Display posts from previous
Sort by

The Star of Bethlehem

1 by Mark
As its close to Christmas I thought it might be fun to open up a discussion here about we think the Star of Bethlehem actually was?

There have been lots of theories presented over the centuries by astrologers and more recently astronomers. What is your take on this?

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

2 by Tom
There are two ways to look at this: one is that it was a supernatural event, and if we're going to accept that, there is no point in going any further. The second, obviously, is that it was a natural event. There is a problem here since outside of the Gospel of Matthew, there is no mention of it. It is difficult to accept the idea that a brilliant star shone throughout the heavens, and no one noticed except three guys from Persia. For the record, the Gospel never uses a number of "wise men." Only the plural. There could have been two. There could have been 32.

This is why the astrological explanation seems to work best and the Magi were astrologers. Some English language Bibles have been changed to reflect that. They are no longer called "Wise Men," but rather they are called "astrologers." So what do astrologers do? They study the cosmos.

From here we can concentrate on a relatively short time frame of about 12 years 6 BC to 6 AD. Most of the suggestions, e.g. Jupiter Saturn conjunctions, occur regularly and one would think that such an event would require something with more pizazz in order to motivate men to travel great distances. Great kings are one thing; the Deity is quite another.

Astronomy professor Michael Molnar's little book, The Star of Bethlehem, The Legacy of the Magi suggests a sequence of events including a grand trine in fire consisting of the rulers of the fire triplicity accompanied by an occultation of Jupiter by the Moon. This combination of cosmic events are exactly what the astrologers of the day would look for that plus other historical clues puts the birth of Christ at April 17, 6 B.C. This also is within the lifetime of Herod.

One astrologer friend of mine, after hearing the explanation, said to me, "Can you envision an Aries dying for anyone else?" She had a point, but the Sun is exalted in Aries, and Christ is a solar figure (whew).

Molnar's book is usually available this time of year (Rutger's University Press), and it fun to read whether the reader accepts his theories or not. Unlike most academics he has a good grasp of astrology. One caveat, if you buy the book and decide to cast some charts to use while you read, Molnar uses a sidereal zodiac. This is important since the tropical zodiac puts Saturn in late Pisces in that grand trine, but in early Aries using sidereal. Enjoy.

Tom

Re: The Star of Bethlehem

3 by margherita
Hello Mark, Tom and all forum
MarkC wrote:As its close to Christmas I thought it might be fun to open up a discussion here about we think the Star of Bethlehem actually was?

There have been lots of theories presented over the centuries by astrologers and more recently astronomers. What is your take on this?

Mark

I know the one mentioned by Tom, which Kepler explained in detail in his De Stella Nova in pede serpentari- I don't know where he took the idea, anyway a lot of the book is about Great conjuctions and confutation of Pico della Mirandola and the the G.C. of the end of the Pisces. The second part of the book is in fact called "De Jesu Christi servatoris vero anno natalizio"


But I prefer - I find very poetical the sermon by Marsilio Ficino De Stella Magorum, about the Magi's star where Ficino recovers a Medieval idea according which the star was nobody else than the Archangel Gabriel under the guise of a star.

Ficino wrote "And under the form of a star informed the students of stars, and through the light of the star, derived from the Sun he guided them towards the Sun."

It's a star for astrologers.

It's interesting to note that even Jesus death is linked with another astronomical event, the Sun eclipse.

margherita
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.wordpress.com

4 by Eddy
According to Roger W. Sinnott it was the occultation of Jupiter by Venus in 2 BC,
http://www.askelm.com/star/star001.htm
Here's an interesting list of the very seldom events of mutual planet occultations,
http://www.go.ednet.ns.ca/~larry/planets/occltlst.htm

Although I don't see myself as a very religious person, last year (when I read the issue of the occultation) I tried to make a Jesus natal chart but I didn't feel comfortable with it, like I shouldn't do such a thing.

5 by Tom
There is no way to settle this, but I think it does make for an interesting discussion. We have all sorts of proposed charts for Christ going back at least to Cardan. What I like about Molnar's theory is that the planets associated with rulership, Sun, Saturn, and Jupiter, the rulers of the fire triplicity, are in a grand trine at the time of the occultation. The advent of incarnation of the deity should be unique or as close to unique as possible otherwise every time a conjunction or occultation comes along so would a new God. It had to be something very unusual to grab the attention of foreign astrologers to make them want to travel to pay homage. If the events in described in Matthew happened or something very much like those events happened, we have to account for the human responses, and I don't think a single occultation, or conjunction or even a triple conjunction would have produced much more than a yawn.

Still Molnar's argument isn't the only one that makes sense or can be applied, so feel free to post any one that you like.

Tom

6 by margherita
Tom wrote:There is no way to settle this, but I think it does make for an interesting discussion. We have all sorts of proposed charts for Christ going back at least to Cardan. Tom
Cardano proposed one of the most "modern" chart for Jesus because he based the chart on birth place and time.
To be more precise Cardano put Jesus chart into the Comment to Tetrabiblos, and in fact he desired to come back to Ptolemy method, eliminating any trace of Arab or hermetic superstition.

But the traditional horoscope for Jesus, the Medieval one, was the one with 8 degree of Virgo rising.
This was because Albumasar in his Great Introduction proposed his famous list from Teucer (readers of my blog know very well) with the Woman with the Child rising in the first facie of Virgo.
She was Isis in Teucer list (which is translated in English in Rethorius compilation by Holden) but obviously Albumasar and then his tranlators knew very well another Virgin feeding a child.

On the other hand Cardano just cast the chart for Jesus as he was a common man. If I don't remember bad, now i'm out of home, it was Pico della Mirandola in his Disputationes that rise the point with the Virgo Ascendant, it is not possible to have such ascendant in Israel for midnight,
margherita
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.wordpress.com

9 by SGFoxe
i've always liked the 7bc ju/saturn conjunction in pisces -- when joined by the full moon of an early succouth ... according to david pingree the ONLY contribution of Persian (magian) astrology was the Ju/Sa cycle. makes sense that these friends of herod were following their "star" -- the nt passage -- two travelled together to be joined by the third metaphors the ju/sa synod joined by the waxing moon.

of course, that could be yeshua's circumcision, since the magi arrived timely for that

just sayin

11 by Tom
I just re-read my original post about Molnar and I made an error - a pretty big one. I said there was a grand trine involving an occultation of Jupiter. It should have been three planets in Aries and an occultation of Jupiter. Must have had trines on the brain or something. The idea is that the three planets ruling the fire triplicity rose in the sign Aries, exaltation of the Sun, accompanied by an occultation of Jupiter and I believe a heliacal rising of Jupiter as well. The combination of astrological symbols portended the birth of a great king.

Sorry for the error.

Tom
Last edited by Tom on Fri Dec 25, 2009 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

12 by Estebon_Duarte
Chris Brennan wrote:Dieter Koch from Astrodienst just published a new book on the subject in which he argues that it was a heliacal rising of Venus in the 2nd century.

I just posted an overview of his argument on my blog if anyone is interested in checking it out: http://horoscopicastrologyblog.com/2009 ... -of-jesus/
interesting book, thanks for the review.
I actually enjoyed the research and conclusions brought forth. The chart proposed is also interesting in its information regarding the <i>Hillaj</i> and <i>Kadukhudhah</i>.
Western Predictive Astrology by Estebon Duarte Independent Researcher AMA MACAA
Natal Chart & Annual Solar Revolution Reports
www.organic-astrology.com
!! Read first: forum policies
Recent topics
Post Reply

Return to “Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques”