It's time to ask this question...

[Ark Guy]

But back to the star...what was it seebs?

 

[Lotar]

The text surrounding the six days and the usage of the term in other portions of the bible along with early christian writing show us the days were literal.

On the other hand, I have shown verses that clearly show angels have been referred to as stars and that angels can shine brightly. So the literal star, or object could be a literal angel identified as a star.

Of course it really could be a real star way out in space...see my post 16.

Not so. You use a figurative verse to justify your inturperetation of a literal verse. There is never one literal verse in the Bible that refers to angels as stars. There is not descriptive verse in the the bible that says they look like stars, only that they were bright. Moses and Elijah are also described as bright, could it had been them?

 

[beardly]

On a side note. The star was in the sky for around three years. It is a misconception that the three wisemen were in the stable when Jesus was born.

-db

 

[Ark Guy]

beardly,

I think the following verse indicates that the star was not visible for a little while.

MAT 2:10 When they saw the star, they were overjoyed.

If the star was there when they arrived they would have no need to see herod

 

[Ark Guy]

Not so. You use a figurative verse to justify your inturperetation of a literal verse. There is never one literal verse in the Bible that refers to angels as stars. There is not descriptive verse in the the bible that says they look like stars, only that they were bright. Moses and Elijah are also described as bright, could it had been them?

I suppose it could have been them, but I doubt it. Like the angels they have not been referred to as stars.

What do you think the star was lotar?

 

[Lotar]

I suppose it could have been them, but I doubt it. Like the angels they have not been referred to as stars.

Nor are angels.
You accept that this may be a possibility, yet reject such a liberal interpretation of the creation? Atleast there is a reason behind the latter.

What do you think the star was lotar?

Most likely just that, a star. Possibly a number of stars that came into close alignment to create one bright star in the sky. It may also have been a comet. I really don't know.

 

[Ark Guy]

Nor are angels.
You accept that this may be a possibility, yet reject such a liberal interpretation of the creation? Atleast there is a reason behind the latter.


Most likely just that, a star. Possibly a number of stars that came into close alignment to create one bright star in the sky. It may also have been a comet. I really don't know.

Hmmmmm, funny how you know it wasn't an angel...is it because I said it might be and you gotta disagree with everything I post?

So you think it was a close alignment that made it look like a bright star??? Then explain how it moved ahead of the magi and then stopped over the house.
You also need to explain how a star can stop directly above a house. That particular star would be directly above every house in that town.

 

[Bushido216]

Hmmmmm, think about it. For got to make a star move so that it travels across the sky, then stop it over the house where Jesus was meant that God had to push the star many light years across the sky. Which I'm ok with.

The problem is that the Theo-Evos seem to have a problem with God moving stars across the sky during the creation period so why allow it in this instance?

I knew it! He had to eventually bring it around to the creation of the universe some how.

Here, in this particular instance, I have no qualms with God moving a star about the firmament (get the pun?).

However, there is proof directly contradicting Genesis 1:1-8 as a literal history, so I have problems with it.

/me wonders how long he has until he has to explain this again.

 

[Ark Guy]

I knew it! He had to eventually bring it around to the creation of the universe some how.

Here, in this particular instance, I have no qualms with God moving a star about the firmament (get the pun?).

However, there is proof directly contradicting Genesis 1:1-8 as a literal history, so I have problems with it.

* Bushido216 wonders how long he has until he has to explain this again.

The biblical contradictions continue......There is also proof that says a guy doesn't come back to life on the third day of being dead. When you have been dead for that long...you stay dead. Or so the medical profession says.

 

[Lotar]

Hmmmmm, funny how you know it wasn't an angel...is it because I said it might be and you gotta disagree with everything I post?

My answer has nothing to do with what you believe or not, considering that I have only replied to a few of your posts, you are in no position to make such a presumption

I see no logical reason to believe it was an angel. I believe if it was an angel, the bible would have said so.

So you think it was a close alignment that made it look like a bright star??? Then explain how it moved ahead of the magi and then stopped over the house.
You also need to explain how a star can stop directly above a house. That particular star would be directly above every house in that town.

I don't know, I've heard an explaination before, but it has been a while. It may have been a matter of perspective and the natural shift that occurs over the months.
I also said it could have been a comet.

God may have just grabbed some stars an drug them across the sky. I don't know, and frankly, I don't really care.

 

[Bushido216]

The biblical contradictions continue......There is also proof that says a guy doesn't come back to life on the third day of being dead. When you have been dead for that long...you stay dead. Or so the medical profession says.

Ark Guy, you're being dishonest. You know that's now what I said. Please stick to the main discussion and do not derail what I said.

We have no direct evidence contradicting Lazarus's resurrection. However, we do have evidence contradicting a literal Genesis 1:1-8.

Is this clear?

/me notes that it has only been 10 hours and 47 minutes since he last explained this.

 

[TheBear]

How far above the earth was this star? Was it within the atmosphere? 500 feet? 2 miles? Was it closer than the sun? Outside the Milky Way?

 

[Ark Guy]

For the star to move and stand over a particular house I don't think a star in the heavens would give that kind of resolution from the earth.

I think your 500 feet is more like it.

I also think during the birth of Christ it was much higher. High enough for the Magi to see, recognize as unusual and fullfillment of what they believed could be prophecy, then start their journey.

 

[Ark Guy]

We have no direct evidence contradicting Lazarus's resurrection. However, we do have evidence contradicting a literal Genesis 1:1-8.

Is this clear?

One would think that Bushido would agree that in lazarus's case...4...days of being dead, then rising back to life contradicts science.

But for some strange reason he just can't accept that fact.

 

[TheBear]

If 500 feet is correct, it may have been an angel. Stars do not exist in our atmosphere.

 

[Bushido216]

One would think that Bushido would agree that in lazarus's case...4...days of being dead, then rising back to life contradicts science.

But for some strange reason he just can't accept that fact.

Okay... I'll word it like this. We have no scientific evidence denying that raising from the dead, okay? Are you happy now?

 

[Ark Guy]

Okay... I'll word it like this. We have no scientific evidence denying that raising from the dead, okay? Are you happy now?

Bushido, the scientific evidence is that ...it/that... can't happen.

For example last night I broad jumped 50 yards. That's half a football field!!!...can you present some scientific evidence denying that?

The ability for something NOT TO OCCUR, such as a resurrection or that long of a broad jump is scientific evidence enough that it didn't occur.

Do you understand yet or will I need to explain it a bit more to you?

 

[Ark Guy]

...back to the star.

 

[Bushido216]

Bushido, the scientific evidence is that ...it/that... can't happen.

For example last night I broad jumped 50 yards. That's half a football field!!!...can you present some scientific evidence denying that?

The ability for something NOT TO OCCUR, such as a resurrection or that long of a broad jump is scientific evidence enough that it didn't occur.

Do you understand yet or will I need to explain it a bit more to you?

That's why it's a miracle, Ark Guy, keep up.

 

[Ark Guy]

And the creation of Adam from the dust followed bt the creation of Eve from Adams side wasn't a miracle...perhaps you ought to get in the race Bushido.

This is the last I will post on this topic in this thread. if you wish to continue discussion, please start a new thread as this is off topic and not relating to the Star of Bethlehem