We don’t really know very much about the Magi as depicted in the New Testament. We don’t know how many there were. We are never told that they were kings. The names we associate with them are taken from tradition, not scripture. The biblical account in Matthew (we only have a single passage in one of the gospels as the source for this story) does little more than present an event at an unspecified point after Christ’s birth in which an unnumbered party of unnamed “wise men” (or possibly magicians) visits him in a house, not a stable, with only “his mother” mentioned as present.
From this basic information, much interpretation has followed, despite the relative simplicity of the tale. For example, the gifts in the story were those that were traditionally given to kings. It was often suggested in the early church, that by offering gold, frankincense, and myrrh, the magi were abandoning their magical practices in honor of the King of the Jews.
The Magi were no doubt Gentile by background. We do not know their place of origin, but many scholars suggest Persia. From this very basic account the early church devised a season called Epiphany which concerns the first manifestation, recognition and disclosure of Jesus as the Messiah. A particular epiphany is not meant to be a triumphal occasion for those who have seen the light to celebrate their privileged status; it is meant to encourage “humble admission that God’s glory may be manifested where we least expect it.”
Perhaps no element of the story has produced more speculation and interest than the star of Bethlehem. Many believe that long ago this issue was settled by astronomers who could find no actual proof of a star of great magnitude at that juncture. In fact, most theologians and New Testament scholars believe that the star is “midrash,” a story made up to satisfy Old Testament prophecy.
The birth of Jesus itself is very difficult to determine with any accuracy, so the normal range of possibilities embraces any time between 20 B.C. and 10 A.D. Rather than stars, comets have often been considered more likely prospects than stars, but the only one that is potentially worthy of note is the comet of 5 B.C. This comet was observable for more than 70 days which means it was extraordinarily bright. Much of the corroborating evidence comes from observations by the Chinese who maintained meticulous records. This particular comet might have caused the Magi to take notice because it occurred in combination with three other relevant astronomical events occurring then and fits well with other textual elements of confirmation in the story. With the corroborating astronomical evidence associated with the theory, the best possibility for dating the birth of Jesus is considered to be March 9 through May 4, 5 B.C. which coincides with the first appearance of this comet. Actually, on this basis, we can reconstruct a life of Jesus as follows: born 5 B.C., baptism in A.D. 29 at age 33, and crucifixion in April of A.D. 33 at age 37. Naturally, this is speculative, but some scholars are willing to consider it based on the evidence currently in hand.
Matthew begins his account by showing a contrast between the Gentiles and Jewish secular and religious leaders. In this way, he demonstrates how Jewish leaders rejected Jesus and oppressed him while the Gentiles accepted him. He uses his narrative to emphasize that Jesus is the true king of the Jews and is the direct descendant of King David; he is not only superior to Herod the Great but also to King Solomon, the wisest king in Israel’s past, because he is the Incarnated Son of God. Herod exemplifies the sort of king whom Jesus later denounces, a tyrant who lords it over those he rules. The Magi “are depicted as persons who do as they are instructed, who seek no honor for themselves, and who gladly humble themselves, kneeling even before a woman and a child who at the time were considered to have little value.
For Matthew, the key question is: whom does God favor? His answer would no doubt be: not kings or wise men but the magi who embody qualities that this Gospel will declare antithetical to the traits of the (true) royal and the wise” Additionally, Matthew has a particular view of what constitutes a “proper response to Jesus.” It is not worship. Rather, it is repentance. And repentance implies change; we turn around and head in the opposite direction in our lives. The people Matthew wants us to focus on as models of faith are the humblest ones, the marginalized, the forgotten, the overlooked.
In reality, the Magi do not belong in a Jewish story meant to promote the faith. They were hardly respectable people; they were dream interpreters, fortune-tellers, star-gazers and “horoscope fanatics — a practice condemned by Jewish standards.” They would have represented “the epitome of Gentile idolatry and religious hocus-pocus.” Matthew now depicts these Gentile visitors as pro-Jesus, while Herod and the rest of Jerusalem are anti-Jesus. This is because for Matthew Jesus is savior not just of Jews but also of Gentiles.
There is a lot to consider here, but in the end, it’s more productive to focus on the overall message this story conveys. For one thing, we learn here that even in infancy, Jesus inspired both worship and hostility. It is all there from Day One – adulation as well as plots to kill him (in this instance by King Herod who was threatened by the very existence of a rival claimant to his throne). There is an enormous contrast here between the foreigners or outsiders and the insiders or the establishment. This theme is central to Matthew’s message, and the story of the Magi is in some sense a microcosm of the overall thrust of his gospel.
Greg+