Posted on 12/09/2008 11:28:16 AM PST by Free ThinkerNY
Astronomers have calculated that Christmas should be in June, by charting the appearance of the 'Christmas star' which the Bible says led the three Wise Men to Jesus.
They found that a bright star which appeared over Bethlehem 2,000 years ago pinpointed the date of Christ's birth as June 17 rather than December 25.
The researchers claim the 'Christmas star' was most likely a magnificent conjunction of the planets Venus and Jupiter, which were so close together they would have shone unusually brightly as a single "beacon of light" which appeared suddenly.
If the team is correct, it would mean Jesus was a Gemini, not a Capricorn as previously believed.
Australian astronomer Dave Reneke used complex computer software to chart the exact positions of all celestial bodies and map the night sky as it would have appeared over the Holy Land more than 2,000 years ago.
It revealed a spectacular astronomical event around the time of Jesus's birth.
Mr Reneke says the wise men probably interpreted it as the sign they had been waiting for, and they followed the 'star' to Christ's birthplace in a stable in Bethlehem, as described in the Bible.
Generally accepted research has placed the nativity to somewhere between 3BC and 1AD.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
A touchstone to determine the actual worth of an
“intellectual”, find out how he feels about astrology.
LAZARUS LONG
Headline should have read:
ASTRONOMERS CONFIRM THE BIRTH OF JESUS.
But atheists still refuse to admit Jesus existed.
This has been the prime theory for many years. The thinking is that the Romans changed Christmas, which was a the time a fairly minor holiday, to December after the Empire converted because it coincided with a pagan holiday.
This hypothesis is over 20 years old.
no, perhaps one.
Perhaps one sitting within the earths atmosphere serving as a beacon, stationary as a omni directional beacon. We are told that people came in from every direction inclusive of the wise men. I think some came in from over hill and dale with their asses from as far as 200 miles away; meaning the “star” was constant and static for many days. You have to remember that all stars move, excepting the north star, and thus cannot act as a “beacon”.
Also, a lot of the artists depictions show focused light on the birthplace.
And there is more, far more, but they did not use or say it in those words.
Maybe they’re right. If Jesus were a Capricorn he would have said “Give joyfully unto Caesar” and “the harvest is plentiful, the laboroers are few—that’s because you’re all a bunch of lazy louts.”
Nit picking makes me crazy!
Yes... yes... that's the answer we've been searching for for millennia. THANK GOD FOR SCIENTISTS!!!
“there’s your sign!”
FYI, it wasn't an "old" Roman celebration, it was the feast of Sol Invictus (the unconquerable sun), which was a late Roman cult--dating from 274 under Aurelian. Christianity predates this cult, and Chrysostom in the 380s was saying that the feast of Dec. 25th was established by the Roman Church from the old Roman census records. It is quite conceivable--even probable--that the Sol Invictus cultists took the date from Christianity and not the other way round.
By the way, the earliest mention of both dates occurs in the same place: the Philocalian calendar or Chronography of 354. The Calendar certainly mentions Christ's birthday on Dec. 25: "VIII kal. Ian. natus Christus in Betleem Iudeae." The reference to Sol Invictus is somewhat more tenuous: "N·INVICTI·CM·XXX". Both of these feasts were evidently well established by 354; there really is no evidence to support the idea that the Christians got this date from pagans.
But I agree with the second part of what you said. Theologically, the subject of the feast is the important thing and not the date.
My estimation is sometime between April and June, given the fact that the shepherds were in the fields tending their flocks and the newborn lambs.
By the way, here’s the calendar of 354:
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/index.htm#Chronography_of_354
The pagan “birthday of the unconquered” is listed under Part 6 toward the end:
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/chronography_of_354_06_calendar.htm
The Christian festival of the Lord’s birth is listed in Part 12, Commemorations of the Martyrs:
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/chronography_of_354_12_depositions_martyrs.htm
Well great. Now we can get back to this year’s “holiday.”
Yes, most definitely. I understand that two different words altogether were used to describe Christ in the manger, and in the house.
I figure this report was a payoff to the star gazers by the retail industry in order to get a “twofer” during these hard economic times. What better way than to have two Christmas’s per year and double holiday profits. /sarc
“According to the Bible, Jesus started His ministry at age 30, and was put to death 3 1/2 years later at the Passover. Given that the Passover occurs in late March or early April(first full moon after the Spring Equinox), Jesus would have been born 1/2 year before that, in late September or early October.”
By jove, sir, if your calculations are correct, Jesus was neither a Capricorn nor a Gemini, but was actually a Libra! Oh posh. I think it is clear the December 25 date is correct, though this has nothing to do with me personally being a Caprrcorn mind you. Me, Jesus, Elvis, Robert E Lee—get the picture?
I knew I would draw some replys.
And of course God could have done anything he wanted to get their attention.
Even though I do believe in UFO’s from another planet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.