what about all the writings and scriptures of the Egyptian faith? Or the Mayans? Romans? Just because they were apparently wiped out by whatever means doesnt make their gods wrong. Christianity is a faith, that I believe, will fall in that same place.
Both sides calling the other names, and arguing with each other, saying that the other side is wrong. How is that any different that watching two boxers fighting in the ring, and you merely cheer for one of them because you like one of them more or identify with one of them more? Anyone that is biased towards a particular subjects is gonna make them unable to accept the other's argument, and look for ways to put the other side down
@osgangstarrr Now Peter and John didn't exist! Heck, friend, how do you know that I exist? The existence of Peter and John is at least as likely as that of Caesar, Napoleon, and Abraham Lincoln. This is skepticism run amok!
If Jesus was in fact the son of "God" why hasn't any other Human being walked on water, or performed miracles? Why? Are you going to say, "there is only one son of God and he shall return! Read revelation!" The heavens proclaim the glory of god? How? So hieroglyphics are not historically accurate when compared to words written by man in the bronze age? Maybe Horus was in fact a hybrid of human and animal. Isn't a man who performs miracles comparable to that of a mythical figure?
Joseph Campbell done us wrong! The problem with comparative mythology, on which Zeitgeist's rather shallow argument hinges, is that it tends to gloss over substantive and informative differences between stories in the name of finding some supposed common thread. In his interviews with Bill Moyers, Campbell tried to apply a comparative mythological premise to the image of a woman and a snake and a tree, and found that it completely undermined his ability to explain Judeo-Christianity...
@CoryTheRaven ...He didn't seem to allow for the possibility that the Hebrews took this common Mesopotamian image and deliberately inverted its meaning.
A simple reading of the myths of Osiris and Horus, Dionysos and Krishna would dissuade any strong correlation with Jesus. Any close reading would reveal quite poignant differences.
there is ZERO evidence at the time of jesus or even soon after. With earthquakes, zombies, mass murder of male children, feeding of multitudes, not to mention rising from the dead (many more) and not one word from one the many historians of the time. With one of the most recorded times of the bronzed age and not one of the historians can place any part of the Christ story. NOT ONE, Please prove me wrong. There is no question that jesus was a myth.
@itsasin1969 Friend, in case you're really interested, take a look at the library of serious books on the historical Jesus. You might start with N.T. Wright and then move on to Raymond Brown, John Meier, Ben Witherington, and E.P. Sanders. In a word, we have more reliable evidence regarding the historicity of Jesus than we do regarding that of practically any other figure from the ancient world. The line you're pursuing was de-bunked in the late 19th century.
@wordonfirevideo Friend, I'm asking you, the person in the vid. to provide me evidence outside the bible for JC at the time of or even soon after his so called life. As an Atheist I never want to say the there is absolutely no god, It’s just that I’ve never seen any good evidence for one. Regardless we can say for sure that the Jew/Christian/Islamic god is NOT real. This is why I say your faith is a joke. plz prove me wrong.
@itsasin1969 You're falsely narrowing your data field. In fact, you're doing the wrost possible thing you could do as a historian, which is to automatically eliminate ANY AND ALL data you actually HAVE (for no reason except you don't like its philosophical or metaphysical implications) and basing your argument on the lack of data you WANT. First, an absense of evidence is not evidence of absense. Secondly, to do any historical work AT ALL, you MUST begin with what data you have...
@itsasin1969 ...In this case, the Church already did the work of assembling the data for us. The New Testament is not a single text written by a single author. In the NT we have multiple sources all dating to within the lifetimes of people who were present at the events, and in some cases ascribable to those very people. In fact there are 4 separate biographies, which might be considered an embarrassment if they did not together provide multiple attestation...
@itsasin1969 ...Furthermore, the earliest scrap of textual evidence we have is a creed recited by Paul in 1 Cor. 15 that dates to within 3-5 years of the death of Christ. As far as ancient history goes, that it practically instantaneous. The remainder of Paul's epistles date to within 20 years. 3 of the 4 Gospels date to within 40 years. Compared to the CENTURIES between the lives and the biographies of historical figures we take for granted, that is nothing. You have to go off what you HAVE.
@CoryTheRaven Christians are the only ones who think that. The Journal of Higher Criticism (edited by Price) argued that 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 was not an early Christian creed written within five years of Jesus' death. Price[6] and Detering[7] denied that Paul wrote the verses and believed they were an interpolation possibly dating to as far back as the beginning of the 2nd century. So i need proof from outside the bible for all the amazing things the bible says. More lies for Jesus.
@itsasin1969 If you're going to quote from the Wikipedia article on 1 Cor. 15, you might as well quote the beginning and the end of the same paragraph. Yeesh.
@CoryTheRaven i'm just doing the same thing you are doing. But I still want evidence at the time of jesus or even soon after. With earthquakes, zombies, mass murder of male children, feeding of multitudes, rising from the dead and many more. Where is it? Your faith is a joke and if god were real, he would want nothing to do with your bloodthirsty dribble you call the bibble . Stop doing evil. you're, gona burn in hell.
I had to stop myself from laughing and yelling at the computer: "You're missing the point!"
Jesus came to reveal the inner machinations on man's heart, to show that man is accustomed for God. So I don't see why atheists are so shocked that what Jesus taught was common sense!
One thing also about Christianity as opposed to the ancient myths is (as FB said) has often said... the extra-biblical texts attests to Jesus' existence. What makes Christianity different then myths is what some of those ancient texts are. When the strongest critics of Christianity speak of Jesus as a verified person who walk Israel, we have to consider the validity of this claim. If contemporaries of St. Paul had a chance to claim Christ was "made up," they would have jumped at the chance!
@sulkow82 Also, if the apostles made up the whole thing, then why were they willing to die for a lie? Why would the evangelists make the apostles look so stupid and immature in the Gospels? Why, in first century Judea, would the first witnesses to the empty tomb be women? The answer is simple...the apostles and evangelists were honest men.
no.. there is no great distinction. The bible is just as much a myth as all the others. You tried quite hard to put your myth apart from the others. Luckily the young are not ALL so ignorant as to believe you and your laughable attempt at the separation..when there isnt any but the tiny tiny details.
Its been a great week here in Ireland. Our new priminister finally gave the pope a proper going over re: the lies, cover ups, and ongoing abuses of the catholic church in relation to innocent children. Telling him that the rule of law supercedes canon law. Not being from Ireland, you would never appreciate the control the church had on all levels of government, the police, and everyday people. The church was never questioned and we have a history of destroyed lives because of blind faith!
@killtherude 1) 4.5 billion years. 2) 65,000,000 years ago. 3) The story of Noah's Ark is not to be taken literally. 4) No. 5) Could be. No real evidence. And finally, spare me the condescension. Catholics are not fundamentalists.
@wordonfirevideo Continued: Your obviously intelligent. In my opinion, it's a shame you use it toward a corrupt & brainwashing system that will probably be weeded out within the next few generations. I understand faith, I been there before, I'm one of the fortunate ones to be able to see the truth by using "real evidence" as you answered in question 5. There is no real evidence in the bible & contradicting your logic it shows there may be hope within your views. I wish you luck...
@killtherude Ah yes, religion will disappear in "a few generations." Friend, you join a long line of failed prophets of the end of religion: Feuerbach, Marx, Nietzsche, Freud, Comte, Sartre, etc., etc. You might see the logic in the Bible if you understood how to read it properly. Like so many atheists, you seem to be a recovering fundamentalist. Try the far more intellectually satisfying tradition of Catholicism.
@wordonfirevideo Ah well, maybe it's just wishful thinking, but in time I believe religion will fade. As for misunderstanding the Bible, it's only an assumption you seem to believe to whomever is in question... and wouldn't that be a huge percentage of religious people who have been misled, therefore contradicting religion in general and for most who believe in the word of the Bible? It sounds like an excuse you give yourself to hold on to your own faith.
@killtherude Go ahead: challenge me. I maintain that the argument from contingency is a compelling demonstration of God's existence. Show me where I'm wrong. I also maintain that the Bible is a product of the church and hence must be read in and with the church. Show me where I'm wrong.
@wordonfirevideo Call up "The Atheist Experiment" and challenge yourself with some intellectual monsters like yourself. If your able to convince them to try Catholicism (which I believe one of them studied to be a Priest or Preacher for 20yrs) then you'll be able to convince myself. Your right about one thing, I did grow up with an Evangelical family who I still have to deal with at times... but I am not a recovering fundamentalist. I also dated a very sweet Catholic girl who I went to Mass. ; )
@wordonfirevideo lol... okay I'll admit, I guess I am a recovering fundamentalist. I think you hit a soft spot! lol It's been many years though, and I definitely see a much bigger picture and seem to have grown out of it with education and wisdom.
@wordonfirevideo Moby Dick is a work of fiction, while the Bible is otherwise. Secondly, what clues could be utilized as examples in order to substantiate a non-literal interpretation of a specific passage or set of passages?
@wordonfirevideo In response to the Zeitgeist myths can I suggest you watch or read "Gods in the Sky" by Allan Chapman. He explores all the ancient myths and how they helped us understand the universe in ancient times.
Mithras it claims was born of a virgin on December 25, when actually he emerged fully formed from a large rock. He didn't have a birth date until he was combined with Bacchus and Apollo into Sol Invictus. Then his birth was not a once off event but a cyclical thing, based on the cycle of daylight hours increasing and decreasing. The Roman cult of Mithras wasn't much like the Persian original, didn't really get going until after Christ, and targeted very different demographics (rich military men)
@BiblePreacher889 i could show u pictures if youtube would allow me ( which doesn't ) on comments of Horus baptizing a pharaoh in a pyramid , or a picture of the nativity of horus also from a piramid , he being visited by three wise men and the announcement to osiris . btw i have seen this priest saying there is not such thing as being baptized when it comes to Egypt mythology , so he is obviously lieing . plus Horus did had disciples , they made pyramids for him , pyramids which tell his tale .
How can he be perfect when he created a disaster. Look at our world, more good than bad. Wars everywhere over nothing. Each and everyone are sinners acording to the Bible. So how is he perfect? Would you say someone was the perfect artist but every drawing had at least one mess up? I wouldn't. Perfect means free of flaws. This is only simple things. You could go into the science behind why Christianity and any other religion is fake. Get your head out of your ass because it's stinking.
Yall Christians crack me the fuck up. Creationism is a joke. Science proves itself while faith is a synonym for ignorance. When will yall learn? You're holy book contradicts itself in to many ways. There are many disturbing things as well. This comes from someone who was raised Christian. Who created god? Why would god create evil at all? Why is that god has a plan but you can go to hell? He planned on you going there? He seems to get credit for everything good but takes no blame for wrong.
I think that it's obvious if you look at the makers of Zeitgeist, athiests, Masons, New Age pervayers, that they have an agenda and it is for the very new world order they try to warn against, and Christ is in their way. Their goal is to brainwash youth who donnot have the time to delve into history and true astronomy, and the true historian Josephus. Thus we have to be alert and explain to them how this movie is worse than just wrong they are lying on purpose.
ok here is where you have it all wrong : Osiris IS in fact represented as a virgin , yeah sure she actually had sex with another god which had not penis but had a made out penis made of golden , so yes the history of Horus is more complex and yes might be easier to find stupid , however let me ask you this : how different is the history of jesus ? god comes , visits Mary ( we know well what visit means in the bible ) and then Jesus is born from a virgin ? is this not Myth ? seriously ????
