Zeitgeist Movie

Response: Act I

Very interesting video! I don’t quite understand what his point is. He suggests the Torah (what we call the Old Testament) and the New Testament are merely astrological code books, which is evidenced by the symbols found in the Bible. So, what he is suggesting is the events in the Bible never occurred, unless his later claim to their literary aspect is meant to convey real events; I don’t know.

The most important thing about Christ is not facts about books that were copied, politicized, some banned, and others edited; rather it is about Christ’s teachings and how we live our lives. If the Bible is an astrological guide, then what are we to make of Christ’s teachings? Do they all symbolize astrological events? One would be naive to think astrology was not important to ancient people. The Old Testament shows over and over the problems Yahweh had with the Israelites: they were always worshiping Baal. I am curious what sort of teachings/ethics Horus espoused, for this would be a fascinating discussion, which I will be looking up.

I am all about tying together interesting facts, but to make facts the basis of one’s belief in God is idolotry. Facts change and are shaped to serve those in power, as the speaker says. My faith doesn’t rest in councils, papals, books, and preachers, it rests in a relationship that requires continual exploration – even the study of gods like Horus.

Here is a good website for continued research: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm

Just to stir the pot, here are some mistakes I noticed in the video

1. The fish symbol was not used as a pagan worship device; it secretly pointed believers in the direction of meetings, since to be a Christian in Rome meant death at that time.

2. Horus was the god of war; Jesus is the God of love. This means they had completely different missions

3. Many historians, including Tacitus (a Roman) and Josephus (a Jew), wrote of Jesus Christ, which contradicts his claim that no historians wrote of Jesus

Response Act II: Combating Myth with Myth

I have figured it out!

Around the 40 min. mark there is a great discussion of myth. It says, “Myth is an idea, while widely believed, is false,” and myths mobilize people around a common tale that is not interested in reality.

So, like any good conspiracy thoery, this video proposes a mythos based on a variety of facts. (The sounds of the planes crashing into the buildings, which was dubbed in, makes the myth more believable.) I can’t produce facts nor can I dispute many of the facts proposed in this video. I face the same problem with my belief in aliens. Yes, I believe in aliens, and a whole lot of other things, but my facts are dependent upon a mythos, which is informed from a variety of sources: none of which I would stake my life on. Paradigm shifts in science also show us how science facts depend up a mythos and can change over time, which means I unwilling to stake my life on them too.

So, I guess I am suggesting we all believe in myths, whether they are in Horus, Yahweh, Jesus, Allah, the Government, or popular culture. You might not like my myth, and I might not like your myth, but through the dialectic, hopefully (at least in my humble opinion) we will arrive at a kernal of mythological truth. Hopefully this video doesn’t merely create new myths, but challenges viewers to test their previous myths with “a Hammer” and then a “tuning fork” (see Nietzsche). From this dialectic and testing of myths, we find truth, and unlike the above quotation, all myths are based on truth; we just don’t want to accept the truth sometimes.

Sorry for the cryptic ending!

Crazy stuff, guys. There’s really not much for me to say though. There are implications for politics and ethics, but I don’t want this to devolve into a conspiracy blog! There’s probably “something” to all three sections, but I’m certainly not ready to swallow the whole she-bang.

It really did shock the heck out of me though. Figured it at least needed to be discussed, and I was hoping for some critical analysis (which you two–Court and Lill–have already provided).

There’s also a very interesting addendum out there–two more hours, mainly on the Fed, but also including their proposed solution–something called The Venus Project. Pretty much, living in harmony without markets and with the help of technology. Strangely, that’s actually something Chomsky has advocated… Might devote an article to the plausibility of that alone.

Oh, and I also posted because I was somewhat scared to do so. (Worried I’d destroy the credibility of my prestigious blog, lol!) But when things scare me, I force myself to do them. Hence MMA, teaching, blogging. No visits to the mortuary yet, but that’s on my list