Bart Ehrman is one of the most well-known and influential critics of traditional Christianity and the inspired Bible (“anti-theists”) writing today. Formerly, in his own words, he was “a fundamentalist for maybe 6 years; a conservative evangelical but not extreme right wing for maybe 5 years more; and a fairly mainstream liberal Christian for about 25.” The primary reason he gives for having lost his faith is the problem of evil (a very serious topic I have dealt with many times). He stated on 3-18-22 in a comment on his blog: “I could no longer explain how there could be a God active in this world given all the pain and misery in it.” I don’t question his sincerity, good intentions, intellectual honesty, or his past status as a Christian; only various opinions which Christians must (in consistency) regard as erroneous.
Dr. Ehrman “received his PhD and MDiv from Princeton Theological Seminary, where he studied textual criticism of the Bible, development of the New Testament canon and New Testament apocrypha under Bruce Metzger.” He has written 30 books, which have sold over two million copies and have been translated into 27 languages.
Ehrman explains that the purpose of his blog is “to disseminate scholarly knowledge of the New Testament and the earliest periods of the Christian church to a non-scholarly audience, . . . Every post is rooted in scholarship – not just my own but that of thousands of scholars who have worked for centuries on understanding the historical Jesus, the New Testament, and the origins of Christianity.” Well, the conclusions of scholars are only as good as the solidity and truthfulness of the premises by which they are operating.
This is one of a series of reply-papers, in which I will address many of his materials from the perspective of archaeology, history, and exegesis.
*****
I am responding in this article to a particular erroneous point Dr. Ehrman makes about the star of Bethlehem, in which (so I will contend) he fundamentally misunderstands the biblical text and the presence of habitual phenomenological language in the Bible. Here is what he has stated (his words will be in blue):
How does a star . . . lead the Magi not just to Bethlehem but stop over a house? How does a star stop over a house? (12-26-19)
Miracles, of course, defy historical explanation. But even so, are there features of the two accounts that are difficult to explain even on the assumption that miracles happen? How, for example, does the “star of Bethlehem” in Matthew stop moving over Jerusalem, resume moving, and then stop over a house? (11-18-21)
When I discuss this account while wearing my historical-critical hat, I talk about the plausibility of . . . a star that stops moving over a city, and then over an actual house, . . . (12-25-21)
What Does it Mean to Say that the Star of Bethlehem “Went Before” the Wise Men (Matthew 2:9)?
This refers to (in context) to the wise men being in Jerusalem and talking to Herod (Mt 2:1, 7-9). He “sent them to Bethlehem” (2:8), which is south of Jerusalem, about six miles (I myself traveled this route in 2014). Therefore, this (I submit) is what the Bible (which habitually uses phenomenological language) means by saying that the star “went before” them.
In other words, it would always have been “ahead” or “in front of” or “before” them as they traveled: much as we say we are “following the sun west” or how American slaves (in folklore, at least, if not in fact) attempting to escape to the north followed the “drinking gourd” (the “Big Dipper”) north.
Thus, one could say that the Big Dipper or North Star “went before” the slaves, just as we say they “followed” it. The North Star would also lead anyone to the North Pole if they kept following it; that is, by our vantage-point it would “go before” them.
We also refer to the sun “rising” and “setting” as if it is moving. But we know that the appearance of its movement to our eye is due to the earth’s rotation. It’s all phenomenological language, which we use all the time, just as the biblical writers also did. Hence, “The Bible History Guy” writes:
Later that year, in late November to early December of 2 B.C., Jupiter’s position in the sky, when viewed from Jerusalem, was to the south – in the direction of Bethlehem. This was six months after the brilliant birthday conjunction of Jupiter and Venus. This was just the right time for the Magi to reach Jerusalem. (1)
We know from the astronomical charts that Jupiter was to the south from Jerusalem; therefore, it “went before” the wise men as they traveled south to Bethlehem: the journey that the text refers to.
Jupiter wouldn’t have moved much on the way from Jerusalem to Bethlehem. A camel travels about 3 mph average, so it would have taken two hours to get to Bethlehem. That’s roughly the entire time the Bible refers to them (in non-literal language, I believe) following a star. In the language of appearance (non-literal language), it “went before them” not in perceived motion, but because it was always ahead of them on the way.
Dag Kihlman provides an even more fascinating and specific view:
Jupiter — if this was the star of Bethlehem — was not seen in the early evenings in December in 2 BC. It rose very late, at roughly 9 PM. . . .
