Gospel In The Stars

Is The Gospel In The Stars?

Today there is a resurgence of a once-popular doctrine that claims the New Testament gospel is written in the stars. It is commonly referred to as the Gospel in the Stars—though it is known by other names too—and was introduced in the 1800s by E. W. Bullinger and Joseph A. Seiss through their books, Witness of the Stars and Gospel in the Stars.

The thesis of these books is that the stars, through the twelve signs of the Zodiac, were originally designed by God to communicate the gospel. Both men claim that through a godly understanding of the signs of the Zodiac, the gospel was known to those living before the flood of Noah and passed down through oral transmission. Both claim that this good type of heavenly sign reading was later corrupted by Satan into the occultic practice of astrology that we are all now familiar with. Both men also proclaimed the alleged recovery of this proper interpretation of the Zodiac, saying that this "heavenly sign" is a great witness to God and His Word.

In his book, Mr. Seiss frankly admits that the insights leading to his new revelation that the gospel was in the Zodiac came "in connection with his studies of the marvelous wisdom embodied in the Great Pyramid at El Giza" (p.5). It should not have to be said, but since many Christians are dabbling in Pyramidology these days, we will say it: Pyramidology is not of God. Try as you may, you will never find a single connection in either history or in Scripture between the things of God and the Pyramids. The Pyramidic shape, its symbolism, and the wisdom that built it, has been associated with Paganism from the beginning of time.

Of course, the editors of the NIV have made an incompetent effort at establishing just such a link by changing the phrase "head of the corner" to "capstone." This blatant attempt to move the reader from the idea of a Temple (which is a Judeo/Christian concept) to the idea of a Pyramid (which is a Pagan concept) has no basis in the Greek text, for it distinctly conveys the idea of a foundation stone upon which the entire building rests. The Lord Jesus is the chief cornerstone of the Temple, not the capstone of an ancient Pagan Pyramid.

After admitting that his new Gospel in the Stars theory came out of Pyramidology, Mr. Seiss turns around and says "by way of the Bible itself we reach the idea of the gospel in the stars" (p.13). Is this true? Can we indeed come to the conclusion of the Gospel in the Stars by way of the Scripture?

While the Scripture does say the heavens are given for "signs," it never states (or implies) that these signs present the gospel. The Scripture tells us that the material creation reveals God's glory and power. It states that the unseen things of God are "clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made" (Rom. 1:20), and that "there is no speech or language where their voice is not heard" (Ps. 19:3). However, it never states that the heavens—or any other part of the material creation—declares the gospel of Jesus Christ. The New Testament gospel is presented only in God’s written Word and it is proclaimed only by the preaching of that Word.

If the thesis of Mr. Bullinger and Mr. Seiss be correct, there are many places in the Scripture—including Psalms 19:1-4, Romans 1:19-24, Hebrews 1:1-2, and II. Peter 1:21, to name just a few—where we could expect to find support for it. These are places that not only could have but should have mentioned the great witness of the Gospel in the Stars, yet they fail to do so.

For example, Hebrews 1:1 tells us that God "spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets." The writer failed to mention that God also talked to the fathers through the Zodiac. Why the noticeable silence on such a grand theme? Because the creation only bears witness to God's eternal existence and wisdom. The written Word takes it from there and explains the gospel. This distinction is destroyed by asserting that the gospel is contained in the stars.

Mr. Bullinger and Mr. Seiss freely admit that the gospel can't actually be seen in the stars. It can only be seen through a Christianized interpretation of the Zodiac. In addition, the figures of the Zodiac cannot be seen in the natural formations of the stars. In his sermon entitled The Gospel in the Stars, Dr. D. James Kennedy—who promotes the ideas of Bullinger and Seiss inside the Religious System—also admitted that "you can look at the stars in Virgo until you are green in the face and they would never look like a woman."

But let’s suppose, just for the sake of argument, that through "oral tradition" people knew the constellation under the sign of Virgo was supposed to represent a woman. Even better, lets suppose that in its natural formation it really did look like a woman. It is still a giant leap of faith to assume they would instinctively know from that "sign" that the Son of God was to be born of a virgin, much less that He would die in our place and offer pardon for sin.

The reality is, a person will never derive the gospel from looking up at the starry heavens at night, or from studying the signs of the Zodiac, without some kind of additional help or interpretation. Should the reader doubt this claim, simply test it by finding a dozen people who have never heard this doctrine, then place an un-interpreted diagram of the Zodiac in front of them and ask them what they see. Not one of those twelve people will start explaining the New Testament gospel to you. Indeed, the idea that the gospel is in the Zodiac will never even enter their minds unless you plant it there.

You would have to explain the Zodiac gospel to them, and even then they probably would not believe you. How much less would such a concept enter their minds just by looking up at the stars at night? Yet, in contradiction of both Scripture and common sense, Mr. Seiss says the gospel, "in all its length and breadth, stands written upon the stars...." (p. 14).

