It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
very few of the descriptive points ring a bell with me.
Originally posted by JoseChung
Originally posted by Alethea
Why do we see the Phoenix represented in the political arena as well as the churches?
Some of these people will crap all over anything unless it's Jesus, and I find it disgusting. Have felt an affinity with the Phoenix for years now too and won't be agreeing with any of that at all. (edit : just messaged the site and told them what I think.)
Originally posted by Archangelelijah
There are still only 12 star signs with this one overlapping the other two. People who are born within this date of star sign Ophiuchus have split personalities.
Originally posted by ledzeppelin489
I'm pretty sure all of your signs haven't changed, you were still born under your sign regardless. These new signs only affect newborns.
Originally posted by ledzeppelin489
I'm pretty sure all of your signs haven't changed, you were still born under your sign regardless. These new signs only affect newborns.
Originally posted by Archangelelijah
This star sign Ophiuchus was not to be revealed until the Serpent has made itself aware to humans again! This has happened.
Humans now know they handle the serpent with respect for what it has given man in the form of all knowledge. The secret worship of this idol has humans at this point of evolution. Technology made by the effort of all humans over time.
There are still only 12 star signs with this one overlapping the other two. People who are born within this date of star sign Ophiuchus have split personalities.
Originally posted by JoseChung
Originally posted by JoseChung
Originally posted by Alethea
Why do we see the Phoenix represented in the political arena as well as the churches?
Some of these people will crap all over anything unless it's Jesus, and I find it disgusting. Have felt an affinity with the Phoenix for years now too and won't be agreeing with any of that at all. (edit : just messaged the site and told them what I think.)
Just incase anyone was interested, this is the reply I got :
[name]
Thank you for your letter to Cutting Edge Ministries.
Yes, we realize exactly how important that bird is to false religions.
That is exactly why we are sharing the truth with you.
Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father but by me."
[name], we are not arrogant or bigoted. We simply care for your eternal destiny.
Please turn from yourself and turn to Jesus. Confess that you are guilty of violating God's law.
Trust the shed blood of Jesus Christ as the full payment of your offenses, and ask Him
to forgive and save you.
God loves you. Jesus paid for your sin. Please turn to Him today.
Originally posted by LeoVirgo
Originally posted by SeaWind
Originally posted by LeoVirgo
reply to post by SeaWind
Sidereal has its own mistakes....
The Sun would of been seen in Leo at my birth...going by true observation, true solar positions.
And just looked into what you said...I dont think that is right even on sidereal. I dont see tropical Virgo over lapping into Cancer at all.
But thanks for the thought!
LV
edit on 15-1-2011 by LeoVirgo because: (no reason given)
LeoVirgo, Your Sun is at about 13 and a half degrees Sidereal Cancer. Your Tropical Sun is at almost 7 degrees Leo. That you are not aware that the Sidereal Zodiac is more than 20 degrees behind the Tropical, should not surprise me. Approximate dates for Sidereal Cancer are July 15 to Aug 16 (this varies from one year to the next, as does the Tropical). You say you were born on July 30, 1975.
Your Sun is not in Virgo, but if you wish to believe this and create your own Astrology, you are welcome to do so. There's always room for experiment. The Zodiacal Signs are symbolic and do not always align perfectly with the star constellations, even in Sidereal (which is much closer than Tropical). The meaning of the Zodiacal signs is based on observation over a VERY long time.
SeaWind
I see where we miscrossed paths...my birthdate was Aug 30 '75...not July.
Maybe that is why we werent seeing the same on sidereal.
To further on why I dont follow the sidereal, even though I find it better then the tropical...is I use the real true positions from Earths perspectives...I give each sign their true degrees (like Scorpio is very small). I use 13 signs for the solar wheel then also include a outside wheel for planets and moon that leave the solar path and enter signs like Cetus, Serpens, Sextans, Bootes, Coma Berenices, and sometimes include the cusp of Orion if needed. There are 3 days out of the year the Sun rides the cusp of Orion and I include that. This past lunar eclipse, the Moon sat on Orion's cusp...so again, I include that.
