Comments on: God’s Purpose for the Star of Bethlehem http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/ Thoughts on God and life from a Christian perspective Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:51:36 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Mary C. http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8210 Mary C. Mon, 15 Feb 2010 02:27:50 +0000 http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8210 Yes, I am persistent, and for good reason. I am interested in knowing the truth, whatever it may be, not a confused mass of academic philosophy and theology. Yes, I am persistent, and for good reason. I am interested in knowing the truth, whatever it may be, not a confused mass of academic philosophy and theology.

]]> By: Ray Fowler http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8200 Ray Fowler Sun, 14 Feb 2010 01:55:49 +0000 http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8200 <b>Mary</b> - Well, you are certainly persistent! We will just have to agree to disagree on this one. Mary – Well, you are certainly persistent! We will just have to agree to disagree on this one.

]]> By: Mary C. http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8189 Mary C. Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:04:31 +0000 http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8189 Ray, a number of points. First, I forgot to say the statistical theory is simple--which is an indication of good science. Second, the Augustan decreee took place in 8 BC which would very probably rule out 5 and 4 BC. There are other reasons--Herod dying in the spring of 4 BC, for example. 5 BC has definitely been ruled out by most astronomers. Furthermore, 4 and 5 BC don't have any "significant" astronomical event that we know of. The 7 BC triple conjunction is well known in Babylonian annals. But, aside from this, the topic is "God's purpose for the star of bethlehem". Figure it out! Most bible stories require us to think clearly, read closely, and discuss rather than to attribute them to a magic show. I suspect many stories are statistical in nature. In fact, the cycles of history are statistical in nature. It is important to understand and presumably get a better grasp of ourselves and the universe. It is NOT just get a question of someone's birth. Ray, a number of points. First, I forgot to say the statistical theory is simple–which is an indication of good science. Second, the Augustan decreee took place in 8 BC which would very probably rule out 5 and 4 BC. There are other reasons–Herod dying in the spring of 4 BC, for example. 5 BC has definitely been ruled out by most astronomers. Furthermore, 4 and 5 BC don’t have any “significant” astronomical event that we know of. The 7 BC triple conjunction is well known in Babylonian annals.
But, aside from this, the topic is “God’s purpose for the star of bethlehem”. Figure it out! Most bible stories require us to think clearly, read closely, and discuss rather than to attribute them to a magic show. I suspect many stories are statistical in nature. In fact, the cycles of history are statistical in nature. It is important to understand and presumably get a better grasp of ourselves and the universe. It is NOT just get a question of someone’s birth.

]]> By: Ray Fowler http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8183 Ray Fowler Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:17:16 +0000 http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8183 <b>Mary</b> - A legitimate theory must also fit all the evidence at hand. As I mentioned above, the statistical theory you reference dates the appearance of the star in 7 B.C. I believe the historical evidence points to a later date, more likley 4 or 5 B.C. Also, the textual evidence in Matthew seems to describe a more specific movement of the star than would result from the triple conjunction of Jupiter-Saturn. Rather than call each other mistaken, let's just say we disagree. Far more important than the date of Jesus' birth is the fact of his birth - the birth of God's Son into our world in human flesh to be a Savior for all who believe in him. Mary – A legitimate theory must also fit all the evidence at hand. As I mentioned above, the statistical theory you reference dates the appearance of the star in 7 B.C. I believe the historical evidence points to a later date, more likley 4 or 5 B.C. Also, the textual evidence in Matthew seems to describe a more specific movement of the star than would result from the triple conjunction of Jupiter-Saturn.

Rather than call each other mistaken, let’s just say we disagree. Far more important than the date of Jesus’ birth is the fact of his birth – the birth of God’s Son into our world in human flesh to be a Savior for all who believe in him.

]]> By: Mary C. http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8180 Mary C. Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:21:59 +0000 http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8180 Ray, you are mistaken. You skirt the issue. A legitimate theory even worth considering must have a prediction which comes true if it is indeed to be valid. No other theory as far as I know comes even close to making a prediction. Furthermore, no theory as far as I know explains all the known facts. Furthermore, no theory as far as I know even mentions truths about human nature and weakness--which make up tons of bible stories. Furthermore, the theory as far as I know is not a money making or power crazy proposition. Ray, you are mistaken. You skirt the issue. A legitimate theory even worth considering must have a prediction which comes true if it is indeed to be valid. No other theory as far as I know comes even close to making a prediction. Furthermore, no theory as far as I know explains all the known facts. Furthermore, no theory as far as I know even mentions truths about human nature and weakness–which make up tons of bible stories. Furthermore, the theory as far as I know is not a money making or power crazy proposition.

]]> By: Ray Fowler http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8105 Ray Fowler Sat, 30 Jan 2010 18:34:42 +0000 http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8105 <b>Thomas</b> - Thanks for joining the discussion. I am familiar with the site and with the theory that the star was a conjunction of Jupiter and Venus, but I do not agree with the author's conclusions. I have several problems with the theory. The first is the date of Herod's death. The website claims that Herod died in the year 1 B.C., and states that "Excellent scholarship confirms that date." However, the one footnote to support this assertion is a single self-published book by author <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_L._Martin" rel="nofollow">Ernest L. Martin</a>, who wrote a number of books with sensational views. (Martin's book on the star is called <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Star-That-Astonished-World/dp/0945657870/" rel="nofollow">The Star That Astonished the World</a>.) Most scholars accept the date of 4 B.C. for Herod's death, which would eliminate the Jupiter/Venus conjunction of 3/2 B.C. as a viable explanation for the star. Secondly, I believe Matthew's gospel indicates that the star directed the Magi not only to Bethlehem, but to the very house where Jesus was. So for me, none of the planetary conjunction theories provide a satisfying explanation. I guess those are my two main objections. I also disagree with the website's interpretation of the symbolism in Revelation 12. It is a beautifully designed site with many interesting facts, but it seems very much influenced by Martin's book which, as I stated before, seems to make some questionable claims. Thomas – Thanks for joining the discussion. I am familiar with the site and with the theory that the star was a conjunction of Jupiter and Venus, but I do not agree with the author’s conclusions.

