Talk:Star of Bethlehem
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Star of Bethlehem article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 3 months may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
|Star of Bethlehem has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.|
I myself do not think that the story of the Star of Bethlehem was inspired by an event that occurred at the time Jesus was born. But as even a glance at the posts above confirms, many readers do think about the issue this way. So I think a discussion of when Jesus was born is relevant. The fact that the nativity was traditionally dated as 2BC is certainly significant to Sinnott's theory. Kauffner (talk) 14:21, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Astronomer Michael R. Molnar has proposed 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. The events were quite close to the sun and would have been difficult to observe, even with a small telescope, which had not yet been invented.
The final clause is irrelevant, given that the Antikythera mechanism had been invented at least a century earlier. While we have only the one, it does not mean others where not available, which could easily depict the occultations. --Pawyilee (talk) 09:46, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Misleading and Outdated Information
The actual identity and place of the Bethlehem star has already been discovered and verified scientifically, confirmed by NASA and agreed upon by millions of people (search for Bethlehem Star Project)
I just wish to underscore how this article is so woefully outdated especially concerning the facts and what's worse is that there's even a "pious invention" section present yet the vast scholarship of the the Bethlehem Star and the Star Project is utterly ignored. This gives a false perception that the Bethlehem star was mythological when in fact it was a real astronomical event, as real as the lunar eclipse during Christ's crucifixion and the solar eclipse during his baptism. If this is not rectified soon, I will be complaining.
Antimatter meteor theory
Philip M. Papaelias suggested that an antimatter meteor which had been transformed into a ball lightning after the entrance in the atmosphere can be a reasonable explanation, since hypotheses such as a comet, a straight line configuration of two or three planets, a supernova explosion or any other known celestial body can not designate any place on Earth and can not stay over the place where Jesus was. The city and the time of the Jesus' birth were known to the three wise men from Daniel and his seventy weeks prophecy. What remained to be found was the exact location in the city, which had been revealed to the magi by the movement of the ball lightning.
has been repeatedly added to the article over the past few days by Fpapael11 (talk · contribs) and several IPs. Each time, it has been reverted for various reasons such as original research and lack of reliable sources. Editor - you will need to gain consensus that this content is appropriate, and this page is the place to state your case. However, if you continue to add the content without discussion, you will be blocked from editing here. —SMALLJIM 16:03, 28 June 2014 (UTC)