Star of Bethlehem?

[ziggy]

Hello All,
I've been reading about a theory that the Star of Bethlehem was a conjunction of Mercury and Venus, 25/12/7bc, it seems that this was one of a series of conjunctions that occur in a 480year cycle,and seem to coincide with other Biblical events,such as the founding of the Temple of Solomon etc. I set the clock, selected a vantage point etc, sure enough there are Mercury and Venus, it didnt look bright enough (even zoomed right in) to have got me heading off on my camel, is there a better way to set it up? I'm sceptical about the date incidentaly, didnt the calendars get all out of step and need a week taking out? By the way, (just in case) I'm definately not wishing to introduce any sort of religious debate or controversy into Celestia, this is purely for interests sake.

[jw]

This is what I saw:
cel://SyncOrbit/Sol:Earth/-007-12-25T06 ... 05875&lm=2

[jgrillo2002]

here, cel://SyncOrbit/Sol:Earth/-007-12-25T06:16:43.45185?x=GwseMSXxGOW1DA&y=nogNn4NuFhA&z=iKKwxvWe5ojy/////////w&ow=0.194012&ox=-0.369142&oy=0.905489&oz=0.078630&select=Sol:Pluto&fov=47.250141&ts=0.000000&rf=105875&lm=2

[anton-rumata]

Hello @ziggy,
the star of Bethlehem cannot have been a conjunction of Venus and Mars:

Johannes Kepler justified another theory, which is regarded today of many as more probable around 1615. In the asterisk of the fish 7 v.u.Z. a large conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn took place. Sun, earth, Jupiter and Saturn were located in a row.
Jupiter applied in the Astrologie as the king star and Saturn with the people Israel was always equated. In addition the fish were considered as asterisks of Israel (actually whole Mesopotamien). Therefore the "march direction" was given to the ways.
Probably even the evangelist was affected by the description of this journey. Such an event takes place only every 854 years. In mathematics of the Babylonier there was for it the expression (14)(14) 854:60=14 remainder of 14. Babyloni mathematics used the sixties-system! And the line of ancestors at the beginning of the gospel after Matthaeus begins with 2 times 14 ancestors. But that is only one detail at the edge.
The Austrian astronomer d'Occhieppo discovered museum cuneiform scripts of babylonischen priests, who describe the astronomical event 7 v.u.Z. in the British.
The zodiakallight by the way pointed the way after Bethlehem.

Anton

[MrBatman]

My favorite theory: How about, it was just a miracle?

[anton-rumata]

I do not stand in such a way on miracles. I find better, if miracle stories can be explained with the help of the science.
A scientific explanation is more convincing for me than stories with angels or miracle lights. Nevertheless I believe in a quantity, which is located in the Bible.
Anton

[ElPelado]

by the way, Bethlehem is pronunced Beit-Lehem. Beit comes from the word "bait", that is house, and lehem is bread. its a city in Israel(i am not sure, but maybe its under palestinian teritory).

[julesstoop]

I allways thought it was a conjunction of Jupiter, Saturn and Venus. When I'm back home I'll see if I can reproduce something with Celestia like that somewhere around the year 0.

[guest]

Since the topic is of interest to me I thought I would put my two cents in. There ia another date also considered when
the star event occured. That is 4/17/6 B.C. Jupiter
came out from behind the moon. I won't go into the reasons because I don't want to take up to much time with this subject. The problem is that no other
bookin the bible mentions the star. The Chinese who were the greatest
astronomers of the ancient world never mentioned it. The Romans who were the greatest record keepers never mentioned it. The event was only important to a few of the
Jews. They were just trying to make the ancient prophesy
come true. Think about it. If Jesus really was the King of kings why would only three wise men come to see him and
thousands? As it turns out the three wise men were thought to be astrologers.

[anton-rumata]

Only the scholars (astronomers) from Babylon brought the conjunction of the planets in the constellation of the fish with the birth of a great king in connection. Even the Jewish priests knew only the prophecies. The king of Israel and its advisors was surprised perfectly.
Without the theological background one will bring also hardly the event in the sky with the birth of a king in connection. I do not believe also that Chinese astronomers are interested in Jewish theology. The Babyloni scholars had however entrance to these information. Babylon had occupied in the past Israel and a majority of the elite of the people (also priest and scholar) some time into the own country had also moved.

Why shouldn't the birth of Jesus have been an insignificant event? Many more importantly is nevertheless, which happened thereafter. I trust this report from the bible, because he is conclusive and logical. And the astronomy supplies with also still another good explanation to me, in order to understand the events.
That anyhow much rather is me to believe than in any miracle lights or like.
At that time there was also no separation between astrology and astronomy, how we know her today. Astronomers observed the stars and had often the task to interpret certain events in the sky. That had also completely practical reasons. Thus could be interpreted on the basis the morning stairway of the Sirius, when into Egypt the Nile steps over the banks and the fields are inundated. The three (or more) scholars Jesus in Bethlehem looked for, do not find that I theologically not problematic.

Anton

[guest]

I had a problem understanding your English. But I think I understood most of It.
You make some good points but you misunderstand. The Chinese knowing Jewish
theology , that is totally irelevent. They did not report anything unual in the sky nor did anyone else, that was my point.
So either the star never happened or maybe an event like a conjunction of planets occured but was of little consequence to people who were more
knowledgeable. Everything
I have said is taken from Biblical Scholars. I have been reading them for years. I can go into lengthy detail about the star but that is not the point of this forum.

