Star of Bethlehem and Christ's Birth

Hmmm... The morning star, eh? Interesting.

Since we have written records from multiple civilizations that they knew about planets since at least the 600's BC (about the same time as the passage in 2 Kings was written). So, based on this, you would have to assume that the magi were ignorant of the rest of the world to assume that they knew nothing about planets.

Personally, I don't think they were ignorant.

 

They weren't ignorant. That is why they were looking for something in the first place and when they saw this incredible conjunction and this series of events which had never happened before and will never happen again, they understood what it meant. They were not called 'wise men' for nothing.

Did others see it? I'm sure they did. Did others follow the star? No, they did not.

Just like today. People all see the same creation. Most attribute it to evolution, in direct contradiction to both God's Word as well as common sense. Few follow. Men have not changed.

 

- A planetary conjunction occurs when two or more planets appear to be very close together in the night sky as seen from Earth. Conjunctions between Venus and Jupiter are fairly common, occurring as often as three times a year.

http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/venus_jupiter_upcoming_conjunction.html

 

Let's see, the world knew about planets at least as early as the 600's BC. 2 Kings talks about planets, as opposed to stars. The wise men came from the East, where they were pretty big into astronomy. Yet, the wise men didn't know enough to call them planets. Hmmm...

 

He hasn't 'elaborately' painted any picture. He has presented the data. Major difference.

A number of professional astronomers and historians are in agreement, the other one linked here for example. He is not alone.

Research continues and sometimes old beliefs die hard. But when new information comes to light, it is foolish not to check it out.

You have given no specifics that you disagree with. Just that you disagree.

You said you read 'all' of Barry's work. Not 'all' of the article. I have not even read all his work!

In addition, if you did read all the star article then you did deliberately misrepresent what he said about Jupiter.

Now, what else do you disagree with?

Prophecy nut, did you not read what I said? Read it again, carefully! "this incredible conjunction and this series of events which had never happened before and will never happen again,"

This was not just any conjunction. This was a series of conjunction events that never happened before and will not happen again. The wise men saw, and knew that.

Hope of Glory, as Barry explains early on in the article:

As we begin this search, we note that the word "star" had a variety of meanings then. It could mean anything that blazed, shone or moved across the sky. It could mean an aurora, the sun, moon, or a star. It may mean any strange light in the sky - a bolt of lightning, an oddly illuminated cloud, a planet, or grouping of several planets.

Yes, the 'stars' were subdivided into types, one of them being the 'wanderers', or what we recognize as planets. But they were all grouped under the category of stars.

It would be so lovely if some of you folks actually read and paid attention to what you were reading before you started critiquing it!

 

Helen said:

obviously any other research is null and void! If the encyclopedia says something, that is it...forever!

As a general rule, when your view is the minority one, there's probably a good reason.

 

I think the problem with trying to figure out what exactly the star was "scientifically" is we are taking away from the power of God to do as He wishes. It can't be proven scientifically how Lazarus was raised from the dead. Why does the star have to have a scientific explanation? Why can't God have used an angel, or put a special "star" in the sky for His purposes?

 

That sounds like a Roman Catholic argument to me!

If that were true

1. We would all be Roman Catholic
2. We would all be long-agers
3. We would all be evolutionists
4. We would all be geocentrists
5. We would all believe the universe was made up of shells
6. etc. etc. etc.

I prefer looking at the data. There is a quote on the front page of my husband's website which I think best describes our approach:

It is never good science to ignore anomalous data or to eliminate a conclusion because of some presupposition. Sir Henry Dale, one-time President of the Royal Society of London, made an important comment in his retirement speech: "Science should not tolerate any lapse of precision, or neglect any anomaly, but give Nature's answers to the world humbly and with courage." To do so may not place one in the mainstream of modern science, but at least we will be searching for truth and moving ahead rather than maintaining the scientific status quo.--Barry Setterfield, March 7, 2002

We KNOW that the 4 BC date was primarily a miscopy of one of the Josephus mss in the Middle Ages. We KNOW what happened astronomically. We KNOW that three old men on camels were not going to frighten Jerusalem or cause Herod to become so disturbed.

WHAT IS WRONG with the facts? What is wrong with taking a look at what actually happened instead of following the pretty fairy tale that has hung around all these years? What is wrong with letting both the Bible and creation itself tell us what happened?

Why the neuroses about this, people?

 

Webdog, there does not HAVE to be a scientific explanation for what happened, but when we go back and explore a little, there is one. We do think it was the miraculous Shekinah Glory Cloud which stood over the exact house. But what caught the attention of the Magoi, who were LOOKING for that sign at that time, and what they followed, was something we can see by using our computers now to run time backwards astronomically and seeing what was going on in the sky at that time, if anything. As it turns out, the events they saw were unique in the history of the earth and very meaningful to people who studied the stars, which they did.

