Customer Review

16 of 29 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Almost but not Quite, January 27, 2012
By 
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Star of Bethlehem (DVD)
I actually enjoyed the film even though I did not find it to be factual about the dates the author was using for the birth of Jesus. I did contact him regarding the descrepancies but he clung to his very loose determinations. I found the astrological parts to be quite fascinating. I enjoyed it but would not recommend it to anyone without letting them know about the date descrepancy.

It isn't hard to research the date of the birth of Jesus it is very well documented in History. It was the Emperor Constantine that choose the date of the Winter Solstice for the birthdate of Jesus. Constantine just switched the birthdate of Tamuz the son of the Sun God that the pagans had been celebrating for centuries to the birthdate of the Son of the Creator of the Universe who was actually born during the Feast of Trumpets somewhere between September and October. There are other historical facts that also prove the time of the birth of Jesus but he wasn't interested in hearing about them either.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
Name:
Badge:
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
 
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in
 

Comments

Tracked by 4 customers

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 27 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Feb 15, 2012 5:33:40 AM PST
Jean Ascher says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Feb 24, 2012 6:20:38 AM PST
EGM says:
The discrepancy in Larson's dates stem from his tweaking the masterpiece work of the late Ernest L. Martin (which Larson even cites on his website) and switching the celestial event described in Rev. 12.1-2 from being Christ's birth to Christ's conception. This contradicts the text itself which plainly describes the woman (Bethulah (Virgo)/Mary) giving birth:

"And a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pains and the agony of giving birth." --Revelation 12.1-2

There are other logistical reasons why this only fits the time of Christ's birth, but Larson's switch also covers up deep significance, because the date of Christ's birth on Rev 12.2 was the Jewish New Year, "Rosh Hashanah" (Head of the Year), the new moon of Tishri 1 (a 2 day feast because no man knew the day or hour until at least two witnesses presented their sighting of the new moon in the temple), which is symbolic of new birth, new beginning, the day of Adam's creation according to Jewish tradition, when everyone then in Israel advanced a year in age whatever day they were born, and the Feast of Trumpets when the Kings of Judea were inaugurated, and which will be the time of the resurrection (new birth) at the last trump when Christ comes to inaugurate his Kingdom (1Corinthins 15.52; 1Thessalonians 4.16, 5.3-4). On Pope Gregory's calendar which the Western world uses today, Christ's birth according to Rev 12.1-2 fell on September 11, 3 BCE (Jerusalem time) --a date now considered a day of grief instead of joy even if using a false calendar system. I have verified this for myself using the same program used by Larson (Starry Nights), unfortunately free programs on the net are not accurate enough. This and so much more treasure is hidden if we accept Larson's teaching as authority that Rev 12.2 is describing the conception of Christ and not his birth despite the text describing a birth: "She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pains and the agony of giving birth." Really makes you wonder why he is doing this.

Again, Larson knows this information because it's all laid out in the book he cites from the late Ernest L. Martin, "The Star that Astonished the World," free to read on Dr. Martin's old website. Here's a chapter relevant to this topic: askelm*com/star/star006*htm

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 1, 2012 1:29:48 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Mar 1, 2012 1:58:32 PM PST
Gene Ort says:
Resonant Trinities
I met Rick Larson twice and had one brief and one lengthy discussion about his Star Story. It impacted my life so strongly, I took courage that I might find an answer and asked my question; what does it mean to be in the image of God? Using Rick's diligence as a model, I got answers and wrote a book. My gratitude to Rick runs deep.
In answer to your constructive criticism, I prefer the signs (astronomy, not astrology) and the accuracy of Matthew's reporting to a man's words, years later, especially in Revelation saying a sign in the sky was pregnant, crying out in pain, and giving birth. (I know it's symbolic but really? Do you also understand the rest of Revelation?)
This past Christmas, the Magi on lawns and in the bible were still standing or kneeling by the "brephos" (infant on mother's milk) in a manger, not a "paidion" (toddler or boy off of mother's milk) in his house. Whether you read Greek or Aramaic, Y'shua was not in a manger when the Magi came until English became the written word. Of course, Herod had the same problem of establishing a birth date and ordered all boys two years old and younger killed.
It was suggested that we look to our hearts to know the truth. I have. Thank you Rick Larson and Stephen McEveety.

