posted June 10, 2006 02:37 PM            

Silverstone, I heard you once saying Pisces represents the exhibition of all the other star sign's qualities. Hence, 20 March( pisces) might seem very convincing as Jesus exhibited qualities of Virgo (innocense, logical), cappy(a great father figure), compassion (pises), aries(ability to not hang on to past, but move on; always horny ...hehehe...kidding lets get serious), etc....

Most scientists maintain a date of 17th Apr when the most planets re-occulted again in the sign of Aries (Judea). Aries, the beginning of souls. The firstborns. Lets talk guys.
http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~mmd/star.html

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) 1998 The Editors of The Observatory. The authors have a non-exclusive right to republish this material. Permission to copy this article for personal use is granted by the Editors and the authors but this permission does not extend to copying in any form for general distribution, advertising, or promotional purposes, for creating new collective works, or for resale in any form.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lunar Occultations of Jupiter and Saturn, and the Star of Bethlehem

Molnar(1) has presented a detailed case for his proposal that the Magi's star, or star of Bethlehem of the New Testament gospel of St. Matthew(2), may be identified with a pair of astrologically significant lunar occultations of Jupiter in Aries on 6 BC March 20 and April 17. Here, we report the identification of further contemporary astronomical events, a pair of occultations of Saturn in Pisces, which may be capable of astrological interpretation as ``omens'' supporting Molnar's hypothesis. We also show that Molnar's model horoscope for the birth of Christ requires a remarkably rare set of circumstances.

Molnar's argument depends not just on the fact of an occultation of Jupiter (which is a relatively common occurrence), or even on a pair of occultations, but on the astrological interpretation of the first occultation being within the terms of Jupiter in Aries--a technical terminology meaning that Jupiter's precise position within Aries amplified its own influence and especially the powerful influence of an occultation. The presence of Mars in Aries was a further a priori requirement for his identification. Aries was traditionally associated with Judaea and surrounding areas, according to the Tetrabiblos of Claudius Ptolemy (see ref. 1). The presence of an astrological device, the Lot of Fortune, in the same part of the zodiac as the first occultation is also crucial to his identification of these events as the Magian star. He showed that similar horoscopes in the Magian or Chaldaean system had been described in ancient times for Roman emperors such as Augustus, Tiberius, and Hadrian.

Molnar's suggested identification of the star of Bethlehem also fits a circumstance described by St. Matthew: the Magi came to Judaea believing that a king had been born, but Herod's advisors, who did not practise astrology, had not seen the portent because it took place at a time when it would have been invisible, and would therefore have been known only to astrologers. Molnar proposed a new interpretation of the account of the Magi seeing the star ``in the east,'' a phrase that has had many suggested interpretations but which can be read in its astrological meaning ``at the rising''. But the Greek phrase could be a common ancient mistake for the technical term meaning ``at heliacal rising'' or rising with the Sun. Finally, Molnar observed that the second occultation, although it did not take place in the terms of Jupiter in Aries, nevertheless would have provided a confirming omen to the Magi because it took place in the general direction of Bethlehem as seen from their location in Jerusalem.

Molnar argued that the Magi (``wise men'') were astrologers who were able to predict the occultations from their observations of the Moon and empirical knowledge of its complicated path. Such occultations, he pointed out, were particularly significant astrological events, especially in association with certain configurations and heliacal risings, even if they were invisible to the eye because they took place after setting or during the middle of the day. In Magian astrology, the importance of a lunar conjunction was dependent on the proximity of the Moon to the other object, with an occultation being a particularly powerful form of close conjunction.

