---

posted by: seochris (reply)
post date: 12.17.06 (8:36 pm)

This is surely a brilliant piece of sorted information which I would be reading again. If you don't mind Pastor I would also give this post's printot to my friends.

I like this particularly the explanation of the wise men and the stars.

Thanks and Take care

---

posted by: babe4jesus55 (reply)
post date: 12.17.06 (10:27 pm)

Ooooo I always love a challenge in the end. I would say I'm more a priest: too caught up in making sure all my religiousness is just right to see all the glory Jesus is and perhaps threatened too. No, myself is very threatened; probably why I'm forever trying my own way first and THEN leting Him have His way once I fall on my face with my effort. Perhaps one day I will learn. Thanks again, PD.

---

posted by: PastorDave (reply)
post date: 12.18.06 (6:42 am)

Reply to: seochris
Sure. Pass it along. I put this together for our evening study at church. Generally I'm able to be a bit more studious with what I present in the evenings, since those in attendance are more seasoned believers. This is the 4th of a 5-Part-Study entitled "What Were They Thinking?"
(1) Joseph & Mary
(2) Zachariah & Elizabeth
(3) Innkeeper & Shepherds
(4) Wise Men & Herod
(5) God

Have a great day.

---

posted by: PastorDave (reply)
post date: 12.18.06 (6:47 am)

Reply to: babe4jesus55
Now, the options were: Herod or Wise Men? You've expanded what is to be considered. And you make a good point- next time, if there ever is a next time, I present this message I will include this third option at the conclusion. I would like to be more as these Wise Men, relentless pursuit of Jesus.

As I know you here on t-blog, I'd say you are a wonderful representative of Christ. Probably not perfect, but that's a characteristic we all have in common. You do avoid the contentious controversies, which is probably good, since they generally do not change anyone and just result in hard feelings. Maybe I'll learn to do the same.

---

posted by: heavyarms (reply)
post date: 12.19.06 (8:22 am)

Pastordave: Why do men feel the need to give a physical explaination of "the star in the East?" Is it so difficult to believe that the God who allowed the Red Sea to part, created the heavens and the firmament, made man from dust, could also cause a bright light to appear?

---

posted by: PastorDave (reply)
post date: 12.19.06 (4:46 pm)

Most of the time I find that God works through natural processes to accomplish His purposes. Being consistent with this idea, Jesus was born of a woman and emerged upon the scene as an infant. Joseph was warned in a dream to flee Bethlehem. The baby was born in a manger. All three occasions could have been much more mysterious, but God chose otherwise. So He very well could have used a convergence of planets or another such phenomenon to make the "star" for the Wise Men.

I shared the info in my sermon mostly for the sake of interest, just to give my audience something to think about. If God created a star and used it specifically for this purpose, then so be it. That's great. But, not necessary.

Thanks for your visit; please come and comment often. I'll return the favor!

---

posted by: heavyarms (reply)
post date: 12.20.06 (8:38 am)

Please understand that I wasn't complaining. I just find it interesting that some people, in the interest of disproving Christ's birth (or at least the date of Dec. 25, which I agree is likely not the correct time of year), will argue that the star could not have been there "Experts have looked at astrological patterns and found that..." Whether it was the actual light from a gaseous body commonly called a "star" (which, if you think about it, would still have to take some pretty sweet planning on God's part considering that the starlight we see usually originated from its source hundreds, thousands, or even millions of years in the past) or just a bright light from a "supernatural" source is irrelevant.

For all of the natural processes that He uses through, there are some that can (and should) be described as miraculous. Jesus born of a virgin, Moses spoken to through a burning bush, the Red Sea being parted, Moses turning his wooden staff into a live serpent. Try as I may, I can't find a rational explanation for these, and I believe part of my faith is to accept that God does not have to work through actual natural or physical processes. God's not limited by physics like the rest of us.

Again, this was not a critique, just an observation. And hey! I come and comment a lot. Well, once or twice a month, but that's a lot for me.

---

posted by: PastorDave (reply)
post date: 12.20.06 (9:47 am)

Reply to: heavyarms
In no way do I think you were complaining. And if you were, so what? I enjoy the discussion and the challenge. If I come across too direct, just consider it a foible of the writing, and not the writer. And you are right- God can do amazing things, and in faith I believe many of those are recorded in the scriptures. I'm not sure the nature of the particular star of which we discuss. I don't think the first century astrologers would have noticed much difference between a star or a comet.

Your Name:


Your Comment: