The Star Of Bethlehem Explained

[mymistake]

Why should I waste bandwidth watching an hour of nonsense? If I wanted to watch an hour of videos there are many good ones to choose from. If Christians had a better explanation for the Star of Bethlehem and their explanation was simpler than "It's fiction", then they could just tell us. There is no need for the smoke and mirrors and hour long videos.

[Guest Babylonian Dream]

Why should I waste bandwidth watching an hour of nonsense? If I wanted to watch an hour of videos there are many good ones to choose from. If Christians had a better explanation for the Star of Bethlehem and their explanation was simpler than "It's fiction", then they could just tell us. There is no need for the smoke and mirrors and hour long videos.

And hour long videos of nonsense that could've been spouted in one sentance at that.

[mcdaddy]

OC has officially replaced Jay as the most dumbfuck xian in ex-C's history.

[BMandeville]

This simpleton is starting with a conclusion in which he has a considerable emotional investment and attempting to rationalize it. He's working backwards and begging the question; he already assumes his conclusion to be true instead of honestly seeking the correct answer. If he found contradictory evidence, it likely wouldn't change his opinion. What he's doing is garden-variety, street-level foolishness, and it impresses only the scientifically and philosophically illiterate.

 

The use of a star to mark Jesus' birth is nothing more than a metaphor to symbolize royalty and an add-in to justify prophecies written in older Hebrew texts.

 

Even if there was a highly visible star around the time of Jesus' supposed birth, so what? What does that prove? That there really was a guy named Jesus who was actually Yahweh in human form, and only present on Earth to sacrifice himself to himself in order to save us all through some moral loophole? Nobody would reasonably reach that conclusion based on the verification of some astronomical anomaly. The only people who find this compelling at all are people who already believe in Christianity.

 

Try again. This is embarrassing.

[Will02]

Also, the very idea of a god using a star as a message beacon is absurd when you take distance into consideration. Light from the sun takes roughly 8-9 minutes to reach Earth. Light from nearby stars may take several years or less to reach Earth. When you look at the night sky, some of the stars you see are so far away that the light hitting your retina at that particular moment may have left the surface of that star hundreds or even thousands of years ago. Light from new stars or supernovae may not become visible from Earth for centuries (or more) after the fact, so the timing would have to be ridiculously precise.

[Xerces]

Very good video.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGeSRyzN49Q

 

Also very good video:

 

[Guest Babylonian Dream]

More proof the writers of the NT were writing about a planet for symbolic purposes. I was out last night looking up at Venus and I thought of something. At no point would it really appear above you no matter how it travelled. They clearly were never witness much to watching stars. They simply knew the lore around stars and knew they wandered, and would move throughout the sky, and since they were "just lights above the earth", that had meaning. This belief in astrology goes back to the first chapter of Genesis. God said he made the stars for astrology.

[hereticzero]

The 'star of Bethlehem' has not been noted in other writings of astronomy. I find it doubtful the 'star' could only be seen from Bethlehem or the mid east so I claim the 'star' is just one more hoax perpetrated by the Christian church. The 'star' is also not noted among writings by Hebrews of that time period. A star so bright, moving in the heavens, would not go unnoticed by others of that time. Yes, you have three wise men, according to the babble, who followed the star to Bethlehem but there is nothing that records the star's appearance or that anyone ever noticed it beyond the yahoos written of in the babble--and the Jews also had astronomers. There are also no astrological papers from the time going into detail of this supposed 'star.' Astrologers would have gone nuts over a new star in the heavens and the births of kings, etc., etc., but they do not.

 

The video does not explain Jack Shit except to bolster someone's faith in the impossible. It is just more mindless trash from Christians with no common sense and a total lack of understanding as to how our universe works.

I don't think you watched the video. He uses the same astronomical software astronomers use. This software uses the same math any astrophysicist would use.

