Close Topic Options

Zodiac Signs - Page 2

I actually ride the fence on this one, sometimes when I read it I think there is something to it, but other times when I just think it through I think its all bunk. My mother has a book titled The Secret Language of Birthdays. Besides the newspaper this book is my only experience of astrology so I have to rely heavily on it to make my assertions...
The book gives descriptions of people who were born for each day of the year. I encourage anyone to at least look at this book sometime. The descriptions are very detailed and it lists bad traits along with good. The descriptions for each day is very different and although there have been some misses the book has been accurate the majority of the time. When we first got it we tested it by reading our friends descriptions to them, but we read them the wrong page at first and almost everyone we did this to piped up with "That doesn't sound like me." But when we read them their page for real they had to admit that it was them- the good and the bad. Were it not for this book I would probably give anybody a funny look for saying they put any credence into astrology at all.
There is a branch of philosophy called determinism that states in brief that if you knew where every little bit of matter in the universe was, and what speed it was moving, and what direction that you could know anything right down to what someone was thinking. Perhaps astrology tries to duplicate the theory of determinism, but since it only takes the planets into account it gets some things wrong- just a thought and a little off topic as well I admit.
I have never seen anyone who believed in astrology very strongly so I have a tough time seeing it as a religion and one person that I know of who does lend it some credence also goes to church- (I don't know, can religions mix and mingle like that?) If anything I consider it a science- even if I sometimes consider it a cracked science.
One last thought, the horoscopes in the newspapers aren't any good and should not be used to formulate any opinions- there is a reason they are placed in with the comics.
-Unferth


Edited: Unferth on 20th Apr, 2005 - 5:01am

Signs Zodiac

This is exactly how I am. I notice that when I happen to catch my 'scope in the paper or online that I read into it what I want to. I don't seek out the 'scope on a daily basis and I do have a friend who won't leave home without reading hers and then subsequently telling me mine against my will. However, it always strikes me as odd that everyone who happens to share the same birth month as me could be having that same "troublesome week" or whatever the lesson du jour happens to be. Skeptic be thy name.

Zodiac Signs Paranormal & Mystics Dreams Studies

The art of Astrology is in fact a form of divination. It is not a religion, however it is part of many religions.

No one is going to perfectly fit into any one catagory, however they will have strong traits from that catagory. One does not use the casting of their chart to predict the future, instead they use it to better know themselves. Anytime one knows what is to happen in the future, that future can be altered. Instead people from certain religions use it to help them find the path that they need to walk in life, they use it to have faith and hope in their religion. I personally see nothing wrong with it.

I have casted my Astrological chart and in fact I do fit some of the traits of many planets within my chart. It isn't a all knowing thing, it is something that you work on and with.

Page 2 Signs Zodiac

In reference to SteveB's post comparing the Zodiac to the Mazzaroth:

I always find it interesting when the Bible adapts something older into its own teachings, and then damns the old teachings. That is essentially what this is. Twelve symbols, painted in the sky, telling a story and inspiring their audience to believe? That's a zodiac, no matter what ethos or doctrine you put behind it.

All kinds of cultures have their own zodiacs, and not all of them have twelve characters, either. The fact that the Mazzaroth so closely compares to the astrological zodiac hints more of a political maneuver on the part of the authors of those particular Books than it does the actual Word of God. Sort of like how the Romans adopted the Greek ethos when they came, saw and conquered. It's easier just to change the names of the dieties people already believe in than to force a whole new doctrine on them. A truly Christian perspective would have been truly, completely different than the "heathen" ways that came before.

Not trying to discredit your beliefs, SteveB . . . just making an observation. Personally, I don't care what people "call" things. It's really just semantics, and it's all the same story no matter who's telling it.



(This next part runs on the idea that, when explaining how things work, our perceptions are more important than what actually is.)

I think you're right about the first part. I wouldn't say astrology "gets things wrong," though, so much as it just doesn't get them as right as we'd like. Modern technology has opened up the cosmos beyond anything a 16th-century mystic could possibly imagine. But only a few hundred years ago, when even people that didn't believe in astrology still took it to heart, the whole entire Universe basically ended somewhere around Neptune. Speaking determinalistically, we now have an infinite number of variables to consider for any given prediction, whereas before we only had about eight. Now factor into that how different people interpret the same data differently . . . .

Kind of complicates things, I think.

Offtopic but, QUOTE (NightVision) I notice that when I happen to catch my 'scope in the paper or online that I read into it what I want to. I think that's really the point of ANY set of beliefs, whether you call it a religion or not.

Now . . . MY two cents . . . .

I'll direct you all to a book called The Mayan Prophecies by Adrian Gilbert and Maurice Cotterell. Cotterell has a theory that gives a lot of scientific validity to the whole "star-sign thing." In a nutshell, your astrological traits have nothing to do with when you're born -- but they have everything to do with when you are conceived.

The sun is constantly bathing us in radiation called the solar wind. Most people know this, but they don't know that every three months the polarity of that wind changes due to the rotation of the sun and magnetics and stuff.

So say you conceive a child as the solar wind is in a positive cycle. As the gametes are combining to form an embryo and DNA is being constructed, solar radiation supposedly predisposes particular genes to be expressed and others to remain dormant.

Three months later, as the solar wind reverses polarity, the fetus enters a new developmental stage. Coincidentally, many expectant mothers experience a very distinct change in their baby's activity and behavior -- kicking and moving more, poking them in the ribs, mom's eating habits change (meaning the baby's nutrient demands have changed), that sort of thing. Cotterell believes this is basically because the solar wind is backwards now, and it's ticking the little guy off. (I'm paraphrasing...)

