My ass! He admitted it! Theres written record of him admitting it! Your delusional thinking is even beyond my meager comprehension!

It's funny how when you make stuff up, other people "all of a sudden" accuse you of making it up! You're a riot. Here it is:

Stahrwe: "You also neglect to understand that Jesus rose from the dead and is alive today, so He has most definitely heard the word Christian."

But to give you the benefit of the doubt, I think you're merely repeating something that another person made up.

The point of mentioning Eusebius, which I rightly thought would be the opportunity for another major digression from the topic of the thread by you know who, was that Josephus, the foremost ancient source on Jewish history, is routinely cited by apologists as verifying the existence of Jesus, but skeptics argue that Eusebius fraudulently inserted the Jesus line in Josephus' text. That is immaterial for this thread. What does matter though, is that Josephus, Philo and Aquinas confirm that the zodiac was a central motif in ancient Jewish religion, symbolised by the stones on the breast plate of the high priest. Apologists tend to go into a frenzy when anyone points out that Judaism has such strong astrological themes. This frenzy is informative to explain the amnesia that dogmatists have so successfully inflicted on the world. The apologist attitude is "hey, we suppressed that 2000 years ago, so it never happened". What a shame, they must think, they can't burn all the copies of Josephus, Philo and Aquinas that hint at the place of the zodiac in Judaism so we could revert to a totally stupid world of darkness where people believe everything they are told by apologists.

The main miracle under discussion in this thread is the feeding of the 5000 by Jesus. I have suggested it is an astrotheological allegory for the Great Year, because the loaves and fishes story precisely matches the interpretation of Christianity as a cosmic story about the slow movement of the zodiac caused by precession. So we have Stahrwe, with his besty Jesus hanging out on earth since the resurrection (shame he is invisible to history), or we have an effort to explain the miracle as an allegory for natural events. I encourage readers to look at the diagrams of precession in my post dated 26 August half way down page 6 of this thread. The middle picture in particular, showing the stars at the time of Christ, illustrates how the spring equinox was moving from the sign of the lamb into the sign of the fishes. This metaphor is abundantly present throughout the Gospels, and explains the real natural meaning of Christianity.

Junking miraculous explanations does not mean that we have to junk the text. The authors had a deeper intent that has been masked by the stupid literalism of orthodoxy, as Jesus himself points out in Mark 8 where he complains that the disciples do not understand the loaves and fishes story. The deeper significance here is that understanding the stellar framework of the Bible provides a basis to understand how the similar stellar framework of the New Age of Aquarius has a real scientific meaning.

Stahrwe: "You also neglect to understand that Jesus rose from the dead and is alive today, so He has most definitely heard the word Christian."

Get real! You honestly believe that this guy is alive today? OK if you believe that then put up some proof that he is. Give solid hard core evidence that he is alive. Your buddy Paul made up that word just like he made up the Damascus Road incident and other mythological mumbo jumbo. Don't forget Jesus if he ever lived was Jewish he was not Christian or a monk he was Jewish. He lived a Jewish lifestyle, he practiced Jewish rituals. You know the Jews don't believe your Christian rhetoric about him to them he has never returned and never died on that stick. As far as Jesus goes there are too many holes in the Christian myth to support he ever lived. If the Jews can accept it why come the whacko fundamental Christian right cannot accept it? His return has been purported by Christianity for thousands of years and still no Jesus but they put an escape clause in which says no man knows the time or day that gets them out of looking like morons.

In fact I am not the author of the Gospels. They state that after being crucified, Jesus rose from death on Sunday.

Ding ding. They made it up, and you're repeating it.

So why didn't They?

As previously posted, the remarks in Josephus are not confirmation that the Jews intended the stones to represent the zodiac he merely says that some people say that they do.

you may read through the OT with no direct mention of the zodiac. At least I don't remember one. There are references to Orion, and the Pleiades.

Please Stahrwe, try to be just a little bit less careless in your comments. As stated in my previous comment, and raised before by you, the 'some people say' line was from Saint Thomas Aquinas, not Josephus, who unequivocally said the jewels in the breastplate symbolised the twelve signs of the zodiac. cf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_sym ... he_priests

Jewish Encyclopedia: The vestments of the high priest were interpreted in three ways.

