Star of Bethlehem

Many scholars who see the gospel nativity stories as later apologetic accounts created to establish the messianic status of Jesus regard the Star of Bethlehem as a pious fiction.[26][27] Aspects of Matthew's account which have raised questions of the historical event include: Matthew is the only one of the four gospels which mentions either the Star of Bethlehem or the Magi. Scholars suggest that Jesus was born in Nazareth and that the Bethlehem nativity narratives reflect a desire by the Gospel writers to present his birth as the fulfillment of prophecy.[28]

The Matthew account conflicts with that given in the Gospel of Luke, in which the family of Jesus already lives in Nazareth, travel to Bethlehem for the census, and return home almost immediately.[29]

Adoration of the Magi, by Jean Fouquet (15th century). The Star of Bethlehem can be seen in the top right. The soldiers and castle in the background may represent the Battle of Castillon (1453).

Matthew's description of the miracles and portents attending the birth of Jesus can be compared to stories concerning the birth of Augustus (63 BC).[nb 4] Linking a birth to the first appearance of a star was consistent with a popular belief that each person's life was linked to a particular star.[30] Magi and astronomical events were linked in the public mind by the visit to Rome of a delegation of magi at the time of a spectacular appearance of Halley's Comet in AD 66[31] led by King Tiridates of Armenia, who came seeking confirmation of his title from Emperor Nero. Ancient historian Dio Cassius wrote that, "The King did not return by the route he had followed in coming,"[31] a line similar to the text of Matthew's account, but written some time after the completion of Matthew's gospel.[32]

The ancients believed that astronomical phenomena were connected to terrestrial events – As Above, So Below. Miracles were routinely associated with the birth of important people, including the Hebrew patriarchs, as well as Greek and Roman heroes.[33]

The Star of Bethlehem is traditionally linked to the Star Prophecy in the Book of Numbers:

I see him, but not now;
I behold him, but not near;
A Star shall come out of Jacob;
A Scepter shall rise out of Israel,
And batter the brow of Moab,
And destroy all the sons of tumult.[34]

Although possibly intended to refer to a time that was long past, since the kingdom of Moab had long ceased to exist by the time the Gospels were being written, this passage had become widely seen as a reference to the coming of a Messiah.[4] It was, for example, cited by Josephus, who believed it referred to Emperor Vespasian.[35] Origen, one of the most influential early Christian theologians, connected this prophecy with the Star of Bethlehem:

If, then, at the commencement of new dynasties, or on the occasion of other important events, there arises a comet so called, or any similar celestial body, why should it be matter of wonder that at the birth of Him who was to introduce a new doctrine to the human race, and to make known His teaching not only to Jews, but also to Greeks, and to many of the barbarous nations besides, a star should have arisen? Now I would say, that with respect to comets there is no prophecy in circulation to the effect that such and such a comet was to arise in connection with a particular kingdom or a particular time; but with respect to the appearance of a star at the birth of Jesus there is a prophecy of Balaam recorded by Moses to this effect: There shall arise a star out of Jacob, and a man shall rise up out of Israel.[36]

Origen suggested that the Magi may have decided to travel to Jerusalem when they "conjectured that the man whose appearance had been foretold along with that of the star, had actually come into the world".[37]

The Magi are sometimes called "kings" because of the belief that they fulfill prophecies in Isaiah and Psalms concerning a journey to Jerusalem by gentile kings.[38] Isaiah mentions gifts of gold and incense.[39] In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament probably used by Matthew, these gifts are given as gold and frankincense,[40] similar to Matthew's "gold, frankincense, and myrrh."[41] The gift of myrrh symbolizes mortality, according to Origen.[37]

While Origen argued for a naturalistic explanation, John Chrysostom viewed the star as purely miraculous: "How then, tell me, did the star point out a spot so confined, just the space of a manger and shed, unless it left that height and came down, and stood over the very head of the young child? And at this the evangelist was hinting when he said, "Lo, the star went before them, till it came and stood over where the young Child was."[42]

Although magi (Greek μαγοι) is usually translated as "wise men," in this context it probably means 'astronomer'/'astrologer'.[43] The involvement of astrologers in the story of the birth of Jesus was problematic for the early Church, because they condemned astrology as demonic; a widely cited explanation was that of Tertullian, who suggested that astrology was allowed 'only until the time of the Gospel'.[44]

In 1614, German astronomer Johannes Kepler determined that a series of three conjunctions of the planets Jupiter and Saturn occurred in the year 7 BC.[8] He argued (incorrectly) that a planetary conjunction could create a nova, which he linked to the Star of Bethlehem.[8] Modern calculations show that there was a gap of nearly a degree (approximately twice a diameter of the moon) between the planets, so these conjunctions were not visually impressive.[45] An ancient almanac has been found in Babylon which covers the events of this period, but does not indicate that the conjunctions were of any special interest.[45] In the 20th century, Professor Karlis Kaufmanis, an astronomer, argued that this was an astronomical event where Jupiter and Saturn were in a triple conjunction in the constellation Pisces.[46][47] Archaeologist and Assyriologist Simo Parpola has also suggested this explanation.[48]