I don't think you read my post that calls your video 'horse shit.' This would indicate I saw the video and disagree with your line of horse shit. Horse shit is easy to identify once you understand that what you are looking at is horse shit. Even when a horse farts, it is explaining to you that horse shit is going to follow. Therefor, one does not have to actually step into horse shit to know the pile of road apples in front of you is horse shit. If a Christian's mouth is moving with an explanation of anything, horse shit is soon to follow. The Christian in the video is using, you claim, 'astronomical software astronomers use' to explain his horse shit. Why don't you tell me what the name of his 'astronomical software' is that he uses, cuz I got lots of it and mine does not explain any magical star appearing in the sky and traveling over Bethlehem and holding still over a manger, inn, group of shepards, or any other act of fantasy employed or explained by Christian astronomer wannabes. Therefor, you make my case in calling your video 'horse shit' an easy task for me.

[par4dcourse]

Pyramids, therefore ALIENS!!!

 

It's really aliens, therefore PYRAMIDS!

[Guest Babylonian Dream]

Pyramids, therefore ALIENS!!!

 

It's really aliens, therefore PYRAMIDS!

No, because you need illegal aliens to make the pyramids. Therefore, Cthulhu himself did it! In order that we shall see his sign and worship him.

[BlackCat]

OrdinaryClay- I studied Larson's claims in depth, this time last year (when I was still a believer). I found the video very compelling, but just to be sure (and as I couldn't use Starry Night, or the other software) I emailed an astronomer called John Mosley, who used to work at the Griffith Observatory and if you google him you'll see he used to run 'Christmas' shows at the planetarium, that show the same astronomy as Larson. The planetary conjunctions did indeed occur as Larson shows in his video, and they seem to 'fit' the description of this 'star'. The timing seems right, but Larson has got some problems with matching the 'star' to these planetary conjunctions. Here's an interesting article I came across by Bible-Science-Guy:

http://biblescienceguy.wordpress.com/2010/12/24/the-star-of-bethlehem/

 

Another thing that struck me about Larson's claims, is that if he is right, then astrology is a necessary ingredient to understanding the 'star'. I don't think Larson is right to claim it's not astrology. It may not be the kind of astrology we are used to today, that is about fortune telling, but Larson is using constellations, that to all intents and purposes look like an alternative 'zodiac', and lo and behold, these different 'signs' are supposedly telling the future. As a believer at the time, this 'astrology' aspect sounded loud alarm bells. I know Larson himself had alarm bells go off initially. I understand that as a believer, these claims, seem to provide concrete scientific proof, that the claims of the Bible are true, but I think on very close inspection, Larson's claims to a 'gospel in the stars' is not proof for this 'star' or a gospel in the stars. It may well 'prove' that astrology which we find in pagan religions prior to Christianity and Judaism, used astrology and its influences have entered the Bible?? I'm not sure about this, but it's something I plan to study. Another warning, I noticed on youtube, that people who have watched the video, are now trying out the software, and you'd be surprised what 'signs' they find, and try to fit to things. It's a bit like the bible codes. You can make them say anthing. One last point: after watching the video, I emailed Larson with the obvious question, which I'm sure passed your mind, upon watching the film: 'hmmm, if the stars predicted the birth, then the death of Jesus, surely they predict the second coming of Jesus, and hence we should be able to work out when he is coming back. Well, I got an interesting reply from Larson. He said, he had if I remember rightly, he was working on something but didn't feel released to present it yet. So, it'll be interesting to see if Larson does come out with any predictions. Let me know if he does.

[HitchWithMe]

Interesting...

Can someone give an explanation of the star of Bethlehem in the gospel account of Mark?

How about in John?

If you've taken the time to look, you'll see that neither of these documents take the time to mention elements that we consider the nativity. Each biblical account had an audience, a time, and an agenda.

 

The order of the gospels on a time line looks like:

Mark

Matthew

Luke

John

Mark was written before Jesus had a significant Jewish following - or at least a wide Jewish acceptance. There is no account of a miraculous birth. Matthew was written later, probably by a scribe because all the bad-mouthing of scribes found in mark was removed while the rest was copied. Matthew was for a Jewish audience and had much "heavy lifting" in terms of Jesus fulfilling Old Testament prophesy - there was prophesy about a messiah being born in Bethlehem - the Jewish writers made this possible by creating a story of a required census in ones hometown, which is why Mary and Joseph had to travel to Bethlehem. This census ordered by roman leaders is recorded NO WHERE though we have very good records of imperial Rome. Censuses, which did occur, never required people to return to a hometown to be counted. The story was made to help the Jesus character fit Jewish prophesy.

