|
|
|
teched246
Skeptic Friend
123 Posts |
 Posted - 05/24/2011 : 20:18:25 [Permalink]
|
| Why should this be limited to the Zeitgeist information, a myth is a myth is a myth and not limited to that on the Zeitgeist video. |
He wants to constrict this challenge to a specific list of claims because he knows that without elaborating on a great number of other things, the claims won't make any sense. Zeitgiest wasn't about going into the intricate details, but rather was a quick, superficial once-over of the ancient mysteries. How many people would've arrived at a dead end in thier Horus research had they known of the Triune nature of Horus? Zeitgeist stated that horus' story is a series of allegorical myths involving the sun's movement throughout the day, but what it didn't state was that horus is a different sun diety -- or a different aspect of the trinity -- *depending on the time of the day*. It is vital information such as this that kingdavid is desperate to surpress. How could anyone understand Attis' crucixion without understanding Osiris-Horus' and the tree aspect? Unfortunatley for kingdavid, there's a loop hole that he opened up for me unknowingly, and I do intend on exploiting it to the fullest.
|
"For all things have been baptized in the well of eternity and are beyond good
and evil; and good and evil themselves are but intervening shadows and damp
depressions and drifting clouds.Verily, it is a blessing and not a blasphemy
when I teach: ‘Over all things stand the heaven Accident, the heaven
Innocence, the heaven Chance, the heaven Prankishness." -Nietzsche |
| Edited by - teched246 on 05/24/2011 20:28:17 |
 |
|
|
KingDavid8
Skeptic Friend
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 04:09:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by changingmyself
Why should this be limited to the Zeitgeist information, a myth is a myth is a myth and not limited to that on the Zeitgeist video. |
Because we came here to debate whether Zeitgeist's info on pre-Christian deities was accurate. The problem is that there are well over 100 claims about pre-Christian deities that aren't in Zeitgeist (I address most of them at my website), and if we're going to add any of those in, then we would have to add all of them in (and not just the ones you think you can "prove"), and you would then have to prove a majority of those 100+ claims. I'm guessing that you aren't interested in doing such.
| What if we can show that the highest level scholars do say these things david? Are you going to believe it then or are you still going to claim that your challenge has gone unanswered? |
No. If you can show that university-level scholars agree with this stuff, or that the evidence is strong enough to get published in peer-reviewed journals (or that there are pre-Christian stories or heiroglyphs showing it, or that general mythology websites agree), then you would definitely have answered it. I may or may not find the evidence convincing, but this challenge is only about whether such evidence even exists in the first place. |
|
|
|
KingDavid8
Skeptic Friend
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 04:19:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by teched246
How many people would've arrived at a dead end in thier Horus research had they known of the Triune nature of Horus? |
Yes, you used this argument before. Since Osiris was resurrected (which I agree with), this means that Horus was automatically resurrected, since they're part of a trinity, right? The problem is that being part of a "trinity" doesn't mean that what happens to one person in it automatically happens to another person in it. Just because Jesus and God the Father are part of a trinity, that doesn't mean that Jesus parted the Red Sea (that happened before Jesus was even born, just like Osiris' resurrection happened before Horus was even born). If Osiris was the one resurrected, why didn't Peter Joseph just say it was Osiris?
| Zeitgeist stated that horus' story is a series of allegorical myths involving the sun's movement throughout the day, but what it didn't state was that horus is a different sun diety -- or a different aspect of the trinity -- *depending on the time of the day*. It is vital information such as this that kingdavid is desperate to surpress. |
Look, if you can find a university-level scholar (or peer-reviewed journal, etc.) that agrees that Osiris being resurrected means that Horus was automatically resurrected, or that everything that happened to Osiris automatically happened to Horus, go ahead and use it. But I'm guessing that simply arguing that "because they're part of a trinity means that they're one and the same in all details" wouldn't fly with a university-level scholar, and wouldn't fly with this bunch.