@wisdomandchange777 BTW i have much more to say but space is limited and idk if you will even answer this .. btw if you read this go ahead and deny than Horus was baptized and than his baptizer was decapitated as well ..
@wisdomandchange777 Hang on Osiris is a virgin? Do you mean Isis maybe? Anyway that aside, your virginity remains intact if you go to bed with a man with a golden penis? Really? There was no penetration or conception as a product of it? How exactly do you remain a virgin if you have sex and have a child? o.O Virgin before, certainly not virgin after, that would be a HUGE difference to the Jesus story.
@MrWildbill20056 LMAO difference where exactly ? 1ST at all is the bible explicit about how your god impregnated the virgin !? and could it had it been sexual contact !? and second at if the catholics claim she was a virgin and she had a child how big different is it than the original goddess was impregnated by a piece of golden !?i mean do you not get how only a dumb would believe either story !? , they are both fables so you get it .. there is not miracles or even you could make them , Bi says
@wisdomandchange777 oh and yes Isis ( thanks for the correction ) is represented as a virgin , u ever seen the horoscopes ? some of the story of your messiah is there , thats where the biggest lie ever told started .
@wisdomandchange777 You missed my point. The point is that whether or not Isis was a virgin pre conception, she certainly wasn't after. The point of the 'Virgin Birth' is that Mary's virginal 'status' was unaltered. The rest of what you say, again, is no argument at all.
@MrWildbill20056 it is you who misses the point Isis was known as the great virgin long before the 1000th virgin came , oh and yes there is other MYTHOLOGICAL figures which were also virgins .. One of the inscriptions that calls Isis the "Great Virgin" appears in the temple of Seti I at Abydos dating to the 13th century BCE. As stated by professor of Old Testament and Catholic Theology at the University of Bonn Dr. G. Johannes Botterweck, in the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament:
@wisdomandchange777 so yeah Christianity is nothing more than a copy cat whether you want to believe it or not . Horus was baptized , horus was born from the great virgin , he had twelve disciples which are known as the twelve constellation oh and yes he promise he would comeback ... idk if in the clouds but i would not be surprised . i mean c'mon how old do you have to be to believe anything the bible say. do you even know the bible tells you how to treat your slaves and to stone your children
@wisdomandchange777 The ad absudum extension of your 'mythological' argument is that all virgins are mythical. I hardly think so :P The problem is that Isis was worshipped as 'Virgin' and 'Mother', but not as 'Virgin Mother.' The two are functionally utterly different. Virginity/Chastity was not particularly prized by ancient Egyptians and from extant material it's clear no one cared to make anything of it, especially given the different tales regarding the birth of Horus. (He swaps mothers :P)
@MrWildbill20056 first at all i wish you people would make some sense for once so i could feel i am talking to adults , and i say this because i just mentioned what they used to call isis , and now YOU tell me than virginity wasn't important for the Egyptians! WOW just WOW .. and anyways if you are gonna talk about switching mothers why don't you think about that bible verse in which Jesus denies than Mary was his mother and also denies his brothers as well ? , now thats what i call M Switching
@wisdomandchange777 Most of the above is not an argument, it's really just the textual version of a temper tantrum. You say wow and yet it's pretty much the standard scholarly position that the ancient Egyptians put little to no stock in being a virgin/chastity. The Primary material available regarding Isis is explicit in Isis being impregnated via phallus. Everything else is regarding the spiritual birth of the Sun or refers to Neith. Jesus does not deny his mother, he is making a nuanced point
@MrWildbill20056 oh yeah and if it such standard scholarship why don't u quote some few scholars claiming what u are saying !? i mean i quoted a catholic priest and then finally some of u accept she was regarded as the virgin mother of god .. btw are u saying than saying she is not my mother but those who follow me was some kind of example !? hahaha oh gez ... plus i believe only in two gospels is it mentioned than she was a virgin , wasn't that such an important fact to fact to forget ?
@wisdomandchange777 fathom.lib.uchicago.edu/2/21701778/ is the most accessible, open citation on the web I can find, enjoy. At best Isis was regarded as a spiritual great virgin, but also the model wife and mother. The extant material gives us no reason to think the ancienty Egyptians would have thought a sexless marriage was somehow ideal. The Egyptians had no trouble accepting duality ie spiritual birth of the Sun, and bodily actions of their deities, concurrently.
@MrWildbill20056 not only do you misinform but you are a liar as well , i google what you wrote and the result is nothing at all .. and then i google isis virgin mother and it does seem as it was such a huge big deal for them until the veneration of mary about the third century started , only 50 or so years after the adoration of isis stopped , in other words the story of Mary as a virgin was not only added till the third century but started as a substitute of to the adoration to Isis ...
@wisdomandchange777 Actually I'm not lying :P Try to keep the hyperbole minimised. Copy/Paste is corrupting the link. Remove %C2%AD from the link when you try to load it and you will get an article on ancient egyptian society and family life by Brewster. You get your research from Google searches and not academic material? The only material talking about Isis as a virgin mother comes from Acharya S who is notoriously poor on primary sources and who confesses 'biographies are not set in stone.'
@wisdomandchange777 anyways i am pretty sure than even if a time travel machine was made and you got to Israel and asked about Jesus and not a single person knew of him as it appears you would keep believing you fables , wouldn't you !? jesus story is not different to red ribbonhood or superman , they were good to read back then but since people were so ignorant then they were easily convinced they were real ..
@wisdomandchange777 The tone if this response does not instill one with confidence that your reply will be more than bluster. You don't see a difference between having 'conventional' sex via a golden prosthetic and a spirt 'hovering over?' Really? That is comparable to seeing no difference between internal and external reproduction despite totally different mechanics. The rest of what you say is basically 'you are stupid to believe this because it's stupid,' otherwise known as no argument at all
Later, Dionysus had his mother ascend to Mt. Olympus to take a seat beside the gods (sound familiar?). Zeus came to Heracles mother when she was betrothed to someone else and impregnated her with Heracles, a demigod who was the savior of all humanity when he battled the evil Titans (familiar??? It should be. It was a well known church heresy- the whole half god thing. Wonder where they got confused...). It is well known that Luke was a gentile. Incorporation of Greek myth helped win converts.
@thewolfpacktravels Dionysus is notoriously the worst deity to try to make into a 'Jesus-a-like.' The only vague similarities come from Dionysus dying and coming to life again (in hugely different circumstances.), and that he wandered about teaching. That's it. The rest is just fairly awkward semantic based wrangling. As for Heracles, saviour is in no way appropriate. He was worshipped as protector/champion. Luke in no way even suggests a 'demi god' of any sort.
@MrWildbill20056 I addressed what the myth of Dionysus actually is and where the small similarity to Jesus comes from. I also addressed that the "demi-god" worship of Jesus was considered a Greek heresy. I also stated why Heracles is worshipped. Are you really going to sit there and type that Jesus isn't worshipped as a protector or champion against "evil?" What a vacuous strawman your reply was, but then again, so's Father Barron's "semantic" argument so that shouldn't really surprise me.
Father, you need some mythology education or Zeitgeist does (haven't seen it), but one of you needs to learn the story right. Dionysus' mother was tricked by Hera and requested to see Zeus in his Mt. Olympus armor which incinerated her. Dionysus, then just a seed, was sewn into Zeus' thighs and sprang forth from his loins. He became the god of wine, chaos, and orgies. He DID have missionaries. They were called Bacchae. The similarity to Jesus comes from turning water into wine.
@thewolfpacktravels Actually this is mainly a semantic objection. Barron is arguing a specific form of missionary ie self sacrificing to the point of death for no material gain. None of the remaining material would lead us to suspect that Horus or Dionysus had similar followings. Whilst the Bacchanalia was certainly banned and then regulated, private observances were not (so far as we know.), the parties were a hot bed of politcs. Dionysus is not on record changing water into wine further
In a world in caos of a economic fiscal irresponsabilities of powers in control, you have the Batican Compound filled with treasures and pure gold. Christianity is a cool religion, when you guys going to put it at work? I don't want to listend to magic or myths, i wan't REAL RESPONSABILITIES from every one. ZEITGEST want NO WAR real peace, NO MONEY, NO BORDERS who cant limit us.
@aereone --The Catholic Church helps more of the worlds poor than any other secular or prot organization on earth. And if you want the vatican to liquidate its "treasures and gold" why not ask the scientist of europe to sell the Hadron Collider as well? That would certainly feed a few starving peoples.
TZM ties to the United Nations raises caution.The UN is one of the most corrupt geo-political institutions since it's induction.I've seen all of the Zeitgest films and I think there is good information in all three movies.However,I always found it interesting the 1st topic it's makers try to breakdown is Christianity.Check out the references for this at the end of the film,all Theosophy scholars and that's it.Which in IMHO is just lazy filmaking,unless the point of the film is to push an agenda.
Father Barrin I have a question for you, what makes Jesus any more real than any other God like Horus ? Im interested since you Christians seem to love call other Gods myths or ot real and yet claim that your God is the real one.
@777Atheist Well, we might start with literary genre. Mythic texts are set in an indefinite time "once upon a time" or "long, long ago in a galaxy far away," since they deal with the rhythms and patterns of nature. The Horus story is a beautiful example of this: it has to do with the cycles of the Nile. But historical texts, dealing with real events, are set in a definite time and place. "While Quirinius was governor of Syria and Augustus the emperor of Rome..." Start with that difference.
@wordonfirevideo Ok, I have some questions, sorry for the inconveniance, Im just interested in what you might answer. What parts of the Bible do you take literally, for example do you really believe that Jesus could walk on water or heal the sick ? Also do you follow the Old Testament, and if yes, is all the Old Testament or only parts of it, and if you only follow some parts of the OT then why dont you follow the others and whats up with all the violence in the OT ?
@777Atheist Again, friend, it depends largely upon the genre of the texts in question and the intention of the author. Some of the Old Testament texts are mythic or in the genre of religious saga. Others are more straightforwardly historical. Some are poetic--the Psalms or the Song of Songs for example. The Gospels fall in the genre of ancient history (take a look at the prologue to Luke), and so yes, I take much of their content as factually accurate.
@777Atheist --Also one of the most important thing is that Jesus had eyewitnesses to his having lived among men, but the same cannot be said for Horus and co. PAX.
OK, Father Barron here needs to get off his high horse, and get on a plane to Saudi, or Kazakhstan, or Zimbabwe, and meet the people, the starving people, the abused women, the mutilated children and look into their eyes and tell them that when they eventually finish dying their slow death, they get to spend the rest of eternity in hell because they did not accept your 'God'
Your 'God' is petty, Jealous and cruel. Do not tell me differently.
