"The 'Real' Zeitgeist Challenge" DEBUNKED (6of 10) Peter Joseph interviews Acharya S

[12brokenbones]

Do I have this right? Zeitgeist proponents expect me to believe that scientists should be given ownership of all of the world's resources and control of my labor and my children's labor while these same folks insult "debunkers" who are simply asking these Zeitgeisters to support their arguments? I can barely stand to hear this lady utter another falsehood.

[XSC3]

Constantine made Christianity (and all other religions) legal, he gave it some public credibility by his patronage and he gave the church money and some buildings. He wasn't responsible for creating any new doctrine, nor for editing or creating the bible or the canon, as conspiracy theorists like to pretend. There's simply no evidence for it. "Politics" here is being used an excuse to spin yarns and twist facts.

[XSC3]

They think if we can point to one example where such a thing occurred (ie: Christians persecuted the Jews during the crusades and conquered their brothers in Constantinople), therefore it must have always occurred. Conspiracy theorists do this all the time with government conspiracies... well, they lied about the Lusitania, right? They lied about watergate, right? So they must have lied about JFK, 9/11 and space aliens too! (no proof needed)

[XSC3]

Folks like her seem to have started with the conclusion: "Christianity copied itself from earlier, superior religions and used violence to suppress and dominant them" and then tries to work backwards, taking any instance of similarity in the past as proof of plagiarism and any polemic in the past as proof of tampering and syncretism followed by suppression. Any deviation from those patterns is ignored. What if a bunch of male gods were called "Meri," then what? Oh, well just ignore...

[XSC3]

The notion that "things are not all in english" or "things were destroyed" are two non-answers from Murdock. Really? C'mon. She knows the real experts in the field work with what we HAVE (not what they wished we had), and understand the original languages (better than she).

Also, certain "patterns of behavior" might be all well and good, but logically speaking we must prove that happened in this case, rather than simply assume it.

[XSC3]

History matters, regardless of your religious beliefs. Thus the facts should matter, and nobody should be defending these two clowns simply because they stroke someone's atheistic ego (and anyway, they both seem to be implicitly advocating a kind of new agey religion as an alternative anyway). 'Nuff said.

[XSC3]

It would be foolish for example to charge the creators of "Superman" with plagiarism, saying they ripped of Spider-Man with their character, because both characters have a "secret identity" and "super strength" that they use to fight crime. We can easily show via documentary evidence that Superman was created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster in 1932, and so it could not possibly have been "inspired" by Spider-Man (who was created no earlier than the 1950's)

[XSC3]

I may be changing my mind on "Peter Joseph." may be deluded after all (rather than deliberately dishonest as I previously suspected). He may be so dedicated to his "cause" that he simply doesn't bother to really understand what's going on here to see how foolishly contradicted it is. Murdock seems to be making it up as she goes along, in typical amateur fashion. and as long as they appear to be on the "same side" it's all good

[blaziermissy]

Discrediting Diodorus by Christian apologetic sources and then claiming Diodorus as nationalistically bias for Greeks is such human psychological denial that I laughed.

Does thou not see thour art presenting rebuttle with Christian biased info?

Let me remind you that you are arguing for beliefs in talking snakes and virgin births. Please evolve already. We must move on from this insanity and unify to gain the world we ALL deserve: A resource based economy and social system.

[XSC3]

what a silly rebuttal. the question is not "talking snakes vs. virgin births" the question is:

Which source was written first? Because if you're going to say "Source A inspired Source B" then you must AT LEAST prove Source A came first. If you have only a hearsay account of that being so, then that's a problem. It's hypocritical for Murdock and Joseph to say we can't trust Christians because of their religion and in turn trust pagans for THEIR religion.

[blaziermissy]

lol.....Talking snakes vs virgin births? You're actually "arguing" about which of these retarded, perpetual myths came first? Are you insane?

[XSC3]

blaziermissy, you're not listening to me.

the ASSERTION from the conspiracy theorists is that Christianity COPIED its beliefs (it's "mythology" if you will) from non-historical, pagan beliefs that came first. IF you want to argue that they're correct in this assertion, you must AT LEAST provide credible evidence that those pagan stories were documented FIRST. It doesn't matter if you believe they're "all silly."

[blaziermissy]

Oh yeah, I'm listening to you. All you have to do is read her books. If you're STILL not convinced, then study "patterns of human behavior" in history and recognize that we do emmulate each other and that with each conquering we destroy info from the defeated. Also, study human behavior and motive, as welll as political philosophy and theories and how cohesion of masses is accomplished through religion.

Don't fear the conclusions.

[XSC3]

That's all well and good, the trouble is that she misuses the sources. If we take sources from hundreds of years after Christianity and say they must be the same as sources hundreds of years BEFORE Christianity (implying the pagan cults were static), take portions of quotes (out of context), redefine words anachronistically, and take words from different languages and say there is a connection because they SOUND similar... and discount modern sources due to suspected "Christian bias" ...

[XSC3]

So the Roman empire sat there for three hundred years trying to kill off the Christians, then finally decided "I know! We'll modify their religion and use it to control the masses! Perfect!" Whether that theory is coming from Mr. White or Dorothy Murdock & "Peter Joseph" it's still ridiculous. Nothing to "fear" just nothing they've yet proven.

[blaziermissy]

Have you read her books? Have you studied abroad? Comparitive Religions?

Do your own research and don't limit yourself to the U.S.

Perhaps you'd like to further research Constantine and the events that let to Christianity politically. You must always keep in mind that politics throughout the past advocated religious ideology. Keep that in mind.

[XSC3]

blaziermissy, I see you have enabled "friend lock." Add me and we can discuss this in far more detail over Private Message (PM).

[yourfiction]

I can't believe what they are saying in this clip. Joseph and Madame S are a joke. LOL

[psycofloyd]

haha "let it slide"

[BloodStainedLamb]

the fact that Joseph is even having this conversation with Murdock and agreeing to everything she's saying is a testament either his desperation to hide his blatant lies and misinformation or is complete lack of intellectual capability to wrap his head around these arguments to see how they are horribly fallacious and incompetent. Joseph's ego is larger than his brain and that ego is being put into a vice and squeezed.