I've read and heard numerous articles on numerous theories of the Christmas Star/Star of Bethlehem since I was a child. Most of the information Larson presents has been already covered many times over, yet this man appears to grace himself with a tremendous amount of more credit then others have. Being a Christian, and knowing this man is also a Christian, this made it very disturbing.
The theory he presented is just that - a theory. There are a number of serious holes in his theory, according to real experts, and he also failed to recognize where the Bible states that the star was a MIRACLE (that would mean that this was not done in the natural order of things, yet the supernatural.) He was using a simple computer program, and basic scientific methods to try to pin down one of God's supernatural miracles.
He stated that his approach was different then any of the others before him (this, in of itself, is incorrect). Also, Scholars found long ago that Jupiter and Venus were in conjunction around the time of Christ's birth. This was not from Larson's own findings, by any stretch of the imagination.
He pins December the 25th as the date of Christ's birth, yet if you read the Bible, when Mary visited her cousin Elizabeth, who was carrying John the Baptist, it states how far along she was in her pregnancy, the time of year it was (they mentioned the holiday) and that would put Christ's birth in September. Most people, even mainstream Christian's now realize that Christ was not born in or around December. Many people now know that December 25th was originally a pagan holiday/festival, and that it used to be a common ancient practice to place Christian holidays and/or events "on top of" pagan ones, in attempts to eliminate the memory of it.
I have difficulties with the usage of tactics like soft inspirational music in the background when the person is speaking, in attempt to soften and endear the viewers to them (The entertainment industry and Televangelists use this tactic, and it's not a good one to stand by if you want to be taken seriously), nor is the tactic of showing massive amounts of camera/film shots where the person is in deep serious contemplation, or having 'noble' expressions, nor is the tactic of reenacting a person on their knees, reverently praying, tears flowing, etc. (These are the tactics of deception, of fools and the entertainment industry.)
Going on the information given and the methods used, I saw only another speculative theory, but this one coming from a noticeable amateur, seemingly taking credit for other experts work. Going on the tactics used, the self applause, and quality and interest-retention of the film in general, I found it seriously lacking.
It's a good thing I do not doubt the existence of God's work, including His miracle with the Bethlehem star. If I had to rely on theories like this, I'd be in trouble.
