From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Sun Dec 27 1998 - 10:42:42 EST
At 9:06 PM -0800 12/26/98, Ron Rhoades wrote:
>Trevor Jenkins wrote:
>>When I checked with my reference books I find that there are only
>>2 >occasions where the word MAGOS is used. The first being the adoration
>>of >the Magi and the second being the opposition of Elymas Bar-Jesus
>>(Acts >13). In Matthew it is translated into English as "wise men" (KJV,
>>RSV) >or Magi (NIV) and in Acts as "sorcerer" (KJV, NIV) or "magician"
>>(RSV). >
>> The selection of wise men by the KJV and RSV translators seems to me to
>>be "politically correct" even before that became popular.
>> In my evangelical fervour I'm tempted to posit the view that Matthew
>>wanted sorcerer/magician here.
>
>Trevor,
>
>Very little here on grammar, but, sticking to the word used, the "magi"
>were not held in honor by the writer of Matthew or the first century
>Christians. Justin Martyr, Origen, and Tertullian, when reading Matthew
>2:1, thought of magi as astrologers. The name Magi became current as a
>generic term for astrologers in the East with all its negative
>connotations.
>
>So the evidence is strong that the magi who visited the infant Jesus
>were astrologers not "wise men" in a positive sense. Correctly, then,
>many modern English translations read "astrologers" at Matthew 2:1.
>
>"Off topic", IHO that the tradition of the star and magi being sent by
>God was a later syncretism along with so much else associated with
>"Christmas." Matthew shows that the "star" led them first to King Herod,
>who then tried to have Jesus killed (Matthew 2:1, 2). As astrologers,
>they were servants of false gods and were, wittingly or unwittingly, led
>by what appeared to them as a moving "star," which no one else is
>reported to have seen. The plot failed, however, due to God's
>interference.
>
>Since they were, in fact, violators of divine principle, it would seem
>further unlikely that the Bible writer would view them as sent by God
>(Isa.47:13, 14, Deut.18:10). (God used angels and not astrologers or a
>star to directed worshipers of God to the infant.)
>
>I would think it more likely that this "star" was sent by someone
>seeking to destroy Jesus before he was able to fulfill his God-given
>assignment. (Gen.3:15)
It appears to me that questions under discussion here are getting pretty
far removed from the Greek and are pretty deep into speculation. I just
want to say a word about the translation of MAGOS/MAGOI and offer the
briefest of comments on the two text sequences in which the word appears in
the NT. Herodotus tells of the MAGOI in the original sense as Zoroastrian
priests in Persia, but in the syncretist climate of the Hellenistic era
associations of any one national religion came readily to be linked up to
each other in various combinations. I think the association with astrology
is clearly there in Matthew's birth narrative, but in Acts I think the
association is rather with sorcery: Simon Magos endeavors to learn from
Peter how to exploit the phenomena associated with the Holy Spirit to work
magic--and MAGIKH (TECNH) surely derives from MAGOS bearing this sense. As
for translation, I rather think using the Latin plural form "Magi" is a
reasonable expedient precisely because it will send the reader who really
cares to know to reference works to sort out what sort of persons may be
described in these passages.
Finally, and very briefly,since this is not the forum proper for discussion
of theological interpretation of these passages in which MAGOI or a MAGOS
appear, I personally think it's a mistake to assume that the word is used
the same way in the two books (Mt & Acts) without further investigation. I
think it is clearly pejorative in Acts, but I am inclined to think that in
Matthew the MAGOI visiting the Christ child in their parents home in
Bethlehem are positive figures indicating Gentile recognition of the birth
of Israel's king as a portentous event. If one wants a single English word
to translate MAGOS, my own vote would probably be for "wizard" with that
word's broad range of positive and negative connotations and denotations as
interpreters of signs and, in some instances, as sorcerers. But I still
think that the more appropriate expedient would be to retain the Latinized
plural "Magi" for MAGOI.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cconrad@yancey.main.nc.us
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:12 EDT