ZEITGEIST, The Movie

[HereticHulk]

Why don’t you give us an example of one of these supposedly abundant and easily refuted lies?

I got answer for this one!

And I learned from the kind debunkers in this very thread.

DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH! But seriously, I cannot post links yet.

 

[Par]

I got answer for this one! And I learned from the kind debunkers in this very thread.

Pardon me? So, can you give us an example of one of these supposed lies, or can you not?

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I got answer for this one!

And I learned from the kind debunkers in this very thread.

DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH! But seriously, I cannot post links yet.

Provide the link sans the http://

 

[Drudgewire]

I got answer for this one!

And I learned from the kind debunkers in this very thread.

DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH!

Two posts and you've already got the "avoid a real answer at all costs" twoofer MO down to a science. Bravo!

 

[Bell]

Yup!

Yep!

I've been lurking here awhile and reading this thread especially. Wow!

It will get worse... for the troofers...

It's like all these debunkers are one person with different online handles.

Correct! We are infact all and the same NWO-bot.

All these links to debunk this and debunk that, when the debunker's lies are worse then the government's.

Imagine the NWO in power when we finally rule the earth...

Zeitgeist had its errors, but the overall truth of its message rings through all this tripe of these anti-"troofers".

Errors, so we are all urged to do research on YouTube ourselfs? Oh wait, that was Loose Change...

I could post links all day that would refute what the refuters say. It comes down the fact that the Bush's and Clinton's are one and the same. I wouldn't be surprised if one day it came out that somewhere down the lineage they are the same incestuous blood.

So the W. in George W. Bush stands for William?

This also asplanes why Bush Sr. only served one term... he didn't, he served three! 12 years of r00lin teh earth, that's why Bill... Bush Sr. was drunk when he handed over power to Bush Jr./his son. 12 years was to much...

 

[huskerdooo]

Hi all,

I just saw this movie last night and I wanted to research its claims.

I was wondering if someone could point be to a place (link etc.) where the Part I material is refuted.

I have read all 13 pages of this thread but I remain unsatisfied with the various arguments on both sides.

Thanks all.

 

[Drudgewire]

Hi all,

I just saw this movie last night and I wanted to research its claims.

I was wondering if someone could point be to a place (link etc.) where the Part I material is refuted.

I have read all 13 pages of this thread but I remain unsatisfied with the various arguments on both sides.

Thanks all.

Welcome to JREF huskerdooo.

The problem with a refutation of Zeitgeist is that it's so all over the place and such a mish-mash of other conspiracy theories (that have no evidence either but have been around long enough to sound good) which suddenly seem to have context because of the way they've been woven together with other imaginary tales... that one gets a headache even trying to go fact by fact with it.

Asking for a refutation of Zeitgeist is like asking which parts of the Scooby Doo movie couldn't really happen.

 

[dudalb]

My brain spins from the way it goes from being a Da Vinci Code wannabe to being a Loose Change ripoff in about a minute.
IT is the Woo Woo Film with Something in it for every variety of Woo.

 

[boloboffin]

Hi all,

I just saw this movie last night and I wanted to research its claims.

I was wondering if someone could point be to a place (link etc.) where the Part I material is refuted.

I have read all 13 pages of this thread but I remain unsatisfied with the various arguments on both sides.

Thanks all.

The first part of Zeitgeist is largely stolen directly from Brian Fleming's The God Who Wasn't There, and when I say "stolen," I mean "clips of the movie directly taken from the film."

So any competent debunking of GWWT will serve as a debunking source for Part 1 of Zeitgeist. Here's one.

 

[huskerdooo]

Thanks Bolo, I will check that link out.

The movie does go all over the place. Well, I tried to focus my question on Part I. It seems more cohesive and rational than Part II and Part III.

Did they ever try to tie in Part I with Parts II and III? I do not remember a strong connection being made or implied.

 

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

That film is unbearable to watch. It's like having your brain stuffed in a blender, blended with strawberries and bananas, and then poured back in your skull.

 

[JimBenArm]

That film is unbearable to watch. It's like having your brain stuffed in a blender, blended with strawberries and bananas, and then poured back in your skull.

Mmmmm. Banana-Berry-Brain smoothie....

 

[Corsair 115]

Mmmmm. Banana-Berry-Brain smoothie....

I hear such a recipe is a hit with the zombie crowd...

 

[GreNME]

Thanks Bolo, I will check that link out.

