The birth of Jesus is on this wise:


....says Matthew in the Gospel of Matthew KJV.

The story goes on to say that Kings from the East brought treasures for a King that was being born. They found Jesus in the Manger and gave him the Treasure.

What happened to the treasure? Please don't just say: I don't know. Speculate!...those who are familiar with the New Testament...what happened to it?

I don't recall it ever being talked about anywhere else. I don't think Joseph and Mary spent it...it wasn't given to them.
...and by the way...what ever happened to Joseph? I don't recall.

I read a book a long time ago in which the premise was that Jesus body wasn't resurrected, that Peter and friends had stolen it and that it was entombed within the walls of the Vatican to this very day....which brings to mind another question: Why is the Vatican in Rome? And is the original Treasures of Jesus Vaulted away somewhere within the Walls of the Vatican? Who is it that is most revered in the Catholic Church? Jesus? I think not...I think if that is so then his Mother Mary is a close second. And back to the question of Joseph? Did he die? Leave? Vanish? Where was he at the crucifixion? Did Mary still have all the treasure? Did Mary start the Catholic Church with the treasure? Does anyone have a clue or even care?

There are no answers to any of those questions within the Bible, joc. I'm sure there are stories and fables that answer the questions, but there are no answers within the Bible.

Answering your question is like trying to explain Mother goose or the grims brothers. Its just a story mate. Think of it like an cartoon, just remember its all meant for entertainment purposes only and isn't based on fact

They most likely have been sold. I do not see any other real use for them in a barn.

Thanks. I didn't think so. Nonetheless....here we have Baby Jesus with an incredible amount of Wealth...not just a little, because Kings don't give other Kings cheap gifts! They obviously didn't need the money to live on...Joseph was well off and a good tradesman. Is the question of Joseph remotely answered anywhere? If not...maybe that explains everything...perhaps Joseph ran off with the loot.


With all due respect...no it isn't. There isn't a person alive who actually believes that Grims Fairy Tales or Mother Goose stories are actually real. A good bit of the world believes deeply that the Bible stories are real...that you don't has no effect on others beliefs. Therefore...one must at least consider the relevancy of the story and thus the relevancy of the questions...because:

1. The Roman Catholic Church is real not fable, and owns more real estate in the world than any other entity.
2. The Roman Catholic Church has something that most churches don't...an amazing amount of Gold! What is the relationship between the Gold of the Vatican and the original Gold given to Jesus.
3. Just because the answers aren't found in the Bible doesn't mean the answers don't exist.

I would have burned the the frankincense and myrrh. Incense is quite useful for keeping flies away and smells amazing. Would have given the gold away or used it to buy things.

IIRC, Church tradition has Joseph dying sometime during the boyhood of Jesus.

The Vatican is in Rome because the Vatican is built on Vatican Hill, and Vatican Hill is in Rome. If you want to know why the Holy See is in Rome then look to the fourth century or fifth century. At a couple of the church councils, it was decided which bishops were most important in the Empire. Rome, followed by Constantinople, were at the top, as the two cities were the capitals of the Empire. Alexandria was third, why I can't remember right now, but probably for its theologians and economic significance. Antioch and Jerusalem were included in the top five for historical reasons. Then the Great Schism happened and Rome excommunicated everyone else, and everyone else excommunicated Rome.

I would suggest the story of the gifts of the Magi was just that - a story and there was no actuality to it.

Gold symbolises kingship, incense symbolises priesthood. By relating this story to the masses those promoting Christianity reinforce the message of Jesus as King and High-Priest. The story is a device, nothing more.

Every single one of your threads that I see here, Joc, don't belong in this section as far as I can tell.

I doubt if we will ever know the story and whether it is true or not....Another post on UM mentions an Archbishop who is saying the story of "The Nativity" was never true....There were no wise men, no gifts, no animals in the stable, etc...So who knows, but I was bought up to believe, and "The Nativity" was always an important part of the holiday.......

If and when you ever become a moderator...feel free to move them to the appropriate category you want them in. Actually there are only two...the first you might be correct about...however; the question of the Gold is a Skeptical one at best. I am not really looking for 'feely good', all 'Christiany' responses here. That you are skeptical of the entire story is fine. There are many here though that are interested in more than just 'dismissing' the entire event as fable...some on this side of the Spiritual Forum won't even address something on the other side for fear of Mod Slaps. Your concern is appreciated.

Your giving the Catholic Church a boost there aren't you ?,It looks like your saying that they inherited jesus's gold ,Which makes them the only religion that jesus endorsed ,so all the rest of the Christian sects are phoney



fullywired

I've heard something akin to Leonardo's comment.

The three kings did not GIVE the Baby Jesus the 'treasures', they merely PRESENTED them to him.

Had he chosen Gold, it would have shown him to be a King.
Had he chosen Frankincense, it would have shown him to be a God
Had he chosen Mhyr, it would have shown him to be a priest. Or possibly a spice merchant. It's a bit unclear.

So they probably took all three gifts back with them afterwards. Along with some of Josephs mince pies.

Meow Purr.

