Posted on 12/23/2011 6:28:11 AM PST by marshmallow
An ancient document found in the Vatican archives casts new light on the story of the Nativity and the Three Wise Men who came to offer gifts to the infant Jesus, according to researchers, reports the Times, in an article published in the Australian.
The Revelation of the Magi, reputedly a first-hand account of their journey to pay tribute to the son of God, only now has been translated from ancient Syriac.
Brent Landau, professor of religious studies at the University of Oklahoma, spent two years deciphering the fragile manuscript.
It is an eighth-century copy of a story first written down nearly half a millennium earlier, less than 100 years after the Gospel of Matthew, the original source of the Bible story.
The newly translated tale differs in major respects from Matthew's very brief account.
The Magi of the Bible have long been associated with Persian mystics, but those in The Revelation are from much farther afield - from the semi-mythical land of Shir, now associated with ancient China.
The rest of the article:
They are said to be the descendants of Seth, the third son of Adam, and to belong to a sect that believed in silent prayer.
Perhaps the biggest divergence from the traditional Nativity story is that according to The Revelation there were “scores” of Magi.
It gives a detailed account of their prayers and rituals.
The story relates that Seth passed down a prophecy that a star would appear that would signal the birth of God in human form. The Magi waited thousands of years until the day the star appeared.
>The Bible does not say “three” Magi. It was only assumed to be three because of the three types of gifts given.
How does it differ from Matthew? Is it Gnostic? (The Gnostics wrote fictional gospels from the eye-witness point of view of just about every character, no matter how minor.) My supposition is that if the gospel is Syriac, and the characters Chinese, the answer is likely “no,” it wouldn’t be Gnostic.
Even if it’s merely fiction, it may give rich insight into what Syriacs supposed might reasonably have happened; the magi being Chinese, instead of Babylonian presents us with the possibility of a completely different astrology.
Were the Magi actually Aztecs?
Hmm? Now that is a long journey.
The Bible never says where they are from or how many
I thought they were from Orientar.
The Revelation of the Magi, reputedly a first-hand account of their journey to pay tribute to the son of God,...
It is an eighth-century copy of a story first written down nearly half a millennium earlier, less than 100 years after the Gospel of Matthew, the original source of the Bible story.
8th century, is in the nine hundreds. "Half a millenium earlier" is in the four hundreds. The event itself was a handful of years into BC.
What we have here is Christian folklore from four centuries after the fact. Interesting in and of itself, but doesn't necessarily tell us much that's accurate about the event itself. Matthew's very spare account would be more reliable, even if it wasn't inspired scripture.
Nowhere in the Bible does it say there were three wise men, only that gold, frankincense and myrrh were given to the Christ Child, who was not in the stable but in a house (Matthew 2:11).
He was probably about two years old when they arrived. That’s why Herod issued the order to kill all boys two years old and under. It would make sense that they came from a great distance, following God’s special star to guide them to Jesus.
Interesting find as a work of pseudo-history.
Where does a person go to read the original text?
Eighth century would have been the 701-800 (20th Century - 1901-2000). “Half a millenium earlier” would have been 201-300.
This is available on Amazon as an audio book for $1.86.
Excellent.
“He was probably about two years old when they arrived. That’s why Herod issued the order to kill all boys two years old and under.”
Not necessarily; Herod could easily have been just covering his bases. All Jerusalem knew that Herod was alarmed at the news of the birth of a rival king, and he would be more likely to err on the side of killing a few boys who were older than the prophesied future King than he would to to say “kill all infants not yet able to walk”.
Besides, he had already told the Magi to tell him the location of the child and they had not done so. Why would he trust their calculations of the child’s age? What if they had lied to him and the child was, in fact, older than they claimed?
The only detail we know about them geographically is that they were “from the east”, but you are correct that Scripture never states how many wise men there were.
Very likely, there was a caravan—the wise men, their servants, etc.
If you study the scriptures, the wise men found Jesus at home - not at the stable. So, this tells us that the portrayal of the Christmas story where the wise men are at the stable is incorrect. I do believe Jesus was about 2 years old when they arrived - otherwise, the Biblical account would have used different terminology - such as baby , or babe, instead of child.
“I thought they were from Orientar.”
Thank you for the belly laugh! I needed it.
Laughing so hard I am snorting. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.