The explanation of Philo is as follows ("Vita Mosis," iii. 209): His upper garment was the symbol of the ether, while the blossoms represented the earth, the pomegranates typified running water, and the bells denoted the music of the water. The ephod corresponded to heaven, and the stones on both shoulders to the two hemispheres, one above and the other below the earth. The six names on each of the stones were the six signs of the zodiac, which were denoted also by the twelve names on the breastplate. The miter was the sign of the crown which exalted the high priest above all earthly kings.

Josephus' explanation is this ("Ant." iii. 7, § 7): The coat was the symbol of the earth, the upper garment emblemized heaven, while the bells and pomegranates represented thunder and lightning. The ephod typified the four elements, and the interwoven gold denoted the glory of God. The breastplate was in the center of the ephod, as the earth formed the center of the universe; the girdle symbolized the ocean, the stones on the shoulders the sun and moon, and the jewels in the breastplate the twelve signs of the zodiac, while the miter was a token of heaven.

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica: According to some, the literal reason for these vestments was that they denoted the disposition of the terrestrial globe; as though the high-priest confessed himself to be the minister of the Creator of the world, wherefore it is written (Wis. 18:24): "In the robe" of Aaron "was the whole world" described. For the linen breeches signified the earth out of which the flax grows. The surrounding belt signified the ocean which surrounds the earth. The violet tunic denoted the air by its color: its little bells betoken the thunder; the pomegranates, the lightning. The ephod, by its many colors, signified the starry heaven; the two onyx stones denoted the two hemispheres, or the sun and moon. The twelve precious stones on the breast are the twelve signs of the zodiac: and they are said to have been placed on the rational because in heaven, are the types [rationes] of earthly things, according to Job 38:33: "Dost thou know the order of heaven, and canst thou set down the reason [rationem] thereof on the earth?" The turban or tiara signified the empyrean: the golden plate was a token of God, the governor of the universe.

The Stones of the Breastplate.
The twelve precious stones with which the breastplate was decorated contained the names of the twelve tribes; each name being fully engraved on one stone, in order that, when the high priest came before Him, God might be mindful of the piety of the patriarchs (Ex. R. xxxviii. 8; Lev. R. xxi. 6). No chisel was to touch the stones, nor was it permitted to mark the names of the twelve patriarchs on the stones by means of paint or ink. The engraving was done by means of the Shamir, which was placed on the stone, and had the marvelous power of cutting it along the lines of the letters of the proper names, which were first traced with ink (Soṭah 48b). In addition to the names of the twelve tribes, the stones also contained, at the head, the names Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and at the end the words: "[all these are] the tribes of Jeshurun" (Yoma 73b, where the first two words are not found, while Yer. Yoma vii., end, 44c has them, and also instead of ; Maimonides, l.c. 7, seems to have used a source differing both from Bab. and Yer., as his version has the words ="tribes of God"). These words could not be omitted from the breastplate, since the whole Hebrew alphabet had to be included, in order that, on consulting the Urim and Thummim, the high priest might be enabled to form words from the different colors of the individual letters on the stones of the breastplate, and hence might be able to answer questions put to him (Yoma, l.c.).

Order of the Names on the Stones.
Even in early times there were various opinions on the order of the names of the twelve patriarchs on the stones; and Baraitas existed that discussed the matter. The latter, however, have evidently been lost; for the opinions therein contained are known only through quotations found in the early authors. A Baraita, quoted by Tobias b. Eliezer in his work "Leḳaḥ Ṭob" on Ex. xxviii. 10, says that the order corresponded to that given in Ex. i. 2-4, except that Zebulun was followed by Dan, not by Benjamin, and that the last two names were Joseph and Benjamin (compare Soṭah 36a, b). This corresponds in part with the order in Num. R. ii. 7, except that there Gad precedes Naphtali; while Ex. R. xxxviii. 8 and Targ. on Cant. v. 14 correspond with the above-mentioned Baraita.

