Christmas Star Explained

That's another story.

They may know enough of the bible to realize they better not dare. Besides, maybe a few would enjoy seeing you nice folks on the defensive for a change.

quote:

---

Simple you have to be the most astounding person i have ever seen(read?) I seriously doubt that you actually believe the utter trash that appears on the screen in front of me under you name, it is simply appalling. Im more inclined to believe youre just having a grand old time messing with all of us.

​

Fist of all that titanic post at post 13 was from this page, so at least give the credit to where its so sadly due when you post your illustrious comments. Its not even worth my time to respond to that whole block, but on a first time skim there were a few scientifically objectionable points.

---

I thought I gave the link. Must have forgot, why do you think sites like that are some secret??? Get a grip, man. This is basic stuff here.

quote:

---

What? what makes the bible the record of records? Humans wrote the bible, buddy, as more or less generally accepted by the ENTIRE WORLD. That you believe otherwise matters not because theres absolutly NO BACKING behind it. Along with that, the general consensus on the dating of the bible is that Mark, being the earliest written book, was written around 70 BC, nowhere NEAR the birth of Christ. PEOPLE WROTE THE BIBLE. THE SAME PEOPLE WERE NOT THERE TO SEE THE STAR.

---

Nonsense. What do you think Mark or others did, dream this stuff up?? No. The records were here, and the holy spirit quickened them to mind, as needed. No dreaming up stuff, like evos do involved.

quote:

---

What ramos was saying, if you took the time out of your day to look up COMMENTARY, is that although the book of Matthew was written(at first glance) on the topic of the Nativity story, it was really meant to comment on the political situation of Rome.

---

Right, which is not worth responding to, it is so delusional, and out of touch.

quote:

---

Just because something is named specifically in the book doesnt mean it cannot have a deeper meaning that is not apparant at first glance. Much like your star/flying saucer. The differance is his theory makes some sort of logical sense and yours makes none.

---

There are deeper meanings to the bible, yes, but the story of Christmas is pretty straightforward. Part of that story is the light in the sky the ancients referred to as a star. I thought I gave an interesting prophesy about the king (Sceptre) looking down from afar up on Shiloh. That, plus the wheels of Ezeliel, that show God does have a mobile throne mean that we could place the Dad on the manger scene!

quote:

---

On the same quote, the calendar we are based around is not based on jesus' birth. The year is, true, but the calendar is not. In fact, the Gregorian calendar which we currently use is from around the mid 1500's, and one of its main points was to move the calendar so it corresponded with Easter.

---

Now, perhaps you can explain why AD is something else now, as you suggest. If you can, fine, but watch out, cause who was it that you think came to take His son to heaven!!??? Perhaps the star stayed out of sight that day."Anno Domini (Latin: (In)The year of (Our) Lord[1]), abbreviated as AD or A.D., defines an epoch based on the traditionally reckoned year of the conception or birth of Jesus of Nazareth."
Anno Domini - Wikipedia

quote:

---

Plenty more i could say from the rest of the contents of this particular post, but ill just examine this line.
What on earth are you talking about? First of all you are INTERPERTING the bible, so it does not matter what the truth is when you create your own truth from it. As weve seen, even if Ramoss takes the bible to be true, you and he still came up with different conclusions to its contents when you interperted it. As for its actual Truth, its is NOT ASSUMED TRUE. If the bible was assumed true then there would be no purpose for EVC or debate(except on the interpertation), the bible would be our roadmap to absolutly everything. Do yo think that eveyone on EVC believes the bible to be true? Ive seen you on different threads, you cant even claim ignorance on this topic. Do you think everyone in the world beleives the bible to be true?

​

Ill save you from making a dumb comment and just answer for you. NOT EVERYONE BELIEVES IN THE BIBLE.

