddhism before uttering a word about things she does not know."

  • Don't you think religious scholars might be a little biased? I mean even "The ancient Gods Speak: A Guide to Egyptian Religion" from Oxford Publishing speaks on parallels of Isis and Horus to Mary and Jesus. It has over 50 scholarly contributers, all Egyptologists, and it's edited by Egyptologist Donald B. Redford. So when you tell me this stuff has no scholarly support I call bullshit.

  • Since you aledgedly have all these prechristian texts that state these parallels, it shouldn't be hard to produce one.

  • A Hindu professor also said that Acharya S' take on Krishna is "complete and utter nonsense."

  • I just looked up the alleged inscription on the Isis statue, and it doesn't say anything about Isis' sexual status. All it says it is "I am all that hath been, and is, and shall be; and my veil no mortal has hitherto raised."

  • That means she's never been with a man (she's a virgin). Even Budge directly calls her such. And then there's the text in the Abydos Temple of King Seti I where Isis says she's a virgin. Again, you have to refute the specific quote. Repeating Christian apologetics to me won't convince me of anything.

  • What's even more problematic is that Plutarch has an entire section of his work on Isis and Osiris, which you can view at thriceholy(dot)net, and throughout this entire text, he doesn't mention anything about Isis' alleged virginity.

  • The notion of a woman being made "divinely" pregnant such as by the impact of light is very common in ancient thought and appears throughout pagan religions. Plutarch (De Iside 368) speaks of Isis as being filled and impregnated by the Sun, and of Danae conceiving by Zeus through "a shower of gold" (ie, sun's rays).

  • Even Christian apologist Justin Martyr acknowledges pre-Christian virgin births when he writes:

    "...in the fables of those who are called Greeks, it is written that Perseus was begotten of Danae, who was a virgin; he who was called among Zeus having descended on her in the form of a golden shower."

    And later he writes:

    "And if we even affirm that He (Jesus) was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you accept of Perseus."

  • The early Christian writers knew quite well of fabled virgin births going back as many as 7 thousand years earlier. They pretty much HAD to borrow the virgin birth claim to compete with the ancient pagan followings of the time. People would have no interest in following Christianity without such miracles as were commonly known to have been attributed to earlier gods.

  • Why is there no sound! This is very wrong. The Christians claim that there is no unbiased to there debunking of Zeitgeist. Then they should allow the movement to defend their initial claims!

    Move evidence that the church & its Occult followers are only trying to force there beliefs on others.

  • wmg- nuke the feds i wonder how long i can say this before im labeled a terorrist and hauled off fed express style. lets resurect tom jefferson man would he say u dumb fucks i warned you now lets rock!! these muthaz

  • sorry guys is there no sound with this tape?

  • Wow! That's deep. lol

  • Cootabux....

    Thank you, but I think you may be just a little bit out of touch with reality. Now, I'm not a Christian or even a religious man. But I won't refuse facts simply because I don't like them. As John Adams said, "Facts are stubborn things..". Many key points examined in the Zeitgeist film have in fact been proven wrong, though not all of them. The biggest piece of misinformation in the film is the claim, using cleverly sewn Egyptian texts, that JC is an ancient wise tale. Just not true!

  • That ancient tale tells about as much truth as the people who wrote the bible :)

  • Well.....ya made me laugh. Maybe I'm crazy here buddy but, I'm gonna have go out on a limb and say that zeitgeist remains.....DEBUNKED!!!

  • That would be incorrect.

  • you have no audio...can you please fix it...i'm interested and you're being censored...usually means you're onto something...and redlisted...PRANK CALLER!...PRANK CALLER!

  • I cannot reupload it, but I will be going back over this information in a future video series that will be better than this one.

  • geek...

    Sorry but no 1 has debunked Acharia's work on this subject. Thats a fact. I have seen countless claims that it has, but all of them "proclaim" its debunked, that's all.

    This lady has done an incredible amount of research on JC=sun god! The key in all of this is in the languages. This is Y so little is known, & there has been an effort 2 keep this info from public. It is most assuredly threatening 2 the church & Xians fight it every way they can, even if it requires lies & deception.

  • I wont even debate about this

    Debating with people like this will only urge them to show the world that they are right/knowlegdeable...which is not....

    Its so sad their ego has consumed them and how corrupted mankind are.

    A christian understands the teachings of Jesus

    A roman catholic is about control,membership, and hypocrisy

    HE, them filled confusion in the bible so that people can criticize christianity....oh I meant roman catholic

  • Zeitgeist has been has been debunked.

    at this point if you believe the movie, you're believing a lie.

    that is, the religious parts.