In 6 BC, there were conjunctions/occultations (eclipses) of Jupiter by the Moon in Aries. "Jupiter was the regal 'star' that conferred kingships – a power that was amplified when Jupiter was in close conjunctions with the Moon. The second occultation on April 17 coincided precisely when Jupiter was 'in the east', a condition mentioned twice in the biblical account about the Star of Bethlehem."[49]

In 3–2 BC, there was a series of seven conjunctions, including three between Jupiter and Regulus and a strikingly close conjunction between Jupiter and Venus near Regulus on June 17, 2 BC. "The fusion of two planets would have been a rare and awe-inspiring event", according to Roger Sinnott.[50] Another Venus–Jupiter conjunction occurred earlier in August, 3 BC.[51] However, these events occurred after the generally accepted date of 4 BC for the death of Herod. Since the conjunction would have been seen in the west at sunset it could not have led the magi south from Jerusalem to Bethlehem.[52]

Astronomer Michael R. Molnar argues that the "star in the east" refers to an astronomical event with astrological significance in the context of ancient Greek astrology.[53] He suggests a link between the Star of Bethlehem and a double occultation of Jupiter by the moon on March 20 and April 17 of 6 BC in Aries, particularly the second occultation on April 17.[54][55] Occultations of planets by the moon are quite common, but Firmicus Maternus, an astrologer to Roman Emperor Constantine, wrote that an occultation of Jupiter in Aries was a sign of the birth of a divine king.[54][56] He argues that Aries rather than Pisces was the zodiac symbol for Judea, a fact that would affect previous interpretations of astrological material. Molnar's theory was debated by scientists, theologians, and historians during a colloquium on the Star of Bethlehem at the Netherlands’ University of Groningen in October 2014. Harvard astronomer Owen Gingerich supports Molnar's explanation but noted technical questions.[57] "The gospel story is one in which King Herod was taken by surprise," said Gingerich. "So it wasn’t that there was suddenly a brilliant new star sitting there that anybody could have seen [but] something more subtle."[57] Astronomer David A. Weintraub says, "If Matthew’s wise men actually undertook a journey to search for a newborn king, the bright star didn’t guide them; it only told them when to set out."[53]

There is an explanation given that the events were quite close to the sun and would not have been visible to the naked eye.[58]

Attorney Frederick Larson examined the biblical account in the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 2[59] and found the following nine qualities of Bethlehem's Star:[60][61] It signified birth, it signified kingship, it was related to the Jewish nation, and it rose "in the East";[62] King Herod had not been aware of it;[63] it appeared at an exact time;[64] it endured over time;[65] and, according to Matthew,[66] it was in front of the Magi when they traveled south from Jerusalem to Bethlehem, and then stopped over Bethlehem.[67]

Using the Starry Night astronomy software, and an article[68] written by astronomer Craig Chester[69] based on the work of archeologist and historian Ernest Martin,[70][71] Larson thinks all nine characteristics of the Star of Bethlehem are found in events that took place in the skies of 3–2 BC.[61][72] Highlights[73] include a triple conjunction of Jupiter, called the king planet, with the fixed star Regulus, called the king star, starting in September 3 BC.[74][75] Larson believes that may be the time of Jesus' conception.[72]

By June of 2 BC, nine months later, the human gestation period,[76] Jupiter had continued moving in its orbit around the sun and appeared in close conjunction with Venus[75] in June of 2 BC.[77] In Hebrew Jupiter is called "Sedeq", meaning "righteousness", a term also used for the Messiah, and suggested that because the planet Venus represents love and fertility, so Chester had suggested astrologers would have viewed the close conjunction of Jupiter and Venus as indicating a coming new king of Israel, and Herod would have taken them seriously.[70] Astronomer Dave Reneke independently found the June 2 BC planetary conjunction, and noted it would have appeared as a "bright beacon of light".[78] According to Chester, the disks of Jupiter and Venus would have appeared to touch[68] and there has not been as close a Venus-Jupiter conjunction since then.[70]

Jupiter next continued to move and then stopped in its apparent retrograde motion on December 25 of 2 BC over the town of Bethlehem.[75] Since planets in their orbits have a "stationary point",[68][70] a planet moves eastward through the stars but, "As it approaches the opposite point in the sky from the sun, it appears to slow, come to a full stop, and move backward (westward) through the sky for some weeks. Again it slows, stops, and resumes its eastward course," said Chester.[68] The date of December 25 that Jupiter appeared to stop while in retrograde took place in the season of Hanukkah,[68] and is the date later chosen to celebrate Christmas.[75][79]

