Comments on: The Magi

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:13:32 +0000

On my mission, I went to a Smithsonian exhibit called “Circa 1492″ – it was a global (and truly global) survey of art specifically from 1480 to 1500. Huge, immense, stunning exhibit, with every culture well represented. One painting in particular showed the Magi visiting the Christ child, and one of them was a Brazillian native, with dress details specific enough for the tribe and region to be identified today. I saw this and probably started the Samuel the Lamanite rumor in the very next zone conference.

By: BrianJ

BrianJ — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:10:54 +0000

Three wise men: Samuel the Lamanite, Nephi, and...hmm let's see. Someone else who was "never heard from again." Oh, oh! I know: Hagoth! Amazing! (and to think the Persians tried to take credit for the three Lehite wise men!)

By: gomez

gomez — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 11:01:00 +0000

Deacon, the Mormon rumour I heard also includes Nephi among the wise men. He also disappears around the same time as Samuel and is never heard from again.

By: Deacon

Deacon — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 08:57:33 +0000

Wgat about Samuel the Lamanite being one of them? I remember hearing this mormonised rumour some years ago. Shortly before the birth Samuel leaves the area where he preached and nobody knew where he went. There is also some kind of legend that one of he wise men were black and this tradition seems to carry through to modern day nativity sets. Obviously with Samuel being a Lamanite it fits. Pure speculation from soemone attempting to identify who these men were!!

By: BrianJ

BrianJ — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 05:46:07 +0000

Amen to the post and the comments.

J, #5: awesome!

Kevin, I will say that I don’t think BRM’s “premise seems to be that foreign priests cannot receive genuine revelation from God.” Rather, I think it is that genuine revelation cannot come from the stars (or other pagan ritual divining objects). But since Matthew is pretty explicit that the magi followed the stars, we have to convert their astrology into something more palatable.

By: Owen

Owen — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 04:53:47 +0000

3 Nephi 1:2-3! :)

By: Ray

Ray — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 04:03:36 +0000

Thanks for this summary, Kevin.

I agree completely that we have no need to Christianize or Mormonize the wise men – when a big part of our theology allows for inspiration and revelation and authority outside of the narrow definition of the House of Israel.

By: Mephibosheth

Mephibosheth — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 00:39:11 +0000

#5 LOL at the last line.

By: J. Stapley

J. Stapley — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 23:40:32 +0000

While on my mission, I found an old copy of the Ensign (1971) and it had an article by Ellis T. Rasmussen entitled, "Zoarastrianism." It is a fascinating piece and concludes with this:

Much of the truth and significance of ancient revelations from other than the Judeo-Christian prophets would not be appreciated so readily if it were not for the modern restoration of the gospel as promulgated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Through the perspective of the gospel, it is possible to see why revelations may have been sent to such men as Zoroaster and why some of his teachings would resemble those of our prophets. In fact, it may have been the Magi of Zoroastrianism who perceived by some manner of revelation from the heavens that a miracle child was born in Judea to be a king and who came to worship him.

In searching for the article, I found a "I have a Question" response by Tvedtnes (scroll down) that goes for Zoroastrians as well. Anyway, it seems like a bad idea to impugn the inspiration of someone with ties to magic...

By: Kevin Barney

Kevin Barney — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 23:33:33 +0000

I agree Matt W., that’s one of the things I like about it as well, and you’re right that that impulse is properly applied here.