Thats a pretty desperate argument Billybag, it's like saying god put fossils in the ground to test our faith. Christians often hang onto pathetic Rationalizations to cling onto their faith. Another one is 'why are their still monkeys ?' or 'Charles Darwin died a christian'.
as robbie williams correctly muses upon: "was jesus real? the bible was writen 400 years after jesus died... if you wrote about me 2 years ago you get a load of made up shit, here say, and gossip. y'kno and urrr, the bible was decided in a room, 400 years later, in Italy or sumthing, by people who werent there at the time. then u look further into it, and you get these stories of other religions that pre-date Christianity using the same template" ahahahah owned by a mainstream idiot
@Veneratio05 Friend, you need some elementary courses in Bible and history! The letters of Paul were written in the 50's of the first century, just a few decades after the time of Jesus, and the Gospels were written between 30 and 60 years after the resurrection. Would you automatically dismiss as unreliable an account of the JFK assassination written, say, in the 1990's?
@wordonfirevideo who cares its clear to see all of the miracles were elaborate chinese whispers. how else would you BIG UP the son of god?? today we have materialistic people making up bullshit, but back then they didnt even have science and a rational view of reality! you would have thought they made up MORE for jesus than healing/ressurection. theres a difference between 20 years ago, and 2000 years ago mate incase u didnt notice. we have computers now? look your infront of one. MAGIC right?
@wordonfirevideo I dont think when the bible was written is relevant, 'is it true' is the question. So i guess we can say yes the bible exist so in that since it is true but was it divinely inspired by God? There is simply no evidence to suggest so besides a group of people with a strong conviction and you can have a strong conviction about anything.
One more thing to add, if i say i was taken by aliens. It's NOT your obligation to disprove it, it's my obligation to PROVE it to you
@wordonfirevideo < I agree with you on "Zeitgeist the Movie" using weak points to portray Jesus as myth. Such movies have one goal : drive public away from religion. Although I'm not religious in traditional sense, I still respect its existence as part of human development.
However, many ancient wisdom traditions used mythic metaphors as a way to pass powerful messages so that future generations could be enlightened and religions had been unkind to such sacred knowledge.
Christians tend to have such pathetic arguments like 'why are there still monkeys' and 'Darwin died a christian'. When u prove them wrong they move the goalposts. Arguments against Dawkins and Hitchens tend to be just nitpicking, without any serious argument. I wonder why the Jesus myth is not completely different from older religions. Why couldn't god come up with his own ideas for himself ???
@gavincostin1 -- If they were or not, it was recorded that real people knew and associated with Jesus. "We were not duped by clever myths, but were eyewitnesses to His glory". --St Peter
@gavincostin1 specifically there are three "secular"( if you want to call them that) points of view, during the time and they were recording who was being put to death and going to jail and that stuff.. you know documentation. It is even stated in zeitgeist.
@chess12345789 Do you know what the original source is ? I would genuinely like to know. As I said earlier it seems to me that christianity is deeply embedded in our evolution of religion. If christianity was true it would be purely original without so many similarities with other religions. The basic story of a guy walking around doing miracles and being a messiah is hardly original. There are people alive today who claim to be a messiah and we have witnesses alive today who know them.
@gavincostin1 C.S. Lewis (you've heard of him?) had this same problem with the "derivative" nature of Christianity. Then a friend of his (Tolkien, I think) asked him to consider whether God might have been "whispering" to all mankind in the 'dying god' myths and all the other similarities with the Judeo-Christian revelation. Perhaps these were "proto-evangelia" which God had sown in human history to prepare all nations, as He had specially prepared Israel, to hear the Good News of salvation?
The contention held by Jesus "mythers" is considered laughable in the highest circles of academia. If conventional historical scholarship were based upon the tactics and techniques utilized by the Zeitgeist movie, we would have to grant that Napolean Bonaparte is a mythical construct, inspired by the biographical accounts of Alexander the Great.
It's truly saying something, when even the top secular historians say that the "Jesus Myth" movement is fringe lunacy.
Father, with regards to Horus there is also the fact that Horus' mother Isis took those dismembered parts of Osiris and impregnated herself. Not quite resembling the Virgin Birth.
..and of course lets not forget that not only was the book of fairy tales written approx 50yrs after the mythical figure of Jesus, the 'death' and subsequent 'beaming up' to the christian heaven of his imagined mother was dreamt up err... 1st November 1950.
Nuff said ...
BTW The Zeitgeist Movement have since passed on religion in deference to its insignificance to the survival of the human race. There are more pressing evils.
@morklind your response has no point to the argument, and shows your ignorance to the understanding of Catholicism. Saying "Nuff said" reminds me of being back in pre-school, and the "bully" saying what he wants is what happens. BTW having researched the movement they find Religion to be quite an obstacle to their cause, because from their point of view it supports the current status qua, which is of course capitalism and not the resource-based economy. chnically the Bible is older. Research!
@chess12345789 Yawn ... I am done debating with luddites. I have been there, bought the t-shirt and read the book. For me to argue with you would be like trying to talk to a baby in a pram. I was brought up a catholic - I almost joined the clergy. For fuck sake I even read catechism when I was child. I am as old as the poor deluded man in the video. Believe me there is NOTHING you can tell me that I don't already know ... you have been raped of reason. I don't care that you don't believe me.
@wordonfirevideo I would if a counter position was offered. It isn't. Earnest and sermon-like waffling might work on a doubting subjugated flock but it doesn't fool people brave enough to trust in reason and historical fact over myths that have no basis in logic, reality or evidence. Many different religions with similar attributes predate christianity which itself derives similar astrological 'coincidences'. I ask the most unalterable pertinent question that any innocent child would. Why?
@morklind Hmmm... I guess you don't even know what an argument is. That's just more ad hominem harumphing, friend. When you're ready to make an argument, I'd be happy to engage you.
@wordonfirevideo I cannot fail to be impressed with the religious arrogance displayed and yet no defence has truly been proffered. I am amused you think your indoctrinated mind can engage in a meaningful debate when your whole premise is based on blind faith and unverifiable hearsay. I was a "soldier of christ" and confirmed at 8yrs old. All these religions with similar attributes and astrological coincidences .. and yet they are all huff except yours. Tell me what happens to hermaphrodites?
@morklind Still not an argument in sight! And I'm supposed to be the avatar of superstition and irrationality. Man, if you want to get into this with me, you've got to pick up your game.
@wordonfirevideo The argument is that this reverend's interest in advocating christianity, is not to do with spreading truth, telling us to think for ourselves critically, or questioning olllllllld established systems. His interest in having imaginary friends(god), is not to do with his care for the world, or the future of our children. His interest in defending christianity, is defending his individuality. To have this big a rug pulled out from under his feet, is life-threatening to him.
@Veneratio05 you can find all of his rebuttals to all the myths in zeitgeist on secular channels of the internet. Stop speculating with your prejudice and defend your argument.
I think people are desperate to hold onto their objections when, really, this is an outstanding critique, especially since it is fitted into so short a span of time! The thing is, these mythicists have a very vague, uncritical distrust of the Gospels that is more bias than substance. As Fr. Barron says, you must take into consideration the historical nature of the Gospels which set them apart so drastically from other religious works.
Please understand I am in no way disputing your religion much in the same way you should not dispute my beliefs, I am simply stating your argument is not well founded and in no way can Biblical Texts be used in an argument as it is not a scientifically or academically sound text, you have a doctorate so you must understand that as an academic if I wrote my thesis on the 'history of the world' citing dates on the earths existence based on biblical dates it would not be valid academically at all.
your argument isn't really valid, your rebuttal to Zeitgeist is at best poor, using a text which CANNOT be ratified by todays scholars/academics/scientist to counter an argument which does simply address similarities between Christianity and other religions just simply doesn't work, yes you can argue the differences much in the same way I can argue the differences between 'Pocahontas/Dances with Wolves' and 'Avatar' but at the end stripped down the stories are the same
The rebuttal to Zeitgeist is that most of the "facts" the claimed were either extremely stretched or simply made up. If they make a theological claim about beliefs then where else do we go to besides the holy texts?
@Jim1905 irrelevant, battling a modern day collection of fact and theory/stipulation (all based upon Academically valid texts or historically accurate text) with a 2000 year book containing nothing but accounts of the "supposed" existence of a man called Jesus and even older stories that has little to no validation from the academic or scientific collective does not work, period, this rebuttal addresses fact/theory/historical stipulation with little more than other historical stipulation&fiction
Saying it's a x year old book doesn't make a difference to any of it's claims. Jesus is almost completely accepted as having existed by historians. The book does have validation, it's called philosophical theology and it also needs none from science as it's not a scientific piece.
@Jim1905 my original point was that using the bible in this case was not beneficial and as such really killed his rebuttal, using the text you are defending to reinforce your argument doesn't work at all, perhaps I'll write a book on Neurosurgery tomorrow and when you tell me I'm wrong I'll quote my book, I'm not trying to get into a debate on Aetheism/God or nit-pick at Christians on tiny issues but this rebuttal is weak, period
How is it weak? The movie tried to make claims that Jesus was essentially a copy of other religion's "Jesus" character. The only way to give a rebuttal is to look at what each religion actually says, where do we have information about Jesus in a theological way? The bible. So how else is he going to say, no they're not the same?
@Jim1905 what you've just implied is that because you have no other resources or texts to counter such claims using the bible is appropriate in such situation despite a complete lack of credibility, anyhow the rebuttal is flawed as it begins by attacking the credibility of Zeitgiest (good) however, then he undoes himself by stating that some of the stories vaguely resemble what Zeitgiest is suggesting, now we know stripped down the stories do bear similarities (bad) (1)
@Jim1905 he then fails to address a major aspect of the Zeitgiest religous argument which is with the 12 (bad, instead he focuses completely on the God Born Deity feature) he then states there are more differences but doesn't list any at all (bad, such information allows others to see the research he has done and see the apparent flaws in Zeitgiest, instead none are listed and as such gives implication that perhaps there are a lot more similarities, which there are) (2)
@Jim1905 continuing on to reduce old religions to mythology (good) stating the bible is different to this mythology (bad, what makes 1 ancient text right and another 1 not? he then reduces the ancient mythology to metaphors, ideals and life lessons but does not even acknowledge the same can be done for the bible, which it most certainly can) stating Jesus is not a mythological figure (bad, pure opinion, show me the facts!!) (3)
@Jim1905 stating Jesus is a historical figure (hardly, there may have been a Jewish teacher under a similar name but he would have had to have been married to even be acknowledged by peers or potential followers, thats a fact!)these other Deities likely originate from similar Religous teachers expanded into myths and is it not likely that a different, dare I say it contemporary; myth evolved for Jesus considering it is a later one? (4)
@Jim1905 This rebuttal focuses little on the credibility of Zeitgiest which is really should, it focuses primarily on the 'son of god' aspect and fails to address more so than that, possibly the worst part is at the end where he implies that because none of these long dead myths don't have missionaries and christianity does, it makes christianity right (really, really, really bad) (5)
@laaaaambofgod, Fr. Barron is picking out pieces of the movie that can be easily refuted. Bear in mind that Youtube videos don't go for very long so he has to focus his efforts not on refuting every detail but on certain points. He doesn't say that Christianity is right on account of it having missionaries today, but rather lends it more credibility in that there might be more truth to Christianity if people still give up so much for it. His goal is to disarm the movie not prove Christianity.
