Atheist and anti-theist\u00a0Bob Seidensticker<\/a>\u00a0runs the influential\u00a0Cross Examined<\/em>\u00a0blog<\/a>. I have\u00a0critiqued 82 of his articles<\/a>, (no counter-reply as of yet). He was gracious enough to send me a free e-book copy of his new volume, 2-Minute Christianity:\u00a050 Big Ideas Every Christian Should Understand<\/em><\/a> (May 2022), which I critiqued point-by-point<\/a>. His words will be in blue<\/span>.<\/p>\n *****<\/p>\n This is a reply to portions of his article, \u201cHow did the Star of Bethlehem move like Tinker Bell?\u201d<\/a> (12-19-22).<\/p>\n Can the Star of Bethlehem be explained naturally?<\/span><\/p>\n Yes, there are very plausible, science-backed explanations of it. I have adopted one myself (similar to Rick Larson\u2019s), which is included in chapter 13 of my soon-to-be-published book, The Word Set in Stone: How Science, History, and Archaeology Prove Biblical Truth<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n Micah chapter 5 has the Bethlehem reference: \u201cBut you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0As usual<\/a>\u00a0with claims that see Jesus behind every rock in the Old Testament, when you look at the context, the prophesied ruler doesn\u2019t sound at all like Jesus.<\/span><\/p>\n Sure it does; see my paper, Reply to Atheist Jonathan MS Pearce: Bethlehem & Nazareth \u201cContradictions\u201d (Including Extensive Exegetical Analysis of Micah 5:2)\u00a0<\/a>[7-28-17].<\/p>\n Micah was written after Assyria had conquered the northern kingdom of Israel, and little Judah might be next. During these troubled times, Micah predicted that there would be a king from Bethlehem (since King David was born here, this may simply mean \u201ca king in the line of David\u201d rather than a literal birth in Bethlehem). God will abandon Israel, but then countrymen (presumably scattered Israelites from the aftermath of the conquest) will return to support the new king. With God\u2019s renewed support, the king will bring peace to Judah, defeat any invasion by Assyria, and be celebrated worldwide.<\/span><\/p>\n This doesn\u2019t sound like the career of Jesus.<\/span><\/p>\n To the contrary, it doesn\u2019t sound like anyone else<\/em>. The catch is the phrase, \u201cwhose origin is from of old, from ancient days\u201d (RSV). The Hebrew word for \u201cancient days\u201d is \u02bf\u00f4l\u0101m <\/em>(Strong\u2019s Hebrew word #5769<\/a>): according to Brown-Driver Briggs<\/em><\/a>, its range of meaning includes the following:<\/p>\n 1) long duration, antiquity, futurity, for ever, ever, everlasting, evermore, perpetual, old, ancient, world<\/p>\n 1a) ancient time, long time (of past<\/i>)<\/p>\n 1b) (of future<\/i>)<\/p>\n 1b1) for ever, always<\/p>\n 1b2) continuous existence, perpetual<\/p>\n 1b3) everlasting, indefinite or unending future, eternity<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n If Micah was referring to a current king or a soon-to-be-king, he would not have been \u201ceverlasting\u201d or of \u201cancient time,\u201d etc. This clearly refers to God. No one else can be described like this. See also this article of mine: Dual Fulfillment of Prophecy & the Virgin Birth (vs. JMS Pearce)\u00a0<\/a>[12-18-20].<\/p>\n And there\u2019s no mention of the punch line to the Jesus story, the sacrifice and resurrection of mankind\u2019s savior.<\/span><\/p>\n Who says that has<\/em> to be included? It doesn\u2019t. It\u2019s simply predicting the location of the birth of the Messiah. The topic isn\u2019t His redeeming death.<\/p>\n What actually happened was that the Babylonians conquered Judah in the sixth century, so Micah\u2019s prophecy was wrong.<\/span><\/p>\n It wasn\u2019t, because it was referring to Jesus, the Second Person of the Trinity, Who is eternal.<\/p>\n However, if magi from the east didn\u2019t visit Herod or any other Judean ruler on\u00a0their<\/em>\u00a0ascension to the throne, why (besides literary reasons) is it plausible that the magi would visit this time?<\/span><\/p>\n Because they saw what they believed were signs in the heavens leading to that conclusion.<\/p>\n If they were knowledgeable about Judaism, why did they have to be told about Bethlehem?<\/span><\/p>\n Technically, it\u2019s not certain that they were told about it in the sense of not<\/em> previously knowing it (according to Matthew). It was Herod who inquired as to where the Messiah was to be born (Mt 2:4), and was told that it was in Bethlehem (2:5), on the biblical basis of Micah 5:2 (2:6). Herod then \u201csent\u201d the wise men \u201cto Bethlehem.