A zodiac from a 6th-century mosaic at a synagogue in Beit Alpha, Israel

The Magi told Herod that they saw the star "in the East,"[80] or according to some translations, "at its rising",[81] which may imply the routine appearance of a constellation, or an asterism. One theory interprets the phrase in Matthew 2:2, "in the east," as an astrological term concerning a "heliacal rising." This translation was proposed by Edersheim[82] and Heinrich Voigt, among others.[83] The view was rejected by the philologist Franz Boll (1867–1924). Two modern translators of ancient astrological texts insist that the text does not use the technical terms for either a heliacal or an acronycal rising of a star. However, one concedes that Matthew may have used layman's terms for a rising.[84]

Other writers highly suggest that the star was a comet.[45] Halley's Comet was visible in 12 BC and another object, possibly a comet or nova, was seen by Chinese and Korean stargazers in about 5 BC.[45][85] This object was observed for over seventy days, possibly with no movement recorded.[45] Ancient writers described comets as "hanging over" specific cities, just as the Star of Bethlehem was said to have "stood over" the "place" where Jesus was (the town of Bethlehem).[31] However, this is generally thought unlikely as in ancient times comets were generally seen as bad omens.[86] The comet explanation has been recently promoted by Colin Nicholl. His theory involves a hypothetical comet which could have appeared in 6 BC.[87][88][89]

A recent (2005) hypothesis advanced by Frank Tipler is that the star of Bethlehem was a supernova or hypernova occurring in the nearby Andromeda Galaxy.[90] Although it is difficult to detect a supernova remnant in another galaxy, or obtain an accurate date of when it occurred, supernova remnants have been detected in Andromeda.[91]

Another theory is the more likely supernova of February 23 4 BC, which is now known as PSR 1913+16 or the Hulse-Taylor Pulsar. It is said to have appeared in the constellation of Aquila, near the intersection of the winter colure and the equator of date. The nova was "recorded in China, Korea, and Palestine" (probably meaning the Biblical account).[92]

A nova or comet was recorded in China in 4 BC. "In the reign of Ai-ti, in the third year of the Chien-p'ing period. In the third month, day chi-yu, there was a rising po at Hoku" (Han Shu, The History of the Former Han Dynasty). The date is equivalent to April 24, 4 BC. This identifies the date when it was first observed in China. It was also recorded in Korea. "In the fifty-fourth year of Hyokkose Wang, in the spring, second month, day chi-yu, a po-hsing appeared at Hoku" (Samguk Sagi, The Historical Record of the Three Kingdoms). The Korean is particularly corrupt because Ho (1962) points out that " the chi-yu day did not fall in the second month that year but on the first month" (February 23) and on the third month (April 24). The original must have read "day chi-yu, first month" (February 23) or "day chi-yu, third month" (April 24). The latter would coincide with the date in the Chinese records although professor Ho suggests the date was "probably February 23, 4 BC."....[93]

Russian icon of the Nativity. The Star of Bethlehem is depicted at the center top as a dark semicircle, with a single ray coming down.

In the Orthodox Church, the Star of Bethlehem is interpreted as a miraculous event of symbolic and pedagogical significance, regardless of whether it coincides with a natural phenomenon; a sign sent by God to lead the Magi to the Christ Child. This is illustrated in the Troparion of the Nativity:

Your birth, O Christ our God,
dawned the light of knowledge upon the earth.
For by Your birth those who adored stars
were taught by a star
to worship You, the Sun of Justice,
and to know You, Orient from on High.
O Lord, glory to You.[124]

In Orthodox Christian iconography, the Star of Bethlehem is often depicted not as golden, but as a dark aureola, a semicircle at the top of the icon, indicating the Uncreated Light of Divine grace, with a ray pointing to "the place where the young child lay" (Matt 2:9). Sometimes the faint image of an angel is drawn inside the aureola.

Simon the Athonite founded the monastery of Simonopetra on Mount Athos after seeing a star he identified with the Star of Bethlehem.[125]

LDS members believe that the Star of Bethlehem was an actual astronomical event visible the world over.[126] In the 1830 Book of Mormon, which they believe contains writings of ancient prophets, Samuel the Lamanite prophesies that a new star will appear as a sign that Jesus has been born, and Nephi later writes about the fulfillment of this prophecy.[127]

Members of Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the "star" was a vision or sign created by Satan, rather than a sign from God. This is because it led the pagan astrologers first to Jerusalem where King Herod consequently found out about the birth of the "king of the Jews", with the result that he attempted to have Jesus killed.[128]

In her 1898 book, The Desire of Ages, Ellen White states "That star was a distant company of shining angels, but of this the wise men were ignorant."[129]