@cooliodraw2 I did not say that, if you read the comment the sentence holds the word 'implies' which he most certainly does in the 'missionary' case, nor did I ever say his point was to prove Christianity, as far as I am concerned there could be a God (granted if there is a God he would not be as backward or archaic thinking as the church would make him out to be) I simply explained to another Christian who much like yourself jumped the gun on my comment as to why this rebuttal is poor
@laaaaambofgod, my apologies on jumping the gun on you. What makes you so sure that the Church's thinking of God is archaic or backward? You should look into the considerable theology of God's divine simplicity or the scholastics on the divine attributes of God if you want to see whether the God of the philosophers is compatible with the God of revelation.
a real lack forward and progressive thinking I would have to say, in general I would say that the Catholic church is not in touch with the contemporary world which has become far more free thinking and progressive itself within the last 60 years, that however is my opinion, I simply think that by embracing change instead of fearing it the church could progress and develop for the better in the future
@laaaaambofgod, perhaps that is one perspective of the Church, but on the alternative might consider it an ideal of modernity that such contemporary trends exhibit and advance in morality or philosophy. I'm not sure what you are referring to in particular but the Church has been very conservative in her nature on account of her belief that she is guarding something very precious, the revealed truths of God. One might understand why she advances slowly as a mother protecting something precious.
@cooliodraw2 perhaps, you do make an interesting point, but in consideration to change do you not think the church would benefit from: allowing women to become priests, allowing priests to marry, perhaps taking a new stance on contraception due to larger families being impractical in the world of today, maybe admitting that homosexuality is not a life choice but rather a case of nurture and/or nature & addressing Atheists properly (which is why I commented on this vid in the 1st place)
@laaaaambofgod, the Church proclaims that she doesn't have the power to make women priests on account of the nature of the priesthood to represent Christ (that is to be in the person of Christ). It's not a robbery of women's rights, it's a more ancient observation that women and men may have different functions within a society or in life. Some Catholic priests can marry, in the Eastern Catholic churches this is not forbidden, it is in the Latin West that it is imposed as discipline not dogma.
@laaaaambofgod, so the discipline on priests in the West can change, but I don't think it will. Many of the Eastern bishops had voted in the 1960s at Vatican II that the West should keep the discipline on celibacy for Latin priests. Such introduces the sense of radical duty to the Church, because they are supposed to be acting in the person of Christ.
@laaaaambofgod, with respect to contraception this is simply impossible. Catholics work within the ancient frame of referring to teleology or what the purpose of a thing is, and the purpose of genitalia is the begetting of children. To go contrary to the nature of a human being would be a denigration and lowering of humanity's dignity according to the Church. It is unpopular but the Church's teaching is irreformable, except in some cases i.e having an STD that would severely harm one's spouse.
@laaaaambofgod, the verdict on homosexuality is that it, along with all other's sexuality though to a different degree, is a wounded sexuality. Like all other persons one is called to not sin in one's sexual acts and the homosexual act goes contrary to the nature of a genital organ, since it is for the begetting of children. Homosexuality as sexuality is not a sin, but as all of our sexualities can do, can lead to sin. They are called to chastity and join their sufferings to Christ's.
@laaaaambofgod, the Church does not typically view homosexuality as life choice (such is often the position of fundamentalists) but a struggle with the original sin and temptations that we all bear. Typically the addressing of Atheists is done by the lay people/religious/priests, the lower ends of the hierarchy, but the Pope and like persons have said that we're to begin a dialog of faith with all persons on the basis of our common humanity, always in charity, never in condemnation.
@laaaaambofgod, sorry I disagreed so much, just trying to show where the Church is coming from. I don't think that there's a sort of significant population problem at the moment, birthrates across Europe and soon the USA are too low to replace the dying population, much on account of contraceptive sex. Muslims it's been said will overtake much of Europe in the next 30 or so years, which would yield very very large problems for Christians and non-Muslims, many possibly becoming martyrs.
@cooliodraw2 in regards to atheism friend I just don't think scepticism/criticism is dealt with in an appropriate manner, properly addressing scepticism with a rebuttal that holds academic sway is the only way, for priests I only see benefits for families who can discuss family issues with a spiritual leader who actually has a family and as for contraception, well opinion will always divide, its opinion on this matter however will remain unpopular, impractical and outdated
@laaaaambofgod, perhaps skepticism/criticism isn't dealt with in an appropriate manner, Catholics are not the best evangelists, but to me it seems that Fr. Barron's at least trying, he offers some arguments in other places that hold some philosophical sway (i.e argument from contingency, desire, intelligibility of being). I don't see why priests who belongs to a family (as a person with parents & siblings) can't help other families. I don't think contraception is outdated but it's unpopular.
@cooliodraw2 "... His goal is to disarm the movie not prove Christianity. ..." As a child indoctrinated into the Catholic dogma when I was 6 (1st communion) and then made a 'soldier of christ at 8 (Holy Confirmation) and then at 14yrs old trusting my sense of reason, justice and logic became a happy and content atheist, I want to thank you for that last sentence.
I sense many of your indoctrinated peers would be face palming at this point.
oh dear....i can't stop face palming at this guy. at 4.35 he starts to explain the the bible is different from the myths and he claims this by using religious text....im sorry but you cannot back up a claim about christianity by quoting the bible. that is circular and redundant. now hes saying that we shouldn't believe in the myths because they existed in this far off time just because your religion has dates does not make it any more legitimate. the bible was written by man and man lies.
@bloodrose8790 Well, friend, if I wanted to indicate the difference between, say, Moby Dick and A Thousand Days, I would point to the texts and show how they belong to different genres. There are innumerable signs, inherent in the Biblical texts themselves, which indicate how they are not (for the most part) mythic in character. There is nothing "circular" about this process of demonstration. And if all man made texts are "lies," I'm not sure how you believe any text!
@wordonfirevideo i never said all man's texts are lies, i merely said man has the capacity to lie. or if that is too harsh maybe i should say he has the capacity to make mistakes. country music and rap are two different genres of music but i do not claim that rap is a more valid form of music and everyone who believes otherwise is wrong. people who do claim this are only doing so because rap is POPULAR.
@wordonfirevideo and yes your claim is circular and redundant you said it yourself "there are innumerable signs, inherent IN BIBLICAL texts themselves, which indicate how they are not mythic in character. you can not back up your argument with evidence from the very text you are trying to defend. that would be no different from me writing a book on physics and using the text itself to defend a theory in my text. if i did this wouldn't it seem redundant and weak?
why is it that these "myths of the ancient world" are any different from the christian faith? please explain how Christianity is so different, without dancing around the subject or using circular logic. the only difference between the ancient myths you refute and Christianity is popularity....christianity has lasted this long and is prevalent because its followers outnumbered the followers of pagan religions...this does not make it any more true it just makes it more popular and popularity fades
Great Video.
slowep6 6 days ago
what about all the writings and scriptures of the Egyptian faith? Or the Mayans? Romans? Just because they were apparently wiped out by whatever means doesnt make their gods wrong. Christianity is a faith, that I believe, will fall in that same place.
GKDOUT 1 week ago
Horace was also not born on December 25. He was born on July 15 (we share birthdays) :)
TenderTrap86 2 weeks ago
Both sides calling the other names, and arguing with each other, saying that the other side is wrong. How is that any different that watching two boxers fighting in the ring, and you merely cheer for one of them because you like one of them more or identify with one of them more? Anyone that is biased towards a particular subjects is gonna make them unable to accept the other's argument, and look for ways to put the other side down
Marcloud 3 weeks ago
I continue to be both amazed and amused that people try to debate you, Father. So clear, so reasonable and True. God bless
mZaoa 3 weeks ago
How do you know that peter, john, etc existed? Your argument is terrible sir.
osgangstarrr 1 month ago
@osgangstarrr Now Peter and John didn't exist! Heck, friend, how do you know that I exist? The existence of Peter and John is at least as likely as that of Caesar, Napoleon, and Abraham Lincoln. This is skepticism run amok!
wordonfirevideo 1 month ago 17
If Jesus was in fact the son of "God" why hasn't any other Human being walked on water, or performed miracles? Why? Are you going to say, "there is only one son of God and he shall return! Read revelation!" The heavens proclaim the glory of god? How? So hieroglyphics are not historically accurate when compared to words written by man in the bronze age? Maybe Horus was in fact a hybrid of human and animal. Isn't a man who performs miracles comparable to that of a mythical figure?
osgangstarrr 1 month ago
Joseph Campbell done us wrong! The problem with comparative mythology, on which Zeitgeist's rather shallow argument hinges, is that it tends to gloss over substantive and informative differences between stories in the name of finding some supposed common thread. In his interviews with Bill Moyers, Campbell tried to apply a comparative mythological premise to the image of a woman and a snake and a tree, and found that it completely undermined his ability to explain Judeo-Christianity...
CoryTheRaven 2 months ago
@CoryTheRaven ...He didn't seem to allow for the possibility that the Hebrews took this common Mesopotamian image and deliberately inverted its meaning.
A simple reading of the myths of Osiris and Horus, Dionysos and Krishna would dissuade any strong correlation with Jesus. Any close reading would reveal quite poignant differences.
CoryTheRaven 2 months ago
there is ZERO evidence at the time of jesus or even soon after. With earthquakes, zombies, mass murder of male children, feeding of multitudes, not to mention rising from the dead (many more) and not one word from one the many historians of the time. With one of the most recorded times of the bronzed age and not one of the historians can place any part of the Christ story. NOT ONE, Please prove me wrong. There is no question that jesus was a myth.
itsasin1969 2 months ago
@itsasin1969 Friend, in case you're really interested, take a look at the library of serious books on the historical Jesus. You might start with N.T. Wright and then move on to Raymond Brown, John Meier, Ben Witherington, and E.P. Sanders. In a word, we have more reliable evidence regarding the historicity of Jesus than we do regarding that of practically any other figure from the ancient world. The line you're pursuing was de-bunked in the late 19th century.
wordonfirevideo 2 months ago 17
@wordonfirevideo Friend, I'm asking you, the person in the vid. to provide me evidence outside the bible for JC at the time of or even soon after his so called life. As an Atheist I never want to say the there is absolutely no god, It’s just that I’ve never seen any good evidence for one. Regardless we can say for sure that the Jew/Christian/Islamic god is NOT real. This is why I say your faith is a joke. plz prove me wrong.
itsasin1969 2 months ago
@itsasin1969 You're falsely narrowing your data field. In fact, you're doing the wrost possible thing you could do as a historian, which is to automatically eliminate ANY AND ALL data you actually HAVE (for no reason except you don't like its philosophical or metaphysical implications) and basing your argument on the lack of data you WANT. First, an absense of evidence is not evidence of absense. Secondly, to do any historical work AT ALL, you MUST begin with what data you have...
