Zeitgeist Refuted, Brainwashing 101 - Comparative Religion

Historians have well documented Jesus and his life and miracles, all those that deny this should read a book.

Saying Jesus of the Bible never existed is like saying Jerusalem isn't there, it's rediculous.

Most if not ALL first century historians record Jesus and his miracles and crucifixion

Tacitus in his Annals (c.115 A.D.) mentions that Christ was crucified under Pontius Pilate

The correspondence between Pliny the younger and the Roman Emperor Trajan (98-117 A.D.) corroborates the New Testament history

Flavius Josephus (37-100 A.D.), the first century Jewish historian, makes mention of Jesus,

Clement (A.D. c. 30-100) the Bishop of Rome

Polycarp (A.D. 70-155) the Bishop of Smyrna, a student of the Apostle John

Ignatius (A.D. 35-110) the Bishop of Antioch

Irenaeus (A.D. 130 -200) the second century Bishop of Lyons

Tertullian (A.D. 160 -220) a second century apologist

Clement (A.D. 150 -215) the second century Bishop of Alexandria

Contrary to what the liberals of the Jesus Seminar tell us, we have far more than "likelihood" and "possibility" to confirm the reliability of the Gospel stories. We have substantial authentic evidence that the Jesus of history is the same person revealed to us in the Gospel accounts. We have the first and second century apologists who wrote extensively about Jesus and Christianity. Some of these were men who knew the Apostles. There were reliable second-generation historians who were taught by the Apostles who were in turn alive during the ministry of Jesus.

There is video at the site as well. This video series was done to counter an ABC news piece of the late Peter Jennings.

There is some question as to the origin and translation of the name of the saviour of all humanity. The transliteration of Jesus from the greek;
http://www.plim.org/JesusOrigin.htm
(Posted Image)

Also:
The Romans carried out the execution of the savior of all humanity, being the NAZIs of the day they kept records of this event, records get lost or destroyed over time this makes later century historians and writers who had access to these records important as well, not just eyewitnesses of the Man.


Aulus Cornelius Celsus (25BC-50) Roman Encyclopedian, would have been the one to recorded the death and other burial records and events of Jesus, even included the hight of Jesus that was then later used to compare to the Shroud of Turin

Tacitus (56-117) greatest first-century Roman historian, writes of Jesus and the Christians

Suetonius (69-130) second greatest first-century Roman historian, writes of Christians

Lucian (120-180) Roman writer/playrite wrote a satire about Christianity, The Passing of Peregrinus

Julian the Apostate/Roman Emperor (331-363) wrote three volumes making mention of Christians and Jesus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_history

The film producer's problem is not with Jesus really it is with the Bible, scriptures that record Jesus and the stories of the Bible.

The Bible recordes that GOD spoke and created the earth, universe and everything within.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God....14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

If the bible is not the inspired Word of God then Jesus was just a man. The Bible is the inspired Word of God, this every Christian knows. There are three ways to know the Bible is real beyond a doubt;

1.prophecy, the Bible is the only religious book containing prophecy, with hundreds of prophecies already fulfilled, stretching from the old testament to the new showing the Bible to be inspired by God. Here God tells how he does this; Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done,(Isaiah 46:10)

2.archaeology, fair archaeology shows the historical accuracy of the Bible every time. There are at times political and spiritual forces working against this.

3.faith, I like to prove things scientifically as much as possible buy when it comes down to it faith in the end is needed. We're not going to see the big bang or creation or the animals all getting on the Ark. This is often enough for some to build a calf or start worshipping the sun as an object they can see.

Where is the evidence that he performed real miracles?

Such as? There is absolutely no evidence of Noah's Ark.

The "history" of Jesus is all over the road. You could spend the rest of your life reading about Jesus and then die not knowing with any certainty who he really was and what really happened.

That depends on what you qualify as evidence. Ancient Sumerian and Mesoamerican writings tell of the deluge and tell strikingly similar stories for that matter. Don't know if you qualify that as "evidence" per se.

This documentary will cause more damage to the 9/11 truth movement by mixing fact with fiction.

The religion part of this documentary will turn lots of people off the 9/11 part as they make all these false claims then expect for people to believe the part about 9/11.

They should of made separate documentaries as people will not take the 9/11 part seriously due to the lies and misconceptions in the religion part of Zeitgeist.

It was quite laughable watching the religion part and the makers start making up weak points trying to tie all religions together.

I would not recommend this documentary or give it to anyone but would rather give them Loose Change and Terrorstorm.

That depends on what you qualify as evidence. Ancient Sumerian and Mesoamerican writings tell of the deluge and tell strikingly similar stories for that matter. Don't know if you qualify that as "evidence" per se.

No, I don't qualify that as evidence, because there is no archeologic evidence of a gigantic, worldwide flood and there is no evidence of a gigantic Ark.

You've already made this point, spelling mistake and all.

To which I responded:

That depends on what you qualify as evidence. Ancient Sumerian and Mesoamerican writings tell of the deluge and tell strikingly similar stories for that matter. Don't know if you qualify that as "evidence" per se.

