by The Great Christ Comet- Revealing the True Star of Bethlehem (retail) (epub)
15 Pseudo-Eratosthenes, Catasterismi 9; Benko, Virgin Goddess, 111; André Le Boeuffle, Les Noms Latins d’astres et de constellations (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1977), 212–215; Boll, Offenbarung Johannis, 109–111; Malina and Pilch, Social-Science, 163; Tim Hegedus, Early Christianity and Ancient Astrology (New York: Peter Lang, 2007), 236–227. For ancient references to Virgo, see Aratus, Phaenomena 93–138; Cicero, De Natura Deorum 2.42; Hyginus, Poetica Astronomica 2.25; Nonnos, Dionysiaca 2.655.
16 Pseudo-Eratosthenes, Catasterismi 9.
17 Hyginus, Poetica Astronomica 2.25; Mary Amelia Grant, The Myths of Hyginus (Lawrence: University of Kansas, 1960), http://www.theoi.com/Text/HyginusAstronomica2.html#25 (accessed March 26, 2014); Theony Condos, Star Myths of the Greeks and Romans: A Sourcebook (Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes, 1997), 206.
18 Apuleius, Metamorphoses 6.4.
19 For example, the fourth-century AD Avienus, Phaenomena 273–292. See Bruce J. Malina, On the Genre and Message of Revelation: Star Visions and Sky Journeys (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 159. On Isis worship throughout the ancient world, see R. E. Witts, Isis in the Ancient World (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1971).
20 On Isis as Virgo, see Boll, Offenbarung Johannis, 108–110; Benko, Virgin Goddess, 111–112; M. Tsevat, “bethûlâh,” in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, vol. 2, ed. G. J. Botterweck, H. Ringgren, and H.-J. Fabry, trans. J. T. Willis (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977), 338–343, esp. 338–339. On the Dendera Zodiac, see note 43, below.
21 Hegedus, “Some Astrological Motifs,” 80–81. Cf. Malina, Genre and Message, 160: “in the mind of the first-century Mediterraneans, the female statuses and roles of virgin, mother, and queen could . . . readily reside in the same person.”
22 Condos, Star Myths of the Greeks and Romans, 207.
23 E.g., George R. Beasley-Murray, Revelation, New Century Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1981), 197; Brian K. Blount, Revelation: A Commentary, New Testament Library (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2009), 225.
24 It should also be remembered that the woman represents Israel/Jacob, and that the twelve stars represent the twelve tribes. Had there been only eleven stars on the woman’s crown, the symbolism on that level would have been ruined.
25 Ptolemy, Almagest, book 7, H37 (my translation). For an excellent recent translation of Ptolemy’s Almagest, see Ptolemy’s Almagest, trans G. J. Toomer (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998).
26 In fact, in his description of the constellation, while Ptolemy does describe δ (Delta) Virginis as on Virgo’s right side (under the girdle), he portrays γ (Gamma) Virginis as in the left wing. But he probably meant that the star was both on Virgo’s wing and on her side.
27 Ptolemy, Almagest, book 7, H37 (my translation). Ptolemy was referring to the star δ (Delta) Virginis. Hipparchus had located δ on Virgo’s right shoulder. The third-century BC Aratus, Phaenomena 137–138, writing before Hipparchus, stated that Vindemiatrix was located above her shoulders, which reveals that the right shoulder was perceived to be around δ Virginis. Ptolemy argued against Hipparchus’s interpretation of δ Virginis on the ground that the head stars would then be too far from δ. Ptolemy made an excellent point: in Hipparchus’s constellation the proportions of Virgo’s upper part were utterly absurd—her neck was giraffe-like!
28 Pseudo-Eratosthenes, Catasterismi 9: see Condos, Star Myths of the Greeks and Romans, 205.
29 See the translation in ibid., 205–206. Unfortunately, because Theony Condos is too influenced by Ptolemy’s version of Virgo, she is unable to identify which stars Hyginus and Pseudo-Eratosthenes had in mind in most cases. Moreover, she acknowledges that ε Virginis was the wing by the shoulder, even though in her scheme it is nowhere near the shoulder, but rather at the mid-belly region.
30 This astrologer lived in the late first century BC or early first century AD; see Boll, Sphaera, 8; and Otto Neugebauer, The Exact Sciences in Antiquity (Mineola, NY: Dover, 1969), 189, 175, 189 (between 100 BC and AD 50). T. Boiy, Late Achaemenid and Hellenistic Babylon (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 310, states that Teukros lived in the first century BC; and Bruce M. Metzger, “Ancient Astrological Geography and Acts 2:9–11,” in Apostolic History and the Gospel: Biblical and Historical Essays Presented to F. F. Bruce, ed. W. Ward Gasque and Ralph P. Martin (Exeter: Paternoster, 1970), 130, said that Teukros “flourished about 10 B.C.”
