The Bible as Astrology

[Nogodnomasters]

The Old Testament from creation through Solomon is a story of the constellations. It was written circa 2141 BCE and was a living document. As the cardinal points changed verses were added to new cardinal points. The original text appears to have remained in tact. The original story was fairly simple and basic. There were very few moralistic or universal truths contained in them, other than if you didn’t do what YHWH wants you die. The stories were altered to reflect this morals or “tarot card” aspects as they seem to have some connection (outside of the scope of my research, but it seems to exist.) The four original cardinal points of the ancients are Leo, Aquarius, Taurus, and Scorpio. This are reflected in Biblical writings such as Ezekiel and Revelation although these texts came later. In the original text Leo as the summer solstice is the rotating flaming sword YHWH places east of Eden. The winter solstice is the blinding/ cutting off the hair/ destruction of the temple in the story of Sampson. The autumnal equinox is the killing, or sacrifice of Uriah. The vernal equinox has two points in Taurus which the author uses. One represents the eye of Taurus. This would be the blessings of Jacob. This is the traditional point in that constellation. A second one occurs in the Pleiades with the circumcision of Gershom. This I surmise would be around the true authorship of the text. There are attempts to move those points when the cardinal points progressed. The three plain cities were added to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah along with Lot’s wife turning into a pillar of salt. This was the new equinox in Libra. The vernal equinox was changed. The repeated blessings in Deut. 33 were an attempt to place the vernal equinox in Aries. The story of the molten calf was added to show this procession. The winter solstice was moved to Capricorn, but not done too well. The kid-goat was added to the story of Samson and the removal of the head of Goliath was to mark this spot. The summer equinox was altered tremendously. Many stories were added to tale of Abraham to bring this event into Cancer. Most notably was the addition of the attempt to sacrifice Isaac and the institution of circumcision. The original tale runs through four dozen constellations and hundreds of stars in a contiguous fashion. Several of the constellations are different from today’s constellations; however the ancient Arabic star names are still with us. By doing a simple comparison of the two, a whole new picture emerges. Knowing when the story was written, it becomes even easier to identify the original text, because of the anachronisms. These can be easily removed and shown to be an insertion. I also discovered a technique used to insert foreign material into a text. It was the use of a repeated phrase. Foreign material was inserted between a repeated phrase. This is why Abraham travels with Lot twice, Samuel dies twice, Solomon is made king twice etc. Generally it is here where the anachronisms are located. http://www.infidelguy.com/modules.php?name=Calendar&file=index&type=view&eid=14

 

[iBrian]

If I may ask: how do you actually make the associations between the astrological symbols and the stories themselves though? I have difficulty seeing a clear conne tion.

Would it be possible to use a particular story to relate to how it is illustrative of a particular constellation?

Also, are you speaking of the Bible as a specific study of the movement of the stars, or simply a reflection?

Do your ideas also require that each Biblical story is an absolute verifiable historical truth? For example, I've seen bob x deconstruct The Book of Daniel elsewhere as a later work, rather than a contemporary narration. How do such ideas affect your own?

Sorry for the questions - I'm trying to get to get a handle on your reasoning process, so that I can properly follow it.

 

[Nogodnomasters]

I use a number of comparison techniques that tie a story together. First off I use a comparison of myths. While one is not allowed to compare Bible stories to astrology, it is fine in our culture to do so with the myths of Babylon, Greece, and Egypt. There is information in those areas. Bible stories are compared to those other stories, but never to the direct source.

The second way, or verification is to compare the meaning of the names of people and places in the Biblical text to the ancient Hebrew and Arabic names of the stars. For instance the Bible uses the word "Shecham" three times, 2 for places, one for a person. It means "shoulder." In the constellations all 3 times it appears in the shoulder of a constellations and in two of those times, the name of the star means "shoulder." Now compound this a couple of 100 times and you have more than a coincedence. Here is an example:

