Jesus is Astrological?

[Xiilent]

I was surfing youtube like I do, and I came across this video and found it to be really interesting and actually makes sense to something that never made sense (Jesus Christ). It talks about why Jesus Christ's "life" is so similar to an IMMENSE amount of other people's "stories" that are exactly like Jesus' (Born of a virgin, 12 disciples, resurrection, etc). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljRKhZ81aqY
Its almost 11 minutes long, but if you watch it and pay attention it makes a LOT of sense. So I'd like to hear what everyone else thinks about this. Also, has anyone else ever heard of this? I've been doing "atheist research" for years now but never came across something like this.

[Xiilent]

If people dont want to actually watch the video, I'll explain it i guess.
On December 24th, Sirius aligns with Orion's Belt, a.k.a. the Three Kings. On December 25th, their alignment points to where the sun rises (Why the Three Kings follow the Star of the East, and the birth of the "Sun"). The zodiac Virgo, also referred to as the "House of Bread", the literal translation of Bethlehem is "House of Bread". From the Summer solstice to the winter solstice, the days become colder and shorter, and the rising of the sun appears shorter. These changes symbolized death, or the coming of the death of the "Sun". By December 22nd, the sun percievably stops moving south and seems to remain in one spot and "seems to remain in the vicinity of the south cross 'crux' constelation" and on december 25th the sun begins to rise north bringing longer days (the crucifiction of the sun, the death of the sun for 3 days, then his resurrection). The celebration of the "resurrection" isn't celebrated until the spring equinox (easter) because that is when the days have more light than darkness. The twelve disciples of jesus were the twelve constellations.

So... yea. there you go. I still don't quite understand EVERYTHING but the majority of it makes sense to me.

[Recusant]

This is a clip from the movie "Zeitgeist." Some of what is related in the clip is true, but too much of it is BS, in my opinion. For a critique of this portion of "Zeitgeist," you can read "The Greatest Story Ever Garbled" by Tim Callahan for Skeptic magazine.

[Xiilent]

Does the portion I summarize at least have some truth to it though? It seemed to make sense but I'm pretty ignorant of the subject.

[history_geek]

I've seen that also, and while it is true that dear ol' Jeebus apparently does have striking similarities to gods of other faiths, astrology plays little if any part on the xtian mythos. For example, the date 25th of December is the birthdate of Mithras, but not that of Jesus, if we follow the biblical accounts. In fact, his birtdate is never given or even implied, thus leaving most of the scholars guessing between spring and autumn that would fit better with the climates in the gospel stories.

I remember seeing somewhere the year and name of the Roman emperor who announced that Jesus had (miraculously) been born on the same date as his then arch-rival, Mithras. Unfortunately I can't seem to find that article anymore, but I did find these two that might interest you (I just skimmed trough them for now, but I might go back and give them a proper read later...):


Is it Christianity or Mithraism?

In Religions of Antiquity (Selltzer 1989) noted Mithraism was a product more of the Roman Empire than Persia. Mithra was born in a cave or emerged from a rock (not a virgin birth) the cult excluded women (Christianity didn't) and had seven levels of ascension (Christianity didn't) and was tied heavily into astrology, which Christianity wasn't. Further, Mithra was a warrior, Jesus was no such thing. While it is true the later Christian Church grafted common aspects of paganism onto the faith (Mithra's birthday was December 25, Jesus birth date in not stated in the Bible and is unknown), doesn't distract from the fact the two faiths had nothing in common.

Debunking the Jesus-Mithra Connection

Many writers attempt to use Mithraism to discredit Christianity. While a non-Christian myself, I'm forced to take a hard look at the material I've posted on this website and have come to the conclusion it's false. The claims don't add up, the evidence is lacking. They are little more than anti-Christian propaganda, which is not my purpose here. Let's take a hard look at what do know and don't know. What I present is my opinion based on the best evidence I can find.

I'm not much better then an armature myself when it comes to this, but I found these interesting. And then there's always case Horus, I suppose....

[Recusant]

Does the portion I summarize at least have some truth to it though? It seemed to make sense but I'm pretty ignorant of the subject.

It does contain some genuine information, but unless one either knows the subject well, or does some extensive research, there's no way to tell the facts from the fluff; it's a pastiche created for polemic effect. It presents itself as a documentary, but in my opinion it really is nothing of the sort.  As the first sentence of the critique I linked above says:

Perhaps the worst aspect of "The Greatest Story Ever Told," Part I of Peter Joseph's Internet film, Zeitgeist, is that some of what it asserts is true. Unfortunately, this material is liberally — and sloppily — mixed with material that is only partially true and much that is plainly and simply bogus.

[Xiilent]

Perhaps the worst aspect of "The Greatest Story Ever Told," Part I of Peter Joseph's Internet film, Zeitgeist, is that some of what it asserts is true. Unfortunately, this material is liberally — and sloppily — mixed with material that is only partially true and much that is plainly and simply bogus.

What part is bogus though? I really don't know and I'd like to get a grasp on the information

[Recusant]

What part is bogus though? I really don't know and I'd like to get a grasp on the information

  I do recommend that you take a look at the article I linked earlier (scroll a little way down the page) which goes into some detail regarding the failings of that section of Zeitgeist. It's a start, anyway.

[hismikeness]

I recently heard Peter Joseph on a podcast I listen to and found him to be a compelling figure, but much too fringe and susceptible to wacky conspiracy theories than I think is healthy. he talked about resource based economies, instead of currency based, and while I liked the utopian thought of it, I don't think it would ever be possible. He continually emphasized he wasn't trying to lead a "cult", but the more he talked about it, the more it seemed to me that was exactly what he was doing.  ???

He was very "I'm no leader of a movement" all while running a web page called the Zeitgeist Movement.

On topic of the OP, I had seen this video before, but didn't know it was Mr. Joseph's work until pointed out by the quote in Recusant's post above. I was skeptical before, and Moreno know after learning more about the filmmaker.