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.

 

"The Bright Morning Star", What is That?

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Consider the idea that revelations was written by an old man in a cave...

Also that it might not have been "Jesus" that was supposedly speaking to him.

"Inspired" is a very subjective word...


edit on 21-8-2011 by Akragon because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand

Originally posted by louieprima
Lucifer is the Morning Star AND Jesus is the Morning Star?
confused

They both took the hit...think of two sides, one coin.

Proof...
Isaiah 45:7
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
I think scholars have decided there were something like four different writers under that same name, Isaiah and my current thinking is to be suspicious of what god is speaking there.


I just use simple logic to come to my conclusions. If there was nothing, then God created everything, then the perception of good and evil is surely included into the confines of creation, thus God (just as he says) "makes peace and creates evil". Is it not down to the "free will" (judgement) of man to decide his or her own path?

Isaiah 59:8
The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.

Doesn't it say to be weary of scholars? "He's got the whole world in his hands..."

Peace
The word evil in that verse is open to interpretation and can be translated as catastrophe with the flood being an example.
I really don't see one word in the Bible being actually spoken by God Himself and is through levels of intermediaries to where we have fourth hand info at best. Some people get around this by saying God wrote the Bible. I don't go with that theory. I think the Old Testament is the product of creating a past from some oral traditions and some manuscripts that were already archaic in very ancient times. We have guesses at interpretation of those old manuscripts that were studied in Babylon by the people who were from the remnant of Israel. They created new books in a new script loosely based on an ancient script documents. Those are completely gone unless they were transcribed onto clay tablets in cuneiform.
The crooked paths are what are done by God to those who already chose not to follow him.
I don't know about the reference to scholars.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 





The Romans in the time of the Apostles were seriously into Isis and had an annual city wide festival in her name with a procession and is thought by some to be the origin of the more modern Carnival.


Good memory, OP. Now, if you are able, go and read the first several pages of Fulcanelli's Mysteries of The Cathedrals, otherwise you are going to get all slogged down in the Lucifer/Jesus stuff and things will grind to a halt.

Good luck, My Unknown Friend.


Here: en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 21-8-2011 by Frater210 because: There:



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 05:20 PM
link   
You might want to do a search on "Combat Myth" (Collins), but essentially, I think the most likely understanding is that of a reference to pagan deities known to the locals-- much like "Alpha and Omega" are not Jewish attributes to God, but probably served as a known ascription referring to a god or gods.

One already pointed out that meaning comes with wisdom, and another pointed out how mysteries are typically rejected when it comes to preaching and teaching in lieu of simply ignoring it.

My own style, for better or worse (I think "better" or else I would not do it) is to embrace the mystery-- the unknown and dwell there along with what is known, so that meaning has an opportunity to come as I grow wiser (IF i grow wiser!).

Anyway, any astronomer will point out that any star or planet which appears in the morning, also will appear in the evening, equally. For that reason, I tend to accept that it had meaning to the people and time of the writing-- those in the seven churches addressed at the start of the Revelation.

I think you are embracing the mystery, but I do not thing anyone on ATS is going to provide a definitive answer-- I know I am not-- I haven't a clue.

Speculation, I do have: If the same star or planet appears in the morning and equally in the evening, then Jesus reference to it as the MORNING star refers to the beginning. He had just referenced the Alpha and Omega, but also is setting up for the invitation, "The Spirit and the Bride say 'Come!'" and so the emphasis on being a morning star-- the East representing the start of a new day-- a new era (age), a new Jerusalem, and New Heaven and a New Earth about to dawn.

My speculation and two dollars and eighteen cents will buy you a cup of coffee.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Daniel 12:2, 3
"Many of those who sleep in the dusty ground will awake – some to everlasting life, and others to shame and everlasting abhorrence. But the wise will shine like the brightness of the heavenly expanse. And those bringing many to righteousness will be like the stars forever and ever."

Paul said not all stars are the same and some are brighter than others.
Venus would be the brightest, plus was thought of (in some ancient culture) in its evening context as the star that gives birth to the rest of the stars. So this angel or god-like apparition claiming to be son of God is conferring to someone the status of that bright star. Looking at it in the light of this reference to stars in Daniel, Jesus could be the number one person to lead others into righteousness.
edit on 21-8-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 07:13 PM
link   
Venus is always brighter than any star. The greatest luminosity, apparent magnitude −4.9,[7] occurs during crescent phase when it is near the Earth. Venus fades to about magnitude -3 when it is backlit by the Sun.[6] The planet is bright enough to be seen in the middle of the day when the sky is very clear[clarification needed], and the planet can be easy to see when the Sun is low on the horizon. As an inferior planet, it always lies within about 47° of the Sun.[8]

Venus "overtakes" the Earth every 584 days as it orbits the Sun.[1] As it does so, it changes from the "Evening star", visible after sunset, to the "Morning star", visible before sunrise. While Mercury, the other inferior planet, reaches a maximum elongation of only 28° and is often difficult to discern in twilight, Venus is hard to miss when it is at its brightest. Its greater maximum elongation means it is visible in dark skies long after sunset. As the brightest point-like object in the sky,

[Source wikipedia]

Maybe some people are reading to much into it. IMO Jesus was telling us exactly who he was
and useing the stars to draw the picture. He stated that he was the light of the world.