Out of curiosity, we reviewed the astronomical events of 6BC with two commercially available PC packages3,4. The results confirm fully Molnar's descriptions of the two occultations. But in the course of this diverting exercise we noticed two other events which, to the best of our knowledge, have not been previously mentioned: on the calendar day before each occultation of Jupiter, the Moon also occulted Saturn in Pisces. The first occultation of Saturn took place on March 19, 22.20 - 22.30 local Jerusalem time4, i.e., after the planet had set and about 19 hours before the first occultation of Jupiter on March 20; the Moon occulted Saturn again on April 16, 10.51 - 12.09 local Jerusalem time4, about 25 hours before the second occultation of Jupiter. We consider the viewpoint of Jerusalem (or at least, the viewpoint of the Middle East) to be of some importance in this discussion because the lunar parallax would render the occultations of Jupiter and Saturn into conjunctions if they were observed from other, distant parts of the Earth.

Saturn's astrological significance is also well documented. In Humphreys' discussion 5 of the possible identification of the star of Bethlehem as a comet recorded by Chinese astronomers in the spring of 5 BC, it is noted that in Magian astrology Saturn represented the divine Father and Jupiter his son. Furthermore, according to late Mediaeval Jewish sources, Pisces was associated with the Jewish people. We note, though, that Molnar cautioned the reader that interpretations such as this may have changed over 1500 years.

Although Molnar did not specify uniqueness as one of his criteria, the expected rarity of Molnar's a priori model horoscope for Christ can be estimated. We used Dance of the Planets (reference 3) to calculate every lunar occultation above the horizon from the region of Jerusalem over a sample period of 2000 years (-1050 to +950). There were 369 single occultations and 42 double occultations ( i.e., one month apart). Of the latter, only three were in Aries (one of which was Molnar's event) and two more were ``near misses.'' It would seem from this limited sample that such double occultations occur about twice a millennium in any given zodiacal sign. However, Mars is present in Aries only for 1/12 of the time, on average, so such a rare combination of events would occur about once every 6000 years. If one relaxed the criteria to seek only single occultations of Jupiter in Aries with Mars in the same sign, the average frequency would be once in 780 years, still quite a rare event. Therefore, we conclude that the occurrence of astrological events with the right general properties would have been rare enough (separated by 1-2 millennia) to have been unique in the experience and lore of the Magi.

At the time of the second saturnian occultation, both codes agree that the planet was well within one degree of the first point of Aries. In other words, at its occultation and that of Jupiter which followed, Saturn was in Pisces and about to enter the sign of Aries, which was associated with Judaea by the traditions of the era. Molnar pointed out that the occultation of Jupiter on April 17 would have occurred in a southwesterly direction as seen from Jerusalem, about 30° from the azimuth of Bethlehem, and suggested that---given the vagaries of the Judaean road system---this was close enough to have impressed the Magi as a powerful confirmation6 . We note that the occultation of Saturn on the previous day would actually have bracketed (188-218°) the true azimuth of Bethlehem (~195°) as seen from Jerusalem. We speculate that this may also be relevant to the literal interpretation of the star having ``stood over where the young child was''. Unlike ordinary celestial objects, which move through the sky with the Earth's diurnal rotation, an occultation lasting of the order of one hour can only take place in a narrow range of directions as seen from any single location.

We are not experts on Magian astrology or on Biblical exegesis, and are unwilling to assign definitive astrological, mystical, or religious import to our results. We leave it to others to interpret such shades of meaning, and to consider whether the remarkable events of 6 BC March 19--20 and April 16--17 lend further support to Molnar's proposed identification of the star of Bethlehem. We thank the referee, Dr. D. Hughes, for his comments on an earlier version of this letter.

Yours faithfully,

M.M. Dworetsky and S.J. Fossey

DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY ,
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON ,
GOWER STREET ,
LONDON , WC1E 6BT

e-mail: mmd@star.ucl.ac.uk , sjf@star.ucl.ac.uk

1997 November 19

REFERENCES
(1) M.R. MOLNAR, QJRAS, 36, 109, 1995.
(2) BOOK OF MATTHEW, 2, 1.
(3) DANCE OF THE PLANETS V2.7, QED EDITION (ARC SCIENCE SIMULATIONS, COLORADO), 1994.
(4) SKYMAP V2.2 (SKYMAP SOFTWARE, CHESHIRE), 1995.
(5) C.J. HUMPHREYS, QJRAS, 32, 389, 1991.
(6) BOOK OF MATTHEW, 2, 9.