  • Oh of course. Just the religious part...

    So... sacrificed any rams to volcano Lord Yahweh recently? I hear he likes the pleasing aroma of burnt offerings.

  • here watch this series, this might help you better understand how zietgest is wrong.

    /watch?v=7JRUF18Z0iQ

  • you can't even post a link correctly, bet it's gonna be just awesome

  • LOL! I'm with you, man.

  • The religion chapter of Zeitgeist has been debunked. It, actually, yeah. It has been debunked. Nice video, but, you still fail, since 99% of the religion section of zeitgeist was proven to not even be twistings of the truth, but outright fabrications. By scholars and historians even. Even atheists joined in the fight to prove to the world Zeitgeist was overflowing with lies and mis-truths. I'm sorry o_o Accept the truth now.

  • I'm just waiting to see one of these "debunkings." I've seen claimed debunkings, but I can usually spot holes in them pretty quick. Plus there's plenty of scholars who have contributed information that backs up the religion portion - that's not what they were even trying to do, yet did so anyway. If you have a new "debunking" not presented by a religious nut, I will gladly check it out.

  • Here is my Debunking. And it's amazingly simple. What acharya s Said, about the 42 some christ clones, cannot be found. Anywhere, in any written record of history, ancient text, or what have you. Maybe roughly 1-3% of it can be, and some of that is even taken out of context. But that's the debunking. The debunking is, you can never, and will never be able to show me where her writings are backed up by history, and I invite you to show me up and tell me where it is in fact written.

  • That's a bold, unbacked claim. It's not debunking. I promise you that even if it's possible to debunk all that, you can't do it in one comment box, niether can I prove anything in a comment box, nor do I have any desire to get into another comment box conversation with someone who seems to have made up their mind. I prefer making videos to make my points.

  • Send me an email dude. That's all you have to do. And if you don't, and show zero interest in pointing me to at least a few historical records, you have -proven my point-. :\ Alright. So yeah, an email please. Make a believer out of me with hard evidence, I'd think that would be your goal, since you promote zeitgeist and acharya s's work.

  • "If you have a new "debunking" not presented by a religious nut, I will gladly check it out. "

    Yet you totally listen to the unproven ranting's of an anti-christianity nut .... (and debunked is debunked doesn't matter who does and what bias they have)

  • That was anti productive of you.

  • did u use music? someone must have reported you and they silence u

  • To Chelevsara..dont put yourself in ridiculous repeating like a papagayo the New Age gospel of Zeitgeist...Read a bit more please...a bit more of effort maybe ? Just a tiny bit more please..

  • New Age is a soup of distorted myths and distorted religions from around the world..a real intellectual prostitution...the figure of Jesus bother the new age techno yuppies who have been dreaming to become gods with fake spirituality imported through an army of prepayed and preselected oriental fake gurus. The real spiritual orientals are the first critics of all this theater..like Zeitgeist : Bread and Circus for the crowd as in Roman times. Read the book " Stripping the Gurus "..Wake up !

  • Dr. Edwin Bryant, is Professor of Hinduism at Rutgers University and a scholar on Hinduism. He translated life of Krishna and is the author of Krishna: A Sourcebook. When asked about the claim that Krishna had been crucified, he replied, "That is absolute and complete non-sense. There is absolutely no mention anywhere which alludes to a crucifixion." He added that Krishna was killed by an arrow from a hunter who accidentally shot him in the heel. He died and ascended. It was not a resurrection.

  • Zeitgeist doesn't claim Krishna is crucified.

  • Dr. Alister McGrath, Professor of Historical Theology at Oxford University, says, Parallels between the pagan myths of dying and rising gods and the New Testament accounts of the resurrection of Jesus are now regarded as remote, to say the least...If anyone borrowed any ideas from anyone, it seems it was the gnostics who took up Christian ideas."

  • Alister McGrath is also a little biased and deluded.

  • he's a reptilian look at his forehead were his hairline starts you'll see him shape shift. there every where.

  • can you remake this. I want to hear whats being said please. Thank you.

  • :) Hardcore people are funny. Thanks for making this movie a hit church. You played right into that one, didn't you?

  • You get your information from a travel guide? C'mon "Egypt Guide for Travel and Tours"

    What's next. Jim Loy? Wow what a good source, you make me laugh and I won't mention your other links. What about Dyonisus, Mithra? Have you read the book Corpus Hermeticum? You should, to get better sources like those. Can't you come up with something better? At least a "little" better?

