A Norwegian astrologer, A.J. Bevan, has written on the star of
Betlehem. This is an article where he connects the birth of Jesus with
an eclipse 18 September 61 B.C.
http://www.astronor.com/eclipse_paths.htm
Though I find this interesting (the eclipse was total over Betlehem
and Jerusalem), I do not see how it connects with a time frame of at
most seven years before common era. I guess it is supposed to indicate
the place, but I don't see why, except for the fact that we have
Betlehem as the place where Jesus should be born. But I see nothing in
the eclipse that gives it this particular meaning. (But I may be
thick. It has happened.)
In another article he writes about the birth chart of Jesus, and
offers an example based upon Jupiter conjunction Saturn:
http://www.astronor.com/birth.htm
There are more related articles, but I shall leave to the interested
to investigate the site on their own.
/Kjell
Post by Kjell PetterssonIf I spread posts about the star of Bethlehem evenly throughout the
year, I can probably make them last until the next Three Kings Day, so
many different theories seem to be around. They abound!
If the previous had a Christian inclination, this one is even more so.
The author seems to regard creation as having occurred 4000 B.C.
Nevertheless, astronomical data seem to be correct. Like Ficino he
considers the actual star of Bethlehem to have been "the angel of the
Lord", but he recounts a number of celestial phenomena he thinks are
related to Jesus' birth. One should perhaps not be surprised that the
subject matter attracts Bible-oriented researchers as well as
astrology-oriented ones. (The site goes under the general description
of "Biblical Astronomy".)
He does give some historical background and context which makes his
reasoning more than just any home-spun theory. This context has to do
with Caesar Augustus and celebrations that were held in connection
with his jubilée; which was "star-studded" with celestial events. The
writer's interpretation is that these celestial events were not about
Augustus, but that they heralded Christ's birth. I found the
recollection very interesting, especially since it contained my
favourite fixed star Regulus. :-)
I would say that regardless of religious inclination, it makes sense
that a budding religion would want to associate its founder with
events such as these.
http://www.geocentricity.com/ba1/no122/bethstar1.html
/Kjell
Post by Kjell PetterssonI came upon this text from Marsilio Ficino regarding the Star of the
Magi (De Stella Magorum), which perhaps is not so valuable from an
astrological perspective, as it mixed the supernatural with the
celestial (he says the star is a comet, but the comet is really an
angel). He does however include a few astrological ideas on the
matter, so I thought it could be interesting nevertheless.
http://heavenastrolabe.net/the-star-of-magi/
/Kjell
Post by Kjell PetterssonA blog post on another book about the Star of Betlehem (the book
having that very title, author Dieter Koch), even including the birth
chart of Jesus (Virgo Sun, Libra Moon, Leo ASC).
http://horoscopicastrologyblog.com/2009/12/23/new-book-on-the-star-of...
/Kjell
Post by Kjell PetterssonToday is celebrated the most astrological of Christian holy-days, the
Epiphany. There have been many ideas on what the star of Betlehem
could have been (assuming there was one) and how the three magi were
led to find the newborn child.
Kepler favoured the idea of a Jupiter/Saturn-conjunction. Or three,
actually. In art the star has often been depicted as a comet, and a
supernova has also been suggested. Yet another theory has been
expounded relatively recently (everything post-Kepler is recently),
and I found this theory to be interesting. Pieces of it are described
http://www.eclipse.net/~molnar/
He (Michael R. Molnar) has written a book, "The Star of Bethlehem: The
Legacy of the Magi", which I have not read, which surely goes into
more depth than the web page.
/Kjell