The Great Christ Comet (57 page)

When Jesus was buried, his tomb was sealed and guarded by Roman soldiers (Matt. 27:57–66) and yet, two days later, this very tomb was found to be empty (Matt. 28:1–8; Luke 24:1–12, 22–24). Over the following weeks, many hundreds of people testified that they saw him in individual and/or group encounters (1 Cor. 15:3–7). At the end of this period, his closest disciples insisted that they had seen him ascend into heaven in a cloud, and that angels in attendance had pledged that he would return in the same manner (Acts
1:9–11
).

If we believe the testimony of the Gospels, therefore, Jesus certainly did live up to his celestial billing. In particular, what Isaiah prophesied concerning the Messiah came to fulfillment in and through him. Jesus was indeed Immanuel; he was indeed the metaphorical great light that shone in the deep darkness. The comet not only had taken Jesus's part in a celestial drama, but had also by its extraordinary brightness revealed his glory.

The Comet

With respect to what happened to the comet after the Magi's arrival at their destination, we simply do not know for sure. If it maintained the same brightness slope as it had around the time of its U-turn around the Sun, it would have remained potentially visible for many months thereafter (although it would have been below the horizon for a few weeks in March/April).
4
According to our orbital elements, the comet would have gone on to spend the latter part of the spring and most of the summer in Aries the Ram
5
before slowly returning to Pisces. But the Bible gives us no explicit indication of what happened with respect to the comet from the end of November of 6 BC onward, and comets are so variable in their rates of fading that it would be unwise to make any dogmatic pronouncements. Besides, whatever happened in the rest of the cometary apparition after the comet had stood over the house in Bethlehem is basically irrelevant. After all, the most magnificent comet in human history had announced that the Messiah was born, who he was, what he was destined to do, and where he was.
6

Will the comet soon return to the inner solar system? The slight ambiguity in the orbit, particularly its shape (or eccentricity), means that we cannot at this point be sure when, if ever, the comet will be back. If the comet has an eccentricity of 1.0, it is now 900 times farther away from the Sun than Earth is.
7
However, the orbit may be less elongated (i.e., have an eccentricity of less than 1.0), in which case the comet might be closer to our part of the solar system than that. It is even possible that the comet is already well on its way back toward the Sun and may soon make a reappearance. If it does return, it will no doubt put on another majestic show for all humans, a display that will inevitably push
every human spectator to reflect on the religious significance of what it did in 6 BC.

What the Great Christ Comet did in 7–6 BC was extraordinary and merits wide telling. People of all disciplines—astronomers, theologians, historians, artists, etc.—must come to grips with its story. In an era when science is often viewed as the enemy of religion, the Christ Comet suggests that science may be the best friend of religion. In a period when the claims of Christ are commonly disregarded, the Star calls upon all to give his claims a fresh reappraisal. At a time when humans are so preoccupied with “the now,” this Comet of comets exhorts us to reflect on the past and the future, giving us perspective for the present. In a world where Creation's wonders are often assigned to nothing other than random chance, the Magi's Star prompts us to consider whether there is not in truth a Sovereign Creator and Governor of it all.

Could there be a clearer example of God's mastery over the Cosmos than the celestial events that marked the birth of Jesus? The comet's size, shape, and chemical composition were all tailor-made for this occasion. Its orbit had its programmer's fingerprints all over it. In fact, the plan for the messianic sign was already in motion at the point that the solar system came into existence, and the precise moment of the Messiah's birth was firmly established then, guaranteed by the laws of physics. After all, the comet, the planets, and the Moon all had to be in their appointed locations within their orbits, as did Earth, for only then could the Sun, the stars, the constellations, and the meteoroids be in their proper positions. Moreover, Earth's revolution had to be in perfect sync with the comet's for this wonder to unfold. In addition, Earth's atmosphere and weather had to cooperate fully. A different comet had to have a fragmentation event at one particular historical moment so that its meteoroids could be in place, at their ascending node, to give rise to the Hydrid meteor storm on the eve of Christ's birth. The precession of the equinoxes (the slight wobble of Earth on its axis) played a key role in determining where within Virgo the cometary baby was located and where the radiant of the meteor storm was. Further, Earth's historical rate of rotation had to be such that the meteor storm occurred over the Middle East.

