Massacre of the Innocents

[Godscreated]

Your trying to say a very specific place and I'm saying that it was the city where the Christ child was born. The Bible doesn't say the star stopped over the stable, it says the place. A planet in retrograde will stop at a specific point in the sky and from a persons perspective at the time and place they are it would look as it it stopped over a certain place. I've challenged you to look at the DVD "The Star of Bethlehem," but stubborn you just can't do it. I read the book you sent me when I first came to this site, I took your challenge. The star and the planet both had names and yes at that time with significant meaning to who the Christ child was to be, imagine that.

GC

Okay, GC, I watched your video, and discovered about what I expected, it didn't answer the necessary questions.  What does it mean for a star to stop over a specific place on earth?  He makes the speculation that this referred to the turning phase of Jupiter through its retrograde motion within the sky.  Even if I accepted that speculation, that gives us a 'when', not a 'where'.  The only reasonable interpretation one can give to the idea of Jupiter or the conjunction being "over the place where the Child was" is that one can draw a direct line between the center of the earth, and that object in the sky, and that when this line intersects the surface of the earth, it does so at Bethlehem.  Mr. Larson demonstrated no such thing, and given the position of the objects in the sky at the time, it seems highly unlikely that such a line would have intersected Bethlehem.  A more pressing concern would be how magi would be able to determine this fact from visual observation, and the fact is that they wouldn't have been able to do so.  Any determinations made from visual observation would have placed them in a large general region, not a specific town.  Moreover, we know why they went to Bethlehem, and it was because of prophesy, not because of any star in the sky.

So even if one can make an appropriate interpretation of what it means for a star to stop over a certain location, your video did not in any way demonstrate that such had occurred.  As Mr. Larson says on his website, "Magi viewing from Jerusalem would have seen it stopped in the sky above the little town of Bethlehem."  Whether this was even possible, much less something actual, Larson doesn't even begin to explore.  So your video answered basically nothing.  It gave one more speculation that an object might have been in the night sky at the time of the birth, but no indication that said object localized to a specific town, nor that a human observer could have even determined that it had done so.  In short, the video was just more speculative crap that didn't answer the basic questions.

So, as expected, your video showed absolutely dick.  What it did, however, show, was what a gullible twat you are.  But then, we already knew that.

Flaw 3: The theory is unable to give a plausible account of the Star’s behaviour over Bethlehem

Larson’s explanation of the Star’s behaviour at the climax of the Magi’s journey is inadequate. Matthew 2:9b strongly suggests that the Star was observed to “stand over” a particular house, not the town as a whole, leading the Magi to the exact place where the child was. This is indicated by the context. Matthew in v. 8 underlines how difficult finding the Messianic child would be for the Magi. Then, immediately after Matthew mentions that the Star stood over the place where the child was, he emphasizes the Magi’s joy at seeing this.  Finally, in v. 11 he makes explicit what “the place” was—it was a house. Advocates of the 3–2 BC hypothesis are unable to offer a plausible explanation of what Matthew describes in v. 9b.

The Star’s “standing” could not refer to Jupiter becoming stationary relative to the fixed stars immediately before changing apparent direction, as Martin and Larson suggest, because that is not detectable by the human eye in the short space of a few hours.  Moreover, as surviving records from Babylon reveal, ancient astronomers would have known when Jupiter would change its apparent direction well before it happened....Moreover, since the Star’s “standing” occurred at the end of the Magi’s journey from Jerusalem to Bethlehem, not its start, in order to be perceived to be “over” Bethlehem, it would have had to be in the very roof of the sky (the zenith) or near the horizon. However, it was neither.  Jupiter never got higher than 67½ degrees over the southern horizon on December 25 and so was 22½ degrees from the zenith.