Another three months later, and the solar wind is positive again. The baby settles down throughout the third trimester and enters another distinct developmental stage.

Another three months later, and the solar wind reverses again, but by now the kid's had enough and he wants out. Cotterell believes the contrasting change in polarity at nine to ten months is what triggers the release of hormones responsible for birth. And because at conception certain genes were expressed and others were inhibited, the baby is born with a particular set of characteristics that may be representative of a particular quality of solar wind. This is of course HEAVILY dependent on what characteristics were available at conception, I.e. what genes the mother and father passed on to the child. But it still might account (in some people) for the typical Gemini nose, or Aquarius cheekbones, or that thing Capricorns do where they look older than they are when they're young and younger than they are when they're old -- IF those genes were available to be turned on or off in the first place.

When you read the book, you'll understand why the zodiac changes every month instead of every three . . . but it's way too long for me to get into here. Anyway . . . .

The deciding factor, then, if you believe in it, is the condition at conception -- and NOT the constellation the sun was rising in at birth. That part came about hundreds of years ago as people started to notice patterns in certain personality types, and associate them with the environment. "These guys are both jerks, they were both born in August, and OH LOOK! The sun is in Leo in August!" * It could have just as easily been associated with the seasons of the year, except that rising signs are a lot more reliable than the weather.

* (I'm a Leo, by the way. Don't get your panties in a bunch.)



So . . . .

I think that's really the point of ANY set of beliefs, whether you call it a religion or not.

I think the zodiac can only determine your future as far as you are willing to believe it can. There's that whole determinism angle Unferth brought up . . . astrology as most people know can be though of as a primitive perspective on this. Primitive doesn't necessarily mean useless, though, because, hey, people thought it worked once, right? So what changed? The other thing is that when an astrologer says you will "meet a dark stranger," some people subconsciously, ore even consciously look for that dark stranger. So of course they're going to meet him . . . .

I obviously don't consider astrology a religion. It's not that I think a "religion" needs to imply a higher power or a reason for existing (whether we know what it is or not), or even a collective agreement and organizational structure among practitioners. All of that is true, but more than that, I think astrology is simply science. Now we have to debate the differences between science and religion, which is WAAAAY off this topic.

I'm not sure what "darkness or light" is referring to . . . but I cast my vote for legit. Just not for the same reasons most people would.

These are my views.

Offtopic but, I don't believe any of this is off topic . . . otherwise I wouldn't have posted it, right? I think this all goes to point out the reasoning behind my views, and without that, my views are nothing. The whole point was to discuss whether astrology is real or not, and this is how I've defended my position. I only bring this up because I've noticed many of my other posts in different threads have been edited by moderators as "off topic."

Signs Zodiac

I do not read my horoscope all the time and I do not base my life upon what it says when I do, but I do notice there are alot of things about my Zodiac sign that are strangely accurate. Sometimes it is so accurate that it is scary, but because I do not base my life on it, I just smile and say "That is interesting". As far as my birthstone is concerned, I don't believe that has to do with any of my personality or anything, but it does happen to be my favorite color. I am strange enough that the "flower of my birth month" became my favorite flower, next to the rose, the moment I found out what it was.

Zodiac Signs

The Sign for the year, 2007 Orion cutting off the head ot the beast and judgement of the Scarlet Whore.
God has given signs in the heavens, hidden by the light of the Sun, yet revealed to his Elect thru faith in Him.
Here is the First sign:
When Orion rises in the morning, Mercury (a messenger of God) in his hand, and the Sun (God) with him, Mars (war) is over the head of Cetus (Leviathan, the scarlet whore). The Little Bear begins pushing Drayco toward the Ground.
At the same time Venus (Messiah of Israel) and Saturn (social change) coming together in Leo (sign of the return). Jupiter (God of Gods, protector) is over Scorpio (the enemy).
In the west Aquila (the Eagle) falls to the ground. Then Aquarius (the one who goeth and returneth) pours out his water (Holy Spirit) to the fish (Elect) preceding the fall of Cetus (Leviathan) and Pices (the fish) to the ground.
And after this, Mars (war) moves into Taurus (Israel) and the Sun moves to Cancer (assembly of the Elect, the separated, the called out).
And then,
The Sun in Leo, Mercury in Leo, Venus in Leo, Saturn in Leo, Mars in Taurus, Jupiter in Scorpio.
The Little Bear having pushed Draco to the ground, In the East at dawn the Sun and his hosts rise with Leo. Mars (war) is in Taurus (Israel). Jupiter (Ruler of Gods) over Scorpio (the enemy). In the West, Cetus (Leviathan) and Pices (the fish) fall to the ground.


The Second Sign, the sign of Armageddon, 2008.
The Sun in Leo, Mercury in Leo, Venus in Leo, Saturn in Leo, Mars over Crater of Leo(Cup of indignation of His wrath), Jupiter in Sagittarius (the Archer, coming forth of the conqueror).

Zodiac Signs - Page 2

It's fun to think about, to be honest. I don't necessarily believe it shapes my life, but when I see descriptions of a Taurus, I can connect almost completely with it.

My sign is apparently ruled by Venus, which is connected with love, beauty, and money. I connect to that, and prefer those three in my life over other things. It's an earth sign, which is connected to ambition, focus, and resilience. These are three concepts that help me get through the day. Also, a Taurus prioritizes consistency and reliability in all areas of their lives. I need routine and security in my everyday life, which helps me cope with my depression and anxiety.

From an article I found:

Taurus Zodiac Sign: Personality Traits

My husband can attest to these traits in me, and he lovingly reminds me of this sometimes. I can be petty and most of the time I have to have the upper hand in all things.