  • Obviously you didn't check the sources of those touregypt articles. For example "The Ancient Gods Speak: A Guide to Egyptian Religion" was written by Egyptologists, and edited by an Egyptologist. And if you can find me a better site with hieroglyph translations feel free to share it.

  • Please fix the sound...I'm so wanting to watch this!!

  • For the most part it's stuff that you'll see me cover on my JezusRa channel in my "Christianity Exposed" series (working on part 4 right now). It will be presented as an assault, rather than as a defense, since the subject has nothing to do with showing how Zeitgeist Part 1 hasn't actually been debunked, yet basically shows that anyway.

  • No sound :( prohibited :((( by WMG

    Why?

  • 13 years ago i was in India among many new agers....this crap is not new for me...maybe for u...i got not angy about Zeitgeist, rahther i laugh about this intellectaul prostitution...Zeitgesit site blocked me as they have blocked many other educated social scientists asking questions...anyway..sooner or later the truth will come out... Chemtrails are real, mind manipulation and hypnotism are real...Do u know who pay more than a million for the production and post production of this film ?

  • Seeing as how I could probably come close to remaking that film, not spending a penny - I want to know where you got this idea that it cost over a million to make.

  • I will let u know how much it is going to cost my film using max coz with Pinacle the effects are not that appealing...but if for u to make a film like Zeitgesit it can cost no money, u maybe can work for my art assocaition in France ( just joking )..u most be a master in pcs and computer programms i guess...

  • Obatal has no idea whatsoever, she/he should read Richard Dawkins'  book "The God Delusion"

  • Please list exactly which scholars and historians document Jesus' life in detail with precise dates?

    And please no Christian scholars, they are obviously biased yes?

    Educated Religious Scholars who claim to be social scientists are worst than Nazi's

  • Zeitgeist = New Age In fact what Zeitgeist is promoting is the NEW AGE ideology based in Astrotheology...the funny thing is that Zeitgeist says that Jesus was a myth resulting of astrotheology - WHAT A LIAR - it is them, New agers who are promoting astrotheology... I suggest to read this two books :

    " The Danger of the Rainbow " and " Stripping the Gurus"

  • Actually that's just a conspiracy theory based on a fallacious generalization. It's like saying because both Hitler and Kurt Cobain loved eating chocolate, basically that means they're both Nazis. Seriously that's the logic being used in this conspiracy theory, which is religiously originated due to anger toward the information presented in Zeitgeist Part 1. So it's a dishonest rebuttal to it, probably started by Alex Jones I'm guessing.

  • Again, the pious sowing seeds of doubt in the minds of those who wish for nothing more than than the advancement of the human race as a whole, not for the select few. You can call it new age because YES A NEW AGE FREE OF SLAVERY AND DEBT IS WANTED.. Go and ask an impoverished family from Zimbabwe if they would like running water, low cost clean energy, technology to improve crops. The message of Zeitgeist CLEARLY is for all of us to begin thinking globally in an altruistic fashion.

  • Jesus understood Bible prophecy. He knew that the Autumn of the year 27AD was a fulfillment of the prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27. When the Most Holy was to be anointed v.24.

    He is the Most Holy that was anointed at the end of the 69 weeks spoken of in v.25. He was officially cut off in the midst of the week as spoken of in v.26-27. "after (the first 7 weeks and) threescore and two (62) weeks shall Messiah be cut off". Remember the prophet Isaiah, said that Messiah would be "cut off too" ch 53.

  • Jesus wasn't officially the Messiah until He was anointed with the Holy Ghost. Thats when He started His Messianic ministry.

    Acts 10:38, "How God ANOINTED JESUS of Nazareth WITH THE HOLY GHOST and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him."

    "in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan" "Now after that." "Jesus came into Galilee...saying, The time is fulfilled" (Mark 1:9,14-15)

  • Mate the music nazi's have silenced your video. Might have to do a reupload

  • I'm basically going to go over all this again on my JezusRa channel, in my "Christianity Exposed" series, which is what that channel is dedicated to. It's not particularly about Zeitgeist, but it will deal with a lot of the same stuff. I basically plan to remake this series there, without making it about Zeitgeist, if that makes any sense. You might have to see it to understand. I only have one vid in that series up just yet. Next one coming soon.

  • Apparently the maker of this video doesn't know that the cross is not a biblical Christian symbol. There is not one verse in the bible to vindicate people using as a chain, etc.