The movie does go all over the place. Well, I tried to focus my question on Part I. It seems more cohesive and rational than Part II and Part III.

Did they ever try to tie in Part I with Parts II and III? I do not remember a strong connection being made or implied.

Huskerdooo, I have actually gone through the entirety of part I and pointed out almost all of the factual errors and mis-attributions made throughout it. If you would like, I could either give you a formatted PDF of what I collected, or I can even start a new thread (this one has gotten far too personal between some of the posters for me) and go step-by-step through it to show you what I have collected so far.

There is admittedly a great deal of information in the first part alone, and I have only about 8 pages (in Word) of notes. If I actually formatted only what I have up to this point, it will be much longer than that. However, since this is something I plan on doing anyway I'm more than happy to share it with whomever is interested. I eventually plan on going through the whole film and deconstructing as much as I feel necessary, to add to a larger-scale project I am working on in my free time.

Pre-emptive disclaimer: I am not religious, I do not make excuses for religion in my dissection of Zeitgeist, and some of the stuff I correct the makers of the film on can still be construed as anti-religious if someone really wanted to take it that far. I am, however, markedly not anti-religious-- I am simply an avid lay-scholar of history and, as such, I make it a point to follow social and cultural influences throughout the ages. I have no problem with religion, but I do not subscribe to any faith (or even non-faith, I am happily agnostic). I cannot provide justification for or against any religion, just an analysis of historical data based on those that the movie claims to use.

 

[huskerdooo]

Thanks GreNME.

I sent you a private message indicating my email address. I would enjoy looking over your comments on Part I.

 

[dudalb]

Some people are praising this film because it "exposes" Christianity as being a fraud.
Problem is the evidence used in the first third is as bad as anything a Christian fundy can come up with. Just one kind of woo attacking another,at best.

 

[Nick227]

I hear such a recipe is a hit with the zombie crowd...

Does this make Zeitgeist another zom-com a la "Shaun of the Dead"?!

To stick a couple of cents worth in, I think seeking hard data either way for the "Did Jesus really live?" question is going to be hard to do and, as I will try to explain, not actually what the makers of the doc are attempting to do.

I think most who've been around the spiritual scene for a while agree there does appear to exist a "perrenial philosophy." It's expounded through a variety of spiritual symbol systems - astrology, tarot, qabalah, and more. The Jesus myth is pretty much in line with it. This seems to me to be what the movie is trying to say here.

What, perhaps thankfully, they didn't attempt to go into in the Zeitgeist Movie is Qabalah, the purported mystical basis for the Pentateuch, and to some the basis of the whole of both testaments. I refer within Qabalah especially to the studies of Gematria and Isopsephia (Alchemy also is significant but let's not go there). Because, 2000 years ago, the Hebrew and Greek languages had no separate number systems, they used the letters to double for numbers. This led to the possibility of creating whole new patterns of significance within written language, and this principle was used to "encode" mystical belief systems. As time passed and both languages picked up their own number systems, so the secondary meaning passed even further from view.

As a relevant example here, with regard to Greek, the language of the New Testament, it's interesting to note that the number value of Jesus (Iesous) is 888. And of Christ (Xristos) is 1480. These add together to give 2368. The number relationship 888:1480:2368 reduces to the similar ratio 3:5:8 and (drumming, da da!)...358 in Hebrew is the number for Messiach, or Messiah. A multitude of similar number puzzles and hidden relationships like these are unveiled and studied in some Qabalah schools and, suffice to say, most people who study these things in any depth tend not to believe in a historical Jesus, though by no means exclusively so. It becomes clear with lengthy study that much of the Old and New testaments is allegorical on a host of different symbolic levels. The interested reader is drawn to "The True and Invisible Rosicrucian Order" by Dr Paul Foster Case, or to the work of Frederick Bligh-Bond and Thomas Simcox-Lea.

To conclude, the study of Gematria or Isopsephia is undertaken, not as an attempt to find the most insanely abstract use of one's time, but to "bootstrap" the mind into mystical states of awareness. It starts when an individual simply, for no reason they can easily divine, becomes attracted by these things. I think Zeitgeist attempts to work in a similar way. It's not seeking to be accepted on a rational level. It's pushing out a subtle symbol system and some people find themselves bizarrely attracted, possibly accounting for the near 3 million who have viewed it since June 26 on Google alone.

