Tonight's Lesson: Jesus Lights the Sun, Moon & Stars

[_Inconceivable]

If you have never watched this clip about the history of the Christ, it is a red pill/rabbit whole experience.

Go directly to 14:00 (to cut through the periferals) and watch it to about 38:00.

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/


Prefering to keep the comments to that segment referred to above - thanks

[_Roger Morrison]

Very interesting. Familiar data, but never so systematically observed. It seems somewhat to be, "too good to be true." Which begs the questions: how authentic, and documented is this information?

As it is attached to the 9-11 conspiracy suggestions further along, it's credibility legitimately comes under askance. What say ye??

[_Some Schmo]

Oh oh... expect darte to swoop in any second and call you to repentance for watching that pack of lies.

As for the first 38 minutes of that show, I would say that it at least makes more sense than what christians believe, whether it's accurate or not.

[_Yoda]

I agree with Roger, Inc. The 9-11 conspiracy theory crap toward the end is utter BS. The whole piece loses credibility.

[_Some Schmo]

I agree with Roger, Inc. The 9-11 conspiracy theory crap toward the end is utter BS. The whole piece loses credibility.

While I understand this widely held sentiment (referring to the idea that if someone speaks crap on one subject, they shouldn't be listened to on other subjects), doesn't it actually break down under closer scrutiny?

Essentially, it means that anyone who has ever told a lie about anything is never to be trusted again. In other words, you can't really trust what anyone says, because nobody has any credibility, because at some point, everyone has told a lie about something.

Shouldn't each proclamation, therefore, be weighed on its individual merits? I'm all for critical skepticism, but to me, that means analyzing something based on its related facts, not (at least, entirely) on the source from which it came. I suppose it can come down to how much BS is spouted by said source, but I still think automatic dismissal on that basis alone is problematic.

[_Inconceivable]

I agree with Roger, Inc. The 9-11 conspiracy theory crap toward the end is utter BS. The whole piece loses credibility.

Yes, I do too. There was a portion of time I wasted in my life when I used to lean toward the John Birch/ET Benson/far Right Wing (about 10 years or so). I refuse to let that material affect my life whether it has truth or not.

However, either there are vivid similarities to Horas and the other "Christs", the three stars, sun, zodiac, equinoxes or it's not.

It's not right to throw the baby out with the bathwater, right?

[_Roger Morrison]

I agree with Roger, Inc. The 9-11 conspiracy theory crap toward the end is utter BS. The whole piece loses credibility.

While I understand this widely held sentiment (referring to the idea that if someone speaks crap on one subject, they shouldn't be listened to on other subjects), doesn't it actually break down under closer scrutiny?

Essentially, it means that anyone who has ever told a lie about anything is never to be trusted again. In other words, you can't really trust what anyone says, because nobody has any credibility, because at some point, everyone has told a lie about something.

Shouldn't each proclamation, therefore, be weighed on its individual merits? I'm all for critical skepticism, but to me, that means analyzing something based on its related facts, not (at least, entirely) on the source from which it came. I suppose it can come down to how much BS is spouted by said source, but I still think automatic dismissal on that basis alone is problematic.

Correct Schmo, that's why i said:

...credibility legitimately comes under askance. What say ye??

And, Ye have spoken :-) OTOH, I do wonder, "why attach the Jesus section to 911?"

Guess it requires more looking into, eh?