Hmmm, no source on this fine piece of...um...scholarship?

Presumably this is about as factually correct as the part I of the Zeitgeist Movie on the same topic, which has been glowingly reviewed as:

Skeptic magazine's Tim Callahan, criticizing the first part of the film (on the origins of Christianity), wrote that "some of what it asserts is true. Unfortunately, this material is liberally – and sloppily – mixed with material that is only partially true and much that is plainly and simply bogus."

Chris Forbes, Senior lecturer in Ancient History of Macquarie University and member of the Synod of the Diocese of Sydney, severely criticized Part I of the movie, asserting that it has no basis in serious scholarship or ancient sources, and that it relies on amateur sources that recycle frivolous ideas from one another, rather than serious academic sources, commenting, "It is extraordinary how many claims it makes which are simply not true." Similar conclusions were reached by Dr. Mark Foreman of Liberty University.