Now equate what the star does. It is the brightess in the midsts of darkness. It then heralds
in the light.To me it is simple because I view GOD as perfect pure light. And Jesus would
be more brilliant [full of light] compared to the angels. Which in bible prophecy star = angel.
But if you dont have my point of view it wont make any sence. [Which is normal for me LOL]
I hope it helps but if not I gave ya a good laugh.

LOTZA LUV
Great thread JM




posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
2 Peter 1:19
"Moreover, we possess the prophetic word as an altogether reliable thing. You do well if you pay attention to this as you would to a light shining in a murky place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts."

Peter would have been someone who had gained a full knowledge of Jesus while in physical company with the man. He would also be familiar with his prophetic sayings. So he is saying that his testimony is something to take heed of while you are getting to that same point yourself.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 10:06 PM
link   
edit- haha thats funny started this before returning to finish and now see you posted that passage in Peter
so I'll bring up instead the Virgo giving birth Venus Elenin Stellarium thing I've seen mentioned in other threads/articles/sites, any interest in that or think it's a hoax?


edit on 21-8-2011 by Rustami because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rustami
edit- haha thats funny started this before returning to finish and now see you posted that passage in Peter
so I'll bring up instead the Virgo giving birth Venus Elenin Stellarium thing I've seen mentioned in other threads/articles/sites, any interest in that or think it's a hoax?
I would put it with 2012, in that it is not something we can do anything about so paying attention to it is a distraction. Just my opinion and if you have an opinion on it, go ahead.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


personally never thought much about star anything out of the norm until started looking into scriptures and other info and find it a very interesting subject and so think there may be something to it all, someone had mentioned that Stellarium? showed Virgo giving birth first to venus supposedly on October 4th?
edit on 21-8-2011 by Rustami because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
Revelation 22:16
“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star!”

Who? My angel? What? Confused? If you feel that way then you have company. Let's see of we can figure this thing out?

Can angels claim to be God and with right, as in being perfectly acceptable practice? Yes, it seems so, and not only angels but prophets and Moses can speak exactly as if they were God themselves.

So could Jesus have an angel who speaks as if he is God or speak as if he was the son of God? How far does this concept go in its application?
edit on 21-8-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)


The angel of the Lord is Christ's pre-incarnate form, his proto-form if you will. No loyal angel of God would ever claim to be God especially to men. Angels are horrified if anyone attempts to worship them as if they are God. An angel is just a messenger of God, usually sent to minister to humans or to give words of encouragement.

Prophets dont speak as if they are God nor did Moses. They were merely relaying a message through the Holy Spirit, which is the spirit of Truth.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Consider the idea that revelations was written by an old man in a cave...

Also that it might not have been "Jesus" that was supposedly speaking to him.

"Inspired" is a very subjective word...


edit on 21-8-2011 by Akragon because: (no reason given)


It is thought by many theologians that John of Patmos was really the Apostle John, because John was one of the few apostles to escape being crucified/beheaded/stoned. Its a god chance that it is because they would have been around the same age and well into their twilight years.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 
You're making a lot of broad generalities.
Can you put any of that into an application?



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 12:23 AM
link   
here's just one of many across the web mentioning these things



liked this display the best @5-7 minutes in and where I got the 10-4 from




posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand

Originally posted by louieprima
Lucifer is the Morning Star AND Jesus is the Morning Star?
confused

They both took the hit...think of two sides, one coin.

Proof...
Isaiah 45:7
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
I think scholars have decided there were something like four different writers under that same name, Isaiah and my current thinking is to be suspicious of what god is speaking there.


I just use simple logic to come to my conclusions. If there was nothing, then God created everything, then the perception of good and evil is surely included into the confines of creation, thus God (just as he says) "makes peace and creates evil". Is it not down to the "free will" (judgement) of man to decide his or her own path?

Isaiah 59:8
The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.

Doesn't it say to be weary of scholars? "He's got the whole world in his hands..."

Peace
The word evil in that verse is open to interpretation and can be translated as catastrophe with the flood being an example.
I really don't see one word in the Bible being actually spoken by God Himself and is through levels of intermediaries to where we have fourth hand info at best. Some people get around this by saying God wrote the Bible. I don't go with that theory. I think the Old Testament is the product of creating a past from some oral traditions and some manuscripts that were already archaic in very ancient times. We have guesses at interpretation of those old manuscripts that were studied in Babylon by the people who were from the remnant of Israel. They created new books in a new script loosely based on an ancient script documents. Those are completely gone unless they were transcribed onto clay tablets in cuneiform.
The crooked paths are what are done by God to those who already chose not to follow him.
I don't know about the reference to scholars.


