NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,28348,24764536-5014239,00.html

IT'S an enduring mystery - and a source of equal wonder to scientists and Christians alike.

But an Australian astronomer believes he has answered the riddle of the Bethlehem star, even narrowing down the date of Jesus' birth to a day.

The guiding star that led the three wise men, or magi, to the birthplace of Jesus Christ is one of the most lasting symbols of biblical mythology.

News editor of Sky and Space magazine Dave Reneke says complex charting software has allowed astronomers to map the night sky as it would have appeared more than 2000 years ago and has revealed a spectacular astronomical event at the time of Jesus' birth.

"It's like a digital map where we can move forward in time as well as backwards," Mr Reneke explained.

Generally accepted research has places the nativity to somewhere between 3BC and 1AD.

Using the Bible book of Matthew as a reference point, Mr Reneke pinpointed the planetary conjunction to an exact date in 2BC.

Similar to the planetary alignment of the "smiley face" witnessed across the Western sky last week, he said a "beacon of light" would have been visible across the eastern dawn sky as Venus and Jupiter moved across the constellation of Leo on June 17, 2BC.

Wow. So, does this mean Christmas is cancelled?

Nah, doubt it. It's been thought to have been wrong for ages, but no-one's really cared enough yet to move it around.

Don't most modern Christians agree now that Christmas Day does not represent Jesus' exact date of birth and is merely representative of his birth?

Are we gonna have to change our dating systems.

I doubt it. I doubt anything will be changed by the discovery. Its already admitted that they just named a date for Christmas (actually they did it deliberatly to closely corrospond with a pagan solstice celebration).

I was joking. >_<

Why would it be? It has been said before that they knew Jesus wasn't born exactly on December 25th.

But this: "Similar to the planetary alignment of the "smiley face" witnessed across the Western sky last week"

How did I miss this.

I was joking. >_<

I figured that much.

Oh Cool, so now we only need to debunk the rest of the Jesus myth
[queue religion debate]

Nah, Seriously though, fancy tech, but can't see anything coming of it.


But this: "Similar to the planetary alignment of the "smiley face" witnessed across the Western sky last week"

How did I miss this.

How the hell did you miss that???

http://llama009.com/whirlpool/IMG_0973-sm.jpg

Oh Cool, so now we only need to debunk the rest of the Jesus myth
[queue religion debate]

Please no surely we have had enough of those already.

*snip image*

Is that all? Well I didn't miss much then I was imagining something spectacular.

Wait a minute! You mean George Washington wasn't born on the third Monday of Februrary?! Let's cancel President's day!

Oh Cool, so now we only need to debunk the rest of the Jesus myth
[queue religion debate]
How did this debunk anything?:confused:

Don't most modern Christians agree now that Christmas Day does not represent Jesus' exact date of birth and is merely representative of his birth?

Of course. It's obvious that the early church decided to celebrate the birth of Christ at the end of December in order to provide a replacement holiday for the pagan holidays that occurred at the same time, like Yule or Brumalia. The early church did this sort of thing a lot so as to ease the transition from heathen to Christian.

Christmas isn't really accurate to his date of birth, I mean who the hell takes their sheep out to graze in the dead of winter?

How did this debunk anything?:confused:

Bunk: A built-in bed on board ship, often erected in tiers one above the other; A cot; One of a series of berths or bed places in tiers; A wooden case or box, which serves for a seat in the daytime and for a bed at night; A piece of wood placed on a lumberman's sled to sustain the end of heavy

YARRRGHH! BE LAND ON THE PORT BOW! UNLEASH THE FORTOPSAIL! WE B E GOIN AFTER BOOTY TODAY!

Christmas isn't really accurate to his date of birth, I mean who the hell takes their sheep out to graze in the dead of winter?

To be fair they lived in the Middle East, where its pretty damn warm.

don't be silly clearly what is being described is oppositemass

gee yould think that ancient astronomers would have noticed that it wasnt a star but 2 planets.

Wait a minute! You mean George Washington wasn't born on the third Monday of Februrary?! Let's cancel President's day!

Win. :D

Don't most modern Christians agree now that Christmas Day does not represent Jesus' exact date of birth and is merely representative of his birth?

Yes, we do.

gee yould think that ancient astronomers would have noticed that it wasnt a star but 2 planets.

These were astronomers that thought that a star would move across the night sky and lead them to their messiah. They weren't exactly poster boys for modern astronomy.

These were astronomers that thought that a star would move across the night sky and lead them to their messiah. They weren't exactly poster boys for modern astronomy.
or ancient astronomy.

or ancient astronomy.

