Where did the 3 Kings go?

[marco]

We learn that the baby Jesus was visited by three kings, wise men or magi. They came to see him and then disappeared into the shadows of history or fiction. So we ask:

What was the point of their visit?
In what way did it affect history?
If they are just symbolic, unreal figures - what is their purpose?

More importantly, does this mythology - if it is mythology - destroy belief in Christ?

[JehovahsWitness]

More importantly, does this mythology - if it is mythology - destroy belief in Christ?

Firstly there is no scientifically verifiable proof that the story is mythology, so that's just opinion based speculation which can reasonably be dismissed as such.

Secondly, no it is evident the account doesn't destroy belief in Christ, why should it?


JW

[marco]

Firstly there is no scientifically verifiable proof that the story is mythology, so that's just opinion based speculation which can reasonably be dismissed as such.

Do you think science concerns itself with disproving myths? There are millions of myths from the period, so one more doesn't fill the barrel. Who were they? What did they come for? Where did they go? What purpose did their journey serve? No real, convincing answers.

Secondly, no it is evident the account doesn't destroy belief in Christ, why should it?

A tale of potentates emerging from the "East" would surely get just a passing mention somewhere in history, unless they were insignificant. And if they did indeed carry away with them an understanding of a supernatural happening, surely the countries from which they came would have been told.

The rest is silence, as Shakespeare might say.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 3 by marco]

The point being the story has evidently NOT destroyed belief in Christ.

Was that not your question?

More importantly, does this mythology - if it is mythology - destroy belief in Christ?

[Tired of the Nonsense]

We learn that the baby Jesus was visited by three kings, wise men or magi. They came to see him and then disappeared into the shadows of history or fiction. So we ask:

What was the point of their visit?
In what way did it affect history?
If they are just symbolic, unreal figures - what is their purpose?

More importantly, does this mythology - if it is mythology - destroy belief in Christ?

Wikipedia
Magi
Magi (/ˈmeɪdʒaɪ/; Latin plural of magus) is a term, used since at least the 6th century BCE, to denote followers of Zoroastrianism or Zoroaster. The earliest known usage of the word Magi is in the trilingual inscription written by Darius the Great, known as the Behistun Inscription. Old Persian texts, pre-dating the Hellenistic period, refer to a Magus as a Zurvanic, and presumably Zoroastrian, priest.

Pervasive throughout the Eastern Mediterranean and Western Asia until late antiquity and beyond, mágos, "Magian" or "magician", was influenced by (and eventually displaced) Greek goēs (γόης), the older word for a practitioner of magic, to include astrology, alchemy and other forms of esoteric knowledge. This association was in turn the product of the Hellenistic fascination for (Pseudo‑)Zoroaster, who was perceived by the Greeks to be the "Chaldean", "founder" of the Magi and "inventor" of both astrology and magic, a meaning that still survives in the modern-day words "magic" and "magician".

In English, the term "magi" is most commonly used in reference to the "μάγοι" from the east who visit Jesus in Chapter 2 of the Gospel of Matthew Matthew 2:1, and are now often translated as "wise men" in English versions.[1] The plural "magi" entered the English language from Latin around 1200, in reference to these. The singular appears considerably later, in the late 14th century, when it was borrowed from Old French in the meaning magician together with magic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magi

The Magi were Zoroastrian astrologers who were considered to be very spiritually powerful and knowledgeable 2,000 years ago. Their journey to Bethlehem to worship the new born king, was the author of Gospel Mark's attempt to established that Jesus was the fulfillment of Persian prophesy that a savor, or Saoshyant, a descendant of Zoroaster, who was predicted to be born a thousand years after Zoroaster, had at last arrived. This savior would sit at the right hand of God and judge humankind at the end of days.