God speaks to each of us in our own language. Daniel had been head astrology/astronomer/wise man for many years in their courts. He carried with him the prophecies that caused them to be watching the sky at that particular time.

And then God did what He had told Daniel He would do -- there was a sign in the heavens. The Magoi recognized it, followed, and found Christ.

That's a wonderful, wonderful thing, and something we should be rejoicing over to know what happened, and not fighting over and running those who are searching down.

Life from death, like Lazarus, we KNOW is a miracle. No one questions that that I know of. But when we are told specifically about signs, then we look for them, do we not?

 

Yes, and they called them "stars", in the same manner that they called stars, nebulae, and galaxies "stars".

Yes it is. But the word in the scriptures (translated "planet" in the KJV) does not mean "wanderer". It referrs to a constellation.

You're backwards analyzing using contemporary comprehension. That line of thinking is unreasonable. They called plants stars, and called planetary conjunctions stars. Period.

No, they're not. Most are not. But a conjunction of this magnitide, where Jupter is practically on top of Venus, is rare.

You're presuming that a messianic birth should be expected every time the conjunction occurrs. That's ridiculous. There have been many comets, supernovas, etc, as well, that have also been claimed to be the star of bethlehem, but I don't recall any messianic births since then either, which really makes your point pointless.

It does not "point out the specific house". It simply says the star stop over the house. In order for it to have pointed out just the one specific house, then it sould have had to be low enough to remove any doubt of the house next door being the one. If that were the case, then it would not have been called a star. No, for them to refer to it as a star, the star of bethlehem would have been among the canopy of the night sky to be a star.

 

They passed closer together on May 17, 2000 than they did in 2 BC. I don't recall any miraculous births happening 5 years ago, do you?

from Barry: Oh no they did not! As an astronomer, I watched the conjunction on May 17, 2000. I remember thinking, 'This is not nearly as close as it was in 2 BC.' In 2000, the planets were actually several diameters of the moon apart; that is, over 1 degree apart. In 2 BC, the planets were less than 1/50 of a degree apart. In other words, they were so close that they fused into one ball of light as viewed from the earth, with over twice the brilliance of Venus.

 

Amazing how some of the experts who have the intellect and qualifications to evaluate the nativity are far away from the truth. The works of Dr. Ernest Martin, Craig Chester and Barry Setterfield are explanations in futility.

The three principle books I relied on were: In the Fullness of Time, Paul L. Maier; Was Christ Born in Bethlehem?, Sir William Ramsay and A Chronographic Analysis of the Nativity, Jack V. Scarola.

The chronology of Jesus I developed from these sources will be included in my upcoming book, this chronology has Jesus' birth and census by Augustus in 8 BC and Chirst's crucifixtion April 3, 33 AD.

We know from Scripture the star seen by the Magi in the east when Christ was born was the same star that guided them from Jerusalem to Bethlehem approximately two years later (Mt. 2:9-11). This star cannot be a normal planet because they move east to west, not north to south as did the Bethlehem star. A close planetary conjunction could not be the star for they are all too common, occuring almost every year whereas the Bethlehem star appeared for the first time at Christ's birth and reappeared the second time guiding the Wise men.

After the star's appearance there were several conjunctions of Jupiter and Saturn from March to December of 7 BC. The Wise men would have waited until spring of the following year to travel the long distance to Jerusalem, probably arriving there in May of 6 BC. In this same year, as recorded in Antiquities 17:42-45, Herod executed those who were predicting the coming of a Judaic Messiah. He died two years later.

Several Bible translations have this star "rising" when the Wise men from the east saw it for the first time in 8 BC. Another Bible, the New Living Translation has: "We have seen his star as it arose." The Wise men were east of Bethlehem watching his star rise in the western sky in the opposite direction of all the other stars. His star did not follow the normal pattern of planetary stars, it had to be the Shekinah glory of God or illuminated angels. Which one is it?

 

Thanks for your most kind reply MM. My main thought was really about the impossibility of a Friday crucifixion. You have done a lot of reading and a lot of research, but all I can believe is scripture, and scripture will not allow Passover to be on (Friday). If from the below, you can find error, I would appreciate scripture to prove so. I worked long and hard with the guidance of the Holy Spirit to find the truth in His Word. It is all in the Book. Walk through this (and others) with me to see if you agree this is what His Word brought together reveals.

I posted something to this effect on another religious board quite a while ago, and somewhere on this board also.

Most here know the Jewish day began at 6PM (nights and days are Sunset and Sunrise meaning a 24 hour day). To understand about the literal three days it is necessary we know what went on before, and what happened afterward. I’ve done this going solely by scripture, and it proves without a doubt Wednesday was the preparation day, and is the only day that is possible for our Lord Jesus Christ to be pilloried, and killed.