Why not? They may have been good ancient astronomers they just didn't know it was two planets instead of one. Assuming that the astronomer in the article is correct.

Why not? They may have been good ancient astronomers they just didn't know it was two planets instead of one. Assuming that the astronomer in the article is correct.
because they didnt "see a star" on the horizon, jump into the minivan and take the highway to jerusalem. by the time they got done talking about it, getting their shit together to make a major pilgrimage, and walked all the way to jerusalem--its obviously 2 planets and they are majorly embarrassed. all the more so because they realize that its venus and jupiter, planets that they have seen many many times.

consider for a moment this passage from matthew chapter2:

1 When Jesus therefore was born in Bethlehem of Juda, in the days of king Herod, behold, there came wise men from the East to Jerusalem, 2 Saying: Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the East, and are come to adore him.

they are IN the east, they see a star IN THE EAST and they go to jerusalem that has to be WEST of them. not good following skills.

gee yould think that ancient astronomers would have noticed that it wasnt a star but 2 planets.
The biblical account on the motivations of the three wise men is (at least) second hand, and probably substantially further from the original source than that. It is possible that the astronomers themselves were following the alignment of a couple planets, but subsequent story tellers didn't understand the details or just didn't care (Rule of Cool (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfCool), and all that).
Alternately, this particular astronomer is full of crap and looking to get his name in the papers, so he's decided to try his hand at Bible Science because that interests a lot of people for some damn reason.

because they didnt "see a star" on the horizon, jump into the minivan and take the highway to jerusalem. by the time they got done talking about it, getting their shit together to make a major pilgrimage, and walked all the way to jerusalem--its obviously 2 planets and they are majorly embarrassed. all the more so because they realize that its venus and jupiter, planets that they have seen many many times.

Yes, maybe if the article is correct.

consider for a moment this passage from matthew chapter2:

1 When Jesus therefore was born in Bethlehem of Juda, in the days of king Herod, behold, there came wise men from the East to Jerusalem, 2 Saying: Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the East, and are come to adore him.

they are IN the east, they see a star IN THE EAST and they go to jerusalem that has to be WEST of them. not good following skills.

Or no good following directions.

They must have made a wrong turn at Albuquerque.

Yes, maybe if the article is correct.



Or no good following directions.

They must have made a wrong turn at Albuquerque.
i happens to me all the time.

The biblical account on the motivations of the three wise men is (at least) second hand, and probably substantially further from the original source than that. It is possible that the astronomers themselves were following the alignment of a couple planets, but subsequent story tellers didn't understand the details or just didn't care (Rule of Cool (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfCool), and all that).
Alternately, this particular astronomer is full of crap and looking to get his name in the papers, so he's decided to try his hand at Bible Science because that interests a lot of people for some damn reason.
aye but then you have the problem with the new testament not being TRUE and that way leads to madness.

they are IN the east, they see a star IN THE EAST and they go to jerusalem that has to be WEST of them. not good following skills.

Maybe they thought they could shave a few miles off thier journey by going in the wrong direction? Kind of like Christopher Colombus?

Maybe they thought they could shave a few miles off thier journey by going in the wrong direction? Kind of like Christopher Colombus?
i think they were saved by the star reappearing as soon as herod told them where to look. then the damned thing moved in the sky until it was right over joseph's house. kinda freaky but thats why it took wise men to deal with it.

i think they were saved by the star reappearing as soon as herod told them where to look. then the damned thing moved in the sky until it was right over joseph's house. kinda freaky but thats why it took wise men to deal with it.

Well a moving star is part of the reason why their is the comet theory. Of course if they went to Josephs house they were way off in where they wanted to be, hell they were in the wrong town entirely.

Well a moving star is part of the reason why their is the comet theory. Of course if they went to Josephs house they were way off in where they wanted to be, hell they were in the wrong town entirely.
not in matthew. in matthew they were all in a house in bethlehem. and would have been there for a while--herod killed all boys under age 2

comets dont move in the sky until they are over a particular house.

Why not celebrate Abraham's birth or death, he was the father of the two brothers that have brought forth Both Judeaism that lead to christianity and Islam. What seperates these religions is a rivalry between brothers.

i think they were saved by the star reappearing as soon as herod told them where to look. then the damned thing moved in the sky until it was right over joseph's house. kinda freaky but thats why it took wise men to deal with it.

Maybe.