| Unfortunatley for kingdavid, there's a loop hole that he opened up for me unknowingly, and I do intend on exploiting it to the fullest. |
Can't wait. |
|
|
|
KingDavid8
Skeptic Friend
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 05:07:26 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by teched246
Unfortunatley for kingdavid, there's a loop hole that he opened up for me unknowingly, and I do intend on exploiting it to the fullest.
|
Though I gotta say that it's telling that you're admitting to have to rely on a "loop hole" in order to provide evidence. You'd think that if these claims were true, you could just post the direct evidence, like, you know, the stories where these things happen. We have the pre-Christian stories for most of these deities, so what's the problem? |
|
|
|
changingmyself
Skeptic Friend
USA
122 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 06:49:29 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by KingDavid8
Originally posted by changingmyself
Why should this be limited to the Zeitgeist information, a myth is a myth is a myth and not limited to that on the Zeitgeist video. |
Because we came here to debate whether Zeitgeist's info on pre-Christian deities was accurate. The problem is that there are well over 100 claims about pre-Christian deities that aren't in Zeitgeist (I address most of them at my website), and if we're going to add any of those in, then we would have to add all of them in (and not just the ones you think you can "prove"), and you would then have to prove a majority of those 100+ claims. I'm guessing that you aren't interested in doing such.
| What if we can show that the highest level scholars do say these things david? Are you going to believe it then or are you still going to claim that your challenge has gone unanswered? |
No. If you can show that university-level scholars agree with this stuff, or that the evidence is strong enough to get published in peer-reviewed journals (or that there are pre-Christian stories or heiroglyphs showing it, or that general mythology websites agree), then you would definitely have answered it. I may or may not find the evidence convincing, but this challenge is only about whether such evidence even exists in the first place.
|
They are at the very end of the religion portion, there is a long list of other deities with the same attributes. So all of those are in the Zeitgeist movie.
|
"The gospels are not eyewitness accounts"
-Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School
|
|
|
|
KingDavid8
Skeptic Friend
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 08:41:25 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by changingmyself
They are at the very end of the religion portion, there is a long list of other deities with the same attributes. So all of those are in the Zeitgeist movie.
|
Are you seriously offering to go through that list of those deities and try to find evidence for at least half of the claims for each and every one of them? For most of them, Zeitgeist doesn't even tell us what the parallels are supposed to be (for good reason, several of the deities on that list don't seem to be part of any culture's mythology or religion at all, and all of them have no significant parallels to Jesus if you actually research them.)
I've researched and responded to this entire list on my website at this page:
http://www.kingdavid8.com/Copycat/GodList.html |
|
|
|
changingmyself
Skeptic Friend
USA
122 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 09:58:47 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by KingDavid8
Originally posted by changingmyself
They are at the very end of the religion portion, there is a long list of other deities with the same attributes. So all of those are in the Zeitgeist movie.
|
Are you seriously offering to go through that list of those deities and try to find evidence for at least half of the claims for each and every one of them? For most of them, Zeitgeist doesn't even tell us what the parallels are supposed to be (for good reason, several of the deities on that list don't seem to be part of any culture's mythology or religion at all, and all of them have no significant parallels to Jesus if you actually research them.)
I've researched and responded to this entire list on my website at this page:
http://www.kingdavid8.com/Copycat/GodList.html
|
Actually, you haven't gone over our evidence and provided contradictory evidence, you went over Acharya's. I am not Acharya and neither is Teched. So yeah..that fails on every account.
I think that you know that Buddha was part of a religion as was the other ones listed by Teched.
I have actually researched them but I don't use people like JP Holding and other apologist websites like you do to get my information. I use actual scholars.
At least one of your links do not even work on your evidence...for instance: krishna.avatara.org
What is really funny though, on this one of your links I can see the parallels in the first paragraph. A god is incarnating himself to be born into this world by a human woman. Sounds very familiar, doesn't that sound familiar to you?
That is the irony of it all, every time I have searched for this information, I get most of it from the very people that deny the parallels although admitting to the very things that make them parallel. And that, makes me smile. 
