You never mentioned that. I was under the impression Zeitgeist was a truther flick, which is the only thing about Zeitgeist's content you mentioned.
I'm highly impressed that you nitpicked that one quote and ignored the rest.
Ok, lets look at the rest, this should be amusing too.
Chris Forbes, an ancient historian and senior lecturer at Macquarie University has criticised the work noting that Freke and Gandy are "not real scholars, they are popularisers. He notes that their arguments about Jesus are "grossly misconceived, and their attempt to draw links between Jesus and various pagan god-men is completely muddled.
The best of the things you mentioned, however, its a blanket statement that contains no justification for its conclusions. There is no explanation as to why all this is the case.
"this was like asking a professional astronomer to debate with the authors of a book claiming the moon was made of green cheese."
Appeal to ridicule, again it lacks any actual information.
This is an old argument, even though it shows up every 10 years or so. This current craze that Christianity was a mystery religion
I'm not even sure what this has to do with the subject at hand, unless maybe it addresses one of the other books (I only have access to The Jesus Mysteries), as best I can tell from your descriptions and a brief skim they aren't arguing that Christianity started as a mystery religion, but that the myths about Jesus were adopted from other religions.
As for the rest of that post... why is attacking Zeitgeist relevant? (Hell its a truther flick, its poor quality isn't even in dispute). Is this some kind of variation on Ad Hitlerum?
