The problem with all of this "Star of Bethlehem' stuff is that it
assumes factual content of the Birth Narratives, which most serious New
Testament scholars don't.

Stop and consider: the "Decree of Augustus" in Luke, and the "Massacre
of the Innocents" in Matthew, are both considered fictional events by
non-religious historians. So how likely is either account to be true?

Plus, the two Birth Narratives (in Luke and in Matthew) are mutually
contradictory. (Read them carefully and critically). At least one must
be false. Non-fundamentalist scholars assume that both are probably
mostly (if not entirely) fiction.

So the Star of Bethlehem was..... a made-up story, to try to make the
birth of Jesus seem Really Important. Sorry.

Robert Sheaffer - author, "The Making of the Messiah"

wrote:

Any celestial event that is assigned a 'meaning' (beyond physics) is
within the realm of ancient astrology. Astronomy is 'observation' and
astrology is 'interpretation'.

To date, all of the astronomical theories and possibilities have been
thoroughly investigated. All of the astronomical theories are mundane,
however, all astronomical commentators have done a superb investigatory
job probing the window of time (7 BC to 4 BC) and coming up with
possible 'Star of Bethlehem' candidates.
--
Robert Sheaffer - User name "Roberto" at debunker-dot-com
Skeptical to the Max!
Visit the Debunker's Domain - http://www.debunker.com
Resources Debunking All Manner of Bogus Claims
Also: Skepticism / Astronomy / Opera / more