---

Not everyone understands it or believes it either. Not everyone believes in spirits, or God, or some form of spiritual, but most do. So???

quote:

---

Heres a thought, brennakimi was being sarcastic/laughing at you/ridiculing you, not agreeing with you. Im inclined to think that she/he thinks your story as as much cock-and-bull as everyone else who reads your empty space. Why on earth does god need a ship!? he is, by definition, limitless and omnipotent! what use does a being that is (as defined by your accepted bible) everywhere and EVERYTHING need transportation? and why such conventional transportation? There is absolutly no rationale for this or anything youve written so far.

---

How would I know why He choses to have wheels??? I notice that His throne was on that starship, maybe that has something to do with it! Why lug around a big throne across the universe! Maybe the angels observed around the Sceptre need it to tag along with the Almighty, and He is a nice Guy? Why doubt for nothing? Remember, this baby is likely much much much much much much much much much much much older than our universe!

quote:

---

Hilarious. My favorite post so far. Do you even know what HMS stands for? How is it logical, possible, or make ANY sense that the vehicle of the creator of the universe has a title given to it by Her Majesty (i dont recall who presided circa 0 BC...), the Queen of ENGLAND( does not EXIST on 0 BC...). And of course, the ever popular "first class," which, in conjunction with the HMS tag, means a vessel of a high military rank. Too much Star Trek for you?

---

I used it for His Majesty. Remember, He was here long before a monarch of England. But I feel that the Holy Spirit, is a woman, and She is God as well, so what the hec.

quote:

---

All in all, my ribs hurt from laughing. Don think i dont take your ideas seriously(sarcasm), its just that i dont understand how on earth you arrived at them, nor do they make any logical sense, nor are they supported. Im sure books could be written about what i left out (why is god an alien, why noone thought it odd that a starship was on a barn, why you know sparingly to not all that much about the bible, ect) but im sure youll invoke the wrath of some logical, sensible member that will be ... amazed... by your theories.

---

The idea of this thread is the biblical star of Bethlehem, and what it was not, and what it likely was. If it were a star or cosmic event, some record would exist. Since it was not, according to that evidence we are left with it being what I say, or something else biblical, or the whole thing being a fabrication.I use the evidences, and bible to see what must have been, assuming God is real, and true.

quote:

---

I hope to god that your proposed topic on "why there were no natural physical laws in the beggining" goes through. I cant wait.

---

I have been looking at the facts for awhile now, so your euphoric hopes that you or others would have a good showing are very very very unlikely. I learn from my wins. What I mean by that, is if I just barely win a debate, I learn from that, so the next time, I really mop up the floor with em.For example, with Razd, even though I won by default, and he never showed up after the thing got closed down as I said it would, I learned something. Like reviewing a boxing match, I see where I allowed an approach, that I should have KOed more quickly. But that's another story.

quote:

---

Yeah so i lurk more than i post, thats why my posts are so low for two year's worth of membership. So sue me.

---

No problem, if all you got is what you posted here, I can see why you need to lurk most of the time. Relax.

quote:

---

You should also note that he cannot keep his wild speculations consistent between threads.

​

Heaven, according to Simple, used to be above the Earth, presumably within reach of tower enthusiasts that once lived in Babel. God had to step in and stop the construction to prevent these citizens from reaching Heaven. Jesus, after his death, moved Heaven to a safe location to prevent space shuttles from marring the scenery.

​

Its difficult to piece it all together, but its clear (in Simple Speak) that Heaven was a real place above Babel.

---

PART of heaven. Heaven is a big place. There was a spiritual level nearby before Babel. Angels used to marry women, yes.In the big event that changed the universe, the split, the spiritual was divided from the physical. Therefore, of course, there was no longer a spiritual level on earth, in the world of men.

quote:

---

What does this have to do with the Christmas star (aka the HMS Starship Sceptre?)

​

This spacecraft "6 times the size of a football field!" looked like a star. That must put that sucker pretty high up to begin to compare it to the pin pricks in the sky.

​

How low was Heaven for the tower of Babel to attract Gods concern? How high was the spacecraft for it to look like a star? Why would God be riding in a spacecraft if Heaven itself was closer?