31 My translation of the Greek text in Catalogus Codicum Astrologorum Graecorum, ed. and trans. Franz Boll, vol. 7 (Brussels: Lamertin, 1908), 202; cf. idem, Sphaera, 210; idem, Offenbarung Johannis, 109–110. The Arabian astrologer Abu Ma’shar, from the ninth century AD, in The Great Introduction to Astrology, book 6, chapter 1, wrote of Virgo that she was “a Virgin that Teukros called Isis; she is a pretty, pure virgin with long hair, with a beautiful face; she has two ears of corn in her hand and is seated on a throne on which lie cushions. She is looking after a little boy and gives him bread to eat, in a place called the Atrium; this boy is called by some peoples Isu (Jesus)” (translation influenced by Alfred Jeremias, Handbuch der altorientalischen Geisteskultur [Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1913], 172; cf. A. E. Thierens, Astrology in Mesopotamian Culture: An Essay [Leiden: Brill, 1935], 34). Abu Ma’shar was referring to a Persian translation of the book Sphaera Barbarica by Teukros of Babylon.
32 Boll, Catalogus, 7:203. Teukros locates the beginning of the emergence of the head at 1–3 degrees, the nose at 4–6 degrees, the neck at 7–10 degrees, the arms at 11–13 degrees, the fingers at 14–18 degrees, Spica at 19–21 degrees, and (the upper section of) the lower half of the leg at 22–23 degrees.
33 In earlier centuries, the Babylonians regarded Virgo as two distinct constellations consisting of the Furrow (who carried an ear of grain), who rose first, and the Frond (who carried a palm branch). While the Greco-Roman Virgo and the later Babylonian Virgo were parallel to the ecliptic, these constellations were oriented at close-to-90-degree angles to the ecliptic. It seems that at some stage around the middle of the first millennium BC, when the zodiacal band was divided into twelve equal signs, the Furrow and Frond were united into a “single unified figure” who carried an ear of grain in her left hand and a palm branch in her right hand (Gavin White, Babylonian Star-Lore: An Illustrated Guide to the Star-Lore and Constellations of Ancient Babylonia, 2nd ed. [London: Solaria, 2007], 115).
34 A. Sachs, “A Late Babylonian Star Catalog,” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 6 (1952): 146–150, and N. A. Roughton, J. M. Steele, and C. B. F. Walker, “A Late Babylonian Normal and Ziqpu Star Text,” Archives of the History of the Exact Sciences 58 (2004): 566–567 (cf. van der Waerden, Science Awakening II, 99) point out that a pre-Seleucid-period fragmentary star catalog portrays Zavijava (β Virginis) as the rear foot of the Lion (Leo). Obviously, this imagining of the Lion, if it continued into the era when Virgo (consisting of the Furrow and the Frond) was conceived of as resting along the ecliptic, would not have been consistent with Virgo’s head being where Hipparchus and Ptolemy located it, namely at ξ, ν, ο, and π. The only other catalogued Babylonian stars of Virgo, also from the pre-Seleucid period, are Spica (α Virginis) (called “the bright star of the Furrow”) and Porrima (γ Virginis) (called “the single star in front of the Furrow” and “the root of the furrow”).
35 The Hebrew name for Virgo, Bethulah, was given alongside the image. For more on this fascinating image, see Eleazar Lipa Sukenik and Steven Fine, The Ancient Synagogue of Beth Alpha (London: Oxford University Press, 1932), 31 and plate XIII.2.
36 See Boll, Sphaera, 58; cf. 210–211. In addition, Franz Boll described an ancient gem on which Isis was portrayed as Virgo holding Horus, who is carrying an ear of grain, with a star over Virgo’s head and another ear of grain standing beside her (ibid., 211).
37 Although many scholars claim that stephanos was not used of royal crowns, this is incorrect. Gregory M. Stevenson, “Conceptual Background to Golden Crown Imagery in
the Apocalypse of John (4:4, 10; 14:14),” Journal of Biblical Literature 111.2 (1995): 260, points out that in Hellenistic Greek stephanos was used of royal crowns and that this usage was “more common among Jewish authors.” The LXX translators and Josephus consistently preferred stephanos to diadēma when speaking of the crown worn by Israelite kings. This practice, he concludes, does not imply that these crowns were wreaths but rather “demonstrates that in the minds of some later Israelites stephanos was considered an acceptable term for describing a royal crown.” Aside from Rev. 12:1, Revelation uses stephanos of royal crowns in 6:2 (of the rider of the white horse); 14:14 (of the Messiah); 4:4 (of the 24 elders); and 9:7 (of locusts).
38 Ernest L. Martin, The Star of Bethlehem: The Star That Astonished the World, 2nd ed. (Portland, OR: Associates for Scriptural Knowledge, 1996), available at http://www.askelm.com/star/star008.htm (accessed March 26, 2014) stated that Prof. John Thorley, “When Was Jesus Born?,” Greece and Rome, 2nd series, 28.1 (April 1981): 87–88, had successfully identified from a star atlas the twelve stars of Virgo’s crown. However, Thorley’s list included eight stars firmly associated in the ancient mind with the constellation Leo (σ, χ, ι, θ, 60, δ, 93, and β, all Leonis) and only four associated with Virgo (β, ν, π, and ο, all Virginis). Moreover, the resultant crown was absurdly large, 16 degrees wide and 20 degrees tall, extending up as far as Leo’s hindquarters. We can be confident that no ancient ever imagined Virgo’s crown where Thorley did!
39 A sketch of the Esna zodiac can be viewed at http://www.repertorium.net/rostau/secondary/esnae.html (last modified August 29, 2006).
40 The crown functions in various ways in Rev. 12:1: to reveal the woman’s identity, and to give a baseline for the proportions of Virgo as she is envisioned during this scene. At the same time, the crown contributes to the impression that this is an enthronement scene and that Virgo is destined to be greatly exalted.
41 Cf. Gen. 37:9, where the Moon, together with the Sun and eleven stars, is envisioned as bowing down before Joseph.
42 So Hipparchus, Hyginus, Pseudo-Eratosthenes, and Ptolemy. See Boll, Offenbarung Johannis, 113.
43 In a famous sculptured zodiac from a temple in Dendera, Egypt, Virgo seems to be presented as standing with an ear of grain in her hand, and right below her is a woman sitting down, with Horus standing by her right side, which some have suggested may possibly be a second representation of Virgo (see Boll, Sphaera, 243). For beautiful images of the Dendera Zodiac, go to the website of the Louvre Museum: http://cartelen.louvre.fr/cartelen/visite?srv=car_not_frame&idNotice=19044 (accessed April 4, 2014). While Teukros of Babylon portrayed Virgo as seated on a throne, a cuneiform tablet from Uruk in Seleucid Babylonia, also in the holdings of the Louvre (AO 6448), portrays the Furrow (an early conceptualization of Virgo) as standing.
44 Ptolemy, Almagest, book 7, H37.
45 Cf. Martin, Star of Bethlehem (http://www.askelm.com/star/star006.htm [accessed March 26, 2014]): the Sun was “mid-bodied to her, in the region where a pregnant woman carried a child.” Martin chose September 12 in 3 BC as Jesus’s day of birth based on Rev. 12:1 (ibid.). However, (1) v. 1 is not the moment of birth, but the prelude to the birth, the birth itself being related in the following verses; (2) dating Jesus’s birth to 3 BC is based on a flawed chronology of Herod and the Herodian dynasty, as we have already seen.
46 For a useful overview of new lunar crescent observation in the ancient Near East, see Leo Depuydt, “Why Greek Lunar Months Began a Day Later than Egyptian Lunar Months,” in Living the Lunar Calendar, ed. J. Ben-Dov, W. Horowitz, and J. M. Steele (Oxford: Oxbow, 2012), 153–164; and John M. Steele, “Living with a Lunar Calendar in Mesopotamia and China,” in ibid., 374–380. For treatments of ancient Jewish New Moon Observations, see Sacha Stern, “The Rabbinic New Moon Procedure: Context and Significance,” in ibid., 211–230; and Lawrence H. Schiffman, “From Observation to Calculation: The Development of the Rabbinic Lunar Calendar,” in ibid., 231–243.
47 The description of Virgo in Ptolemy’s Almagest indicates that, to the ancient mind, the feet of Virgo corresponded with μ Virginis and λ Virginis, unlike some modern representations of Virgo (such as in Starry Night® Pro 6.4.3) that portray her feet at 109 and μ Virginis.