 

Luke has an extravagant nativity while John does not. Again, consider each gospel account had an audience, an agenda, and a time period. All gospels are pretty well accepted as non-witness data. Mark, the earliest gospel, was hodge-podged together 30 years AFTER the death of the historical Jesus - by the most conservative estimates. All others were written later.

 

Why are we arguing about the possibility of a supernatural star explanation when the documents which give us the idea of such star have a 50% internal consistency rating and are well accepted to be recorded 60-63 years after the event itself anyway?

 

Here's a little parallel: we arguing over the idea that the metal plates Joseph Smith found in th ground were BRONZE in material instead of GOLD.

 

Why would this argument even begin to matter if anyone with half a brain would realize there is good reason to doubt the validity and/or historicy of the back story from which it comes?

[BlackCat]

I am more than happy to discuss (not argue) this subject, as having just come out of Christianity, I understand the mindset and 'love' of the gospels, or rather the trust that is put in them. I never had a problem with the gospels being different, with some including certain stuff and others not. So what? I still don't see how that is a big deal. Why would you want four identical accounts? One would have been sufficient surely? I agree the gospels are written for different audiences. As for the 'star' account and the resulting slaughter of the badies by Herod, this seems to validate the 'prophecy' of 'Rachel weeping for her children' (Jer 31:15). So we have two possibilities: there was a star, or the 'prophecy' in Jeremiah had to be accommodated and so the story was made up to tick that prophecy off the list. Larson's claims seem to 'prove' that there was a weird 'star' around the time that Jesus was supposedly born- and his claims are backed up by Nasa software- so I for one, understand why this subject is interesting and don't mind spending time discussing it. On the other hand, not coming from a Mormon background, i certainly wouldn't fancy wasting time discussing whether the plates were gold or bronze- lol but there may be some ex mormons that wouldn't mind.........lol.

[Ravenstar]

Magi... the educated of that time period, other than nobility, were.. umm... ASTROLOGERS, PRIESTS/PRIESTESSES, MAGICIANS and ALCHEMISTS. Astrology can be found in every culture of that time period.. they were the 'wise men' (and women in some cases) Egypt, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome... all of them studied and applied astrology. ESPECIALLY to 'ROYAL' events...

 

A 'star' pointing out a ruler (kings, etc..) was expected, probably necessary to be considered a valid claim... and remember that the Jews were expecting a temporal leader.. their messiah was going to save them from the Roman Occupation...

 

ASTROLOGY... it's where the expression "fate was written in the stars' comes from. ASTROLOGY.

 

Horoscopes were cast all the time, for everything from coronations, war, agricultural success, what they were to wear that day... whatever... (along with reading entrails, and seeking the Oracle at Delphi, or any number of divination practices - it was NORMAL and widespread — they were all extremely superstitious)

 

If you know anything about astrology 'a star' could have meant a planet in the zodiac, or an aspect, or any number of interpretations of said cast horoscope.... NOT a real star in the night sky - astrology doesn't quite work the same way astronomy does - astrology has very specific rules and maths in it that must be followed that have very little to do with actual star-gazing. It's FORTUNE-TELLING... DIVINATION (isn't that a sin?)

 

The Chinese and other people kept pretty good records of astronomical occurrences... yet there is no record of anything unsual around that time period in other cultures.. some way more advanced than the Hebrew goat herders.

 

FAIL

 

One more thing.. if you care to actually find out.. the Bible itself is chock full of astrological symbolism.

[mymistake]

Why would you want four identical accounts? One would have been sufficient surely?

 

I don't know why the Catholic Church included four out of the dozens of gospels avalibe. However they clearly should have picked Thomas instead of John. Thomas, Mark, Matthew and Luke are all related in that one is a source for the others or they all copied from the same source. John is like the rest of the Second Century gospels.