Why not celebrate Abraham's birth or death, he was the father of the two brothers that have brought forth Both Judeaism that lead to christianity and Islam. What seperates these religions is a rivalry between brothers.
no room in the calendar for it.

lol I took a wrong turn at Alberqueque last week and I don't even live in the damn country:D

not in matthew. in matthew they were all in a house in bethlehem. and would have been there for a while--herod killed all boys under age 2

Well no because according to Luke, Joseph and Mary went from Nazareth to Bethlehem. And even on top of that according to Matthew, they left Bethlehem and went into Egypt for a while.

comets dont move in the sky until they are over a particular house.

Unless it appears that it has disappeared.

Well no because according to Luke, Joseph and Mary went from Nazareth to Bethlehem. And even on top of that according to Matthew, they left Bethlehem and went into Egypt for a while.



Unless it appears that it has disappeared.
luke and matthew disagree on many details. luke has no magi so we have to rely on matthew for HIS details.

comets still dont move in the sky until they are over a particular house.

id say that it was an angel (like in luke) but thats not in matthew AND it would have been in the wrong time frame.

They didn't have calendars then, did they? Christmas is just a celebration of the birth of Jesus. I'm a Catholic.

They didn't have calendars then, did they? Christmas is just a celebration of the birth of Jesus. I'm a Catholic.
of course they did, they were just different from the one we use today.

of course they did, they were just different from the one we use today.
Calendars without pictures of baby animals on them do not count as calendars in a technical, legally-binding sense.

luke and matthew disagree on many details. luke has no magi so we have to rely on matthew for HIS details.

What? magi?

comets still dont move in the sky until they are over a particular house.

id say that it was an angel (like in luke) but thats not in matthew AND it would have been in the wrong time frame.

An angel?

What? magi?



An angel?
i am confused as to what your questions mean? are you not familiar with the word magi? did you not know that there are angels in luke?

i am confused as to what your questions mean? are you not familiar with the word magi? did you not know that there are angels in luke?

No wait let me do that again I'm tired and about to go to bed.

luke and matthew disagree on many details. luke has no magi so we have to rely on matthew for HIS details.p/QUOTE]

Yes in regards to the three wise men, not on the birth of Jesus Christ. All of the gospels leave various things out and only include those which are the author(s) considered important to include.

[QUOTE]comets still dont move in the sky until they are over a particular house.

id say that it was an angel (like in luke) but thats not in matthew AND it would have been in the wrong time frame.

Why would it be in the wrong time frame? Or are you talking about the article's time frame And maybe an angel I don't know.

Yes in regards to the three wise men, not on the birth of Jesus Christ. All of the gospels leave various things out and only include those which are the author(s) considered important to include.

Why would it be in the wrong time frame? Or are you talking about the article's time frame And maybe an angel I don't know.
matthew and luke disagree on many details in their nativity stories.

but youre going to bed so we dont have to get into that now.

the wrong time frame means that the angels were all heavenly glowing in the sky on the night of jesus' birth in luke. the wise men came along well afterwards so it was wrong of me to even bring up the idea that the star that led them to joseph's house could have been an angel (since matthew doesnt mention angels at all)

To be fair they lived in the Middle East, where its pretty damn warm.

You ever been in the desert at night, even in summer?

because they didnt "see a star" on the horizon, jump into the minivan and take the highway to jerusalem. by the time they got done talking about it, getting their shit together to make a major pilgrimage, and walked all the way to jerusalem--its obviously 2 planets and they are majorly embarrassed. all the more so because they realize that its venus and jupiter, planets that they have seen many many times.


I saw a planetarium show once where they said one of the planets was appearing to be moving backwards at some point in the appropriate area of time, so they postulated that the "wise men" were confused and thought it was a new star.

I saw a planetarium show once where they said one of the planets was appearing to be moving backwards at some point in the appropriate area of time, so they postulated that the "wise men" were confused and thought it was a new star.
doesnt that suppose that they werent aware of it before it started "moving backwards"?

doesnt that suppose that they werent aware of it before it started "moving backwards"?

Nope. I googled and apparently I remembered wrong.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Components/Interactives/Technology_Science/Space/star.swf

That explains what I remember them saying at the planetarium.

Nope. I googled and apparently I remembered wrong.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Components/Interactives/Technology_Science/Space/star.swf

That explains what I remember them saying at the planetarium.
i cant seem to have it come up. is there a page with a link that i can try?

http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,28348,24764536-5014239,00.html



Wow. So, does this mean Christmas is cancelled?
Old news. The date was fixed as December 25th to get pagan people who were celebrating Saturnalia to switch over.

Just put up the tree, drink your eggnog, and enjoy.

this si all assuming the wise men were real.
Were following a physical star as opposed to a mental one.
And that was the event in the night sky they followed.