CoryTheRaven 2 months ago
@itsasin1969 ...In this case, the Church already did the work of assembling the data for us. The New Testament is not a single text written by a single author. In the NT we have multiple sources all dating to within the lifetimes of people who were present at the events, and in some cases ascribable to those very people. In fact there are 4 separate biographies, which might be considered an embarrassment if they did not together provide multiple attestation...
CoryTheRaven 2 months ago
@itsasin1969 ...Furthermore, the earliest scrap of textual evidence we have is a creed recited by Paul in 1 Cor. 15 that dates to within 3-5 years of the death of Christ. As far as ancient history goes, that it practically instantaneous. The remainder of Paul's epistles date to within 20 years. 3 of the 4 Gospels date to within 40 years. Compared to the CENTURIES between the lives and the biographies of historical figures we take for granted, that is nothing. You have to go off what you HAVE.
CoryTheRaven 2 months ago
@CoryTheRaven Christians are the only ones who think that. The Journal of Higher Criticism (edited by Price) argued that 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 was not an early Christian creed written within five years of Jesus' death. Price[6] and Detering[7] denied that Paul wrote the verses and believed they were an interpolation possibly dating to as far back as the beginning of the 2nd century. So i need proof from outside the bible for all the amazing things the bible says. More lies for Jesus.
itsasin1969 2 months ago
@itsasin1969 If you're going to quote from the Wikipedia article on 1 Cor. 15, you might as well quote the beginning and the end of the same paragraph. Yeesh.
CoryTheRaven 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CoryTheRaven i'm just doing the same thing you are doing. But I still want evidence at the time of jesus or even soon after. With earthquakes, zombies, mass murder of male children, feeding of multitudes, rising from the dead and many more. Where is it? Your faith is a joke and if god were real, he would want nothing to do with your bloodthirsty dribble you call the bibble . Stop doing evil. you're, gona burn in hell.
itsasin1969 2 months ago
THANK YOU FR.BARRON YOU FINALLY ANSWRED MY QUESTION ON HORUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!THANK YOU !!!!! STAY BLESSED:D
RomanCatholicsUnited 2 months ago
Does anyone have a high resolution picture of Jesus that shows on 5:40? If you do please PM me the file or link. Thank you!
legolus 3 months ago
This video led me to watch the movie.
I had to stop myself from laughing and yelling at the computer: "You're missing the point!"
Jesus came to reveal the inner machinations on man's heart, to show that man is accustomed for God. So I don't see why atheists are so shocked that what Jesus taught was common sense!
LVCIVSTVLLIVSATELLVS 3 months ago
One thing also about Christianity as opposed to the ancient myths is (as FB said) has often said... the extra-biblical texts attests to Jesus' existence. What makes Christianity different then myths is what some of those ancient texts are. When the strongest critics of Christianity speak of Jesus as a verified person who walk Israel, we have to consider the validity of this claim. If contemporaries of St. Paul had a chance to claim Christ was "made up," they would have jumped at the chance!
sulkow82 6 months ago 3
@sulkow82 Also, if the apostles made up the whole thing, then why were they willing to die for a lie? Why would the evangelists make the apostles look so stupid and immature in the Gospels? Why, in first century Judea, would the first witnesses to the empty tomb be women? The answer is simple...the apostles and evangelists were honest men.
GruntLogic 3 months ago
@GruntLogic Thanks, good point.
sulkow82 3 months ago
@sulkow82 No thanks needed. I was merely repeating what writer Mark Shea said when he gave a talk to our Diocese young adults group.
GruntLogic 3 months ago
no.. there is no great distinction. The bible is just as much a myth as all the others. You tried quite hard to put your myth apart from the others. Luckily the young are not ALL so ignorant as to believe you and your laughable attempt at the separation..when there isnt any but the tiny tiny details.
BrynjaLives 7 months ago
@BrynjaLives --"We were not duper by clever myths, but were eyewitnesses to his glory". -St Peter
HouseHaunter992 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Its been a great week here in Ireland. Our new priminister finally gave the pope a proper going over re: the lies, cover ups, and ongoing abuses of the catholic church in relation to innocent children. Telling him that the rule of law supercedes canon law. Not being from Ireland, you would never appreciate the control the church had on all levels of government, the police, and everyday people. The church was never questioned and we have a history of destroyed lives because of blind faith!
newfrontier01 7 months ago
Atheist are some snide MFers.
VictoryInJesus454 8 months ago
Robert,
Would you be so kind to answer these questions?
1. In your opinion, how old is Earth?
2. How long ago did the Dinosaurs go extinct?
3. How is it that life can go extinct with less then 10,000 of it's species, but the animals on Noah's Ark survived?
4. Did all the Egyptians go to hell because the Jesus story wasn't around and they followed a different God (the Sun)?
5. Do you believe other life to exist elsewhere?
Try to answer non-biblically if your capable. Thank you
killtherude 8 months ago
@killtherude 1) 4.5 billion years. 2) 65,000,000 years ago. 3) The story of Noah's Ark is not to be taken literally. 4) No. 5) Could be. No real evidence. And finally, spare me the condescension. Catholics are not fundamentalists.
wordonfirevideo 8 months ago 4
@wordonfirevideo Continued: Your obviously intelligent. In my opinion, it's a shame you use it toward a corrupt & brainwashing system that will probably be weeded out within the next few generations. I understand faith, I been there before, I'm one of the fortunate ones to be able to see the truth by using "real evidence" as you answered in question 5. There is no real evidence in the bible & contradicting your logic it shows there may be hope within your views. I wish you luck...
Cheers
killtherude 8 months ago
@killtherude Ah yes, religion will disappear in "a few generations." Friend, you join a long line of failed prophets of the end of religion: Feuerbach, Marx, Nietzsche, Freud, Comte, Sartre, etc., etc. You might see the logic in the Bible if you understood how to read it properly. Like so many atheists, you seem to be a recovering fundamentalist. Try the far more intellectually satisfying tradition of Catholicism.
wordonfirevideo 8 months ago 23
@wordonfirevideo Ah well, maybe it's just wishful thinking, but in time I believe religion will fade. As for misunderstanding the Bible, it's only an assumption you seem to believe to whomever is in question... and wouldn't that be a huge percentage of religious people who have been misled, therefore contradicting religion in general and for most who believe in the word of the Bible? It sounds like an excuse you give yourself to hold on to your own faith.
I challenge you...
killtherude 8 months ago
@killtherude Go ahead: challenge me. I maintain that the argument from contingency is a compelling demonstration of God's existence. Show me where I'm wrong. I also maintain that the Bible is a product of the church and hence must be read in and with the church. Show me where I'm wrong.
wordonfirevideo 8 months ago 22
@wordonfirevideo What do you believe in?
ram0000100 8 months ago
@wordonfirevideo Call up "The Atheist Experiment" and challenge yourself with some intellectual monsters like yourself. If your able to convince them to try Catholicism (which I believe one of them studied to be a Priest or Preacher for 20yrs) then you'll be able to convince myself. Your right about one thing, I did grow up with an Evangelical family who I still have to deal with at times... but I am not a recovering fundamentalist. I also dated a very sweet Catholic girl who I went to Mass. ; )
killtherude 8 months ago
@wordonfirevideo lol... okay I'll admit, I guess I am a recovering fundamentalist. I think you hit a soft spot! lol It's been many years though, and I definitely see a much bigger picture and seem to have grown out of it with education and wisdom.
Cheers
killtherude 8 months ago
@wordonfirevideo Thank you for this father, I dislike how uninformed individuals take us cahtolics as fundamentalists.
manuelturcios 8 months ago
@wordonfirevideo
Question:
How and where does the Bible give the impression that the story of Noah is not be taken literally?
Mechanized0 7 months ago
@Mechanized0 How do you know not to take Moby Dick literally? Clues internal to the text. Same thing with certain Biblical passages.
wordonfirevideo 7 months ago
@wordonfirevideo Moby Dick is a work of fiction, while the Bible is otherwise. Secondly, what clues could be utilized as examples in order to substantiate a non-literal interpretation of a specific passage or set of passages?
Mechanized0 7 months ago
@wordonfirevideo In response to the Zeitgeist myths can I suggest you watch or read "Gods in the Sky" by Allan Chapman. He explores all the ancient myths and how they helped us understand the universe in ancient times.
butternutsquashist 6 months ago
Mithras it claims was born of a virgin on December 25, when actually he emerged fully formed from a large rock. He didn't have a birth date until he was combined with Bacchus and Apollo into Sol Invictus. Then his birth was not a once off event but a cyclical thing, based on the cycle of daylight hours increasing and decreasing. The Roman cult of Mithras wasn't much like the Persian original, didn't really get going until after Christ, and targeted very different demographics (rich military men)
magister343 8 months ago
@BiblePreacher889 i could show u pictures if youtube would allow me ( which doesn't ) on comments of Horus baptizing a pharaoh in a pyramid , or a picture of the nativity of horus also from a piramid , he being visited by three wise men and the announcement to osiris . btw i have seen this priest saying there is not such thing as being baptized when it comes to Egypt mythology , so he is obviously lieing . plus Horus did had disciples , they made pyramids for him , pyramids which tell his tale .
wisdomandchange777 8 months ago
That last paragraph had some a couple grammar and spelling mistakes, my bad..
DILLRAW 8 months ago
How can he be perfect when he created a disaster. Look at our world, more good than bad. Wars everywhere over nothing. Each and everyone are sinners acording to the Bible. So how is he perfect? Would you say someone was the perfect artist but every drawing had at least one mess up? I wouldn't. Perfect means free of flaws. This is only simple things. You could go into the science behind why Christianity and any other religion is fake. Get your head out of your ass because it's stinking.
DILLRAW 8 months ago
Yall Christians crack me the fuck up. Creationism is a joke. Science proves itself while faith is a synonym for ignorance. When will yall learn? You're holy book contradicts itself in to many ways. There are many disturbing things as well. This comes from someone who was raised Christian. Who created god? Why would god create evil at all? Why is that god has a plan but you can go to hell? He planned on you going there? He seems to get credit for everything good but takes no blame for wrong.
DILLRAW 8 months ago
I think that it's obvious if you look at the makers of Zeitgeist, athiests, Masons, New Age pervayers, that they have an agenda and it is for the very new world order they try to warn against, and Christ is in their way. Their goal is to brainwash youth who donnot have the time to delve into history and true astronomy, and the true historian Josephus. Thus we have to be alert and explain to them how this movie is worse than just wrong they are lying on purpose.
purnapoosmom 8 months ago in playlist Father Barron Commentary
ok here is where you have it all wrong : Osiris IS in fact represented as a virgin , yeah sure she actually had sex with another god which had not penis but had a made out penis made of golden , so yes the history of Horus is more complex and yes might be easier to find stupid , however let me ask you this : how different is the history of jesus ? god comes , visits Mary ( we know well what visit means in the bible ) and then Jesus is born from a virgin ? is this not Myth ? seriously ????
wisdomandchange777 9 months ago
@wisdomandchange777 BTW i have much more to say but space is limited and idk if you will even answer this .. btw if you read this go ahead and deny than Horus was baptized and than his baptizer was decapitated as well ..
wisdomandchange777 9 months ago
@wisdomandchange777 Hang on Osiris is a virgin? Do you mean Isis maybe? Anyway that aside, your virginity remains intact if you go to bed with a man with a golden penis? Really? There was no penetration or conception as a product of it? How exactly do you remain a virgin if you have sex and have a child? o.O Virgin before, certainly not virgin after, that would be a HUGE difference to the Jesus story.
