PDA

View Full Version : Astro-Theology & Christianity (a study to further verify my astrology thread)


dollar
29th August 2007, 12:43 AM
Well i'm back for another wack at it ;) and like the title suggests I still stand behind my astrology = the Bible thread.

First off nothing presented here is intended for the degradation of your beliefs. The information presented here is to empower you and enhance your beliefs by finding out the deep driving meanings behind them. As they always say knowledge is power.
_________________________________________________

I draw the following information from this web site which I suggest you go to and read for yourself:
http://www.taroscopes.com/astro-theology/astrotheology2.html
I will give a very brief look of the information presented on the site:
There were four ancient cults of power
(Stellar, Lunar, Solar, Saturnian)
The great Cults finally decided to united together instead of always being in competition with each other for the power over men.
The name Israel (Is Ra El) is derived from three deities of these ancient Cults: Isis, Ra and El (Moon, Sun and Saturn).
Their symbolism pervades our world (example's:
Rings (ear rings, finger rings ect...), Sun symbols, crescent moon symbols (on flags ect...), Stars, ect..ect.. the symbolism stuff needs a whole discussion thread of its own)

Seven Churches of the Bible = In all there were 7 cults with the first 4 being of most importance (Stellar, Lunar, Saturnian, Solar, Vulcanus (Fire Cult), Dionysian (Drug, or "Psychedelic" Cult),
Venusian (Cult of Venus) which eventually all molded together.

"Time itself was divided to reflect and commemorate the unification of the Cults. The year round was broken down into 12 months to honor the Solar Cult. Their god was the sun and his number was 12. The next division of time was a month and, as the word's etymology indicates, this was sacred to the Lunar Cult, whose chief tutelary deity was the moon. The next division of time is a week, in which the 7 gods of the Stellar Cult are honored. These are today's days of the week. The worshippers of the god Saturn was given Saturday as a feast day, and since their god (planet) moves so gradually, the larger, longer cycles of time where attributed to him. The hands of a physical timepiece have, for generations, concealed and revealed this sectioning of time according to the Cults. The hour hand represents Horus, the sun. The minute hand stands for Min, the moon-god. The fast moving second hand stands for Mercury, the god of the Stellar Cult, as do the 12 divisions. On elaborately designed watches and clocks, the hands often display circles upon them, to illustrate that they represent planetary orbs. The very word year comes from the Egyptian yehrah. This word signified the Lunar Year. The passage of the moon was observed very closely by the Egyptians. Even under the Atonist period the moon was considered important. It was referred to as "silver Aton."

"During the tenure of the Stellar Cults women held superior positions in society, religion and government."
"One of the main reasons why the knowledge of the Sidereal Cult is kept obscure is to keep women divorced from their power in ways that are barely understood."
"Christ even remonstrates to his disciples "Be ye as wise as Serpents." This doesn’t make much sense until we discover that the serpent was the prime symbol of the Stellar Cult, the "wise-ones" of old. And, what's more, the Egyptian hieroglyphic for "woman" was a serpent. This is one of the reasons why the serpent was considered negatively by later Christians."
_________________________________________________

"One of the most important and familiar idioms of the Christian religion is the so-called Lord's Prayer. Not many people have asked where it came from. Most people trust what is written in the Gospels about its origin. It is from the Maxims of Ani (ancient egyptian writting) that the so-called "Lord's Prayer" of Christianity was taken:
The Lord's Prayer (left) next to the Maxims of Ani (right):

Our Father, which art in heaven - The God of this Earth is the ruler of the horizon

Hallowed be Thy Name - Th god is for making great his name. Devote yourself to the adoration of his name

Thy kingdom come - Give your god existence

Thy will be done - He will do thy business

In earth, as it is in heaven - His likeness is upon the Earth

Give us this day our daily bread - God is given incense and food offerings daily

And forgive us our debts - The god will judge the true and honest and forgive our debtors

And lead us not into temptation - Guard against the thing that god abominates

But deliver us from evil - Preserve me from decay

For thine is the kingdom - God is the king of the horizon

The power, and the glory - He magnifies he whoever magnifies him

For ever and ever Amen - Let tomorrow be as today
Amen

Another striking similarity:
"From the Maxims of Ani (or Anty the Scribe), the papyrus found by Mariette Bey and now kept in the museum of Boulacq, we read passages that incontestably influenced the composers of the Old Testament:

Do not enter into the house of another, but know that if he invites you, it is an honor for you. When you enter a divine sanctuary avoid noise, and respect the house of God.