Originally posted by ledzeppelin489
reply to post by LeoVirgo
Is this some kind of astrological wheel? I'm not familiar with them, but I mean, if you were born on August 17, 1985, you were born under that sign no matter what, there's nothing you can do to change that, unless you go back in time and somehow "move" the constellations (impossible) so I don't see how this can affect anyone who isn't a newborn
Here We Go Again with the "Zodiac Is Wrong" Scam (There's more info about this issue on my site: www.freewillastrology.com...) News Flash: The zodiac isn't wrong. Your sign isn't changing. Ignore the misinformation. Every year or so, another astronomer erupts into the mainstream media with a portentous announcement about how, due to the precession of the equinoxes, the astrological signs are no longer aligned with the actual constellations. Often the supposed 13th constellation, Ophiuchus, is also invoked as a further proof of how delusional astrologers are. What it means, according to these experts, is that astrology is invalid. Most of the people who think they're Tauruses are actually Aries. Most Scorpios are really Libras. And so on. That latest offering is from Parke Kunkle, a board member of the Minnesota Planetarium Society. "When [astrologers] say that the sun is in Pisces," he speculated, "it's really not in Pisces." His supposition hit the Internet recently, on Gawker gawker.com... and the Minneapolis Star Tribune www.startribune.com... , among other places. I understand that scientists like him would prefer not to lower themselves to the task of actually doing research about how astrology works. But if they're going to question its foundations, they should at least learn it well enough to know what they're talking about. Here, briefly, is the lowdown on what certain astronomers are too lazy to find out for themselves. The astrological signs are not defined by the constellations you see in the sky. In antiquity, when both astrological and astronomical thinking were based on insufficient data, the names of the constellations happened to be paired with the astrological signs. Today, those pairings are no longer in sync: Astrological signs do not line up with the constellations in the same way they did way back then, due to the precession of the equinoxes. Modern Western astrologers understand this perfectly. It 's irrelevant to their work because the information upon which they base their hypotheses does not involve a study of distant stars or constellations. Rather, their data have to do with the movements of the planets in our own solar system within a zone of influence defined by the relationship between the Earth and Sun. The key demarcation points in that relationship are the equinoxes and solstices. At the Northern Hemisphere's vernal equinox, which occurs on about March 20th of each year, the Sun enters into the sign of Aries. At the Northern Hemisphere's summer solstice, the sun enters into the sign of Cancer. The locations of the constellations are irrelevant; the "influence of the stars" isn't considered. To reiterate: Western astrologers don't work with stars or constellations. Their focus is our solar system. They study the patterns of the planets and the moon as they pass through 12 zones defined by the relationship between the Earth and sun. Those zones have the same names as constellations because of a historical quirk, but they are unrelated to the constellations. When Parke Kunkle triumphantly says, "There is no physical connection between constellations and personality traits," as if he has finally stamped out the delusions of us astrologers, he doesn't realize that we agree with him completely. We don't deal with constellations. P.S. There haven't been many corrective articles in the mainstream press -- most publications have been content to let their un-fact-checked stories stand as if they were gospel -- but the New York Times and the Daily Beast did have the journalistic integrity to make a stab: nyti.ms... andwww.thedailybeast.com...:mainpromo7 .
Originally posted by ledzeppelin489
reply to post by LeoVirgo
Is this some kind of astrological wheel? I'm not familiar with them, but I mean, if you were born on August 17, 1985, you were born under that sign no matter what, there's nothing you can do to change that, unless you go back in time and somehow "move" the constellations (impossible) so I don't see how this can affect anyone who isn't a newborn
Originally posted by Cecilofs
Because the Sun has been passing through this new sign for a few thousand years and so anyone born during those dates was born at a time when the sun was in Ophiucus. Its just that we were told we were born under Scorpio/Sagittarius because Ophiucus wasn't an accepted part of the Zodiac. The point is that people have known about this for a long time but Astrologers/Vatican/whoever else didn't want it changed.
Its like living your whole life thinking your parents were your biological ones but then one day they tell you that you were adopted. Maybe not to the same extent though, hehe.
Originally posted by coyotepoet
Here's what fantastic writer and astrologer Rob Breszny has to say about it. True he's an invested astrologer, but he is one that is open minded enough to call things like they are.
if they're going to question its foundations, they should at least learn it well enough to know what they're talking about. Here, briefly, is the lowdown on what certain astronomers are too lazy to find out for themselves. The astrological signs are not defined by the constellations you see in the sky. In antiquity, when both astrological and astronomical thinking were based on insufficient data, the names of the constellations happened to be paired with the astrological signs. Today, those pairings are no longer in sync: Astrological signs do not line up with the constellations in the same way they did way back then, due to the precession of the equinoxes. Modern Western astrologers understand this perfectly. It 's irrelevant to their work because the information upon which they base their hypotheses does not involve a study of distant stars or constellations. Rather, their data have to do with the movements of the planets in our own solar system within a zone of influence defined by the relationship between the Earth and Sun. The key demarcation points in that relationship are the equinoxes and solstices. At the Northern Hemisphere's vernal equinox, which occurs on about March 20th of each year, the Sun enters into the sign of Aries. At the Northern Hemisphere's summer solstice, the sun enters into the sign of Cancer. The locations of the constellations are irrelevant; the "influence of the stars" isn't considered. To reiterate: Western astrologers don't work with stars or constellations. Their focus is our solar system. They study the patterns of the planets and the moon as they pass through 12 zones defined by the relationship between the Earth and sun. Those zones have the same names as constellations because of a historical quirk, but they are unrelated to the constellations.
Coyotepoet, unlike Rob Breszny, I do NOT use the Tropical Zodiac -- I'm a Sidereal Astrologer. When Breszny says his focus is the solar system what he means is that his focus is on the Sun Sign, using the Tropical Zodiac which aligns itself with the Vernal Equinox as the Aries Ingress.
There are many different Sidereal zodiacs (depending on which precession rate is used or what Fixed Star is used for alignment) -- all are much closer to the IAU zodiac than the Tropical. But in Sidereal Astrology, both the Ascendant (Rising Sign) and Moon Sign are MORE IMPORTANT than the Sun Sign.
But I agree that the zodiacal grid used to look at the sky -- in order to READ MEANING into the chart -- is largely SYMBOLIC, as even most of the sidereal zodiacs used -- do NOT align perfectly with the constellations.
This is a concept that seems to escape Leo/Virgo, who is clearly NOT an Astrologer.
I tried to clear up this mess in my ATS thread, "Your True Star Signs: What You Need to Know":
www.abovetopsecret.com...
SeaWind