Follow me if you will from the six previous days, and see that Jesus Christ had to arise on the third day, just as scripture says, which is Saturday yet He appears arising on Sunday. We also must realize Mark 15:42 is a ‘High Holy Day”, and not the weekly Sabbath – ”And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath.” Leviticus 23:5-7 informs of the High Day Sabbath shown in John 19:31. This High Sabbath always follows “Preparation Day”.

Let’s begin with John 12:1 saying there will be six days, and then the Passover on the seventh day. I can find nothing to refute what follows:

Nisan 8th is our Thursday going to Friday in John 12:1-2 and their beginning of Thursday 6PM-6AM. Jesus arrived 6PM or later for verse 2 advises they made Him supper. John 12:3-11, still a Thursday - ointment applied, and visitors.

Nisan 9 is our Friday going to Saturday, and their ending of Thursday then beginning Friday at 6PM. John 12:12 on their Friday A.M. , branches from Palm’s, acquiring the colt and we see Jesus went to Jerusalem and into the Temple, looked around and back to Bethany, before the Saturday Sabbath, the 10th and the closing of the gates. Also Mark 11:1-11, and Matthew 21:1-11. .

Nisan 10 is our Saturday going to Sunday, and their ending of Friday, then beginning Saturday at 6PM. Mark 11:12 on their Saturday 6AM-6PM they returned to Jerusalem from Bethany, cursed the fig tree, then into the Temple and cleaned house. Jesus left the city, Jerusalem as the Sabbath day was closing, again destined Bethany. Also Matthew 21:12-17.

Nisan 11 is our Sunday going to Monday, and their ending Saturday, then their beginning Sunday at 6 PM (above). Mark 11:20-27. Noticed the fig tree again in the AM, and back to the Temple with the “chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders” asking by what, and whose authority did Jesus do these things. This also in Matthew 21:18 and on.

Matthew 26:1-2, tells us there is two more days and then the Passover.

Nisan 12 is our Monday, and their ending Sunday, then their Monday at 6PM.

Nisan 13 is our Tuesday, and their ending Monday, then their Tuesday at 6PM

Nisan 14 is our Wednesday, and their ending Tuesday, then Passover on Wednesday beginning at 6PM.

So sometime before Thursday (High Sabbath)began, Jesus had to be placed into the Tomb before as the following day of Passover is a “High Sabbath Day”. Using a 24 hour day then Friday would begin the 2nd day, then to Saturday the 3rd Day, on which Jesus Christ arose perhaps nanoseconds before, or just as the next day was dawning, that being Sunday. Here we have the ending of the Old Testament on the Sabbath just as the New Testament begins on the dawning of the first day of the week, Sunday. Christ arose on the third (3) day of death (Sabbath) to the new living day of a New beginning.

So I see three days as we have two days becoming one on Wed/Thur and then two days becoming one on Sat/Sun meaning 72 hours.

The following to buttress a little - Jesus died at 3PM, and taken down sometime between 3 and perhaps 5:00PM Wednesday. John 19:31, ”The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.” Wednesday was the preparation day (Passover) and the next day, Thursday was the “High Sabbath Day”, so they had to get Jesus off of the Cross before 6 PM. They accomplished this, and also were able to place Him in the earth just short of the dawning of their new day, Thursday, or just at Sunset.

Saturday the weekly Sabbath day. Genesis 2:3 says God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it, and on this day Jesus Christ arose on the "sanctified" day into the beginning of the new day Nisan 18th Sunday. Genesis 1:5 tells us this new day God called the light Day, and the darkness he called night. And the evening and the morning were the first day of the week. The prophecy of 72 hours in the earth was fulfilled.

If we stop and think for a moment, who said three days, and three nights? It was Jesus. There are approximately 12 hours of light, and approximately 12 hours of dark, and these add up to One 24 hour day. If somebody believes in half days, they know something that God knows nothing about. God knows the orbit of the earth, and it has been making the rounds on a regular basis since God set it in motion.

In the earth and laid in the tomb Wed/Thur sealed, and for three nights and days was in the earth arising then coming forth on Sat/Sun. The wording of Matthew 28:1-2 tells us this is so. ”In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. 2. And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.” Just as the Sabbath was ending and the first day of the week was beginning, the Mary’s were through the gate as they opened and an earthquake happened when the angel rolled open the door of the tomb.

We are to believe scripture, and not about Easter eggs, bunny rabbits, half days, and Idol Holy Days. Nowhere in His Word can we find anything about Christians observing the man made Holy Days. Christian faith, ituttut.

 

webdog asked:

Why can't God have used an angel, or put a special "star" in the sky for His purposes?

Because that wouldn't be intellectually respectable to the skeptics, who are presuppositionally committed to a naturalistic worldview.