News: The Star of Bethlehem

You know I was thinking of asking the same thing today. I was wondering if anyone thought that it was some kind of natural phenomenon that God used or some special star that He created just for the occasion.

Some church historians and Bible scholars belive that it was some kind of lining up of jupiter and saturn to cause a bright star, which they were able calculate back to date the time of the nativity.

What I would like to know is how did the wise men know about the star since there is nothing in the Old Testament that I know of about unless it is NUmbers 24:17 which I doubt.

[ December 23, 2002, 11:35 PM: Message edited by: Ps104_33 ]

 

And then you wish everyone a Merry CHRIST MASS sheeeesh

 

Christmas is not Biblical, there is no Christ Mass celebrated by nonCatholics. We have taken the term from the Catholics and made it a secular holiday. I have no problems with secular holidays.

 

Let me offer the writings of Edersheim, a noted authority of the life of Christ:

"In the astronomical tables of the Chinese - to whose general trustworthiness so high an authority as Humbidt bears testimony (Cosmos, Vol 1. p.92)- the appearance of an evanescent star was noted. Pingre and others have designated it as a comet, and calculated its first appearance in February 750 A.U.C, which is just the time when the Magi would, in all probability, leave Jerusalem for Bethlehem, since this must have preceded the death of Herod, which took place in March 750..." Edersheim,The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Volume 1, 1883.

Edersheim also quotes some Jewish Rabbinical writers who include astrological findings. For example, he quotes from: The Book of Elijah..chapters about the Messiah...that a star from the East was to appear two years before the birth of Messiah.......

I might add that Edersheim also states at one point around this subject...."Here we leave the domain of the certain, and enter upon that of the probable..."

I am not at all into astronomy, so you could baffle me on any given day. Trusting these quotes offer something to chew on.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Numbers 24:17, along with a spectacular shining star, probably gave them enough to follow it (it had to be close enough to follow, correct?). They went to the capital of Jacob to find the King. What's so hard to believe?

Astrologers go against the Bible, but that doesn't mean they don't use it. My mother-in-law studied astrology and thought highly of the Bible, yet she never saw anything in it that was against her beliefs. That's why she does'nt have eyes to see or ears to hear. The Bible tells the story.

As for your theory of the star, Post-it, you show your lack of belief in the Bible as truth because you try to put your low possibility of thought on God's plane. An impossibility, just as the rest of the unbelieving world. If God said it occured the way told in Matthew, then that is all we need to believe.

Merry Christmas to you too, Post-it, or is that too hard to believe?

 

If you start following a Star located in East, in about 4 hours it will be behind you. You would have to turnaround to keep following it and you would never catch up with it since you would have to travel 1000 miles an hour to maintain the star overhead.

It couldn't be a comet Jim, the same problem occurs with any body in space. They would have to be traveling at an incomprehensible speed to maintain a single point in the heavens on that latitude. For every measurement above the earth an object is located that wishes to maintain a single position relative to a point on earth, it must travel at an exponentially increasing speed. Assuming it was a star (sun-like in size) it would have to be traveling trillions of trillions of miles per nano-second. It would be the only object in the universe that would move that fast.

If the earth stopped right now and we looked out into space, all the “stars” would pretty much not be seen to be moving at all. They would appear to be frozen even though they are moving at great speeds. Then in the middle of this stillness, there would be one lone star being seen to be moving at tremendous speed circling the earth in just 24 hours from deep within space. The only other movement that we could see would be the planets in our own solar system. Sorry, the miracle speeding star just doesn’t make sense.

More likely, if it did happen, it was just a light of some kind created by God for this one event which hovered inside earth's atmosphere above Jesus at birth. ** comments concerning falshood of scriptures deleted ***

[ December 28, 2002, 10:54 PM: Message edited by: C.S. Murphy ]

 

You are so down to earth, Post-it, that you forget that there is a supreme being, capable of doing anything. If the Bible said it was a star, then it was a star. Your finite mind obviously can't comprehend something so great as a miracle like this. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Why do you find it so hard to believe in something that is so fantastic and unexplainable? We do not experience or see all that God has for us, or we could never believe that He really exists. Do you not find this true? How do you believe in God if you have never seen Him?