Nick

 

[GreNME]

To stick a couple of cents worth in, I think seeking hard data either way for the "Did Jesus really live?" question is going to be hard to do and, as I will try to explain, not actually what the makers of the doc are attempting to do.

No, they state exactly that in some of their first section. Perhaps you mean your personal interpretation of what they attempted?

I think most who've been around the spiritual scene for a while agree there does appear to exist a "perrenial philosophy." It's expounded through a variety of spiritual symbol systems - astrology, tarot, qabalah, and more. The Jesus myth is pretty much in line with it. This seems to me to be what the movie is trying to say here.

And such a claim is patently false. If you want, I can send you a copy of the notes I took in PDF form as well, or simply start my own thread where we can go over each and every part in socratic form.

What, perhaps thankfully, they didn't attempt to go into in the Zeitgeist Movie is Qabalah, the purported mystical basis for the Pentateuch, and to some the basis of the whole of both testaments. I refer within Qabalah especially to the studies of Gematria and Isopsephia (Alchemy also is significant but let's not go there). Because, 2000 years ago, the Hebrew and Greek languages had no separate number systems, they used the letters to double for numbers. This led to the possibility of creating whole new patterns of significance within written language, and this principle was used to "encode" mystical belief systems. As time passed and both languages picked up their own number systems, so the secondary meaning passed even further from view.

The movie covers Christianity and Judaism specifically, but it condemns all religion, even relatively new ones like Wicca, Kaballah, and so on.

As a relevant example here, with regard to Greek, the language of the New Testament, it's interesting to note that the number value of Jesus (Iesous) is 888. And of Christ (Xristos) is 1480. These add together to give 2368. The number relationship 888:1480:2368 reduces to the similar ratio 3:5:8 and (drumming, da da!)...358 in Hebrew is the number for Messiach, or Messiah. A multitude of similar number puzzles and hidden relationships like these are unveiled and studied in some Qabalah schools and, suffice to say, most people who study these things in any depth tend not to believe in a historical Jesus, though by no means exclusively so. It becomes clear with lengthy study that much of the Old and New testaments is allegorical on a host of different symbolic levels. The interested reader is drawn to "The True and Invisible Rosicrucian Order" by Dr Paul Foster Case, or to the work of Frederick Bligh-Bond and Thomas Simcox-Lea.

You perform the same fallacy that the movie does, and that has to do with language. You are attempting to connect Hebrew with Greek, even though their language systems were very different. For example, I don't know where you got "Messiach" from, but if you were seeking the Hebrew word "Moshiach" then you got the spelling wrong. The word Christ translated into Hebrew would essentially be messiah (masiah), which is often transliterated by those who are unaware of Jewish beliefs to mean the same as the Moshiach. Whoops. Let's also point out that your Greek transliterations for Jesus [Ίησους (Iēsous)] and Christ [Χριστός (Christós)] lose some important accents that actually play a significant role if someone is counting numerical value (for example, no "X" in the transliterated form of Χριστός).

Unfortunately, this is a common mistake, though, and one that Zeitgeist makes repeatedly with a whole slew of different languages.

To conclude, the study of Gematria or Isopsephia is undertaken, not as an attempt to find the most insanely abstract use of one's time, but to "bootstrap" the mind into mystical states of awareness. It starts when an individual simply, for no reason they can easily divine, becomes attracted by these things. I think Zeitgeist attempts to work in a similar way. It's not seeking to be accepted on a rational level. It's pushing out a subtle symbol system and some people find themselves bizarrely attracted, possibly accounting for the near 3 million who have viewed it since June 26 on Google alone.

Nick

Actually, the more likely reason is that human beings have an innate tendancy to see patterns in everything, whether such patters truly exist or not. Our brains work in such a manner that we can and often will continue to sufficiently increase the complexity of the pattern we are searching for to match the randomness of what we are viewing, in order to eventually find a long enough space between repetitions so as to finally and triumphantly exclaim that we have found that elusive divine pattern.

When some practice of numerology can explain to me the pattern behind Pi, then I will be impressed. Better yet, have them explain it in Base 2 form, as well. Base 10 is passe.

Just so you know, Nick, I mean nothing personal to you or your belief if you subscribe to what you posted. However, there are some serious rhetorical fallacies within just what you posted that very closely resemble many of the fallacies found in the Zeitgeist movie. If you find meaning in it, I am glad for you, but I would encourage you to invest yourself further into some conventional mathematical theory to see how mathematics alone, without mysticism or claims of religious connection, can be wonderous and poetic and, I would wager to someone like yourself who may find numbers fascinating, spiritual and creative.