---

posted June 11, 2006 01:21 AM              

Good post! I will post my beliefs which are dependent upon my research on my quests for truth, so I can get your feedback and others on this topic... give me some time...

posted June 11, 2006 12:30 PM              

Bethlehem, Galilee is a city of the Zebulun, mentioned first in Joshua 19:15. It is located about ten kilometres west-north-west of Nazareth.

At first it was simply named "Beth Lehem", which confused it with the Bethlehem near Jerusalem, which is much better known today. To solve this problem some scripts refer to the two as "Beth Lehem of the Judea (tribe) territory" and "Beth Lehem of the Zebulun territory".

Herod Archelaus (23 BC–c. AD 18) was the ethnarch of Samaria, Judea, and Idumea from 4 BC to AD 6. He was the son of Herod the Great and Malthace, the brother of Herod Antipas, and the half-brother of Herod Philip.

Archelaus received the kingdom of Judea by the last will of his father, though a previous will had bequeathed it to his brother Antipas. He was proclaimed king by the army, but declined to assume the title until he had submitted his claims to Caesar Augustus in Rome. Before setting out, he quelled with the utmost cruelty a sedition of the Pharisees, slaying nearly three thousand of them. In Rome he was opposed by Antipas and by many of the Jews, who feared his cruelty; but in 4 BC Augustus allotted to him the greater part of the kingdom (Samaria, Judea, and Idumea) with the title of ethnarch.

He married Glaphyra, the widow of his brother Alexander, though his wife and her second husband, Juba, king of Mauretania, were alive. This violation of the Mosaic law and his continued cruelty roused the Jews, who complained to Augustus. Archelaus was deposed in the year 6 and banished to Vienne in Gaul; Judea became a Roman province.

In the Bible, Archelaus is mentioned in the story of the Flight into Egypt of the Gospel of Matthew, and the Parable of the talents in the Gospel of Luke probably refers to his journey to Rome. His slaughter of the 3000 may also have been the source for the narrative of the Massacre of the Innocents, confusing Archelaus with his father, Herod the Great.

Though many readers follow the author of Matthew in identifying a prophetic allusion from Jeremiah 31:15, others see this episode as expressly crafted for the purpose of recording apparently fulfilled prophecy. The Massacre of the Innocents is not mentioned in the other gospels nor in the early apocrypha, nor in any other historic record of the era, and most scholars see it as a fabrication based on artistic license. Noticably, Josephus, a major historian of the time, was vehemently anti-Herod in his writings, but this massacre, perhaps Herod's greatest crime, is not even hinted at in Josephus' writings.

Josephus does record Herod's execution of two of his sons by his wife Marianme because he believed they posed a threat. (The Jewish War (I.535–7) and Jewish Antiquities (16.121–7, 356). The episode was notorious and heavily displeased Herod's patrons in Rome, and it would be expected that a massacre of further children would have been even more notorious and even more upsetting to Rome, but Rome reports not a sound about the existence of such a massacre. The execution of the two sons, who Josephus describes as young men, has been represented by Robert Eisenman as the original that inspired the account in Matthew, since his two sons were the Jewish children that Herod thought had sought to replace him.

Herod's murder of his own sons certainly points to Herod having deep-seated suspicion and jealousy, and some apologists have used this to argue that Matthew's portrayal of a Massacre of Innocents is historically plausible. (Witherington 2001 p. 71). Josephus records several examples of Herod’s willingness to commit such acts to protect his power against perceived threats, but suggests that not all such acts were recorded, as he summarizes that Herod “never stopped avenging and punishing every day those who had chosen to be of the party of his enemies.” Antiquities 15.2. Nevertheless, Josephus is vehemently anti-Herod in his writings about the period, and would be expected to have mentioned something that could constitute a major attack on Herod's character, such as the killing of hundreds of very young children.

