I guess I'm a little slow on the uptake, but it took me a while to work out what the vid was getting at: Christianity, then 9/11, then economics . . . oh right, these are all big conspiracies. Took me about an hour and a half but I got there in the end LOL.

I have mixed feelings about the non-religious parts of the vid. As others have said here, actual facts seem a bit lacking. Each one of these topics really needs a lot more time and investigation than this vid gives. Before making firm decisions about anything I always like to hear both sides of the argument, and weigh up in my mind which seems more plausible.

I wouldn't put it past those in power to kill their own people. It happened in Nazi Germany. Were certain events, like the sinking of the Lusitania and Pearl Harbor, and even 9/11, set up so that the subsequent wars could be justified? Maybe. I wouldn't rule it out.

However, I also think that there are a lot of Americans who find it hard to believe that their country could be vulnerable, that awful things out of their control really can happen. More comforting in some ways to believe that it's an inside job, not done by "people in caves," as someone put it. There are even undertones of racism here, because of course no one else in the world is clever or strong enough to be able to commit these atrocities are they -- it had to be Americans themselves.

There are good arguments on both sides. I think we need to be vigilant and always question. We are certainly in trouble if we let outselves be herded around like sheep.

About the segment on Christianity? I can see the point that is trying to be made here, but I feel that only a rabid atheist who was totally devoid of any shred of spirituality would put it together and present it in this way. I have a lot of problems with it.

It is totally focused on the ancient Western world. India is mentioned a few times but they had contact with the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, etc. What about (the rest of) Africa, China, the Americas? Were the people who made the vid afraid that if they investigated sun-god religions there, that they would not fit the mold they were trying to create? Probably, but only because they had such a narrow-minded agenda, which seemed to be to show that Christianity is a "myth," meaning it is untrue, and that it was perpetuated simply to be an opiate for the masses. Religion can, and is, used for this purpose, but it is not its only purpose, and there actually are religious people who are intelligent enough not to take that approach with it.

The word "myth" used to mean a universal truth. Interesting how semantics work. There are actually a lot of universal truths in the religions of the world. That's where this vid really misses the point. It shows that Christianity was born from several different ancient religions, and goes on to conclude that because of this it is factually untrue, and therefore a big con. It doesn't consider that there are other kinds of truth, like truths about the nature of human existence.

Does it matter so much HOW the symbols in modern religions came to be? What's important is what those symbols mean to people, then and now. Maybe saints with haloes and Jesus on the cross have their roots in astrology and sun-worship, I think that's very likely, but they mean different things to people today and that's legitimate for them.

I also think it's rather selective and spurious reasoning to try to tie absolutely everything in ancient religions to astrology. For example, the themes of the virgin birth, the death of the hero and his resurrection. These are very potent themes in many myths going back a very long time. The myth of the hero's journey through life and death is something that resonates deep in the psyche because it is about the journey of life that we all embark on. The virgin birth can have the function of establishing the divinity or other-worldliness of the hero. Death and rebirth are metaphorical symbols for so many aspects of life that it would be impossible to list them all. How very narrow-minded to contrain these things to astrology. If the ancients knew their astrology and astronomy, then why construct whole religions around them? Easier just to use your observatories and a calendar.

I have to say that when I started learning about Christianity's roots in other religions, my eyes shot wide open and I began to question everything I was taught in my cossetted Sunday school classes, where we were never taught anything about what anyone else in the world believed. That was my path, to leave that behind and search for more universal truths. But it is not everybody's path, and I respect that. I don't think it's right to simplistically try to demolish people's beliefs by saying look, it's all just a code for astrology.

Finally, I did not like the sardonic atheist speaker with his applauding audience. It's a classic straw man tactic to belittle your opponent's position and then ridicule it. I find this tactic stupid, distasteful and bigoted. Cartoons of God in the sky shouldn't have any place here. Ken Hovind used the same tactic in the vid I saw him in, using cartoon mockeries of what he was presenting as Darwinist beliefs. Anyone who does this kind of thing, whether I agree with their actual point or not, is going to draw my instant dislike and criticism.

Well thanks for getting me to think there Elvis. I haven't got a lot of time for long vids, especially with the eBaying, would rather read some links. But anything that keeps my brain working is welcome.

Linda.