http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mstarofbeth.html
For an interesting take on Theory A (The Supernova Theory) read the short story, The Star by Arthur C. Clarke.
That’s one of Clarke’s best short stories. In 1985, it was adapted into an episode of the revived Twilight Zone, starring Fritz Weaver. (Weaver, BTW, starred in a few episodes of the original Zone, one of the few actors to appear in both versions of the series.)
When all else fails, ask Cecil.
Here’s a related story from Martin Gardner of CSICOP.
In the mailbag column, Euty discusses the possibility that the star of Bethlehem was an actual astronomical event, and lists three possible theories: A) supernova; B) comet; and C) a planetary conjunction. There is a fourth theory, D) planet.
Imagine that you are an ancient astrologer, in the evening of late summer of 1BC, and you are watching the bright planet Mars in the east as it turns retrograde to pass through Pisces. Pisces is regarded as the zodiacal sign where evidence of the messiah will appear. Mars will be at opposition in Pisces in mid-September, and at its brightest (magnitude -2.5). In that dark area of the sky, there are only a small number of stars brighter than sixth magnitude, and as Mars slowly backtracks through it, you notice that there is one new star, about magnitude 5.7. It is not on your charts, and even more amazingly, it is moving, and also moving west! It continues to move west through the month of November, as Mars returns to prograde and passes by it less than a degree away. The new star continues its westward journey.
No planets are so dim, and it is clearly not a comet, and no other stars move. Your colleagues are convinced it is a sign and decide to follow the star west towards Jerusalem. You arrive in early December, and the star seems to have stopped, and stood still. For two weeks, it stays within an area of the sky of less than one arcminute in radius, after having spent the previous four months moving almost 240 arcminutes–about the width of the full moon every two weeks. After your conversation with the king, you observe the star that evening. It is nearly directly south, and you follow it to Bethlehem.
In the next month, the star vanishes in the sunlight, and is not found again for centuries. Of course, it wasn’t really a star, but a planet: Uranus.
Kinda interesting, don’t you think? More links
rocks
Out of interest why is the supernatural always dismissed outright on the Straight-dope? I think generally that’s a fair position but it seems to be an odd position when talking about religious phenomena. Or is it to be politically correct (that is try not to offend anyone)?
Not so much dismissed, as obvious and not needing any further explanation. If there were a super-natural phenomenon – a bright star that hung a couple of hundred feet over a manger, was seen by shepherds and magi but not by anyone else (like, not by Herod’s soldiers) – well, OK, that’s what the story says. If you believed that happen that way, then we’ve just said it all. That’s not very interesting, and there’s not much to add. We can’t explain or validate unknown miracles.
Note that an event can be “miraculous” without necessarily being supernatural magic. If you believe that some sort of astronomical event occurred at just the right moment, that can be “miraculous” without having to be supernatural.
I understand the position and thats fair enougth. If someone argued that the star is in fact a reference to an angel and not a cosmic occurence then that would pretty much stop the debate - period.
It would move into the realm of theology. Which is interesting unto itself but thats not really what the Straight Dope is about.
Thanks for your reply.
The Straight Dope has sometimes tackled theology, although usually indirectly. “Who wrote the Bible?” has a bit of theological discourse in it, f’rinstance. And “Does the Koran really promise Islamic martyrs 72 virgins?” … but mostly, we’re either trying to find historical (or archaeological or astronomical or whatever explanations) or we’re doing text analysis.
Hey, don’t know if NPR has streaming audio about it, but I remember hearing on last week (April 17th)'s broadcast of To The Best Of Our Knowledge (www.ttbook.org) there is a modern astrologist who is trying to reconcile ancient star catalogs to works of art and literature. Specifically, he believes that (plus or minus 50 years) there was indeed a supernova which occured around 1 A.D. I forget the gist of the whole show, but basically that bit of the Biblical tale is legit.
What’s an astrologist?
Darn, wrong term. Astrologists are those guys who read the stars. I mean to say astronomer. My apologies.
My dad was in California in 1951 and brought back a “Guide to the Addresses of the Stars.” I remember reading it in the mid-50’s. But I think my Mom threw it out. That is all.
I’ll throw my Star of Bethlehem Thread in here as well for a different explanation. The author says it’s been considered the best explanation at present, although not conclusive. Some of the Dopers have raised serious issues with the gospel of Matthew and astrology actually predicting the birth of Jesus, but it might explain the journey of the wise men.
Actually, the guys who use the stars for divination are called astrologers, not astrologists (unless the name has changed recently). So I was doubly confused.
But I’m a bit skeptical about this astronomer’s claim. I’m not aware of any known supernova remnant which could be 2000 years old, and even if there were, there simply isn’t enough data about supernova remnants to date them to within 2.5%, as claimed. Except, obviously, for those which were observed and recorded going off, such as the supernova of 1054 (the one which led to the Crab Nebula), but to say that’s the case here is rather putting the cart before the horse.
My personal belief (based on the text) is that it was an angel. Similar to the “Column of Fire” that lead the Israelites on their 40 year trek.
But I realise that would put a fubar on “naturalistic” explanations.
My own memory of that time is oft’ removed and fuzzy at best.
I can easily see how the un-wise men of that time could not understand, much less record, the methods of the Wise Men. The Wise Men could not only read and write, they could also understand mathematics. They could even decipher messages from God as written in the Stars.
Angels are nice, but the astrology sign/star works for me.
May all your angels
Be peaceful.
ItS
r~
I’d love a natural explanation, because in my book that would be a greater demonstration of God’s power. I just havent read any good ones.
Yet.
Peace.
Just out of curiosity, what do you find bad about mine above, from whoa five years ago.
I suppose you’d discount the theory that Joseph set of a flare?
I agree. It goes beyond reasonable doubt that the Wise Men were astrologers “reading” the Heavens.
Maybe the astrologers were angels in disguise. Or, maybe God created Uranus on the spot just for the astrologers.
Then again, maybe not.
Believe what you wish. I will stick to facts and truth.
r~