 

 

I agree the gospels are written for different audiences. As for the 'star' account and the resulting slaughter of the badies by Herod, this seems to validate the 'prophecy' of 'Rachel weeping for her children' (Jer 31:15). So we have two possibilities: there was a star, or the 'prophecy' in Jeremiah had to be accommodated and so the story was made up to tick that prophecy off the list. Larson's claims seem to 'prove' that there was a weird 'star' around the time that Jesus was supposedly born- and his claims are backed up by Nasa software- so I for one, understand why this subject is interesting and don't mind spending time discussing it. On the other hand, not coming from a Mormon background, i certainly wouldn't fancy wasting time discussing whether the plates were gold or bronze- lol but there may be some ex mormons that wouldn't mind.........lol.

 

History does not record Herod visiting with Wisemen from the east or slaughtering babies. And Judeism doesn't consider Rachel a prophecy. Those things are Christian spin. Long before history got started winter solctice was worshiped. On that morning the sun rises to fight winter. But the battle doesn't end there. Final victory doesn't come until vernal equinox in spring. That is why Human culture has so many saviors who are born in late December and rise from the dead in spring. The same organization that choose the gospels that would go into their Bible also choose for Christmas to replace pagan holidays.

[BlackCat]

Magi... the educated of that time period, other than nobility, were.. umm... ASTROLOGERS, PRIESTS/PRIESTESSES, MAGICIANS and ALCHEMISTS. Astrology can be found in every culture of that time period.. they were the 'wise men' (and women in some cases) Egypt, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome... all of them studied and applied astrology. ESPECIALLY to 'ROYAL' events...

 

A 'star' pointing out a ruler (kings, etc..) was expected, probably necessary to be considered a valid claim... and remember that the Jews were expecting a temporal leader.. their messiah was going to save them from the Roman Occupation...

 

ASTROLOGY... it's where the expression "fate was written in the stars' comes from. ASTROLOGY.

 

Horoscopes were cast all the time, for everything from coronations, war, agricultural success, what they were to wear that day... whatever... (along with reading entrails, and seeking the Oracle at Delphi, or any number of divination practices - it was NORMAL and widespread — they were all extremely superstitious)

 

If you know anything about astrology 'a star' could have meant a planet in the zodiac, or an aspect, or any number of interpretations of said cast horoscope.... NOT a real star in the night sky - astrology doesn't quite work the same way astronomy does - astrology has very specific rules and maths in it that must be followed that have very little to do with actual star-gazing. It's FORTUNE-TELLING... DIVINATION (isn't that a sin?)

 

The Chinese and other people kept pretty good records of astronomical occurrences... yet there is no record of anything unsual around that time period in other cultures.. some way more advanced than the Hebrew goat herders.

 

FAIL

 

One more thing.. if you care to actually find out.. the Bible itself is chock full of astrological symbolism.

 

If you watch the video in the OP, you'll see that the 'star' being proposed is indeed a set of astronomical events (which can be verified via Nasa computer software) e.g planetary conjunctions, and not a 'star' as such. The NASA software can calculate the movement of the planets and stars going back thousands of years, and so the math is CORRECT regardless of what the Chinese recorded. It is true that they did not record events like meteors or comets or such like, which have been proposed as the 'star', for the period we are considering, but that is not what is being proposed in the video anyway.

 

I do care to find out about the astrological symbolism in the Bible, as I stated in my previous post, which you may not have read. When I used to read the Magi as saying 'we saw his star', I knew they were saying 'we've been studying astrology', as a planet or star of its self could not have any significance regarding the birth of a King. It should prove an interesting study.

[BlackCat]

 

I don't know why the Catholic Church included four out of the dozens of gospels avalibe. However they clearly should have picked Thomas instead of John. Thomas, Mark, Matthew and Luke are all related in that one is a source for the others or they all copied from the same source. John is like the rest of the Second Century gospels.

 

I watched a documentary at the weekend called 'The Lost Gospels', on Youtube. I didn't realise there were so many of these 'unchosen' letters/gospels. As I waited with bated breath to see if a conspiracy had occurred and the real truth about life and God etc, might be about to be revealed- all I got, was more of the same, only from my 'biased' understanding, these gospels sound more whacky if anything.

