Star of Bethlehem

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.

At the time of the birth of Christ astrology and astronomy were the
same 'science'. In fact, the only reason that celestial events and
objects were studied was to try to ascertain what 'meaning' was to be
derived from the observed phenomena.

Christ, according to the New Testament, was born before King Herod
died. Herod's death is a matter of historical account and it occured in
April of 4 BC ( 3 B.C.E. because of no year "0" ).

Additionally, NO ONE but the Magi 'saw' the star.

Also, the 'star that rises in the east' is (also) the Sun. I mention
this because there is a great deal of astrological/astronomical
allegory incorporated into The New Testament account of Christ's birth.
For Instance, 'a star that stopped over a house where the child and his
mother were'.

The star that 'stops' is the sun at a solstice point (solstice means
'sun stationary') and a 'house' is a component of an ancient (and
contemporary) astrological chart. The 'house' of the mother is the
astrological 4th house which begins at the time of the summer solstice.
Some evidence is now forming which indicates a possible
astronomical/astrological allegory.

The Old Testament states that the Messiah/King will be born in
Bethlehem (Hebrew for 'house of bread'). Bread, in astrology is
related to the astrological sign of Virgo (The Virgin). There is
further writing in the Old Testament about a 'star' (asterism, which
may be plural (also) for a collection of or constellation) linked to
the birth of the Messiah/King.

The Persian Magi were highly advanced astronomer/astrologers. By
'highly advanced' I mean being possessed of the knowledge of the entire
solar system as it is encoded in mathematic symbols in the construction
of The Great Pyramid at Giza (2800 BC).
See, http://www.templeofsolomon.org/Pyram..._symbolism.htm
for a virtual mind boggling overview of The Great Pyramid.

With that said, it is my opinion that the Star of Bethlehem was an
astrological event witnessed ONLY by the highly advance Persian Magi.
The 'Star' was (IS) revealed in an ancient astrological chart by the
astrological geometric associations (aspects) of the Sun, Moon and
planets. The chart can be viewed he
http://www.templeofsolomon.org/pageone.htg/pageone.htm

and a comparison of astronomical charts and astrological charts for the

2nd of March 5 BC can be seen he
http://www.templeofsolomon.org/StarofBethlehem-star.htm

It is unimportant if astrology is considered by some to be
'non-science'. The astrological charts have been prepared by employing
methods that were used at the time of the birth of Christ (same as the
western astrological chart of today).


Best Regards,
John Charles Webb, Jr.

On 5 Dec 2005 13:11:14 -0800, wrote:

.... another bunch of stuff irrelevent to astronomy.

Plonk!

Not if you research Kepler or, ge3nerally, astronomical research
regarding the Star of Bethlehem.

Having a problem with Uranus?

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

The birth of Jesus was extremely important. Some day, you will realize that
importance.


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

Robert Sheaffer wrote:
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.

************************************************** **

Well, you are 100% right regarding the literal words used in the
writings.
The purpose of my posting this Star of Bethlehem item in
sci.astro.amateur
is because I have found (research) that much of Matthew's account can
also be interpreted as an astronomical/astrological allegory dealing
with the beginning of the Piscean Age. (a star 'stopping' is a solstice
-sun stationary - point).
Presently there is no consensus about precisely when the current age
began. There are variances, among commentators, of 300 to 500 years.
This seems to me to be an astronomical issue dealing with precession
(measurement of ages) and the calendar. Astronomers for over hundreds
of years have attempted to find the star that Mathew references. If the
star can be located, rather than, initially, dismissed as fiction, then
astronomers (keepers of the calendar) could propose any necessary
tweaks to get the calendar in alignment with precession and exactly
where we are within the present age.

Every degree (day) that the calendar was adjusted (+ or - ) either adds
or subtracts 72 years of precessional movement (one degree of
precession = 72 years). Plus no year "0" presents another precessional
problem for calendar accuracy. Additionally, when all of the primary
calendar adjustments were made the speed of light was not even
contemplated. So, the early astronomers were looking at the sun not
realizing that light speed issues had them seeing the sun's location 8
minutes earlier or 2 degrees 'off' of the earth's axis rotation,
throwing off the zodiac (Vernal Equinox March 21st) an additional 2
degrees (which is 144 years of precessional movement).