The Magi bring "gifts" sounds like an invention, but Matthew didn't fantasize. He simply put a theological spin
on actual events. The truth is more likely to be that these Magi were not "oriental" at all. Since Matthew insisted that
Jesus came "only for the lost sheep of the House of Israel." Gentiles, therefore, were wasting their time.

They were Babylonian Jews, nicknamed "Magi" by Palestinians. And they were giving a payment to Mary and Joseph.

Either money for the child's upbringing, cash for Joseph for not going public on Mary's extra-marital conception,
or more likely, to buy the child from them. Adoption was common for illegitimate children.

I also wonder why the only place for them to stay was a barn.

This was the place of their birth correct? Wouldn't you think they could stay with Aunt Mildred or some other family member? People rarely traveled then so I could see a lot of the family still in town. But I suppose it makes for a much better story the other way.

I think the whole nativity story was a fabrication,it seems just a ploy to get Jesus born in Bethlehem (Davids royal city) and fulfill the prophecy,let's look a little closer at the story .

Quote
as for the hometown of Jesus' parents, neither gospel can agree where it was. Matthew has them residing in Bethlehem in Judea, while Luke says they lived in Nazareth in Galilee. Incredibly, Luke has Joseph take his wife Mary, in the last stages of her pregnancy, on an arduous four day journey by foot to Bethlehem because of the census. This assumes that the "census" (i.e. a registration which was to assist in levying a poll or a property tax) was conducted in a most peculiar way. According to Luke, illiterate peasants had to somehow trace their tribal and family heritage back to their ancestral birthplace, and then to report there for registration. The confusion and mass movement of population this would entail was, in fact, contrary to the sensible Roman practice of registering men (women had no political or property rights) for the head tax at their current dwelling place or the chief town of the local taxation district.

It was important, however, for the authors of both these gospels, that Jesus be born in Bethlehem because it was the city of David from where, it was prophesied, Israel's ruler would come (Micah 5:2). Even so, John's gospel, contrary to Matthew and Luke, relates the common knowledge that Jesus was not born in Bethlehem, and that he was not a descendant of David (John 7:41-42).
http://www.religioustolerance.org/xmas_lib.htm

You said SPECULATE: the gold was either given to the Temple or spent. If spent, sooner or later it wound up being given to the Temple. When the Romans destroyed the Temple, they took the gold to Rome and spent it on building the Collisseum. As this all happened before the Vatican was built, it's not stored away in the Vatican. It has probably been melted down and recirculated many times. Most any gold object you see may have a little of this gold in it. OR: it may be just a fanciful story.

The importance of gold, frankincense and myrrh is that they come from southern Arabia by way of Mesopotamia. Frankincense and myrrh are made from the exudate of a small tree that grows only in southern Arabia, Ethiopia and northwest India (The importation of these products to America was banned by the Bush administration because they come from Muslim countries and some subsistence farmer might use the money to buy a bomb instead of a new pair of shoes.). Arabia is the best choice because of high quality and closest proximity. These products were carried up the Incense Road, going right through Mahd adh Dhahab (Cradle of Gold) in the process. The story is simply assuring the reader that the "wise men" were from Mesopotamia (Assyria?).


Traditionally, Nero had Christians burned on the very site that would later be occupied by the Vatican; although, there is little evidence to support the contention. If Peter and friends stole the body, they had to hide it somewhere else for about 300 years until the first basilica was built by Constantine. If there was a body in the basilica, it would have been moved when the modern basilica was built. In short, we are building up a lot of ifs, so IF there was a body to hide, it is probably buried somewhere in what is now Jerusalem.


Rome was, at the time, the center of civilization. Anything that was important was in Rome. If the church was to grow, it had to have a presence in Rome. If it didn't, we'd all be worshipping Mythra (December 25th was MYTHRA's birthday; modern Christians are pretty close to being Mythra worshippers already; the date of Jesus' birth is unknown; though, I can make a case for April 19, 6 BCE.).


The Vatican didn't exist at the time. The treasures would need to be squirreled away somewhere for centuries, then moved to the Vatican, for this to be true.


I'm not Catholic, so I don't know who they revere. I don't think the Bible, at least the currently approved versions, tell what happened to Joseph; though, I recall a story that he and Joseph of Arimathea took Jesus' body to Glastonbury in England and interred it there. In the fifth century, King Arthur was imbued with Jesus' spirit while visiting Glastonbury Cathedral (which hadn't been built yet) and as a result will one day rise from the dead to drive the invading Saxon hordes back into the sea. If you visit Cortez, Colorado and face west at sunset, you can see Jesus' body lying with its head to the northwest and its feet to the southeast, arms folded across the chest, waiting for the Resurrection. There are lots of ideas about what happened to Jesus' body - take your pick.
Doug

The Jews did not practice astrology at the time. The Magi were astrologers. BUT, Jews living in Babylon or Assyria might have learned astrology. Well, he did say to SPECULATE. Doug

Houses at the time in that area were built on two levels, an upper level where the family lived and a lower level where the animals were kept. Rising heat from all those bodies kept everybody warm at night. Mary would not have been banished to an outside building, but rather would have stayed with the animals in the lower room. Some such houses still exist.
Doug

The word "Magi" is the plural of the word Magus - the title of the priests of the ancient (but still extant) Persian region of Zoroastrianism. Zoroaster (the Greek form of the old Persian Zarathustra) was the prophet of arguably the world's first monotheistic religion and is thought to have lived around 1000 BC.

fullywired

Actually Philo of Alexandria and the Greek historian Strabo likened the Essenes to the Magi.
Essenes, were adepts in prophecy according to Josephus, and what is astrology if it's not prophesy?
More to the point, the Essene leadership during the time of Herod the Great was Babylonian, again according to Josephus.
So Magi was a term for Babylonian Essenes. Not Zoroastrian priests.