They didn't have calendars then, did they? Christmas is just a celebration of the birth of Jesus. I'm a Catholic.

They had calendars but the weekend wasn't invented until much later. Hence why historians describe life back then as "nasty, brutish and short." You'd just barely be getting your Friday night drunk on and then have to go to work in a couple of hours.

They must have made a wrong turn at Albuquerque.
Were they headed for Pismo Beach for the clams?

Everyone knows Jesus was born in the Spring...

the Current Celebration was put in line to coincide with the Germanic Samhain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samhain)

I think the point that you're all missing is that they have an exact date now; June 17th, 2.

I think the point that you're all missing is that they have an exact date now; June 17th, 2.

actually, all they said was that the conjuction happened on June 17th 2 AD. and that it may be the 'Bethlehem Star'

so it's only ONE theory.

another places similar astrological events on Dec 25 (http://www.bethlehemstar.net/dance/dance.htm#stop).

so it's not that the Birth date was found, but one possible birthdate was found.

Great. Except that just because the bible says wise men followed a guiding star to jesus's birthplace, doesn't mean that it actually happened.

Great. Except that just because the bible says wise men followed a guiding star to jesus's birthplace, doesn't mean that it actually happened.

they followed a bottle more like.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIjBO26qjYM

Great. Except that just because the bible says wise men followed a guiding star to jesus's birthplace, doesn't mean that it actually happened.

Well, the CHRISTIANS have an actual date now.

Well, the CHRISTIANS have an actual date now.
...if they accept the findings as fullproof, and if they accept Matthew's account over Luke's, etc.

I doubt it'll be accepted by Christians the world over.

...if they accept the findings as fullproof, and if they accept Matthew's account over Luke's, etc.

I doubt it'll be accepted by Christians the world over.

Monty Python's account is the most accurate end of story.

I think the point that you're all missing is that they have an exact date now; June 17th, 2.
unfortunately according to matthew jesus was born before herod died. herod died in 4 bc.

this is not the star you are looking for.

Don't most modern Christians agree now that Christmas Day does not represent Jesus' exact date of birth and is merely representative of his birth?

No, most don't believe that.

No, most don't believe that.
are you suggesting that dec 25th IS the bday of jesus or that most christians are too ignorant to know better?

No, most don't believe that.

are you suggesting that dec 25th IS the bday of jesus or that most christians are too ignorant to know better?

Oh, I do enjoy ripping on the fools that think Jesus was born on the 25th of December.

That was the old Roman holiday of Sol Invictus, since under the Julian calendar December 25 was the first day that they could measure the increase in sunlight hours. Between that and a whole bunch of other pagan holidays, all astronomically determined celebrations that would follow the winter solstice (thereby throwing them all within two days of each other), the Christians had an easy time of switching all of the sun worship festivals to a single celebration of a different Son.

Oh, I do enjoy ripping on the fools that think Jesus was born on the 25th of December.

That was the old Roman holiday of Sol Invictus, since under the Julian calendar December 25 was the first day that they could measure the increase in sunlight hours. Between that and a whole bunch of other pagan holidays, all astronomically determined celebrations that would follow the winter solstice (thereby throwing them all within two days of each other), the Christians had an easy time of switching all of the sun worship festivals to a single celebration of a different Son.

but that doesn't show that Jesus was NOT born on Dec 25th.

it just shows that other things were celebrated on Dec 25th.

You ever been in the desert at night, even in summer?

I know it gets cold at night, and I don't pretend to know the first thing about tending sheep.

Christmas isn't really accurate to his date of birth, I mean who the hell takes their sheep out to graze in the dead of winter?

Since when was there any proof that he was ever born at all. The so called 'facts' are mainly due to the testament of Josephus and it is widely believed that this was tampered with in the middle ages by the church itself.
:rolleyes:

i dont think most people care if the date is correct or not.

they just want to celbrate the hope and good will associated with the birth of jesus.

i dont think most people care if the date is correct or not.

they just want to celbrate the hope and good will associated with the birth of jesus.

*nods*

most pronouncement about Christmas is usually "it is when Celebrate the Birth of Christ".

There were times when my family celebrated my birthday days, weeks or months before or after my real birthday.

i cant seem to have it come up. is there a page with a link that i can try?

Sorry, here is another link, it doesn't go into as much detail, but the Jupiter retrograde paragraph covers a bit.

http://www.astronomynotes.com/history/bethlehem-star.html

Sorry, here is another link, it doesn't go into as much detail, but the Jupiter retrograde paragraph covers a bit.

http://www.astronomynotes.com/history/bethlehem-star.html
thanks.