Pray humbly with a sincere heart so that all your words are said in secret. Then God will listen to your message and will accept your offerings.

Always remember that it is your God that gives and decides on your existence, and think of him continually, tomorrow as today.

The God of this world lives in light, above the firmament, but his emblems are on earth. Do not dispute his mysteries and you will see the divine one give the sun to make all vegetation grow, to make food for man to feed himself.

Do not be rough with your woman when you know that she looks after your house. Recognize her merits and put your hand in hers. Doing otherwise will sow misfortune, and show a bad example for your children. They will lose a source of peace and happiness. "
__________________________________________________

"The burden of Egypt. Behold, the Lord rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and the heart of Egypt shall met in the midst of it. And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians and they shall fight every one against his brother, and every one against his neighbor...And the spirit of Egypt shall fail in the midst thereof - Isaiah 19:1"

"And why was Egypt, this magnificent seat of learning and culture, such a "burden" to the Christian Emperors and Bishops?
(read full text at source URL to find out)
__________________________________________________

Much of the Bible is the personification of Stellar phenomena.
Through asto-theology we find many parallels to biblical text:
There is a reason why we find 4 gospels. The four "Gospels" are representations of the four cardinal points of the zodiac.

"The Bible is an outgrowth of the Torah, but the Torah is an outgrowth of the Tarot, in fact they are the same word, meaning Law, or Way, same as Tao."

"The 4 Types have always been symbolized by the 4 elements, Fire, Water, Air and Earth, or as in Tarot: Wands, Cups, Swords, Disks, or in playing cards, Clubs, Hearts, Spades and Diamonds. In ordinary playing cards, the Joker represents the one who has nucleated the four, and integrated within each of these divisions. He wears the four colors of the 4 suits, because he is "four in one." The design of the Pyramid, its four faces rising to a singular apex, was also a seminal symbol of the unification of the four modalities of being. Christ upon the Cross, and Pharaoh upon his cuboid throne also refer to this greatest of mysteries."

"The Four Gospels. They too represent the four elements. "
________________________________________________

"The story of the primal parents at the Tree of Life, the mysterious serpent and the temptation are all derived from Egyptian Sidereal myth. Egypt was known by alien nations as the “Land of the Tree and the Serpent."
"The Female body was called the Tree of Life and like a tree the female produced fruit. Her fruits are the circular ovum."
"the Book of Genesis or Genisis. Isis was the supreme mother goddess of Egypt"
"Genesis means "genes of Isis," or even "generation (progeny), of Isis."
"Isis is the later Eve and Mary, the virgin queens. The Book of Genesis is therefore a book of genes, relating to the human DNA (the real Tree of Life)."
"The serpent and the apple were symbols of the sperm and the ovum. The "biting of the apple" was always a connotation for the sperm entering the ovum."
(there is much more to this found at the source URL, oh and by the way ISIS (the word) squeezed together gives us the american dollar symbol, also curiously we find a pyramid on the dollar bill)
__________________________________________________

"Many of the anecdotes and stories in New Testament have to do with the astronomical phenomena called 'The "Precession of the Equinoxes."

