Sun does not equal "Son." Who would make such an error?
Since you're making these claims, I would very much appreciate it (and I'm sure others would, as well) if you would post your original source materials as documentation to back them up.
Good luck with that -- because there are none which prove any link to Christianity.
(Hint: Zeitgeist is based upon flawed sources).
________________
And you personally researched all the "sources," for reliability, right? How do you know they are not along the lines the works of Massey and Acharya S?
Do you not grasp the concept that a source which says Horus (et al) was born on December 25th does not prove a link to Jesus, because the original source material for Jesus (the Bible) does not say when Jesus was born? The fact that his birthday is celebrated on that day is irrelevant because he was not in fact born on that day?
Further, just one example of the faulty scholarship of the writer is this, in writing:
"Therefore, it must be reasonable to assume that people in the sun-worshipping societies interpreted the sun’s rising in the constellation of Virgo as if the Virgin gave birth to the Sun, which was worshipped as a god. Consequently, the Virgin gave birth to the God or to the Son of God. "
Any scholar would know that it is not "reasonable to assume." Because such conclusions require huge leaps of inference --that is the opposite of scholarship.
And, if you read his references -- they do not prove any connection. So sorry, but your citation fails.