"The scene then moves from the tail of Ursa Major into Boötes. There are now several dreams which predict Joseph will rule over his brothers. Boötes is the constellation of “the coming one” thus we have predictions of the future. In one dream the sun (Esau) the moon (Jacob) and the 11 stars (zodiac signs as siblings) all bow down to Joseph. Joseph is the colorful garnet star Arcturus, hence the coat of many colors. Boötes and Arcturus are both the herdsman and the ox driver. Boötes is the inventor of the plow. In this tale Joseph is a dutiful shepherd as the constellation suggests. He is sold into Egypt, which is Taurus the ox or bull. The star Nekkar is connected to wild animals, such as hyenas or female wolves. The brothers took the coat and claimed Joseph was killed by wild animals. The coat remained behind as the star Arcturus while Joseph was sold into Egypt by “Ishmaelites” who would have been heading toward Cancer. The Egyptians referred to the constellation as Smat, which is “the one who rules or governs” which is what Joseph did in Egypt. Boötes was considered a symbol for Egypt itself as was Taurus. Josephis a shepherd, ox man and governor as the constellation suggests.
The well Joseph was tossed in seems to be a mystery. This would normally imply a nebula or dark spot in space. Boötes seems void of such matter. It is possible the pit was the star Mufrid, “Lance of the Lance Bearer.” Most likely the pit was a trapezoid formed by the stars Nekkar, Seginus, Princeps, and Alkajurops. This was where predators would lie in wait for the ancient fold around the pole."


This work does not include Daniel. Historically the tale is cannot be 100% correct, but it is based on historical events and in some cases historical people. It is history slanted to fit the stars and vice-versa.

 

[Dave the Web]

Please excuse my ignorance but can you explain a little more slowly how you apply your reasoning to a specific story?
I am genuinely interested in the idea but am finding it not well explained at the moment. You make too many conenctions with assumed knowledge that perhaps your audience does not share. I would be grateful for a small example to follow your argument properly.

 

[Nogodnomasters]

Please excuse my ignorance but can you explain a little more slowly how you apply your reasoning to a specific story?
I am genuinely interested in the idea but am finding it not well explained at the moment. You make too many conenctions with assumed knowledge that perhaps your audience does not share. I would be grateful for a small example to follow your argument properly.

There are many tales, stories, from various religions/myths which connect their religion to the stars. The Greek names of the constellations and stars for example. There is the use of certian gods in the astro-plane of the Temple of Denderah. Many of these stories are similar or have been compared to Bible stories by various experts in the field such as Robert Graves. In addition to the Bible tales themselves, the Jews wrote detailed explanations of these stories in later centuries known as midrashes. These details make a deeper or stronger connection between the stories of the Bible and Greek myths etc.

We know where the Greek myths are in the sky, because our constellations are named after them. If we were to (and I am actually working backwards on this) superimpose the Bible story into that slot, a strange thing occurs. We find that the ancient Arabic and Hebrew name of the stars of that constellation relate to that Bible story. What is more remarkable is that Bible story line flows in an almost contineous line from constellation to constellation and at times from star to star within the constellation. There are far too many examples for it to be a coincidence or a stretch of imagination.

There are of course differences too as one would expect between cultures and over a thousand years of time.

Many ancient constellations are radically different from today's constellations as testified by the Arabic meaning of the stars such as Hercules and Ophiuchus. These for instance were not men but pasture lands as demonstrated by the ancient meanings of the stars within the constellations. It is here where Abraham divided his land with Lot. Abraham took over Hercules and Lot went to Libra where Sodom and Gamorah were judged. Lot in Hebrew mean to wrap of cover. The northern star of Libra means "the price which covers." The judgment of Sodom and Gomorah followed the splitting of the land.

In Egypt it was different. There was first a judgment in Libra. This was followed by the splitting of the land between Horus and Set. The constellations were used basically in the same manner, but the story line was reversed.

In the New Testament we now feel the Greek/Roman influence. The trial of Jesus is still in Libra. The potter's field is Ophiuchus with the repented Judas as Serpens. However Ophiuchus takes on a Greek flavor as a healer as Joseph attends to the body of Christ. Hercules is no longer land, but is the resurrected Jesus with his foot crushing the serpent Draco, conquering evil. The crucifixion scene is located right below Libra. The Southern Cross represents the cross, with Lepus as the victim (Jesus) being speared in the side by the Roman centurian (Centaurus). Pilate is also represented by Centaurus (Pilate=armed with spear).The mock crown is the northern crown associated with the color red (blood) and his mock robe is the star Arcturus. It is in Bootes where Jesus is mocked in torment just as Joseph was mocked by his brothers and stripped of his coat of many colors. There is a 2000 year difference in the age of the story of Jesus and Joseph, plus there is the Greek influence on the culture yet we see some of the basic elements show through which are astrological similar.