"The Age of Pisces
The Christian Mythos coincided with the Age of Pisces. This is the reason why there is much in the way of water symbolism in the New Testament. There is the mention of Baptism, the fact that the disciples were mostly fishermen. Then there is the walking on the water, the washing the feet of the disciples, the feeding of the five thousand with two fish, etc. The Christians still use the symbol of the fish to symbolize Jesus. The letters of the word Jesus Christ the Savior of the World, in Latin, give the word for fish. The Pope wears the "Ring of the Fisherman," and the Pope's headdress is a fish head, from the side. The early Christians were called the "Little Fishes." In the Old Testament we read about the prophet Jonah being swallowed by the whale or the great fish. All the imagery of the chapters and verses of the New Testament can be related to the Precessional phenomena, as that it what it was composed for in the first place. It was never meant to be a biography."

"The 12 Official and 72 Unofficial disciples
This refers to the twelve houses or signs of the zodiac that are found on or very near to the ecliptic. The ecliptic is the path of the sun around the zodiac. There are more than twelve constellations there of course. And in fact if one counts all the constellations of great importance, there are 72, not counting the 12. These extra-zodiacal constellations are called the paranatellons. They also pay homage to the passing sun. So it was written that Jesus had 12 official servants and 72 others that also carried the message. The symbol of the Arthurian Round Table is also a motif that is based on the round of the zodiac. Now these paranatellons are the leitmotif behind innumerable other Biblical and mythical stories. But because we are not conversant with these constellations and their esoteric relevance we do not notice when they turn up either in fiction or art, architecture or commercial."

"Creation in "Six Days"
This refers to a period of 2,160 x 6 or 12,960 (a number found encoded in almost all the sacred megalithic structures and temple complexes of the world). A Precessional "day" is 2,160 years long. This is 1 degree every 72 years for a sign of 30 degrees. But the 2,160 was considered so sacred that its mystery was rarely mentioned to the uninitiated. Instead of it, the number 666 was used. (6x6x6 = 216.) This is the real reason why the orthodox Christian hierarchy have made this number out to be satanic. It is because it has to do with Astro-Theology, astrology and the Stellar Cult. When a particular secret number was to be expressed, another related code number was used in its place. The Jews did the same thing with the word Adonai, which they uttered in place of Jehovah. There is nothing "satanic" about the number 666. It is, however, the "Number of the Beast" alright.
...LET HIM WHO HATH UNDERSTANDING
RECKON THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST
FOR IT IS A HUMAN NUMBER...
Man is in the womb for 9 months. Upon his birth, he is forever circumambulated by the wheel of the zodiac. And for his personal life, for the life of the earth upon which he lives, for light and energy he needs the outer sun, the center of the zodiac. Nine months is 270 days. The wheel of the zodiac like all circles and cycles that man will live in, is defined by 360. And the sacred numeral of the sun is 36.

270 + 360 + 36 = 666 (the Human Number)

Moreover, all the numbers between 1 and 36, again make 666. The number 666 is a solar number also. (The number 36 has long been connected to cycles and to the zodiac. The Etruscans, Greeks and Romans, all had calendars of ten months of thirty-six days.)

Additionally, as modern biologists have discovered, the human gene is made up of 23 chromosomes. 2 divided by 3 equals .666 (The Number of the Beast)

(This in no way exhausts the depth of significance of the number 666.)"

"The Bible mentions Christ as the good "Shepherd" and there are the "Shepherds" who watch their "flocks" by night who come to visit him in the manger."
"And Egyptian Pharaohs and priests of knowledge in that Age were referred to as the "Good Shepherds." The "Flocks" that they watched by night were the stars in the night sky, as they were all Siderealists. This is why we read that the Magi, as well as the "Shepherds," following the bright star, knew of the place of birth of the Solar King, Jesus Christ. The word "Shepherd" was a euphemism for "astrologer," for it is they who "follow," the stars."

(Much more to read on astrology and the bible at the source URL)

Agian this is a very small sampling of a much larger study. If you found the above information of interest then visit:
http://www.taroscopes.com/astro-theology/astrotheology2.html

Here is are some links which supplement the above info:
An Astro-Theology video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3891904901581551087
A symbolism video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9117504928805157392

(find other complementing video's here http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Jordan+Maxwell+ or here http://www.taroscopes.com/webstream/webstream_startpage.html)

Another great web site related to the above information can be found here: http://www.freedomdomain.com/relig.htm

Society is on a need to know basis people and those in power be don't feel we need to know.

rusmeister
29th August 2007, 03:31 AM
Unfortunately for you, Dollar, the Orthodox position is that the Faith cannot be enhanced because it is not relativistic. It is the Absolute Truth.

