Guys, I'm scared.

>>18883988
as you should be

it begins

>>18883988
Bruh how can this be real if our eyes arnt real tho

There's at least one reason why prophecies fail: Astrologers are watching at stars, which perhaps died down millions of years ago.

>Photoshopping the eyes further apart to make it creepier

Lol

Nothing will happen tho

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dates_predicted_for_apocalyptic_events

Matthew 24:36

File: Captura de pantalla (491).png (116KB, 571x620px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 571x620px

>>18884048
Not to mention the way it'll look depends largely on what color table you use for the projection

>>18884108
wtf?! Stars are actually not colored like crazy parrots?

This is all miss information and a waste of time. First it was the flat earth shit now its the red dragon. THIS IS 2 YEARS OLD YOU FUCKS! Baited hard

>>18884167
Wow this falls like a tetris block into literally every rule of shilling.
Especially the "THIS IS OLD" thing.
This is a month old.

I don't get into space retardation but I'm pretty sure what this guy is saying is that the conspiracy labelled in this thread is 100% true.

I don't believe it, but this makes it seem like the FBI does.

>>18884179
Oh look its a Shill.
The "Red Dragon" was found 2 years ago kiddo try again

>>18883988
Look to the Stars.
The Mother Will Give Birth.

>>18883988

>fake
planets are not stars?

>>18884034
how can you see when you're blind?

>>18883988
Revelation 12 - September 2017 Theory

Although it does not give credit, the article referenced above is just another take on previous Revelation 12 speculation. I first saw it in a Scottie Clarke video in 2013 on his "Eternal Rhythm and Flow" YouTube channel and website. (I was informed by Mark Chiswell that Luis Vega put out the theory earlier.)

Whoever originated the theory, what it gets right is that the constellation of Virgo (the virgin) fits the heavenly woman spoken of in Revelation 12:1:

Revelation 12:1 — And a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.

The woman being clothed by the sun with the moon at her feet makes sense literally when you understand the woman as Virgo the constellation. Every year somewhere from mid-August through mid-September the sun is mid-body to Virgo and the new crescent moon is at the bottom of Virgo. It literally happens in the sky just as Revelation 12 depicts.

But what about her "crown of twelve stars?" According to Clarke there are nine stars from the constellation Leo above. The other three stars are supplied by a conjunction in Leo of Venus, Mars, and Mercury, aligned with Regulus. And "Scott has looked for this formation in other years and cannot find it"(!).

>>18884794
Problem #1: Ignoring The Very Next Verse

There are many problems with this theory we can discuss. The very first one is typical to these theories and another one it has in common with the blood moon and shemitah theories of 2015: It's ignoring the context. Look at the very next verse tying the Woman sign to a birth:

Revelation 12:1-2 — 1 And a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. 2 She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pains and the agony of giving birth.

If we doubt that the birth is meant literally, the next few verses dispel that. They show Satan wants to kill the son who is clearly identified as a very well-known person:

Revelation 12:4-5 — 4...And the dragon [Satan] stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she gave birth he might devour her child. 5 She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne

This "male child" that comes from the woman is depicting the birth of Jesus. Who is also the one person in history destined to rule all nations (Mt 28:18; Rev 19:16; Eph 1:21) and who has ascended to heaven (Jn 3:13) as verse 5 also says.

As you can see, this context connects the Woman directly to the birth of Jesus in the first century. Jesus' mother was Mary, a righteous woman of Israel. This is what the Woman fully represents, the faithful church, founded through Israel in 30 AD.

File: star52a.gif (42KB, 501x849px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 501x849px

>>18884797
"Revelation Can Only Cover Things 'After This', Not In the Past" / Revelation 4:1!

Some doubt that Mary is the woman giving birth, confused over a past event being found in a prophecy book like Revelation. They often note how John records early on in the book that an angel told him would be shown things "that must happen after this" (Rev 4:1). They expect this rules out anything in Revelation happening before John's time (90AD), such as Mary giving birth to Jesus (1 B.C. supposedly).

