Re: The wise men and their star

Stein Arild Stromme wrote:

>I agree that the visit of the magi is not necessarily to the newborn
baby Jesus, he might have been up to two years old, given the logic of
the text. You are also right that there is no mention of any manger
anywhere, in Matthew nor in Luke.<

 There is no mention of any stable anywhere, but a manger is mentioned
in Luke 2:7,12,16.

>But your harmonization attempt is a
bit strained, in particular in verses 8-10 and 22-23 of Matt 2. There is
nothing in Matt which indicates Galilee before 22-23, and there is even
given a special reason why Nazareth was chosen at that moment.<

 I agree that the text of Mt 2:8-10 doesn't explicitely say that the
magi went to Nazareth in Galilee, but neither is there any direct
evidence that they followed Herod's wish by going to Bethlehem. But the
text definitely suggests surprise and great joy at experiencing a
fulfillment of their desire exceeding their expectations. Had they just
followed Herod's counsel of going to Bethlehem, without getting any
additional sign (like the star going before them and clearly designating
the specific house within a town), they would at best find what they
expected. There would be no occasion for rejoicing "exceedingly with
great joy" _before_ "going into the house".

Matthew doesn't talk of Nazareth or Galilee before their return from
Egypt (v.22-23). But we should not automatically assume that Joseph
would first have wanted to return to Nazareth. Being poor, they might
not even have left many belongings in Nazareth before going to Egypt. On
the other hand, they had received a whole series of prophetic
announcements (through various angelic messages, Zechariah and
Elizabeth, the shepherds, Simeon, Anna, the wise men, even apart from OT
prophecies) about what Jesus was supposed to do for Israel, so they
might first have thought they _had_ to go to live in Jerusalem, or at
least somewhere in Judea. As a carpenter, Joseph would hardly have had
too much difficulty finding work anywhere. But when he was told in a
dream to go to Galilee, his choice of Nazareth would be quite natural.
The background theological reason Matthew gives ("that what was spoken
by the prophets might be fulfilled: 'He shall be called a Nazarene'")
was certainly not Joseph's idea. But it corresponds to a tendency
typical of Matthew. It would be useless to ask whether or not Matthew
knew they had lived in Nazareth before. If he knew it, there is no
reason to expect him to say so. None of the evangelists presents
anything like a complete biography (or historical account in the modern
sense).

>In any case, it hardly makes any sense for a star to stop over a house
:-) The nativity stories have many characteristics of myths.<

 I'm not Bultmann - I prefer a miracle to a myth. The most natural way
to read the text seems to indicate a sign. To invoke myths appears to me
to be a cop-out for evading a difficulty.

 Peter

-- 
Dr. Peter Ruest, CH-3148 Lanzenhaeusern, Switzerland
<pruest@dplanet.ch> - Biochemistry - Creation and evolution
"..the work which God created to evolve it" (Genesis 2:3)