No, I don't qualify that as evidence, because there is no archeologic evidence of a gigantic, worldwide flood and there is no evidence of a gigantic Ark.

Seashells in the Rockies? I personally have handled rocks with the fossilized remains of oceanic life in the Smokey Mtns. Not saying this proves anything. Just saying. :D

That depends on what you qualify as evidence. Ancient Sumerian and Mesoamerican writings tell of the deluge and tell strikingly similar stories for that matter. Don't know if you qualify that as "evidence" per se.

great, another thread started that will only divide us...


Regarding the flood. The history channel (if I'm remmebering correctly) had a good special on the Bible Flood, where they search for geological evidence of a massive flood that covered the Earth, but they did not find it.

HOWEVER, they DID find evidence of a massive flood, which would have occurred roughly during the time-period in question, that covered much of the middle-east, which as we know was the "Entire world" to those populations who would have not seen or heard of the rest of the world at the time.

Since the story was written down by men, and probably told orally for generations before it was written, it is certainly likely that the writer of that story didn't understand just how large the Earth is, and misunderstood exactly what was happenning.

The story is true, but the flood might not have been global.

For skeptics, you can see that even some Christians are open to re-interpreting the stories in the Bible when evidence emerges in the real-world that might suggest we alter our understanding of scripture, if ever so slightly.

We are not brain-dead followers of fairytales. There's so much more to it than that. And we certainly do not all believe the same details about our faith, nor do we all worship alike.

Please remember these things when posting about this topic. We are not all very strict about our interpretations of the stories in scripture.

Peace,

Such as? There is absolutely no evidence of Noah's Ark.

There is recorded by the historians above made mention of the miracles by Jesus, besides whats recorded in the Bible. Tacitus in his Annals was at least one the Dr.Kennedy said had these writings. I could care less what they write, most of them were pagan and as such were in a different view of the Jews and their God, btw showing they were two different religions. There was paganism and the God of scriptures that is now the Bible.


Recorded in the Bible is where Jesus is resurrected with an earthquake, along with others who also came out of their graves appearing to many in town before going to Heaven with Jesus. Hows that for a miracle?


No Evidence of Noah's Ark?
Jesus spoke of Noah and the flood, so, either it happened or there was no Jesus of the bible.


There has been an Ark found, many including myself believe to be Noah's Ark, AND as important mountains of evidence for a global flood. The dinosaurs existed just preflood, them and all other fossils were buried in the many layers of flood sediment.

Found all over the planet is a universal chalk layer made of single cell sea algae that settled to the ocean floor forming the chalk, proving the earth was under water, how long and at what depth.

Under the microscope, chalk consists of the tiny shells of countless billions of microorganisms composed of clear calcite set in a structureless matrix of fine-grained calcium carbonate (microcrystalline calcite). The two major microorganisms whose remains are thus fossilised in chalk are foraminifera and the spikes and cells of calcareous algæ known as coccoliths and rhabdoliths.

Have blood cells ever been found in dinosaur fossils?
Actual red blood cells in fossil bones from a Tyrannosaurus rex? With traces of the blood protein hemoglobin (which makes blood red and carries oxygen)? It sounds preposterous -- to those who believe that these dinosaur remains are at least 65 million years old.

THE EVIDENCE
The evidence that hemoglobin has indeed survived in this dinosaur bone (which casts immense doubt upon the 'millions of years' idea) is, to date, as follows:

The tissue was colored reddish brown, the color of hemoglobin, as was liquid extracted from the dinosaur tissue.

Hemoglobin contains heme units. Chemical signatures unique to heme were found in the specimens when certain wavelengths of laser light were applied.

Because it contains iron, heme reacts to magnetic fields differently from other proteins -- extracts from this specimen reacted in the same way as modern heme compounds.

To ensure that the samples had not been contaminated with certain bacteria which have heme (but never the protein hemoglobin), extracts of the dinosaur fossil were injected over several weeks into rats. If there was even a minute amount of hemoglobin present in the T. Rex sample, the rats' immune system should build up detectable antibodies against this compound. This is exactly what happened in carefully controlled experiments.

Evidence of hemoglobin, and the still-recognizable shapes of red blood cells, in unfossilized dinosaur bone is powerful testimony against the whole idea of dinosaurs living millions of years ago. It speaks volumes for the Bible's account of a recent creation.
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c026.html

I've posted the Ark info already in the other zeitgeist thread page2, but will do it again if need be, because it is a very good find.

You've already made this point, spelling mistake and all.

To which I responded:

This is a good point to rebut exactly what Jim said, but not to debunk the theory of a Diety entirely.

Not pushing anything on you, just let me explain briefly.

You said,

I would add,

But it would be ridiculous to assume that ALL things we do not have evidence of MUST not exist, simply because we cannot detect them. Surely there is at least one thing in existence which we do not yet have proof of. To close one's mind entirely to these ideas is not advisible. Always leave the door of your mind cracked open slightly.

