CHAPTER 23

THE SECOND APPEARANCE OF THE STAR

    In a previous chapter I pointed out the inadequacy of the translation of the Greek word estathé, being grammatically 3rd person singular, aorist 1, indicative passive of the verb histémi. The verb means "to stand", and if used in the passive voice takes on the meaning of "being made to stand". This is a little clumsy, but when used in an astronomical setting, is the ideal way of representing the stationary points in the orbits of planets. Hence the best translation is "the star became stationary over above where the little child was." I have looked at this verse in thirteen different translations of the Bible, and not one of the editors has given us the true meaning of this Greek verb. This is sad, and seems to reflect that the Biblical scholars have failed to avail themselves of the services of an astronomer before sending their text to the publishers. Here then is the evidence from the versions -

            First of all, Matthew 2:2.  It should read, “We have seen His star in its (heliacal) rising.”  However, most of the Versions retain the word “East”.

 

Authorised Version.  “We have seen his star in the east.”

N.I.V.  “We saw his star in the east.”

Living Bible.  “We have seen his star in far-off eastern lands.”

The message.  “We observed a star in the eastern sky.”

Weymouth.  “For we have seen his star in the east.”

20th Century N.T.  “For we saw his star in the east.”

J.B.Phillips.  “For we saw his star in the east.”

J.N.Darby  “We have seen his star in the east.”

R.S.V.  “We have seen his star in the east.”

            But the following Versions have shown a more exact translation.

N.E.B.  “We observed the rising of his star.”

Moffatt.  “We saw his star when it rose.”

Amplified Bible. “We have seen his star in the east at its rising.”

Translator’s N.T.  “For we saw his star when it rose.”

 

            Matthew 2:9 refers to the star “standing still”. The Greek word is in the Passive Voice, and should have been translated “became stationary.” Not one of the Versions has rendered this with proper accuracy.

 

Authorised Version. “The star which they saw in the east went before them till it came and stood over where the young child was.”

N.E.B.  “The star which they had seen at its rising went ahead of them until it stopped above the place where the child lay.”

N.I.V.  “The star they had seen in the east went ahead of them till it stopped over the place where the child was.”

Moffatt.  “The star they had seen rise went in front of them till it stopped over the place where the child was.”

Living Bible.  “And look! The star appeared to them again, standing over Bethlehem.”

The Message.  “Then the star appeared again, the same star that they had seen in the eastern skies. It led them on until it hovered over the place of the child.”

Amplified Bible.  “The star which had been seen in the east at its rising went before them, until it came and stood over the place where the young child was.”

Translator’s N.T.  “The star which they had seen when it rose, went before them, till it came and stopped over the place where the child was.”

Weymouth.  “Strange to say, the star they had seen in the east led them on until it came and stood over the place where the babe was.”

20th Century N.T.  “And the star which they had seen in the east led them on, until it reached, and stood over the place where the child was.”

J.B.Phillips.  “And now the star, which they had seen in the east, went in front of them as they travelled until at last it shone immediately above the place where the little child lay.”

J.N.Darby.  “And lo, the star, which they had seen in the east went before them until it came and stood over the place where the little child was.”

R.S.V.  “And lo, the star which they had seen in the east went before them, till it came to rest over the place where the child was.”

 

            This is another study altogether! Many lessons can be drawn from a comparative study of the Versions. Notice for example how the word “babe” was used in one version, whilst two versions spoke about where the child “lay”. But, as mentioned before, the Greek word for a baby is brephos, the word used by Luke in 1:41, 1:44, 2:12, and 2:16, in connection with events before Jesus’ birth and when the shepherds went to the stable. But the Greek word paidion refers to a little child, and this is uniformly used of Jesus when the Magi visited. As to the use of the word “lay”, (when the Greek only reads “was”) all I can say is that it is an invention of the translators, presumably to comply with their traditional concepts from singing carols at Christmas time.

 

            How great is the need for accuracy in the work of translation. It is altogether misleading for anyone to intrude his or her own ideas into the translation of an ancient script. If the language is allowed to say only, and exactly, what was written, then we might have a chance of understanding the message. The above analysis is a prime example of how tradition has veiled the truth, and enabled mockers to get a handle on the text and pronounce it to be nothing but romantic nonsense.

