It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The answer to this question lies in the fact that although today we know that the spring equinox moved from Aries to Pisces around the first century A.D., this would not have been the opinion of astronomers and astrologers at the time Mithraism flourished. The reason for this is that in the late Hellenistic and Roman periods there was an almost universally accepted standard that the spring equinox was located at 8° Aries (a figure borrowed from Babylonian astronomy, specifically Babylonian "System B").  As Otto Neugebauer says, "we have ample evidence for Aries 8° as vernal point for the two centuries which straddle the beginning of our era,"  and Neugebauer goes on to present exhaustive "proof for the continued use of the Babylonian norm of 'system B' for the vernal point [i.e., 8° Aries] during the first five centuries A.D." 
reply to post by racasan
What you described with your solstice pole idea is what would give you the tropical year (time from solstice to solstice). The time it takes to reach the same place with respect to the fixed stars is the sidereal year. Due to the wobble in the earth's axis, they are not the same. This is what gives us precession.
What I referred to was the division of the sky into twelve equal parts of 30 degrees. Since the zodiac constellations are vastly different in size, how do you decide to divy the sky up equally? You have a genteman's agreement. That used in antiquity (referred to by scholars as Babylonian System B) differed from the IAU version by eight degrees. Thus, at the time, the sun would not rise in Pisces during the spring equinox until many centuries later.
reply to post by racasan
You are assuming "rising in Pisces" means rising in the constellation - it doesn't. It means rising in the sector of the sky assigned as "Pisces." In any division of the sky into twelve equal parts, you will end up with areas assigned to a constellation including another since the lengths of the constellations are vastly different. If you want to ignore that, then you can throw out the whole idea since there won't be equally assigned areas for your ages. You have to go with the areas as they assigned them - not us. In every source we have from the first few centuries AD, it states that the sun rose in Aries. That doesn't mean the sun rose in that constellation but that it rose in the area assigned "Aries."
The other problem is that you are placing a lot of emphasis on a system that simply did not exist. Not in Egypt, not in Babylon, not in Greece, not in Rome. They had not even figured out precession until the second century BC so it is kind of silly to think MItra and Horus millennia earlier were based upon it. Not to mention that they didn't even use the zodiac at that point in time. The importance is that Zeitgeist claims this was an already existing template when Christianity appeared which is simply an impossibility.
reply to post by racasan
There is scant evidence any legend of John Barleycorn existed prior to the fifteenth century and none that he predated medieval Europe. While the Green Man is an ancient pagan symbol, there is only the image - we have no ancient pagan myths of the Green Man although some imaginative neopagans have made some up and claimed they were ancient.
Court: "James son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" ossuary inscription not proven as forgery
Mystery continues to surround an ancient burial box that is inscribed with the words, "James son of Joseph, brother of Jesus," after a Jerusalem court found Oded Golan, a private collector of antiquities, not guilty of forging the inscription.
The court said the 2000-year-old box will probably "continue to be investigated in the archaeological and scientific arena, and time will tell," according to a report from Reuters. The court's decision puts an end to a legal battle that began in 2004 when Golan was indicted.
Not everything she says is true.
But the basic things she is saying is.
Jesus is a copy of Horus. Almost everything about Horus was stolen to create the story of Jesus, including the names of "The Word", "The Lamb of God", etc.
Others Scholars looked at these facts and the only things they disagree with in regard to The Horus and Jesus connection is that there is no evidence that Horus had 12 disciples and a few other things...
but most of the things about Horus was copied and used for "Jesus" ...
reply to post by labarum
do you not understand the picture I provided?
Here’s the software I used
check it out for yourself
2000 years ago the sun when viewed on the spring equinox started to move into Pisces – that is a fact
I showed how the solstices and equinoxes can be ascertained even with very simple Stone Age methods
Maybe if you asked an astronomer about the asto bits in astrotheology instead of focusing just on theology that might help
The current definition of Pisces is the youngest of the zodiacal constellations. The "Swallow" of Babylonian astronomy was larger, including parts of Pegasus. Late Babylonian sources mention DU.NU.NU "The Fish-Cord"