 

[bananabrain]

i am just about fed up of this. nogodnomasters (the handle's a giveaway, isn't it?) has clearly got no interest in how we approach our own texts, never mind that his arguments sound absolutely laughable to a traditional jew. why not say that muhammad was an accountant while you're at it? all this is is tendentious conjecture based on spurious association, apparent ignorance of the religious context of the time period and an entirely unwarranted assumption that he knows what the talmudic sages were thinking. all of this adds up to what i can only characterise as a deliberate attempt to paint traditional judaism as a lie.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Nogodnomasters]

i am just about fed up of this. nogodnomasters (the handle's a giveaway, isn't it?) has clearly got no interest in how we approach our own texts, never mind that his arguments sound absolutely laughable to a traditional jew. why not say that muhammad was an accountant while you're at it? all this is is tendentious conjecture based on spurious association, apparent ignorance of the religious context of the time period and an entirely unwarranted assumption that he knows what the talmudic sages were thinking. all of this adds up to what i can only characterise as a deliberate attempt to paint traditional judaism as a lie.

b'shalom

bananabrain

Traditional Judaism is a lie, as are all religions but I am just the messenger. My work is a scholarly approach not a religious one. I know my arguments are outside of the box. Since you have never read my work, I would find it hard to criticize what one does not fully understand based on prejudices. Having failed with an intellectual challenge, the next step for the loser in an argument is to resort to ad hominems. I would prefer an intellectual challenge. A pity you cannot provide one.

 

[iBrian]

Ahem - this argument stops now.


bananabrain -

On a comparative-religion.com it has to be accepted that not every opinion expressed on Judaism will be your own particular view on Judaism. If you disagree on certain comments then it is for you to refute the post, not the poster.

ll we simply ask is that interfaith dialogue remains civil and respectful. If you feel that a post is disrespectful of Judaism then support your position with regards to Judaism from a calm and reasonable perspective. If you disagree then make an argument against the points made, and not the other person. It's my responsibility to determine whether a poster is being offensive, and my responsibility to act on it. If anyone sees offence then they are welcome to use the "report post" link to report abuse of these forums, and/or e-mail myself to discuss points of concern.



Nogodnomasters -

The point applies also to yourself - this is not a place to seek argue with other posters. Where any poster perceives attacks upon themselves, then it is for the CR staff to ajudicate action and deal with the situation. Please note the reference to reporting posts and e-mailing myself (or Moderators) in the event of dispute. That is the civil way to deal with such issues.

As to the comment that Judaism is a lie and so is all religion - that is not a position that will be either supported or tolerated here. We are here to discuss religious and spiritual issues, not pass judgement on them. People are free to express their views and support them through discussion and reasonable argument - but judgement itself is to be left for others to make according to what information is supplied and discussed in any particular instance.

 

[Nogodnomasters]

I did not write the Babylonian Talmud filled with astrological references.

I am not the rabbi who wrote the reason why Jacob had 12 sons is because there are 12 signs in the zodiac.

I did not write the works of the ancients which professed the Jews were obcessed with the heavens.

I did not write the Kabbalah.

I did not place huge zodiacs on the floors of their temples.

I simply ask the question that maybe, just maybe their religion has some basis in astrology with all these Jews claiming it does.

Rather than rely on traditional indoctrination, I did my own research. What I discovered was remarkable and compliments what the Jews themselves claimed about their own religion and then some. Using the scholarly structure of Wellhausen and Friedman as well as the latest in archaelogical discoveries I have been able to isolate what was the original text. I was also able to correspond this text to a real time period with real events and real people. This text also had heavy astrological overtures. This was the golden age of astrology.

There will be three basic ways this information will be treated:

1) Accepted- And religion is bogus.
2) Accepted-and religion and astrology are both real.
3) Denied- keep one's head in the sand and ignore the facts.

I chose the first. BB choses number 3. I have found there are those who accept option #2. They are very interested in my work.

http://www.lynnsastrologyforum.com/guest_write.asp

Some people are capable of separating my personal beliefs from my work. When you accuse me of certain religious beliefs, I will let you know exactly where I stand.

Do I have an agenda? Yes. It is to destroy all the world's religions by exposing them as fakes. I don't expect to meet my goal this year, but it is a worthwhile goal and I will keep on trying. You must excuse me if I have trouble buying into the idea of two nudists taking dietary advice from a talking snake as anything as a fable. In fact all the Jews I have met hold that opinion too. The story as it turns out has a basis in astrology. Big deal.