Even the Southern Cross, which is the only constellation to form a somewhat recognizable figure in and of itself—and thus is "Exhibit A" for those promoting this idea—would have failed to present the gospel to the ancient viewer. This is simply because the physical meaning of the cross—that it would be used as an instrument of death someday—was unknown before Roman times. Looking at any kind of a cross, be it in the stars or on the earth, would never have meant anything to anyone living before the New Testament period.

Even the obvious statement of King David in Psalm 22, "they pierced my hands and my feet," was only understood after its meaning had been revealed by its fulfillment in Christ. Nobody in the Old Testament knew what David’s words meant. To this very day the spiritual meaning of a cross is unknown to those who have never read the Scripture or heard the gospel preached.

If a direct reference to the future crucifixion in plain Hebrew language was not comprehended by the ancients, how much less would a symbol of that crucifixion, which was itself unknown until the Roman period as well, bring about such a comprehension? Even if the entire solar system formed one giant cross, nobody would have had any idea what it meant!

The same applies to the sign of Virgo and her child. Even if the woman and child were visible to the naked eye in their natural formation, nobody would have understood from simply looking at them that the woman would still be a virgin when the child was born, or that this would be possible because the Spirit of God came upon her and overshadowed her.

To suggest that the gospel, in all its length and breath, was fully presented and understood by studying the Zodiac, and that it was passed down through oral tradition, when the Old Testament itself did not even present it, when the very symbols of the gospel were not even understood by men until the Roman period, is religious insanity! It is a logical absurdity that places astrology and oral tradition above the Scripture.

Knowing that nobody in their right mind would believe you can simply look at the stars or the Zodiac and intuitively read the New Testament gospel in them, Bullinger and Seiss said God originally imparted the wisdom needed to "read" this great sign in the heavens to the ancients, who then passed that knowledge down from one generation to another by way of oral tradition.

This explanation sounds plausible except for two small problems: (1) it can never be proven historically, and (2) it stands in direct opposition to testimony of Scripture. The Scripture says the message that the heavens declare is "clearly seen" and "understood" by all peoples of all languages, simply by observing God's creation (Rom. 1:20) (Ps. 19:3).

In other words, if you can’t understand or clearly see the message the heavens declare simply by looking at it with the naked eye, if you must have that message taught to you or explained to you—guess what my friend? You are not listening to the message the heavens are declaring, but to the message Satan is declaring! The Zodiac gospel has never been and never will be clearly seen and understood through a simple observation of the heavens with the naked eye. Therefore, in no way can it be equated with what the Scripture says the "heavens declare."

The term "gospel" is used 101 times in 95 verses in the Bible—all in the New Testament—and is never associated with the stars or the witness of creation; a very conspicuous silence. The apostle Paul states that the gospel began to be preached with the advent of Christ (II. Tim. 1:10). Since he did not qualify that statement by saying only the "written" gospel began to be preached at that time, there is no justification for claiming it was ever preached anywhere else or in any other fashion. He refers to "the beginning of the gospel" in Philippians (4:15) and also states that the gospel had been a mystery, "kept secret since the world began" (Rom. 16:25).

The meaning of this statement is impossible to deny....unless you simply choose to reject the testimony of the Scripture. The Bible explicitly declares that the New Testament gospel was kept secret since the world began. It also testifies that the proclamation of this mystery began with the advent of Messiah. Therefore, the claim that the gospel has been understood through reading the Zodiac and passed down by oral tradition for thousands of years contradicts the Scripture’s own testimony of itself.

Mr. Seiss claims that "men who lived almost a thousand years [before the flood] were taught the gospel by God from the stars." Oh really? Then why didn't Noah, in his preaching to those before the flood, present that gospel? He also claims that "all the great doctrines of the Christian faith were known, believed, cherished, and recorded [in the stars] from the earliest generations of our race, proving that God has spoken to man, and verily given him a revelation of truths and hopes precisely as written in our Scriptures" (p. 15).

This is a bizarre speculation that is founded neither in Scripture nor in world history. Far from supporting the Scripture, this whole idea undermines it and gives mankind an excuse to look to oral traditions and other extra-biblical sources for Divine revelation instead of only to God's written Word—and that is exactly what Satan wants us to do. When we leave the written Word we enter the enemy’s territory.

Getting back to his claim that "by way of the Bible" we reach the idea of the Zodiac gospel; if we can reach this conclusion by way of the Bible, where exactly in the Bible is it found? If the Zodiac gospel is so Biblical, why doesn’t the Scripture clearly refer to it even once? Why didn't the prophets mention it for support? Why on the day of Pentecost didn't Peter, who referred to "signs" in the heavens (Acts 2:19), mention this great sign? One would think that such a great witness to the gospel and to God’s Word would have had a powerful effect upon Jews "who require a sign."

Why didn't Paul, when reasoning with the Greeks at Athens—or in his many debates with unbelievers elsewhere—along with referring to what their "own poets have said" (Acts 17), mention this great sign in the heavens? Surely someone in those pagan nations would have read and understood before-hand the very gospel he came to declare unto them; and certainly such an amazing event would have been recorded somewhere in the New Testament, yet there is no mention of it.