[ElPelado]

can some one please tell me where in the bible this "star" appears??

[julesstoop]

can some one please tell me where in the bible this "star" appears??

Try google. This is what I came up with in some five minutes:

Excerpt from: http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/bethlehem.html

The description of the 'star' in the Gospel of Matthew (the only mention of the star in the Gospels) is too ambiguous to make possible a definitive identification with known astronomical phenomena of that era. Astronomers have proposed conjunctions of some of the planets as a likely explanation of the 'star.' Possible conjunctions involve Jupiter and Saturn in 7 BC; Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars in 6 BC; and Jupiter and Venus in 3 BC. Other possibilities are appearances of comets in 5 BC and 4 BC, and a nova (exploding star) in 5 BC. Alternatively, there may have been a sighting of the then unknown planet Uranus, which, though faintly visible to the naked eye, was not discovered until AD 1781. lf the appearance of the 'star' was a miracle or a myth, astronomical explanations are unnecessary and invalid.

And more from: http://www.probe.org/docs/starbeth.html

Matthew's account beginning in Chapter 2 verse 1:


Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem, saying, "Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star in the east, and have come to worship Him" (Matt. 2:1-2, NASB).
...
...
And having heard the king, they went their way; and lo, the star, which they had seen in the east, went on before them, until it came and stood over where the Child was. And when they saw the star, they rejoiced exceedingly with great joy. And they came into the house and saw the Child with Mary His mother; and they fell down and worshiped Him; and opening their treasures they presented to Him gifts of gold and frankincense and myrrh (Matt. 2:9-11, NASB).

[Guest]

I should also add that there were many other gospels. Of the gospels that were chosen to go int the bible only Matthew mentions it. But Matthew
is the Greek version that you see in the bible and has been reworked, so it could all be made up to give the birth some
significance.

[julesstoop]

Possibly. The gospels were anyhow only written around 70-120 AD. That's a pretty long time after the life of J.C. I believe Luke to be the closest to the original Judeo-Christian tradition.

[MrBatman]

Actually that's not a long time at all. Jesus lived till about AD 30 or 33. Most of the eyewitnesses of his life and miracles were still alive at AD 70, when Matthew was most likely written, and at least one of the Apostles lived until AD 100. If the gospel writers got anything wrong, anyone who was there and saw the events (including most of the Apostles, who were still alive) could easily have said, "no, it didn't happen that way", and that gospel would have either been rewritten or thrown out, as many were. Paul, in about AD 58, wrote that there were quite a number of eyewitnesses, numbering in the hundreds, that could vouch for the truth of his writings, and that's only a dozen years before Matthew was written. There was certainly no time whatsoever for any "legends" or "myths" to spring up, they would immediately have been contested. (Especially among a community that valued truth above all else - witness the ten commandments "thou shalt not bear false witness", and Pliny the Younger's letter to the Emperor Trajan, where he said the early Christians met weekly and bound themselves by a solemn oath never to lie).

By contrast, I believe the earliest life story of Buddha was written something like 500 years after his death, and certainly there were no living eyewitnesses left.

[guest]

You could not be more wrong. I have been reading the works of
many many Biblical scholars for the last 12 years. Your thinking is simplistic When Budda
was written was irelevent. What is relevent is how accurate the
stories are. Let me give you one of many examples. In the new
testament it says Judas hung himself, Yet in another book it
says he threw himself in a pit of fire. Which way was it? they
both can't be true. But in light of the many years it was written
parts are forgotten other parts are added to, etc. Thirty years or
more is a long time from telling a story to finally writing it down.
If this was the proper place to discuss this topic I would go into detail but I don't want Chris to get angry at the direction we are heading into.

[guest]

i heard that the star of bethlehem was actually the death star exploding.

[julesstoop]

@ MrBatman:
People usually died pretty young around those days, and global information repositories were non-existent, but you have a point, of course.
However, to be honest, I don't believe the Christus-legend to contain much of a historical truth. To me it (especially Luke) all sounds like a rewritting of symbolism allready contained in the Thora. Told in such a way to circumvent anti- Judaic Roman laws in Isra?l. The child of Isra?l (the mother of the people) times the unnamed (equals Thora) has a history similar to that of JC.

[MrBatman]

You could not be more wrong. I have been reading the works of many many Biblical scholars for the last 12 years. ... What is relevent is how accurate the stories are. Let me give you one of many examples. In the new testament it says Judas hung himself, Yet in another book it says he threw himself in a pit of fire. Which way was it? they both can't be true.

You could not be more wrong. None of the books of the Bible says he threw himself in a pit of fire, that was from a TV movie. Matthew says he "hung" himself, and the book of Acts says he "fell headlong, his body burst open and his intestines spilled out." Both are plausible. He could have fallen headlong in the hanging until the rope went taut, and then hung there until he rotted and his body burst open. Or more likely, he didn't "hang" himself at all, as we Westerners understand it. In ancient times, a form of capital punishment was to "hang" someone by impaling them on a large spike. (Vlad the Impaler was famous for this.) So he could have fallen headlong onto a spike, bursting open his abdomen.

May I suggest that you read the Bible unbiasedly for a change, and get less of your information from your "many scholars" and TV movies?