---

Good questions. Firstly, remember, as I said, we do not know by the bible how big this is. I grabbed a size I thought would be impressive. This has a wingspan of nearly a football field! If we put this, say, 40,000 feet up, how big would it look, at night? The space station is about an acre as we speak. That is 24% or so bigger than a football field.Many so called UFO sightings are bigger than this.Example"The incident began on Sunday, December 12, 2004, when Robert and Anne were enjoying the evening at about 7:10 PM. Soon, they saw a glowing light in the night sky. They first noticed the phenomena through their sliding door which led to the outside deck.Robert described the sight as "a huge ball of brilliant white light coming toward the house from the west."The size of the object was immense, according to the couple as big as several football fields, covering the landscape with glowing light. The couple was mesmerized with the glow, which did not hurt their eyes, although it was extremely bright."
Humor & WhimsyBut in the case of the Christmas star we have indirect evidence. It could not have been seen that far away, or there would be records. I would use 100 square miles as an example, as Moab, if I recall is not much further than that, well, that is a long story, let's just use 100 miles as the example.Perhaps we could use 14,500 feet as an elevation for the ship, to see it we could have the shepherds and wise men see it, but not, say, China, and other places. Mount Rainer is about the height, and can be seen for about 100 miles.We could tweak this if need be, but we need to start somewhere.About your question on Babel. They had to know that they could build a tower up to it,, so it could not have been too high up at all. The CN tower in Canada is 1,815 feet high or so. I would guess that the spiritual level at the time of Babel was no more than 2-3 thousand feet up.

quote:

---

The size is unimportant. What is important is the portion of Heaven that was 2-3000 feet up before Jesus moved it.

---

The spiritual level before Babel was low enough that man could have built a tower to it. Maybe we could stretch it to 4 or 5 thousand feet even, assuming they were real smart then, and could build that high if they really made an all out effort. But it was close at hand, we can say that.The separation of the spiritual from the physical in this universe left us in this physical only state we call natural. Here, there is no spiritual level nearby. (They can visit, but that isn't the topic)The same effect is what left us with decay, present light, and etc, including affecting lifespans and life processes.This is what you must mean by Jesus 'moving' the spiritual level.

quote:

---

But there was a physical Heaven before Jesus moved it. You even said so. Its quoted in my post on this very page:

---

So you think spirits need a physical place??? Strange. No idea about that trip, you are on your own there.

quote:

---

You can use whatever elevation suits your fantasies. The point is that the Physical Heaven you have proposed is below the height of Gods observatory in His spaceship.

---

Ha!! That is funny, but sad. Firstly, I propose no physical heaven. Forget that. Real heaven, yes. Not physical. What you need to get clear here is that the former spiritual level is gone long long ago. Wherever a plane, or God's wheels go does not matter, the spiritual level isn't here any more.Get it??

quote:

---

God ruined the tower of Babel project because he did not want man strolling into Heaven. Angels married women. God, presumably, needs a dock to park his ship in Heaven. These are physical attributes!

---

No. Not at all. Spirits can assume physical bodies, of course, they still can. But they don't live here anymore. They visit. Some visit a lot. God's wheels need no physical dock. Hard to believe you are serious.

quote:

---

And...? What is the second part to this tale? Surely if they could build a tower to it they could interact with it. This is physical. This isn't that hard to understand, hell its your story!

---

No. For example the body of Jesus was not physical only after He arose from the dead. It was also spiritual. The new Jerusalem has real people in resurrected bodies like Jesus had. It also has mansions, and trees, and etc. But it is not a physical place. It is a merged place. In other words a physical and spiritual together place. Eternal.The physical only is decaying, dying temporary. Merged is the eternal state. Even in the past, the angels could take on a physical body. But, when their spiritual place was separated, they were no longer here.Now, to come to the PO place of earth, it is a distinct trip, and they need a passport, so to speak. A specific permit, or reason to be here. No longer can they marry, and mingle as they did.

quote:

---

You think God would create languages and move everyone if the tower could not reach Heaven anyways? This is your trip, I am just along for the ride.

​

Secondly! Why does God need a spaceship then? Strange.

---

That was already answered. I never said that the tower could not have reached the spirit level of the time. No idea what you are talking about.The separating of the spiritual from the physical causes the different way of communicating, and processing thoughts, and words. No need to create different languages. The differences of men just become apparent as we are limited to PO thinking.A starship is what the bible describes, so why not??? Nothing else better explains the Christmas star according to the evidences we have.

quote:

---

I'm not. Your answers have brought laughter to my household. Any and all seriousness is gone the minute I see you have made a post.

---

Laughter is a good thing. When you start to realize where the joke lies, then that is a very good thing.

quote:

---

Ok, so God stopped them from building a tower to heaven because...

---

Because if they reached that level, they could live forever. That would not be good. First we needed our hearts changed, and cleaned of sin.

quote:

---

Because its stupid. Feel free to think this way, you could start wearing Nike shoes and gather converts for the next comet.

---

Your opinion that the Almighty can't get around and has wheels as the bible says is not clever, or based on anything.

The birthright changed when Shiloh came! Besides, that is your preferred interpretation."10. until Shiloh come--Shiloh--this obscure word is variously interpreted to mean "the sent" (Joh 17:3), "the seed" (Isa 11:1), the "peaceable or prosperous one" (Eph 2:14) --that is, the Messiah (Isa 11:10; Ro 15:12);"
Genesis 49 - Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.orgNeedless to say it has to do with the coming, and birth of Jesus! The Christmas star exemplifies that.I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel,..This fits. The Father beheld the birth, but not nigh. It was high above. The sceptre arose, the star of Christmas.Ps 45:6 - Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.here we have the throne, and sceptre in the same verse.

What is there to discuss about the fact that the bible says God has a flying sapphire throne?? I use it for a reference. You can't deny it. Give it up.Da 7:9 - I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.The issue here is the light that was over Jesus. Was this the Father looking down from afar as prophesied about Shiloh??I don't see you proposing anything else here.

quote:

---

err, no. assuming that shiloh = jesus (we'll hold off on that part for the moment), zedekiah, the last king of judah, died more than five hundred years before jesus was born.

---

Is there a point here??? So? What, you think that that guy dying means that the Sceptre of God could not come as indicated??

quote:

---

i'm not sure how you're drawing these connections. is it at random? it seems like it.

---

If you mean from the verses I gave, I could explain a bit more, I suppose.Gen 49:10
The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.Here is my take. The presence of the Father, (the Lawgiver) in the form of the starship, that would appear over the birth of Shiloh.The departing of the Sceptre, or presence of the Father after the birth of Jesus, insinuates that now men would only have Shiloh as a way to be the people or kingdom of God. Only to Jesus would the gathering of the people now be!!!In fact, I believe, so total was this departure, that, as Jesus died, that moment, the ark of the covenant was taken to heaven.The records were messed with, and this fact covered up, in my opinion. As if the ark were lost in ages past, and never there.But, that too is another story.You can't deny that Shiloh did come, and it seems a strong interpretation that fits with the rest of the bible, that the Sceptre was the Lawgiver, or Father that looked down on Jesus, and was that Christmas Star!

quote:

---

... and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.

​

was THAT ever a quotemine! in otherwords, it's about a jesus. you just picked the wrong one. who smote moab? who possessed edom and seir? i'll give you a hint -- it happens only a few books later.