 

 

History does not record Herod visiting with Wisemen from the east or slaughtering babies. And Judeism doesn't consider Rachel a prophecy. Those things are Christian spin. Long before history got started winter solctice was worshiped. On that morning the sun rises to fight winter. But the battle doesn't end there. Final victory doesn't come until vernal equinox in spring. That is why Human culture has so many saviors who are born in late December and rise from the dead in spring. The same organization that choose the gospels that would go into their Bible also choose for Christmas to replace pagan holidays.

 

Good points. The gospels contain references to OT verses that supposedly had fulfillment in the events the gospels are recording e.g John the Baptist as a voice in the wilderness, the Rachel weeping for her children, and all the Jesus references. The followers of Jesus are attempting to give credibility to their Messiah, rightly or wrongly. It seems very strange that there are no historical secular records of Herod slaughtering the babies and children. That had always bothered me.

 

I'm considering buying a book by a member of this forum: Diana Agorio, called 'Sex Rites, the Origins of Christianity'. I'm hoping this book will explain how these 'saviour' gods developed and how astrology influenced Judaism and Christianity. The materials I have read on this so far (Christian authors) always claim that most of these 'similar' gods (like the stuff in Zeitgeist) came AFTER Jesus. I can't wait to check all this out properly.

[Ravenstar]

Noted

 

I think it would be fascinating to see what the Vatican has locked up as far as scriptures and ancient texts go - I bet it would blow minds.

 

The similar gods... Osiris for sure, was WAY before Jesus, the first mention of him in the Egyptian 5th Dynasty, 2500 BC

 

Mithra was also around before Jesus;

 

"In 1907 a large number of clay tablets was found in the palace archives of Boghazkoy, the capital of the ancient Hittites in the north of the Anatolian plateau. These tablets contain the first recorded mention of the name 'Mithra', who, together with the Lord of Heaven, is invoked as the protector of a treaty between the Hatti (the Hittites) and their neighbours, the Mitanni. The date of the treaty is somewhere in the fourteenth century B.C., and since the latest known reference to the Western Mithras occurs in the fifth century A.D. these tablets show that the god was revered for nearly two thousand years.'

 

Adonis is thought to have been related to Dumuzi.. who was a Sumerian God.. (4000 BCE) way before the Hebrews. That sort of makes sense since Abraham came out of Mesopotamia [ur was a Sumerian/Babylonian City-State] he was either Sumerian or Babylonian/Akkadian before he founded the Hebrew people.

 

 

Short list of death/rebirth deities

• Australian Aboriginal mythology
  
  • Julunggul
    
  • Wawalag
    

  [*]Akkadian mythology

  • Tammuz
    
  • Ishtar
    

  [*]Arabian mythology

  • Phoenix
    

  [*]Aztec mythology

  • Quetzalcoatl
    
  • Xipe Totec
    

  [*]Canaanite mythology

  • Adonis
    
  • Baal
    
  • Eshmun
    
  • Melqart
    

  [*]Christian mythology

  • Jesus
    

  [*]Dacian mythology

  • Zalmoxis
    

  [*]Egyptian mythology

  • Osiris
    
  • Amun
    
  • Horus
    
  • Amun-Min (Amen-Min)
    

  [*]Etruscan mythology

  • Atunis (also known as "Adonis" in Greek)
    

  [*]Finnic mythology

  • Lemminkäinen
    

  [*]Greek mythology

  • Adonis
    
  • Cronus
    
  • Dionysus
    
  • Orpheus
    
  • Persephone
    

  [*]Hindu mythology

  • Chinnamasta
    
  • Iravan
    
  • Barbarika
    

  [*]Japanese mythology

  • Izanagi
    

  [*]Jewish mythology

  • Lailah
    

  [*]Khoikhoi mythology

  • Heitsi-eibib
    

  [*]Native American mythology

  • Kaknu
    

  [*]Norse mythology

  • Gullveig
    
  • Odin
    
  • Baldr
    

  [*]Phrygian mythology

  • Attis
    

  [*]Religion in ancient Rome

  • Aeneas
    
  • Bacchus
    
  • Proserpina
    

  [*]Slavic mythology

  • Jarilo
    
  • Kostroma
    
  • Marzanna
    

  [*]Sumerian mythology

  • Dumuzi
    
  • Inanna
    

  [*]Yoruba mythology

  • Obatala
    
  • Moremi Ajasoro
    

[BlackCat]

Thanks for the head start Ravenstar.