    Also, it was the Romans that used the cross, not Jesus, He was just nailed to it. What if it had been an electric chair? Then you gonna walk around with a chair everywhere on your neck?

  • You can't even hear the audio, so what the fuck are you blabbing on about?

    No one's claiming the cross enthusiasm comes from the Bible. Not everything goes back to the Bible. This shit is more about traditions than the Bible.

  • Exactly. So why is there showing so many crosses in this video? It has nothing to do with Christianity?

    You have to forgive me because I can't hear what is said. Are you talking about Christianity? If not, then disregard all I said. If you are talking about Christianity using crosses, why? Again, I can't hear so I am deaf to the argument...

  • The problem here is that you're making the Bible what Christianity is all about. Yet Christianity existed before the New Testament's compilation begun. Paul's writings are the earliest in the New Testament, and he speaks on Christianity and multiple christs. Today, Christians place more importance on the Bible, but back during its compilation, the importance was on traditions. The OT maps out some of these traditions.

  • The Bible is what Christianity is all about. The Bible is not just New Testament. It is Old Testament too. Back during Paul's time, studied it diligently. Jesus read it on every sabbath (Luke 4:16).

    Approx. 25% of the N.T is quoting from the Old testament. Especially in Paul's epistle to the Romans.

  • Christianity is only partially based off the Torah, etc (Old Testament). See it's a hybrid religion, incorporating Judaism and paganism, placing worship on this figure known as the Christ, which of course, whether historical or mythical, there were many so called christs, just as there were different Christian cults. The Roman Catholic Church was the victory cult that decided what would be included or excluded from the NT. And they had a thing for crosses, as Egyptians had a thing for ankhs.

  • Christianity is not at all a hybrid religion. Christians of today are commanded to follow the same law that the Jews of the Old Testament followed.

    The only difference, is that Christ fulfilled, the sacrificial law written by Moses. Also the yearly feasts, sabbaths and holidays. Other than that its, the same.

    Jews of old, confessed their sins and they are symbolically placed on the lamb, Christians confess their sins and their sins are placed symbolically on "the Lamb of God", Jesus.

    ...

  • Jews of old kept all 10 of the commandments of God. Christians today are to keep all the commandments of God. (Rev 12:17; Rev 14:12)

    Jews worshiped Jehovah God, our Father. Christians worship, Jehovah God, our Father. Its that simple, Jews and Christian's whole duty is to fear God and keep the commandments (Ecc 12:13)

    Lastly, the Catholics had no say on what books were added into the N.T. In fact, They didn't even come into control until Constantine made Christianity legal in the 4th century.

  • And we had the N.T. already completed and canonized about 200 years before Constantine. Check these few verses:

    "Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles" "things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest (twist), as they do also the OTHER SCRIPTURES" (2 Pet 3:15,16)

    1Ti 5:18 For THE SCRIPTURE SAITH,.. "The labourer is worthy of his reward." This is a direct quote from Luke 10:7. Luke Was scripture already

  • "Lastly, the Catholics had no say on what books were added into the N.T."

    This is different from what I have found. If not the Catholics than who?

    Just to be clear I'm not saying they wrote them, I'm saying they decided which books would be included, and which would be omitted.

  • Thats what I am saying. They didn't decide what was canon (to be included or omitted). They have no hand in that. The Bible was completed (Old and New Testament) over a Century before Catholicism officially came to be.

    Even before the death of John, who was an overseer to the Scriptures, we had the N.T. compiled, save the his letters and books. (Which are awesome)

    In the N.T. itself. Peter calls Paul's letters scripture and Paul calls Luke's Gospel scripture. Also, James quotes Matt 5.

  • "Christianity is not at all a hybrid religion."

    I disagree.

    "Christians of today are commanded to follow the same law that the Jews of the Old Testament followed."

    I know. Not a credit to their cause.

    "The only difference, is that Christ fulfilled, the sacrificial law written by Moses."

    Moses, the guy who met volcano LORD Yahweh in person, and convinced him not to betray his covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Yeah, I know Moses.

  • Ok then. Can you explain to me how Christianity is a "hybrid religion"? Christians are no different than Jews.

    In fact, the Bible says that physical Jews are not even real Jews if they have not Faith in the atoning sacrifice of the Lamb of God. (Romans 2:28-29) read that.