---

Ah, no. This is why I say it is somewhat of a mystery, or has been. Like a riddle." It is exceedingly difficult to fix the true sense of this prophecy in all its particulars. Probably the star, Numbers 24:17, is only an emblem of kingly power. Among the Egyptians a star is said to have been the symbol of the Divine Being. The sceptre refers to the kingly power in exercise. The corners or outskirts may mean the petty Moabitish governments, as the Chaldee has understood the term. If karkar, which we translate utterly destroy, be not the name of a place here, as it is in Judges 8:10, (which is not very likely,) it may be taken in one of those senses assigned to it, (See Clarke on Numbers 24:17.) and signify the blending together the children of Sheth, that is, all the inhabitants of the earth; for so the children of Sheth must necessarily be understood, unless we consider it here as meaning some king of the Moabites, according to Grotius, or a city on the borders of Moab, according to Rabbi Nathan. As neither Israel nor the Messiah ever destroyed all the children of men, we must (in order to leave the children of Sheth what they are generally understood to be, all the inhabitants of the world) understand the whole as a prophecy of the final universal sway of the sceptre of Christ, when the middle wall of partition shall be broken down, and the Jews and Gentiles become one united, blended fold, under one shepherd and bishop of their souls."
Numbers 24 - Clarke's Commentary - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.orgSo, we can have the people being blended, or, as the other verse put it, 'gathered' by Jesus, eventually!!! The star was visible in that area, which means all the way out to the borders of Moab. If we look that up, we see that isn't all that far. Again, this all goes to showing that the star could not be anything but a starship, or it would have been seen a lot further.Piece of cake.

quote:

---

"nigh" means "now."

---

Near, means close. so? Of course the Sceptre was not to be seen until Shiloh came. I never said that they had to see it who were nigh to the time of the prophesy.

quote:

---

i don't know what you think "scepter" means. but it's a staff

---

Especially the one of a king. In the sense here. But that is picking daisies." Verse 10. From Judah the sceptre shall not depart
The Jews have a quibble on the word shebet, which we translate sceptre; they say it signifies a staff or rod, and that the meaning of it is, that "afflictions shall not depart from the Jews till the Messiah comes;" that they are still under affliction and therefore the Messiah is not come. This is a miserable shift to save a lost cause. Their chief Targumist, Onkelos, understood and translated the word nearly as we do; and the same meaning is adopted by the Jerusalem Targum, and by all the ancient versions, the Arabic excepted, which has [Arabic] kazeeb, a rod; but in a very ancient MS. of the Pentateuch in my own possession the word [Arabic] sebet is used, which signifies a tribe. Judah shall continue a distinct tribe till the Messiah shall come; and it did so; and after his coming it was confounded with the others, so that all distinction has been ever since lost."
Genesis 49 - Clarke's Commentary - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.orgAnother point you may want to take note of here. The lawgiver, or principal of the verse had a sceptre. God is known to have one, as other verses show!!! PsalmBut"There is no example on record of a sceptre having ever been actually handled by a Jewish king."
Bible Dictionary: Sceptre

quote:

---

yes. it's a symbol of royalty. so is a throne. both signify a king. an earthly king sat on a throne, and held a scepter. one of the classic images of god is as a king, so they use kingly terminology.

---

Not an earthly king of Israel. Work on that.

You make a thread if you can't read the bible. God has wheels. They fly. You can't deny it. Face it. Ask around.
If you have something relative to why they did not fly over the birth of His son, do let us in on it. If you have some evidence, do tell. Otherwise, it seems like you are not really in the spirit of things here.

quote:

---

that is neither what that verse means, nor what shiloh evidently means. you are horrendously misreading things, again.

---

Your opinion is noted. But the verse speaks for itself.Focus on the fact that there was a star over the birth of Jesus, according to the bible. Deal with it, regardless of whether you agree that it is what some other verse may or may not be talking about.Have you the slightest reason to think that something other than a ship would better fit the bill here??

quote:

---

sball not depart... until. do i have to diagram this? it's there when israel gives it to judah. it's there as all the kinds of judah rule. it will leave when "peace" comes. get that? you're reading it backwards, on top of your obvious misinterpretation.

---

The Prince of Peace came. The wheels of God flew for more than just a few years at Bethlehem. As was evidenced in Ezekiel.

quote:

---

do you just make this stuff up? i could but a few hundred "random fundie obsessions" into a hat, and draw them at random, and make more sense than this. "let's see, the loch ness monster... is the holy grail... and the antichrist will... find noah's ark... in america."

