The Magi are a source of much debate in modern scholarship. Despite having in common an intention to read the story of the Magi in its historical context, these different approaches have produced very conflicting views of who the Magi are and what they mean in the context of Matthew.
The paper analyses Giambrone’s argument paying close attention to his use of Second Temple literatureand his exegesis of some of the Lukan parables. Several deficiencies will be observed with attendant implications for the assumed cogency of Anderson’s proposals and the parallel work of Eubank.
The paper will contribute to a growing, number of papers relating the sign narratives to broader themes in the Gospel rather than focusing specifically on analysis from source or form critical perspectives.
The paper seeks to contribute to this analysis of Jesus as judge in Acts by considering this theme in light of non-Jewish Hellenistic literature, with a focus on the myth of the appointment of Rhadamanthus, Minos and Aeacus as judges in the afterlife in the writings of Homer, Pindar, Virgil, Plato, Plutarch, Lucian, and Athenagoras.