I bust out my sherlock holmes cap, pipe, and fat bicurious bespeckled sidekick for this case.

What are "magi"? The original Greek in Matthew 2:1ff., calls the men who came to visit Jesus magoi, the plural of magos. The English word "magi," is based on this Greek word, but is actually the Latin plural of magus, which in turn is simply a transliteration of the Greek New Testament word magos. Confused, yet?! More importantly, what does Matthew 2:1-12 tell us about magi? The text reveals that they had the wealth and knowledge to travel and offer lavish gifts; they also had knowledge about the stars ("We have seen his star in the east . . ." Matthew 2:2). Does the remainder of the New Testament tell us more about magi? The only other occurrence of the Greek word magos is Acts 13:6,8, where it is translated "magician," meaning one who practices sorcery. The Greek Old Testament (LXX) has an occurrence of magos (Daniel 2:2), and there it also means "magician." But see also Jeremiah 39:3,13, where a "Rabmag" is mentioned.

Fortunately other ancient literature comes to our aid in helping us to understand who magi were. From the Jewish historian Josephus, the Greek historian Herodotus, and the writings of Strabo, a clearer picture of the people called the magi appears. The magi first appear in history in about the 7th century B.C. in the Median empire (Herodotus I, ci). It is possible that we see examples of them in Daniel 2 and Jeremiah 39. At the time of the birth of Jesus they were an ancient priestly caste dwelling within the Parthian empire that practiced astrology (note: at this time, "astrology" was a hybrid of astrology and what we now call astronomy). They were adept at interpreting dreams (which we possibly get a flavor of as early as Daniel 2). Also at the time just prior to the birth of our Lord, the magi formed the upper house of the council of the Megistanes, whose duties included the election of the king of the Parthian empire (Strabo, XI, ix, 3). Thus, the magi at this time were very possibly "king makers." (Sources: D. W. Jayne, "Magi," The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, vol. 4:31-34; Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews and The Jewish War; Herodotus, The History of Herodotus; A. Holmstead, History of the Persian Empire).

Quickly Watson ,the games afoot!!!!!

One of the most important sections of the “Cave of Treasures” is that which contains a description of the Magi and their visit to Jeru­salem, for it appears to be based upon the work of some writer who had exact knowledge of their methods. They are here grouped with the Chaldeans, who were presumably Babylonians, but they themselves are called the “ wise men of Persia.” Both these bodies of sages had studied the motions of the “Malwâshê,” or Signs of the Zodiac, for centuries, and through them they felt that they were able to forecast with accuracy the course of events on this earth.

The Magi were terrified at the appearance of the star, which led them subsequently to Bethlehem, and thought that the king of the Greeks was about to attack the land of Nimrod. At length they consulted their great astrological work which is here called “ Gelyãnà dhe Nemrôdh,” :.e. the” Revelation of Nimrod,” and there they learned that a king was born in Judah. What this “Revelation of Nimrod” was cannot be said, but it was evidently one of the large series of Omen-texts of which so many examples exist in the British Museum. The “Cave of Treasures” says that the Magi were three kings, and gives their names, and thus repeats the tradition which was general in the early centuries of the Christian Era. On the other hand, the “Book of the Bee,” following a very ancient Oriental tradition, says they were twelve in number, and gives their names ; but it must be noted that some of the names are only found at a com­paratively late period of Persian History.

http://www.adamandevecave.com/wf.html

LOL, no I don't think so. I think the last time we see Joseph in the Bible is when Jesus was about 12 and his parents found Him teaching at the temple, found in Luke 2.

what happened to the Gold ? spent it.

frankincense and muhr ? since they are resins probably burned them during holidays.

'mark Gibbs' "The Magi bring "gifts" sounds like an invention, but Matthew didn't fantasize. He simply put a theological spin
on actual events. The truth is more likely to be that these Magi were not "oriental" at all. Since Matthew insisted that
Jesus came "only for the lost sheep of the House of Israel." Gentiles, therefore, were wasting their time. They were Babylonian Jews, nicknamed "Magi" by Palestinians. And they were giving a payment to Mary and Joseph. Either money for the child's upbringing, cash for Joseph for not going public on Mary's extra-marital conception, or more likely, to buy the child from them. Adoption was common for illegitimate children."

You were inspired to write this from Bali?

Yep. I live in Bali..and have plenty of time to think. But..I really copied these lines from the book..The Virgin and The Priest

Ebay?