What Is Wrong with Rick Larson’s 'Star of Bethlehem' DVD Documentary  [emphasis mine]

 Thank you for watching but it's to bad you couldn't see the real results. The program he used is one to be know as highly reliable and not only did he show the possibility of the planet topping it's progress over Bethlehem but that the criteria he sat up from the Bible before starting was also met, you seem to have missed this point or you just did not want others to know that fact. Opinions by you and others do not hold any weight, hr used a scientific method and still you and the rest want accept the science you seem to hold so dear. What you seem to dismiss because it "doesn't seem to or is not detectable by the human eye is only a playing of words. what appeared to happen through human sight is what the reality is. also you are wrong in your dating of the event, it happened two years after Jesus birth, the date of Dec. 25th was not set by the retrograde of the planet. Yes that's correct, the Magi came two years after the birth of Jesus. The announcement of Jesus birth came by the angels to the shepherds in the field that night, which does look to be Dec. 25th or close to that date. The Magi most probably did know the retrograde pattern of the planet if it is that stable. What they had never seen was the conjunction of the planet and star at the time the retrograde stopped, that had never been seen before nor since, funny that, what say ye. In what you wrote you have proven you and anyone you got information from did not pay attention to Mr. Larson nor what the Bible says. The scientific program and the Bible line up in 9 separate areas. It amazes me how desperate people are to dismiss Jesus, they will either flat out lie or intentionally leave out information so they can say, see i told you it wasn't true. In your heart you know this to be true and what you have done. I do once again thank you for looking into the DVD at the least you have more courage than Min and the rest here.

GC

---

It pointed out a specific town not a building read the Bible and you can find such simple answers. The star set past the horizon where the town was. At a certain time of year i can watch the sun set exactly where the city I grew up in is. Stars do the same, this particular star was a planet in retrograde. 

GC

You not only need an education in astronomy but you also need one in geography.

The Magi first travelled "from the East" to Jerusalem.  Any star or the planets Mars, Jupiter and Saturn (including these planets in apparent retrograde motion) would rise in the East and appear to travel across the sky during the night and set in the West.  Thus, the "star" would not set "past the horizon where the town was" (your words).  It would set behind the Magi as they travelled East towards Jerusalem.

After arriving in Jerusalem they continued to follow the same star which (according to the story) led them to Bethlehem.  However, Bethlehem is basically about 10 miles due South of Jerusalem.  Again, that star would set in the West, not the South.

As to the two inferior plants relative to the Earth, Mercury and Venus, they will either appear in the West at sundown and set shortly after that, or appear in the East shortly before sunrise and disappear from view when the sun rises.  So, it is possible that either Mercury or Venus could have acted as a guide for the Magi on their journey East to Jerusalem, but only in the early morning before dawn.  Neither planet would guide anyone traveling South.

But don't be sad.  Fictional stories often do not follow reality.

 Your trying to say a very specific place and I'm saying that it was the city where the Christ child was born. The Bible doesn't say the star stopped over the stable, it says the place. A planet in retrograde will stop at a specific point in the sky and from a persons perspective at the time and place they are it would look as it it stopped over a certain place. I've challenged you to look at the DVD "The Star of Bethlehem," but stubborn you just can't do it. I read the book you sent me when I first came to this site, I took your challenge. The star and the planet both had names and yes at that time with significant meaning to who the Christ child was to be, imagine that.



The Bible did not say the star appeared directly over head and that would not be a necessity. The star was a planet in retrograde that's why it appeared to stop.

GC

---

A planet demonstrating apparent retrograde motion will not stop in the sky.  It will appear to move across the sky from East to West due to the Earth's rotation, just like any star does.

Planets appear to change there location in the night sky relative to stars (i) because of their own orbits around the sun and (ii) (in the case of apparent retrograde motion) because of the parallax effect of the Earth's orbit around the sun relative to the particular plant's orbit around the sun.  Such apparent retrograde motion takes weeks to months to cycle.

How long did it take the Magi to walk 10 miles from Jerusalem to Bethlehem?  Why did they travel at night and not during the day?

The star (planet) was over the city because God knew exactly where they would be when the planet stopped. You're trying to place things in a light that did not exist, they were where they were and no other place, these people knew more about the movement of the stars than most people today do. You call them dummies yet they were at the top of the knowledge of the day. 

GC

The planet did not stop.  Yes, many folks back then certainly knew more about stellar and planetary apparent motions than you do.  Of course, writers of fiction do not necessarily have to comport with reality.

If you had followed in Jorm's footsteps and actually watched the DVD you would see what stupidity you are throwing around. You are even going against what you said in your last post, you need to get it together and quit making things up so you can remember what you say. 

GC