A more realistic view (if Jupiter was the star of Bethlehem) is that the magi traveled early in the morning, when Jupiter was still visible. . . . In the early morning, Jupiter was south of Jerusalem, and thus in the direction of Bethlehem.
If the magi travelled in the early morning they would probably have followed the normal route between Jerusalem and Bethlehem: Derech Beit Lechem. This route follows the terrain and slowly turns to the west. If the magi started at a suitable hour, they would have had Jupiter in front of them as they left Jerusalem. If they travelled by donkey, camel or horse . . . they would have had Jupiter in front of them all the way to Bethlehem, since Jupiter would have moved slowly to the west just as the road slowly turned west. (2)
How Do We Understand the Star of Bethlehem Coming to “Rest Over the Place Where the Child Was”?
Matthew 2:9 (RSV) . . . the star which they had seen in the East went before them, till it came to rest over the place where the child was.
“The Bible History Guy” again provides a good summary of what the astronomical data indicate:
On December 2, 2 B.C., Jupiter entered retrograde motion. It continued in this state till December 25 (Julian calendar). During this time, Jupiter appeared to travel horizontally above Bethlehem, when viewed from Jerusalem, while the other planets visible, Mercury and Venus, dipped normally toward the horizon as they traversed the night sky. Jupiter’s horizontal stasis throughout December – right above Bethlehem when viewed from Jerusalem – made it appear to come to rest, as Matthew recorded, above the City of David. (3)
What is the “retrograde motion” of planets? Astronomer Christopher Crockett explains:
Typically, the planets shift slightly eastward from night to night, drifting slowly against the backdrop of stars. From time to time, however, they change direction. For a few months, they’ll head west before turning back around and resuming their easterly course. Their westward motion is called retrograde motion by astronomers. . . . [It’s] an illusion caused by the motion of Earth and these planets around the sun. (4)
As an analogy, when we pass a car on the freeway, it temporarily seems to be moving backwards. As already noted above: in December, 2 BC, Jupiter appeared to come to a stop above Bethlehem and — according to some researchers — remained there seemingly motionless for six days (5).
Ernest L. Martin noted that at dawn on December 25th in that area, it would have been at an elevation of 68 degrees, above the southern horizon: shining down on Bethlehem. See: The Star That Astonished the World, published in 1991 (6). It would have been the brightest “star” in the sky on that day and location.
Another important aspect of this discussion is the clause “it came to rest over the place where the child was.” First of all, the text does not say that this means it shone specifically onto a “house.” This is a common misconception. Matthew 2:11 (i.e., two verses later) simply says they went “into a house”: not that the star was shining on it, identifying it. We must be precise about what any given text under consideration actually asserts and does not assert. Two of the very best and renowned Protestant Bible commentators and exegetes of our time agree:
It is not said to indicate the precise house, but the general location where the child was. (R. T. France [see link for citation]) (7)
The Greek text does not imply that the star pointed out the house where Jesus was or that it led the travelers through twisty streets; it may simply have hovered over Bethlehem as the Magi approached it. (D. A. Carson [see link for citation]) (8)
Let’s examine the actual biblical text a little more closely. The Greek “adverb of place” in Matthew 2:9 is hou (Strong’s word #3757). In RSV hou is translated by “the place where” (in KJV, simply “where”). It applies to a wide range of meanings beyond something as specific as a house.
In other passages in RSV it refers to a mountain (Mt 28:16), Nazareth (Lk 4:16), a village (Lk 24:28), the land of Midian (Acts 7:29), Puteoli (Pozzuoli): a sizeable city in Italy (Acts 28:14), and the vast wilderness that Moses and the Hebrews traveled through (Heb 3:9). Thus it can easily, plausibly refer to “Bethlehem” in Matthew 2:9.
In RSV (Mt 2:9), hou is translated by the italicized words: “it came to rest over the place where the child was.” The question, then, is: what does it mean by “place” in this instance? What is the star said to be “over”? As we’ve seen, other uses of the same word referred to a variety of larger areas. The text does not specifically say that “it stood over a house.” Yet many able and sincere, but in my opinion mistaken, Christian commentators (along with the skeptics) seem to think it does.
This is an important point because it goes to the issue of supernatural or natural. A “star” (whatever it is) shining a beam down on one house would be (I agree) supernatural; not any kind of “star” we know of in the natural world. But a star shining on an area; in the direction of an area (which a bright Jupiter was to Bethlehem in my scenario: at 68 degrees in the sky) is a perfectly natural event.
