The star of Bethlehem

[M110]

On the History channel tonight is The Star of Bethlehem. They are gathering all relevant experts together to try and explain the star. Sounds interesting.
Merry Christmas to all.

[Geoff45]

There are so many plausible theories, that we'll never know for sure what it was or even if it ever happened.

[M110]

Very true. It will be nice hearing 'experts' opinions.

[Suzy]

Thanks for the heads up - I will set Foxtel to record. :thumbsup:
Some months ago, there was an article in either Astronomy or Aust. Sky & Telescope magazine giving some thoughts on it but for the life of me I can't remember what they thought it might be, and it could take me a month of Sundays to dig through all the magazines. I wish I had a quick reference method for trying to find things in those magazines.:rolleyes:

[M110]

Maybe somebody else who remembers it and will chime in and prompt your memory. Anybody?

[M110]

Everybody went to bed so I had the telly to myself, so sat down to watch it. Without giving too much away, a few quite plausible theories. Twas good.

[Suzy]

Whoa, they go to bed early, and on Xmas eve! :eyepop:Must be in a hurry for Xmas day to come around. :lol: I haven't watched it yet (I've recorded it), was busy watching the Melbourne Christmas Carols tonight.

Yes please, does anyone remember the article I mentioned in my previous post???

[M110]

2 kids hanging for tomorrow, and one wife working the last day before her holidays. So yes they were all keen to get to bed in preparation of the big day tomorrow.

[Suzy]

I finally watched it tonight, and yes, I have to agree, there seems to be many plausible theories. They talked about the possibility of it being Jupiter and Saturn together in the sky. I don't see how it can be this though, as these are clearly two "stars" - not one. I researched this topic further and came across this interesting link http://www.btinternet.com/~prgreetham/Wisemen/theory1.html (http://www.btinternet.com/%7Eprgreetham/Wisemen/theory1.html). This article suggests that the Madgi (both the programme & the website have concluded that the three wise men are likely to be Madgi as they new the sky well. However, the programme suggests the Madgi, as educated as they are with the sky, would have known about this event, but the link given here suggests otherwise.

The other theories were a comet or the one I'm going with- a Supernova. They also picked the eyes out of everything, right down to camels vs horses, to saying just because there were three gifts, doesn't mean there were only three men, and then of course, lots of possibilities of who the men are. It did give a lot to think about. But, alas, at the end of the day, still leaves us totally clueless as to what the "star" may have been! What do you think it may have been, Andrew?

I could have missed other theories in this programme as I dozed off because I am not well at the moment, and this is why I am up at 3.30am doing this post. Coughing so hard and then waking up choking several times not being able to get my breath, I gave up on sleep! :mad2: Sipping a hot cup of licorice tea to soothe the dry tickly cough. Found out by accident today that this worked and gave me relief for a few hours. When I couldn't sleep before I googled for some remedies and sure enough, anacide is recommended! http://www.consultation.ayurvediccure.com/effective-treatment-for-tickling-cough/
I am feeling better, so I am going to give sleep :zzz2: another go :prey:...

[luigi]

I believe a comet is by far the most likely theory. A bright comet with a bright tail would be something spectacular and unusual.

A supernova would have left a remmant.

[rcheshire]

I'm going with a comet. I read a paper on the same - as I recall it was suggested that the star was visible during the day - suggests a comet. I'll see if I can dig it up - somewhere on the hard drive? I think the author identified a comet event that occurred some 3 years earlier based on the Gregorian Calendar, and around March of that year.

[Analog6]

There is an interesting animated gif on Wikipedia showing the 2 planets. I had always thought it was a comet, I read it somewhere

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sky_Jerusalem_South-7BC-11-12.gif

[rcheshire]

Well 5 BC. This article/paper examines the astronomical/astrological data, observations and context surrounding the star of Bethlehem. The author, interestingly a Metallurgist/Material Scientist, does a pretty good job of identifying the star as a very bright comet that appeared in 5 BC. According to Chinese records, appearing between April and May of that year.

It's a long read, and kept my attention. Usually, I skim over, but the detail provided makes it worth while reading in detail.

www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/Astronomy-Cosmology/S&CB%2010-93Humphreys.html

[thunderchildobs]

I have always wondered how many other comets / conjuctions appeared / occured over the centuries in the same region of the sky as the star of Bethlehem ( for astrogical purposes) and nothing special happened.

Also would like to hear what modern astrolgers (and the Isralei government) would say and do if the conjuction occurs today.