MrWildbill20056 8 months ago
@MrWildbill20056 LMAO difference where exactly ? 1ST at all is the bible explicit about how your god impregnated the virgin !? and could it had it been sexual contact !? and second at if the catholics claim she was a virgin and she had a child how big different is it than the original goddess was impregnated by a piece of golden !?i mean do you not get how only a dumb would believe either story !? , they are both fables so you get it .. there is not miracles or even you could make them , Bi says
wisdomandchange777 8 months ago
@wisdomandchange777 oh and yes Isis ( thanks for the correction ) is represented as a virgin , u ever seen the horoscopes ? some of the story of your messiah is there , thats where the biggest lie ever told started .
wisdomandchange777 8 months ago
@wisdomandchange777 You missed my point. The point is that whether or not Isis was a virgin pre conception, she certainly wasn't after. The point of the 'Virgin Birth' is that Mary's virginal 'status' was unaltered. The rest of what you say, again, is no argument at all.
MrWildbill20056 8 months ago
@MrWildbill20056 it is you who misses the point Isis was known as the great virgin long before the 1000th virgin came , oh and yes there is other MYTHOLOGICAL figures which were also virgins .. One of the inscriptions that calls Isis the "Great Virgin" appears in the temple of Seti I at Abydos dating to the 13th century BCE. As stated by professor of Old Testament and Catholic Theology at the University of Bonn Dr. G. Johannes Botterweck, in the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament:
wisdomandchange777 8 months ago
@wisdomandchange777 so yeah Christianity is nothing more than a copy cat whether you want to believe it or not . Horus was baptized , horus was born from the great virgin , he had twelve disciples which are known as the twelve constellation oh and yes he promise he would comeback ... idk if in the clouds but i would not be surprised . i mean c'mon how old do you have to be to believe anything the bible say. do you even know the bible tells you how to treat your slaves and to stone your children
wisdomandchange777 8 months ago
@wisdomandchange777 The ad absudum extension of your 'mythological' argument is that all virgins are mythical. I hardly think so :P The problem is that Isis was worshipped as 'Virgin' and 'Mother', but not as 'Virgin Mother.' The two are functionally utterly different. Virginity/Chastity was not particularly prized by ancient Egyptians and from extant material it's clear no one cared to make anything of it, especially given the different tales regarding the birth of Horus. (He swaps mothers :P)
MrWildbill20056 8 months ago
@MrWildbill20056 first at all i wish you people would make some sense for once so i could feel i am talking to adults , and i say this because i just mentioned what they used to call isis , and now YOU tell me than virginity wasn't important for the Egyptians! WOW just WOW .. and anyways if you are gonna talk about switching mothers why don't you think about that bible verse in which Jesus denies than Mary was his mother and also denies his brothers as well ? , now thats what i call M Switching
wisdomandchange777 8 months ago
@wisdomandchange777 Most of the above is not an argument, it's really just the textual version of a temper tantrum. You say wow and yet it's pretty much the standard scholarly position that the ancient Egyptians put little to no stock in being a virgin/chastity. The Primary material available regarding Isis is explicit in Isis being impregnated via phallus. Everything else is regarding the spiritual birth of the Sun or refers to Neith. Jesus does not deny his mother, he is making a nuanced point
MrWildbill20056 8 months ago
@MrWildbill20056 oh yeah and if it such standard scholarship why don't u quote some few scholars claiming what u are saying !? i mean i quoted a catholic priest and then finally some of u accept she was regarded as the virgin mother of god .. btw are u saying than saying she is not my mother but those who follow me was some kind of example !? hahaha oh gez ... plus i believe only in two gospels is it mentioned than she was a virgin , wasn't that such an important fact to fact to forget ?
wisdomandchange777 8 months ago
@wisdomandchange777 fathom.lib.uchicago.edu/2/21701778/ is the most accessible, open citation on the web I can find, enjoy. At best Isis was regarded as a spiritual great virgin, but also the model wife and mother. The extant material gives us no reason to think the ancienty Egyptians would have thought a sexless marriage was somehow ideal. The Egyptians had no trouble accepting duality ie spiritual birth of the Sun, and bodily actions of their deities, concurrently.
MrWildbill20056 8 months ago
@MrWildbill20056 not only do you misinform but you are a liar as well , i google what you wrote and the result is nothing at all .. and then i google isis virgin mother and it does seem as it was such a huge big deal for them until the veneration of mary about the third century started , only 50 or so years after the adoration of isis stopped , in other words the story of Mary as a virgin was not only added till the third century but started as a substitute of to the adoration to Isis ...
wisdomandchange777 8 months ago
@wisdomandchange777 Actually I'm not lying :P Try to keep the hyperbole minimised. Copy/Paste is corrupting the link. Remove %C2%AD from the link when you try to load it and you will get an article on ancient egyptian society and family life by Brewster. You get your research from Google searches and not academic material? The only material talking about Isis as a virgin mother comes from Acharya S who is notoriously poor on primary sources and who confesses 'biographies are not set in stone.'
MrWildbill20056 8 months ago
@wisdomandchange777 anyways i am pretty sure than even if a time travel machine was made and you got to Israel and asked about Jesus and not a single person knew of him as it appears you would keep believing you fables , wouldn't you !? jesus story is not different to red ribbonhood or superman , they were good to read back then but since people were so ignorant then they were easily convinced they were real ..
wisdomandchange777 8 months ago
@wisdomandchange777 The tone if this response does not instill one with confidence that your reply will be more than bluster. You don't see a difference between having 'conventional' sex via a golden prosthetic and a spirt 'hovering over?' Really? That is comparable to seeing no difference between internal and external reproduction despite totally different mechanics. The rest of what you say is basically 'you are stupid to believe this because it's stupid,' otherwise known as no argument at all
MrWildbill20056 8 months ago
Later, Dionysus had his mother ascend to Mt. Olympus to take a seat beside the gods (sound familiar?). Zeus came to Heracles mother when she was betrothed to someone else and impregnated her with Heracles, a demigod who was the savior of all humanity when he battled the evil Titans (familiar??? It should be. It was a well known church heresy- the whole half god thing. Wonder where they got confused...). It is well known that Luke was a gentile. Incorporation of Greek myth helped win converts.
thewolfpacktravels 9 months ago
@thewolfpacktravels Dionysus is notoriously the worst deity to try to make into a 'Jesus-a-like.' The only vague similarities come from Dionysus dying and coming to life again (in hugely different circumstances.), and that he wandered about teaching. That's it. The rest is just fairly awkward semantic based wrangling. As for Heracles, saviour is in no way appropriate. He was worshipped as protector/champion. Luke in no way even suggests a 'demi god' of any sort.
MrWildbill20056 8 months ago
@MrWildbill20056 I addressed what the myth of Dionysus actually is and where the small similarity to Jesus comes from. I also addressed that the "demi-god" worship of Jesus was considered a Greek heresy. I also stated why Heracles is worshipped. Are you really going to sit there and type that Jesus isn't worshipped as a protector or champion against "evil?" What a vacuous strawman your reply was, but then again, so's Father Barron's "semantic" argument so that shouldn't really surprise me.
thewolfpacktravels 8 months ago
Father, you need some mythology education or Zeitgeist does (haven't seen it), but one of you needs to learn the story right. Dionysus' mother was tricked by Hera and requested to see Zeus in his Mt. Olympus armor which incinerated her. Dionysus, then just a seed, was sewn into Zeus' thighs and sprang forth from his loins. He became the god of wine, chaos, and orgies. He DID have missionaries. They were called Bacchae. The similarity to Jesus comes from turning water into wine.
thewolfpacktravels 9 months ago
@thewolfpacktravels Actually this is mainly a semantic objection. Barron is arguing a specific form of missionary ie self sacrificing to the point of death for no material gain. None of the remaining material would lead us to suspect that Horus or Dionysus had similar followings. Whilst the Bacchanalia was certainly banned and then regulated, private observances were not (so far as we know.), the parties were a hot bed of politcs. Dionysus is not on record changing water into wine further
MrWildbill20056 8 months ago
In a world in caos of a economic fiscal irresponsabilities of powers in control, you have the Batican Compound filled with treasures and pure gold. Christianity is a cool religion, when you guys going to put it at work? I don't want to listend to magic or myths, i wan't REAL RESPONSABILITIES from every one. ZEITGEST want NO WAR real peace, NO MONEY, NO BORDERS who cant limit us.
aereone 10 months ago
@aereone --The Catholic Church helps more of the worlds poor than any other secular or prot organization on earth. And if you want the vatican to liquidate its "treasures and gold" why not ask the scientist of europe to sell the Hadron Collider as well? That would certainly feed a few starving peoples.
TheDesertProphet454 10 months ago
TZM ties to the United Nations raises caution.The UN is one of the most corrupt geo-political institutions since it's induction.I've seen all of the Zeitgest films and I think there is good information in all three movies.However,I always found it interesting the 1st topic it's makers try to breakdown is Christianity.Check out the references for this at the end of the film,all Theosophy scholars and that's it.Which in IMHO is just lazy filmaking,unless the point of the film is to push an agenda.
kenchun24 10 months ago
Father Barrin I have a question for you, what makes Jesus any more real than any other God like Horus ? Im interested since you Christians seem to love call other Gods myths or ot real and yet claim that your God is the real one.
777Atheist 10 months ago
@777Atheist Well, we might start with literary genre. Mythic texts are set in an indefinite time "once upon a time" or "long, long ago in a galaxy far away," since they deal with the rhythms and patterns of nature. The Horus story is a beautiful example of this: it has to do with the cycles of the Nile. But historical texts, dealing with real events, are set in a definite time and place. "While Quirinius was governor of Syria and Augustus the emperor of Rome..." Start with that difference.
wordonfirevideo 10 months ago
@wordonfirevideo Ok, I have some questions, sorry for the inconveniance, Im just interested in what you might answer. What parts of the Bible do you take literally, for example do you really believe that Jesus could walk on water or heal the sick ? Also do you follow the Old Testament, and if yes, is all the Old Testament or only parts of it, and if you only follow some parts of the OT then why dont you follow the others and whats up with all the violence in the OT ?
OT = Old Testament
777Atheist 10 months ago
@777Atheist Again, friend, it depends largely upon the genre of the texts in question and the intention of the author. Some of the Old Testament texts are mythic or in the genre of religious saga. Others are more straightforwardly historical. Some are poetic--the Psalms or the Song of Songs for example. The Gospels fall in the genre of ancient history (take a look at the prologue to Luke), and so yes, I take much of their content as factually accurate.
wordonfirevideo 10 months ago
@777Atheist --Also one of the most important thing is that Jesus had eyewitnesses to his having lived among men, but the same cannot be said for Horus and co. PAX.
