wumpscut said:
Your off handed dismissal of everything is a pile of lies and how those of us who found it interesting are stupid without even going to the trouble to show sources that refute the movie like Frankcastle did tell me how self satisfied and smug you are.
Well, lets's start with the movie's statement that Christ is a myth. Discounting both the Epistles (written in the first forty years) and Gospels (Mark written within 40 to 50 years, and John written within 60 to 70 years) there are many additional secular sources which mention his life for instance Josephus and Tacitus, so this statement is rather like saying that Lucius Mummius Achaicus or that the Emperor Caligula never lived after all almost everything known about the former comes from but a single book.
Then there is the claim that the Crucifixion is taken from pagan mythology such as the myth of Attis however this statement is just plain inaccurate. There is more than ample evidence that in fact the resurrection of Attis wasn’t added to the myth until the mid second century likely in response to Christianity.
Much of the first part of the movie is seemingly based on the book the
The Christ Conspiracy. written by D.M. Murdock using the pen name Acharya S.
That the destruction on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 was caused by the controlled demolition of the buildings is a canard that has been addressed here on TERB numerous times. It has been refuted in reports and articles from the National Institute of Standards and Technology ,the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society, the
Journal of Engineering Mechanics and may others.
I believe my "offhand dismissal" is well justified.
