Post by Cindy on Aug 24, 2015 10:41:51 GMT -5
I thought I'd share a very interesting theory about the Star of Bethlehem with you.
The New Testament uses two Greek words for star, ‘astron’ and ‘asteer.’ Wherever ‘astron’ is used (Luke 21:25; Acts 7:43; 27:20; Heb 11:12) it plainly means a physical celestial body, but this is not the case for ‘asteer’ which clearly denotes an angel in Rev 1:20. Notably, this understanding of a spiritual being usually makes the better sense whenever ‘asteer’ is used (Matt 24:29; Mark 13:25; 1 Cor 15:41; Jude 13; Rev 1:16, Rev 1:20; Rev 2:1, Rev 2:28; Rev 3:1; Rev 6:13; Rev 8:10, Rev 8:11, Rev 8:12; Rev 9:1; Rev 12:1, Rev 12:4; Rev 22:16). Now, this list is exhaustive except for Matt 2:2, Matthew 2:7, Matthew 2:9, Matthew 2:10; so, on that reasoning, the ‘star’ which the wise men saw was a spiritual being, an angel, if you like. That explains how a ‘star’ could move from the east to the south (see exegesis) and then stand so precisely over Jesus’ home that it directed the wise men to this particular house. The popular theories suggesting this ‘star’ was a conjunction of Venus and Jupiter or Mercury, etc., all falter on this point, for they cannot explain how this celestial phenomenon moved around the sky and identified a particular house in Bethlehem, as, dependent on the viewer’s position, it would have appeared to be over every house in the city, just as the rising moon can be positioned over every house in your block, or city, if you will only move to the correct viewpoint! It is remarkable that some Bible scholars point out the impossibility of a star leading the magi to the house in which Jesus lived, yet fail to do the word study on ‘asteer’ which provides such a simple and rational explanation to this problem.
The Bible neither tells us how many wise men there were, nor exactly where they came from. Firstly, it is useful to know that the Greek word translated ‘wise men’ is ‘magos,’ and that this term originated in the lower Mesopotamian basin. Originally a Median tribe, the magi were a hereditary priesthood, often possessing great political power and functioning as king-makers in the Median, Babylonian, Persian, and Parthian empires. They first appeared in the seventh century BC, and had a strong tradition that favored the exercise of sacerdotal and occult powers; furthermore, prophetic powers were ascribed to this hereditary priesthood. They were monotheistic, believing in one beneficent Creator Who was opposed by a malevolent evil spirit. The principal element of their worship seems to have been fire. Pliny writes of magi in Chaldea, Egypt, Armenia, Ethiopia, and Gaul; of these only Chaldea lies east of Palestine, so is the only attested area which fits the biblical narrative. Some suppose there were three magi because of the three specie of gifts, but there is no other basis for this conclusion. Indeed, early church tradition held there were twelve magi, later tradition reduced them to three, even later tradition gave them names—Melchior, Balthasar, and Caspar—linking the gifts with them in that order.
The Septuagint of Daniel uses ‘magi’ for the kings’ advisors (Matthew 1:20; Matthew 2:2, Matthew 2:10, Matthew 2:27; Matthew 4:4; Matthew 5:7, Matthew 5:11, Matthew 5:15) which supports the conclusion suggested above. So the magi were not Eastern kings, but did come from the lower Mesopotamian basin. How did they know what the star meant? Again, we cannot say, for there is no Old Testament prophecy about such a star (unless it be Num 24:17), yet something led Abram to Palestine from the same region. Could it be that traditions about him endured for twenty-one centuries, and that these magi knew of the Abrahamic Covenant? If so, when they saw an angelic presence did they put two and two together and follow the same 1,200 mile route Abram had used twenty-one centuries previously? Maybe, but we cannot be sure.
We cannot establish Jesus’ age at this visit precisely, but Matt 2:9 uses a Greek word which usually describes a child over eighteen months old whereas Luke 2:16 uses the normal word for baby, thus suggesting a gap between these two events by indicating Jesus was no longer a baby at the magi’s visit. Clearly, He was more than six weeks old as the dedication ceremony had passed, for, firstly, the immediate flight into Egypt precludes this possibility, and secondly, had the magi arrived prior to this, their gift of gold would have enabled Mary to sacrifice a lamb rather than a turtle dove. Equally clearly, Jesus was not older than two years. Further, Joseph’s family lived in a house by this time (Matt 2:11), so the days of the cave in the feed lot had passed.