48 This is a Julian date.
49 In 5 BC, the other major candidate for the year of Jesus’s birth, the Sun was too high in Virgo, namely over her left shoulder, to be plausibly regarded as clothing her. Some revisionist chronologists date Herod’s death to early 1 BC (Ormond Edwards, “Herodian Chronology,” Palestine Exploration Quarterly 114 [1982]: 29–42; W. E. Filmer, “Chronology of the Reign of Herod the Great,” Journal of Theological Studies 17 [1966]: 283–298; Ernest L. Martin, The Birth of Christ Recalculated, 2nd ed. [Pasadena, CA: Foundation for Biblical Research, 1980]; Andrew E. Steinmann, “When Did Herod the Great Reign?,” Novum Testamentum 51 [2009]: 1–29). Doing so facilitates dating Jesus’s birth in 3–2 BC. The Moon passed over 5 degrees to the south (left) of λ Virginis (which the Greeks regarded as her left foot), and was essentially level with it, while the Sun was over the upper abdominal region on September 11, 3 BC. That far from λ Virginis, the Moon could not plausibly have been construed as being under her feet. In 2 BC the Moon similarly passed over 5 degrees to the south (left) of λ Virginis and then only when the Sun was far from Virgo’s torso. Moreover, the case for dating the death of Herod to 1 BC is weak. It cannot plausibly explain why Herod’s sons Archelaus, Antipas, and Philip II all dated their reigns to 4 BC (see Timothy D. Barnes, “The Date of Herod’s Death,” Journal of Theological Studies 19 [1968]: 204–209). The idea that Herod appointed all three as coregents years before his death is uncompelling. Herod was, after all, having extraordinary problems, right up to his death, deciding who would succeed him—he wrote six or seven wills denominating who would succeed him, the final one five days before his death. Since Archelaus and Philip II were introduced into Herod’s will only in the immediate run-up to Herod’s death, it is hardly likely that they were appointed coregents three years before it. The claim that the events that Josephus reports to have occurred between the eclipse and Passover cannot be accommodated between the lunar eclipse on March 13, 4 BC, and Passover, over 4 weeks later (e.g., Steinmann, “When Did Herod the Great Reign?,” 15–16), is artificial. For instance, Steinmann’s estimates (pp. 15–16) of the time necessary for travel and treatments are exaggerated, failing to take any account of the urgency of the moment or to reckon with overlaps. The suggestion that a partial lunar eclipse would not have been taken as a bad omen (pp. 16–17) is wrong—in the ancient Near East throughout the first millennium BC, partial eclipses could be regarded as terrible portents that augured death for kings or disaster for kingdoms.
50 Actually, the new lunar crescent should technically have become visible on the evening of September 14, in ideal conditions.
51 However, it is theoretically possible that it could have been seen before sunset by eyes shielded from the Sun.
52 While Matthew presents the Messiah’s mother as Mary, Rev. 12:1–5 identifies her as Israel. The two are compatible, for Mary is the representative of Israel when she gives birth to the Messiah (cf. Isa. 9:1a; Mic. 5:2–3).
53 Cf. Isbon T. Beckwith, The Apocalypse of John (New York: Macmillan, 1919), 622.
54 For example, the coma of the large Comet Hale-Bopp in 1996–1997, and the coma of the small but hyperactive Comet Hyakutake, which made a close pass by Earth (see the photographs of Hyakutake in Robert Burnham, Great Comets [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000], 7; and those of Hale-Bopp in ibid., chapter 4 [pp. 100–135]). It is also worth noting that a more fan-shaped parabolic coma can look like a glorious human or even possibly a baby draped in a blanket. Interestingly, Pliny referred to an extraordinarily bright comet that looked like a god in human form (Natural History 2.22).
55 Note that, in her Magnificat (Luke 1:46–55), Mary’s exaltation through her conception of the Mess
iah is highlighted.
56 Farrer, Revelation, 141, suggested that v. 1 implied that Virgo would be especially exalted in the lunar month thus initiated.
57 Tamsyn Barton, Ancient Astrology (London: Routledge, 1994), 103.
58 Ibid.
59 See Marten Stol, Birth in Babylonia and the Bible: Its Mediterranean Setting (Groningen: Styx, 2000), 105–106.
60 As we will highlight below in chapter 8, the influence of LXX Isa. 7:14 (“the virgin shall be with child and bear a son”) on Rev. 12:2 (“And she was pregnant; and she was crying out because of labor pains and the agony of giving birth”) is strong. Therefore, it is preferable to regard the clause “she was with child” in Rev. 12:2 as relating to a distinct phase of the vision and not merely as a redundant subset of the delivery scene (contra NIV, “she was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth”). For this reason, the NASB is justified in placing a semicolon (rather than a comma) after “she was with child” and before “and she cried out” in Rev. 12:2: “she was with child; and she cried out, being in labor and in pain to give birth.”
61 In the Greek text a participial phrase (en gastri echousa, “having in the womb,” “being pregnant”) is used. The employment of the participle here is probably Semitic, it being used for a finite verb, as in Rev. 1:16 (echōn) and 19:12 (echōn) (so also Charles, Revelation, 1:316). Alternatively, it is possible that we have here a periphrastic participle, in which case estin is implied.
62 My translation. It should be noted that there is a shift from the aorist tense in v. 1 to the present tense in v. 2. The choice of the present tense is no doubt for the sake of vividness.