 

By the way, your reply to 'Still have any Gods'- 'not really' is intriguing. Does that mean you are still open to the possibility of a First Cause?

[Joshpantera]

You can look to the east at night and see the nativity procession of stars right now, slowing inching their way into the position that they'll be in on Christmas Eve.

 

http://www.stellarho...hree-kings.html

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRcCEZflIP4

 

The nativity of the gospels can be seen to parallel the procession of constellations (Orion's belt, Sirius, and Virgo) moving across the from east to west from sundown Christmas Eve to Sunrise Christmas morning every year. It's cryptic in the gospel account, but it does appear to be there (I'll expand though out). The blog link goes into the details of this symbolism as addressed to the seasons which moved from Egyptian times to Greco-Roman and into Christianity.

 

Orion's 3 belt stars are very prominent and stand out on the eastern horizon at sundown from around this time of year right on through the winter solstice and bit beyond. Later in the evening Sirius rises as the brightest star in the eastern sky and you can see (even right now) how obvious and eye catching they all are in the early evening hours as the stars rise in the east. This is proposed as the Bethlehem star reference.

 

The axis of Orion's belt stars are pointing down towards the earth with Sirius not far below the axis roughly mapping out the region where the most southern sunrises will take place during the winter solstice time of year. Later, after midnight, Virgo rises in the east along the ecliptic. And behind Virgo the sun will eventually rise on it's journey from it's southern most point during the winter solstice back towards the north for the summer solstice before reversing direction again. I enjoy watching the nativity written in the stars every year around this time from the perspective of looking out over the Atlantic and considering how the procession of constellations relates to ancient cultures and their observation of the natural world and sky and how they chose to mythologize what they observed. I find that sort of thing interesting. And it's very stand out, I can see why it became important to these people and then passed around in mythologies.

 

I found it interesting that some Christian apologists have recently taken issue with the modern popular claim that Jesus was never said to be born around the winter solstice in scripture - a claim that's made all the time and is so common that I'm sure everyone is familiar with it. I guess these apologists were mad about it and wanted to prove that the scriptures do actually outline the winter solstice time of year for Christ's birth and that it wasn't just a later edition made by the church; as non-scriptural tradition after all.

 

The apology gets sort of interesting:

The web's only site devoted to proof of Christ's December 25th birth

The purpose of this site is to set forth the case, based upon Scripture and sacred history, of Christ’s birth, Dec. 25, 2 B.C.

We believe the Dec. 25, 2 B.C., birth of our Lord is abundently demonstrated by competent Biblical evidence.

The Biblical Case for the Dec. 25th Birth of Christ

http://www.dec25th.info

 

But, of course, from a more freethinking perspective this scriptural analytical analysis done in favor of keeping Jesus as the "reason for season" actually does nothing more than outline the possible intent of the gospel writers to align there story line Jesus with the traditional winter solstice kingly solar birth celebrations in the sense of usurping the previous mythologies from that far back in Christian history - the late 1st to early 2nd centuries.

 

A bit of a backfire on the apologists from my perspective but they don't seem to catch that implication. Yeah, no wonder the nativity scene - though a bit cryptic - parallels quite closely the procession of constellations around the winter solstice time of year. So in actuality this seems more a case of the church finally agreeing to celebrate Jesus birth the day after the winter solstice based on a close reading of scripture, which itself sets up for the usurping of the popular pagan religious winter solstice holidays. There's no doubt that later church officials had this in mind, but the original idea seems to have been there from as far back as the Gospels, if not earlier.

