Very well-written article! It's actually extremely similar to one of the first articles I wrote on Substack: "A Christian Case for Astrology" I covered a lot of the same points, but you went into more depth on certain topics. I enjoyed it a lot!
A few weeks ago, I was listening to the Lives of the Saints for the day and Pope Leo the First was the saint for the day. I learned about the story of him turning away Attila the Hun right as he was about to invade Rome. In this story, St. Peter appears next to Pope Leo holding a sword, menacingly staring at Atilla.
Around the time I heard this story, I was brainstorming which of the 12 Apostles correlate to the 12 zodiac signs. Instantly, it all clicked for me: Peter is associated with the sign of Leo. Leo is the leader archetype of the zodiac and its virtue is boldness; the vice associated with Leo is pride and hubris. This matches with Peter being the first of the apostles to boldly proclaim that Christ is Lord, yet also the one who denies Christ three times.
Very thorough overview, well done. I've studied this some myself: the fact that the cherubim faces and the actual zodiac are twisted so that two of the signs are in the wrong place has always been a head-scratcher for me. I have two thoughts, the later of which is more important:
First: What do you make of the traditional correspondence between the fixed zodiac signs and the writers of the Gospels? We have in plenty of Christian iconography a kind of correspondence which symbolizes Mark as the Lion (Leo), Luke as the Bull (Taurus), Mathew as the Man (Aquarius), and John as the Eagle (essentially Scorpio). Now, the problem here would be that not all of the Gospel writers were themselves among the original Apostles, so this may be a seperate correspondence.
Second: The idea of Judas as Benjamin is curious. Benjamin is after all the tribe in the book of Judges which becomes corrupt enough that the other tribes briefly go to war with it. But if we understand the story of Joseph as being in parallel to Christ, then it seems to make sense that just as Judah turned Joseph over to the Egyptians to be sold into slavery (and this is very often seen as a kind of symbolic death for Joseph), it seems that the same named Judas (Judas is just a latinized Judah) turning Christ over to the Pharisees seems to be a direct parallel. At the end of the narrative of Joseph, Judah apologizes for having sold Joseph into slavery, and Joseph says "you meant it for evil, but God meant it for good" (how Joseph was sold into slavery but with God's hand involved, in order to be the means by which all of Israel would be rescued from a famine). Similarly, when Jesus demonstrates in multiple places that he knows that he must be betrayed and given over to death, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled. And so Jesus shows that he both knows and understands the purpose behind Judas betraying him, and that although Judas of course means it for evil, God means it for good for the salvation of all peoples. All of this would have me thinking of Judas as corresponding to the Isrealite tribe of Judah, barring our consideration of other symbolic lines of thought. But as other comments mention, especially in the Book of Revelation it seems that we mustn't think of Judas Iscariot as being among the names of the Apostles of the Lamb on the gates; very likely it's Matthias.
Anyways. It's perhaps possible that, since there are so many different ways in which the zodiac is used in parallel with the twelve tribes and the twelve apostles, we shouldn't think of their categories as always fixed and static, but as meant to be saying something like "Judah is most generally like Benjamin or Aries, but in this moment he is like Judah or Leo." I don't know. What do you think?
I’ve literally just published a book (Heavens of the Hebrews - Ancient Astronomy) where I push the idea that rather than try and fit Genesis 49 into the Greek Zodiac, I rework the constellations to align with the blessings. Effectively making Abraham’s descendents like the stars.
You propose that Judas Iscariot corresponds to Benjamin — Amethyst — Aries in St John's Apocalypse. Though it's a little doubtful that S. John would consider Judas the Betrayer to be a part of the New Jerusalem. Iscariotes was of course already lost at the time of S. John's writing, so clearly could not be a foundation stone within either the Church or the Kingdom. St. Luke 6.16 mentions two disciples named Judas. The first 'Judas son of James,' may be the same Thaddaeus (as in S. Mathew and S. Mark). Thus it's difficult to see why you feel that it's essential to include Judas Iscariotes in this correspondence??
Ah. It’s because Judas is consistently at the end of each list. As I indicate in the article, I think a good case can be made that St. Paul replaces Judas, and so it would be his name that’s actually in the new Jerusalem.
Very well-written article! It's actually extremely similar to one of the first articles I wrote on Substack: "A Christian Case for Astrology" I covered a lot of the same points, but you went into more depth on certain topics. I enjoyed it a lot!