Now let us work from these facts. The magi’s journey from lower Mesopotamia was twelve hundred miles long and may have taken three months, but, as camels (a usual mode of transport) can cover fifty miles a day and a three month journey requires only a daily stage of thirteen miles, that period must be regarded as a maximum. How, then, does this reconcile with the two year period of Matt 2:16 (two years-or nine months longer, if Mary’s pregnancy is added to the period)? Even if they came from Vladivostok (about as far east as can reasonably be posited) the journey would be completed in a year at an average of twenty miles per day! We can reconstruct the facts sketched above into the following theory which seems to harmonize with all the biblical details.
The ‘asteer’ did not lead the magi to Jerusalem, but merely appeared in the east (which apparently means their home country), for it reappeared when they left Jerusalem and then led them to Jesus (Matt 2:9). The report of its second appearance indicates that the ‘asteer’ only ‘appeared’ and gave no verbal instruction. Acts 7:2 records a similar event which occurred twenty-one centuries earlier in the same locale, “The God of Glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia,” and ‘glory’ echoes Luke 2:9 which is associated with an angel! Presumably, the magi needed to research the phenomenon they had witnessed in order to understand its meaning, because, as at its second appearance, no instruction was given (we know their knowledge was imperfect as they first went to Jerusalem, not Bethlehem). This research led them to the Abrahamic event, and thence to the Scriptures which the Jews had brought into exile (the exile extended into their area). This research, maybe including Daniel (himself a magus of his day), made them realize that the event to which their attention was being drawn was the advent of the Messiah whom the Jews expected. Furthermore, the timetable in Dan 9:24–25 would have provided tentative confirmation that the time was ripe for the Messiah’s advent. Having reached this conclusion, they naturally presumed the Messiah, the Jewish King, would be born in the Jewish capital and thus arrived in Jerusalem.
The manifestation Abraham saw was God Himself (Acts 7:2), and as the Messiah was to be ‘God with us’ (Isa 7:14; Matt 1:23) and because of their monotheism, a logical, though faulty, conclusion would be that God had not entered the virgin’s womb at the time of His manifestation to the magi. Even if they completed their complicated research expeditiously, it would still have seemed prudent to wait until at least the likely birth date before embarking on their journey in order to avoid anticipating the Messiah’s arrival, especially as Judea was unlikely to welcome Parthians after their 36 BC invasion (see later). So the magi’s departure could well have been delayed until nine months after the manifestation. Their reasoning, if as presumed above, would have been wrong, for the manifestation marked the birth, not the incarnation of the Son, but, lacking the wisdom of hindsight, this hypothetical conclusion does not seem unlikely. Moreover, the intricacy of their likely research could readily have taken a year. This suggests they arrived to worship Jesus when He was about one year old, which suits the Greek noun used to describe Him. This theory also explains the magi’s visit to Jerusalem and their joy at seeing the ‘asteer’ again, which they then realized was not the Messiah Himself, but only a similar manifestation to that which prompted Abraham to emigrate from their homeland two millennia earlier.
The context suggests that Herod’s meeting with the magi took place late in the afternoon (the talk of dreams suggests that immediately after the worship in Bethlehem the parties retired for the night—as the ‘star’ was probably an angel, this word does not necessarily indicate night). The magi, in stark contrast to the chief priests and scribes, wasted no time in traveling to Bethlehem. I imagine it was as they approached Bethlehem that, behold, the same bright manifestation they had seen in the East again appeared before their caravan. However, on this occasion it was in the south, not the east, for the road from Jerusalem to Bethlehem runs south. No wonder they were overjoyed (Matthew 2:10), for the reappearance of this manifestation and its ability to move around held the promise that it would avert the necessity for a diligent search of Bethlehem as Herod had foreseen (Matthew 2:8). This bright manifestation, like the pillar of fire which led Israel in their Exodus, led them into Bethlehem until it poised itself over the very house in which the child Messiah was! The concerns over locating the Child which they doubtless discussed as they left Jerusalem were all dispelled; there was no doubt whatever that they had found the correct child. It is not hard to understand their joy, nor their immediate worship of the Child!
Mills, M. S. (1999). The Life of Christ: A Study Guide to the Gospel Record (Mt 2:1–12).