So there's nothing to even respond to here. What you believe is irrelevant. The question is, will you accept what the Orthodox Church teaches? Do you even know what that is? (I'd bet dollars to doughnuts you don't.)

dollar
29th August 2007, 02:30 PM
Unfortunately for you, Dollar, the Orthodox position is that the Faith cannot be enhanced because it is not relativistic. It is the Absolute Truth.

So there's nothing to even respond to here. What you believe is irrelevant. The question is, will you accept what the Orthodox Church teaches? Do you even know what that is? (I'd bet dollars to doughnuts you don't.)
The Orthodox view on life was not always present you know. It didn't exist forever like you make it sound. How can you say your beliefs are outside of space and time when it came into existance from space and time from organized religions in society?
All things had there beginning's.
Now obviously you do not want to see how the belief system you have started out. Why you do not want to know is beyond me...
:scratch:
Please help me understand why the origin of your belief is irrelevant to what you believe.
Are not the origin and the belief one in the same thing?
:confused:
This is why I say the information of the origin can enhance your belief and empower you so you get the original story before it was shall we say changed / corrupted over the years. You will be able to get more out of a belief if you know what it was all about when it first came into being no?

There is the origin, then there is the outgrowth. The origin will always be the most pure part of the belief but both origin and the outgrowth are one in the same thing serving together to bring out a deep meaning. Although we need to be careful of some of the outgrowth as pieces of it are not put there to help you gain spiritual perfection. This may be a shock to you but yes sometimes humans running certain organizations have their own agendas which are put in place, not for your benefit.
:doh:

Philothei
30th August 2007, 12:00 AM
Because Jesus Christ is the Alpha and the Omega and the light and there are also no more prophets (like yourself) to "enlighten us" with your wisdom. Christ is the only ways and the Truth. That is in the answer to Pontius Pilate... I do not wish to go on that should do it.


God bless,
Philothei

Knowledge3
30th August 2007, 01:15 AM
The problem I see with the information provided (a cut-n-paste) is that it suggests a religious pluralism. It is also a generalization and abstraction of Christianity.

Sacrum Silentium
31st August 2007, 07:35 PM
"Beware of reading the doctrines of heretics for they, more than anything else, can equip the spirit of blasphemy against you." - Saint Isaac of Syria

JustinHesychast
31st August 2007, 09:51 PM
That's an interesting post. I enjoyed reading your last thread, too. :)

dollar
31st August 2007, 11:26 PM
That's an interesting post. I enjoyed reading your last thread, too. :)
Your welcome :) I'm glad this information is of interest to you.

rusmeister
1st September 2007, 01:10 AM
That's an interesting post. I enjoyed reading your last thread, too. :)
Justin, I'll just say you're young, you have a lot of winds blowing you in different directions. Be careful! You need a firm foundation! There are very bad directions to be blown in.

dollar
1st September 2007, 01:20 AM
"Beware of reading the doctrines of heretics for they, more than anything else, can equip the spirit of blasphemy against you." - Saint Isaac of Syria

"Ignorance, the root and the stem of every evil."
-Plato

Yes I figured i'd be attacked. I understand some have devoted their whole life to something in which they possibly didn't know how that belief started.

dollar
1st September 2007, 02:53 AM
That's an interesting post. I enjoyed reading your last thread, too. :)
Justin, I'll just say you're young, you have a lot of winds blowing you in different directions. Be careful! You need a firm foundation! There are very bad directions to be blown in.
Calling me a bad wind / direction rusmeister?

This just goes to prove that younger people are overall more open minded than the older.

But rusmeister is right justin, you shouldn't take anything I present to you as the truth. I don't want you to believe a word I type to you.
As I once saw: "truth is not told, it is relized."