A few weeks ago, I was listening to the Lives of the Saints for the day and Pope Leo the First was the saint for the day. I learned about the story of him turning away Attila the Hun right as he was about to invade Rome. In this story, St. Peter appears next to Pope Leo holding a sword, menacingly staring at Atilla.
Around the time I heard this story, I was brainstorming which of the 12 Apostles correlate to the 12 zodiac signs. Instantly, it all clicked for me: Peter is associated with the sign of Leo. Leo is the leader archetype of the zodiac and its virtue is boldness; the vice associated with Leo is pride and hubris. This matches with Peter being the first of the apostles to boldly proclaim that Christ is Lord, yet also the one who denies Christ three times.
Just my opinion!
Very thorough overview, well done. I've studied this some myself: the fact that the cherubim faces and the actual zodiac are twisted so that two of the signs are in the wrong place has always been a head-scratcher for me. I have two thoughts, the later of which is more important:
First: What do you make of the traditional correspondence between the fixed zodiac signs and the writers of the Gospels? We have in plenty of Christian iconography a kind of correspondence which symbolizes Mark as the Lion (Leo), Luke as the Bull (Taurus), Mathew as the Man (Aquarius), and John as the Eagle (essentially Scorpio). Now, the problem here would be that not all of the Gospel writers were themselves among the original Apostles, so this may be a seperate correspondence.
Second: The idea of Judas as Benjamin is curious. Benjamin is after all the tribe in the book of Judges which becomes corrupt enough that the other tribes briefly go to war with it. But if we understand the story of Joseph as being in parallel to Christ, then it seems to make sense that just as Judah turned Joseph over to the Egyptians to be sold into slavery (and this is very often seen as a kind of symbolic death for Joseph), it seems that the same named Judas (Judas is just a latinized Judah) turning Christ over to the Pharisees seems to be a direct parallel. At the end of the narrative of Joseph, Judah apologizes for having sold Joseph into slavery, and Joseph says "you meant it for evil, but God meant it for good" (how Joseph was sold into slavery but with God's hand involved, in order to be the means by which all of Israel would be rescued from a famine). Similarly, when Jesus demonstrates in multiple places that he knows that he must be betrayed and given over to death, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled. And so Jesus shows that he both knows and understands the purpose behind Judas betraying him, and that although Judas of course means it for evil, God means it for good for the salvation of all peoples. All of this would have me thinking of Judas as corresponding to the Isrealite tribe of Judah, barring our consideration of other symbolic lines of thought. But as other comments mention, especially in the Book of Revelation it seems that we mustn't think of Judas Iscariot as being among the names of the Apostles of the Lamb on the gates; very likely it's Matthias.
Anyways. It's perhaps possible that, since there are so many different ways in which the zodiac is used in parallel with the twelve tribes and the twelve apostles, we shouldn't think of their categories as always fixed and static, but as meant to be saying something like "Judah is most generally like Benjamin or Aries, but in this moment he is like Judah or Leo." I don't know. What do you think?
Lovely to see other christians interested in the mystical like that. I’m just confused about why can’t the Judas you mentioned not Judas Thaddeus.
I’ve literally just published a book (Heavens of the Hebrews - Ancient Astronomy) where I push the idea that rather than try and fit Genesis 49 into the Greek Zodiac, I rework the constellations to align with the blessings. Effectively making Abraham’s descendents like the stars.
I can DM you an online version 👍🏽
Sure, I’d be interested to see!
@johngoldmouth right up your alley
You propose that Judas Iscariot corresponds to Benjamin — Amethyst — Aries in St John's Apocalypse. Though it's a little doubtful that S. John would consider Judas the Betrayer to be a part of the New Jerusalem. Iscariotes was of course already lost at the time of S. John's writing, so clearly could not be a foundation stone within either the Church or the Kingdom. St. Luke 6.16 mentions two disciples named Judas. The first 'Judas son of James,' may be the same Thaddaeus (as in S. Mathew and S. Mark). Thus it's difficult to see why you feel that it's essential to include Judas Iscariotes in this correspondence??
I’m not sure what point you’re making
Ah. It’s because Judas is consistently at the end of each list. As I indicate in the article, I think a good case can be made that St. Paul replaces Judas, and so it would be his name that’s actually in the new Jerusalem.