From: Ron Rhoades (rrhoades@jps.net)
Date: Thu Dec 31 1998 - 16:35:50 EST
Hello Carl,
Thank you for the time you spent on this subject. I always appreciate
your posts, the knowledge you share and the tolerance you display,
especially for "little Greeks."
>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....I do NOT believe that Matthew portrays them as in collusion >with Herod the Great.
I don't have a problem seeing the honor and gifts as viewed in a
somewhat positive light signifying prophetic fulfillment or recognition
from non- believers, or whatever. *If* any respect is accorded to the
MAGOI it is in that they obeyed the divine intervention. But we must
note this was not a result of their own decision, but a result of a more
dangerous power than Herod.
I don't feel the MAGOI themselves are used as positive figures in light
of the use of the word MAGOI and its negative connotations. Any
translation should reflect this connotation; so magi or astrologers are
OK. OTOH, the choice of "wise men" would be diluting the force of the
original, IMO.
Though "collusion" is too strong a word, as astrologers, in the view of
"believers," they were servants of false gods and as such were,
*wittingly or unwittingly* led into a purpose designed for evil. I
believe this is explicit in the account. 1. They were first led, not to
Bethlehem, but to Jerusalem. This was no accident given the fact that
the "star" later was able to guide them directly "to the place where the
child was." 2. The means by which they were led on their journey was
astrological divining, something the God of the Bible condemned and He
would not personally use, or in any way condone. 3. The result was the
mass murder of the children in Bethlehem. The sender of the "star" would
be responsible, definitely NOT Jehovah! (Jn.8:44)
>But I am not convinced that there is a uniform Biblical perspective on >astrological thought...At any rate, I don't see any clear indication in >Biblical texts that astrological calculations are condemned.
This is kind of surprising to me since I see an absolute uniformity on
this.
1. Astrology was essentially polytheistic, a different god was believed
to rule over each section of the heavens. So all the Scriptures against
having another God besides Jehovah would apply. All the Scriptures,
Hebrew and Greek, against idolatry would apply (1Cor.10:14, 1Jn. 5:21,
etc.).
2. Jehovah strictly forbade his people to worship "a form like anything
that is in the heavens above." (Ex 20:3, 4)
Astrology in every form was specifically condemned. 2 Ki.17:16, 17;
21:3,6; 23:5,10,24 "they kept leaving all the commandments of Jehovah
their God and proceeded to...bow down to all the army of the
heavens...what was bad in Jehovahās eyes, to offend him...to the sun and
to the moon and to the constellations of the zodiac and to all the army
of the heavens." cf. Isa 47:13, Jer.8:1-2 ;19:13, Zeph.1:5
Stephenās speech is indicative of the Bible's view of Astrology: Jehovah
"handed them over to render sacred service to the army of heaven, just
as it is written in the book of the prophets, ĪIt was not to me that you
offered victims and sacrifices...But it was the tent of Moloch and the
star of the god Rephan that you took up.'"÷Ac 7:40-43.
Romans 1:24-25 also condemns those who look in worship to the created
things, rather than God.
"Their condemned practice of astrology and the adverse results of their
visit, placing in danger the life of the future Messiah, certainly allow
for, and even make advisable, the consideration of their having been
directed by a source *adverse* to Godās purposes as relating to the
promised Messiah. It is certainly reasonable to ask if the one who
"keeps transforming himself into an angel of light," whose operation is
"with every powerful work and lying signs and portents," and who was
referred to by Jesus as "a manslayer when he began," could not also
cause astrologers to Īseeā a starlike object that guided them first, not
to Bethlehem, but to Jerusalem, where resided a mortal enemy of the
promised Messiah.÷2Co 11:3, 14; 2Th 2:9; Ge 3:1-4; Joh 8:44."
>(in fact, I think there are pointers to astrological notions in >Ephesians and even more in Colossians).
Stars etc. are used in the Bible in a figurative sense and in metaphors
or similes, but I don't believe they are ever used favorably as a means
of foretelling or as objects of proper worship.
>Syncretism is a mixed bag, not something one can judge as either wholly >positive or wholly negative. Syncretism can be a threat when what is an >essential core notion of the faith is diluted or lost in the process of >cultural diffusion. So yes, syncretism is a problem, but it is not per >se something to be feared.
We are probably dealing with a slight difference in definition here.
Using/adopting cultural differences and knowledge is acceptable. But I
define syncretism in religion strictly as something that causes
Scriptural belief or principals to be diluted or lost, a loss of Truth.
This usually starts small, with seemingly insignificant matters. So I
think the Scriptures demand a watchful "fear" of any dilution.
Deut.12:30,31, Jn.4:23,24, Mt.15:3,6,9.
This basically is the problem I have with the translation "wise men." I
believe it contributes to an acceptance of all the fable and untruths
associated with "Christmas," most of which has been adopted from
paganism. This dilutes the true worship and distracts from the proper
view of Christ and who he is now (ie: a baby vs a Mighty King).
Trevor, these translate MAGOI as Astrologers: AT, NEB, TAY, PHIL, NWT.
Yours,
Ron Rhoades
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:12 EDT