 

[Nick227]

No, they state exactly that in some of their first section. Perhaps you mean your personal interpretation of what they attempted?

Hi GreNME,

It is my personal interpretation, for sure.

And such a claim is patently false. If you want, I can send you a copy of the notes I took in PDF form as well, or simply start my own thread where we can go over each and every part in socratic form.

Just to be clear, could I ask...are you denying there exists any meaningful parity between spiritual symbol systems? Or that the story of Jesus doesn't fit within any such parity that might exist?

The movie covers Christianity and Judaism specifically, but it condemns all religion, even relatively new ones like Wicca, Kaballah, and so on.

Well, I don't know that I'd regard Qabalah, or Kabbalah, as a religion. Or, necessarily, as recent. Of course, such points can be debated pretty much ad infinitum to, in my experience, little satisfactory conclusion.

You perform the same fallacy that the movie does, and that has to do with language. You are attempting to connect Hebrew with Greek, even though their language systems were very different. For example, I don't know where you got "Messiach" from, but if you were seeking the Hebrew word "Moshiach" then you got the spelling wrong. The word Christ translated into Hebrew would essentially be messiah (masiah), which is often transliterated by those who are unaware of Jewish beliefs to mean the same as the Moshiach. Whoops. Let's also point out that your Greek transliterations for Jesus [Ίησους (Iēsous)] and Christ [Χριστός (Christós)] lose some important accents that actually play a significant role if someone is counting numerical value (for example, no "X" in the transliterated form of Χριστός).

Well, by Messiach, I meant mem, shem, yod, cheth, or, numerically 40, 300, 10, 8. I am not saying that Greek and Hebrew are so related. What I am saying is that both languages originally used letters to relate numbers, through assigning different numbers to each letter in the alphabet. This allowed subtle patterns of meaning to be conveyed, not present through considering the meaning of the words alone. A simple example might be the Hebrew words Achad and Ahebar, both adding to the number 13 and meaning, respectively the words "One" and "Love." Going back to MSYCh, if you prefer not to believe that the scholars of the time crossed over between Greek and Hebrew isopsephia, that's up to you, but the example I quoted is well known in Qabalah circles and certainly books like The True and Invisible Rosicrucian Order or The Apostolic Gnosis will carry it and many more, though you would be right to say that the majority stick within one language.

Actually, the more likely reason is that human beings have an innate tendancy to see patterns in everything, whether such patters truly exist or not. Our brains work in such a manner that we can and often will continue to sufficiently increase the complexity of the pattern we are searching for to match the randomness of what we are viewing, in order to eventually find a long enough space between repetitions so as to finally and triumphantly exclaim that we have found that elusive divine pattern.

Would you care to speculate on what it might be that causes that rush of positive feeling through the body when one feels there is a pattern? Might it be that the pattern currently in one's conscious perspective matches one existing in the unconscious?

When some practice of numerology can explain to me the pattern behind Pi, then I will be impressed. Better yet, have them explain it in Base 2 form, as well. Base 10 is passe.

Yes, that would be some achievement! Are you saying you can predict values of Pi in base 10?

As an aside, and possibly one that might not help so much here (!), could I ask if you're familiar with the work of University of Swansea maths professor Vernon Jenkins? He managed to derive reasonable approximations of the irrational number Pi from and e through putting the words and letters of Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1 (the two principle accounts of the creation) through the same simple formula. If you google him you'll no doubt find his method detailed, should you be interested.

Just so you know, Nick, I mean nothing personal to you or your belief if you subscribe to what you posted. However, there are some serious rhetorical fallacies within just what you posted that very closely resemble many of the fallacies found in the Zeitgeist movie. If you find meaning in it, I am glad for you, but I would encourage you to invest yourself further into some conventional mathematical theory to see how mathematics alone, without mysticism or claims of religious connection, can be wonderous and poetic and, I would wager to someone like yourself who may find numbers fascinating, spiritual and creative.

I may well do that one day!

Regards

Nick

 

[Nick227]

What does anyone think of Part 3 of this movie in relation to the comment released from Alan Greenspan's recently published book?

"I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil" (quoted from Wikipedia: Alan Greenspan)

Would you say this covers some ground towards verifying that hidden agendas clearly exist in major government policy?

Nick