    Just as the Jews of old had to have faith in the lamb, Christians do. Hag 2:4 The just shall live by FAITH! (This is Old Testament)

  • "Ok then. Can you explain to me how Christianity is a "hybrid religion"

    I already did. They took from Judaism which in itself was a hybrid religion, and then they took from pagan christ legends. There was a cult of Mary, just as there was a cult of Isis, Sun cults, and Jesus cults.

  • What do you mean they "took" from Judaism? Did you not read what I just wrote? The Christians WERE JEWS! That WAS their religion.

    Rom 11:1 I (Paul) say then, Hath God cast away his people (Jews)? God forbid. For I ALSO AM AN ISRAELITE, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

    All the Apostles were Jews. Jesus was Jew. You are accusing them from stealing, from their own religion. I just told you they KEPT THE TORAH and O.T. As do I! Except for the abolished ceremonial laws. I am Jew.

  • "What do you mean they "took" from Judaism? Did you not read what I just wrote? The Christians WERE JEWS! That WAS their religion."

    Yeah, I just meant they mixed shit. I'm not accusing anyone of stealing. Don't misrepresent me.

  • I meant "take" by saying stealing. That was bad wording on my part. But again, you are saying they are mixing stuff. Mixing it with what?

    Jesus was prophesied about all through the Old Testament, to do the EXACT things He did. He came to save Israel. They rejected Him, and thus rejected God.

    If you are alleging that Christ is mixing, you are in error. The old testament (written centuries before Christ) described Jesus and what He was to do. For starters just read Isa 53. Big time fulfillment.

  • I read Isa 53, and didn't see any mention of Jesus.

  • Fuck.,.. NOW i SEE Why you are an ATHEIST

    just look at your Face What HAPPENED TO YOU ????

  • Congratulations, you're the first one stupid enough to use my face as an attack against me.

  • The following will be all about Jesus in Isiah 53. I'll put just 1 N.T. verse after each.

    v.5 "he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities" (1 Pet 3:18)

    v.7 "he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter" (Mark 15:2-5)

    v.8 "He was taken from prison and from judgment" (Mat 27:31-60)

    v.9 "He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth." (Act 13:27-29)

  • v.12 "he was numbered with the transgressors" (Mk 15:27, 28)

    v.12 "he bare the sin of many" (Luk 23:34)

    v.12 "made intercession for the transgressors." (Heb 9:28)

    There are many more N.T. verses I could add, but I don't have the space. These should suffice it for now. And all this coming from just 1 short chapter.

    Hope this helps.

  • Like I said, Isiah 53 of the OT didn't say anything about Jesus.

    Peter, Mark, Matthew, Acts, Luke, and Hebrews are all in the NT, and come later in the space time continuum.

  • Isa 53 said that the Messiah would "bare the sin of many", be "numbered with the transgressors", make "intercession for the transgressors", be wounded for our trangressions" and "bruised for our iniquities", be "taken from prison and from judgement", be "brought as a lamb to the slaughter" etc. THATS EXACTLY what happened to Jesus.

    This is speaking VOLUMES about Christ before He was ever born on earth.

    P.S. "Christ" means "Annointed One"

    "Messiah" means "Annointed One"

    "Christ" = "Messiah"

  • Yes, but accounting for the time space continuum, this messiah didn't become Jesus until the New Testament, yes?

  • OOh boy, watch out now, meddling with the trinity brought the first major church schism :)

  • Every king of Judea/Israel/Kanaan (or however that area was called over time) was anointed. I've read somewhere that kings even were referred to as 'son of God'. Ies 53 refers to a person in that time. The links to Jesus Christ were made later. Prophesies imho should be precise and announced in advance.

  • Actually, no. There is no where that specifies that kings are referred to as "son of God". Especially since most of the kings were evil and apostate.

    Isa 53 is most assuredly NOT referring to just some person at that time. For it is Biblical teaching that ONLY Christ bore the sins of people, only He makes intercession for transgressors. Only he was bruised for our iniquities and wounded for OUR sins. This is all Isa 53. Christ fulfilled this.

    This is very precise and WELL in advance.

  • @eazail: "There is no where that specifies that kings are referred to as "son of God""

    Actually, it has even been applied to the people of Israel. Sorry.

    On Isa53: ok not a person maybe, so if you read it along with 52 and 54 it is about a nation. But definitely not about Christ, as JC had no children, did not live in the past, was not despised and rejected, did open his mouth, deceited (Mat 13:11-15), and was not into sharing the spoils with the strong as "prophesied".