There's a more information about the Magi and about Herod if anyone's interested. Just let me know.
The New Testament uses two Greek words for star, ‘astron’ and ‘asteer.’ Wherever ‘astron’ is used (Luke 21:25; Acts 7:43; 27:20; Heb 11:12) it plainly means a physical celestial body, but this is not the case for ‘asteer’ which clearly denotes an angel in Rev 1:20. Notably, this understanding of a spiritual being usually makes the better sense whenever ‘asteer’ is used (Matt 24:29; Mark 13:25; 1 Cor 15:41; Jude 13; Rev 1:16, Rev 1:20; Rev 2:1, Rev 2:28; Rev 3:1; Rev 6:13; Rev 8:10, Rev 8:11, Rev 8:12; Rev 9:1; Rev 12:1, Rev 12:4; Rev 22:16). Now, this list is exhaustive except for Matt 2:2, Matthew 2:7, Matthew 2:9, Matthew 2:10; so, on that reasoning, the ‘star’ which the wise men saw was a spiritual being, an angel, if you like. That explains how a ‘star’ could move from the east to the south (see exegesis) and then stand so precisely over Jesus’ home that it directed the wise men to this particular house. The popular theories suggesting this ‘star’ was a conjunction of Venus and Jupiter or Mercury, etc., all falter on this point, for they cannot explain how this celestial phenomenon moved around the sky and identified a particular house in Bethlehem, as, dependent on the viewer’s position, it would have appeared to be over every house in the city, just as the rising moon can be positioned over every house in your block, or city, if you will only move to the correct viewpoint! It is remarkable that some Bible scholars point out the impossibility of a star leading the magi to the house in which Jesus lived, yet fail to do the word study on ‘asteer’ which provides such a simple and rational explanation to this problem.
The Bible neither tells us how many wise men there were, nor exactly where they came from. Firstly, it is useful to know that the Greek word translated ‘wise men’ is ‘magos,’ and that this term originated in the lower Mesopotamian basin. Originally a Median tribe, the magi were a hereditary priesthood, often possessing great political power and functioning as king-makers in the Median, Babylonian, Persian, and Parthian empires. They first appeared in the seventh century BC, and had a strong tradition that favored the exercise of sacerdotal and occult powers; furthermore, prophetic powers were ascribed to this hereditary priesthood. They were monotheistic, believing in one beneficent Creator Who was opposed by a malevolent evil spirit. The principal element of their worship seems to have been fire. Pliny writes of magi in Chaldea, Egypt, Armenia, Ethiopia, and Gaul; of these only Chaldea lies east of Palestine, so is the only attested area which fits the biblical narrative. Some suppose there were three magi because of the three specie of gifts, but there is no other basis for this conclusion. Indeed, early church tradition held there were twelve magi, later tradition reduced them to three, even later tradition gave them names—Melchior, Balthasar, and Caspar—linking the gifts with them in that order.
The Septuagint of Daniel uses ‘magi’ for the kings’ advisors (Matthew 1:20; Matthew 2:2, Matthew 2:10, Matthew 2:27; Matthew 4:4; Matthew 5:7, Matthew 5:11, Matthew 5:15) which supports the conclusion suggested above. So the magi were not Eastern kings, but did come from the lower Mesopotamian basin. How did they know what the star meant? Again, we cannot say, for there is no Old Testament prophecy about such a star (unless it be Num 24:17), yet something led Abram to Palestine from the same region. Could it be that traditions about him endured for twenty-one centuries, and that these magi knew of the Abrahamic Covenant? If so, when they saw an angelic presence did they put two and two together and follow the same 1,200 mile route Abram had used twenty-one centuries previously? Maybe, but we cannot be sure.
We cannot establish Jesus’ age at this visit precisely, but Matt 2:9 uses a Greek word which usually describes a child over eighteen months old whereas Luke 2:16 uses the normal word for baby, thus suggesting a gap between these two events by indicating Jesus was no longer a baby at the magi’s visit. Clearly, He was more than six weeks old as the dedication ceremony had passed, for, firstly, the immediate flight into Egypt precludes this possibility, and secondly, had the magi arrived prior to this, their gift of gold would have enabled Mary to sacrifice a lamb rather than a turtle dove. Equally clearly, Jesus was not older than two years. Further, Joseph’s family lived in a house by this time (Matt 2:11), so the days of the cave in the feed lot had passed.