 

            A further word here about the Greek verb found in the text. As it is written it is estathé, which is passive, and may be found in other parts of the New Testament. Take for example Mark 13:9. “You shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.”   The words “shall be brought” are estathé, and strictly translated it should read, “You shall be MADE TO STAND before rulers and kings.”  I have no quarrel with the A.V. wording because the passive sense is conveyed, but a stricter form of translation would have been helpful.

 

            Another example is in Matthew 18:16.  “In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.”  Instead of “may be established”, we could write “shall be made to stand.”  It implies an outside agency, a divine assistance, granted to establish the corroborative evidence of the witnesses.

 

            A final example is in Romans 14:4, which will be helpful because estathé occurs twice.  “Who are you to judge another man’s servant? To his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall BE HOLDEN UP, for God is able to MAKE him STAND.”  In both instances the A.V. translators have clearly shown the passive voice in the verb.

 

            Hence, in Matthew 2:9 we could render the translation as follows -  “the star - - WAS MADE TO STAND over where the young child was.”  This would not be out of order, but would not betray the astronomical significance of the expression. In this instance “became stationary” is the only acceptable translation, being both passive in its expression, and at the same time describing exactly what happened to Jupiter as it began, or completed, its retrograde loop.

        Returning now to the flow of this chapter, it is this second appearance of the star that now attracts our attention. And because we are able (thanks to Bryant Tuckermann) to plot the track of Jupiter amongst the stars in that far off year, we can obtain an accurate estimate of the time of arrival of the Wise Men in Jerusalem and Bethlehem.

    One thing, however, remains a little uncertain concerning the Magi’s interpretation of the heliacal phenomena. Did they consider the portent connected with the conception or the birth of the coming king? There is no simple answer to this question from extant data. But our "very special example" may be sufficient to enable us to decide which it was. Because of the "two years" mentioned by Herod in connection with the slaughter of the Bethlehem innocents, it seems doubtful that the Magi rushed off to Judæa from their homeland, in fact it suggests a considerable gap between the conjunctions of August B.C. 3 and the time when Jesus would have been between one and two years of age. The Christmas carols and traditional interpretation, that the wise men visited Jesus at the manger site, must be greatly in error, and can be dismissed at once.

    Referring again to Tuckermann’s planetary positions, we find the next stationary points of Jupiter after the birth of Jesus (in September B.C. 2) are 28th December B.C. 2 and 28th April B.C. 1. To comply with Herod’s "two years" requires us to settle for the April B.C. 1 stationary point, and so we get the impression that the Magi arrived in Jerusalem round about Passover time in that year, which fell between 7th and 14th April. This gives a strong signal to the effect that the Magi interpreted the rising of Jupiter as the time of Jesus’ conception, rather than his birth. Otherwise, why didn’t they travel the previous year, say between April and June? But they manifestly didn’t, for the simple reason that they would have arrived before Jesus had been born!

    And so, after leaving Herod, and travelling southwards towards Bethlehem, they were probably prevented from seeing the heavens for some days due to cloud cover. The statement that they suddenly saw "His Star" again suggests this as a simple explanation. On reaching Bethlehem, and perhaps staying with the family for some while at their residence (note here, they saw Jesus "in the house", not in a cave or a stable), they watched the movement of Jupiter, now high in the zenithal region of the sky, and it was stationary!

    But this is not all. They learned from their visit that Jesus was conceived in a miraculous manner. Technically speaking, she was still a "virgin", even though she had given birth to a child. Looking into the heavens, they saw Jupiter stationary, but where was it? The answer is in Virgo! The planet was stationary, next to the second brightest star in the sign of Virgo, named Zavijavah, right next to the Virgin’s head at an altitude of 68° above the horizon. Here then was cause for them to rejoice even more, and so they unloaded their expensive gifts and bestowed them on the Royal Child. An interesting point arises here from that ancient document held in the Bodleian Library at the University of Oxford, papyrus codex Bodmer V., the Protoevangelium of James, (mentioned before.) In it we read that the Magi were able to see Jesus "standing by the side of His mother Mary." Here is evidence indeed to show that they were not visiting the Babe in the Bethlehem manger, but in a house when he was old enough to stand, and that means He must have been about 7 months of age, which fits in well with other facts, for example, Epiphanius stated that the star shone in the east two years before the Magi arrived in Jerusalem. (Panarion Haer. 51.22.13).