\u201d The text doesn\u2019t indicate whether they already knew<\/em> about Bethlehem or not. They may have; or if they didn\u2019t, they simply had an incomplete knowledge of Judaism (being likely adherents of Zoroastrianism), just as many Christians and Jews to this day have a lousy, inadequate knowledge of the Hebrew Bible \/ Old Testament.<\/p>\n It may very likely have been that they thought (or \u201cknew\u201d) the event would be in Jerusalem or its environs. When they arrived, they asked, \u201cWhere is he who has been born king of the Jews?\u201d (Mt 2:2). They either didn\u2019t know it was to be in Bethlehem, or they did, and were asking more specifically, \u201cwhere exactly<\/em> does he live?\u201d It would be (under this hypothesis) the difference between knowing what city or township one lives in, and knowing their actual address, or at least street. We can only speculate about what the text doesn\u2019t clearly spell out. And by this time, it was one-to-two years after His birth, anyway. The Holy Family could have moved somewhere else (in fact, they did eventually move to Nazareth). In my upcoming book, I wrote about this as follows:<\/p>\n My own educated guess, based on my own studies and research, is that the visit of the wise men occurred when Jesus was a year old and that they told Herod the star had appeared a year and three months previously (thinking he may have been born then<\/em>), based on the conjunction of Jupiter (thought by ancient astrologers to be the \u00a0\u201cking\u201d of planets) and Regulus (the star of kingship, and brightest in the constellation Leo) in September, 3 B.C. Herod then decided to kill all children under two just to make extra sure that he killed Jesus.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Perhaps they only knew of a Jewish canon with no Micah, but the book of Micah would\u2019ve been over 500 years old at this point. <\/span><\/p>\n Maybe they didn\u2019t know of it, or they had a different interpretation of that verse: perhaps not regarding it as the prediction of this king or Messiah. The Jews argued amongst themselves about all kinds of issues. That\u2019s what the Talmud is about. But the Persians knew about Jews and Judaism to some extent as a result of having freed them (after they conquered Babylon), and allowing them to go back to Israel and Jerusalem in the 5th century BC, due to the magnanimity of Kings Darius and Cyrus.<\/p>\n They might have been isolated from mainstream Judaism, but then we\u2019re back to the question of why they would make the difficult trip to connect with a Judaism they were isolated from.<\/span><\/p>\n Again, because the stars suggested it (according to their ancient astrological knowledge). I wrote in my book:<\/p>\n It\u2019s not rocket science (then or now) to know and understand that Jerusalem was west of Persia\u2014so a star to the west having to do with a king (Jupiter and Regulus were associated with a king) and a lion (of Judah), the constellation Leo, provided that there was an existing familiarity with Judaism, would logically lead to Jerusalem, both geographically and in the context of the religions of that time.<\/p>\n I examined my own globe of the world and saw that Jerusalem is almost exactly due west from northwest Persia, where the\u00a0Magi\u00a0likely came from. In current maps, Baghdad and Amman, Jordan are roughly on the line due west from this area.\u00a0Baghdad\u00a0was built in the eighth century. Ancient\u00a0Babylon\u00a0lies about 53 miles south of Baghdad, but it was conquered by the Persians in 539 B.C. and was never the same again, eventually becoming a ruin and wasteland.<\/p>\n Amman (ancient\u00a0Ammon, in the region of the Ammonites in current-day Jordan) was not religiously significant enough at this time, either, and after the fourth century B.C. it was conquered by the Greeks, Egyptians, and Romans. It was no extraordinary astronomical deduction, then, to conclude that some important happenings due\u00a0west<\/em>\u00a0were to occur in Jerusalem.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Since God spoke to the magi directly when he warned them in a dream to avoid Herod on their return, why couldn\u2019t he just have told them, \u201cGo to Bethlehem, avoiding Jerusalem, by date X to visit the new king of the Jews\u201d?<\/span><\/p>\n Who knows<\/em>? Many things God does are mysterious, and we should fully expect this, if indeed He is omniscient, as Jews and Christians believe He is. But what is truly silly is to think that we can totally figure such a God out, and second-guess Him at every turn.