The star that is connected with the birth of Christ, as recorded in Matthew 2, features in just 12 verses of the gospel and yet has given to rise to acres of theories and speculations. So, before we look at what this star could have been, let’s examine the biblical text.
First, Matthew tells us that the Magi said, “…we saw his star when it rose” (2:2; ESV and NIV). The more familiar wording of the AV is “…in the east”, which, of course, is not contrary to the ESV rendering; while the Christian Standard Bible has, “…at its rising”.
The Greek phrase εν ανατολη (en anatole) can mean either “in the east” or “at its rising”, and the Magi’s statement about when and where they saw the star could mean either that they were in the east when they saw it or that they saw it rising in the east.
If they meant that they saw the star in the east, the question arises as to why the Magi decided to travel westwards. After all, remember that the Bible doesn’t actually say that the star guided the Magi to Jerusalem, though, of course, it may have done so. It may well be that the Magi headed for Jerusalem because they had deduced from all their diligent reading of the ancient and sacred texts that this star indicated the birth of a long-promised Jewish king and so Jerusalem would be the obvious place to go to. Perhaps they had overlooked, or forgotten, Micah’s reference to Bethlehem (5:2).
Second, let’s examine the most important word in our study – star. The Greek word translated in Matthew 2:2 is the word ἀστήρ (aster), which is where we get the word astronomy from. The problem for us is that, in the Greek, a star can refer to any point of light in our night sky, including stars, but also planets, comets and supernovas.
So what are the possibilities? Now I not a scientist nor an astronomer, so all I can do is make as much sense of the theories that I have read and see what fits best with the biblical record which, ultimately, has to be the touchstone of truth; but we simply cannot be absolutely sure as to the nature of this heavenly being.
As I understand it, a supernova is an exploding star which shines very brightly for several months. According to NASA, “These spectacular events can be so bright that they outshine their entire galaxies for a few days or even months. They can be seen across the universe….about two or three supernovas occur each century in galaxies like our own Milky Way.” 1 (https://spaceplace.nasa.gov/supernova)
If a supernova can “outshine their entire galaxies” and “can be seen across the universe”, then it is highly unlikely that Herod was ignorant of its existence and so had to ask the Magi when it had first appeared.
Could it have been a comet? Well, according to numerous sources I have consulted, one thing comets don’t do is stand still! They can travel at between 2,000–100,000 miles per hour, and even faster when they are nearer the sun. The star of the nativity “came to rest” over Bethlehem, so it can’t have been a comet unless of course – and this isn’t impossible – God himself supernaturally caused it to be stationary. Interestingly, the form of the verb in Greek is passive, so it could read ‘it was caused to halt’,
What about the idea of a planetary conjunction? Now I am really getting out of my depth! I understand that a conjunction happens when two objects in the sky — moons, planets or stars — appear so close together that they seem to be one. It is, of course, a trick of perspective, because, in reality, they remain millions of miles apart, but from our viewpoint on earth, it looks like one object in the sky.
Such an event would probably have been very significant to the Magi, who were students of these things, and could well have gone unnoticed by others, such as Herod. But the Scriptures don’t say that the Magi saw a conjunction of stars that looked like a, single, star. Additionally, the Magi saw “his star” on at least two occasions. First, when they were in the east and again when leaving Herod. It appears again, perhaps three months after their first sighting, and it moves as it guides them the few miles to Bethlehem, before being ’caused to halt’, over the place where Jesus and his parents were.
While, at face value, none of the above, satisfy me, it is, of course, quite possible that God overruled his so-called natural laws and made a star or supernova or planet act in a way never before seen. I don’t have a problem with that at all.
But here’s another possibility – given the uniqueness and supernatural nature of the event at the heart of this issue – the virgin birth of the Saviour – might God not specially design and create a unique star for a unique occasion?