The signs of Christ's birth

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

On 12/12/2019 at 4:43 PM, Jonah said:

I believe the Bible records it accurately when it indicates who saw the star, but one is
free to speculate and add other names to the scripture.

"And behold, there shall a new star arise, such an one as ye never have beheld"

What does that mean?

Cheers.

 I assume it was a bright supernova that lit up the sky while it was night in the western hemisphere. As day approached here and night began in the East the light finally began to lessen and by the time night had fallen in Jerusalem it was just a really bright star. Always remember night here, day there.

Edited December 20, 2019 by Emmanuel Goldstein

[mikbone]

This makes a compelling argument that the magi were looking at a sign in the heaven that focused on the planet Jupiter as it moved thru the background of the constellations with conjunctions with Regulus, Leo the Lion, and Venus.  

[Guest Mores]

On 12/20/2019 at 3:03 PM, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

 I assume it was a bright supernova that lit up the sky while it was night in the western hemisphere. As day approached here and night began in the East the light finally began to lessen and by the time night had fallen in Jerusalem it was just a really bright star. Always remember night here, day there.

The brightest supernova in astronomic history would have been only visible to the naked eye if you happened to be looking directly at it -- or pretty much so.  It would not "light up the sky".  Most supernovas take years to fade away.  So, if it were even brighter than others recorded in secular history, it would have taken much longer than three days to fade away.

Forgive me, to everyone, why are we trying to find some more mundane explanation for the Star?  Can we not understand that miracles happened? 

• An immaculate conception
• Angels visiting mankind on multiple levels.
• Non-Jews of the period being warned in visions by night.
• The most important:  The condescension of God.

Why are lights in the sky not to be taken as equally miraculous (i.e. - inexplicable)?  Couldn't it "simply" be some miraculous source of Light?  I say "simply" because it seems that in an effort to find a more mundane/secular explanation, we tend to complicate things more than we would if we just accepted that it was a miracle.  And such mundane explantations don't really hold up to scrutiny.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

17 minutes ago, Mores said:

"An immaculate conception"

Did you know that this phrase is not referring to the conception of Christ? It refers to the catholic belief that Mary's conception made her free from original sin, thus making her a clean vessel into which Jesus could be conceived. Because if this did not happen then Jesus would be under original sin too. It is a twisting of doctrine.

[Guest Mores]

17 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

Did you know that this phrase is not referring to the conception of Christ? It refers to the catholic belief that Mary's conception made her free from original sin, thus making her a clean vessel into which Jesus could be conceived. Because if this did not happen then Jesus would be under original sin too. It is a twisting of doctrine.

No, I did not.  I hope, then that you would be gracious enough to accept my post with what you clearly understood to be my intention.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

13 minutes ago, Mores said:

No, I did not.  I hope, then that you would be gracious enough to accept my post with what you clearly understood to be my intention.

i meant it as an interesting aside, not as a criticism. 

[zil]

1 hour ago, Mores said:

Couldn't it "simply" be some miraculous source of Light?

A really, really high-powered LED (probably made by Cree).   Maybe with some sort of broad diffuser¹.  Yeah.

¹Firefox need to update their spelling dictionary.

[zil]

14 minutes ago, zil said:

A really, really high-powered LED (probably made by Cree).   Maybe with some sort of broad diffuser¹.  Yeah.

¹Firefox need to update their spelling dictionary.

Ooooo - and it was powered by a star going supernova.  Yeah!  (Don't anybody destroy my fun with facts about how that wouldn't work.  I don't want to hear it.  I've got a good miracle going on here.)

[Guest Mores]

24 minutes ago, zil said:

Ooooo - and it was powered by a star going supernova.  Yeah!  (Don't anybody destroy my fun with facts about how that wouldn't work.  I don't want to hear it.  I've got a good miracle going on here.)

An LED powered by a supernova.  What could possibly go wrong with that?

[zil]

1 minute ago, Mores said:

An LED powered by a supernova.  What could possibly go wrong with that?

Nothing!  Absolutely nothing!  It's perfect.  Perfect, I tell you.  Downright miraculous!

Not sure, but a capacitor might have been involved.  (Ask @mordorbund if you want to be sure.)

[Guest Mores]

23 hours ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

i meant it as an interesting aside, not as a criticism. 

