Why did the Christian messiah fail to fulfill the messianic prophecies?

No, I am not. I am not discussing the video at all. I have no problem with someone trying to identify the star of Bethlehem. While I don't think such a thing is possible, the attempt is astronomy and not astrology. I've been perfectly clear about what I think is BS.

I appreciate the recommendation. I'm not the least bit interested in astrology/numerology, so I will most likely leave this video alone. It does not seem that there is anything new here regarding attempts to find dates that correspond to the birth of Christ using astronomy.

Retrograde motion is the point where a planet would appear to move backwards against the backdrop of stars. However, that is not the same thing as not moving with respect to folks on earth. The earth's diurnal rotation causes even the stationary stars to rotate in the sky. Not sure that this explanation works.Edited by NoNukes, : replace annual with daily.

Sigh. Retrograde does not mean that the planet does not follow all of the rest of the stars around the sky. If Jupiter had just stopped before reversing, it would still appear to traverse the night sky exactly as do the stars.Planets other than Mercury and Venus move relatively small amounts against the background of stars at all times. Jupiter does that even when not in apparent retrograde motion. Regardless of whether you understand that, apparently what you don't understand is that stopping before going retrograde would not make a planet continue to hover over Bethlehem.Got it now?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Just as every other bright star would do. Again, Jupiter pausing in retrograde just makes it act like a bright star. Do stars hover over the same position?

You are begging the entire question here. If you cannot come up with a way for a planet to stop over a city, then what do you have? It would at least be Interesting if we could actually establish the relationship. But trying to force an explanation without facts is just astronomical numerology. Apparently that is what this thread has devolved into.

I think a familiarity with the night sky is valuable in putting what Larson says into perspective. Last year there was a very brilliant conjunction with Jupiter and Venus around August. Most likely the most spectacular one we will see in our lifetimes. Earlier this month, Jupiter was in opposition and was at its near peak brightest. If you missed it, don't worry, you can see another opposition in about 13 months.Now granted, those observations won't help with the astrology part of things. But they do give us some clue regarding what planets and stars do, and how often. If you haven't got that perspective, then you might be too easily impressed when the astrology/numerology cranks are doing their thing.Keep looking up!Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Faith, the planets did what they did which includes a lot more stuff that is not being mentioned here. There is no known association of any of that planet moving with any Biblical event whose date we do not know exactly. The narrative that ties all of this stuff together the putative forcing.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

What wild accusations?You are not being objective. As is your wont, you've watched yet another video, and have bought into whatever is being sold. Everyone here has seen you go through that same process that time and time again.Here is a reasonable way to proceed.1) Astrology is horse caca 2) planets, even in retrograde don't hang stationary over a city, and 3) we don't know the date of Christ's birth.
There is no real reason or import to accept anyone's guess about the date. That applies to both believers and non-believers. The exact date has no theological relevance.I don't doubt Larson's honesty. But I could say the same thing for Davidjay. I don't doubt his honesty either.ABE:I overspoke. I do think Davidjay has some honesty challenges. But I think he believes that the numerology he describes is something divine.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Perhaps it is time to cite some text.

quote:

---

Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,

​

Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.

---

Perhaps I misunderstood your meaning. Could you clarify where you think the star appeared? Small wonder that he wouldn't say any such thing, but instead is trying to explain how the star stood in one place:

quote:

---

When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was.

---

I agree. In particular that is what I expect a Bible literalist to do. I have no problem with your doing that, at least for the purpose of the discussion. But you are not assuming that the story is literally true, are you?The real problem I have is the little respect you have for the text of Matthew. About the only thing you seem to give credit to in the text is that there was an important star. Everything else about the Magi and the motion of the star, even where it appeared in the sky are up for grabs to the point where you assume the text is inaccurate. For the rest of your argument you lean towards Larsen's discussion even though that requires essentially taking Matthew as being metaphoric language for quite ordinary astronomical phenomena. In short you seem to like astrology much more than you like the Bible text.Just to be clear on where this post is headed, consider this. If you applied that same logic to the discussion of the Flood in Genesis, you and I might likely find ourselves in a much larger agreement. But quite frankly that isn't what I expect from any literalist. At least I can respect your view of the Flood from a theological position.I cannot muster similar respect for your opinion here. In your discussion with Paul you've denied the degree of astrology that you are accepting only to have to change after Paul pointed out just how immersed your posts are in the subject. That is not what this discussion is about at all. PaulK and I in particular have been working from the text and have argued for the text being true. The only debunking has been of your interpretation of natural events that might match the text. My own impression is that it is the astrology that is to be debunked and not the Bible itself. Maybe the Magi did believe in astrology, but even in that context, the text most take primary position over a good story.Your accusation is well off the mark.

Yes. But my general impression of Paul is that he debates fairly. In this case, citing the text to show that your favorite interpretation is incorrect is something that both believers and non-believers might do.So I am really not concerned about having PaulK as company. I find your accusation to be the same thing as saying that Christians cannot disagree on the interpretation of the text. Clearly, that is wrong. A valid argument is valid no matter who makes it. I don't buy that as a reasonable justification for astrology, and certainly not as an excuse for departures from the text. Your mileage may vary. But surely the meanings attached to the stars are a human creation. Or do you really think it is God that decided that a bunch of stars near Regulus looked like a lion? The discussion here is not personal. Amusing. Yet another claim to martyrdom. Perhaps you should stop making everything is about you. I am discussing your opinion and the basis for that opinion. As long as I am telling the truth about what you post, then you are smearing yourself.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

I don't think this is a great example of a failure of inerrancy. The scripture describes Paul's flagging memory very well. If Paul actually made those statements, where is the issue with the scripture?Surely this wasn't your best example...

I spelled out exactly what text you are departing from. If you don't see it, that is not due to my lack of pointing it out. Or does it simply mean that somebody is talking in astrological terms. If it had occurred in another sign, I am sure that something could be made of that too. Astrology is BS. Human beings have a natural tendency for identifying patterns even when they are not there. Astrology is the best-known example of that, but so is the idea that comets are evil omens.Knowing that, folks might well write using those terms, even if they don't practice astrology. It is possible that Bible authors did that as well.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Sometimes the truth hurts and it is not so easily dismissed as a lie. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.