Not saying that statement proves God exists. Just saying that it proves he might exist, and there is good reason to search for him.

Like I have said before. Those who do not search, certainly won't find anything. I would also add that in this type of endeavor, it is most worthwhile to search with one's heart, as opposed to only trusting your eyes. Tell me, have your eyes ever deceived you before?

Just some thoughts to ponder,

Peace,

That depends on what you qualify as evidence. Ancient Sumerian and Mesoamerican writings tell of the deluge and tell strikingly similar stories for that matter. Don't know if you qualify that as "evidence" per se.

No, I don't qualify that as evidence, because there is no archeologic evidence of a gigantic, worldwide flood and there is no evidence of a gigantic Ark.

Seashells in the Rockies? I personally have handled rocks with the fossilized remains of oceanic life in the Smokey Mtns. Not saying this proves anything. Just saying. :D

Because it does not. How do you know that was oceanic life? Has anyone tested the fossils?

Bible is a religious book and has no scientific value whatsoever.

To be precise, Tacitus described Jesus as a historical figure.

No, Christianity evolved from Judaism.

Again, the Bible has no scientific value whatsoever.

The Bible has no scientific value whatsoever.

Those must be tiny mountains, because I can't see them.

Wait, are you telling me that dinosaurs existed at the same time as humans?

No, that proves that Earth was an oceanic planet many years ago, long before Noah.

No, why should it sound preposterous?

That's funny, because there were things dated with radiocarbon that are 45 000 years old. Also, how is the preservation of the soft tissue the absolute proof?

That depends on what you qualify as evidence. Ancient Sumerian and Mesoamerican writings tell of the deluge and tell strikingly similar stories for that matter. Don't know if you qualify that as "evidence" per se.

Noah's Ark and the global flood can't be mentioned without immediately recounting absurd pagan accounts. If they're anything like other flood myths they're just basterdised versions of the original created long ago to lead pupils astray and it's still working today being taught in universities and in the worldwide media.

Noah’s Flood and the Gilgamesh Epic

In 1853, the archaeologist Austen Henry Layard and his team were excavating the palace library of the ancient Assyrian capital Nineveh. Among their finds were a series of 12 tablets of a great epic. The tablets dated from about 650 BC,
but the poem was much older. The hero, Gilgamesh, according to the Sumerian King List, was a king of the first dynasty of Uruk who reigned for 126 years.

Genesis is older
It makes more sense that Genesis was the original and the pagan myths arose as distortions of that original account. While Moses lived long after the event, the Torrah tells of events long before his time. For example, Genesis 10:19 gives matter-of-fact directions, ‘as you go toward Sodom and Gomorrah and Admah and Zeboiim’. These were the cities of the plain God destroyed for their extreme wickedness 500 years before Moses. Yet Genesis gives directions at a time when they were well-known landmarks, not buried under the Dead Sea.

It is common to make legends out of historical events, but not history from legends. The Bible teaches that mankind was originally monotheistic. Archaeological evidence suggests the same, indicating that only later did mankind degenerate into idolatrous pantheism.

That is, the human writers of the Gilgamesh Epic rewrote the true account, and made their gods in their own image. The whole Gilgamesh-derivation theory is based on the discredited Documentary Hypothesis. This assumes that the Pentateuch was compiled by priests during the Babylonian Exile in the 6th century BC. But the internal evidence shows no sign of this, and every sign of being written for people who had just come out of Egypt. The Eurocentric inventors of the Documentary Hypothesis, such as Julius Wellhausen, thought that writing hadn’t been invented by Moses’ time. But many archaeological discoveries of ancient writing show that this is ludicrous.
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3107

Many other flood accounts are also compared at the site for those honestly wanting to understand this topic outside of what is being taught in the secular government institutions.

The Bible as well has stories far older than the flood, all given to Moses written down including many prophecies precluding anything but devinely inspired Word of GOD!

Archaeological evidence confirms scripture with every dig of the earth. There is strong evidence that both the site where Moses received Word from GOD at Mt.Sinai and Noah's Ark have been found, as well as many other discoveries.
http://www.wyattmuseum.com
Video of "The Search for the Real Mt.Sinai" can be found on Google and at the www.Archive.org

Sitchin places the Deluge at 13,000 years ago, when Nibiru was passing by at about the same time that a massive polar ice melt was underway that sent the ice caps plunging into the ocean pushing mile high waves that rolled from pole to pole and back again.

why are you posting all the same stuff that was in a thread a couple days ago?

why stir up another argument about God?

I'm all about teaching people the truth and all, but trying to prove historically that all these things happened is NOT the way to do it.

Reach out to the hearts of others, not just their minds!

Debatable.

Yeah, as long as you can post the satanic new world order religion c&p dropping unopposed then it's not divisive, but as soon as questions start and facts come out to counter the false religious belief espoused (evolutionary paganism/satanism) then it's divisive.

Why don't you go get the ass-monkey producer of this piece of NAZI propaganda and tell him I want to talk to him.

Absolutely. But I'm not going to speculate as to what it is before it has been found.