     And the ancient Jewish Messiah-Haggadah discusses the heptad (seven year period) in which the Son of David will come, and states that in the 5th year "the Star shall shine forth from the East, and this is the Star of the Messiah - - and at the close of the 7th the Messiah is to be expected." In other words, the Star was expected to appear two years before Messiah’s birth. (This information was found in Beth Jellinek, "ha-Midrash", Leipzig and Vienna, 1853-1878.) It was actually 14 months from July B.C.3 to September B.C.2.

    As an interesting aside here, one may quote from the Roman poet Virgil, writing about 30 years before the birth of Christ, "Now the Virgin returns - - - now a new generation descends from heaven on high - - - Only do thou, pure Lucina, smile on the birth of the child under whom a golden race will spring up throughout the world!" The Virgin he was referring to was probably connected with the ancient Babylonian, Egyptian, and Greek mythology, but nevertheless, it is intriguing to realise that in those days there was a very widespread feeling that a new and golden age was about to be ushered in.

    Whilst staying in Bethlehem, the Magi must have been warned about the character of Herod the king. Everyone in Judæa was scared of having any contact with this cruel sadistic monster, who could at a moment’s notice demand the execution of anyone who got in his way. It was therefore no surprise that eventually the Magi received a dream, warning them not to return to Herod, but to depart to their own country by another route. These words suggest a sizeable retinue of people with the Magi, and a sumptuous splendour that would attract attention wherever they went. Hence they couldn’t easily disappear from the land without being noticed. Perhaps they made their way down to the Dead Sea, and took "the King’s Highway" northwards rather than travel through Judæa and Samaria. This is conjecture, but could well have been a possible route of their departure.

    During the course of this year, B.C. 1, Herod was actively engaged in bringing his eldest son Antipater to trial, and was awaiting Cæsar’s instructions. It was not only a harassing time for him, but a period in which there would have been many activities to cause him to forget the Magi and their visit for the time being. It must have been quite a while later, that he suddenly realised he’d been tricked. No one had shown up. Enquiries showed that the Magi had departed without gracing his palace a second time as expected. In his state of mind at the time, together with the advance of a terminal illness, he became savage to a degree seldom witnessed in human history. Calculating from the date given him by the Magi, and knowing that the August B.C.3 conjunctions portended the conception of Jesus, he sent for the execution of all the children under two years of age.

    What is so distressing about this whole wretched scenario, is the clear knowledge that Herod must have known his days were rapidly nearing their termination. He was approaching 70 years of age, and his medical condition was worsening by the week. What possible "good" (to his warped mind) could ensue from an attempt to eradicate a contender to his throne under such circumstances? One might ask whether he might have been doing it for his son and successor, but Herod had a bad habit of slaughtering his sons, and appeared to have no filial affections whatsoever.

    I said in a previous chapter that the eastern churches remember the slaughter of the innocents on December 29th, the day of the partial eclipse of the Moon. From the available data, I now see that this was too late if Herod assumed the planetary conjunctions foretold Jesus’ birth, but could only have been meaningful if interpreted in terms of His conception. Hence, assuming that December 29th B.C. 1 was the actual date of the massacre, then it favours the view that conception was understood by the Magi. The following list of dates will be useful to see the situation at a glance.

August B.C.3                             Stellar phenomena.
December B.C.3                        Jesus’ conception.
March B.C.2                              Birth of John the Baptist.
September B.C.2                       Birth of Jesus.
April B.C.1                               Visit of the Magi.
December B.C.1                       Herod’s massacre of the Bethlehem infants.

    Looking at the dates we have established so far, the August B.C. 3 appearances of Jupiter were after the conception of John the Baptist, but before the annunciation to Mary. But it is significant that Venus was descending during that time, whilst Jupiter was rising. It reminds us of John the Baptist’s words about himself and Jesus, when he said, "He must increase but I must decrease." (John 3:30) The stellar signs were not meant to be a chronological “fit”, but a forewarning.

    In the Appendix  I have presented graphs showing the movement of the planet Jupiter in the years B.C. 3 to A.D. 1., together with all the historical notices that have been mentioned in the text.