The alternative theory suggested to me by a commenter is Dr. Werner Papke’s theory, where the Star of Bethlehem is explained as a supernova. He is a German bio-physicist and the theory in his book « Das Zeichen des Messias. Ein wissenschäftler identificiert den Stern von Betlehem ». I looked at introduction texts for the book, but did not buy and read the book as the supernova-theory has the serious problem that no supernova was observed in the time of Jesus’ birth. Chinese astrologers made observationas and even noticed a minor nova in 5 BC. Thus, they should have seen a supernova. The same is true of Babylonian astrologers, who observed e.g. Halley’s comet apparences in 164 BC and 87 BC. Also Romans would have noticed a supernova and mentioned it. Cassius Dio mentions Halley’s comet of 12 BC.
Apart of a supernova, a comet or a real miracle, there are no other phenomena, which would last for longer than a month, time enough for Babylonian Magi to travel to Jerusalem, talk to Herod the Great, and to continue to find the child. A star constellation does not last so long, though it may repeat, ot there may be a different star constellation later. However, I am quite convinced that Halley’s comet of 12 BC fits all data best. The supernova theory must be discarded as there are no observations of it in the ancient records.
My main arguments are that the information in the Gospel of Matthew fits the birth of Herod Agrippa I and therefore the Star of Bethlehem must be Halley’s comet of 12 BC, which preceeded the birth of Herod Agrippa in 11 BC.
The first argument is that Herod the Great did not kill male children of Bethlehem, but he did kill Hasmonean princes. Josephus Flavius would have written about such an outrageous act by Herod the Great, as he did write of murders of Hasmonean princes. Thus, Bethlehem in Matthew is not a city, it means the Hasmonean royal family.
The second argument is that this is confirmed by Mica 5:1. The prophecy that the Messiah will be born in Bethlehem is incorrectly stated in Matthew 2:6. In Mica 5:1 Bethlehem Efrata is a minor clan, not to be counted among the clans of Judah. Mica 5:1 explicitly states that the new royal family is not from one of the leading families of the tribe of Judah (like the David family would be), but from a small clan, possibly not of the tribe of Judah, like Hasmoneans.
The third argument is the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew 1. We can ignore the oldest part of this genealogy from Abraham to David as it is from that part of the Bible which is not confirmed by a historical evidence. The second part of the genealogy is instead quite believable. It is also from the Bible, but from the Books of Kings and Chronicles. There are 18 generations form David to Jeconah (19 names including David and Jeconah). Matthew forgets four generations: between Joram and Uzziah there were Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah, and between Josiah and Jeconah there was Jehoiakim. The reign of David is usually given as 1010-970 BC and of Jeconiah as 598-597. Approximating the time by taking the beginning of the reigns, the time it 1010-598=412 years. As there were 18 generations, the length of a generation is 23 years. This is very reasonable as the king title usually goes from the father to the oldest son. The generation time of 23 years for the lineage by the oldest son corresponds quite well to the male generation time of 30 years if the son is any son, not only the oldest.
Thus, the second part of the genealogy in Matthew is basically correct, taken form the Bible, and adding the missing kings we get the generation estimate 23 years for the lineage by the oldest son, which gives about 30 years for lineage by any son. The third part of the genealogy of Matthew gives 12 generations form Sheatiel to Jesus (13 names including Sheatiel and Jesus). Sheatiel was born three generations after Josiah, Josiah reigned 649-609 BC and may have been born around 669 BC. Then three generations is about 23*3=69, so Shetiael was born around 600 BC. Jesus was born around 0 BC. The time is about 600 years. If there were 12 generations, the generation length wes 50 years. That is not possible. We can conclude that the 12 generations in Matthew span only about 360 years and do not reach Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel. The Davidic lineage, which Zerubbabel still had, disappeared and was forgotten when High Priests took all power and the Persian installed governer position disappeared. Latest this would have happened when Alexander the Great conquered Persia. We can conclude that no descendants of the Davidic lineage were known in Jesus’ time (the Rabbis and Exilarchs, who later claimed so, had no historical basis for it). The Davidic lineage had to be understood symbolically and the natural candidate was the Hasmonean lineage.
The fourth argument is that the genealogy of Jesus in Luke has many names that resemble names of Hasmonean kings, like Jannai (Alexander Jannaeus). In another post I have mapped the names in Luke to the genealogy of Herod Agrippa I and it gives a very good match. Thus, Luke gives, in a masked way, the genealogy of Herod Agrippa I.
The fifth argument is that the Essenes waited for three important characters, two of whom were Messiahs (Messiah of Aaron and Israel). They were the king Messiah and the prophet Messiah. The third character was an announcer, or prophet. The prophet Messiah was to die on a cross for the redemption of sins, he was to be a man like Moses and a miracle maker. He was to die and to raise from the death in the thind day, but notice that this is a reference to Hosea 6:2. Hosea means the people, Israelites: God has punished the people but will redeem them. The death and resurrection of the propher Messiah is a symbolic deed, like the marriage of Hosea to an unfaithful wife in Hosea 3 is a symbolic deed. The king Messiah will be a king like David, not a symbolic figure, whiose kingdom is not from this world. Also in the Gospel of John 1:25 it is clearly stated that there will come these three characters.
The sixth argument is that Josephus Flavius in the Jewish war describes the signs in the sky in the year 66 AD: a comet and a sword. That is, two signs because there were two Messiahs. The second one, sword, can as well be seen as a cross. It can only be a star constellation. Thus, the sign at the birth of Jesus was a star constellation. The first is a comet, the singn of the king Messiah, as a comet become the maker of kings in the Middle East after Caesar’s comet of 44 BC. Usually a comet has always been a bad omen, but Octavianus interpreted Caesar’s comet as a good omen: Julius Caesar was taken to the sky and become a star and a god. Thus, Octavianus, whom Caesar had adopted in his testament, become the son of God, and after his death he also become a god. This, I think, is the explanation of Daniel 11:36-45. This ending of Daniel does not fit to Antiochius IV Epiphanus, but it does fit to Octavianus/Augustus, his worship of Julius Caesar and his war against Mark Anthony. This hart of Daniel may well be written around 30 BC, which may also be the time when Daniel 9:24-27 was modified so that the seventy yearweeks do not refer to Onias III but to a coming Messiah, Jesus. After 44 BC Jews investigated comets from old records and noticed that Babylonian astrologers had recorded a comet in 164 BC and 87 BC. The one in 164 BC fits very well to the rise of the Hasmonean (Maccabee) family. The time 87 BC may be about the birth year of Alexander of Judea, the father of Mariambe I and a rebellionist. Alexander of Judea, his brother Antigonus II Mattathias and his father Aristobulus II rebelled against the Roman supported reign (first of Hyrcanus II, then of Herod the Great). Because of these earlier comet apparations it was clear that the grandson of Mariamne I, Herod Agrippa I, would have to be the waited Messiah, who drives Romans away.
I rest my case. No supernova of Werner Paphe was seen at that time, and it would have be seen by Chinese and Babylonian astrologers and by Roman historians. I only say: You, who can read the signs of the summer and harvest, you cannot read the signs of the Messiah and the end of the times, though they are very clear and in prophecies. I consider this question as solved: Herod Agrippa I was to be the king Messiah, while Jesus was selected as the prophet Messiah.