 

If we follow that logic, then the Bible must be wrong not only on one point but in many. Yet the Bible is true, there is no lie in it. But I suppose that if the reader wants to find fault in the Word of God then he/she will find them. The errors, however, are not there, for the Word of God does not contain any. Now when it concerns the Bible and their Catholic writers, I hate to break it to you Post-it but none of them were actually Catholic. The last time I checked, they were all Hebrew writers - except perhaps Dr. Luke, who wrote two books in the New Testament. Now, if we are talking about minor scribal errors, then we can point to some - but their numbers are very few and in between and more importantly they have nothing to do with salvation issues or doctrinal statements.

Now, the New Testament writings depicting the birth of Jesus, are referring to the appearance of a star indeed. But the Greek scholar, Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, defines it to be a luminous body, resembling a star, such as the wise men saw in the sky, leading them to Bethlehem. We can assume that the motion of that luminous body which appeared to the wise men was different from any other stars. It differed also possibly appearing in the daytime since they may have been traveling during the day. The original Greek word is aster (#792), gen. asteros, probably from the base of (#4766) a star (as thrown over the sky).

 

If I may, folks, my husband lectured in astronomy to other astronomers for years, was the one entrusted with the Dodwell papers when George Dodwell, government astronomer for South Australia died, and has done detailed and exacting research into the subject of what the Christmas Star was.

You will find the results of his research here:
http://www.ldolphin.org/birth.html

In short, the magi were not astronomers, but the entire upper house of Persia, the magoi. They, along with their armed retinue was what so thoroughly alarmed both Herod and all Jerusalem at that time. Believe me, please, three old men on camels just wouldn't have had that impact!

The Christmas Star was not a single star, but a predicted conjunction which has only happened once in the history of the earth. It came close to happening again in 1999-2000 but, as Barry just mentioned to me when I asked him, some essential elements were missing.

If you are really curious about the star, I think you will find some interesting material in his article.

 

That was a nice article from Barry, thanks for posting it Helen!

 

Mat 1
9. When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was.
10. When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy.
11. And when they were come into the house,...

So this is a star that can locate a house, it can be found directly above one single point on earth the size of a house. For this to be true, either it wasn't a star at all but a low hanging light, or if it were as Star or conjuction etc it would be impossible to determine even something as large as a State. An star that high above us can't be used to pin point a house. Add to this mix the fact that the earth is rotating... it can't be a star.

*** attack against the book of Matthew removed*** If there was a light, it was something besides a star.

[ December 28, 2002, 10:57 PM: Message edited by: C.S. Murphy ]

 

suggest you read the article, post-it, so you might have some understanding of what the Bible is talking about and not what we have imagined it to be talking about.

 

In Hebrews 11:1-3 we read: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. For by it the elders obtained a good report. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

Now, when the Bible tells me that there was a star leading the wise men from the East, then it was a star. God who could bring this world into existence with His word "Let there be," and there was, He can certainly create a star suitable for this occasion!

 

Exactly what I was trying to say, Barnabas. That is why, when we in our finite minds, can have such a problem when we try to explain God's miracles. When we put our explanations to work, somehow mans flaws come out. Helen, the article was good, especially the history of the Magoi and possible links to the Jewish feasts. But so many unsubstantiated facts leave room for flaws in the argument, which is why we should not try to explain away God's power to perform miracles with human discovery and experience. This is how people like Post-it can run away with human reasoning and make his argument plausible.

 

Normally I would agree with you, Olivebranch, but when all the 'unsubstantiated facts' fit so perfectly together as a whole, some credence must be given. If anyone can show where any of Barry's material there is wrong, he would sincerely and humbly like to know.

 

His theory is completly wrong. This Star had to move just above a single house where Jesus lay. A conjunction can't do that!!! At the most, Stars in conjunction can point at an area the size of our solar system. Planets in conjuctions can point at something the size of a planet.

 

The assumption that Jesus was 15 months old when the wise men came. The star was already in the east, making it stationary, not moving to lead them. It did not have to appear for two years, because if they had known the date when the Messiah was to be born, or there about, they wouldn't have needed to wait two years to travel a six week journey. Why explain all the star light with the zodiak, knowledge of the planets, and such, the when then next unexplainable thing, the marking of the building, was given to the Shikanah glory? Would they have not heard Micah's prophecy of the Messiah in Bethlehem?
What occured in 1999-2000. The certain elements, what was this?

 

[/b] [/QUOTE]Yikes! What a scary statement! Boy, I am glad that Christ was born of a virgin just as God predicted in Isaiah. Post-it, do you have any manuscript evidence for the accusations you have? What are the important parts of salvation to you? Just wondering......

Neal

[ December 28, 2002, 10:59 PM: Message edited by: C.S. Murphy ]