  • I'll start off saying that, Christ was despised and rejected,

    Christ said, "They HATED (despised) me without a cause" (Joh 15:25), and "the Son of man must suffer many things, and be REJECTED" (Mar 8:31)

    Of Jesus it is said, "opened he not his mouth" (Acts 8:32), in the context of Isa 53:7.

    The verses you posed for him deceiting are not of deceit. Christ is said to be "without sin" (Heb 4:15)

    Also, there is no verse in this chapter saying He would have children. What is said is "seed"...

  • "if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed" (Gal 3:29). All who believe on Christ are of His seed.

    About sharing the spoils with the strong Christ says, "I appoint unto you a kingdom", "That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." (Luke 22:29,30)

    Lastly, I don't know where you got the idea that Isa 52-54 is talking about a Israel. First of all, if it really ways, it would be a huge contradiction here where it first says...

  • "O captive daughter of Zion", "ye shall be redeemed without money" (Isa 52:2,3)

    But then later God says He, "shalt make his soul an offering for sin" (Isa 53:12).

    Which is it? Will Israel be "redeemed" or will Israel "make his soul an offering for sin"?

    Common sense says that the first is talking about Israel and the 2nd one is about a man. For a nation has no soul, only a man has a soul. Also, lambs were used as offerings for sin and Jesus is, "THE LAMB OF GOD".

    This baby milk...

  • P.S. If you want to know the point of Isa 52 where the writing stops being about Israel and starts to be about the Messiah, check here. This is where it starts:

    Isa 52:13 Behold, my servant (the Messiah) shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high.

    When previously talking about Israel, Israel is called, "ye". When the topic moved to the Messiah it changes to "he". See the difference?

  • eazail, the evangelists were well aware of the prophesies. You'll find that each evangelist in the Bible had an agenda. Matthew was mostly into showing ho JC fulfilled the prophesies. Another to show he was a proper Jew.

  • Not exactly sure what you mean now. All this I know. Christ Himself knew the prophecies that spoke directly about Him.

    (Luke 4:16-22)

  • featuring music from: Sepultura

    thats why you lost the audio

    :/

  • Yeah, my bad. What was I thinking actually giving the band credit? Hehe. Oh well.

  • i dont mean the text

    i mean the song itself

    but i think ur smart enough to have figured that out already

    ;)

  • You should redo this video. It sucks that youtube is cracking down on audio tracks, but you can still communicate the message.

  • Why the hell did they remove the audio anyway?

  • "Zeitgeist Debunked? Don't Make Me Laugh! (Part 1), may have audio content from Kamaitachi by Sepultura that is owned or licensed by WMG."

    WMG = Warner Music Group

  • Yeah I know, but it looked like it is mostly you talking. Maybe there's a song in the background but I didn't know that was enough to set off their filters or whatever.

  • I know, it doesn't make any sense. WMG sucks balls.

  • Well in any event I look forward to these. I think Keith made a lot of good points in his videos - or at least, it appeared to me that he did - so I really do want to hear a good rebuttal. I'm an atheist but I am always open to both sides of everything, hence why I subscribe to channels and watch videos that present lots of different opposing views.

  • There could be good points against some of it. I'm certainly not of the faith that Zeitgeist is 100% true. There's a lot of conjecture involved not only in what they're talking about, but in Egyptology itself. Based on my personal research I believe the conjecture to be accurate, at least for the most part. This idea that it's straight up lies though is bogus, and Keith is deluded if he thinks he's actually debunked it. Like the Bible, Egyptian writing comes with many interpretations.

  • Yes, they are ball gobblers.

  • Alright buddy? I'm starting my own video series, one video's uploaded so far. More to debunk Keithtruth than anything, so check it out if you're interested.

  • There are lots of theories to explain the origin of Religion. The problem is not that. Its what actually Religion make to people and society.

  • lol, unbiased research...

    well i'm glad the world is so cut and dry that all the facts that oppose our desired ideologies are clearly false, and the ones that affirm our ideologies are clearly "unbiased."

  • it seems that this turned into a fight to see who's more smart... not to get the truth out.

    youtube has turned into the number one source of "Knowledge and Understanding" in this era....

    Be real, everyone should go on their own and find their truth, not based of he say she say, whether fact or not. Lazy people, always want the easy way out in ANYTHING IN LIFE.

  • lol

  • Okay... Well, thank you for the intelligent dialogue... Ah-HAH! HAH! HAH! HAH!

  • lol , nice try zeitgeist has been debunked , now its been defended by a debunked person

  • wtf? When did I get debunked?