The word "evil" in the Hebrew is "Ra" (Rah). English may interpret this how it will but, the transliterated word from the Hebrew speaks very clearly about what it means.


H7451 ra` rah
from H7489;
bad or (as noun) evil (natural or moral). (Incl. feminine raaah; as adjective or noun.).
KJV: adversity, affliction, bad, calamity, + displease(-ure), distress, evil((- favouredness), man, thing), + exceedingly, X great, grief(-vous), harm, heavy, hurt(-ful), ill (favoured), + mark, mischief(-vous), misery, naught(-ty), noisome, + not please, sad(-ly), sore, sorrow, trouble, vex, wicked(-ly, -ness, one), worse(-st), wretchedness, wrong.


I'd have to agree with you that "God" doesn't have an "autobiography". It is clear that the bible is an amalgamation of reductionist themed stories from many different generations of people; stories passed through an oral tradition then scribed by men and edited in their time and place to achieve an affect which it has done beautifully.

Excuse my reference to "scholars". I meant to say "scribes".

Peace



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:18 AM
link   
Angels cannot speak as though they are God. They each recognize who is in charge. Man will interpret the word as if it came the angel themselves, when it is Father who gives the words to say. Angels have been asked many times, "Are you God?"

Jesus is above the angels, so he can call upon any of them and say my angel. But, he has a host of them that are assigned to him.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


You are correct sir. Many people when speaking to angels, think it is God. It is firmly stated to said person to thank Father not I.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 03:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
Revelation 22:16
“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star!”

Who? My angel? What? Confused? If you feel that way then you have company. Let's see of we can figure this thing out?

Can angels claim to be God and with right, as in being perfectly acceptable practice? Yes, it seems so, and not only angels but prophets and Moses can speak exactly as if they were God themselves.

So could Jesus have an angel who speaks as if he is God or speak as if he was the son of God? How far does this concept go in its application?
edit on 21-8-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)


You want to know what a morning star is in the context of 22-16 eh? For that I believe he was using the term with the meaning that the Egyptians used back then.

Stars, Gods, and Religion in Ancient Egypt

A common term for the ruler of Egypt. The morning and the evening star.

And Daniel.

Daniel 7
20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.
21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.

Daniel 8.
10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.
24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

A star in the Egyptian religion are saints who made it to heaven. mingling with the gods. A Morning Star is a king or ruler. King David would be a Morning Star by this meaning.

And just thought I would note this little detail out of Revelation. It would appear he plans to make someone the ruler of earth. Lucifer's replacement.

Revelation 2
26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
28 And I will give him the morning star.

Revelation 12
5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by ntech
 

And just thought I would note this little detail out of Revelation. It would appear he plans to make someone the ruler of earth. Lucifer's replacement.
That little detail is what I am interested in.
Is there a son of God who gives Jesus this title?
I would be led to believe that Jesus was the son of God.
Also in my particular church I was brought up in, I was led to believe that this character with hair white as wool was in fact Jesus.
I am looking at it now and what I see is at the very end of revelation, a parenthetical small section of Revelation where someone plainly says, "I, Jesus". To me, that leaves no doubt or ambiguity concerning exactly who he is, and it sounds like, the man Jesus, as in the same man portrayed in the Gospels, is the one given the title.
Now, once this is settled, who was the person who's face was as the bright sun? He was the one giving Jesus the title. He also says he is the son of God.
Was Jesus, all along in the Gospels, comparing himself to another? Not to God himself but maybe this other person who is in heaven. Was Jesus thinking of himself as the type, meaning the earthy counterpart, to the anti-type who was his heavenly counterpart?
Was "my angel" an angel at his beck and call, or was his angel a sort of guiding spirit who Jesus the man was speaking on behalf of?



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60


Was Jesus, all along in the Gospels, comparing himself to another? Not to God himself but maybe this other person who is in heaven. Was Jesus thinking of himself as the type, meaning the earthy counterpart, to the anti-type who was his heavenly counterpart?

That sounds a bit like the Platonic theory of ideas, as an ideal archetypes for each thing.

There is a verse that I occasionally think of:


MT 18:10 "See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven.

That seems to me that each person has a counterpart in heaven. So rather than a "guardian angel" following you around and pushing you out of the way of accidents, your angel is in heaven. I guess my main problem is I've got no idea what heaven is.


en.wikipedia.org...
The objects that are seen, according to Plato, are not real, but literally mimic the real Forms. In the allegory of the cave expressed in Republic, the things that are ordinarily perceived in the world are characterized as shadows of the real things, which are not perceived directly. That which the observer understands when he views the world mimics the archetypes of the many types and properties (that is, of universals) of things observed.

Is heaven abstract? Therefore real? Are we shadows of things in heaven?
edit on 22-8-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-8-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join