Posted on 12/23/2004 11:21:04 AM PST by GLDNGUN
Scholars debate whether the Star of Bethlehem is a legend manufactured by the early church or a miracle which marked the advent of Christ.
But if the Star was a real astronomical event, what could it have been?
IT'S AN ASTRONOMICAL MYSTERY. A strange star is claimed to have appeared at the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. This site is an investigation of the story found in the Biblical Gospel of Matthew, a story often called the 'Star of Bethlehem.' It brings the words of Roman and Jewish historians alongside the visions of ancient prophets. It mixes "modern" mathematicians with murderous turmoil in the Roman imperial court. It combines all these with astronomical facts which no one disputes. And it concludes that the star was a real event. Come solve this age-old mystery for yourself...
Scholars dont believe in miracles. There always has to be a reason.
Well, often there is a reason behind a miracle. SOMETHING was in the sky. It's certainly interesting to investigate what that SOMETHING was. If the information from the site is true then it further reveals a God who timing and orderliness is beyond our comprehension. Imagine taking a cruise to Mexico, getting off the boat, walking on the beach, and having a bottle wash up at your feet. Your uncork the bottle and note falls out that is written specifically to you from hundreds of years ago, greeting you on the date and time you read the note. What happened in the heavens at the time of Christ's birth is infinitely more amazing that the beach analogy described.
There are those that say the 'Magi' who were guided by the star were actually being guided by something rather less than holy--since the consequence of their visit alerting Herod to the 'new King' was the subsequent slaughter of male children under the age of two in the lands near the sighting.
So was the star a miracle of God or something darker? Or just legend? Talk amongst yourselves. Me, I'm gonna have some more eggnog.
fyi
Sorry I don't remember the author but it seems like a Poul Anderson or another of those NY City 30s 40s writers.
LOL. And "those" people have had too much eggnog. ;-)
That's like saying if a Christian missionary brings the Gospel to a remote place and persecution of Christians follow there, then the missionary must have been sent by the Devil. Satan is always trying to interfere with God's plan. What's new about that? It was God who organized the universe, not Satan. If the heavens give signs, God is the author of the message, not the Devil.
I'd suggest reading the info at the site.
Sci-Fi indeed. Any fantasy about God wiping out a civilization to announce the birth of Christ is not close to "seeking an answer" to anything.
Now if you want a serious look at the Star...
"The Star," by Arthur C. Clarke. A parable, really, of the religious person's efforts to reconcile God's goodness with the evils of the world.
Yeah, it was filmed for TV for the Twilight Zone series from the 80's (the ones in color). Since that show (like Serling's old one) specialized in irony, that story was right up their alley, and they would often do stories that only ran 5-15 minutes.
I believe the star occurred, but I do not believe it was a "star" at all. I think it was some sort of "guiding light" that looked like a star, but it must have been close to the earth if the Wise Men in Jerusalem could be specifically guided to Bethlehem a short way away.
I think "scientific" explanations are only necessary for people who want to explain away miracles.
I wrote a really long paper about this in college. On a typewriter. I wonder if I think any of makes sense now. :~D
So said the Magi.
This was evidently the Shekaina Glory, God's own light, the same light that followed the Israelites in the desert and what illuminated the interior of the tabernacle.
Those old wise men were smarter than the average bear to recognize it.
P.S. Notice that the Honda robot is named Asimo! Alot kinder than that Will Smith Schlock "I Robot"
Interesting theory, but I don't think so.
We now know much about the Star.
It signified birth. It signified kingship. It had a connection with the Jewish nation. It rose in the east, like other stars. It appeared at a precise time. Herod didn't know when it appeared. It endured over time. It was ahead of the Magi as they went south from Jerusalem to Bethlehem. It stopped over Bethlehem.
I don't think the Shekaina Glory would fit all of those parameters.
God creaed the heaven and the Earth. One little nudge by his finger would certainly send an object hurtling out of the Oort cloud to preseage the coming of Jesus!!
... Yep, Clarke's "The Star".
With a troubling, yet unforgettable final line:
"My God ! Why did these people have to be thrown into the fire, that the sign of their passing might be seen over Bethlehem!". . .
. . . or a close approximation thereof. . .
I think "scientific" explanations are only necessary for people who want to explain away miracles.
The problem with that theory is that only the Wise Men could see it. Herod looked at the same sky the Magi did, but he and his advisors didn't see anything out of the ordinary. That's because they didn't know how to "read" the signs in the heavens. The Magi did. That's what this story is about.
This doesn't in the least "explain away" a miracle. On the contrary it speaks of a miracle on the largest scale possible. This miracle could only have been authored by the Creator of the universe. Read the info and let me know what you think.
God creaed the heaven and the Earth. One little nudge by his finger would certainly send an object hurtling out of the Oort cloud to preseage the coming of Jesus!!
Comet? "The first problem is sociological. At this time in history (and all the way into the middle ages), comets were regarded as omens of doom and destruction, the very opposite of good tidings. This was in part because of comet behavior. They were perceived in ancient times to break into the sky ignoring the highly ordered and repetitive clockwork movement of the heavens. The Almighty could have chosen to use an ominous sign for the birth of Christ. Presumably, He can do whatever He likes. But if the purpose of the Star was to communicate something joyful to man, a comet seems an unlikely choice.
A bigger problem is that there do not appear to have been any comets in 3 or 2 BC. Several civilizations maintained records of such phenomena, notably the Chinese. These records have been preserved to the present day, and no comets are recorded for these years.
Finally, comets are obvious things. Anyone could and would have seen a comet. Herod would not have needed to ask the Magi when such a thing appeared. The Biblical Star was very likely not a comet."
"Evidence from the Bible and astronomy suggests that the Star of Bethlehem was a comet which was visible in 5 BC, and described in ancient Chinese records. A comet uniquely fits the description in Matthew of a star which newly appeared, which travelled slowly through the sky against the star background and which 'stood over' Bethlehem. The evidence points to Jesus being bom in the period 9 March-4 May, 5 BC, probably around Passover time: 13-27 April, 5 BC. Birth in the spring is consistent with the account in Luke that there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby keeping watch over their flock by night. Birth in 5 BC also throws light upon the problem of the census of Caesar Augustus. A new chronology of the life of Christ is given which is consistent with the available evidence. This chronology suggests that Christ died close to his 37th birthday."
More: http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/Astronomy-Cosmology/S&CB%2010-93Humphreys.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.