Howdy Alex! long time no see, how’s things down there in Greece? Are you still refuting Stephen Hawking’s theory that universes can start from absolutely nothing! or from bubbles yet? lol. Missed our talks Alex, take care!

P.S. Vlatko probably knows you are here by now :)

You are not writing with a cool head. Your comments are just what you are condemning GENERALIZATIONS:

“Why is it that those who don’t believe, assume that those who do are afraid of intellectual stimulation? “. How can you say that if you have not met/discussed with ALL those unbelievers?

“That they are the ones who cannot be questioned, and anyone who disagrees, will have a religious reason.”. Same as above.

“I think that comments like those, show just how limited your own intellectual capacities are.”. That to me is a totally ridiculous conclusion and shows that you are not reacting intellectually.

“Most consider Newton as the biggest contributor to physics, and he was a believer.” So what? Check this out “http://bit.ly/J5qY4g”

“I guess that it just goes to show that you don’t have to believe to be an id**t.” From all your comments and this conclusion, I don’t believe that you are a brilliant man.

My conclusion is that: “. . . anyone WHO can make generalizations like THOSE ABOVE , CAN NOT … ….. expect to be taken as unbiased”, and becomes irrelevant.

That being said, while part of me feel that Zeitgeist is truly a conspiracy theory and not representative of any truth, it is so well laid out and cohesive as to be very persuasive. This ‘Refuted’ doc however is so all over the place it is difficult to even follow or process any of it. And it comes off as more trying to disprove something instead of trying to prove it. A disproof doesn’t mean proof.

I am not a religious person but I am not so set in that that I am not open to ideas that may change my mind in the future. This doc however doesn’t come close to changing my opinion.

I will say first that I am an atheist, and this work does not convince me to change that, though it definitely tries. I will say, however, that if you pay attention to it it is a much more competent presentation of a Christian defense than the vast majority of what we usually see, and it does throw enough opposition on the possible roots of Christianity as presented in Zeitgeist to make me accept that Zeitgeist may quite possibly have this point wrong. However, to call this a refutation of the entire precept of Zeitgeist is also in error… absolutely. In feeling threatened by the presentation of Christianity in Zeitgeist the creator of this work missed the much larger, and ultimately more important arguments that Zeitgeist sets out to present. In fact, I think if the author here had not been so impulsively reactionary he might have found that he, and the bible, in many ways validate the ideas of Zeitgeist and the two can quite reasonable co-exist.

How do Zeitgeist and the bible’s views on usury compare?
How do they compare on the value of war?
How do they compare on the true value of a person?
How might a GOOD Christian interpret man’s role as the stewards of the Earth– is it to be exploitative or symbiotic?

In fact, in an interview with Peter Joseph he commented that there are many things he likes in the bible, he just sees the evil in its application as a religion, and the division it has spawned amongst people. In some ways the author of this work even supports this claim, but he is careful to keep saying true Christians believe in peace, love, and harmony, and argues that many (if not almost all) are not true to the bible or Christ’s teachings. I will not concern myself with how he knows his IS the true faith– I believe he is trying to be true to his own moral compass. I will not get into every detail of his ‘refutation’, which are in at least a few cases apparently not more validated than the passages to the contrary in Zeitgeist. In fact, I think it unfortunate that Zeitgeist gave so much attention and such prominent placement to the views on Christianity, since it must so polarize many people’s responses that for many it render’s them incapable of moving on and finding the value in Zeitgeist… it creates the most division on this point alone, and undermines the message.

Take Zeitgeist with a grain of salt… sure. It would be contrary to the message of Zeitgeist not to. But in getting caught up in the issue of the existence or absence of God, do not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

…

Uh… OSIRIS.

That’s enough right there to stop me even watching this video.

One of the best features of our society is the freedom to express different views on the same issue letting each of us decide for ourselves.