You must excuse me Brian, but you have a thread for spirituality etc. This thread is comparative religion. What I have provided is a common theme for religious beliefs which falls under this topic heading. When you start to compare religions you find out they are basically the same. This leads one to one of two conclusions. Either their are all false or the opinion of a universalist. Are you claiming only universalists or universalist opinions are welcomed here? I personally have no problem with BB's post. He is entitled to his belief and opinion and so am I. I know this is your forum, but I take no offense by his post despite what it appears on the surface. I consider it a show of his frustration in mounting evidence. I don't think he crossed any line. I enjoy spirited debate. I can down in the dirt with the best of them. When someone practically begs me to rub their face with their religion, it is a temptation to big for me to ignore- sorry.

Are you saying that we can compare religions and if the logical conclusion of the facts and evidence is that a religion is false, we cannot express that opinion?

I have not attacked anyone claiming their are ignorant because of their religious beliefs. I have simply pointed out the facts and expressed my views of them on certain religious fables/myths/beliefs. No one is forced to believe them. Having been raised Catholic and having once believed in Jesus, I find it easy how someone indoctrinated from birth in a specific religious belief has trouble being weened off of it. I do not fault anyone for it or consider them less of person for holding those beliefs pounded into their brains as children. I am just a Secular Humanist and I am here to help you.

"Imagine no religion...."

 

[Chronicles]

Hi Nogodnomasters -

(using my other alias here as I am out away from home)

The point about my comment is - although perhaps yourself (and others) may or may not mind a roll in the dirt, I make no provision for dirt here.

I expect members of this forum to be able to carry themselves in a generally civil and mature manner.

Of course, there are and will be lapses - we all have bad hair days - but ultimately a forum like this requires some maintained level of mutual respect, so that constructive interfaith dialogue may take place.

I don't demand that people modify their opinions and personal judgements to take part in discussions - merely to take into consideration where they are when they deliver them.

I uphold no single religious or non-religious view here - merely seek to ensure an environment where such views may be most constructively expressed.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -​

Now - if we can put this moment behind us I would much prefer it if this thread gets entirely back on topic - "The Bible as Astrology".

For example, Nogodnomasters, it would be interesting if you have any citations from the Babylonian Talmud on the issue of astrological interpretation. That would give certain grounds for bananabrain (and others) at least to cast thoughts with regards to the context of such statements, erlate them to other commentaries, and consider them in relation to other aspects of belief within Judaism.

And soon - not long after Christmas - we will have the Babylonian Talmud hosted on the main comparative-religion site. So any information forwarded in the nature of discussion should be faily easily to cross-reference.

 

[Vajradhara]

Traditional Judaism is a lie, as are all religions but I am just the messenger. My work is a scholarly approach not a religious one. I know my arguments are outside of the box. Since you have never read my work, I would find it hard to criticize what one does not fully understand based on prejudices. Having failed with an intellectual challenge, the next step for the loser in an argument is to resort to ad hominems. I would prefer an intellectual challenge. A pity you cannot provide one.

Namaste,

thank you for the post.

ah.. the old "religion is a lie" routine. one wonders... did you have a bad experience with a religion at some point?

in any event... it is my opinon that you are incorrect, not all religions are lies, furthermore, you cannot prove that they are. to do so, at least for the monothestic traditions, you would have to prove that God does not exist, which cannot be done.

by the by... your post is also and example of an ad hominem, since you disdain that so much, one would tend to think that your posts wouldn't contain them.

it is my opinion that the crux of the matter is this... you purport to know Judaism better than an adherent of the religion.... and you have never claimed to have been one. why on earth would your opinion on the matter carry more weight than someone that actually practices the religion in question? that does not make much sense to my way of thinking... it would be like you telling me that an orange tastes like an apple... even though i know what an orange really tastes like, because i grow them in my orchard.

if you do have some facts to back up your assertions, we would all like to see them so we can discuss your points in an intelligent manner. as it stands, it's simply idle speculation on your part with no substance.

 

[Nogodnomasters]

Namaste,

thank you for the post.

ah.. the old "religion is a lie" routine. one wonders... did you have a bad experience with a religion at some point?

in any event... it is my opinon that you are incorrect, not all religions are lies, furthermore, you cannot prove that they are. to do so, at least for the monothestic traditions, you would have to prove that God does not exist, which cannot be done.

by the by... your post is also and example of an ad hominem, since you disdain that so much, one would tend to think that your posts wouldn't contain them.

it is my opinion that the crux of the matter is this... you purport to know Judaism better than an adherent of the religion.... and you have never claimed to have been one. why on earth would your opinion on the matter carry more weight than someone that actually practices the religion in question? that does not make much sense to my way of thinking... it would be like you telling me that an orange tastes like an apple... even though i know what an orange really tastes like, because i grow them in my orchard.

if you do have some facts to back up your assertions, we would all like to see them so we can discuss your points in an intelligent manner. as it stands, it's simply idle speculation on your part with no substance.