<\/p>\n Why would the ambiguous motion of Jupiter be preferable?<\/span><\/p>\n Heavenly signs are important to many religions. The Bible stated:<\/p>\n Numbers 24:17<\/strong> A star shall come forth out of Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out of Israel.<\/p>\n Joel 2:30\u00a0<\/strong>And I will give portents in the heavens . . .<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Avoiding a visit to Herod would\u2019ve also avoided tipping him off to the rival king, which caused the Massacre of the Innocents (not that avoiding bloodshed is much of a priority in the Bible).<\/span><\/p>\n We either have free will or we don\u2019t. If we do, we are truly free, and God isn\u2019t obliged to intervene every time human beings commit evil or plan to do so (I wrote about this very thing<\/a> at great length, twenty years ago). The example I always use to illustrate the point relates to the Nazi Holocaust. Atheists and many others seem to want to blame God<\/em> for that. For the life of me, I have never been able to understand or figure out why<\/em>:<\/p>\n Atheist or other critic of God<\/em>: \u201d why didn\u2019t you stop<\/em> the Nazis? You\u2019re responsible<\/em> for them and for the Nazi Holocaust!\u201d<\/p>\n God<\/em>: \u201cI\u2019m not<\/em>! The rest of the world was perfectly capable of observing the German military build-up and stopping it before it got off the ground. But it preferred to close its eyes. John F. Kennedy wrote his book, Why England Slept<\/em> about this. Knowing this propensity for head-in-the-sand irresponsibility, I did, however, send my messenger Winston Churchill, who warned vociferously through the mid-30s of the German build-up. No one wanted to believe him. So why do you blame Me<\/em> for your own willful blindness and stupidity? You were amply warned of the great tragedy that was to occur. You could have fully prevented it. You chose not to. And so it\u2019s just the usual human blame-shifting. You foolishly and vainly try to blame Me for your own blindness and wickedness. In a similar manner, Malcolm Muggeridge warned England and the west of the Soviet forced starvation of ten million Ukrainians in the early 1930s and no one wanted to believe him<\/em>, either, preferring their own fantasies of good old \u2018Uncle Joe\u2019 Stalin. How is that My<\/em> fault?\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Of course, if we\u2019re questioning God\u2019s motivation, <\/span><\/p>\n What makes anyone think they are competent to do so in the first place<\/em>: especially a person who doesn\u2019t even believe<\/em> in God?<\/p>\n we could ask why he celebrated the most important event on earth since Creation with a vague light show that would be understood by a few strangers rather than something grand that would alert the world.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n He does lots<\/em> of unexpected things like that. God becoming a baby in a manger is perhaps the most inexplicable thing of all from our warped human perspective. We want kings coming from the heavens throwing thunderbolts around (like Zeus). That\u2019s the kind of \u201cgod\u201d we invariably manufacture. But the real God chose instead to come to earth as a baby in a stinky, lowly cave (I\u2019ve been there, and it is indeed a cave), and for that matter, to be tortured and executed in one of the most painful ways known to man. Scarcely anyone could have predicted either thing.<\/p>\n But of course, when God does indeed do something grand like, for example, making the sun dance and have different colors, and immediately drying up the rain and mud, as happened at Fatima, Portugal in October 1917, with 70,000 witnesses, atheists simply blow that off, too. It\u2019s what they claim they want (Bob expressed it above, again, and I\u2019ve seen this demand a hundred times), but when it actually happens<\/em>, they thumb their nose at it, as they do with every other miracle God has ever performed. Nothing is ever good enough for them. And that\u2019s because they refuse<\/em> to believe, not that they are unable<\/em> to or that there isn\u2019t enough reason<\/em> to. It\u2019s two different things (will vs. mind).<\/p>\n The real light show and universal manifestation will be the Second Coming, but by then it will be too late for those who refuse to believe and follow God. They will have had every chance to believe, and to choose to cease their rebellion, or continue in it all the way to hell, where they can finally be free from the \u201coppressive\u201d God that they so despised, altogether, and forever.