Finding the 'star', in my thinking, will help to align the zodiac and
the calendar. Both of these issues are completely within the realm of
astronomers, the keepers of the calendar.

All of it is quite fascinating.

Robert Sheaffer wrote:
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.

************************************************** **

Well, you are 100% right regarding the literal words used in the
writings.
The purpose of my posting this Star of Bethlehem item in
sci.astro.amateur
is because I have found (research) that much of Matthew's account can
also be interpreted as an astronomical/astrological allegory dealing
with the beginning of the Piscean Age. (a star 'stopping' is a solstice
-sun stationary - point).
Presently there is no consensus about precisely when the current age
began. There are variances, among commentators, of 300 to 500 years.
This seems to me to be an astronomical issue dealing with precession
(measurement of ages) and the calendar. Astronomers for over hundreds
of years have attempted to find the star that Mathew references. If the
star can be located, rather than, initially, dismissed as fiction, then
astronomers (keepers of the calendar) could propose any necessary
tweaks to get the calendar in alignment with precession and exactly
where we are within the present age.

Every degree (day) that the calendar was adjusted (+ or - ) either adds
or subtracts 72 years of precessional movement (one degree of
precession = 72 years). Plus no year "0" presents another precessional
problem for calendar accuracy. Additionally, when all of the primary
calendar adjustments were made the speed of light was not even
contemplated. So, the early astronomers were looking at the sun not
realizing that light speed issues had them seeing the sun's location 8
minutes earlier or 2 degrees 'off' of the earth's axis rotation,
throwing off the zodiac (Vernal Equinox March 21st) an additional 2
degrees (which is 144 years of precessional movement).

Finding the 'star', in my thinking, will help to align the zodiac and
the calendar. Both of these issues are completely within the realm of
astronomers, the keepers of the calendar.

All of it is quite fascinating.

In article QSamf.136$z21.131@fed1read04, Mij Adyaw wrote:

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

The birth of Jesus was extremely important. Some day, you will realize
that importance.

Nah - the important event here wasn't the birth of Jesus. The
important event was the decision by the Roman Empire to make
Christianity its State Religion. Without that, Christianity would
probably have been an extinct religion today, and some other religion
(islam?) would have become the dominant religion in the western world.
Or perhaps Christianity would have been one among the many branches of
"New Age" - these people enjoy trying to revive extinct religions...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/

Paul,

It seems to me that you may have had a bad experience with Christianity. You
should try to find a good Christian Church. Hopefully, one day you will
understand the importance of the birth of Jesus and what he has done and is
currently doing for the world.

Merry Christmas and Best Regards,

-mij


"Paul Schlyter" wrote in message
...
In article QSamf.136$z21.131@fed1read04, Mij Adyaw wrote:

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

The birth of Jesus was extremely important. Some day, you will realize
that importance.

Nah - the important event here wasn't the birth of Jesus. The
important event was the decision by the Roman Empire to make
Christianity its State Religion. Without that, Christianity would
probably have been an extinct religion today, and some other religion
(islam?) would have become the dominant religion in the western world.
Or perhaps Christianity would have been one among the many branches of
"New Age" - these people enjoy trying to revive extinct religions...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/

In article bwDmf.277$z21.225@fed1read04, "Mij Adyaw"
wrote:

Paul,

It seems to me that you may have had a bad experience with Christianity. You
should try to find a good Christian Church. Hopefully, one day you will
understand the importance of the birth of Jesus and what he has done and is
currently doing for the world.

I prefer to not throw pearls before the swine, so to speak, particularly
in a place like s.a.a. I think it's safe to assume most here are older,
well-educated and rooted in their core beliefs/non-beliefs.

--
Jay Swartzfeger
http://www.swartzfeger.com
Scottsdale, AZ