Wikipedia
Saoshyant
The role of the Saoshyant, or Astvat-ereta, as a future saviour of the world is briefly described in Yasht 19.88-96, where it is stated that he will achieve the Frashokereti, that he will make the world perfect and immortal, and evil and Druj will disappear.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saoshyant

So, where did the Magi go after worshiping Jesus? Presumably they went back to Persia to prepare for the end of days. They need not have been in a hurry, as it turned out. Of course one needs to keep in mind that the author of Gospel Matthew is the ONLY source for any of this. None of this appears in any other Gospel. This was the author of Gospel Matthew's way to illustrating to the Jewish followers of the Pharisees, the Farsi, or those Jews who subscribed to Persian beliefs, that Jesus was the fulfillment of ancient prophesy.

[MadeNew]

A tale of potentates emerging from the "East" would surely get just a passing mention somewhere in history, unless they were insignificant. And if they did indeed carry away with them an understanding of a supernatural happening, surely the countries from which they came would have been told.

Questioning the historical record of these three Magi... I find it harder to believe you are educated in such matters, then to believe you raise a reasonable doubt to the validity of the story based on the historical record of three Magi.

Answer me these questions... What country are we not getting these historical writings from (specifically)? Where the three Magi were from? And how many people can you name from that region or country? Historically speaking, from that time period, how many people can you name? And of those people, how many Magi's can you name?

[Tired of the Nonsense]

A tale of potentates emerging from the "East" would surely get just a passing mention somewhere in history, unless they were insignificant. And if they did indeed carry away with them an understanding of a supernatural happening, surely the countries from which they came would have been told.

Questioning the historical record of these three Magi... I find it harder to believe you are educated in such matters, then to believe you raise a reasonable doubt to the validity of the story based on the historical record of three Magi.

Answer me these questions... What country are we not getting these historical writings from (specifically)? Where the three Magi were from? And how many people can you name from that region or country? Historically speaking, from that time period, how many people can you name? And of those people, how many Magi's can you name?

The Magi were Persians. The Persians, or Parsi (Farsi) originated in the Pars regions of ancient Iran. The three Magi spoken of by Gospel Matthew were not named. According to a tradition which originated several centuries after the time of Jesus, they were named Melchior, Caspar and Balthazar. These names have no basis in scripture, nor in fact in history.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 7 by Tired of the Nonsense]

If you presumably have evidence that there were Persian Magi, or Parsi (Farsi) originated in the Pars regions of ancient Iran, why pray tell could the gospel accounts not be alluding to such ones?

You are correct the bible doesn't provide the names of the travellers, but you seem to be under the misconception that Matthew refered to there being three of them in number, which he does not.

JW

[marco]

Questioning the historical record of these three Magi... I find it harder to believe you are educated in such matters, then to believe you raise a reasonable doubt to the validity of the story based on the historical record of three Magi.

But I am not educated in these matters, though TotN has shed some light on them. I asked from a sense of curiosity why three "kings" would come on a journey and return with no resultant gain. What's the point of their being in Matthew?

Your subsequent questions, asking me to say where the Magi came from and why and the names of some of their countrymen, leave me baffled. I just don't know. Matthew doesn't offer any explanation. TotN suggests that it was just a ploy of the gospel writer and maybe that's where the truth lies.

It is rather like McDougal appearing in Macbeth from nowhere and returning to nowhere. It makes one to wonder most greatly about the gospel account, does it not?

[marco]

[quote="[url=http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/

The earliest known usage of the word Magi is in the trilingual inscription written by Darius the Great, known as the Behistun Inscription. Old Persian texts, pre-dating the Hellenistic period, refer to a Magus as a Zurvanic, and presumably Zoroastrian, priest.
[/quote]

I know magus is used in Latin for a magician and of course its plural is magi. That was a nice piece of research you did, TotN. It is like pulling a thread on a garment and finding that the whole piece is coming apart. But when we poke at a piece of gospel writing we do find holes.

I read an entertaining little fiction about the fourth magus, who didn't get to offer his pearl to Jesus and only at the crucifixion did he ask when had he offered a cup of water to Christ in all his wanderings. A nice story.