[mswhin63]

I don't have the history channel so I couldn't watch but many year ago I was asking a few questions about this, although I do not know what the star of Bethlehem is what I did find out is th trailing of the star should have been seen in March. Even within the bible the shepard's flock their sheep at night mean't that is was not in the winter (They only flock in the warmer months) as it is bitterly cold, even too cold to give birth in a stable.
This is historical information as well. So it would be interesting what would have been seen around that month.
It is a well known fact that Christmas was a Pagen festival that was taken over by early Christianity to try and overpower the pagen festivities of the time.

I am not interest in debating the incidents only the timing.

[rcheshire]

You might be interested in the article posted previously, it goes to great length to discuss many of the points you raise, including the timing.

[Suzy]

Thank you- that was a very informative read. :thumbsup: You're right- though it's a long read, it did keep my attention too, right to the very end. ;):)

[Mariposa]

the only "but" to the comet theory would be that in that time comets were considered messengers of bad things to happen. Also, only the Madgi knew about the "star" when they met Herodes, none of his artrologers/astronomers knew anything about the phenomenom, a comet would have been very well known. According to the texts, also this "star" behaved in such a way that seems very much in accordance to the retrograde movement of external planets such as Jupiter or Saturn.
It is alwas going to be a mystery, specially because not even the month or year is known precisely to calculate astronomical events, there will be many possibilities.

[rcheshire]

I must read that section again, but I'm sure that It doesn't say that the Magi knew of the comet, instead they took it as a sign once it was seen, consistent with various signs, such as planetary conjunctions, etc, which were considered indicators of important events. This it seems, extended from a general belief that the 'heavens were for signs'.

I don't argue the authenticity of the account or the events surrounding the comets appearance. Merely, that the author presents a pretty good argument for the comet.

[NeilW]

Or.....it may have never happened at all. Only one of the four gospels, Matthew, mentions the star and the magi (and only one other, Luke mentions the birth of Jesus). The others either considered it unimportant or hadn't heard the story. Anyway, it's always puzzled me how any celestial object, be it star, planet or comet, could direct anyone to a specific house :shrug:

[cookie8]

Hi Suzy
The article was on page 67 of Astronomy 2006 year book. I thought it was 2 years ago but usually it will be right if you double that.

[M110]

That was a good lot of reading, kept me busy for a while, thank you both

[Suzy]

Hi Vincent, many thanks for taking the time to look that up. I don't have books that go that far back though; this article would have been within the last 8 months (but closer to six I think). I'm going to start digging.. :question:

[astroron]

Suzy and Vincent, this article is published in a couple of times over the last few years :)
Suzy I have the 2006 year book:thumbsup:

[rcheshire]

I think the considered opinion, reading the article posted earlier, is that the object did not point to a specific location, as in a house/stable. That, I feel, is an interpretation that may have been somewhat idealised by our forebears.

Interesting that the gospels differ in detail - but they are different perspectives centered around a single theme - it doesn't surprise me that the Star of Bethlehem is not mentioned in every case. It may not have been of particular significance to one author.

[Barrykgerdes]

The controversy over this subject has raged for years. There have been countless searches for possible phenomena without turning up any real possibilities. The most likely reason is "authors interpretation". I would suggest that as the Magi were coming from the east they watched Venus setting in the west over a number of nights and placed their own interpretation of a normal astronomical event. Each night it would have set a little earlier leading them to believe they were getting closer to their object.

Barry

[rcheshire]

Equally then, there is no reason not to suggest that it was other than planetary.

The Magi would have been familiar with the rising and setting of Venus. A special event in their dialogue, on the other hand, it prompted them to make the journey. Which may indicate that the phenomena that they were observing was out of the ordinary.

[Suzy]

I found the article!
It's the Astronomy magazine January 2010. Way back than I expected, and wasn't AS&T as I thought. :rolleyes: I went on to the Astronomy website and printed out their index for their magazines. http://www.astronomy.com/en/Magazine/About Magazine/Annual Index/2004/03/Annual index.aspx (http://www.astronomy.com/en/Magazine/About%20Magazine/Annual%20Index/2004/03/Annual%20index.aspx) Lots of printing at around 35 pages per year - but well worth it. Index's are now nicely filed with magazines in their binders. :D
Australian Sky & Telescope have an index to their magazines also. http://www.austskyandtel.com.au/TheMagazine/Index/tabid/665/language/en-US/Default.aspx

[Keshdogga]

Disregard My comment.

[rcheshire]

The discussion has proceeded on the basis that the events in question are recorded by several sources. The scientific approach should be an examination of the authenticity of the accounts. But this has not been a focused discussion, instead, some have sought out articles and so on, as a matter of curiosity and fun.

[Keshdogga]

Yeah I'm sorry I was very very tired when I wrote that stupid reply It'd be alot better to just completely disregard what I said. Sorry guys.