Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Zeitgeist the movie, Real? or just Real crap?

  1. Jul 3, 2008 #1
    Zeitgeist the movie, I watched a downloaded version of it. It can be seen online for those who haven't at this site,


    Its an awesome movie and if its true, its a real eye opener, if its not... Man, I sure got fooled... XD

    Now some people claim that its true, some claim that its a load of crap, some say some part is true some parts are not.

    For those who have seen it, do any of you know if its really true or not?
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 3, 2008 #2
    Saw a 1 min clip of it from your link, could you give an overview of what its about ?
  4. Jul 3, 2008 #3
    My school's newspaper is quoted on its wikipedia page haha
  5. Jul 3, 2008 #4


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Per wiki:

    Zeitgeist, the Movie is a 2007 documentary film, produced by Peter Joseph about the Jesus myth hypothesis, the attacks of 9/11, and the Federal Reserve Bank as well as a number of conspiracy theories related to those three main topics
  6. Jul 3, 2008 #5
    Damn, too bad if its crackpot. The one min I fast forwarded to was talking about mosses and the 10 commandments, and how they came from some text in egypt. The little bit I did see seemed interesting....:rolleyes: ......too bad.
  7. Jul 3, 2008 #6
    Mosses? "And so God gave the green lump of moss two stone plaques, upon which were the rules to conduct society by." Sorry, smartassing over.
  8. Jul 3, 2008 #7
    Quite entertaining. Is it copyrighted ?
  9. Jul 3, 2008 #8
    The movie is mostly crap, but not entirely. Their theories on Christianity are about as popular in Biblical studies departments as creationism is in science. In fact I remember spotting many major errors myself. The section on 9/11 conspiracies is just idiotic. I've delved into that issue in quite a bit of depth (I have a friend who's a 9/11 conspiracy fanatic), and there's no compelling evidence in favor of an act of terrorism being an inside job. Some of their banking conspiracy theories, however, do have a factual basis. Indeed I knew about this long before I heard it from Zeitgeist. It's true that the Federal Reserve is a quasi-public organization (you can even read about it on Wikipedia), and the history of the government's involvement with wealthy private citizens in establishing our modern currency is more or less correct. But it's quite a stretch to say that this is all part of a worldwide conspiracy to set up a one-world government and control us with microchips that will be implanted in our fingers. This is nothing more than Left Behind minus the antichrist part.
  10. Jul 4, 2008 #9
    Damn, humanino, what is with you and copyrights? You're making me laugh.
  11. Jul 4, 2008 #10
    It was released officially onto google. So it may be copyrighted, but it was released to google with permission.

    EDIT: binzing, I believe that posting copyrighted material is against PF guidelines.
  12. Jul 4, 2008 #11
    He grows on you.
  13. Jul 4, 2008 #12
    All material is copy right to its creator/owner for something like lifetime plus 75 years(?) I think. It doesn't matter if the person has gone through the channels to make it legally official. The creator/owner can though release it to the public domain more or less by giving anyone permission to use the material (usually with conditions such as not for profit).

    Anyway... I think that there is a thread here somewhere about the 'Jesus myth' and the man in Italy who tried to sue the church for fraud if anyone is interested.
  14. Jul 4, 2008 #13
    It is Nazi propoganda. Part of the pro german students at my school like the movie zeitgeist.
  15. Jul 4, 2008 #14
    Who me and my smart aleck ways, or Mosses?
  16. Jul 4, 2008 #15
    The movie is utter crap. Don't let it fool you with its spooky music.
  17. Jul 4, 2008 #16
    What kind of theories do they have about Christianity? That the figure of Jesus had already appeared before the canonical Jesus did? That many of the stories and myths of the Bible had come from other sources? Or was it Da Vinci Code type crap?
  18. Jul 4, 2008 #17
    The conspiracy part about 9/11 is nonsense. So is the part about the federal reserve. The part about Christianity is greatly exaggerated.
  19. Jul 4, 2008 #18
    I think they say something like this, Horus (an egyptian god) is sort of an interpetation of the sun, and that the figure Jesus is basically Horus. (in short (horus=sun)=jesus.)