My response to that is twofold. First, it does not say "I will ONLY show you things coming after." The exciting part to mention is of course the future things, but it does not preclude showing other things, too. Secondly, the Book is a Book of revelation, not "future prophecy." There is much in the past that is a mystery which humanity needs revelation on, including the key players of the righteous vs Satan and the work of Christ. This revelation from the past establishes the characters for the future part of the revelation. In other words, for John to be shown the key things in the future, some explanatory revelation of the past is appropriate and reasonable to facilitate that.

Anyway, scholars have found that the sky on September 11, 3 BC to show the exact picture of Revelation 12:1, pointing to the birth of Christ on that day:

>>18884806
Problem #2: Adding to the Bible

For me the next problem is how Clarke has added elements to the biblical text that are not there, allowed for by problem #1 in ignoring verse 2 and 5.

When he says this may be the rapture or second coming you would rightly ask, where does it say this in Revelation 12? Nowhere. It's added.

Why do we tolerate people adding to the Bible? Especially when it plainly warns in the same book against doing that (Rev 22:18-19). I understand why. It's mainly because they sound authoritative. Appearing on video helps. Putting your ideas in images helps. Also we assume they know more than us and who are we to disagree with someone who studies more than us?

It would do us well to remember that we're called in NT to question and judge what those in the church proclaim, even when prophets (1 Cor 14:29), proving or disproving them by Scripture (Acts 17:11). This is what I did above with my first objection to the theory.

File: 12_stars.jpg (57KB, 611x609px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 611x609px

>>18884810
Problem #3: The Woman's Crown Already Has 12 Stars

I think Scottie Clarke was so excited to find something "extremely rare" to combine with a Bible prophecy (namely, those three planets appearing in Virgo) that he missed something huge. There are already always twelve stars crowning Virgo, depending who you ask it is either the constellation called "Berenice’s hair".

Ernest Martin in his book The Star That Astonished the World cites the twelve stars as follows:

And note: Professor Thorley who reviewed the first edition of my work has shown that there are exactly twelve stars surrounding the head of Virgo as we see them from earth. And indeed there are. If one will look at Norton’s Star Atlas, twelve visible stars will be seen around Virgo’s head. They are (according to astronomical terminology): (1) Pi, (2) Nu, (3) Beta (near the ecliptic), (4) Sigma, (5) Chi, (6) Iota — these six stars form the southern hemisphere around the head of Virgo. Then there are (7) Theta, (8) Star 60, (9) Delta, (10) Star 93, (11) Beta (the 2nd magnitude star) and (12) Omicron — these last six form the northern hemisphere around the head of Virgo. All these stars are visible and could have been witnessed by observers on earth

Either way, there is no need for a "rare" conjunction of three planets to fill out the crown of twelve stars.

>>18884815
Problem #4: "It's Extremely Rare" Is Not Scriptural

It's worth noting that something being rare does not make it miraculous or divine or prophetically significant. Yes, miracles are rare and sometimes rare events are significant. But rare events like conjunctions are not miraculous or supernatural. They happen quite naturally, as rare as they are.

The Bible does not tell us to look for rare events or rare signs in the heavens or rare signs of the rapture in the heavens. Some will say in response "what about the Star of Bethlehem? Wasn't that a unique event they spotted in the sky and acted on?"

It's true that the Star of Bethlehem must have been a rare event. It had to be for the Magi to see it and know it was the time to pick up and travel hundreds of miles to meet Jesus. But I can assure you they did not travel all that way because they saw something rare or unique in the sky and decided what it meant like our modern Christian prophecy speculators do (justifying this by taking Genesis 1:14 out of its "day, month, year/calendar signals" context to make it about a "heavenly billboard of prophetic signs").

They must have had some authentic prophet tell them exactly what to look for in the sky and exactly what it meant: the Messiah's birth. If I knew a sign in the sky meant the Son of God was on earth, I'd make the trek to meet him, too.

To be sure, the Magi had much more revelation about Christ's birth sign in the sky than we have recorded in Revelation 12 written after the fact, coupled with some kind of weird speculation like this Rev 12 - Sept 2017 theory offers.

Let's not fall for the unscriptural rarity argument for a prophecy theory.