What I find most astonishing after looking over your website though, is that you are using various no name websites,that tells these stories of Buddha, Krishna and the other gods in a fairy tale fashions instead of using the actual texts or using scholars to back up your counter claims.
This is what I have said all along david, you have not researched this information if you are only reading tektonics and fairy tale websites who actually believe that these gods are real and think that this disproves the parallels.
You really need to do a works cited list on your webpage and use actual books instead of sending people to webpages. You do know what scholarly work is right? |
"The gospels are not eyewitness accounts"
-Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School
|
| Edited by - changingmyself on 05/25/2011 10:10:34 |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 10:27:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by teched246
| Why should this be limited to the Zeitgeist information, a myth is a myth is a myth and not limited to that on the Zeitgeist video. |
He wants to constrict this challenge to a specific list of claims because he knows that without elaborating on a great number of other things, the claims won't make any sense. Zeitgiest wasn't about going into the intricate details, but rather was a quick, superficial once-over of the ancient mysteries. How many people would've arrived at a dead end in thier Horus research had they known of the Triune nature of Horus? Zeitgeist stated that horus' story is a series of allegorical myths involving the sun's movement throughout the day, but what it didn't state was that horus is a different sun diety -- or a different aspect of the trinity -- *depending on the time of the day*. It is vital information such as this that kingdavid is desperate to surpress. How could anyone understand Attis' crucixion without understanding Osiris-Horus' and the tree aspect? Unfortunatley for kingdavid, there's a loop hole that he opened up for me unknowingly, and I do intend on exploiting it to the fullest. |
I'm thinking of the phrase "Beating a dead horse".You know, there are people that in spite of all the evidence presented, they still will maintain their erroneous beliefs, on whatever. By remembering that in reality there comes a time when you should stop trying and get on with others that could benefit, or something else and leave those who won't be convinced alone. It really is a wiser use of your time, which we all only have a limited amount of. We have had topics go on 40 pages and more with nothing more gained after the first few page but a lot of pissing and pissed off posters insulting each other. It's Always a relief when it's over and we move on.  SS |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
Hercules
New Member
35 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 12:06:11 [Permalink]
|
I was going to stay out of this thread but feel I need to respond to sailingsoul. You're right, sailingsoul but changingmyself & teched246 aren't trying to convince Kingdavid as he is a biased Christian merely out to shore up his faith at all costs. That's why they've chosen this independent forum to vote on the evidence presented.
Basic factoids concerning Zeitgeist part 1:
Zeitgeist: The Movie, Part 1 on religion (2007), is only around 25 minutes long and was never created to serve as a scholarly documentary. The transcript and subtitles have been translated into nearly 3 dozen languages and have been viewed over 200 million times worldwide.
HOW DID "ZEITGEIST: THE MOVIE" COME TO BE?:
"The original Zeitgeist was actually not a "film", but a performance piece, which consisted of a vaudevillian style multi-media event using recorded music, live instruments and video. The event was given over a 6-night period in New York City and then, without any interest to professionally release or produce the work, was "tossed" up on the Internet arbitrarily. The work was never designed as a film or even a documentary in a traditional sense - it was designed as a creative, provoking, emotionally driven expression, full of artistic extremity and heavily stylized gestures.
However, once online, an unexpected flood of interest began to generate. Within 6 months over 50 Million views were recorded on Google Video counters (before they were reset for some reason). The current combined estimates put the number of Internet views at over 100 million as of 2009. Suddenly "Zeitgeist" the event, became "Zeitgeist: The Movie"."
- Peter Joseph
http://www.freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=2997 |
|
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 13:24:21 [Permalink]
|
| I understand. SS |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
KingDavid8
Skeptic Friend
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 15:15:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by changingmyself
Originally posted by KingDavid8
Originally posted by changingmyself
They are at the very end of the religion portion, there is a long list of other deities with the same attributes. So all of those are in the Zeitgeist movie.
|
Are you seriously offering to go through that list of those deities and try to find evidence for at least half of the claims for each and every one of them? For most of them, Zeitgeist doesn't even tell us what the parallels are supposed to be (for good reason, several of the deities on that list don't seem to be part of any culture's mythology or religion at all, and all of them have no significant parallels to Jesus if you actually research them.)