The reason would be one cannot see the forest through the trees. People raised in a specific religion are indoctrinated in a belief. Their mind is trained to work in a pattern which they will generally maintain througout their adult life and never break free. I have broken free from the "inside the box" ideology.

If you constantly look at something from one point of view and are content with it, that is fine. Some of us want to do more intellectually than rot in the norms dictated to us from society.

My non-belief does not stem from a bad experience but from reading and studying the Bible, what I once believed was the word of God. In fact I encourage Chrsitians to read and study the Bible as a way to become an atheist.

Claiming my work is "idle specualtion" is acceptable from one who has never read it. However, having never read it, to claim it is wrong and I am ignorant is ad hominem to which I respond accordingly.

I have given you a demonstration of how the system works in my explanation of Joseph. If this was just one story that had similarities, it would indeed be idle specualtion. However, it is not just one story. It is a long connected text that spans 4 dozen constellations and hundreds of stars in a sane logically pattern. Classical zodiac signs and their meanings appear at Bible stories which realte to them. The generous nature of Taurus and family nature of Taurus appears in the story of Joseph in Egypt which is in Taurus. The great warrior aspect of Aries appears in the story of Moses' conquest of teh Ammorites whose astrological home was Aries. The nature of King David, warrior who loved the arts and shunned the cripples are in Sagittarius. The blinding and cutting of the hair of Samson the sun god comes at the time of the ancient winter solstice. The story of Joseph flows smoothly into the story of Moses with the Eridanus as the Nile river. Moses then crosses over to Cetus, the wilderness. From there he goes up to Aries and conquers the Amorites. He is then bonded to his enemy the Moabites and a star called the "Band." The Arabics knew this star as a bonding to one's enimies. From here goes Joshua, son of Nun (fish) into Pisces where Rahab (sea monster) lives. The Bible cliams no one knows where Moses is buried. This is because he died in an area of the sky that has no star (fore leg of Aries which crosses Pisces.) If the Bible claims it "exists there until this day" there is a star for it (expectition made on inserted stories.) The entire Old Testament is connected in this fashion. Specific stars exist for Moses in Egypt, the murder of the first born, the plague of frogs, the basket he was floated, the crossing, the hand of God destroying the Egyptians. YHWH as the burning Bush is a "flickering star" which changes 3 magnitudes and also considered to speak in Greek mythology. God on Mt. Sinai was a star which appears then disappears. There is a big boat in the sky (Argo) right where the ark should be.

The overall constellations paint a story picture. The stars within the constellations give specific deatails. The stories that are painted are similar to parallel myths of the same constellations and are similar in meaning to the significance assigned to these constellations by astrologers such as Ptomey.

Not only that, but this can be dated with the Great Famine (2350-2200 BCE) being the background for the main stories. These Bible stories from the edited text are extremely similar to the Babylonian stories of the same age and they model their heros after Babylonian kings.

And the edited text has a time line which is 100% archaelogically correct. This is something NO JEW IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD has been able to do with his religion and I have done it. That is why you should believe me.

I challenge you or BB to come up with a time line of the OT which is 100% archaelogically correct, making no apologies, or excuses for accepted archaelogical dates of events.

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste,

thank you for the post.

The reason would be one cannot see the forest through the trees. People raised in a specific religion are indoctrinated in a belief. Their mind is trained to work in a pattern which they will generally maintain througout their adult life and never break free. I have broken free from the "inside the box" ideology.

i agree with you. this is why it is often very difficult for westerners to understand and grasp eastern thought. people are conditioned to think and behave in a certain manner, the point of practice is to undo that.

If you constantly look at something from one point of view and are content with it, that is fine. Some of us want to do more intellectually than rot in the norms dictated to us from society.

this is true and i don't think that anyone was suggesting that you do so, hopefully you consider other posters on this forum as part of the "us".

