Was the star of Bethlehem a real astronomical event?

[CoxRox]

As far as it's claims for God and salvation etc, these matters are ultimately decided on by faith, which unfortunately will not satisfy most people.

This is why I'm confused as to the significance of this bit of info. Anybody will concede there is some, i.e. names of actual cities, historically accurate information in the bible. Unfortunately none of it seems to be of any real significance as far as the validity of the story of Jesus is concerned.

It won't be of any significance to most people for the reasons you state. My own faith in Jesus is the result of reading the Bible and 'sensing' (sorry if that sounds lame) truth and then applying that 'truth' in my life. The RESULTS in my life, tell me I'm on the right track. Stuff like 'the star' serves to strenghen my faith.

[Faith No More]

It won't be of any significance to most people for the reasons you state. My own faith in Jesus is the result of reading the Bible and 'sensing' (sorry if that sounds lame) truth and then applying that 'truth' in my life. The RESULTS in my life, tell me I'm on the right track.

If you don't mind me asking, what results? Is it that you feel better? Do you now have a sense of purpose? I ask because Scientology can results for people too, but that should not be something to base beliefs on. Don't get me wrong, if it works for you great, and you should stick with the principles that are working for you. I just want you to know that results do not validate something as truth.

Stuff like 'the star' serves to strenghen my faith.

Which is why I said previously that you should reexamine why you believe certain things, because I can only assume that your beliefs are based upon equally shaky evidence.

[Cinjin]

At the least, I would say this 'star' is proof that the bible contains information that is historically trustworthy. This doesn't mean that the bible is ALL true. I tried to convey this in my previous post. As far as it's claims for God and salvation etc, these matters are ultimately decided on by faith, which unfortunately will not satisfy most people.

Cinjin- please show me one instance where I have said you must simply believe in Jesus?

In the sentence immediately prior to this one. "...these matters are ultimately decided by faith"

I've studied, doubted, prayed, doubted, studied, prayed a bit more, and even now I still doubt some things, but I have chosen to 'step out in faith' and trust that Jesus is real. Why can you not be somewhat gracious about are differing positions?

You want to believe in a book of nonsense. Fine. That's not the problem. It's the continued attempt to prove a belief that many of us find infuriating. You people constantly have to validate your beliefs by attempting to prove your god and his inept son to the rest of the world. Posting things like silly stars and ancient historians whose credentials have been in question for centuries and whose evidence is circumstantial at best - if not completely made up.

Why can't you people just believe and let it be? You'll notice the deists and buddhists are never trying to prove jack shit to anyone. You ALL claim that belief is so very important to you, but then you spend all your time trying to present "evidence". There is none. Accept it. Get over it and move on.




Final thought: If you can PROVE anything that you believe - you no longer BELIEVE it - you simply know it as fact. So which is it? Do you really need the highly questionable "evidence" of the Star of Bethlehem, the historian Josephus, and the multitude of other half-baked ideas or do you have faith. Cause trying to sell both in the same package is just nauseating. Only a christian could try to combine Belief and Proof in the same stupid circle.

[CoxRox]

If you don't mind me asking, what results? Is it that you feel better? Do you now have a sense of purpose? I ask because Scientology can results for people too, but that should not be something to base beliefs on. Don't get me wrong, if it works for you great, and you should stick with the principles that are working for you. I just want you to know that results do not validate something as truth.

I agree many 'systems' of belief 'work' for people, your example being a good one. Following Christ is very hard at times, but as I've tried to obey the command 'love one another, as I have loved you', I have seen a transformation in radical ways with damaged relationships in my life. Some stuff is too personal to relate, but I gladly attribute the 'results' to the God I pray to. Maybe it's positive thinking doing it, or something psychological like that, you would say. Possibly and in some instances yes. But because I 'see' a Creator in life (intelligent design), because I sense 'truth' when I read the Bible, and because having stepped out in faith and asked God to come into my life and help me etc, and then seen amazing results, I gladly credit Christ with all this. May I ask you, if you are a former Christian?

Stuff like 'the star' serves to strenghen my faith.

Which is why I said previously that you should reexamine why you believe certain things, because I can only assume that your beliefs are based upon equally shaky evidence.

I believe in a God who loves us and created us for a purpose. I believe Christ is the only viable 'explanation' of this. I can't prove this to anyone. It is a personal belief that I think only God Himself can help you with.

---

Cinjin- please show me one instance where I have said you must simply believe in Jesus?

In the sentence immediately prior to this one. "...these matters are ultimately decided by faith"

That's not the same thing and you are misrepresnting what I said. Faith isn't a 'simple' matter.

I thought an astronomical event that seemingly supported the Bible would be an interesting topic to discuss. I'm sorry it's got you so angry. That wasn't my intention.

[Welsh cake]

I think it's awesome when people like COXROX tell you that you simply must believe in Jesus and yet spend years researching trying to find some form of evidence.