I suggest if you still have interest in these things that you do your own research into these things with an open mind and a will for truth. Don't just accept anything you see though, do research and when the dots just start connecting so clearly you know your on to something.

Don't forget, this new knowledge pouring in doesn't need to be anything negative toward what you already have believed. This knowledge can teach you the history and deep driving meanings behind todays modern day beliefs and traditions.
But in the end its up to you to decide how this information will fit into your life.
Rusmeister and I can only give you advice on how truth is found, the rest is up to you.

rusmeister
2nd September 2007, 02:07 PM
If this is not too heavy for you...


Whether the human mind can advance or not, is a question too little discussed, for nothing can be more dangerous than to found our social philosophy on any theory which is debatable but has not been debated. But if we assume, for the sake of argument, that there has been in the past, or will be in the future, such a thing as a growth or improvement of the human mind itself, there still remains a very sharp objection to be raised against the modern version of that improvement. The vice of the modern notion of mental progress is that it is always something concerned with the breaking of bonds, the effacing of boundaries, the casting away of dogmas. But if there be such a thing as mental growth, it must mean the growth into more and more definite convictions, into more and more dogmas. The human brain is a machine for coming to conclusions; if it cannot come to conclusions it is rusty. When we hear of a man too clever to believe, we are hearing of something having almost the character of a contradiction in terms. It is like hearing of a nail that was too good to hold down a carpet; or a bolt that was too strong to keep a door shut. Man can hardly be defined, after the fashion of Carlyle, as an animal who makes tools; ants and beavers and many other animals make tools, in the sense that they make an apparatus. Man can be defined as an animal that makes dogmas. As he piles doctrine on doctrine and conclusion on conclusion in the formation of some tremendous scheme of philosophy and religion, he is, in the only legitimate sense of which the expression is capable, becoming more and more human. When he drops one doctrine after another in a refined scepticism, when he declines to tie himself to a system, when he says that he has outgrown definitions, when he says that he disbelieves in finality, when, in his own imagination, he sits as God, holding no form of creed but contemplating all, then he is by that very process sinking slowly backwards into the vagueness of the vagrant animals and the unconsciousness of the grass. Trees have no dogmas. Turnips are singularly broad-minded.
G.K. Chesterton, Heretics, ch 20


There are some things that one should come to conclusions about and cease to be "open-minded".

Thanks for not confusing me with a turnip! :)

dollar
3rd September 2007, 10:17 PM
If this is not too heavy for you...

There are some things that one should come to conclusions about and cease to be "open-minded".

Thanks for not confusing me with a turnip! :)
"A closed mind is like a closed book: just a block of wood."
- Chinese Proverb

There is much truth in this proverb, its a whole archive of wisdom in one sentence. Read it at least 5 times, The deep meaning in it becomes a little more clear each time you look through it.

rusmeister
3rd September 2007, 11:34 PM
Note that I said, "Some things". There's a big difference between being closed minded about everything and coming to a conclusion on a given subject.

http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~mward/gkc/books/11505-h.htm#THE_ERROR_OF_IMPARTIALITY

(This is in the public domain)
G.K. Chesterton, from his collection of essays, "All Things Considered":

<H2>THE ERROR OF IMPARTIALITY



The refusal of the jurors in the Thaw trial to come to an agreement is certainly a somewhat amusing sequel to the frenzied and even fantastic caution with which they were selected. Jurymen were set aside for reasons which seem to have only the very wildest relation to the case—reasons which we cannot conceive as giving any human being a real bias. It may be questioned whether the exaggerated theory of impartiality in an arbiter or juryman may not be carried so far as to be more unjust than partiality itself. What people call impartiality may simply mean indifference, and what people call partiality may simply mean mental activity. It is sometimes made an objection, for instance, to a juror that he has formed some prime-facie opinion upon a case: if he can be forced under sharp questioning to admit that he has formed such an opinion, he is regarded as manifestly unfit to conduct the inquiry. Surely this is unsound. If his bias is one of interest, of class, or creed, or notorious propaganda, then that fact certainly proves that he is not an impartial arbiter. But the mere fact that he did form some temporary impression from the first facts as far as he knew them—this does not prove that he is not an impartial arbiter—it only proves that he is not a cold-blooded fool.