My non-belief does not stem from a bad experience but from reading and studying the Bible, what I once believed was the word of God. In fact I encourage Chrsitians to read and study the Bible as a way to become an atheist.

thank you for the explanation. it does help to know ones motivation and intent, don't you agree? though, perhaps you can help me here, are you indicating that the only religious text that you have read is the Bible?

Claiming my work is "idle specualtion" is acceptable from one who has never read it. However, having never read it, to claim it is wrong and I am ignorant is ad hominem to which I respond accordingly.

i'm glad that you see it that way. in fact, the position is the only logical one to take. at some point, we will see your evidence and your writings on this and then we can actually have a discussion to some degree about your findings. i look forward to that time.

I have given you a demonstration of how the system works in my explanation of Joseph. If this was just one story that had similarities, it would indeed be idle specualtion. However, it is not just one story. It is a long connected text that spans 4 dozen constellations and hundreds of stars in a sane logically pattern. Classical zodiac signs and their meanings appear at Bible stories which realte to them.

you do realize that we don't actually have the rest of the stories that make your case? when you say "classical" zodiac signs, do you mean western ones or eastern ones? i would presume that you mean western ones, would that be accurate?

The generous nature of Taurus and family nature of Taurus appears in the story of Joseph in Egypt which is in Taurus. The great warrior aspect of Aries appears in the story of Moses' conquest of teh Ammorites whose astrological home was Aries. The nature of King David, warrior who loved the arts and shunned the cripples are in Sagittarius. The blinding and cutting of the hair of Samson the sun god comes at the time of the ancient winter solstice. The story of Joseph flows smoothly into the story of Moses with the Eridanus as the Nile river. Moses then crosses over to Cetus, the wilderness. From there he goes up to Aries and conquers the Amorites. He is then bonded to his enemy the Moabites and a star called the "Band." The Arabics knew this star as a bonding to one's enimies. From here goes Joshua, son of Nun (fish) into Pisces where Rahab (sea monster) lives. The Bible cliams no one knows where Moses is buried. This is because he died in an area of the sky that has no star (fore leg of Aries which crosses Pisces.) If the Bible claims it "exists there until this day" there is a star for it (expectition made on inserted stories.) The entire Old Testament is connected in this fashion. Specific stars exist for Moses in Egypt, the murder of the first born, the plague of frogs, the basket he was floated, the crossing, the hand of God destroying the Egyptians. YHWH as the burning Bush is a "flickering star" which changes 3 magnitudes and also considered to speak in Greek mythology. God on Mt. Sinai was a star which appears then disappears. There is a big boat in the sky (Argo) right where the ark should be.

The overall constellations paint a story picture. The stars within the constellations give specific deatails. The stories that are painted are similar to parallel myths of the same constellations and are similar in meaning to the significance assigned to these constellations by astrologers such as Ptomey.

well... off hand, i can think of several other explanations that would be equally valid. one of which, of course, is that it is exactly what it says it is.

do i understand correctly that this statement above accurately represents your undestanding of the Old Testament and New Testament? moreover, that this opinion was arrived at through rigorous study and research which are detailed in your book? furthermore, that you have weighed all other evidence and found it wanting?

i am trying to be clear here, not confrontational. please do not take offense to my poor posting ability.

Not only that, but this can be dated with the Great Famine (2350-2200 BCE) being the background for the main stories. These Bible stories from the edited text are extremely similar to the Babylonian stories of the same age and they model their heros after Babylonian kings.

And the edited text has a time line which is 100% archaelogically correct. This is something NO JEW IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD has been able to do with his religion and I have done it. That is why you should believe me.

I challenge you or BB to come up with a time line of the OT which is 100% archaelogically correct, making no apologies, or excuses for accepted archaelogical dates of events.

since i view the OT not as an historical document, i see absolutely no reason why it would have to synch up with anything in history. i realize that banannabrain doesn't see it that way, so i'll let him tackle the time line thing.

as i have said... if you have evidence please present it so that we can review it, evaluate it and see if it meets our standards of acceptance. without evidence to support your statements, it would take a leap of faith for me to believe what you have claimed. i apologize, but i cannot take a leap of faith. my faith is based on my own testing of the evidence presented and my reasoning and logic to determine if it's correct or not.

 

[Nogodnomasters]

Hi Nogodnomasters -

(using my other alias here as I am out away from home)

For example, Nogodnomasters, it would be interesting if you have any citations from the Babylonian Talmud on the issue of astrological interpretation. That would give certain grounds for bananabrain (and others) at least to cast thoughts with regards to the context of such statements, erlate them to other commentaries, and consider them in relation to other aspects of belief within Judaism.