There's more evidence of alien abductions than there is of zombie Jebus, at least you can go talk to those who claim to be abductees.

[reverendjeremiah]

I don't believe that 'a year either side' is a big deal. We knew that Jesus was born around 3 BCE, so now that we know the exact year of the 'star', we now can be sure of the EXACT year of His birth.

So you admit your bible was wrong about the date of your savior's birth? I wonder what else the bible got wrong...

the idea that Jesus was the son of God..obviously. All those verses that say Jesus is the only path to salvation is all being taken out of context.

[Faith No More]

May I ask you, if you are a former Christian?

No, I was confirmed in a church when I was thirteen, but I had already decided at the age of twelve that I didn't believe. I can say I really relate though with the questioning of our purpose after loss of loved ones. I've lost two very good friends at young ages and after the second I started searching to see if there was a god behind everything. Not the Christian god, but I really needed there to be a purpose behind things and a reason behind the tragedy I experienced. Eventually I came to the conclusion that I was unable to set my emotional bias aside and have returned to the null hypothesis of lacking belief.

I believe in a God who loves us and created us for a purpose. I believe Christ is the only viable 'explanation' of this. I can't prove this to anyone. It is a personal belief that I think only God Himself can help you with.

We just have to disagree here, because I searched and searched and found nothing beyond my own desires for purpose.

[IATIA]

Faith isn't a 'simple' matter.

Of course it is. Belief without reason. Cannot get much simpler than that.

[Cyberman]

First things first: I want to thank all of you for your patience at my recent bit of melodrama, I just hope I didn't do or say anything too embarassing. Depression's a terrible thing to have to live with. I'm still not 100% myself right now but I was just idly browsing, trying to occupy my mind, when I saw this little lot and if I'd resisted any more I'd probably have burst.

Did you watch the film or read the web site account? I don't know if I am guilty of confirmation bias. A rainy day is very common.

I did watch your video and I did look at your link. It was around the point Josephus entered the picture that I walked out. However there were a few choice morsels to chew on. Sadly they turned out to be mostly gristle and fat.

Rick Larson is not an astronomer. He is a Dominionist Fundamentalist preacher with a PhD in Philosophy who clearly knows more about confirmation bias than astronomy because his tatty little website is full of it. He started with the conclusion that Jupiter and the Bedlam star were the same thing and then created, distorted, inverted, modified and discarded facts to fit. If you think this is what scientists do then you're a bigger fool than I was willing to give you credit for and I have no more time for you.

He asserts nine identifying characteristics that would qualify an object as The Star. Why nine? Who can tell? Perhaps it was the largest number he could extract with the minimum of rectal bleeding. He then proceeds to shoehorn the conjunction of Jupiter and Regulus (α Leonis) into these artificial constructs. Examples:

- Jupiter was 'king' of the Roman gods; Regulus means 'king' in different languages and cultures, although it's really Latin for "Prince" (ie "Little King"). Well, let's twist it a bit; I'm sure nobody will notice.

- Jupiter rose in the East, therefore Jesus. Do I really need to pass comment on this? I wouldn't even pass water on it if it was on fire.

- Jupiter described a retrograde motion in the years 3-2 BC. Well whoop-de-fucking-doo, tickle my balls and call me Mary. Even if that was true, it did the same damn thing 13 months or so earlier, and again 13 months later. And so on. And so on. And so on... Ah, says Larson, but it did it three times, each one a conjunction with Regulus. As near as I can determine, there was a close conjunction around 1 BCE that occurred during a Jupiter retrograde loop - close in this sense means miles a-fucking-way; in the general area, but in no way "crowning" the "king star" as Larson would have us believe. He claims that such a triple pass is much rarer than a normal one, yet this is what every outer planet does when it retrogrades: the 'normal' forward path, then the reverse loop, followed by the resumption of the original forward motion. That Jupiter did this in the region of one particular star is inevitable; have you ever even seen how many stars are up there? (Amazing But True: there are at least seven!).

- Herod was unaware of these things, as he wasn't an astronomer. Yeah, I think by now the bolts in his neck were working loose.

- Oh, and Venus (the "Mother Planet") was involved as well.

Okay, I'm not going to regurgitate everything this idiot has glued together, particularly when he throws in biblespam about "the lion of Judah" etc as another 'identifying characteristic'. This is the bit that really caught my eye:

The specific features of this astonomical alignment CORRESPOND EXACTLY with the 'star' mentioned in the gospels . That doesn't mean that magi really did 'follow' it, or that it really did mean a 'king' had been born. Maybe the writers mixed some truth with fiction.

The elements involved in the story are: a miraculous, some would say magical, star with remarkable homing instincts; a group of peripatetic astrologers; a baby. And you jumped on the one bit of the story that positively screams "mythology" to be the non-fiction part?

[Minimalist]

Faith isn't a 'simple' matter.

"Faith" is the simplest of matters.

Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.

Martin Luther