I do agree with everything you are saying here. After re-reading from the beginning, I think perhaps you thought I was not, when I was only trying to contribute. I, as well as you, think that things should only be explained as natural phenomena.
Its difficult when you quote an evangelist without comment. Missler presents a very mixed up analysis. I think it is important to warn readers when a link you provide has serious flaws, otherwise they will wonder why you linked it.
I think that where both I and the responders to the Bible Studies site are going wrong is a perception that at times you seem to voice a belief that there is "something" to the shift of the ages and a change in conditions here on earth. Are we interpreting that wrong? Such as here:
[GR] Please demonstrate that [as above so below] is science.
RT: The idea that the microcosm reflects the macrocosm is basic causality. Things that occur within a system reflect the larger causal processes of the system. For example, the position of the tide (microcosm) reflects the causal influence of the sun and moon (macrocosm). Leaves fall (microcosm) when the weather gets colder due to axial tilt (macrocosm). It is not about magic or influence of stars, just actual causality. Stephen Jay Gould is one scientist who has used this idea to explain fractal geometry. 'As above so below' is a central idea in hermetic philosophy. Of course, the hermetic tradition has been calumnated by hysterical witch burners, but it was central to the cosmology of great thinkers such as Kepler and Newton. Newton took it so seriously that he translated the main hermetic text, the emerald tablet of Thoth, where this idea is presented, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald_Ta
The Lord's Prayer, 'thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven', shows the prominent role of this hermetic vision of causality in the Bible.
The explanation you quoted here shows the causal relation between microcosm and macrocosm. To say 'all is one' seems an obscure mystical vision, but it is actually a simple logical deduction based on the assumption of universal material causality. It is purely scientific, based on the assumptions that we have one universe with consistent physical laws. The problem with the 'as above so below' axiom is to assess at what point the microcosm cuts loose from its direct causal framework. Your decision to get up in the morning is not caused by the moon or sun. Efforts to find any statistical connection between astrological planetary cycles and human action have drawn a blank, even though some studies such as by Gauquelin may have something there. Human freedom of will can lead us down paths that are not in accord with this deep natural causality, with ideology providing an independent (and often false) framework for decisions.
We are free to make historic decisions that do not line up with the bigger reality of the cosmos. But when ideas are grounded in actual natural reality, free will can aim to be in tune with the cosmos. As above so below, considered in a religious framework, is more a moral ideal of an ecological cosmic attunement of human life - at one ment - than an assertion that our will is determined by fate.
Have you heard of the reported response that Newton gave to Sir Edmund Halley (discoverer of Halley's comet) when Halley dismissed astrology? "Sir Halley, I have studied the matter; you have not!" Introducing Hermetic philosophy into the discussion somewhat verifies the practice of astrology.
Astrology is a highly complicated topic. Newton and Kepler and Leonardo had a very strong interest in the Hermetic revival of the Renaissance. Most popular astrology is just entertainment, routinely exaggerating and inventing correlations as folk speculation. I think of astrology like trying to listen to a local radio station from the other side of the planet. There is a mathematically tiny real signal, but it is so swamped by noise that you can barely detect it. In astrology, we have a natural rhythm of the seasons that has been stable for four billion years of life on our planet, as the context for all genetic evolution. But in human life, the 'noise' of cultural and other terrestrial factors completely swamps any attunement to deep planetary rhythms. Astrology observes this signal just based on observation of planetary positions, and then say if there were no terrestrial factors this would be the situation. But the noise is so great that potential statistical correlations are destroyed. I have a few ideas for rigorous statistical testing of astrological ideas, but I don't have time to do anything about them without help.
With the Great Year, I have pointed out that there is a stable cycle of light and dark due to the earth's precessional orbital patterns that is simply visible in the glacial record, with advance and retreat of ice every 21,000 years as regular as night follows day. This precession cycle has repeated with complete stability about 200,000 times since the dawn of life. Just as life has annual cycles seen in hibernation and deciduous leaf growth and turning, it seems perfectly plausible to me that there may also be a longer life cycle, driven by precession. And it is possible that this cycle was intuitively understood by ancient religion, setting the actual downward path from light to dark since the dawn of the Holocene as the mythological framework of the descent from the golden age to the iron age, and the promise of a slow return to a new golden age over the next ten thousand years.
The way you explain it may well be true, but has it really been scientifically proven, or is it just another self-fulfilling prophecy? Have certain aspects once considered to be the magic of astrology now become scientific? Because you see, it sounds so much like astrology to the average person, no matter how much you protest it is not! Once upon a time, it was astrology pure and simple.
A key issue here is that the astrological framework of the 7000 years of zodiac ages from Taurus to the first half of Aquarius provides a hidden cosmological framework that helps us to understand the myths of the Bible against a real natural backdrop. If the seers who inspired the New Testament really thought that way, as Tat put it above, the idea was that the Age of Pisces was a preparation for an envisaged kingdom of heaven predicted as the Age of Aquarius. The issue is to understand the scientific context of long term cycles, and then look at how this matches to the mythology behind Christian dogma. My observation is that the match is precise, helping us to use astrotheology to understand why Jesus Christ was such a compelling figure, as the symbolic avatar of the Age of Pisces. Study of this material also shows a psychological pathology in the mentality of the current age, especially with supernatural thinking providing a gross distortion that prevents people from seeing the natural basis for the myths. This pathology, seen in fundamentalist faith that spreads its tentacles very widely, suggests to me that we are heading for a crisis, a tipping point that will equate to a cusp between ages. This is what I think the ancients predicted as the apocalypse. The abuse directed towards any thought seen as New Age illustrates the depth of the irrational bigotry against putting cosmology at the center of theology.
Now I am somewhat familiar with what you are propounding, that it is not magic, it is natural occurring phenomena. Yes, and not only that, there may be some other things in the future proven scientifically that we now think of as superstition or a pseudo-science, but things that seem to play out so often that we find we must pay attention to it on a gut level. Who knows?
The whole idea that we should aim to be attuned to nature is widely viewed as a magical reenchantment of culture. The modern scientific enlightenment, with its ethic of disenchantment, is based on entrenching the old Christian alienation between spirit and nature. The New Age is about reconciling spirit and nature, and seeing how this reconciliation is prefigured in the hidden core of earlier mythology.
For now, I think that maybe this is why others are having a hard time understanding where you are coming from; i. e. whether you think that the prophecies are correct and are now coming to fruition, its just that we did not realize that an astrological method is how they arrived at those prophecies.
Yes, that is a very good point. An interesting irony here is that the traditional 7000 year theory of time propounded by the early Church Fathers, including those such as Irenaeus who led the charge against Gnostic thought, suggests that the seventh day, the millennium, basically matches to the shift of Ages from Pisces to Aquarius, just based on the view that the creation occurred in about 4000 BC. It is a far more simple and scientific interpretation of what the ancients actually thought than anything that draws on supernatural traditions.
My main aim here is to explain Christianity using science. The problem is that the cultural ideology of science has the critique of astrology at its birth, so has a deep prejudice against any scientific analysis that makes use of astrological themes. Even the idea of a cyclic vision of history is a red button, enough to prompt alarm bells about association with non-scientific views, preventing a rational examination and dialogue on these ideas.