File: 9-11-3BC.jpg (29KB, 400x278px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 400x278px

>>18884818
Problem #5: The Sun Does Not "Clothe the Woman" on Sept 23, 2017

As the picture above shows, the position of the sun does not match Rev 12:1 which says the sun clothes the woman. As the image above shows, the sun is over her left shoulder. For the sun to clothe the woman, it would be on her body. Not at her head like the crown; not at her feet like the moon. In the middle where her body is; where clothing goes.

If you want to see what it should look like, compare that to the picture of the sky on September 11, 3 BC when (I and many think) Jesus was born:

File: leo.png (211KB, 1000x1165px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1000x1165px

>>18884824
Another point, Leo has more than 9 main stars. Star maps that astronomers use and the older ones can show anywhere between 10-12 stars on them, than the simplify one commonly used today

23 !!!

File: shill-warning.jpg (77KB, 402x402px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 402x402px

>>18884167
>>18884186
Disinfo

>>18883988
Do the space spoom a favor and off yourself, please.

oh wow it's another "doomsday day"

it's not like we had several of these but you pol posters are double digit iq mouthbreathers just kys

good evening anons, i am an ayy. not going to prove it too you since, who the fuck cares. just wanted to say, good luck.

>>18885384
You've only proven you have no idea what you're talking about.
Im not a shill, just smarter then everyone who believes this bullshit

>>18885384
Your mom is really tight
It appears you are adopted. Thats really cool for a shill like you

File: 1417106464001.gif (2MB, 268x206px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 268x206px

/r/ing astrologyfags:

Say one was born on that day. If that were one's birthday on a solar eclipse of 2017, what does that mean?

And also, of what actual purpose could it be? Or what fun things could one be doing that day to intensify its effects or use it somehow?

i feel sleepy, im going to take a nap

>>18883988
Yep, that's a crazy schizo collage all right.

File: wgl150c.gif (8KB, 588x611px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 588x611px

>>18885897
?

>>18883988
It's Kek. He's coming to collect his 7's.

File: 1491888179973.png (29KB, 613x556px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 613x556px

>>18884806
>>18884810
>>18884815
>>18884818
>>18884824
>>18884836
I just wanted to say thanks for the great insight.

You know a lot more about the bible then most people that proclaim to study it.

And on this point, do you have any authors or books that you would recommend to better it's understanding?

File: 1474408825534.jpg (266KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 1920x1080px

>tfw you have hallucinations where God possesses everyone around you for a week or so telling you the end times are near
>he notes you treat people right even though you've been given nothing but reasons to mistreat others
>he notes your complete polar shift from stark atheism to faith in a God, regardless of circumstance as inspiring
>he tells you you are to be the new Adam
>specifically decided for this universe to be the one where he (living through me) met his/our wife at the start of the "game" to fuck up the proletariat for shits and grins and spend eternity traveling the galaxy as nanobot-infused lifeforms, saving races from rich assholes
>reveals the truth about aliens (they are here, are not our friends)
>get on 4chan
>I am a Virgo, born Sept 8th but supposed to be born the 23rd
>due to the hallucinations I am currently back in STL, the city with the giant arch where the solar eclipse will be longest
>tfw

>>18887319
>Actually, if you're wondering this is where I got the text https://escapeallthesethings.com/sept-2017-revelation-12/
when I was looking for things about this, what He was saying made a lot more sense and put simply

But what I liked (besides above) were
http://www.askelm.com/star/
This is a good book
Also this video called Star of Bethlehem, you can find it on youtube it's like an hour long
And the picture here>>18884815
I think was from a page called trackingbiblcalprophecy
and it mentions the star crown again here https://philologos.org/bpr/files/c006.htm

this has some pictures regarding it to http://www.vofoundation.org/blog/biblical-signs-sky-september-23-2017/

>>18887385
>trackingbiblcalprophecy
I hope this was the page it was prophecy or revelations, I forget now

>>18887385
Cheers, thanks man!

File: hellstarremina.png (1MB, 1454x1016px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1454x1016px

holy shit

>>18885810
>>18885818
retarded ad hominems are straight out of the handbook. what are you trying to cover up?

>>18884271
If you want to go forwards, you must first go backwards