There is debate over the ethnic identities of Matthew’s magi. Some argue that these travelers from the East were Jews who had learned the arts of magic and astrology in Babylonia after the Jewish exile in 586 BCE. Others hold that these visitors to Judea were Gentiles. While it is possible that these ancient star-followers were Jews, the textual data in Matthew and Israel’s Scriptures support the conclusion that the magi were Gentiles.

Those who see the magi as Jews note that the Jewish exiles interacted with Babylonian magi according to the Greek translation of Daniel. When Nebuchadnezzar has a disturbing dream, he calls for interpreters among “the enchanters, and the magi (μάγους; mágous), and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans” (Dan 2:2 LXX). “Magi” is an Old Persian term that described Zoroastrian priests; according to Daniel, these figures attempt to interpret the king’s dream along with the “Chaldeans”—another word for “Babylonians.” Since the Jewish Daniel proves to be the greatest interpreter in Babylon, he becomes the “leader” (ἄρχοντα; árchonta) of the “enchanters, magi (μάγων; mágon), Chaldeans, and sorcerers” (Dan 5:11 LXX). Thus, some readers speculate, perhaps Daniel taught Jewish traditions to his underlings (or even converted some of them to Judaism), so that we should identify Matthew’s magi as learned Jews who emerged from Daniel’s intellectual lineage. The main problem with such speculation is that Daniel and his fellow Jews are never called “magi” themselves; to the contrary, the Septuagint distinguishes them from the magi: Daniel and his Jewish friends were “ten times wiser than all the enchanters and magi (μάγους; mágous)” (Dan 1:20 LXX). Thus, while Daniel becomes the chief of all sages under Nebuchadnezzar, Scripture provides no evidence that Daniel was one of the magi or that Jews became magi while living in Babylon.

Much of Matthew’s information suggests that the magi were Gentiles. First, the visitors to Jerusalem ask, “Where is he who has been born king of the Jews?” (Matt 2:2). This question about the “king of the Jews” suggests that the magi are not Jews themselves, or else they would have asked, “Where has our king been born?” Indeed, since only Gentiles use the phrase “king of the Jews” elsewhere in Matthew (cf. 27:11, 29, 37) it’s likely that the magi are Gentiles also—Jews, on the other hand, refer to the “king of Israel” (27:42). Second, if the magi were learned Jews under the tutelage of Daniel’s sagacious successors, then why don’t they already know that the Jewish Messiah must be born in Bethlehem? Based on the prophecy of Micah, the Jewish chief priests and scribes know that the Messiah will be born “in Bethlehem of Judea” (2:5) but the magi do not. This lack of knowledge does not fit the scenario of Jewish magi trained in biblical tradition; instead, Matthew’s presentation suggests a non-Jewish ethnic background for the magi.

The Gospel narrative recalls verses from Israel’s Scriptures that foresee Gentiles bringing gifts to Israel. Once the magi arrive in Bethlehem, they offer Yeshua “gifts (δῶρα; dora)” of “gold and frankincense (χρυσὸν καὶ λίβανον; chrusòn kaì líbanon) and myrrh” (Matt 2:11). This scene echoes the Psalms’ picture of other nations bringing “gifts” (δῶρα; dora) to Israel (cf. Ps 72:10 [71:10 LXX]; 76:11-12 [75:11-12 LXX]). Isaiah 60:5-6 calls these foreign gifts the “wealth of the Gentiles,” which includes “gold and frankincense” (χρυσίον καὶ λίβανον; chrusíon kaì líbanon). Matthew also notes that the magi bring “myrrh” (σμύρνα; smúrna)—an aromatic resin that the Jewish Queen Esther receives from a Persian king (see Est 2:12 LXX). More, the oil made from myrrh—called στακτή (stakté)—is said to have been an item of trade among traveling Gentiles in Joseph’s day (see Gen 37:25 LXX), and royal figures of other nations offer it as tribute to King Solomon (cf. 1 Kgs 10:25; 2 Chron 9:24 LXX). Thus, it is fitting for Matthew’s traveling Gentile magi to offer myrrh to Jesus, the King of the Jews. Insofar as the Gospel’s eastern visitors recapitulate biblical passages about non-Jews offering treasures to Israelites, it makes the most sense to see Matthew’s magi as Gentiles whose worship of Jesus foreshadows his commission to make disciples of “all the nations” (Matt 28:19).