Some apologists have argued that due to the small region involved, the massacre would not have been a particularly large atrocity for the period in general and thus might have escaped mention by Josephus and others. However, Herod Archelaus, Herod the Great's son and successor in Judah, is recorded in several historic sources as massacring some 3000 (adult) rebels shortly after he came to power, a number similar to that expected for Herod, or only one order of magnitude less, so it is certain that the numbers involved in the massacre that Matthew claims existed would be close to being noticed. It is also possible that Matthew had confused Herod the Great with Herod Archelaus, and confused the adults for children.

The earliest extrabiblical reference to the Massacre of the Innocents is by Ambrosius Theodosius Macrobius, a Roman philosopher of the 4th century. The reference is found in Macrobius’ The Saturnalia:

When Augustus heard that Herod king of the Jews had ordered all the boys in Syria under the age of two years to be put to death and that the king's son was among those killed, he said, "I'd rather be Herod's pig than Herod’s son." -Macrobius, The Saturnalia, trans. Percival Davies (New York 1969), page 171.
It was probably a pun in Greek: hus being pig and huios meaning son. Unlike Matthew, Macrobius places the massacre in a Syrian province and combines it with the separate killing of one of Herod's sons. Palestine was considered a Syrian province during Roman occupation and could justify Macrobius' use of Syria. Because of Macrobius’ conflation of two different accounts and the fact that he shows no other signs of dependence on Matthew, New Testament scholar Paul Barnett has posited that Macrobius was relying on an independent source. (Barnett 1993 p. 103). However, given the popularity of Matthew among Christians, the spread of Christianity by that time, and the late date in which Macrobius wrote, Raymond E. Brown conclude that Macrobius' reference is derivative of the Matthean account, though not directly dependent on it.

The prophecy of Jeremiah
The massacre of the innocents is explained by Matthew as fulfilling a prophecy of an old testament prophet, which most ancient manuscripts of Matthew identify as Jeremiah, but the Old Syriac Sinaiticus manuscript has it being Isaiah. The quotation is clearly based on Jeremiah 31:15, so identifying the quote as from Isaiah is a clear error, though some scholars feel this error was in the original text of Matthew, as in this case preserved by the Old Syriac Sinaiticus, with the text being corrected by later copyists.

The text itself is not an exact copy of the Old Testament verse, and the passage has been taken completely out of its original context. In Jeremiah this verse is a metaphorical description of Rachel, the ancestress of the northern tribes, mourning when those tribes were taken into captivity by the Assyrians. The passage in Jeremiah was one of ultimate joy, ending by stating that God had saved the Israelites and the children would be unharmed, conflicting utterly with the destruction of Bethlehem's children in the massacre in Matthew. However in the Catholic and Orthodox churches, the slaughtered children were all proclaimed to be saints, known as the Holy Innocents, thus contriving an explanation of how the prophecy could possibly have the children as being saved.

It is true that Rachel's supposed tomb has long been associated with Bethlehem, providing a tenuous connection between the quotation and the massacre, but Jeremiah, in this quote, seems to be asserting that she was buried in Ramah, a town some five miles from Bethlehem, thus removing this tenuous connection. While Ramah could be translated as on high, Jeremiah is very clear that he is referring to a town by the name Ramah. Another difficulty with the quote is that Bethlehem is in Judah, and thus tradition held it to be descended from Leah not Rachel.

posted July 04, 2006 04:28 AM              

I still think he was born during the first week of August 7th or 8th... just my thoughts!

posted July 04, 2006 08:53 PM            

Sun, Jupiter, saturn, venus, mars, ...etc..all collecting in the sign of Aries/Pisces that period. Only an astrologer would have known about it and hence the reference to the three wise men/magi.

posted July 09, 2006 01:17 AM            

Me too. Or at the very least, a very strong Pisces rising with stellium in Pisces.