Posted on Mar 1, 2012 6:59:19 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Mar 1, 2012 7:09:57 PM PST
EGM says:
Proverbs 28:26 He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool: but whoso walketh wisely, he shall be delivered.

Proverbs 18:2 A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself.

Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

Romans 16:18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Larson makes it sound like God led him to make the celestial discoveries in the video for the 1st time. That's what I first thought when I saw it as I'm sure others did, but I soon found out I was deceived and it was a bit of hollywood (hence Stephen McEveety), and that the changes made to Ernest Martin's and John Mosley's research courtesy of Larson covered up deep treasures while revealing only half-truths. The sign of the woman in heaven mentioned in Rev 12.1 matching the sign of Bethulah/Virgo and the movements of Zedeq/Jupiter was all laid out in Martin's book with precision in 1991. Larson even uses the same language as the book when he keeps saying "but there's more" etc. But the tweaks Larson makes to Martin's astounding research, while blatantly overturning straightforward scripture (Rev 12.2), diminish very important fulfillments that Jews in particular would appreciate, too lengthy to get into here, which could potentially move many of them to accept Yeshua/Jesus as the Messiah. I can't say it enough - for those who want more depth of knowledge on this subject, the late Dr. Martin's book on this subject should be mandatory reading. Here's the opening to chapter 5, which I linked to above:

"The suggestion was made in the last chapter that the Magi presented their gifts to Jesus on December 25, 2 B.C.E. This was not, however, the time of his birth. When the Magi arrived, Joseph and Mary were no longer in a stable with Jesus. They were now residing in a house (Matthew 2:11). Jesus had been circumcised (Luke 2:21) and dedicated at the temple some forty days after his birth (Luke 2:22-24). He was then being called a paidion (toddler) and no longer a brephos (infant). When the Magi arrived, Jesus was already walking and was able to speak a few words as most normal children would be able to do when several months old. Soon after the Magi left, Herod killed the male children in and around Bethlehem who were two years of age or younger (Matthew 2:16). This does not mean Jesus was exactly two years old at the time. The fact that all children two years and under were slain shows that Herod was taking every possible interpretation of the Magi into account for the time of Jesus' birth.

Since it was not clear in astrological interpretation whether the appearance of a star or planet signified the conception or the birth of a baby, Herod decided to kill the children born within a two-year period in order to cover both possibilities.."

askelm*com/star/star006*htm

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 1, 2012 7:19:41 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Mar 1, 2012 7:20:46 PM PST
Gumply says:
I am a believer, a child of the Creator of the Universe, His spirit lives within me and I am very thankful for that gift. I knew on viewing the tape that it was in serious error and that is why I wrote my views on the Star of Bethlehem. My only concern was for the people that might buy the video and buy into the lies. I do consider them to be fabrications and I felt like I had no other choice except to warn people to question and search out for themselves the truth.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 2, 2012 5:44:23 AM PST
Gene Ort says:
I thank you for the reference to Dr. Martin's book and will read it with great interest and open mind. There is still much to learn.
Your first three quotes refer to a heart in ways that I do not accept: that "the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked."
These are either the words of God and true or the words of men with deceit in their minds, not hearts. Is it possible that Y'shua (Jesus) was being deceitful? Not in my book! He used the words I try to live by, that the heart is where you find the truth, not in man's words. Look what the bible has done to women from Genesis on; all to the advantage of man. A good book to read might be The Woman's Bible by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and a committee of 26 women, published in 1895-98, offering a feminine perspective. It is not a bible per se but fairly astute and informed commentary. I took exception to one woman's overly militant views, but it's a good read.
Another Bible I just started into is the new AENT Aramaic English New Testament Bible (2011) which goes directly from Aramaic to English on opposing pages without the "transliteration" of others. It was after all the language of Y'shua.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 2, 2012 5:56:10 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Mar 2, 2012 6:00:12 AM PST
Gene Ort says:
According to The Star of Bethlehem DVD and my Starry Night software, Jesus' birth was on June 17, 2 BCE (based on Herod dying in 1 BCE.) The 7 BCE birth year infers Herod died in 4 BCE. If he died in 1 BCE, they are all wrong. It would be good to know which is correct. What's wrong with wanting to know. We were told to cry out for understanding and search for it as treasure and come to the knowledge of God. I will continue life-long learning. At 74, a sense of urgency builds.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 2, 2012 7:23:26 AM PST
Gumply says:
I have the Aent also and I am enjoying reading it.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 2, 2012 11:47:43 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Mar 2, 2012 11:50:38 AM PST
Gene Ort says:
I just read Chapter 5 of Dr. Martin's book with a birth date of 9/11/3 BCE. The references to this date being the birth date are extraordinary and well worth reading on.
Other quick Internet references to Dr. Martin's life and accomplishments show me a marvelously inquisitive and knowledgeable man willing to go against the prevailing religious thinking. Thanks again.