And it should be remembered that all of this was orchestrated to put on a dramatic celestial show tailored particularly for one small group of people, even when they were on the move. It disclosed to them detailed information regarding the Messiah and his birth, prompting them to leave their homeland on a pilgrimage to worship him. It accompanied and encouraged them as they traveled. After ushering the Magi to Bethlehem, it pinpointed the Messiah's precise location by setting near-vertically on the other side of the house from where they were. Having journeyed with the Magi all the way from Bab­ylon to Bethlehem, we can appreciate just how awestruck they must have been as they bowed down and worshiped baby Jesus. The comet likewise beckons all humans to fall to their knees, doing so with greater awe than the Magi, reflecting a deeper appreciation of what God did to authenticate Jesus as the Messiah on the occasion of his birth—and how he did it.

In the words of Psalm 19:1–4a,

The heavens declare the glory of God,

and the sky proclaims the work of his hands.

Day after day they pour out speech,

night after night they communicate knowledge.

There is no literal speech, nor are there literal words,

no sound is literally heard from them.

Yet their voice goes out into all the earth,

their words to the ends of the world.
8

Appendix 1

The Chinese Comet Records

We have made a case that the Star of Bethlehem was a comet. Why, then, is there no mention of it in the extant Chinese astronomical records?

As great a boon as the Chinese astronomical records are to students of ancient astronomy, there can be no question but that only a small percentage of records from the first century BC and the first century AD have survived.

Many comets were observed by the ancients that are not present in the extant Chinese records: for example, those in 480 BC (Greece only—a horn-shaped comet), 426 BC (Greece only), 373–372 BC (Greece only—this was a spectacular comet described by Aristotle,
Meteorologica
343b as “great” and by Ephorus [Seneca,
Natural Questions
7.16.2] as splitting in two), 345–344 BC (Italy only), 341–340 BC (Greece only), 210 BC (Babylonia only), 164 BC (Babylonia only), 163 BC (Babylonia only),
1
43 BC (Italy only), 42 BC (Italy/Greece only
2
), 31 BC (Italy/Greece only), 30 BC (Italy/Greece only), 17 BC (Italy/Greece only), AD 9 (Germany/Italy only), AD 14 (Italy only), AD 59 (Korea only), AD 79 (Korea and Italy only, or Korea only and Italy only
3
), and AD 85,
4
128, 153, 154 and 158 (all Korea only).
5

Indeed we may add other comets to the list, for example, the Great Comet of 44 BC. It appeared in the aftermath of Julius Caesar's death during the Games of Venus Genetrix at around the eleventh hour of the day
6
and hence was a daytime comet that justified Plutarch's description of “a great comet which shone brilliantly for seven nights after Caesar's murder.”
7
The Chinese record a comet, whether the same one as Caesar's Comet or a different one, in May–June of that year, but
there is no surviving Chinese record of the extraordinary daytime cometary phenomenon that occurred toward the end of July.
8

Octavia
mentions a comet of “brilliant radiance” in the constellation Bootes in AD 62 that is not present in the extant Chinese records.
9

In addition, Pliny
10
mentions a comet that shone almost continually and had a terrible glare in AD 64
11
that some
12
have identified as the Chinese “guest star” in May–July, but, as Gary Kronk notes,
13
Tacitus made it clear that Pliny's comet appeared “at the end of the year.”
14
There is therefore no surviving Chinese record of Pliny's comet. We must remember that comets do sometimes come in clusters. For example, the 1530s saw notable comets in 1531, 1532, 1533, 1538, and 1539,
15
and in the latter half of 1618 three magnificent comets graced the skies,
16
followed by a 100-degree comet early in 1619.
17
The years 1880–1882 featured four great comets.
18

Furthermore, Josephus
19
mentions a comet that remained visible for one year (apparently in AD 65–66), which may or may not at one point have resembled a sword, of which there is no surviving Chinese record.

With respect to the first century BC, the surviving Chinese records mention only 13 (or 14)
20
comets for the whole of the first century BC and indeed a paltry 10 (or 11) comets for the period 50 BC to AD 50:
21
49 BC, 47 BC, May–June 44 BC, 32 BC, 12 BC, 5 BC (possibly two), 4 BC, AD 13, AD 22, AD 39.
22

These Chinese records are derived from the
Han shu
, that is,
The History of the Former Han Dynasty
, which, as noted, was composed in the late first and early second centuries AD, and completed in AD 111. From 50 BC to AD 50, the
Han shu
preserves less than half of all the surviving comet records from the period and about 11–13% of the total number of comets that would generally be expected to be visible to the naked eye over such a period. The large gaps between recorded comets—43–33 BC, 31–13 BC, 11–6 BC, and 3 BC–AD 12—reinforce the conclusion that many cometary apparitions are missing. Indeed there is a notable lull in
Han shu
records of portents generally between 10 and 6 BC. In comparison, 20–11 BC and 5–1 BC are “peak” periods. To some extent the peaks and troughs may reflect political developments within China.
23
For example, the resurgence of records in 5–1 BC coincides with the end of the honeymoon period of Emperor Ai's reign and the upswelling of widespread disillusionment regarding his rule.
24

Even if we judge the extant Chinese records in these centuries by the standard of later centuries—for example, the third or fourth century AD—the patchy nature of the surviving Chinese records is clearly seen. And we have good reason to believe that major comets are missing from the surviving Chinese records in the fourth century. According to Zdenek Sekanina and P. W. Chodas, the intrinsically very bright giant parent of the Kreutz Sungrazing Family of comets arrived at perihelion in AD 356, but we lack any mention of it in the Chinese records.
25
If the progenitor of the Kreutz family, unquestionably one of the most spectacular comets in history, did indeed arrive in that year, the absence of a Chinese record of it might say a lot about the state of the surviving Chinese records even from that period.

What confirms that there were other comets in our period is A. A. Barrett's catalog of cometary observations collected from scattered references in Greco-Roman literature:
26
the southern Europeans happen to mention comets during this very period which are not to be found among the extant Chinese records. Barrett points out that comets are mentioned in Greco-Roman literature for the following years: 49 BC, 48 BC, (July) 44 BC, 43 BC, 42 BC (multiple comets), 31 BC, 30 BC, 17 BC, 12 BC, AD 9 (multiple comets), and AD 14.
27
The historical reliability of some of these Greco-Roman cometary references may be questioned by some, but a good number of them have excellent historical credentials and cannot legitimately be discounted.

Moreover, Korean records make reference to yet other comets unpreserved in the extant
Chinese records in the relevant period, one in March 44 BC and another in AD 46–47.
28

Hunger, Stephenson, Walker, and Yau emphasize what a tiny proportion of astronomical records from the Former Han period (206 BC–AD 9) has survived. They point out that during the entire Former Han period we never find more than 3 observations per year, and they sharply contrast this with the surviving nightly reports in the Bab­ylo­nian Diaries and with the extant Chinese records from subsequent centuries.
29

Lest one think that the surviving Chinese records would have included all of the
major
cometary phenomena in the latter part of the first century BC and first half of the first century AD, we should remember that they lack any reference to the following: the July 44 BC daylight comet; the multiple cometary apparitions in 42 BC;
30
the 17 BC comet as bright as the full Moon that stretched across the whole sky, north to south;
31
the 12 BC comet that experienced a fragmentation event;
32
and “several comets [that] appeared at the same time” in AD 9.
33
Notable comets are therefore missing from the extant Chinese records in the very period during which the Bethlehem Star appeared.

It is clear, then, that the extant Chinese records are very patchy indeed. Indeed so paltry is the number of cometary apparitions in the extant Chinese records in the relevant period that it is preferable to ask not why the surviving Chinese records lack certain comets, but rather why the historians of the
Han shu
preserved the particular ones that they did. Records of most comets, including a number of spectacular cometary phenomena, did not make it into the
Han shu
, and these would have been lost to history without the writings and records of other countries. In the period from 50 BC to AD 50, Greco-Roman literature and Korean astronomical records together contribute more than half of all extant references to cometary apparitions, and make it abundantly clear that the extant Chinese records lack great cometary apparitions.

What factors determined whether the writers of the
Han shu
included or excluded cometary records?

One important factor was that only a limited number of records were available to the historians of the
Han shu
. Hunger et al. state that it is certain that many astronomical records were lost prior to the composition of the
Han shu
.
34
It should be remembered that the efficiency of astronomical record-keeping and record preservation during the Former Han dynasty fluctuated greatly.
35
In explaining the absence of a record of the Halley's Comet 164 BC apparition in the Chinese records, and the lack of a sure reference to the 87 BC apparition, Stephenson comments: “In order to offer an explanation for this deficiency we must examine the statistics of astronomical observations throughout the Former Han dy
nasty. . . . Clearly much data must have been missing by the time the
Han-shu
was compiled . . . , a conclusion that is supported by the highly irregular form of the histogram.”
36

Second, as Hunger et al. also highlight, the content of a history is determined by what its author/editor sees fit to include, and it is therefore likely that a lot of data that would have been of great interest and significance to modern astronomers was deliberately excluded by the ancient historians and therefore has not survived.
37
Pankenier emphasizes that the editors of the
Han shu
, working on behalf of the ruling emperor, made their determinations regarding which astronomical records to include in their history based largely on whether the particular reports showed the working out of gan-ying theory, that every human action is met with a cosmic reaction.
38
They were more likely to include a particular astronomical report if the observation played a key role in political or military history or seemed to augur the end of the dynasty. Halley's Comet in 12 BC made a deep impression on the Chinese at the time because of the astrological messages it seemed to convey against the backdrop of the constellations. According to the
Han shu
, one contemporary astrologer (Gu Yong) stated, “This is an omen of extreme disorder such as has been rarely seen since high antiquity. If we examine the rapid movement [of this object], the variations in the length of its flaming rays, and the [constellations] on which it has trespassed successively, [it clearly signifies] harm to the women of the rear palace within, and the disaster of rebellion in the realm without.”
39
The
Han shu
goes on to record that another official warned that this was a terrible omen for the dynasty.
40
The extraordinary detail given concerning this comet and its interpretation in the
Han shu
is present because it fit so perfectly with the historians' agenda: the heavens had spelled doom for the Former Han dynasty.

Could a reason for the patchy nature of the cometary records be traceable back to the process of reporting observations? The astronomers were civil servants tasked with maintaining a daily watch of the sky, both day and night, on the lookout for celestial omens.
41
They probably spotted most astronomical abnormalities, but did their observations get entered into the Register of the T'ai Shih Ling, the court official whose records were the source of the
Han shu
's astronomical references?

Hans Bielenstein has made the case that, for a portent to get logged in the Register, high court officials had to be concerned enough about its astrological implications for the imperial order to make it the subject of a memorial to the emperor.
42
However, Martin Kern has challenged this interpretation, arguing instead that all unusual events were made subjects of memorials to the emperor.
43
If a portent was reported that caused alarm, it required action by the emperor to restore
cosmic order by making edicts (as, for example, in 44 BC).

A few decades ago it was common for scholars of the Han dynasty to claim that astronomy and astrology had an essentially political function within China, being used as a tool by officials to manipulate the emperors.
44
It was and sometimes still is believed that the astronomers would even stoop to falsifying celestial phenomena to achieve their ends.
45
Scholars such as Dubs, however, have argued that this notion is inaccurate.
46
For one thing, phenomena such as comets were difficult and dangerous to fabricate or try to hide.
47
It is likely that court officials did seek to manipulate the emperor by means of comets, but by the interpretation they assigned to them, not by free invention of them.

In conclusion, the surviving Chinese comet records are manifestly very incomplete. It would therefore be most unwise to assume that, if the Bethlehem Star was a comet, the apparition would have been preserved in the extant Chinese astronomical records.