WayOfTheMaster454 10 months ago
OK, Father Barron here needs to get off his high horse, and get on a plane to Saudi, or Kazakhstan, or Zimbabwe, and meet the people, the starving people, the abused women, the mutilated children and look into their eyes and tell them that when they eventually finish dying their slow death, they get to spend the rest of eternity in hell because they did not accept your 'God'
Your 'God' is petty, Jealous and cruel. Do not tell me differently.
Bl1ndz 10 months ago
@Bl1ndz Oy vey. Hey friend, take a look at my videos on Hell and you might find yourself a bit less confused.
wordonfirevideo 10 months ago
@Bl1ndz -- Our God is GREAT, AWESOME, and worthy to be worshipped.
WayOfTheMaster454 10 months ago
basically his arguement is my religion is true,ur's is mythology
thescorpionking2020 10 months ago
Thats a pretty desperate argument Billybag, it's like saying god put fossils in the ground to test our faith. Christians often hang onto pathetic Rationalizations to cling onto their faith. Another one is 'why are their still monkeys ?' or 'Charles Darwin died a christian'.
gavincostin1 11 months ago
@wordonfirevideo when religion excepts its devoid of rationality, then i will take it seriously
Veneratio05 11 months ago
The first movie is not representative of the zeitgeist movement. it was an art project
aleksinac6 11 months ago
economics.. is about the truth.. other things.. I am not an expert!!!
mehdi12mehdi 11 months ago
as robbie williams correctly muses upon: "was jesus real? the bible was writen 400 years after jesus died... if you wrote about me 2 years ago you get a load of made up shit, here say, and gossip. y'kno and urrr, the bible was decided in a room, 400 years later, in Italy or sumthing, by people who werent there at the time. then u look further into it, and you get these stories of other religions that pre-date Christianity using the same template" ahahahah owned by a mainstream idiot
Veneratio05 1 year ago
@Veneratio05 Friend, you need some elementary courses in Bible and history! The letters of Paul were written in the 50's of the first century, just a few decades after the time of Jesus, and the Gospels were written between 30 and 60 years after the resurrection. Would you automatically dismiss as unreliable an account of the JFK assassination written, say, in the 1990's?
wordonfirevideo 11 months ago 13
@wordonfirevideo who cares its clear to see all of the miracles were elaborate chinese whispers. how else would you BIG UP the son of god?? today we have materialistic people making up bullshit, but back then they didnt even have science and a rational view of reality! you would have thought they made up MORE for jesus than healing/ressurection. theres a difference between 20 years ago, and 2000 years ago mate incase u didnt notice. we have computers now? look your infront of one. MAGIC right?
Veneratio05 11 months ago
@wordonfirevideo I dont think when the bible was written is relevant, 'is it true' is the question. So i guess we can say yes the bible exist so in that since it is true but was it divinely inspired by God? There is simply no evidence to suggest so besides a group of people with a strong conviction and you can have a strong conviction about anything.
One more thing to add, if i say i was taken by aliens. It's NOT your obligation to disprove it, it's my obligation to PROVE it to you
zacharylansing 10 months ago
@wordonfirevideo < I agree with you on "Zeitgeist the Movie" using weak points to portray Jesus as myth. Such movies have one goal : drive public away from religion. Although I'm not religious in traditional sense, I still respect its existence as part of human development.
However, many ancient wisdom traditions used mythic metaphors as a way to pass powerful messages so that future generations could be enlightened and religions had been unkind to such sacred knowledge.
Zeno1999 6 months ago
Comment removed
chess12345789 11 months ago
There probably was a Jesus but the one in the bible is a cartoon character.
gavincostin1 1 year ago
Christians tend to have such pathetic arguments like 'why are there still monkeys' and 'Darwin died a christian'. When u prove them wrong they move the goalposts. Arguments against Dawkins and Hitchens tend to be just nitpicking, without any serious argument. I wonder why the Jesus myth is not completely different from older religions. Why couldn't god come up with his own ideas for himself ???
gavincostin1 1 year ago
@gavincostin1 --Jesus was no myth; can you cite any eyewitness acounts of Mithra or Baal?
WayOfTheMaster454 1 year ago
@WayOfTheMaster454 There is not one eyewitness account, written during the time of Jesus
gavincostin1 1 year ago
@gavincostin1 -- If they were or not, it was recorded that real people knew and associated with Jesus. "We were not duped by clever myths, but were eyewitnesses to His glory". --St Peter
WayOfTheMaster454 1 year ago 2
@gavincostin1 specifically there are three "secular"( if you want to call them that) points of view, during the time and they were recording who was being put to death and going to jail and that stuff.. you know documentation. It is even stated in zeitgeist.
chess12345789 11 months ago
@chess12345789 Do you know what the original source is ? I would genuinely like to know. As I said earlier it seems to me that christianity is deeply embedded in our evolution of religion. If christianity was true it would be purely original without so many similarities with other religions. The basic story of a guy walking around doing miracles and being a messiah is hardly original. There are people alive today who claim to be a messiah and we have witnesses alive today who know them.
gavincostin1 11 months ago
@gavincostin1 C.S. Lewis (you've heard of him?) had this same problem with the "derivative" nature of Christianity. Then a friend of his (Tolkien, I think) asked him to consider whether God might have been "whispering" to all mankind in the 'dying god' myths and all the other similarities with the Judeo-Christian revelation. Perhaps these were "proto-evangelia" which God had sown in human history to prepare all nations, as He had specially prepared Israel, to hear the Good News of salvation?
billybagbom 11 months ago
Jesus existed.
WayOfTheMaster454 1 year ago
i whip my hair back and froth
peterprettypants 1 year ago
The contention held by Jesus "mythers" is considered laughable in the highest circles of academia. If conventional historical scholarship were based upon the tactics and techniques utilized by the Zeitgeist movie, we would have to grant that Napolean Bonaparte is a mythical construct, inspired by the biographical accounts of Alexander the Great.
It's truly saying something, when even the top secular historians say that the "Jesus Myth" movement is fringe lunacy.
coachtaskmaster 1 year ago
Father, with regards to Horus there is also the fact that Horus' mother Isis took those dismembered parts of Osiris and impregnated herself. Not quite resembling the Virgin Birth.
Stitchman3875 1 year ago 2
..and of course lets not forget that not only was the book of fairy tales written approx 50yrs after the mythical figure of Jesus, the 'death' and subsequent 'beaming up' to the christian heaven of his imagined mother was dreamt up err... 1st November 1950.
Nuff said ...
BTW The Zeitgeist Movement have since passed on religion in deference to its insignificance to the survival of the human race. There are more pressing evils.
morklind 1 year ago
Comment removed
chess12345789 11 months ago
@morklind your response has no point to the argument, and shows your ignorance to the understanding of Catholicism. Saying "Nuff said" reminds me of being back in pre-school, and the "bully" saying what he wants is what happens. BTW having researched the movement they find Religion to be quite an obstacle to their cause, because from their point of view it supports the current status qua, which is of course capitalism and not the resource-based economy. chnically the Bible is older. Research!
chess12345789 11 months ago
@chess12345789 Yawn ... I am done debating with luddites. I have been there, bought the t-shirt and read the book. For me to argue with you would be like trying to talk to a baby in a pram. I was brought up a catholic - I almost joined the clergy. For fuck sake I even read catechism when I was child. I am as old as the poor deluded man in the video. Believe me there is NOTHING you can tell me that I don't already know ... you have been raped of reason. I don't care that you don't believe me.
morklind 11 months ago
@morklind Why are you posting here? To share the Good News of Cynisim and Unbelief?
billybagbom 11 months ago
You have to understand his position .. not only is his job on the line ..
his whole raison d'etre is called into question .. I almost care
morklind 1 year ago
@morklind Friend, ad hominem arguments don't get us anywhere. Perhaps you might offer a counter-argument.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago 4
@wordonfirevideo I would if a counter position was offered. It isn't. Earnest and sermon-like waffling might work on a doubting subjugated flock but it doesn't fool people brave enough to trust in reason and historical fact over myths that have no basis in logic, reality or evidence. Many different religions with similar attributes predate christianity which itself derives similar astrological 'coincidences'. I ask the most unalterable pertinent question that any innocent child would. Why?
morklind 1 year ago
@morklind Hmmm... I guess you don't even know what an argument is. That's just more ad hominem harumphing, friend. When you're ready to make an argument, I'd be happy to engage you.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago 7
@wordonfirevideo I cannot fail to be impressed with the religious arrogance displayed and yet no defence has truly been proffered. I am amused you think your indoctrinated mind can engage in a meaningful debate when your whole premise is based on blind faith and unverifiable hearsay. I was a "soldier of christ" and confirmed at 8yrs old. All these religions with similar attributes and astrological coincidences .. and yet they are all huff except yours. Tell me what happens to hermaphrodites?
morklind 1 year ago
@morklind Still not an argument in sight! And I'm supposed to be the avatar of superstition and irrationality. Man, if you want to get into this with me, you've got to pick up your game.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago 3
@wordonfirevideo Just as I thought - no answer to that one. It's a killer isn't it?. Floors people like you every time.
I am almost enjoying your fruitless kidology but you are just a journeyman on a road I travelled a long time ago except I had the courage to question.
Religious dogma is accurate in one respect. You are all sheep. I promised myself a long time ago never again to waste my breath on the blind.
I'll leave you to continue running around in your little box.
morklind 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo The argument is that this reverend's interest in advocating christianity, is not to do with spreading truth, telling us to think for ourselves critically, or questioning olllllllld established systems. His interest in having imaginary friends(god), is not to do with his care for the world, or the future of our children. His interest in defending christianity, is defending his individuality. To have this big a rug pulled out from under his feet, is life-threatening to him.
Veneratio05 1 year ago
@Veneratio05 you can find all of his rebuttals to all the myths in zeitgeist on secular channels of the internet. Stop speculating with your prejudice and defend your argument.
chess12345789 11 months ago
I am glad Father Barron has this ministry "Word on Fire". Keep up the great work!
flyguy619 1 year ago
I think people are desperate to hold onto their objections when, really, this is an outstanding critique, especially since it is fitted into so short a span of time! The thing is, these mythicists have a very vague, uncritical distrust of the Gospels that is more bias than substance. As Fr. Barron says, you must take into consideration the historical nature of the Gospels which set them apart so drastically from other religious works.
BalladoftheWindfish 1 year ago
Comment removed
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
Nice dude
spryrambro 1 year ago
Please understand I am in no way disputing your religion much in the same way you should not dispute my beliefs, I am simply stating your argument is not well founded and in no way can Biblical Texts be used in an argument as it is not a scientifically or academically sound text, you have a doctorate so you must understand that as an academic if I wrote my thesis on the 'history of the world' citing dates on the earths existence based on biblical dates it would not be valid academically at all.