  • How so? Elaborate....please!

  • im not the source of all debunking , yet just a marker that echos others works

  • kingdavid246 and nephilim145 unblocked on 3/17/09 (yeah, I know one day later than promised. My bad.)

  • sh1n081 unblocked on 3/17/09 as promised

  • oneeyedjack1970,

    Name one legitamate scholar who rejects the claims...........You are very misinformed. Try this, pick up a book and read it. no... no... not the Bible, a different book . something written in this century at least. If you are going to repeat information from websites, at least do comparative studies to support your claims.

  • Greek for sun is Helios, not Heli-yos.

    Darn, it's just like with the movie, I don't know what information in it I can trust.

  • Nice nitpick. This wasn't about winning a Greek to English spelling B though, it was about making a point on how certain words sound.

  • Sorry to be nitpicking. But the arguments from similarity in language have to be solid to overcome random similarity.

    The nominative case in Greek always ends in -os, so having words rhyme in Greek is not exactly surprising!

  • Just to be clear, I'm not trying to overcome random similarity...

    And also, I'm no linguist, so correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the nominative case indicator be added separately to those words, and isn't it "oi," rather than "os?" Yos-oi, and Helios-oi? Or am I just confused about that?

  • Then you would know that Helios sounds like Hili'os. Also note the two extra syllables in the word Helios. Still, I like how you don't go into the Hebrew and Aramaic words for son and sun.

  • I studied that a little, and it doesn't look like Hebrew or Aramaic subscribe to this similarity between son and Sun, but it's also hard for me to tell, not being a linguist.

  • Pronunciation of the Dutch was a bit off (Wikipedia has the IPA), although this doesn't really make any difference.

    "Screw the message of the film, Jesus is real, damnit."

    Epic. :D

  • Haha! Yeah someone pointed that out to me on my end, and I was wondering when a YouTuber would point it out... Luckily it's someone who realizes it doesn't make any difference. Thanks, man!

  • TruthInGod unblocked on 3/14/09 as promised.

  • User fmmetamc unblocked on 3/13/09 as promised.

  • Zeitgeist was made by masons. Case closed.

  • NUFF SAID!

  • Noone can accidentally be that deceptive. You, sir, are a liar, and have been exposed as such. That's what happens when you walk out in the light.

  • I'm a liar? The references in the description box say I'm telling the truth. Where's your description box? Oh yeah, you don't have one, because you weren't man enough to do a video response. Instead you just posted a bunch of comments, demonstrating your ignorance and offense. Well, I'm uploading a video response to your garbage in the comments section.

  • I'm sorry, but you can't use German in your linguistic comparison. English is a Germanic language, and there are many, many similarites between the two. The Bible was written in Hebrew and Greek. Use those.

  • Sorry about cussing you there, but this kind of stubbornness in the face of the facts really gets my goat. I mean, is your whole worldview based on the claims made by Zeitgeist? Can you not live without them?

  • There's no controversy surrounding Zeitgeist. Virtually every scholar out there roundly rejects its claims as unfounded and/or misleading. Hell, anyone who's done a basic study of mythology can spot its bullshit right off the bat.

    I mean, how the hell was Devaki a virgin when she had her eighth child -- explain that. If you can't do it, admit you're full of shit.

  • Hear, hear sir! I couldn't agree more. It's lunacy! And don't get me started on the ant-capitalism rant that literally plunges into the darkest depths of stupidity. I'd like to smack the movie maker with a hard cover Ayn Rand book.lol

  • Are you defending the coporatocracy?

  • If you are, by implication, suggesting that I support our modern, government and bureaucratic infested form of capitalism, where some corporations have seen scary amounts of power, then no.

  • If you agree that there's a problem with it, why attack someone for pointing out that problem?

  • You look like a scientologist to me, fuck face.

  • Grow up.

  • It really sucks, my wife and me want to have a kid but with these uncertainties its difficult.

  • DoctorAkke comes from the fact that I have a niece that could pronounce my name and she called me Akke. I thought it was cute so I kept it. Then I combined it with Doctor (since I'm a doctor) and that how DoctorAkke came to be. My PhD is nothing related to history of religions or anything of that source so it is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand, I just mentioned it before as an anouncement of availability to work.

  • That sucks that you got laid off, man. Engineers are something this world needs more of, whether the world realizes it or not.