I've researched and responded to this entire list on my website at this page:
http://www.kingdavid8.com/Copycat/GodList.html
|
Actually, you haven't gone over our evidence and provided contradictory evidence, you went over Acharya's. I am not Acharya and neither is Teched. So yeah..that fails on every account. |
I was responding to the list in Zeitgeist there. The reason I haven't responded directly to your and Teched's information is that you asked me not to do so.
| At least one of your links do not even work on your evidence...for instance: krishna.avatara.org |
Thanks. Looks like the site went down. I linked another Krishna site that gives the same information instead.
| What is really funny though, on this one of your links I can see the parallels in the first paragraph. A god is incarnating himself to be born into this world by a human woman. Sounds very familiar, doesn't that sound familiar to you? |
Yep, but the fact that Christ-mythers feel the need to claim Krishna was "born of a virgin on 12/25" means that even THEY don't find this one parallel to be very convincing evidence for copycatting. If they did, they wouldn't have to add the "virgin" and "12/25" parts. Why stack a deck if you already have the winning hand?
| What I find most astonishing after looking over your website though, is that you are using various no name websites,that tells these stories of Buddha, Krishna and the other gods in a fairy tale fashions instead of using the actual texts or using scholars to back up your counter claims. |
If the "actual texts" back up these claims, or if they're confirmed by scholars who work for universities, feel free to use them in the debate. The problem is that you're asking me to use my website to address evidence that Christ-mythers haven't even given yet. Any that they've actually given, I've addressed at my site, but that's only a handful compared to the 100+ claims they repeat.
| This is what I have said all along david, you have not researched this information if you are only reading tektonics and fairy tale websites who actually believe that these gods are real and think that this disproves the parallels. |
It's the burden of those making the claims to provide the evidence for them. If I don't have all of the evidence, it's only because the many, many Christ-mythers that I've asked to provide the evidence have all failed to do so. Any that they've provided I've added to my website, and addressed there (and any that you provide in the debate, I'll do the same for). But for the vast majority of the Christ-myth claims, none of its proponents have even been able to provide the evidence. The "evidence" they provide is, at best, simply a case of people repeating the claims, just like Zeitgeist does. |
|
|
|
changingmyself
Skeptic Friend
USA
122 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 15:47:55 [Permalink]
|
| "Yep, but the fact that Christ-mythers feel the need to claim Krishna was "born of a virgin on 12/25" |
Krishna being born on December 25th isn't even on your claims list so that is a straw man argument.
[quote]"The problem is that you're asking me to use my website to address evidence that Christ-mythers haven't even given yet."[quote]
In the format that you want it in. You forgot to add that part because both Teched and I have sent you the information in GodAImighy's video but you refused to watch it.
[quote]"It's the burden of those making the claims to provide the evidence for them."[quote]
And then the burden of proof then shifts to the person claiming that they debunked Zeitgeist like you have said repeatedly. In order to say that you debunked Zeitgeist, you have to use the same exact scholarly (scholars that work at Universities) as sources, along with peer reviewed journals and the actual texts instead, you use random websites and saying "no it ain't".
If that is the case then I debunk the bible in the same way....watch:
The Bible- No it ain't
My Source
|
"The gospels are not eyewitness accounts"
-Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School
|
| Edited by - changingmyself on 05/25/2011 15:52:00 |
|
|
|
KingDavid8
Skeptic Friend
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 16:35:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by changingmyself
| "Yep, but the fact that Christ-mythers feel the need to claim Krishna was "born of a virgin on 12/25" |
Krishna being born on December 25th isn't even on your claims list so that is a straw man argument. |
No, it's one of the things many Christ-mythers claim, and which I addressed on my site.