Jesus heralded the age of Pisces.

Early Christians used the sign of the fish/pisces to recognize each other.

posted July 09, 2006 01:46 AM              

quote:

---

Me too. Or at the very least, a very strong Pisces rising with stellium in Pisces.

---

I see Jesus as a Leo sun sign and Pisces his ascendant (Rising sun); that's just my thoughts.

posted July 23, 2006 02:45 PM              

The symbol of the fish is a theme throughout the gospel stories and this is symbolic of Nimrod/Tammuz, the father-son, of Babylon. Another reason for Jesus as a fish was the astrological sign of Pisces, the fishes. Around the time Jesus was supposed to have been born, the Earth was entering the astrological house of Pices. A new age was being born and Jesus the fish could have been a symbol of the age of Pices.

Cheers,

posted August 01, 2006 03:14 PM              

February 28th
Year: -006
Time: 3:34 A.M.
Place: Bethlehem Israel

He has Part of Fortune in the 12th house, with Vertex in the 8th house, with a Juno and Mercury in the 1st house with a Capricorn Ascendant at 14'16. His Tenth house is Scorpio cusp with a Pallas in the 10th house with a Neptune Conjunct Midheaven.

Yes, its Jesus. If scientists have already traced cavemen, and in their own minds "proved" that Adam and Eve never existed (i believe in Creation so i think thats a bunch of wack), then they can trace Jesus's birthdate with the touch of a thumb.

I hope thats helpful.

posted August 01, 2006 05:27 PM              

Cheers,

posted August 01, 2006 05:37 PM              

Sun in Pisces
Moon in Pisces
Venus in Pisces
Jupiter in Pisces
Saturn in Pisces
Uranus in Pisces
Vesta in Pisces

He has a Venus Conjunct Saturn, and he has only sextiles and trines to his ascendant.

His Chiron is a mystery. He may have a lot of things in Pisces but he has no cusp in Pisces, pisces is just the overlapping sign following his second house cusp aquarius.

So it really wouldn't make plausible since for him to be Pisces Rising.

------------------
Virgo Rising, Sagittarius Sun, Pisces Moon

posted August 01, 2006 06:58 PM              

the Beast is man..our shadowSelves..our dark side..we are the beast..we are all one...

now..Jesus is the Son of God..
in a Man..

so..how about 06-06-6
remember Linda wrote about Jesus and Mary..and Isis and Osiris..TwinSouls..
Twins Twins Twins..

is it just possible???

Silverstone..the Leo connection..I think is from Osiris and Isis..the Sphinx

Neptune5..how did you come across that information. ...

posted August 01, 2006 07:03 PM              

I got the info from this french astrology page:
http://www.astrotheme.fr/celestar/portrait.php?info=1&clef=E5t7TAxeM4Jt

It's in french, but all the facts i believe i previously translated for you.

------------------
Virgo Rising, Sagittarius Sun, Pisces Moon

posted August 01, 2006 07:56 PM              

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Number_of_the_Beast_(numerology) http://www.beliefnet.com/story/166/story_16630_1.html http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/new-number-for-the-beast/

posted August 02, 2006 10:38 AM              

I'm glad you have your great belief system, thats what makes the world go round, are different people. I'm a Moon in Pisces with a PIsces Descendant (Virgo Rising) with a Moon (exactly) conjunct descendant but leaning more in the 6th house.

But the reason for my username is because I have Neptune in the 5th house.

------------------
Virgo Rising, Sagittarius Sun, Pisces Moon

posted August 03, 2006 02:27 AM              

I have my own reasons for believing so, which i've illustrated in a certain "poem"

posted August 03, 2006 02:56 AM              

I agree that he is also a LEO

Cheers,