<\/p>\n But (just a trifle I should note), the star of Bethlehem phenomenon happened a year to two years after<\/em> Jesus\u2019s birth. The \u201clight show\u201d that actually happened at His birth was to the shepherds in the fields:<\/p>\n Luke 2:8-14<\/strong>\u00a0And in that region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.\u00a0[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. [10] And the angel said to them, \u201cBe not afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of a great joy which will come to all the people; [11] for to you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. [12] And this will be a sign for you: you will find a babe wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger.\u201d [13] And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, [14] \u201cGlory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased!\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Note that this is not<\/em> the star of Bethlehem. It\u2019s the supernatural light of the \u201cglory of the Lord.\u201d The Star never shone down on the manger and the baby Jesus (it couldn\u2019t have anyway because He and it were in a cave), despite 10,000 Christmas cards conditioning us to believe otherwise. We should get our theology from the Bible, not Hallmark.<\/p>\n God could\u2019ve told everyone or he could\u2019ve told no one, but instead he gave just a hint to a few men hundreds of miles away from the birthplace of Jesus.<\/span><\/p>\n Yes, and what of it? I see nothing wrong with it. See my next comment.<\/p>\n Apparently, God moves in stupid ways.<\/span><\/p>\n The story of both the wise men and the shepherds both made it into inspired revelation, which has now been read by several billion people. I think that\u2019s a pretty good way to go about things. An event: even a spectacular one, is still confined to time and place, and those who come later can always find a way to dismiss it if they are determined to do so. But an inspired message in a book that can move souls and change lives goes on and on. God has His messengers, too: priests, pastors, evangelists, monks, nuns, teachers, catechists; even apologists like me! We spread the Good News. All of this is far more efficient than one \u201clight show\u201d at one point of time. That\u2019s not \u201cstupid.\u201d<\/span> But the objection<\/em> is, if I may say so.<\/p>\n Finally, let\u2019s consider how Jupiter \u201cwent ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Yes, and when and how long did that happen? It was on the six-mile long journey<\/em> from Jerusalem to Bethlehem (Mt 2:1, 7-9).\u00a0A camel travels about 3 miles per hour on average (the same as a man\u2019s walk), so it would have taken two hours to get to Bethlehem, either by camel or foot. That\u2019s 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 \u201cwent before them\u201d not in perceived motion, but because it was always ahead of them on the way<\/em>.<\/p>\n We know from the astronomical charts that Jupiter, in later November and early December in 2 B.C. was to the south from Jerusalem; therefore, it \u201cwent before\u201d the wise men as they traveled south to Bethlehem\u2014the journey that the text refers to. Jupiter wouldn\u2019t have moved much on the way from Jerusalem to Bethlehem. This (I submit) is what the Bible (which habitually uses\u00a0phenomenological language<\/a>) means by saying that the star \u201cwent before\u201d them.<\/p>\n In other words, it would always have been \u201cahead\u201d or \u201cin front of\u201d or \u201cbefore\u201d them as they traveled: much as we say we are \u201cfollowing the sun west\u201d or how American slaves (in folklore, at least, if not in fact) attempting to escape to the north followed the \u201cdrinking gourd\u201d (the Big Dipper) north. Thus, one could say the Big Dipper or North Star \u201cwent before\u201d the slaves, just as we say they \u201cfollowed\u201d it. The North Star would also lead anyone to the North Pole if he kept following it; that is, by our vantage point, it would \u201cgo before\u201d him. It\u2019s all phenomenological language, which we use all the time, just as the biblical writers also did.<\/p>\n \u201c[The star] stopped over the place where the child was\u201d is not something Jupiter could ever do.<\/span><\/p>\n That\u2019s not true, and Bob himself<\/em> concedes how it could do so:<\/p>\n Larson\u2019s attempt to salvage his theory uses one of Jupiter\u2019s switches between forward and retrograde motion (it switches directions twice a year) as a \u201cstopping\u201d point. Yes, Jupiter\u2019s motion relative to the fixed background of stars would apparently stop for several days, but this does nothing to get us to \u201cit stopped over the place where the child was.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n It explains how it could settle over Bethlehem for only roughly two hours of time (at a minimum). The ancients at this time actually knew about retrograde motion, and I believe this is how they described it in simple, observational language. Let\u2019s examine more closely what the author may have been describing in saying that the star \u201ccame to rest over the place where the child was.\u201d<\/p>\n First of all, the text (Matt. 2:9) doesn\u2019t indicate that it shone\u00a0specifically on a \u201chouse.\u201d<\/em>\u00a0This is a common misconception. Matthew 2:11, just two verses later, simply says they\u00a0went<\/em>\u00a0\u201cinto a house\u201d\u2014not that the star was shining on it,\u00a0identifying<\/em>\u00a0it. We must be precise about what any given text under consideration actually\u00a0asserts<\/em>\u00a0and does\u00a0not\u00a0<\/em>assert.\u00a0Two of the very best and renowned Protestant Bible commentators and exegetes of our time (R. T. France and ) agree:<\/p>\n R. T. France<\/a>: It is not said to indicate the precise house, but the general location where the child was<\/em>.<\/p>\n D. A. Carson<\/a>: 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.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The Greek \u201cadverb of place\u201d in Matthew 2:9 is\u00a0hou<\/em><\/a>.\u00a0In the RSV,\u00a0hou<\/em>\u00a0is translated by \u201cthe place where\u201d (in KJV, simply \u201cwhere\u201d). It applies to a wide range of meanings beyond something as specific as a house. In other passages in the RSV, it refers to a mountain (Matt 28:16), Nazareth (Luke 4:16), a village (Luke 24:28), the land of Midian (Acts 7:29), and the vast wilderness that Moses and the Hebrews traveled through (Heb. 3:9). Thus, it can easily, plausibly refer to \u201cBethlehem\u201d in Matthew 2:9.<\/p>\n This is an important point because it goes to the issue of supernatural or natural. A \u201cstar\u201d (whatever it is) shining a beam down on one house<\/em> would be (I agree) supernatural\u2014not any kind of \u201cstar\u201d we know of in the natural world. But a star shining on an area<\/em>, in the direction<\/em> of an area (which a bright Jupiter was to Bethlehem in my scenario, at 68 degrees in the sky), is a perfectly natural event.<\/p>\n Matthew 2:9 is similar to how we would speak in English, \u201cWhere<\/em>\u00a0I was, I could see the conjunction very well.\u201d \u201cWhere\u201d obviously refers to a\u00a0place<\/em>. And one\u2019s place is many things simultaneously. Thus, when I saw the \u201cstar of Bethlehem\u201d-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).\u00a0This is my point about \u201cplace\u201d in Matthew 2:9. It can mean larger areas, beyond just \u201chouse.\u201d If the text doesn\u2019t\u00a0say\u00a0<\/em>specifically, \u201cThe star shone on the house,\u201d\u00a0then we can\u2019t say for sure that this is what the text\u00a0meant<\/em>.<\/p>\n I have found eighteen other English Bible translations of Matthew 2:9 that also have \u201cthe place where\u201d (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\u00a0hou<\/em>, literally meaning \u201cwhere\u201d but at the same time implying\u00a0place\u00a0<\/strong><\/em>(which is the \u201cwhere\u201d referred to). The Living Bible (a very modern paraphrase) has \u201cstanding over Bethlehem,\u201d which bolsters my argument as well (because it doesn\u2019t say \u201chouse\u201d).<\/p>\n Remember the<\/span>\u00a0Bible\u2019s cosmology<\/a>. Stars weren\u2019t light years away but were close enough to<\/span>\u00a0fall to the ground<\/a>\u00a0after the tribulation.<\/span><\/p>\n That was the initial Hebrew conception, yes (and we could delve into the philosophical, scientific Greeks and their ridiculous cosmology at the same time), and there is much non-literal poetic expression involved as well. But by this time, their pre-scientific knowledge (whatever<\/em> they knew) was expressed phenomenologically, and God saw to it that it was accurate as far as it went<\/em> (i.e., the words are in inspired revelation).<\/p>\n The author of Matthew could have easily imagined tiny stars moving like Tinker Bell (a fairy in\u00a0Peter Pan<\/em>\u00a0who looks like a darting light) to direct the magi to the house where Jesus lived, <\/span><\/p>\n Yes, if he had seen Peter Pan<\/em> on TV, but alas, he did not. And as I just proved at length, the text does not say<\/strong> that the star shone on a house<\/em>.<\/p>\n but this doesn\u2019t fit with magi supposedly knowledgeable enough to know how planetary motion actually worked.<\/span><\/p>\n No it doesn\u2019t. The text as read, however, does<\/em> fit in with a layman\u2019s perspective of what retrograde motion produces: a seemingly stationary \u201cstar\u201d (planet in this case). And we know that they had this knowledge at that time (whether Matthew and the Jews in general did or not), as ones who were stargazers and very aware of what was happening in the heavens.<\/p>\n So back to the title of this article: how did the Star of Bethlehem move like Tinker Bell? Answer: it didn\u2019t. At least not with a natural interpretation, . . .\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n I fully agree! It moved like Jupiter does, because it was<\/em> Jupiter.<\/p>\n There is plenty of room to make a plausible skeptical case against Matthew\u2019s nativity story.<\/span><\/p>\n And there is plenty of objective scientific data (from astronomical charts) for us to know where a bright Jupiter or conjunctions were in this general time-period. That can be determined. The much thornier question to work through is the year of Herod\u2019s death, which gives us proposed chronologies of actual years. I get into that in my book as well (and elsewhere<\/a>), but it\u2019s too involved to enter into in this article.<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Practical Matters<\/em><\/strong>: Perhaps some of my 4,000+ free online articles (the most comprehensive \u201cone-stop\u201d Catholic apologetics site) or\u00a0fifty books<\/a>\u00a0have helped you (by God\u2019s grace) to decide to\u00a0become Catholic<\/a>\u00a0or to\u00a0return to the Church<\/a>,\u00a0or better understand some doctrines and\u00a0why<\/em>\u00a0we believe them<\/a>.<\/p>\n 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\u2019m always in need of more funds: especially\u00a0monthly<\/em>\u00a0support. \u201cThe laborer is worthy of his wages\u201d (1 Tim 5:18, NKJV). 1 December 2021 was my 20th anniversary as a\u00a0full-time Catholic apologist<\/a>,\u00a0and February 2022 marked the 25th anniversary of my blog.<\/p>\n PayPal donations<\/a>\u00a0are the easiest: just send to my email address: apologistdave@gmail.com. You\u2019ll see the term \u201cCatholic Used Book Service\u201d, which is my old side-business. To learn about the different methods of contributing, including 100% tax deduction, etc., see my page:\u00a0About Catholic Apologist Dave Armstrong \/ Donation Information<\/a>.\u00a0Thanks a million<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0from the bottom of my heart!<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Photo credit:<\/strong>\u00a0<\/span>OpenClipart-Vectors<\/a>\u00a0(10-8-13)<\/span>\u00a0[Pixabay<\/a>\u00a0\/\u00a0Pixabay License<\/a>]<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Summary<\/em>: I elaborate upon several of the fascinating aspects of the story of the star of Bethlehem and interact with various (failed) objections from atheist Bob Seidensticker.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" + Discussion of Micah 5:2 (The Prophecy of Jesus\u2019 Birth in Bethlehem) Atheist and anti-theist\u00a0Bob Seidensticker\u00a0runs the influential\u00a0Cross Examined\u00a0blog. I have\u00a0critiqued 82 of his articles, (no counter-reply as of yet). He was gracious enough to send me a free e-book copy of his new volume, 2-Minute Christianity:\u00a050 Big Ideas Every Christian Should Understand (May 2022), […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":68688,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[124,1005],"tags":[12515,12532,12687,12684,12690,453,4126,2365,12535,12769,5552,12553,9940,12529,12766,3188,12559],"class_list":["post-68685","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-atheism-agnosticism","category-christmas","tag-anti-theist-atheists","tag-astronomy-the-star-of-bethlehem","tag-atheists-the-magi","tag-atheists-the-star-of-bethlehem","tag-atheists-the-wise-men","tag-bethlehem","tag-bob-seidensticker","tag-christmas","tag-conjunctions","tag-conjunctions-in-daytime","tag-cross-examined","tag-jupiter","tag-magi","tag-star-of-bethlehem","tag-stars-in-the-daytime","tag-three-wise-men","tag-venus"],"yoast_head":"\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2022\/12\/WiseMenStar.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n