Posted on Mar 2, 2012 1:44:28 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Mar 2, 2012 4:26:26 PM PST
EGM says:
"Your first three quotes refer to a heart in ways that I do not accept"

So you disagree with scripture, because that's what those three quotes are.

"These are either the words of God and true or the words of men with deceit in their minds, not hearts."

The Hebrew word "leb" () is used interchangeably with heart and mind in scripture.

You seem to be questioning if the three quotes (Proverbs 18:2, 28:26; Jeremiah 17:9) from the bible are even inspired by God at all because they are at odds with what you personally feel in your heart/mind as if it's the final authority even to the point of rejecting scripture if it disagrees with your position rather than using the holy scriptures as the precious source of timeless wisdom from an omniscient Mind beyond all ages that it is as our guide to carefully reconsider our position in a fallen world, to make corrections and grow in the knowledge and grace of God (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 3:18). Who are we to believe, man's puny minds or the divine writ inspired by the living God of creation? To reject God's word simply for the sake of what's in a man's heart seems to validate what those very scriptures being rejected are saying about man's heart/mind. Imagine a group of people who all claimed to believe the bible in their heart but disagreed with one another over it's teachings.. whose heart is right? This is why the scriptures are laid down for all to search out to determine the truth of a matter as the arbiter -- otherwise you have confusion and chaos, discord and fighting. Man's heart is fickle, subject to change, enticed by myriad of lusts, but God is unspotted by the world and pure, the same forever and his word stands the test of time. Picking and choosing what parts we like and rejecting the rest if it doesn't jibe with our personal thoughts and feelings -- this totally denigrates the bible rendering it useless as a final authority with which to unite people around Christ in a universal brotherhood. Sadly this seems to be the order of the day in the narcissistic, solipsistic society we live in.

Interesting enough, the first time heart/mind (leb) is mentioned in the bible is verse Genesis 6.5: "And YHWH saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart () was only evil continually." How could that be if it is in the heart where we must find the way to truth as you claim? Is scripture in error here too?

"Is it possible that Y'shua (Jesus) was being deceitful? Not in my book! He used the words I try to live by, that the heart is where you find the truth, not in man's words."

No one is claiming Jesus was being deceitful, I'm not sure where you picked that up from -- it's certainly not in any bible I've read. As for the claim that 'the heart is where you find the truth,' could you please provide the verse that indicates this?

"Look what the bible has done to women from Genesis on; all to the advantage of man."

I'm not sure what you mean here, the bible has always tried to lift women up and even refers to God's people as his bride who takes His name/mark as in marriage; Proverbs 8-9 refers to God's Wisdom as a female and to be sought by men (everyone); Christ was born by Mary (Rev 12:1-2) - a role model for women and typology of the Ekklesia (God's people), and reveals the true intention behind the sign of Bethulah/Virgo and Venus as opposed to the sex/fertility cult prostitute/goddess figure ("Queen of Heaven" cf. Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17-19, 25) that pagan influences twisted her into still influencing the world today through occult influences in Hollywood, religions, and society in attempt to overthrow true biblical knowledge and values (Whore of Babylon vs Bride of Christ).. but this seems to be a diversion from the main issue at hand.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 Next ›

Review Details

Item

4.7 out of 5 stars (636 customer reviews)
5 star:
 (554)
4 star:
 (40)
3 star:
 (16)
2 star:
 (15)
1 star:
 (11)
 
 
 
$12.95 $9.93
Add to cart Add to wishlist
Reviewer


Top Reviewer Ranking: 1,948,495