 

And then of course John the Baptist and Jesus birthdays also grain straight into this situation as well:

 

The birth of John the Baptist and Jesus Christ are detailed in Luke chapter 1 and chapter 2. The Catholic Encyclopedia says that the CONCEPTION of John the Baptist was September 24th. While the feast celebrating his birth, known as St. John's Day, is June 24th - coincidentally 3 days after the summer solstice. This puts Jesus' birthday, which the bible says is 6 months after John the Baptists', at Christmas. It's also significant to keep in mind that St. John's Day is one of the first or oldest celebrations of Christianity.

Luke 1:36 (KJV) "And, behold, thy cousin Elizabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren."

This scripture is talking to Mary, Jesus' mum, Elizabeth is John the Baptists mum while the 6th month refers to her pregnancy with him. Mary conceived Jesus shortly after this conversation.

So, we have John the Baptist born at the summer solstice and 6 months later we have Jesus born at the winter solstice.

"The Nativity of St John the Baptist is one of the oldest festivals of the Christian church"

* Someone at Wiki has conveniently deleted the article that was specifically on "St. John's Day" (http://en.wikipedia...._John's_Day read the discussion there which also seems to have been deleted - wonder why/rolling eyes) where much of the discussion about John's & Jesus' births were discussed. So now, ya have to go to the one above or "Midsummer Day."

http://en.wikipedia....i/Midsummer_Day

 

Despite the fact that Christmas seems to have come as a late edition to Christianity as a recognized and organized holiday, in reality there appears to be clear intent on the part of the NT writers to lay out a winter solstice time of year nativity with astromythological symbolism, which, for whatever reason, didn't get large scale public attention until later on in the evolution of the Christian religion - even though it's so clearly spelled out and not so cryptic in Luke 1:36 and beyond. I do find this rabbit hole very interesting because the winter solstice thing apparently traces back much closer to Christian origins than most people realize....

[Ravenstar]

Thanks for the head start Ravenstar.

 

By the way, your reply to 'Still have any Gods'- 'not really' is intriguing. Does that mean you are still open to the possibility of a First Cause?

 

First cause?.. hmmm... I'm beginning to suspect that the universe, or universes are eternal - it just is—and recycles. Whether that has any kind of consciousness, I'm agnostic on that point, and probably more pantheistic in how that may work in reality...

 

my 'spirituality' and thoughts about it are... complicated

[BlackCat]

Joshpantera, that looks an interesting post. Thankyou. Will check out tomorrow. (I'm just having a quick look now before I go to bed. Haven't stopped today.)

 

 

Ravenstar- I am leaning towards your understanding of the universe. Is this not how Einstein and Spinoza understood things?

[Ravenstar]

I haven't read Spinoza yet... Einstein was a mystic, a sentimentalist at heart, in his outlook — where he saw beauty and order is where and how he saw 'god', I believe.

 

I grok... and when religious people speak of the "the proof of god is all around you' I think this is what they are interpreting as god—the awe of nature, beauty and order (though it isn't as orderly as it first appears - even Einstein rejected quantum physics as being chaotic - it offended his aesthetic)

 

I have odd thoughts sometimes that this entire thing.. this universe, is a communal dream.. a mental construct of all sentience, but these are musings and I have no scientific base for it. I muse... and I live in the real world and the question that comes to me is how to express these musings through creativity

 

But the really cool thing about being a non-believer is that my understanding can accept and adjust easily to new information and it's okay to say, "I don't know". This feels like freedom and peace to me.

[BlackCat]

Joshpantera- I'm checking out your post. I've been away this weekend so just having a proper look now.

 

Ravenstar- thank you for sharing your thoughts. I've just come back from the Peak District, which has some amazing scenery and hills, and so I certainly share that awe of nature and an appreciation for its beauty, acknowledging that the 'beauty' I perceive has been borne from chaotic and violent volcanic activity and seismic shiftings of before ancient times. I'm feeling a pull (appreciation) towards an earthbased spirituality or 'getting back to basics'......

[RachelSkates]

The comet is also mentioned in Suetonius. Life of Augustus. They, too, thought of killing all the male babies. However, they all went home and said, "Hmmm. What if my kid will become the king? " And they did not kill anyone.