​

come on.

---

Nope. The veil was rent. The records of the time do not reflect that. What were they going to say, 'Go home now people, no more tithing needed, God, and the ark are not here no more, go home'?? Get serious.
I have heard one legend that says they sewed it back up, and made like it never happened. It should not be a surprise that no ark was found by the Romans, or that the records of it are not there. I am serious.

quote:

---

yes, it is, because the ark disappears around 600 BC. you know, when judah was ran sacked by babylon and carried off into exile.

---

I don't believe that, I think that the records were missing on purpose.

quote:

---

i think you should stay off that site. it's evidently polluting your mind. the verse says destroy, and this sort of gibberish is teaching you that it's ok to just randomly change a word's meaning to make the verse say what you want.

---

I think scholars, and bible commentaries are a good thing, and that it takes the spirit to chose between what eligible meanings are available. In fact I know it.

quote:

---

yes. everything's a UFO now. the sun in genesis 1? UFO. the moon? UFO. stars? UFOs. windows of the heavens? UFOs. fountains of the deep? underwater UFOs. pharaoh's chariots? UFOs. the pillar of fire/smoke? UFO. god's backside that moses sees? UFO.

---

Your incredulity problem with God's word and how He has wheels is getting comical.

quote:

---

could you just stop for a second, and try to think clearly about this? this is the verse that sets up the kings of judah. it's about the kings of judah. period. the "scepter" is the symbol of judah's royalty. not a flying saucer. and it says that judah's sons will be kings until the end.

---

Stop right there, that is your opinion only. And I already pointed out that no king of Israel ever touched a sceptre. God has one, however as the bible says, and the verse I gave already. There are ultimate fulfillments and there are fulfillments, and various degrees of truths about prophesy. You latch onto a fragment, and act like that is the be all end all, 'it all revolves around Israel, and it's leaders.' No. Sorry, you need to lose that bias. It is coloring your take on things.

quote:

---

archaeologically? there's barely record of jewish kings, period. even so, it's not a literal object. it's a symbol of power -- a symbol. the verse is about judah's royalty not an object he possesses.

---

Any way you want to shake it. It was a symbol, right, of whose power??? God's. Who had the Sceptre? God did. Who was the Lawgiver? God was. Who had wheels, and a throne? God did. Are you getting some of this????Edited by simple, : No reason given.

quote:

---

you're the one talking about ezekiel 1 in every thread your participating in. you make a thread for your position.

---

Only where it pertains to the topic.

quote:

---

it says a star. so it means a star. at worst, the magi were more astrologically aware than the israelites, so it could have been a more abstract astrological alignment -- and people have made somewhat convincing cases for that. but it doesn't mean a UFO. you can't just read everything as being about UFOs.

---

No it does not, if you look up what was called a star by the ancients, you would know that. No, it could not be an alignment, any more than SN1987a could lead the tooth fairy to your suite. You keep repeating UFO, as if that is a bad word. Yet, you can't give a reasoned answer as to why a ship could not be what the Christmas star was. Grow an integrity meter, as Razd might say.

quote:

---

er, actually, no. it says a star led the magi to bayitlechem. it doesn't say it was "over" jesus. and even so, it says a star not a flying saucer!

---

Almost any light in the sly, or planet was called a star. Focus. Try and know your walk, before you talk the talk.Edited by simple, : No reason given.

If you want to learn, that is a good thing. If someone has something in the way of science or bible I can learn from I also will do that.Any place where they have no evidence for a myth, and expect others to have for a bible case, I am not interested in the least in having a new thread relax.Those who restrict themselves to the physical only box, may believe as they wish. I already won that debate, no need to waste time exposing the absolute fact that the state of the future and past are not known or knowable to science, therefore not science.I have my own myths, thank you very much, you are welcome to yours.Edited by simple, : No reason given.