Would the writers of the New Testament have used their word for “star” to describe a comet, or was there a distinction between the two?
Yes, they would have described a comet as a star, but that’s not the Star of Bethlehem, in all probability.
According to Father Raymond E. Brown in The Birth of the Messiah, and a number of other corroborating sources, the wise men who followed the star were almost certainly astrologers (and not kings), who saw a conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in that part of the sky with the constellation Pisces, close enough so the two would appear to be one star.
This happens every 1500 years or so. I’d have to look it back up to be sure, but it’s happened since then with nothing special happening at that time.
Jupiter is the king of the planets, Saturn represents endings (and beginnings), and Pisces is the sign attributed to govern the nation of Israel. Put 'em together, you get Messiah.
There was one of these conjunctions around the time of Jesus’s birth. A number of liberal scholars are of the opinion that people remembered that it had happened and added it to the legend surrounding Jesus at some point after the crucifixion. This is prompted by the fact that the story only appears in Matthew, is never referred to anyplace else, and Jesus’s mother doesn’t act like she remembers it later on in Matthew when Jesus is preaching and then crucified.
Here’s wiki’s take on the comet theory. In short, “no”:
Okay, how did that annoying-ass little drummer boy find out about it, then?
“Poetic License”
He just kept going … and going … and going …
I’m not so sure about that. Imagine trying to get an infant to sleep. While stuck living in a barn with the baby in a donkey dish. You might be prone to snap. Have you ever heard of the big drummer adult?
I’m sure we’re all unsurprised to learn there’s an xkcd for that: Three Wise Men (xkcd.com)
The way I see it, there are basically three possible explanations for the Star of Bethlehem.
-
It’s a fiction. A parable with a lot of symbolic meaning, but which didn’t really happen.
-
It was a natural astronomical event. One that somehow accurately foretold the birth of one of the most influential people in history. We can speculate about what the event was, but first we would have to assume that astrology works.
-
It was a miracle sent by God.
Whatever it was, it wasn’t the spectacularly bright object often depicted in art. Herod’s own astrologers had missed it, and had to have it pointed out to the. No comet, or major conjunction, then.
The shepherds told him.
There are other possibilities.
-
It was a natural astronomical event, that just coincidentally coincided with the birth of Jesus.
-
It was a natural astronomical event, that did not happen at the time of Jesus’s birth, but years later was misremembered or deliberately falsified and recorded as happening at the same time (like the census of Quirinius that Luke misreported as having happened in Herod’s time).
-
It was a time-traveling spacecraft sent by future humans to observe the historic event of Jesus’s birth.
Ok, some of these are more plausible than others. Personally I think #5 is the most likely.
Arthur C Clarke documented scientific proof that it was a supernova:
Robert Graves, in Claudius the God has Herod Antipas (son of Herod the Great) think that he himself is the Messiah, and finds this Jesus chap amusing.
Arthur C Clarke wrote a story, the name of which escapes me at the moment, about an advanced and thriving benevolent civilization that is completely wiped out when their star explodes as a supernova, the light of which, ironically, many millennia later, guides the Three Wise Men.
ETA: Ninja’d by @Marvin_the_Martian – sorry, didn’t see your post.
Those who do not follow their threads are doomed to repeat them.
I’m really not sure where the notion of them as kings comes from. “Magi” could be translated as “astrologers”, “seers”, “scholars”, or the like, but it certainly doesn’t mean “kings”.
It’s OK. High overhead, one by one, all the stars are going out.
This is covered by most planetariums in their yearly S.O.B*. show.
*Star of Bethlehem
In this version of the universe the program throws an unhandled exception just after the 8,999,999,999th name was printed out.
Wikipedia has some information on this:
Their identification as kings in later Christian writings is probably linked to Isaiah 60:1–6, which refers to “kings [coming] to the brightness of your dawn” bearing “gold and frankincense.” Further identification of the magi with kings may be due to Psalm 72:11, “May all kings fall down before him”.
There’s more in the Spanish-language version of the same entry, if you’re interested.
From my astrological reference book, Worlds in Collision; I have, on good authority, determined that the Star of Bethlehem is the captured comet Venus.
/s
I’ve watched several videos from users like the Mythvision guy, Bart Ehrman, etc. (And of course I can’t seem to find a suitable partucular video now!)
The former presents guests that compare stories in the New Testament with quite similar classical stories. E.g., virgin/deity impregnation births are quite common, likewise ascension/elevation to deity after death, etc. The unusual star at birth one is also common. Various Roman Emperors were born at a time of such a sign. So the take is that the Magi thing is purely made up. (and helps explain why it’s mentioned in only one Gospel).
Ehrman also pokes holes in the story. ?A star over a house??? The massacre of the innocents. Etc.
So there is really no point in speculating what it was since it didn’t happen.
Note that apologists, of course, try to prove the star was real. One big clue about how you should take such claims is the large number of incompatible explanations that are proposed. If one explanation was the “right” one it would stand out quite clearly.
So citing one book that “explains” it leads nowhere. There are lot of such writings, with a lot of disagreement.