According to the Targ. Yer. on Num. ii. 2 et seq., however, the names on the stones of the breastplate followed in the same sequence as that observed by the tribes when marching in the wilderness (Num. ii. 2-21). Targ. Yer. on Ex. xxviii. 17 et seq. agrees with Josephus ("Ant." iii. 7, § 5) in saying that the names of the twelve patriarchs followed in the sequence of their ages, while Maimonides (l.c.) and Tobias b. Eliezer (l.c.) assert that the names of the patriarchs were engraved on the first stone and the words on the last, Baḥya b. Asher and Hezekiah b. Manoah say, in their commentaries on Ex. l.c., that each stone contained only six letters, selected from the name of the respective tribal-patriarch, together with one or more letters of the names of the three national patriarchs or of the words . Hence the letters on the whole of the stones numbered seventy-two, corresponding with the number of letters in the Shem ha-Meforash. Compare Ephod,Gems, and Urim and Thummim.

Bibliography:Beïr ha-Golah (anonymous work, Mayence, 1877, pp. 93-102;
A. Epstein, Mi-Ḳadmoniyot ha-Yehudim, pp. 83-90;
Abraham Portaleone, Shilte ha-Gibborim, pp. 44a-49b.J. Sr.L. G.
Read more: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view. ... z0xjkeQY00
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view. ... arch=ephod

Joshephus:
5. Besides these, the high priest put on a third garment, which was called the Ephod, which resembles the Epomis of the Greeks. Its make was after this manner: it was woven to the depth of a cubit, of several colors, with gold intermixed, and embroidered, but it left the middle of the breast uncovered: it was made with sleeves also; nor did it appear to be at all differently made from a short coat. But in the void place of this garment there was inserted a piece of the bigness of a span, embroidered with gold, and the other colors of the ephod, and was called Essen, [the breastplate,] .which in the Greek language signifies the Oracle. This piece exactly filled up the void space in the ephod. It was united to it by golden rings at every corner, the like rings being annexed to the ephod, and a blue riband was made use of to tie them together by those rings; and that the space between the rings might not appear empty, they contrived to fill it up with stitches of blue ribands. There were also two sardonyxes upon the ephod, at the shoulders, to fasten it in the nature of buttons, having each end running to the sardonyxes of gold, that they might be buttoned by them. On these were engraven the names of the sons of Jacob, in our own country letters, and in our own tongue, six on each of the stones, on either side; and the elder sons' names were on the right shoulder. Twelve stones also there were upon the breast-plate, extraordinary in largeness and beauty; and they were an ornament not to be purchased by men, because of their immense value. These stones, however, stood in three rows, by four in a row, and were inserted into the breastplate itself, and they were set in ouches of gold, that were themselves inserted in the breastplate, and were so made that they might not fall out low the first three stones were a sardonyx, a topaz, and an emerald. The second row contained a carbuncle, a jasper, and a sapphire. The first of the third row was a ligure, then an amethyst, and the third an agate, being the ninth of the whole number. The first of the fourth row was a chrysolite, the next was an onyx, and then a beryl, which was the last of all. Now the names of all those sons of Jacob were engraven in these stones, whom we esteem the heads of our tribes, each stone having the honor of a name, in the order according to which they were born. And whereas the rings were too weak of themselves to bear the weight of the stones, they made two other rings of a larger size, at the edge of that part of the breastplate which reached to the neck, and inserted into the very texture of the breastplate, to receive chains finely wrought, which connected them with golden bands to the tops of the shoulders, whose extremity turned backwards, and went into the ring, on the prominent back part of the ephod; and this was for the security of the breastplate, that it might not fall out of its place. There was also a girdle sewed to the breastplate, which was of the forementioned colors, with gold intermixed, which, when it had gone once round, was tied again upon the seam, and hung down. There were also golden loops that admitted its fringes at each extremity of the girdle, and included them entirely.

