Zeitgeist

In dealing often with mythological parallelism, I have noticed quite a repetitive mention of Zeitgeist (the 2007 film) over time. It is as if the people digging up the film (and dusting it off) never even bothered looking into the subject with much effort in the first place. Of course, the film rightly points out the connection between Christ and the sun (nothing out of the ordinary there), but such a point is not without conflict. Don't get me wrong, Zeitgeist serves as somewhat of an introduction into general solar mythology; yet, it also contains several blatant errors.

Besides the films "Orion's Belt" and "three kings"1 parallel being problematic (the text does not specify three kings, but rather, gold, frankincense, and myrrh, the correct "three"), its jump back to Exodus and Moses is even worse. The narrator asserts that "the golden bull is Taurus the bull" (referring to the constellation). This is a ridiculous handling of the text however. Notice, the context of the bull in Exodus is not Taurus, but rather, sacred mountain worship. Connecting any random bull with Taurus is in opposition to the surrounding setting. Doing things in this manner (carelessness) simply gives comparative religion a bad name. It is chaotic in nature, and meaningless in definition. Actually, Taurus is in connection with battle and war with Orion (e.g. David vs Goliath, Theseus vs Minotaur, Gilgamesh vs Humbaba, or the bull of heaven). The bull is not in that sort of context here in Exodus—it is in the context of Mount Sinai. The ram's "horn" is not connected with "the new age of aries the ram" (as the film claims), but rather, the mountain (see Exodus 19:13). Moses is horned in the context of the mountain (Exodus 34:29-30, 35). The altar of burnt offerings had horns on its four corners (Exodus 27:2), the relevance being that Mount Sinai is the "smoking mountain" (Exodus 19:18; Deut 4:11; 9:15; Psalm 144:5).

Additionally, the winter solstice "resurrection of the sun" argument put to use is simply poor, as the commentator conveniently adds in the film:
"However, they do not celebrate the resurrection of the sun until the spring equinox, or, Easter."
So they do not celebrate the very unique event of December 25th until April? This is a classic example of forcing parallelism! Actually, the Biblical text indicates no such winter time frame to begin with. Moreover, it is quite clear that the resurrection of Christ is a solar eclipse.
Then the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was torn in two. (Luke 23:45)
Jesus dies in the very next passage (Luke 23:46). And notice, regarding the resurrection, there is a specific mentions of "the stone rolled away from the tomb" (Luke 24:2-3); this clearly parallels solar ecliptic lore.

In summary, comparative mythology is a serious endeavour. Connecting random baseless parallels is not how it is done. A multiplicity of parallels are involved (regarding each motif), careful and sincere archaeological examination being the accurate method.

- Robert Anthony

____________________________________

Endnote:

1. The Greek term used in Matthew 2:1 is actually μάγοι, a nominative plural form of μάγος which means magician (same Greek used in Acts 13:6, 8 for the magician). Thus, "magicians from the East came to Jerusalem."


No comments:

Post a Comment