I have several problems with the theory. The first is the date of Herod’s death. The website claims that Herod died in the year 1 B.C., and states that “Excellent scholarship confirms that date.” However, the one footnote to support this assertion is a single self-published book by author Ernest L. Martin, who wrote a number of books with sensational views. (Martin’s book on the star is called The Star That Astonished the World.) Most scholars accept the date of 4 B.C. for Herod’s death, which would eliminate the Jupiter/Venus conjunction of 3/2 B.C. as a viable explanation for the star.

Secondly, I believe Matthew’s gospel indicates that the star directed the Magi not only to Bethlehem, but to the very house where Jesus was. So for me, none of the planetary conjunction theories provide a satisfying explanation.

I guess those are my two main objections. I also disagree with the website’s interpretation of the symbolism in Revelation 12. It is a beautifully designed site with many interesting facts, but it seems very much influenced by Martin’s book which, as I stated before, seems to make some questionable claims.

]]> By: Thomas Loman http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8104 Thomas Loman Sat, 30 Jan 2010 18:21:14 +0000 http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8104 We now have scientific proof for precisely what the Star of Bethlehem really was. Truly remarkable what God has done. Check it out at www.bethlehemstar.net -- this is awesome! You will be blown away by the greatness of our God. We now have scientific proof for precisely what the Star of Bethlehem really was. Truly remarkable what God has done. Check it out at http://www.bethlehemstar.net — this is awesome! You will be blown away by the greatness of our God.

]]> By: Ray Fowler http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8103 Ray Fowler Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:40:46 +0000 http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8103 <b>Mary</b> - Thanks for your input. (The article Mary is referencing can be found here: <a href="http://cura.free.fr/xx/20pardo.html" rel="nofollow">A Statistical Solution to the Star of Bethlehem</a>.) I still think the 7 B.C. date is too early, plus I'm not convinced the conjunction adequately accounts for Matthew's description of the movement of the star. You can read more of my thoughts on the star here: <a href="http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/10/what-was-the-star-of-bethlehem/" rel="nofollow">What Was the Star of Bethlehem?</a> Mary – Thanks for your input. (The article Mary is referencing can be found here: A Statistical Solution to the Star of Bethlehem.) I still think the 7 B.C. date is too early, plus I’m not convinced the conjunction adequately accounts for Matthew’s description of the movement of the star. You can read more of my thoughts on the star here: What Was the Star of Bethlehem?

]]> By: Mary C. http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8102 Mary C. Sat, 30 Jan 2010 10:39:07 +0000 http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-8102 You can all relax. Any theory that claims to know what the star of Bethlehem is must make a testable prediction. That's fair, I think, also scientific. As far as I know, there is only one theory that fits the bill:"A statistical solution to the star of bethlehem problem". This theory like so many bible stories makes some interesting observation about human nature and weakness. You can all relax. Any theory that claims to know what the star of Bethlehem is must make a testable prediction. That’s fair, I think, also scientific. As far as I know, there is only one theory that fits the bill:”A statistical solution to the star of bethlehem problem”. This theory like so many bible stories makes some interesting observation about human nature and weakness.

]]> By: Ray Fowler http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-7561 Ray Fowler Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:17:52 +0000 http://www.rayfowler.org/2008/12/11/gods-purpose-for-the-star-of-bethlehem/#comment-7561 <b>Joseph</b> - Thank you for your response, but the Bible presents a very different view of Jesus and the star. The star was a one-time, historical event heralding the physical coming of Christ into this world 2,000 years ago and directing the Magi where to find him. We do not see the star today, either physically or in some spiritual sense. Also, Christ is not physically present on earth today. When Jesus Christ entered this world through the incarnation, he was physically present. But following his resurrection, he ascended bodily into heaven and will not physically be present again until he returns. However, after ascending to heaven, he did send the Holy Spirit, and so he is spiritually present through the Holy Spirit today. (John 13-16) Also, although Jesus is not ashamed to call us brothers (Hebrews 2:11), he is the true Son of God whereas we are adopted into God's family. Jesus Christ is not becoming more like God; he is God and was from the very beginning; he is uncreated. (John 1:1-3) On the other hand, we will never be divine. We are created beings, loved by God the Father, and blessed with amazing privileges, but we are not and never will be God. Rather, those who come to God through Christ will worship God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit as one God for all of eternity. Joseph – Thank you for your response, but the Bible presents a very different view of Jesus and the star. The star was a one-time, historical event heralding the physical coming of Christ into this world 2,000 years ago and directing the Magi where to find him. We do not see the star today, either physically or in some spiritual sense.

Also, Christ is not physically present on earth today. When Jesus Christ entered this world through the incarnation, he was physically present. But following his resurrection, he ascended bodily into heaven and will not physically be present again until he returns. However, after ascending to heaven, he did send the Holy Spirit, and so he is spiritually present through the Holy Spirit today. (John 13-16)

Also, although Jesus is not ashamed to call us brothers (Hebrews 2:11), he is the true Son of God whereas we are adopted into God’s family. Jesus Christ is not becoming more like God; he is God and was from the very beginning; he is uncreated. (John 1:1-3)

On the other hand, we will never be divine. We are created beings, loved by God the Father, and blessed with amazing privileges, but we are not and never will be God. Rather, those who come to God through Christ will worship God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit as one God for all of eternity.

]]>