And soon - not long after Christmas - we will have the Babylonian Talmud hosted on the main comparative-religion site. So any information forwarded in the nature of discussion should be faily easily to cross-reference.

I gave an excerpt from the Babylonian Talmud in the other thread, "The Shared Myth" which I found on line using a search engine.

 

[iBrian]

Yes, sorry about that - for some reason I never saw those posts in that thread.

I tried to merge the content of the two last night, to keep all the astrological commentaries in one thread - but the posting timescales were too different and the merged thread read very erratically.

I'll ensure it all keeps together from now on.

 

[Nogodnomasters]

Namaste,




thank you for the explanation. it does help to know ones motivation and intent, don't you agree? though, perhaps you can help me here, are you indicating that the only religious text that you have read is the Bible?


I have read the Koran and the Zend Avetsa, Book of Morman Egyptian book of the Dead, sayings of Confucius. book on Kristna (by Kristna followers) Popul Vuh. The Eastern religions I view more as philosophies. They never really interested me, although I do cross paths with them from time to time.



you do realize that we don't actually have the rest of the stories that make your case? when you say "classical" zodiac signs, do you mean western ones or eastern ones? i would presume that you mean western ones, would that be accurate?


Yes Western ones, although there is an Indian flood tale concerning a Crab that would be astrological. My assumption would be their religion or tales/myths is reflective of their own astrology. It is difficult to envision what they actually depicted the constellations as being in some cases. The ancient Arabic and Hebrew names of the stars is the primary means of story comparisons, the constellations are secondary since we can only speculate on them, assuming they were similar to today's. Ptomey documented the constellations of his age about 2000 years ago. They are not that much different from today. Going back an additional 2000 years, one would expect simialrites and differences which is what I have found. There are a few very minor gaps were the astrology is slightly off. At this point we can make an educated guess. This is what one would expect. For instance in classical astrology Casseopia is the wife of Cepheus. I had to make her his killer. I sometimes wonder if this was a joke, or if the intent of the story was to imply the "certain woman" was Ambimelek's wife. The star for Sarah would imply she was a petite red head or strawberry blonde. Astrology adds or hints at details not in the text. Cepheus think Ambimelek starts out up right in the heavens with Polaris, the perfect star as Jotham at its feet. By night's end Cepheus is on his head, overturned by Jotham who is now the upper or ruling portion of the sky. Cepheus is on his head, killed by a smash to his head. The son of King Sargon I (before David/Narhum Sin) is also killed by being smashed in the head. Like Ambimelek, his brother took over the kingdom. All a coincedence? Perhaps. The stars within the constellation also correspond to the various details of the story. There are also large parts of this story that are not astrological. They fit the pattern of an inserted text. When they are removed, the story makes perfect sense and is a lot "cleaner" too. Another explanation? hmmm. I am open to suggestions.

well... off hand, i can think of several other explanations that would be equally valid. one of which, of course, is that it is exactly what it says it is.

Such as? I could debunk one sign, or two connected signs, maybe even 3 or 4 or 5. But 48 constellations and 100s of stars in a contigeous manner in perfect line with the stories is not a coincidence. It is a deliberate pattern that can not be ignored. One could use a chicken/ egg argument and claim astrology was written based on the original text, but then that argument falls under its own weight when one considers the additions made to the OT were because of changed astrology.

do i understand correctly that this statement above accurately represents your undestanding of the Old Testament and New Testament? moreover, that this opinion was arrived at through rigorous study and research which are detailed in your book? furthermore, that you have weighed all other evidence and found it wanting?

Yes. I have gone on line in other forums. I have found negative feedback useful in fine tuning my work, i.e. eliminating anachronisms etc. There are some specific fine points I may be in error, but the theory overall is sound. It fills in a lot of gaps and has less anomolies than our current model. Archaelogists have been crying out for an alternative time line and explanation of the Bible. Mine fits like a glove. The beauty is the original Hebrew words work out best astrologically. I have noted when the English deviates from this translation in order to make some sense, it is because there is an astrological meaning the translators are missing. There are so many small details that fit neatly into the theory, it becomes overwhelming. My editor and other freethinkers who have read my work are astounded by it. We are currently attempting to get a Ph.D and a university endorsement.

