The primary difference between the views of Larson and Molnar is that Larson looked for spectacular stellar events, and Molnar looked for events that would have been significant to the astrologers at the turn of the First Century. The climax of Larson's presentation is the "Starry Dance." Molnar's is a horoscope in which Judea's regal portents depict the birth of a divine and unconquerable ruler.
Both Larson and Molnar conclude the Star of Bethlehem was Jupiter, and both interpret the phrase, stood over the place, as a phase in Jupiter's retrograde motion. (Jupiter was stationary for about a week before it was seen to move backwards.) But their agreement ends there.
Larson assumes, not arbitrarily, that Herod died in 1 B.C. Molnar adheres to the opinion of scholars that Herod died in 4 B.C. This is important for the timing of the star. The following is a brief review of the conclusions and reasoning of each.
Larson : Astrological symbol for Judea is Leo, based on prophecies likening Judah to a lion.
Molnar : Astrological symbol for Judea is Aries, based on the astrological method of assigning symbols.
Larson: Jupiter and Regulus are regal stars based on astrology. In the year that Larson assumes to be the year of Christ's birth, Jupiter circles, or "crowns" Regulus, the brightest star in Leo, three times before moving on. Jupiter, being the "king planet" would be the one to watch.
Molnar: Jupiter and Regulus are regal stars based on astrology, but we're looking at the skies four to five years earlier. Not only that, we're not looking for spectacular stellar events, but astrologically significant events. This is where I say you're just going to have to buy the book to get a satisfying explanation. Ancient astrology was sophisticated and arcane, and thus, though Molnar took pains to make it accessible to the uninitiated, I found it very difficult to follow.
It's not as simple as seeing something happen in the constellation Aries, it's also how Aries relates to the other constellations in its Trine, Leo and Sagitarius; the positions and behaviors of the Trine's rulers, the sun, Jupiter, Saturn; and the positions and behaviors of their attendants, the moon and the other planets. All this and more was, in addition, viewed in relation to the Cardinal Points, the Ascendant, the Midheaven, the Descendant, and the anti-Midheaven. There's even more, but you get the picture.
Briefly summed up, Judea's regal portents were satisfied in such a way to signify that the ruler then born was an unconquerable, divine ruler worthy of worship. This would indeed be the sign of a birth of world-wide significance, yet would have been noticed only by astrologers.
Jupiter, being the regal planet in this horoscope, would be the one to watch.
Larson: ...we have seen his star in the east. The Magi were in the east when they saw Jupiter. When Jupiter set, viewed from Babylon, it's position on the horizon was directly above Judea. So the Magi knew to go to Jerusalem.
Molnar: ...we have seen his star in the east. The Magi are refering to heliacal rising of Jupiter. It rose in the east just before the sun in the constellation Aries.
Larson: ...went before them.The Magi were in Jerusalem when they inquired concerning the king of the Jews. Now they had to look south to see Jupiter, and literally followed it south to Bethlehem.
Molnar: ...went before them. "The word proegen, ('Went before') is related to the astrological term proegeseis, which indeed means 'to go before' or, more precisely, 'to go in the same direction as the sky moves.' A planet goes in the same direction as the sky when it reverses it's eastward motion through the zodiac and proceeds in the same westward direction in which the sky rotates. The ancient Greeks perceived the 'normal' direction for a planet as the direction of the sky's movement. Today, however, astonomers reverse this concept: they think of movement in the direction of the sky as backwards movement, and call it retrograde motion." So the Magi weren't literally following the star. They knew to go to Jerusalem because of the horoscope.
Larson: ...till it came and stood over where the young child was. The star became stationary over the place. Larson didn't suggest calculating a ground point. He suggested that optically, it appeared to be over the place, just like it appeared to set in Judea when viewed from Babylon.
Molnar: ...till it came and stood over where the young child was. This is the message an astrologer would get reading Matthew 2:9, And behold, the planet which they had seen at its heliacal rising went retrograde and became stationary above in the sky (which showed) where the child was. Molnar did not suggest calculating a ground point either. His take is simply that the star became stationary in the sky, and that the sky showed them by the horoscope (not Jupiter alone) where the child was born.
All in all, a very interesting little study.
But Larson presents some other cool things too. Using his date, the sun is in Virgo with a new moon "at her feet." He believes this has something to do with Rev. 12:1.
Then Larson fast forwards the stars to the date of Christ's death, and Virgo is again "clothed with the sun" with a blood moon at her feet. This is a lunar eclipse, so he places his reference point on the moon looking toward the sun. From the moon, the sun appears in Aries, right where the heart would be (if the drawing is accurate *Molnar made a point about the way the Greeks reckoned the drawings of the zodiac), and at 3 in the afternoon, the time of Christ's death, the earth then blanks out the sun, or snuff's out the heart of the "sacrificial" Ram. But then who was watching from the moon?
If his dates are correct, and if he's interpreting the stars correctly, he puts the Magi's visit to Christ at December 25, A.D. 2.