Sounds good.

[Guest Mores]

22 hours ago, zil said:

Nothing!  Absolutely nothing!  It's perfect.  Perfect, I tell you.  Downright miraculous!

 @mordorbund

 Is this a reference to Trump's phone call?

[Traveler]

On 12/23/2019 at 7:46 AM, Mores said:

The brightest supernova in astronomic history would have been only visible to the naked eye if you happened to be looking directly at it -- or pretty much so.  It would not "light up the sky".  Most supernovas take years to fade away.  So, if it were even brighter than others recorded in secular history, it would have taken much longer than three days to fade away.

Forgive me, to everyone, why are we trying to find some more mundane explanation for the Star?  Can we not understand that miracles happened? 

• An immaculate conception
• Angels visiting mankind on multiple levels.
• Non-Jews of the period being warned in visions by night.
• The most important:  The condescension of God.

Why are lights in the sky not to be taken as equally miraculous (i.e. - inexplicable)?  Couldn't it "simply" be some miraculous source of Light?  I say "simply" because it seems that in an effort to find a more mundane/secular explanation, we tend to complicate things more than we would if we just accepted that it was a miracle.  And such mundane explantations don't really hold up to scrutiny.

Question - In your mind, does something cease to be a miracle - or less a miracle - if it can somehow be explained by empirical science and logic?

 

The Traveler

[zil]

5 hours ago, Mores said:

 Is this a reference to Trump's phone call?

Not to my knowledge.

[brotherofJared]

On 12/20/2019 at 6:38 AM, Jonah said:

Matthew 2:9 seems to depict a star that moved and that movement led the wise men
to find the exact spot where Jesus was.

Do you think this was the same star the Book of Mormon mentions?

Jonah

Same source, but not the same celestial event.

[brotherofJared]

On 12/24/2019 at 11:15 AM, Traveler said:

Question - In your mind, does something cease to be a miracle - or less a miracle - if it can somehow be explained by empirical science and logic?

 

The Traveler

I think a miracle explained is still a miracle.

[brotherofJared]

On 12/23/2019 at 6:46 AM, Mores said:

The brightest supernova in astronomic history would have been only visible to the naked eye if you happened to be looking directly at it -- or pretty much so.  It would not "light up the sky".  Most supernovas take years to fade away.  So, if it were even brighter than others recorded in secular history, it would have taken much longer than three days to fade away.

So it wasn't a supernova. Replace the word supernova with a bight light in the sky that faded away within 36 hours

[brotherofJared]

For me, the answer is simple. The Wisemen didn't arrive in Jerusalem until about 3 years after Christ's birth. It was because of their arrival and announcement that the Christ child was carried away into Egypt and apparently, based on something the Wisemen said, Herod decreed that all children under a certain age be killed, so the event that the Wisemen saw that started them on their journey could not have been the same that led them to the place where the family lived. 

This new star which was such as has never been seen before apparently is the same one that caused a day and a night and a day to appear as one day was certainly not seen in Jerusalem, China or Palestine. Only the Wisemen and the people who lived near them saw it and it was because of them that we have this story. It seems to me that if they started their journey after seeing the star, then they came from very very far away, like say America or somewhere near it, perhaps the same hemisphere.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

4 hours ago, brotherofJared said:

For me, the answer is simple. The Wisemen didn't arrive in Jerusalem until about 3 years after Christ's birth. It was because of their arrival and announcement that the Christ child was carried away into Egypt and apparently, based on something the Wisemen said, Herod decreed that all children under a certain age be killed, so the event that the Wisemen saw that started them on their journey could not have been the same that led them to the place where the family lived. 

This new star which was such as has never been seen before apparently is the same one that caused a day and a night and a day to appear as one day was certainly not seen in Jerusalem, China or Palestine. Only the Wisemen and the people who lived near them saw it and it was because of them that we have this story. It seems to me that if they started their journey after seeing the star, then they came from very very far away, like say America or somewhere near it, perhaps the same hemisphere.

It was obviously the deceleration burn of a Star Drive on the Lord’s interstellar yacht. Sheesh, so simple.

[Guest Mores]

10 hours ago, brotherofJared said:

So it wasn't a supernova. Replace the word supernova with a bight light in the sky that faded away within 36 hours

So, in other words, a star (as the ancients understood it).