When it came to preaching the gospel, Paul based what he said squarely upon what was written about Messiah, both in the Old and New Testaments. He never based what he said on oral tradition (Jewish or non-Jewish) or on the Zodiac. The written Word was his authority.

Why didn't Jesus, who quoted so often from the Old Testament and continually used illustrations from the material creation, make at least one reference to the Gospel in the Stars? Such total silence throughout Scripture on this supposedly "great witness" to the gospel certainly does not prove it is based on the Word. Rather, it proves just the opposite. The idea of the Zodiac gospel cannot be found in the Scripture anywhere. It is an extra-biblical revelation that contradicts the testimony of the Scripture.

The gospel must be preached by men. The reason men must preach it is because God requires that it be made perfectly clear for two important reasons. First, it has to be clear to produce any spiritual effect. Second, it has to be clear because those who refuse it will be judged on the basis of that refusal. If they did not fully comprehend what they were rejecting they could never be judged for refusing it. In a chapter titled The Suffering Redeemer, Mr. Seiss says:

In the divine triad of Brahmanic deities, the second one [the son] the one who became incarnate in the man-god Krishna, sits upon his throne cross-legged, holding the cross in his right hand; and he is the god of deliverance... It is the same story of deliverance and salvation through the Cross-bearer, the divine Son of the Virgin. (p. 39)

In other words, the gospel is not only presented in the Zodiac, it is also presented in the Hindu religion! This is the kind of syncretistic folly that is presented by cults like Unity and Science of Mind. It is a mixing of the holy and the profane, of Christianity and Eastern Religion. It comes from the "all truth is God's truth" mind-set that makes Buddha, Krishna, Freud, Jung and other godless humanists a legitimate source of Divine revelation for many people.

Preaching the gospel from the Zodiac, or from Hinduism is like preaching it from a Star Wars movie or some other occultic story. The fact that Mr. Seiss, according to his own testimony, got his revelation of the Zodiac gospel from studying Pyramidology and Eastern Religions should make all kinds of red flags and bells go off in our spirits.

Because the Gospel in the Stars theory cannot be proven historically, Mr. Bullinger and Mr. Seiss said it was passed down from generation to generation through oral tradition. Now isn’t that convenient! When dealing with oral traditions you are dealing with intangibles; you are dealing with things that cannot be substantiated.

We challenge any person who is preaching this New Age heresy to produce one tangible piece of historical evidence that any ancient people understood the New Testament gospel through studying the Zodiac. Try to find so much as a single reference to the Zodiac gospel anywhere in the archives of recorded human history. And while you are at it, try to find documentation on any recent tribe or nation who—without being exposed to the Scripture or to men who have preached it—have understood the gospel through the Zodiac.

Speaking of oral tradition, what happened to it anyway? Where is it now? Where are all the peoples who have the Zodiac gospel by way of oral transmission? Which tribe, which culture, which nation currently possesses this mysterious oral tradition of the Zodiac gospel? Good luck trying to find them!

Those who become exposed to this error should be very suspicious of the fact that out of the many hundreds of tribes and nations who have had the ability to write for thousands of years, not one of them has even so much as mentioned this great "sign" in the heavens. Yet, they recorded all kinds of other things. They recorded what their cultures were like, their wars, their dynasties, and the natural disasters that struck them. They also recorded their various religious legends, traditions and practices. Yet, not one of them even so much as mentioned the Gospel in the Stars. No ancient (or recent) record of it has ever been found!

Unfortunately, many of those who have been duped by the Gospel in the Stars doctrine do not even realize that they are basing everything they believe on the ideas of a few men in the 1800s. Neither do they realize that one of these men frankly admitted that he was involved in Eastern Religion and New Age Pyramidology. They simply heard this teaching from someone they trusted—most likely a minister—and because it made perfect sense to them, they accepted it as truth. Little do they know that not one iota of this teaching can be substantiated historically, or that it repeatedly denies the Scripture’s own testimony of itself.

The real issue goes a lot deeper than promoting an illogical and unscriptural idea like the Zodiac gospel. This teaching is only the fruit, not the root of the problem. The real issue has to do with legitimate sources of revelation. Astrology, Numerology, Pyramidology, Jewish (or Pagan) oral traditions, Eastern Religions, and many other like modes of revelation are not legitimate channels for believers. They are outside the boundaries that have been placed on us by the Spirit for our own safety, for it is not Jesus Christ but Antichrist who speaks through these kinds of channels. That is why so many of the ideas that come through them, even though they sound so right and look so good, eventually contradict the Scripture at some point.

In an attempt to keep up-to-date and on the cutting edge of prophetic things, more and more believers are turning to extra-biblical methods of revelation. Dear reader, it doesn’t matter how good a new idea sounds to us, or how right it feels, or how much sense it makes, or how great a teaching we can make of it, or how many ministers are promoting it—if it contradicts the Divine revelation contained in the written Word of God it is a counterfeit! So it is with the Gospel in the Stars.