Star of Bethlehem - Candidate Found.

[wisefool]

I have modified my original astrological presentation for the Star of Bethlehem to now include a candidate for the S. of B. itself. Go to my original site to see how it has been transformed: http://members.cox.net/clarkt7/StarofBethlehem

 

[grooble]

I saw on a bbc show once that it was actually Jupiter, in some rare event. It fits with the mythologoy of it, the King of the planets.

 

[wisefool]

Jupiter is in the mix for April 17, 06 B.C. The problem with Jupiter, or Venus, is that all of these planets are very well known citizens of the cosmos, nothing worth getting on your camel and taking a dangerous trip.

 

[wisefool]

You are right regarding the incompleteness of plausibility. On the other hand, if plausible means the best guess we currently have, and something that future science can build on, then plausibility is a step forward, a working hypothesis. Alas, when we venture into mysticism we will never find the "ultimate truth." Thus, plausibility is pretty good, and it beats a host of other crazy ideas. Until somebody comes up with a better astronomical candidate, then NGC 1514 is our best scientific guess.

 

[diogenes]

Jupiter looks like it.<br /><br /><b>Still, the event would have been of great significance to ancient Roman astrologers. After studying the symbolism on Roman coins, he concluded that the "star" was in fact a double eclipse of Jupiter in a rare astrological conjunction that occurred in Aries on March 20, in the year 6 B.C., and again a month later on April 17. <br /><br />Molnar believed that Roman astrologers would have interpreted such an event as signifying the birth of a divine king in Judea. But he lacked proof. Now he says he has found it, in the Mathesis, a book written by Maternus in A.D. 334. Maternus described an astrological event involving an eclipse of Jupiter by the Moon in Aries, and said that it signified the birth of a divine king. <br /><br /></b> http://www.orthodox.net/nativity/astronomers-theory-on-star-of-bethlehem.html

 

[wisefool]

Jupiter could be "it" in astrological context. That would suffice if all that went on was an astrological alignment. My idea was to explore a what-if adjunct to the astrological theory. What if the report of a Star of Bethlehem were literally and simply true? What if there were something "new" (Latin for new is nova) in the sky during that time, so that Matthew was literally true in its reference. My candidate reconciles both the astrological thesis and the would-be astronomical reference. Referencing Jupiter alone only satisfies the astrological thesis. This is not to say that Jupiter is an unsatisfactory candidate, in context; only to say that we should also look at the alternative astronomical candidate. I might add that occultations of Jupiter by the moon are not rare -- two of them occur this year! -- but that births of history-changing kings are indeed rare.