Matthew 2:9 is similar to how we say in English: “where I was, I could see the conjunction very well.” “Where” obviously refers to a place. And one’s place is many things simultaneously. Thus, when I saw the “star of Bethlehem”-like conjunction in December 2020, I was in a field, near my house (in my neighborhood), in my town (Tecumseh), in my county (Lenawee), in my state (Michigan), and in my country (United States).
This is my point about “place” in Matthew 2:9. It can mean larger areas, beyond just “house.” If the text doesn’t say specifically, “the star shone on the house” then we can’t say for sure that this is what the text meant.
I have found 18 other English Bible translations of Matthew 2:9 that also have “the place where” (Weymouth, Moffatt, Confraternity, Knox, NEB, REB, NRSV, Lamsa, Amplified, Phillips, TEV, NIV, Jerusalem, Williams, Beck, NAB, Kleist & Lilly, and Goodspeed).
In all these cases, they are translating hou: literally meaning “where” but at the same time implying place (which is the “where” referred to). The Living Bible (a very modern paraphrase) has “standing over Bethlehem”: which of course, bolsters my argument as well (because it didn’t say “house”).
All these things being understood, all the text in question plausibly meant is that the bright star was shining down on Bethlehem, just as we have all seen the moon or some bright star shining on a mountain in the distance or tall building or some other landmark.
A man might see the light from the harvest moon romantically shining on his girlfriend or wife’s face. It need not necessarily mean that this is all it is shining on. It simply looks that way from our particular vantage-point.
All of this is in my opinion, more plausible and straightforward and in line with biblical thinking than positing a supernatural “star.” It’s true that many reputable and observant Christian biblical commentators exist who do argue for that interpretation, and I don’t disparage them at all. Theirs are honest efforts just as mine is. Reasonable and equally devout Christians can and do disagree. I can only present the reasons for why I hold to my opinion.
Thus it can easily, plausibly refer to “Bethlehem” in Matthew 2:9. It may be that many readers (filled with the endless – sometimes inaccurate — images of Christmas from childhood) confuse this with another Christmas passage:
Luke 2:8-9 And in that region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. [9] And an angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were filled with fear.
Note that it is the light from an angel (rather than a star) that “shone around them” and they were not yet visiting Jesus. Thus, Luke 2:15 states: “Let us go over to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened . . .” They were not in the same place. When I visited Bethlehem in 2014, I saw exactly how far it was: at least according to local tradition. The birth site is a considerable distance away, and at a higher elevation.
We mustn’t be led astray by extraneous factors when exegeting Holy Scripture. I believe the explanation I have adopted is feasible and in complete harmony with both science and the biblical texts.
To say, then, that the star “came to rest over the place” is to observe that they didn’t see it moving much over Bethlehem once they arrived there. I’m not an astronomer, so I can only cite other people who know more about these aspects. If the wise men hit the right day (in Bethlehem), Jupiter would have appeared to be stationary.
In the Christian view, God in His providence could have again arranged that the wise men, exercising their own free will, arrived at just the right time when the bright Jupiter appeared to be a sign above Jerusalem for this king Whom they believed was indicated by what they saw in Persia or Babylon (both due east).
Commentator Peter Pett stated that Jupiter “was actually stationary on December 25, interestingly enough, during Hanukkah, the season for giving presents.” (9) That was in 2 BC. Note again that I am not saying this is when Jesus was born, but rather, when He was at least a year old.
Ivor Bulmer-Thomas opined (10):
As a planet approaches a stationary point and then moves away from it its motion is very slow, hardly detectable by the naked eye for about a week. The Magi would have noticed the slowing down of the planet as they approached Bethlehem, and they would have recognized that a stationary point was near.
Now what is even more interesting is Bulmer-Thomas’ documentation that the ancients knew about retrograde motion of the planets, and stationary points:
[T]here is a wealth of material showing directly that for several centuries before the birth of Christ and round about the time of his birth Babylonian astronomers were deeply interested in retrogradations and stationary points. It is contained in hundreds of cuneiform texts excavated in Babylon and Uruk . . . The three volumes of Neugebauer’s Astronomical Cuneiform Texts (1955) give a vast collection of Babylonian inscriptions dealing with retrogradations and stations. (11)
This is highly significant because it would mean not only that Matthew 2:9 uses phenomenological language, but also that the Magi understood retrograde motion of planets, which may lie behind the terminology (received from oral tradition) of “came to rest over” Bethlehem.