Now let us work from these facts. The magi’s journey from lower Mesopotamia was twelve hundred miles long and may have taken three months, but, as camels (a usual mode of transport) can cover fifty miles a day and a three month journey requires only a daily stage of thirteen miles, that period must be regarded as a maximum. How, then, does this reconcile with the two year period of Matt 2:16 (two years-or nine months longer, if Mary’s pregnancy is added to the period)? Even if they came from Vladivostok (about as far east as can reasonably be posited) the journey would be completed in a year at an average of twenty miles per day! We can reconstruct the facts sketched above into the following theory which seems to harmonize with all the biblical details.
The ‘asteer’ did not lead the magi to Jerusalem, but merely appeared in the east (which apparently means their home country), for it reappeared when they left Jerusalem and then led them to Jesus (Matt 2:9). The report of its second appearance indicates that the ‘asteer’ only ‘appeared’ and gave no verbal instruction. Acts 7:2 records a similar event which occurred twenty-one centuries earlier in the same locale, “The God of Glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia,” and ‘glory’ echoes Luke 2:9 which is associated with an angel! Presumably, the magi needed to research the phenomenon they had witnessed in order to understand its meaning, because, as at its second appearance, no instruction was given (we know their knowledge was imperfect as they first went to Jerusalem, not Bethlehem). This research led them to the Abrahamic event, and thence to the Scriptures which the Jews had brought into exile (the exile extended into their area). This research, maybe including Daniel (himself a magus of his day), made them realize that the event to which their attention was being drawn was the advent of the Messiah whom the Jews expected. Furthermore, the timetable in Dan 9:24–25 would have provided tentative confirmation that the time was ripe for the Messiah’s advent. Having reached this conclusion, they naturally presumed the Messiah, the Jewish King, would be born in the Jewish capital and thus arrived in Jerusalem.
The manifestation Abraham saw was God Himself (Acts 7:2), and as the Messiah was to be ‘God with us’ (Isa 7:14; Matt 1:23) and because of their monotheism, a logical, though faulty, conclusion would be that God had not entered the virgin’s womb at the time of His manifestation to the magi. Even if they completed their complicated research expeditiously, it would still have seemed prudent to wait until at least the likely birth date before embarking on their journey in order to avoid anticipating the Messiah’s arrival, especially as Judea was unlikely to welcome Parthians after their 36 BC invasion (see later). So the magi’s departure could well have been delayed until nine months after the manifestation. Their reasoning, if as presumed above, would have been wrong, for the manifestation marked the birth, not the incarnation of the Son, but, lacking the wisdom of hindsight, this hypothetical conclusion does not seem unlikely. Moreover, the intricacy of their likely research could readily have taken a year. This suggests they arrived to worship Jesus when He was about one year old, which suits the Greek noun used to describe Him. This theory also explains the magi’s visit to Jerusalem and their joy at seeing the ‘asteer’ again, which they then realized was not the Messiah Himself, but only a similar manifestation to that which prompted Abraham to emigrate from their homeland two millennia earlier.
The context suggests that Herod’s meeting with the magi took place late in the afternoon (the talk of dreams suggests that immediately after the worship in Bethlehem the parties retired for the night—as the ‘star’ was probably an angel, this word does not necessarily indicate night). The magi, in stark contrast to the chief priests and scribes, wasted no time in traveling to Bethlehem. I imagine it was as they approached Bethlehem that, behold, the same bright manifestation they had seen in the East again appeared before their caravan. However, on this occasion it was in the south, not the east, for the road from Jerusalem to Bethlehem runs south. No wonder they were overjoyed (Matthew 2:10), for the reappearance of this manifestation and its ability to move around held the promise that it would avert the necessity for a diligent search of Bethlehem as Herod had foreseen (Matthew 2:8). This bright manifestation, like the pillar of fire which led Israel in their Exodus, led them into Bethlehem until it poised itself over the very house in which the child Messiah was! The concerns over locating the Child which they doubtless discussed as they left Jerusalem were all dispelled; there was no doubt whatever that they had found the correct child. It is not hard to understand their joy, nor their immediate worship of the Child!
Mills, M. S. (1999). The Life of Christ: A Study Guide to the Gospel Record (Mt 2:1–12).
There's a more information about the Magi and about Herod if anyone's interested. Just let me know.
!!