  1. It is widely known that the Book of Daniel is a non-historical book. Hence, Daniel teaching Jewish traditions to the Chaldeans was not possible.
    • It is widely /believed/ "that the Book of Daniel is a non-historical book." It isn't "known." The reason so many deny Daniel's historicity is because they reject fulfilled prophecy.

      + More answers (3)
    • Daniel's prophecies have all been fulfilled except those relating to the 2nd coming of Yeshua. God showed Daniel remarkable or powerful insight not only into the end of days but also regarding Jeremiah's prophecy regarding the soon ending of Israel's exile. Study Eschatology !

      + More answers (1)
    • There are actually two possible options as to the identity of the Magi - i.e. the one you have presented above, i.e. Gentiles - but also the possibility of the Magi being from the Northern ten tribes of 'the lost sheep of the house of Israel'. [Matthew 10:5-7]

      + More answers (1)
    • True that the book of Daniel is thought by scholars to be highly Mythical i.e. as per the Wikipedia article: 'Book of Daniel' however it is highly accurate historically in the 11th chapter also because Daniel 11:40-45 is not Referring to Antiochus' military campaigns and death but that of Vespasian's.
    • You Sir! need to get your facts straight so how would you define the Book of Chronicles of the Kings of Medes & it is clear you are unlearned in the Facts of History of the Xerxes I
    SHOW ALL (6)
  2. Wow! Great insight of scripture. This reminds me on a point of Apostle Paul concerning the gentiles of being grafted into a natural plant. Glory be to God of Israel. Hallelujah
    • Thanks for reading, Wanyina. Yes, Paul has much to say about Gentiles being grafted in Romans 9-11. IBC is about to teach a course on these chapters, so maybe you want to consider enrolling.
  3. Dr. Schaser, I wonder...if the magi knew enough about God's religion to predict the birth of the savior, why do we imagine that they dropped out of sight after the visitation? It makes more sense to me to think that after the magi, chroniclers were sent to watch Jesus grow. There might have been at least four of those people. And they may have written in the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But to imagine that the magi went home and continued life as normal is too much for me to believe. Am I going too far with the supposition?

    • + More answers (7)
    • Thanks for your question, David. Matthew explicates that the magi go home after seeing Jesus (see Matt 2:12), so any supposition beyond that data can't be substantiated. On the Gospel writers as chroniclers, Luke -- the only other Gospel that offers information about Jesus' childhood (Lk 1-2) -- begins by specifying that the author was not an eyewitness (see Lk 1:2), and there's no internal evidence for the other Gospel writers watching over Jesus during his infancy or adolescence.

      + More answers (1)
    • Nah I don't think speculation is going over the top so to speak - but a healthy process - that involves thinking for oneself - or thinking 'outside the box' as they say. ;)
  4. Calvary greetings, really love the conversation will love to be part of it, what can i do to be part.. Thank you..
    • Thanks for reading, Ngozi. Our student outreach team will follow up with you about enrollment options.
  5. Dr. Schaser, Thank You so much ! You and all of the team, Bless me sooo. I Love These Articles !!! You All are so merciful to the hateful responses. Many Prayers for You All.
  6. my idea is that the magi certainly sent chroniclers to keep tsbs on Jesus's life. and when Jesus died, they took their writings back to the people who commissioned them. after a lively edit session, to couch this Jewish story in their own language and imagery, we have now the Gospels. it's an interesting idea that might be worth considering.
  7. I would like to suggest that anyone seeking more information on this also read the books written by Steve M. Collins - especially the one titled Parthia. They are well researched and highly informative.
  8. I love the truth. I love your teachings. By coming into your enlightened study of the Scriptures, I see the proper aiming hitting the target dead on! The nations as the magi, included in worshipping the Jewish God of Israel with gifts in the pre-picture of the thousand year reign of the Kingdom of God to King Jesus is magnificent! Disciple the nations! It all comes together in reality! Thank you for your working the Greek and Hebrew in Jewish hands!
  9. I don't think the evidence from the text necessarily indicates that the magi were ignorant of where the Messiah was to be born, although they might have been. Herod, hyper-paranoid about losing his throne, had a very practical reason to know this and yet even he didn't know.
    • Thanks for your comments, Neville. Since the magi ask where the Messiah is to be born (2:2), the data indicates they didn't already know the answer -- they saw and followed the star, but that seems to be all the guidance they have. Like Herod, the magi seem to be unaware of the Bethlehem reference in Micah.

      + More answers (7)
Load more comments


Please enter your name here
Words left: 50
Please enter your comment!