zeitgeistmovie

[perfectpeach]

Please watch this movie. Fastfoward a few minutes to the start of part 1 and let me know what you think. Please Catholics AND all Christians, help me defend christianity

zeitgeistmovie.com/main.htm

 

[PhilVaz]

perfect << Please Catholics AND all Christians, help me defend christianity >>

No problem, already done.

All About Horus: An Egyptian Copy of Christ?

The movie/video is complete garbage.

To makers of Zeitgeist, it is called a “university library” – find one.

There may be other responses to the Zeitgeist movie/video online, but mine is most thorough (along with help from W. Ward Gasque, and Ben Witherington).

Phil P

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Please watch this movie. Fastfoward a few minutes to the start of part 1 and let me know what you think. Please Catholics AND all Christians, help me defend christianity

zeitgeistmovie.com/main.htm

the film quite frankly is ****. The best thing to do is state to all that ask about it not to watch it as it is full of misleading lies and and unbelievable amounts of bull… .

 

[perfectpeach]

Thank you SO much for that site.

Does anyone have anything to say about the rest of the movie?

 

[cathopologist]

Thank you SO much for that site.

Does anyone have anything to say about the rest of the movie?

I would rather watch Close Encounters With The Third Kind than spend another 5 mins of watching that movie.

 

[bpbasilphx]

In his book MERE CHRISTIANITY, C. S. Lewis does NOT ignore the parallels and similarities to Christ found in many pre-Christian religions. He believes them to be the prophecies given to the Gentiles, just as the Tenakh was given to the Jews.

---

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

Here’s the way to defend Christianity:

It’s apart of our history. Whether we abandon practice or not, we should still preserve it AS A PART OF HISTORY. Religion, in general, is the most precious jewel of our history because it was spawned from the imagination of humankind. That’s pretty God-awesome that it lasted this long when you think about it.

Religion was everything in shaping this country and our societies… good or bad, religion had and still has its contributions for this world.

If you’re really worried about losing it, it would be best if we learned how to control it and keep it updated with the times. Unfortunately, I must admit feeling it, even in the chasms of my heart, that God knows we are too advanced for religion.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood

 

[nebula]

Blood,

It’s funny to me that during the Enlightenment thinkers were certain religion would be pretty much eliminated by now. The same call has been given time and time again since then (check out The Sacred Canopy by Peter Berger). The idea is that pluralism and education would make religious belief impossible. It doesn’t take an expert to realize that this does not happen (in fact Berger retracted one of his theses from The Sacred Canopy to that effect). One of things that scholars of religion do nowadays is explain how ti is that religions do remain so vital and strong and even grow given pluralism and increasing education.

So the question is, for you, what makes you think that religions are not for people ‘advanced’ (the notion that societies advance or progress isn’t exactly an idea without serious problems in the first place, by the way), especially when the empirical data refutes that notion?

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

So the question is, for you, what makes you think that religions are not for people ‘advanced’ (the notion that societies advance or progress isn’t exactly an idea without serious problems in the first place, by the way), especially when the empirical data refutes that notion?

Religion is for everyone who wishes for them, but in the long run, we kind of… *know * better than that.

Take me, for example. I’m still a happy Catholic who is proud to practice this faith because it is the only thing I possess that is culture to me. Regardless, I am well-aware that I have the potential to go beyond that: To be agnostic–not atheist, but Agnostic.

If people learn to cherish their faiths as faiths and not as truths than we have *made *religion just as advanced as we have become. That would definitely be an amazing achievement of mankind. It would also be a step towards harmony in my opinion… but that’s just me.

Ironically Yours.

 

[nebula]

blood,

The very fact that you think ‘agnostic’ is beyond ‘Catholic’ implies that your Catholicism is a little shallow. I left agnosticism behind as my level of education increased.

Just something for you to think about and examine your own biases.

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

blood,

The very fact that you think ‘agnostic’ is beyond ‘Catholic’ implies that your Catholicism is a little shallow. I left agnosticism behind as my level of education increased.

Just something for you to think about and examine your own biases.

In a way, agnosticism (if that’s even a word ) has no limits to what you can believe. But I do know where you’re coming from; there are some agnostics out there that don’t have very good insights or values. But the ones who do are beyond their far years.

I give you my word as a Catholic: The agnostics I’ve met in my past and my present are the most insightful people I’ve ever had the honors of meeting. I hope to meet more on my own road to enlightenment… as a Catholic.

Ironically Yours.

 

[nebula]

You missed my point entirely. You seem to think of human society as on a spectrum, that with time we ‘progress’, become better, and likewise religious belief is on that same spectrum with agnosticism as ‘higher’ on the spectrum than full belief. That assumption is just that, an unproven assumption which doesn’t correlate with empirical reality anyway.

I’m sure you know some interesting agnostics. There are interesting people in any group large enough. That kind of anecdotal evidence is not a basis for making the kinds of assumptions that you do.

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

examine your own biases.

As for biases. Who doesn’t have them?

We are all biased in our own special and cursed ways. You are biased, I am biased, this whole forum just as other forums of different religions are biased. And there’s not much wrong with that. The only problem would be an aspiring religious studies professor like me would have problems trying to get the right stories about certain faiths–

Try looking for facts about the Mormon church or Islam or even Proposition 8 without biases! That’s almost impossible!

But back to your comment: Examining biases is only possible through seeing different point of views. I’ve been working very hard in doing just that, but it seems to be a little discouraging on my part.

The people at my school don’t quite care for religion itself–they’re the ones that are doing bad in school.

As for the religious ones… well, they seem a little like this: :hypno:

…go figure.

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

You missed my point entirely. You seem to think of human society as on a spectrum, that with time we ‘progress’, become better, and likewise religious belief is on that same spectrum with agnosticism as ‘higher’ on the spectrum than full belief. That assumption is just that, an unproven assumption which doesn’t correlate with empirical reality anyway.

I don’t think of human society as on a spectrum at all. I think of them–us–as in the toilet, regardless of belief. I do think that in the end, agnosticism is a higher insight, but since it is not organized it would be unfair for me to say that religion is a lower belief, which it isn’t.

That is my answer to that.

 

[nebula]

It’s true, we all have biases, but as you an aspiring scholar you should do your best to identify your biases and minimize them as much as possible and also mitigate them as you try to adjust for whatever shade of glasses you tend to look at the world with. Your last comment is an explicit rejection of what you communicated in your earlier posts: the notion that agnosticism is ‘higher’ (higher compared to what, exactly?) that we’ve somehow ‘outgrown’ religion (outgrown what exactly? what’s the comparison) all of which implies a deep assumption on your part of humanity on a spectrum. If that’s not what you want to communicate in the future be aware of the way you use your terms gives a false impression.