Rigorous study? Not hardly. If it was difficult to figure out, I would have never done so. It was so simple and basic I was shocked that no one had done it before. I wrote the book in under a month and the bulk of it in the one week I took off from work. It was a simple matter of comparing the meaning of the Hebrew words in the OT with the meaning of the Arabic names of the stars. Sure, one needed a little background in this area, but the basic information was all on line. I just put it together.


since i view the OT not as an historical document, i see absolutely no reason why it would have to synch up with anything in history. i realize that banannabrain doesn't see it that way, so i'll let him tackle the time line thing.

It is historical fiction. Since the stars predict the future, they must also represent the past. Eden is based on the Babylonian story of Dilmun. Noah is Gilgamish, Nimrod was a latter Babylonian addition. The flood was the Holocene period when the Middle East and the world experienced flooding. Sodom and Gomorah are also historical. Moses is patterned after Sargon I. Pepi II was the pharaoh of Joseph and the first pharaoh over Moses. The astrological David is patterned after Narhum Sin. The David and Solomon court stories and confrontations were added later patterned after Hammurabi. Thutmose III was Shishak. There was no great Iron Age United Monarchy. Archaeology does not support it. The United Mon. was during the MBII period of the great Canaanite city states. It actually spanned several centuries, but was centered on the character of Hammurabi. If you do not consider the OT historical, then it being astrological is not that great of a leap of faith.

as i have said... if you have evidence please present it so that we can review it, evaluate it and see if it meets our standards of acceptance. without evidence to support your statements, it would take a leap of faith for me to believe what you have claimed. i apologize, but i cannot take a leap of faith. my faith is based on my own testing of the evidence presented and my reasoning and logic to determine if it's correct or not.

I have given you evidence. What more can I say? You claim to have other explanations, but do not supply them. The ball is in your court.

 

[Vajradhara]

I have given you evidence. What more can I say? You claim to have other explanations, but do not supply them. The ball is in your court.

namaste,

incorrect. you have provided your theory and your interpetion of evidence of which i am currently unaware. i simply called it what it is, nothing more and nothing less.

in any event... it sounds like a neat theory, i look forward to your publishing and then further disucssion upon this matter will be possible.

 

[Nogodnomasters]

namaste,

incorrect. you have provided your theory and your interpetion of evidence of which i am currently unaware. i simply called it what it is, nothing more and nothing less.

in any event... it sounds like a neat theory, i look forward to your publishing and then further disucssion upon this matter will be possible.

How can I give you an interpretation of evidence without giving you evidence?

 

[Nogodnomasters]

namaste,

incorrect. you have provided your theory and your interpetion of evidence of which i am currently unaware. i simply called it what it is, nothing more and nothing less.

in any event... it sounds like a neat theory, i look forward to your publishing and then further disucssion upon this matter will be possible.

You make this claim.

"well... off hand, i can think of several other explanations that would be equally valid. one of which, of course, is that it is exactly what it says it is. "

I ask you to back it up.

 

[Vajradhara]

You make this claim.

"well... off hand, i can think of several other explanations that would be equally valid. one of which, of course, is that it is exactly what it says it is. "

I ask you to back it up.

Namaste,

fair enough...

here are several other explanations for the material you have posted.

1. you've made a mistake in interpetation of the texts.

2. you've made a mistake in translation of the texts.

3. you've made a mistake in the process of transferring your knowledge to paper.

4. the texts are absolutely what they claim to be.

5. the texts aren't absolutely what they claim to be and are, instead, metaphor.

6. the astrological conclusions you've come to may be incorrect.

7. whomever determined what the constallations mean may be incorrect.

ad infinitium.

as i said... these are the things that immediately come to my mind, though i am sure that we could have a rational, logical discussion once your book has been published. until that time i'm afraid that all we can do is comment upon the assertions that you've set forth in your postings related to the subject at hand.

as far as i can ascertain, the "facts" you've provided about your theory are the story of Joseph which you've related. however, you make several claims in there that could be correct or incorrect... i realize that you want us to take your word for this, however that will be difficult to do, at least on this forum, without any presented evidence. an interpetation of a story from a (to me, metaphorical) text do not constitute evidence, sorry to say.

as it stands today... i have little reason to believe anything astrologically related.. not least of which because we (Buddhists) are specifically instructed not to engage in this practice because we are not to profit from peoples superstitions. moreover, the astrological assignments that are given in the west for things do not correspond with how things are understood in the east.

for more information on this, you can read the I ching "Book of Change" which details this quite extensively. there are other purposes for the book, however, we shall have to leave that discussion for another time and place.