Guy Consolmagno, director of the Vatican Observatory, wrote a piece on the star of Bethlehem for the Evening Standard in England. The Daily Sun in Arizona also has an article on the star. So does Forbes. I've posted a response to the Forbes one, in their comments section, if anybody is interested.
U.S. News & World Report reposted an article on the infancy narratives in general. It repeats some common objections to the accounts:
In considering the birth of Jesus, it should be noted straight away that two of the New Testament's four Gospels and the writings of the Apostle Paul are completely mute on the circumstances of Jesus' birth.
The two Gospels that do address the birth of Jesus provide differing accounts. In Matthew, Jesus' birth is preceded by dreams that come to his father Joseph, paying little attention to his mother Mary. In Luke's narrative, the emphasis is largely on Mary, with little attention to Joseph. Matthew tells the story of the star and the wise men, while in Luke the news of Jesus' birth is shared with shepherds. In Matthew the wise men present gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh, while in Luke the baby is laid in a manger because there is no room in the inn.
The point here is not that the two stories are mutually inconsistent. Rather it is this: the human beings who wrote these texts had different purposes in mind, and these purposes are clearly reflected in their accounts….
To be sure, it is possible to read the Bible as a newspaper account. Yet literalism is fraught with difficulty, in part because the Bible often tells a story in different ways (such as the two birth narratives of Jesus and the two creation accounts in Genesis), and in part because even those telling the story often seem to recognize that they are operating at the level of myth.
The claim that "two of the New Testament's four Gospels and the writings of the Apostle Paul are completely mute on the circumstances of Jesus' birth" is refuted here. Regarding how different Matthew and Luke's accounts supposedly are, I provide thirty examples of agreements between the two authors here. See my recent discussion of their annunciation accounts for several examples of how well those passages align with each other. For a discussion of the alleged contradictions between the two infancy narratives, as well as a discussion of how significant their agreements are, see here. The notion that Matthew and Luke were writing in a non-historical genre is refuted here and here.
If you come across any other media stories like these, ones that you think are significant in some way, let me know. You can post a comment here or send me an email (see my Blogger profile).