And in my opinion these facts support my natural interpretation all the more, because it’s not just (as a critic might say) “projecting” our modern scientific understanding onto the Bible, but an understanding that already existed and was known by the Wise Men.
But if the star didn’t shine right on the “house” (Mt 2:11) where Jesus was, how did the Wise Men find it? We too often make things too complicated by over-analyzing them. They would simply have to ask the locals about this child who generated so much excitement one or two years previously, and where He lived. Word about notable events travels fast in small towns and people know each other.
It would be like when I visited Woodstock, New York in 1992 and asked someone at a gas station if they knew where “Big Pink” was: the famous house (i.e., to rock music fans) where Bob Dylan and The Band (some of whom lived there) recorded The Basement Tapes in 1967. It so happened that this man lived there, so he took me right to it. That’s how small towns are.
Woodstock, New York in 1990 had a population of 6,290, and yet I could get to a particular house (actually several miles away in the countryside) by running into one man at a gas station. The population of Bethlehem at the time of Jesus’ infancy was estimated to be only 300 by eminent archaeologist William F. Albright. Other Bible scholars think it was no more than a thousand. Yet we are to assume that no one there knew where Jesus and Mary and Joseph lived? That goes against common sense.
Footnotes
(1) “The Bible History Guy”, “The Real Star of Bethlehem”, 12-12-19.
(2) The Star of Bethlehem and Babylonian Astrology: Astronomy and Revelation Reveal What the Magi Saw, self-published, 2017, pp. 97-98.
(3) “The Bible History Guy”, ibid.
(4) “What is retrograde motion?”, EarthSky, 2-6-17.
(5) See, for example, Susan S. Carroll, “The Star of Bethlehem: An Astronomical and Historical Perspective”, 1997,
(6) Available online at Associates for Scriptural Knowledge.
(7) The Gospel According to Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1985), p. 84.
(8) Matthew; part of The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, revised edition (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Academic, 1917), page undetermined at the Google Books page.
(9) Pett’s Commentary on the Bible (on Matthew 2:9). No date is given for the commentary. The author appears to still be living.
(10) “Star of Bethlehem” (Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 33, Dec. 1992), 371.
(11) Ibid., 370.
***
Note: in my particular model, the wise men visit Jesus in December of 2 BC, and I apply the objective data of what we know regarding astronomical events in and around Bethlehem at that time (particularly Jupiter and its retrograde motion). Elsewhere, I deal with the related dating issue of when Herod died, the census, etc. (see many articles collected on my Christmas web page). But generally speaking, retrograde motion of planets, the wise men’s knowledge of same, and phenomenological language in the Bible are points that stand on their own, and I believe that they provide the key to understanding the biblical texts here examined.
But Ehrman interprets hyper-literally (like fundamentalists do) and so he misses the entire point, which is far more subtle and complex than he seems to think possible with the biblical text and that time and place. This is not even a miracle, but rather, a perfectly normal celestial event, that we are able to determine through science: which took place in December, 2 BC in the vicinity of Bethlehem.
***
Practical Matters: Perhaps some of my 4,000+ free online articles (the most comprehensive “one-stop” Catholic apologetics site) or fifty books have helped you (by God’s grace) to decide to become Catholic or to return to the Church, or better understand some doctrines and why we believe them.
Or you may believe my work is worthy to support for the purpose of apologetics and evangelism in general. If so, please seriously consider a much-needed financial contribution. I’m always in need of more funds: especially monthly support. “The laborer is worthy of his wages” (1 Tim 5:18, NKJV). 1 December 2021 was my 20th anniversary as a full-time Catholic apologist, and February 2022 marked the 25th anniversary of my blog.
PayPal donations are the easiest: just send to my email address: apologistdave@gmail.com. You’ll see the term “Catholic Used Book Service”, which is my old side-business. To learn about the different methods of contributing, including 100% tax deduction, etc., see my page: About Catholic Apologist Dave Armstrong / Donation Information. Thanks a million from the bottom of my heart!
***
Photo credit: iessephoto (12-26-20) [Pixabay / Pixabay License]
***
Summary: Agnostic Bible skeptic Bart Ehrman puzzles over what he thinks is a “star stopping over a house.” I counter that the Bible doesn’t even assert this in the first place.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In