| "The problem is that you're asking me to use my website to address evidence that Christ-mythers haven't even given yet." |
In the format that you want it in. You forgot to add that part because both Teched and I have sent you the information in GodAImighy's video but you refused to watch it. |
I've found that when people tell me to "watch a video", they're just trying to avoid having to present any evidence themselves. If GodAlmighty's videos have the evidence that meets the challenge, feel free to take his evidence and post it in the debate.
| "It's the burden of those making the claims to provide the evidence for them." |
And then the burden of proof then shifts to the person claiming that they debunked Zeitgeist like you have said repeatedly. |
And my evidence is the fact that not even the people who repeat these claims are able to provide hard evidence for most of them. They can't find the stories where these things happen, can't find support in peer-reviewed journals, can't find university-level scholars who agree with this stuff, etc. |
| Edited by - KingDavid8 on 05/25/2011 16:37:48 |
|
|
|
changingmyself
Skeptic Friend
USA
122 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 18:02:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by KingDavid8
Originally posted by changingmyself
| "Yep, but the fact that Christ-mythers feel the need to claim Krishna was "born of a virgin on 12/25" |
Krishna being born on December 25th isn't even on your claims list so that is a straw man argument. |
No, it's one of the things many Christ-mythers claim, and which I addressed on my site.
| "The problem is that you're asking me to use my website to address evidence that Christ-mythers haven't even given yet." |
In the format that you want it in. You forgot to add that part because both Teched and I have sent you the information in GodAImighy's video but you refused to watch it. |
I've found that when people tell me to "watch a video", they're just trying to avoid having to present any evidence themselves. If GodAlmighty's videos have the evidence that meets the challenge, feel free to take his evidence and post it in the debate.
| "It's the burden of those making the claims to provide the evidence for them." |
And then the burden of proof then shifts to the person claiming that they debunked Zeitgeist like you have said repeatedly. |
And my evidence is the fact that not even the people who repeat these claims are able to provide hard evidence for most of them. They can't find the stories where these things happen, can't find support in peer-reviewed journals, can't find university-level scholars who agree with this stuff, etc.
|
Your website isn't research david, is is bullshit.
I have seen 7-8th graders put more effort in their book reports than what you put into your "research".
Had you watched GodAImighty's video, you would have seen WHY it takes so long to research and write all of this out but you think it is just oh so easy, but after looking at your supposed evidence, I can see why you would think that, your idea of research is...."here look at that website, it denies it, so does this one..."
It took me 4 days to get the little evidence that I did because I used actual books by scholars and not only did I type it out, I also had to search for the scholar's education. My research is nowhere near exhaustive.
You have claimed repeatedly that you debunked Zeitgeist, but just like the other supposed debunkers, the sources that you list actually admit the parallels or have nothing at all about the originally stories or they use dictionaries that have a brief overview and think that it tells the whole story.
Here is another one for you david, one that I am sure you have probably never heard of.
The fall of the angels - Page 63
Christoph Auffarth, Loren T. Stuckenbruck -
“The ancient Arabic deity Athar is indeed connected with the morning star"
CHRISTOPH AUFFARTH, PROF. DR. DR.
Visiting Fellow 2010: University Professor, Institute for the Study of Religion and Religion Education, University of Bremen, Germany
What is that david? Does that say morning star? Sounds just like Jesus when he says:
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."
Revelation 22:16
You might want to read pages 68-70 Notice that it talks about Sirius...
Remember saying this david?
"And the star Sirius is not a significator of Horus' birth in any way, shape or form, and neither is it a "star in the east". No stars can reside exclusively "in the east" due to Earth's rotation."
kingdavid246 1 week ago
See that on page 68 david?
Can you admit that you were wrong?
|
"The gospels are not eyewitness accounts"
-Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School
|
|
|
|
KingDavid8
Skeptic Friend
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2011 : 18:09:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by changingmyself
Your website isn't research david, is is bullshit.
I have seen 7-8th graders put more effort in their book reports than what you put into your "research". |
Yep, resorting to insults. At this point I'll just wait and see what kind of evidence you post in the debate and let your evidence speak for itself, all right? |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
THE ZG EVIDENCE...