  • Comment removed

  • Yes it is wrong. Man, I'm going to tell you the truth. I was laid off, you see, I'm a PhD in Engineering from UC, Berkeley ,and now I'm looking for a new job and I have more time that I want so surfing I found the zeitgeist and I tried to post a comment. But this guys don't allow to post coments if you don't create an account, so I had to create it. You want more honesty? If you know about an opportunity to work let me know, and this goes to everybody. Thanks

  • Guys, let's be honest with our self. Let's stop using the same old arguments that say "you are clearly angry, and I don't know why?" or "I accept that I can be wrong, can you?" or "Why are you so offended?" First this is just an very recourse-lacking way of saying, I'm cool and clear in my thoughts, you are not, so you are clearly biased and your argument has no value. Guys that technique is getting really old, stop using that and let's talk about real stuffs.

  • Is it wrong for me to speculate that you have another channel aside from this one that you started just a few days ago?

  • Really, I'm not offended. On the contrary, this is interesting and entertaining. If I write is out of amazement, rather than being offended by the movie. It is hard to explain the how amazed I am that people like you still defends this. Its like defending the fact that the world is flat but scientist wants us to believe otherwise. I swear, in my heart there is no trace of "damn Zeitgeist is true, I'm lost, what I'm going to do now"

  • Continuation ... on the contrary when I saw Zeitgeist I immediately recognize the tons of errors and lies that best I could do was to accept it as another fiction movie like Star Wars or the Da Vinci Code. And it was entertaining. My friend, I know that you like this conspiracy stuff. It makes you feel alive, it gives you a purpose, but I recommend you to use your energy in something more serious. Perhaps try agnosticism or something of that sort for which gives you a better chance.

  • Comment removed

  • Dear ChelevSaRa, I can't believe you are really believing this. The serious christian apologist are even talking about this because it is negligible as we say in science. It is funny how you zeitgeisterians use rock or trance music like to make a sence of "WOW, this is so big" but it is so not. In Spanish son=hijo, sun=sol, in italian son=figlio, sun=sole, Latin son=fili, sun=sol. What I'm saying does not demonstrate anything but what your said doesn't either as well. Don't make me laugh.

  • It's pretty clear you're offended. There's no reason to be. I'm simply reporting on how my research into unbiased sources is backing up some of the things that "debunkers" are saying are lies. It's not like I'm just blindly following some religion on faith. There's data here.

  • Did people start to read with just the Bible in the Information Age? And werent the elite or high society the only ones who were able to read books before that? So werent they able to print the first books they wanted us to read to their controlling advantage schemes?

  • catch387 unblocked on 3/9/09 as promised.

  • "unbias research"

    yup, 100 year old scholarship is good enough for me!

  • I believed in Zeitgeist, than I ran out of weed.

    Point is, you, just like everyone else, has no clue what is going on. I know this because you are no better than I and I have no clue what is going on.

    Only difference is I accept it and you feel the need to deny it, oh well.

  • I find it funny how you and others claim KeithTruth blocks you when it is you that block people who point out the fallaciousness of your "arguments". In fact, one person messaged me to ask you if you had blocked them as they can no longer post.

  • KeithTruth and I both block people. I can't speak for Keith, but I do it when it's clear people are here to harass me, insult me, misrepresent things and spread deceit. I'm finding this to be a very common theme amongst many YouTubers of the Christian community. They need to chill out, seriously.

  • You post a picture of a cross in Egypt as if that is proof. Crucifixion was never practised in ancient Egypt therefore it is not a crucifix. I assume there's a conspiracy in German as well. When the language was forming, there was a Jesus conspiracy to make "sohn" and "sonne" sound the same. And Sa doesn't mean son! It means protection. And Ra doesn't mean sun. It is just the name of the sun god. Jesus was separate from God on earth.

  • I'm not claiming a conspiracy. And Sa does in fact mean "son," as Ra is what they called the Sun. You're going to have to give me a credible source that claims otherwise if you want me to see your claims as honest. And though Egyptians may not have practiced crucifixion some of them were certainly crucified by Persians, and probably Romans too. I will be discussing this in part 4.

  • Ignore Keithtruth. He BLOCKED me ages ago, due to me refuting his deceit and hatred for truth. The guy has no idea what he is talking about, nor does he have a clue what Theosophy is.

  • Yeah, there's multiple people I've spoken with who say they pointed out his BS, and his response was to delete their comments and block them. Myself included. I'm apparently not blocked anymore though. A good thing too, because he came and left some very revealing comments that expose his hasty generalizations.

  • Poor guy. Has no clue about zeitgeists connection to theosophy and the new world order.

    Some are just hopeless.