Posted on 12/15/2014 1:25:07 PM PST by SeekAndFind
I’d long noticed that “newspaper astrologers” never seemed to even come close to agreeing. Sounds like some kind of private familiar spirit.
Trying to create a daily “horoscope” for some abstract mass of individuals is a fool’s errand, and it falls right into seeking personal gain which is what I believe to be condemned about the practice, Biblically.
Actually I just specifically said it wasn't, though of course you're free to disagree. But AFAIK, pantheism resents multiple gods, and monotheism represents one God. Hinduism is, as a fact, monotheistic. Multiple manifestations of the one God is not the same as multiple gods.
Correction - what I just said addresses POLYtheism, not PANtheism.
As far as pantheism is concerned, it usually means that there is no "personal God." But in Hinduism, God-as-God is seen as literally beyond the mind of a human being, so in that sense it's not possible to have God be a "person."
On the other hand, since Hinduism believes God incarnates as a person from time to time to help people, accepting a particular incarnation as God is seen AS one's personal God - with the understanding that there's only one infinite God behind ANY particular incarnation.
To make it easy, imagine that Jesus came back periodically at various times and in various places and cultures. It wouldn't change the fact of one God a bit, no matter how many times He returned - nor would it change the essence of His teachings.
It was loaded.
It exploded.
Absolutely.
Genesis 1:14-19 (KJV)
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Psalm 19:1-6 (KJV)
1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. 2 Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. 3 There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. 4 Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, 5 Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. 6 His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
Before man had the written Word, God gave him the plan of redemption in the stars. This was passed down, but quickly devolved into pagan mythology after Babel. If you follow the star names far enough back, you can still see traces of God's Truth. You will also note that all ancient civilizations studied the stars and shared nearly identical concepts of the constellations - revealing a single original source. This is not astrology or any other demonic activity. Stars were created by God. The knowledge they reveal (Psalm 19:2) confirms God's plan.
I also believe the Magi were folks who were both familiar with the Jewish prophecies, and the messages God placed in the stars. And I agree with others who suggested that Daniel was probably a source. I can't imagine three people arriving in Jerusalem would create much of a stir. I suspect it was a very large entourage for both safety and the care of these very important men. This would get Herod's attention.
There are several good books on the subject of God's plan in the stars. One of my favorites is, The Witness of the Stars - E. W. Bullinger. Its in the public domain and probably available for free to read online. Same goes for, The Gospel in the Stars or Primeval Astronomy - Joseph A. Seiss. Both will make you appreciate God's creative perfection even more.
Thanks to you all for your replies. You have given me something to think about this Christmas season.
And a Merry Christmas to you all.
They are people who studied the sun, moon and stars... astronomers..
Those were the ‘wise men’.
The bible and plan of salvation is written in the heavens and it is an amazing story when compared to when Israel observes their Feasts.
Heavens do declare His Glory..and His Plan is up there way before it was written down by man.
And those people were taught what to look for.. by Daniel..and seemed to have come two years after as we hear that Herod was commanding to kill children two and under.
And down the line, over hundreds of years, they finally saw it and they knew that the King of Israel was born..
Revelation 12 has His birth day embedded in it if one studies the sky.
And it is nowhere near December 25.. maybe in about 4000-6000 years that sign would appear near December 25..
Let me put it this way, astrology is bogus and fake.
Astronomy is real.
Satan will always counterfeit what YHWH creates.
I suspect that the prophet Daniel who was chief of the magi of his time (Dan 5:11), provided them with Messianic prophesies which were passed on and enabled the later magi to visit Bethlehem.
for more on Who were the Magi?
http://www.ldolphin.org/magi.html
Condorfights's post 17 gives me pause for thought.
as per the Koran, Abraham, Adam, etc. AND Jesus were all Moslems :-) (yeah, they’re like gays, they want to claim historical figures as their own)
hmmm... what about the non-Biblical history of the Jews? Before Christ?
well it depends on which hinduism — Arya Samaj beliefs are different from Tantric, different from Vedic, different from the worshippers of Lord Ayyappa etc.
Well...maybe :-)
First, Zoroastrians would not have been looking for "the King of the Jews," since AFAIK the Jews did not figure in Zoroastrian eschatology--but descendants of the Judean oligarchy might well have, and moreover would have, as you point out, syncretized Persian/Parthian astrology into their practice, much as synagogue worship in the US emulates some aspects of the majoritarian Christian worship.
Second, the term "magi" would have had a unique meaning in Parthia, but almost certainly a much more generic meaning in the Greek-speaking Roman Empire--much as, for example, the Japanese term "sensei" has a specific meaning among the Japanese people, but a much more generic meaning in English-speaking America: e.g., I am too often referred to by others as a "tea master," which causes me to cringe because I have been an instructor ("sensei") in tea ceremony. My presumption is that there was so little interaction between people in Parthia and people in the Roman Empire, including Judea and Galilee, that anyone of scholarly prominence, including those of Jewish descent, would have been thought of as a magus. Moreover, we also know that the term was used more generically in Greek, because of references to "magus" in non-Parthian situations, such as Simon Magus in Acts.
Third, consider where the story of the Magi occurs: it is only in Matthew's gospel, not mentioned in Luke, who almost certainly would have known of the incident from his interaction with Mary, but who chose not to mention it in his gospel. Why is this significant? Because Luke's "audience" is the Greeks and Greek-speaking expatriate Jews living in Asia Minor, Macedonia, Achaia, and Italy. They might have been impressed by Zoroastrian magi coming to worship Jesus, since the mystery cults were already making their way through the Empire. However, Matthew's "audience" are those steeped in the Tanakh, Jewish scholars who would be looking for proof that Jesus had been the Messiah. They would not have been impressed by Zoroastrian magi, whom they would have considered as unclean heathen--but they would have been impressed by descendants of their long-lost cousins in Parthia being willing to make the 500+ mile journey from Susa to Jerusalem via Ctesiphon, the "summer capital" of Parthia, all because the travelers were convinced that the Messiah had come, since they had "seen his star in the east" (meaning as a morning star, perhaps the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in Pisces). In short, if the magi were Zoroastrian, it would have made more sense for their story to be in Luke's gospel, where the Greek readers would have been impressed by a mystery-cult-related people worshipping Jesus, than in Matthew's gospel, where the Jewish readers would have been repulsed by the idea.
That's why to me it makes more sense that the Magi were Jewish scholars having taken on Parthian characteristics--fully admitting that "makes more sense" is a circumstantial argument, and they may well have been Zoroastrian, or anything else for that matter.
If there is a flavor/flavors that go for a monotheistic, separate-God model, it would be interesting to note. I however still do not go in for virulent relativism. For all its troglodyte overtones I still go with Christ as the best “game” in town.
Different in expression but not essence - all conform to one or more of the six basic manifestations of the Sanatan Dharma.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.