7. Now here one may wonder at the ill-will which men bear to us, and which they profess to bear on account of our despising that Deity which they pretend to honor; for if any one do but consider the fabric of the tabernacle, and take a view of the garments of the high priest, and of those vessels which we make use of in our sacred ministration, he will find that our legislator was a divine man, and that we are unjustly reproached by others; for if any one do without prejudice, and with judgment, look upon these things, he will find they were every one made in way of imitation and representation of the universe. When Moses distinguished the tabernacle into three parts, and allowed two of them to the priests, as a place accessible and common, he denoted the land and the sea, these being of general access to all; but he set apart the third division for God, because heaven is inaccessible to men. And when he ordered twelve loaves to be set on the table, he denoted the year, as distinguished into so many months. By branching out the candlestick into seventy parts, he secretly intimated the Decani, or seventy divisions of the planets; and as to the seven lamps upon the candlesticks, they referred to the course of the planets, of which that is the number. The veils, too, which were composed of four things, they declared the four elements; for the fine linen was proper to signify the earth, because the flax grows out of the earth; the purple signified the sea, because that color is dyed by the blood of a sea shell-fish; the blue is fit to signify the air; and the scarlet will naturally be an indication of fire. Now the vestment of the high priest being made of linen, signified the earth; the blue denoted the sky, being like lightning in its pomegranates, and in the noise of the bells resembling thunder. And for the ephod, it showed that God had made the universe of four elements; and as for the gold interwoven, I suppose it related to the splendor by which all things are enlightened. He also appointed the breastplate to be placed in the middle of the ephod, to resemble the earth, for that has the very middle place of the world. And the girdle which encompassed the high priest round, signified the ocean, for that goes round about and includes the universe. Each of the sardonyxes declares to us the sun and the moon; those, I mean, that were in the nature of buttons on the high priest's shoulders. And for the twelve stones, whether we understand by them the months, or whether we understand the like number of the signs of that circle which the Greeks call the Zodiac, we shall not be mistaken in their meaning. And for the mitre, which was of a blue color, it seems to me to mean heaven; for how otherwise could the name of God be inscribed upon it? That it was also illustrated with a crown, and that of gold also, is because of that splendor with which God is pleased. Let this explication suffice at present, since the course of my narration will often, and on many occasions, afford me the opportunity of enlarging upon the virtue of our legislator.

We have previously discussed that the term Mazzaroth in Job 38:32 means zodiac. It is referenced as such in the margin of the Authorised Version and the Revised Version of the Bible. Did you forget?

This is all typical of how apologists find the cosmic framework of the Bible unacceptable to their dogmatic emotional assumptions, so do everything they can to deny, forget, suppress, distort and avoid the actual words of the Bible. For example, the question of Jesus at Mark 8, how is it that you do not understand the meaning of the loaves and fishes?

I do not know their motive. Does that mean I'm wrong? No.

The alternative is what you believe, then men rise from the dead and donkeys speak. Perhaps Saul of Tarsus had a seizure. Perhaps not. It doesn't matter. It is a fallacy to assume that merely because we cannot answer the question of [why people would continue believing in a fantasy story to avoid brutality] that is must therefore be true. Here are some other fallacies that are related.

Appeal to ridicule: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made by presenting the opponent's argument in a way that makes it appear ridiculous

Historian's fallacy: occurs when one assumes that decision makers of the past viewed events from the same perspective and having the same information as those subsequently analyzing the decision.

Psychologist's fallacy: occurs when an observer presupposes the objectivity of his own perspective when analyzing a behavioral event

Appeal to consequences: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument concludes that a premise is either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences for a particular party

Please go take a class now.

Actually it does. Without an answer you are left with speculation which has a glaring defect in it.

Why isn't it a fallacy to reject something you can't account for?

While I appreciate that readers may get bored with the circular nature of conversation with Stahrwe, we still have the stumbling block of rival explanations of the miracle of the loaves and fishes. Stahrwe says God breaks the laws of physics, contrary to all observed events. I say the Bible has a hidden cosmic meaning, heavily suppressed by orthodoxy. The reason why there is no explicit astrotheology in the Bible is that any such content that may have been in source documents has been removed by dogmatic censors. The scale of Christian destruction of pagan wisdom was immense. Why would they leave anything in their own text that explicitly supported the pagan view? It appears the original authors thought the best and possibly only way such knowledge could be transmitted to future generations was in code. The authors knew that a cosmic Christ could not become the basis of a world religion, so they altered the real cosmic meaning just enough to pass the hurdle of popular acceptance, turning a parable about the Great Year into the miracle of the feeding of the 5000.

On the Jewish Encyclopedia question, I gave a link to the source of the Roman Catholic website Fish Eaters: Precious Stones of Sacred Scripture

I have noticed that our modern book burners are rather efficient in eliminating material that they see as heresy. It does not surprise me at all that versions of texts can be found that censor such references.