If we walk down the street, taking all the jurymen who have not formed opinions and leaving all the jurymen who have formed opinions, it seems highly probable that we shall only succeed in taking all the stupid jurymen and leaving all the thoughtful ones. Provided that the opinion formed is really of this airy and abstract kind, provided that it has no suggestion of settled motive or prejudice, we might well regard it not merely as a promise of capacity, but literally as a promise of justice. The man who took the trouble to deduce from the police reports would probably be the man who would take the trouble to deduce further and different things from the evidence. The man who had the sense to form an opinion would be the man who would have the sense to alter it.

It is worth while to dwell for a moment on this minor aspect of the matter because the error about impartiality and justice is by no means confined to a criminal question. In much more serious matters it is assumed that the agnostic is impartial; whereas the agnostic is merely ignorant. The logical outcome of the fastidiousness about the Thaw jurors would be that the case ought to be tried by Esquimaux, or Hottentots, or savages from the Cannibal Islands—by some class of people who could have no conceivable interest in the parties, and moreover, no conceivable interest in the case. The pure and starry perfection of impartiality would be reached by people who not only had no opinion before they had heard the case, but who also had no opinion after they had heard it. In the same way, there is in modern discussions of religion and philosophy an absurd assumption that a man is in some way just and well-poised because he has come to no conclusion; and that a man is in some way knocked off the list of fair judges because he has come to a conclusion. It is assumed that the sceptic has no bias; whereas he has a very obvious bias in favour of scepticism. I remember once arguing with an honest young atheist, who was very much shocked at my disputing some of the assumptions which were absolute sanctities to him (such as the quite unproved proposition of the independence of matter and the quite improbable proposition of its power to originate mind), and he at length fell back upon this question, which he delivered with an honourable heat of defiance and indignation: "Well, can you tell me any man of intellect, great in science or philosophy, who accepted the miraculous?" I said, "With pleasure. Descartes, Dr. Johnson, Newton, Faraday, Newman, Gladstone, Pasteur, Browning, Brunetiere—as many more as you please." To which that quite admirable and idealistic young man made this astonishing reply—"Oh, but of course they had to say that; they were Christians." First he challenged me to find a black swan, and then he ruled out all my swans because they were black. The fact that all these great intellects had come to the Christian view was somehow or other a proof either that they were not great intellects or that they had not really come to that view. The argument thus stood in a charmingly convenient form: "All men that count have come to my conclusion; for if they come to your conclusion they do not count."
It did not seem to occur to such controversialists that if Cardinal Newman was really a man of intellect, the fact that he adhered to dogmatic religion proved exactly as much as the fact that Professor Huxley, another man of intellect, found that he could not adhere to dogmatic religion; that is to say (as I cheerfully admit), it proved precious little either way. If there is one class of men whom history has proved especially and supremely capable of going quite wrong in all directions, it is the class of highly intellectual men. I would always prefer to go by the bulk of humanity; that is why I am a democrat. But whatever be the truth about exceptional intelligence and the masses, it is manifestly most unreasonable that intelligent men should be divided upon the absurd modern principle of regarding every clever man who cannot make up his mind as an impartial judge, and regarding every clever man who can make up his mind as a servile fanatic. As it is, we seem to regard it as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has taken one side or the other. We regard it (in other words) as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has contrived to reach the object of his reasoning. We call a man a bigot or a slave of dogma because he is a thinker who has thought thoroughly and to a definite end. We say that the juryman is not a juryman because he has brought in a verdict. We say that the judge is not a judge because he gives judgment. We say that the sincere believer has no right to vote, simply because he has voted.
</H2>

dollar
4th September 2007, 02:04 AM
-