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
your argument isn't really valid, your rebuttal to Zeitgeist is at best poor, using a text which CANNOT be ratified by todays scholars/academics/scientist to counter an argument which does simply address similarities between Christianity and other religions just simply doesn't work, yes you can argue the differences much in the same way I can argue the differences between 'Pocahontas/Dances with Wolves' and 'Avatar' but at the end stripped down the stories are the same
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod
The rebuttal to Zeitgeist is that most of the "facts" the claimed were either extremely stretched or simply made up. If they make a theological claim about beliefs then where else do we go to besides the holy texts?
Jim1905 1 year ago
@Jim1905 irrelevant, battling a modern day collection of fact and theory/stipulation (all based upon Academically valid texts or historically accurate text) with a 2000 year book containing nothing but accounts of the "supposed" existence of a man called Jesus and even older stories that has little to no validation from the academic or scientific collective does not work, period, this rebuttal addresses fact/theory/historical stipulation with little more than other historical stipulation&fiction
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod
Saying it's a x year old book doesn't make a difference to any of it's claims. Jesus is almost completely accepted as having existed by historians. The book does have validation, it's called philosophical theology and it also needs none from science as it's not a scientific piece.
Jim1905 1 year ago
@Jim1905 my original point was that using the bible in this case was not beneficial and as such really killed his rebuttal, using the text you are defending to reinforce your argument doesn't work at all, perhaps I'll write a book on Neurosurgery tomorrow and when you tell me I'm wrong I'll quote my book, I'm not trying to get into a debate on Aetheism/God or nit-pick at Christians on tiny issues but this rebuttal is weak, period
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod
How is it weak? The movie tried to make claims that Jesus was essentially a copy of other religion's "Jesus" character. The only way to give a rebuttal is to look at what each religion actually says, where do we have information about Jesus in a theological way? The bible. So how else is he going to say, no they're not the same?
Jim1905 1 year ago
@Jim1905 what you've just implied is that because you have no other resources or texts to counter such claims using the bible is appropriate in such situation despite a complete lack of credibility, anyhow the rebuttal is flawed as it begins by attacking the credibility of Zeitgiest (good) however, then he undoes himself by stating that some of the stories vaguely resemble what Zeitgiest is suggesting, now we know stripped down the stories do bear similarities (bad) (1)
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@Jim1905 he then fails to address a major aspect of the Zeitgiest religous argument which is with the 12 (bad, instead he focuses completely on the God Born Deity feature) he then states there are more differences but doesn't list any at all (bad, such information allows others to see the research he has done and see the apparent flaws in Zeitgiest, instead none are listed and as such gives implication that perhaps there are a lot more similarities, which there are) (2)
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@Jim1905 continuing on to reduce old religions to mythology (good) stating the bible is different to this mythology (bad, what makes 1 ancient text right and another 1 not? he then reduces the ancient mythology to metaphors, ideals and life lessons but does not even acknowledge the same can be done for the bible, which it most certainly can) stating Jesus is not a mythological figure (bad, pure opinion, show me the facts!!) (3)
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@Jim1905 stating Jesus is a historical figure (hardly, there may have been a Jewish teacher under a similar name but he would have had to have been married to even be acknowledged by peers or potential followers, thats a fact!)these other Deities likely originate from similar Religous teachers expanded into myths and is it not likely that a different, dare I say it contemporary; myth evolved for Jesus considering it is a later one? (4)
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@Jim1905 This rebuttal focuses little on the credibility of Zeitgiest which is really should, it focuses primarily on the 'son of god' aspect and fails to address more so than that, possibly the worst part is at the end where he implies that because none of these long dead myths don't have missionaries and christianity does, it makes christianity right (really, really, really bad) (5)
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod, Fr. Barron is picking out pieces of the movie that can be easily refuted. Bear in mind that Youtube videos don't go for very long so he has to focus his efforts not on refuting every detail but on certain points. He doesn't say that Christianity is right on account of it having missionaries today, but rather lends it more credibility in that there might be more truth to Christianity if people still give up so much for it. His goal is to disarm the movie not prove Christianity.
cooliodraw2 1 year ago
@cooliodraw2 I did not say that, if you read the comment the sentence holds the word 'implies' which he most certainly does in the 'missionary' case, nor did I ever say his point was to prove Christianity, as far as I am concerned there could be a God (granted if there is a God he would not be as backward or archaic thinking as the church would make him out to be) I simply explained to another Christian who much like yourself jumped the gun on my comment as to why this rebuttal is poor
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod, my apologies on jumping the gun on you. What makes you so sure that the Church's thinking of God is archaic or backward? You should look into the considerable theology of God's divine simplicity or the scholastics on the divine attributes of God if you want to see whether the God of the philosophers is compatible with the God of revelation.
cooliodraw2 1 year ago
a real lack forward and progressive thinking I would have to say, in general I would say that the Catholic church is not in touch with the contemporary world which has become far more free thinking and progressive itself within the last 60 years, that however is my opinion, I simply think that by embracing change instead of fearing it the church could progress and develop for the better in the future
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod, perhaps that is one perspective of the Church, but on the alternative might consider it an ideal of modernity that such contemporary trends exhibit and advance in morality or philosophy. I'm not sure what you are referring to in particular but the Church has been very conservative in her nature on account of her belief that she is guarding something very precious, the revealed truths of God. One might understand why she advances slowly as a mother protecting something precious.
cooliodraw2 1 year ago
@cooliodraw2 perhaps, you do make an interesting point, but in consideration to change do you not think the church would benefit from: allowing women to become priests, allowing priests to marry, perhaps taking a new stance on contraception due to larger families being impractical in the world of today, maybe admitting that homosexuality is not a life choice but rather a case of nurture and/or nature & addressing Atheists properly (which is why I commented on this vid in the 1st place)
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod, the Church proclaims that she doesn't have the power to make women priests on account of the nature of the priesthood to represent Christ (that is to be in the person of Christ). It's not a robbery of women's rights, it's a more ancient observation that women and men may have different functions within a society or in life. Some Catholic priests can marry, in the Eastern Catholic churches this is not forbidden, it is in the Latin West that it is imposed as discipline not dogma.
cooliodraw2 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod, so the discipline on priests in the West can change, but I don't think it will. Many of the Eastern bishops had voted in the 1960s at Vatican II that the West should keep the discipline on celibacy for Latin priests. Such introduces the sense of radical duty to the Church, because they are supposed to be acting in the person of Christ.
cooliodraw2 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod, with respect to contraception this is simply impossible. Catholics work within the ancient frame of referring to teleology or what the purpose of a thing is, and the purpose of genitalia is the begetting of children. To go contrary to the nature of a human being would be a denigration and lowering of humanity's dignity according to the Church. It is unpopular but the Church's teaching is irreformable, except in some cases i.e having an STD that would severely harm one's spouse.
cooliodraw2 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod, the verdict on homosexuality is that it, along with all other's sexuality though to a different degree, is a wounded sexuality. Like all other persons one is called to not sin in one's sexual acts and the homosexual act goes contrary to the nature of a genital organ, since it is for the begetting of children. Homosexuality as sexuality is not a sin, but as all of our sexualities can do, can lead to sin. They are called to chastity and join their sufferings to Christ's.
cooliodraw2 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod, the Church does not typically view homosexuality as life choice (such is often the position of fundamentalists) but a struggle with the original sin and temptations that we all bear. Typically the addressing of Atheists is done by the lay people/religious/priests, the lower ends of the hierarchy, but the Pope and like persons have said that we're to begin a dialog of faith with all persons on the basis of our common humanity, always in charity, never in condemnation.
cooliodraw2 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod, sorry I disagreed so much, just trying to show where the Church is coming from. I don't think that there's a sort of significant population problem at the moment, birthrates across Europe and soon the USA are too low to replace the dying population, much on account of contraceptive sex. Muslims it's been said will overtake much of Europe in the next 30 or so years, which would yield very very large problems for Christians and non-Muslims, many possibly becoming martyrs.
cooliodraw2 1 year ago
@cooliodraw2 in regards to atheism friend I just don't think scepticism/criticism is dealt with in an appropriate manner, properly addressing scepticism with a rebuttal that holds academic sway is the only way, for priests I only see benefits for families who can discuss family issues with a spiritual leader who actually has a family and as for contraception, well opinion will always divide, its opinion on this matter however will remain unpopular, impractical and outdated
laaaaambofgod 1 year ago
@laaaaambofgod, perhaps skepticism/criticism isn't dealt with in an appropriate manner, Catholics are not the best evangelists, but to me it seems that Fr. Barron's at least trying, he offers some arguments in other places that hold some philosophical sway (i.e argument from contingency, desire, intelligibility of being). I don't see why priests who belongs to a family (as a person with parents & siblings) can't help other families. I don't think contraception is outdated but it's unpopular.
cooliodraw2 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cooliodraw2 "... His goal is to disarm the movie not prove Christianity. ..." As a child indoctrinated into the Catholic dogma when I was 6 (1st communion) and then made a 'soldier of christ at 8 (Holy Confirmation) and then at 14yrs old trusting my sense of reason, justice and logic became a happy and content atheist, I want to thank you for that last sentence.
I sense many of your indoctrinated peers would be face palming at this point.
morklind 1 year ago
oh dear....i can't stop face palming at this guy. at 4.35 he starts to explain the the bible is different from the myths and he claims this by using religious text....im sorry but you cannot back up a claim about christianity by quoting the bible. that is circular and redundant. now hes saying that we shouldn't believe in the myths because they existed in this far off time just because your religion has dates does not make it any more legitimate. the bible was written by man and man lies.
bloodrose8790 1 year ago
@bloodrose8790 Well, friend, if I wanted to indicate the difference between, say, Moby Dick and A Thousand Days, I would point to the texts and show how they belong to different genres. There are innumerable signs, inherent in the Biblical texts themselves, which indicate how they are not (for the most part) mythic in character. There is nothing "circular" about this process of demonstration. And if all man made texts are "lies," I'm not sure how you believe any text!
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo i never said all man's texts are lies, i merely said man has the capacity to lie. or if that is too harsh maybe i should say he has the capacity to make mistakes. country music and rap are two different genres of music but i do not claim that rap is a more valid form of music and everyone who believes otherwise is wrong. people who do claim this are only doing so because rap is POPULAR.
bloodrose8790 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo and yes your claim is circular and redundant you said it yourself "there are innumerable signs, inherent IN BIBLICAL texts themselves, which indicate how they are not mythic in character. you can not back up your argument with evidence from the very text you are trying to defend. that would be no different from me writing a book on physics and using the text itself to defend a theory in my text. if i did this wouldn't it seem redundant and weak?
bloodrose8790 1 year ago
Comment removed
bloodrose8790 1 year ago
why is it that these "myths of the ancient world" are any different from the christian faith? please explain how Christianity is so different, without dancing around the subject or using circular logic. the only difference between the ancient myths you refute and Christianity is popularity....christianity has lasted this long and is prevalent because its followers outnumbered the followers of pagan religions...this does not make it any more true it just makes it more popular and popularity fades
bloodrose8790 1 year ago
The British actor Richard Burton spoke this line in a play`I`m feeding caviar to pigs` talking truth to some ignorant people is a lot like that line.
crafter111 1 year ago
"We were not duped by clever myths, but were eywitnesses of His glory" -St Peter
GraveyardGhost559 1 year ago