    Therefore it must be nazi? (or are you joking perhaps?)
  20. Jul 4, 2008 #19
    It's a slightly different version than what was portrayed in "The DaVinci Code," but it has similarities. Part of it, as has already been stated, is that Jesus is supposedly similar to many earlier pagan deities (this theory originated in the book "Pagan Christs" published in 1903, I believe by a man named Robertson). They go so far as to draw a parallel between the Jesus and another person from the Bible, Joseph the son of Jacob. Of course at this point they fail to understand that the Bible itself teaches that such a similarity exists, and is understood in the context of typology.

    They also make some astrology-based claims (though they do not endorse astrology themselves). They draw some pretty CG pictures of the earth's precession, and show that in the year 2150 we will enter something called the "Age of Aquarius." They claim that ancient Biblical authors knew about these astrological ages, and that everytime the Bible quotes Jesus as talking about the "close of the age," he's referring to the coming of the Age of Aquarius. I've read a fair amount of ancient literature, and I've never seen anything that would even remotely support this claim.

    Anyway, those are the two major claims they make about Christianity that I can remember.
  21. Jul 4, 2008 #20
    I hope you aren't seriously suggesting that Germans and Nazis are the same thing.

    To the contrary, America probably has twice as many neo Nazis as Germany.
  22. Jul 4, 2008 #21
    I watched the entire thing. Why is it one should consider it more than merely an interpretation ? History is not exact science. If you watch the movie, you should better check the claims. Raising the question of interpretation of history is quite interesting to me.

    For instance about religion. Part I ends (36') with a short discussion on the concept of myth in the religious sense, in a deeper sense.
    This is far from being a stupid idea. To many educated christians, it does not matter whether Christ really existed or not, because this does not change the moral of the story. One's faith can rely on whether this person actually accomplished miracles, or instead on what the faith brings to one's life and effectively to one's relation with the world.

    By no means do I take the entire interpretation with me as a reference. It is for me merely a suggestion.

    I am a scientist, and I am both suspicious of easy analogies and interested in what leads people to interpret reality in such and such manner. There are definitely excellent and very bad arguments in this movie. That's why you need to make up your own understanding, but it requires efforts of thinking. It is important to be open minded enough, to consider all other opinions before making its own.

    Rejecting this movie as complete non-sense is no more reasonable to me than accepting it as crystal clear truth. Restricting again to the religious part which I think is less controversial, one way to reach equilibrium in front of a radical interpretation is to display another alternatively radical interpretation. One is expected to only to realize how wide the range of possibilities is, not to side in any extreme position.
  23. Jul 4, 2008 #22


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Hang on - those are not polar opposites.

    If 90% of an argument is sound, and then 10% is thrown in that is complate nonsense, it calls into question the reliability of the entire claim, and more specifically, the reliability of the arguer.

    So, perhaps it is less accurate to say 'the entire movie is nonsense' than to say 'because so much of it is nonsense, one cannot trust anything in this movie (even if parts of it happened to be spot-on that's just too bad)'.

    Nonetheless, the outcome is the same: don't go see it.
  24. Jul 4, 2008 #23
    Well at least we agree on that. I was just very bored yesterday night. At least, that was not on Youtube.
  25. Jul 4, 2008 #24
    Yeah, but Jesus isn't exactly an original figure created for/from Christianity. Jesus-type figures had been around for a while before that. Things like being born from a virgin, being a demigod, etc., is nothing new.
  26. Jul 4, 2008 #25
    That was the entire point for the Nazi propoganda, similar to the Russian pan slavic unity, instead with german unity being the priority.
    Zeitgeist is also some german word for unity.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook