Star was in the EAST?

[chuskcrop]

ok the star the Magi followed…it was in the east, ey?
I have seen several artist depictions of it appearing in the western part of the sky?
(i admit, I don’t have a strong sense of direction!)

 

[bmullins]

It doesn’t necessarily say they saw the star in the east… but that they themselves were in the east when they saw the star… that’s why so many scholars try to place the wise men as being from the orient. So you could translate it like this: “We while being in the East have seen his star in the sky.”

The depiction of it in the western sky would be because if they were East of Jerusalem they would see it to their west if it were ‘over’ Jerusalem.

 

[puzzleannie]

ok the star the Magi followed…it was in the east, ey?
I have seen several artist depictions of it appearing in the western part of the sky?
(i admit, I don’t have a strong sense of direction!)

they saw the star in the EAst at its rising, where all heavenly bodies appear to rise, because of the earth’s rotation. The star appeared to move, and then to stand still, If it was a planet (the name means star that moves) in retrograde motion in its own orbit, then it would appear that way.

all kinds of studies have been done, first to establish the proper date range to search, and then to research what astronomical events might have explained the star. Rick Larson’s STar of Bethlehem seems the most well researched, but since the bible is silent, feel free to believe whatever you want, as long as your theory admits the reality that God uses his own creation to reveal himself to humanity.

when my daugher, who teaches astronomy, alerts me to something she thinks I should watch, I can see the planet “rise” in the east and several hours later, appear to be in the western sky, since it is relatively easy to see these things down hear since the souther horizon is unobstructed.

 

[stanczyk]

So you could translate it like this: “We while being in the East have seen his star in the sky.”

I would like to see a full explanation of the reasoning behind this translation, if you would be so kind.

 

[bmullins]

I would like to see a full explanation of the reasoning behind this translation, if you would be so kind.

Because the bible says specifically the wise men were from the east in Matthew.

When Jesus therefore was born in Bethlehem of Juda, in the days of king Herod, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem.

Matthew Chapter 2:1​

Both the Haydock commentary and the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible indicate that by the context of the words and the specific words used the wise men were likely from Persia. Here is a link to the Haydock commentary on the chapter in Matthew for you to read in full.

ST. MATTHEW - Chapter 2

From the east. Some say from Arabia, others from Chaldea, others from Persia. Divers interpreters speak of them as if they had been kings, princes, or lords of some small territories.

 

[stanczyk]

Because the bible says specifically the wise men were from the east in Matthew.

Matthew Chapter 2:1​

Both the Haydock commentary and the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible indicate that by the context of the words and the specific words used the wise men were likely from Persia. Here is a link to the Haydock commentary on the chapter in Matthew for you to read in full.

ST. MATTHEW - Chapter 2

Certainly the wise men were from the “easts,” plural, i.e. ἀνατολῶν. But Matthew 2:2 in pertinent part reads, εἴδομεν γὰρ αὐτοῦ τὸν ἀστέρα ἐν τῇ ἀνατολῇ, in which the word “east” is in the singular. Thus it seems to refer to τὸν ἀστέρα, the star, not εἴδομεν, we saw.

The translation that makes the most sense to me was discussed above, that the “we saw His star in the east” refers to seeing His star “rising.”

 

[bmullins]

Certainly the wise men were from the “easts,” plural, i.e. ἀνατολῶν. But Matthew 2:2 in pertinent part reads, εἴδομεν γὰρ αὐτοῦ τὸν ἀστέρα ἐν τῇ ἀνατολῇ, in which the word “east” is in the singular. Thus it seems to refer to τὸν ἀστέρα, the star, not εἴδομεν, we saw.

The translation that makes the most sense to me was discussed above, that the “we saw His star in the east” refers to seeing His star “rising.”

Regardless of which one makes more sense, or which one fits our own understanding of it, the question asked was “why do they depict the star in the west”, because the Wise Men are from the East… which would make any sort of star phenomena located over Bethlehem be seen to their West.

 

[stanczyk]

Regardless of which one makes more sense, or which one fits our own understanding of it, the question asked was “why do they depict the star in the west”, because the Wise Men are from the East… which would make any sort of star phenomena located over Bethlehem be seen to their West.

Well, there are a couple of different questions, and one of them is why does it say that they followed a star “in the east.” If they come from the east, they must be heading west, so why would they follow a star that lead them further east? It’s a good question, and I’m fairly certain it has to do with the idea of the star “rising” in the east.

So, the translation of Matthew 2:2 is best rendered as suggesting that the star is what is in the east, not the magi.

