Quote:
Originally Posted by Heretic
I agree that Acharya's book was interpretive as far as trying to UN-define Christ, in fact it was a dreadful read and difficult. Yet that isn't the evidence that has most people scratching their heads. It is the near blatant similarities between the characters she claims he was based off of.
She really doesn't even have to do alot of convincing here for me. The mythologies hold their own weight. I have checked many of your links and none do any more than nit-pick on dates and minor discrepancies that in no way challenges the similarities as a whole.Most make a subjective attempt to pick on enough minor issues to cause doubt, and then cry foul because there are some minor discrepancies.
|
I don't think that these are minor issues if someone claims something and it is not based on fact but on opinion. Which mythologies have you read and of which similarities do you speak? I know of Horus that he was conceived by Isis who was impregnated by Osiris in the land of the dead (nothing virgin about her. You could even claim she was one sick **** lol).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heretic
If it were just Horus, Dionysus, or Mithra and the similarities that border on exact matches on a couple maybe...but there are sooo many that it is undeniable that there is an existing blueprint out there that has been used over and over again. You can even remove Christ from this entire puzzle and still the the footprints remain of an archetype used over and again.
Yet I am open to being wrong here, in fact that would be cool because this issue has alot of people asking questions. Screw all of the other literature on why anyone is or is not correct, the focus can stay only on the mythology to solve this riddle in my eyes. I would LOVE to understand more why the similarities are so remarkably alike amongst so many figures of worship in our ancient past, so I remain open to further proof along these lines only because the rest is just a quagmire of rhetoric that even the scholars cannot agree on.
|
I can understand that. But the main problem here is not what religion is but what Zeitgeist thinks religion is. As far as I have seen the Jesus of the Bible and the Jesus of the Quran are not solar deities that Acharya S, Zeitgeist and Jordan Maxwell (as well as the people that reference him like David Icke) claim he is. At least not on a historical, theological level and of course factual level. Once again, I'm not claiming anything but that these claims are proven to be false and must be corrected.
By the way, I totally agree with Alex Jones on his analyses of the second film. The Venus project just smelled centralization on the first watch and that is not a good thing for me. Someone in the David Icke forum mentioned that even before Alex had posted his comments. There are alternatives to what Zeitgeist and The Venus Project present for energy production and monetary solutions. I need to analyze marx and engels approach more to comment further.
These are my opinions which have nothing to do with the topic but I think I have to share:
I have people proving me that masonry, satanism, mormonism and many other conspiratorial beliefs are in their core luciferianism. Now why the hell would that be important to people that are very intelligent and do many occult rituals? Why do many conspiracy researchers abhore christianity, make these false claims that they can't prove and don't admit that they are wrong and that they can make errors (like any normal human being)? That messes up their credibility in my opinion and casts big shadows on their other works and sources.
It makes christianity look holier then ever in my opinion (and I'm not a christian) since it is being battled with such ferver to no success. I see the same thing with these unjust wars against the muslims that are raging on for years now. these people probably have some very important truth which is trying to be slandered and disguised for years.