 

[puzzleannie]

So, the translation of Matthew 2:2 is best rendered as suggesting that the star is what is in the east, not the magi.

If I am in Philadelphia I am in the east and see the sun rise in the east (or the planet venus for instance). I get on the freeway or toll road and head east, and the sun seems to follow me, or if I take a rest stop, by late afternoon as I near Chicago (in the west) I seem to be following the sun, as I travel east to west. If my journey takes several weeks, rather than one day, then the planet which rose in the east as I began my journey may appear each night in the sky and seem to keep pace with my journey, depending on its orbit.

of course we know the celestial body is not rising, rather my vantage point for viewing is changing due to the earth’s movement, and to a lesser extent my own movement on its surface.

there is no problem or conflict in the biblical accounts about the star or the magi that has anything to do with use of the word East.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

ok the star the Magi followed…it was in the east, ey?
I have seen several artist depictions of it appearing in the western part of the sky?
(i admit, I don’t have a strong sense of direction!)

Here, read this website and you will understand it all. God gave his plan through his heavens. There is quite of bit of history and some technical detail, but once you start reading and understand what God has truly done, your jaw will fall open in awe.

The Bethlehem Star

The DVD is very good to watch. Many people have actually come to faith in God through watching this presentation, which tells me God is indeed working through Rick Larson.

 

[stanczyk]

If I am in Philadelphia I am in the east and see the sun rise in the east (or the planet venus for instance). I get on the freeway or toll road and head east, and the sun seems to follow me, or if I take a rest stop, by late afternoon as I near Chicago (in the west) I seem to be following the sun, as I travel east to west. If my journey takes several weeks, rather than one day, then the planet which rose in the east as I began my journey may appear each night in the sky and seem to keep pace with my journey, depending on its orbit.

of course we know the celestial body is not rising, rather my vantage point for viewing is changing due to the earth’s movement, and to a lesser extent my own movement on its surface.

there is no problem or conflict in the biblical accounts about the star or the magi that has anything to do with use of the word East.

Presumably the magi were going towards a star. If the star was in the eastern portion of the sky, and they followed it to the east, it would not lead them west, it would lead them east.

The attempt to resolve the apparent mistake is to say that Matthew 2:2 refers to the magi as being “in the east” as opposed to the star, but this is not likely to be an accurate reading. The most likely resolution of the apparent mistake is that the word anatole, Greek for “rising” or “east” is meant to refer to the star rising in the east.

 

[chuskcrop]

the star was in the east. that is why i am confused.

 

[stanczyk]

the star was in the east. that is why i am confused.

Well, I think the confusion stems from the assumption that the magi are literally following towards the star. I’m not aware that there is anything that expressly states that they followed the star in order to find Jesus. Though popular imagination has three magi riding camels through the desert using the star to navigate (kind of like Peter Pan, “Second star to the right and straight on till Bethlehem.”) I don’t think this was actually the case.

Matthew states that they saw His star “rising” or “in the east.” The magi were Zoroastrian astrologers, pious monotheists and scholars of prophecy, so it seems likely to me that they used the star as an omen of the Hebrew prophecy of the birth of messiah. So, from what I can tell it seems like the star is what signaled the timing of the birth of Christ, not what literally led them to Christ. The prophecies are what led them to Bethlehem.

 

[bmullins]

We are also making an assumption that the ‘star’ in the east was an astral or astrological sign in the heavens from the natural movement of the earth and planets. There is no need to suppose that. It could easily have been a localized atmospheric phenomena centered over Jerusalem.

The answer to the question though why did they paint it in the west? Because they(the Magi) came from the East so if the star was in Jerusalem, as it was written in Numbers 24:17 - “A Star shall come out of Jacob”, the star would have been West of them. We can make many suppositions as to what the Magi saw or how they determined it, but we can know with certainty that the reason it is painted in the west is simply because of the geographical locations that the artist were aware of.

 

[patrick457]

ok the star the Magi followed…it was in the east, ey?
I have seen several artist depictions of it appearing in the western part of the sky?
(i admit, I don’t have a strong sense of direction!)

I guess for the same reason why artists often portray the parting of the Reed Sea (yes, the spelling is intentional) as happening somewhere at daylight and why the sea is almost always shown as starting to split from the side where the Israelites are, despite the fact that the account in Exodus clearly says that “a strong east wind” (a wind which blows from the east westward, of course) was what caused the waters to divide, and the Israelites were travelling eastward from Egypt. Shouldn’t you expect the sea to part first from the other shore?

 

[PeterK]

I guess I wouldn’t get too worked up over artists’ depictions whose creative goal may be something other than strict biblical interpretive precision.

peterk