They did not follow the ways of this world, but left their homes and followed by faith. This I believe it the wisdom and why these men are wise in the eyes of God (as proof they were rewarded in finding the Lord of Lords, baby king ruler Jesus. Today doing such a thing, leaving your post or work to follow a hunch would be seen as foolishness to many, as that is the way of the world, to conform, to take the know path, to work and not abandon it.
Leave their post? Astrology was their job.
Actually there was a difference even back then though the terms were not individual yet. The motion of the stars were study-able, knowable and calculable (though they has a bear of a time with wanderer mars). This is the ‘scientific’ form and pretty well qualifies under the scientific method, even though that was not invented yet.
Then there is the spiritual interpretive form, the meanings. This was not knowable in the way that the positions are knowable, but taken as related and perhaps hinting at what is going on in the spiritual/heavens.
Also Jesus Confirms that stars are angels:
[QUOTE=Rev1:20]
The mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand and of the seven golden lampstands is this: The seven stars are the angels[e] of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.
[/QUOTE]
Can’t get much better confirmation then that.
As I said they were wise. If this was the case they wandered away from their lands and people. Giving up perhaps many comforts of their homes and their positions to take this journey of faith.
Actually it’s both, and that’s the basis of astrology, one reflects the other and by knowing one you can ‘sense’ what is in the other. there is a earthly version and a parallel heavenly version. This is hinted at several times in the bible, such as God commanding Moses how to make the Arc and the ‘Sea’ thing, as that is what is in the heavens. In my above Revelation verse (1:20) we have Jesus talking about the 7 stars (heavenly) and 7 lampstands (Earthly), and in the Rev cite about the dragon sweeping 1/3 of the stars, that is also about the birth of the Lord of Lord, but not by Mary, but by a angel, the Lord of Lords being born of the heavens and then going into a hidden place, much like the telling of Jesus traveling to Egypt.
They are similar but not exact, but by knowing one and the relationship between the 2 ‘realms’ it is taken that insight can be gained.
So both heavenly and earthly terms are in some form interchangeable and applicable.
They weren’t wise because of their faith.
They were wise because of their knowledge of astrology.
Well - he confirms that those specific 7 are - is it Jesus again talking in the other verses ? or in Mathew? is there any other textual comments in context of the latter verse that he means the same thing? or are you just ‘assuming’ he does?
What does that have to with the ‘star’ in Mathew - where it is not Jesus, but the Magi - talking.
WHere does it state that they gave up comforts or position to take this journey?
Are you implying they lived in a time appropriate ‘RV’ and their home was the open ‘road’. It seems pretty clear that they did not live in that land, so undertook a journey away from their home.
Astrology requires faith, it is faith based. The interpretations are ones of faith.
so what? doesn’t mean they ‘gave up’ anything - you are assuming, as usual, facts not in evidence - the only thing you know is that they went on the journey -they kept thier positions (magi) and they had ‘gifts’ - doesn’t imply they gave up anything -
more importantly - HAD they given up something to do this - the narrative would have included it, since ‘giving up stuff to follow jesus’ was an important point later.
You do have a hinted at relationship in:
[QUOTE=Matthew 24:29]
“Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken,
[/QUOTE]
But yes it is the Bible as a whole where I get this from, interrelated and interconnected acting as one book where I get this from. There is a earthly reason why the bible was put together as we have it, but I believe also a heavenly reason why as well. It is also symbolic of us, not really useful as individuals but all part of the greater whole, all interconnected and part of each other.
I see.
It’s an odd thing to argue over as star being synonymous with angel was common for that time and no theologian or historian would bat an eyelid at the claim that the star in Mathew could be interpreted as an angel.
Is that what we are arguing because you don’t need Revelation to ‘prove’ it.
My Oxford Bible commentary has some cites for star=angel but it’s at home and I’m not - I’ll try and remember to look at it when I’m home if that helps.
Just going further in this, Mathew does not even have to know that stars are angels, txts like 1Cor 14:5 and Rom 12:6 talk about spiritual gifts, how one person may be given the words to say and another to interpret it. Again, my believe, we are all interrelated and made to come together in ways like this. Mathew does not have to know (though he could know) what he is saying to advance the message of God, as shown with the speaking in tongues, as long as there is a interpreter. Both are sometimes needed speaker and interpreter, interconnected people acting as one.
Pretty sure those verses are to do with people speaking in tongues (the least of the gifts).
Surely we don’t want to go there?
There are 2 types of speaking in tongues mentioned, one is speaking in a ‘unknowable’ language, sometimes called the language of angels, however another form mentioned is to speak the language of the listener. Yes fully applicable IMHO, the gifts are not limited to the ones mentioned, nor are they limited by examples of stated gifts.
The general point is it is possible and expected sometimes to have a speaker and a interpreter. And this is IF Mathew did not understand that stars are angels, which is a stretch IMHO.
I don’t disagree, but I have reservations about the use of the Isaiah passage as evidence.
Pulpit Commentary argues thusly:
Barnesagrees, saying:
Gill’s Exposition says:
But then, Gill’s does go on to cite Job 38:7, which directly compares angels to stars.
I’d certainly agree that there is a great deal of literary precedent throughout the Bible for the star==angel metaphor. Just not in Isaiah 14.
I always took the latter to mean that the apostle could speak something he couldn’t understand but the listener would so no interpreter required.
I concede that your general point could fit this though.
The whole thread is baffling, I’ve never heard anyone before ever argue about the star having to be an actual star (as in the big bits of burning gas in space).
It’s a thelogical dead end anyway.
I’m not even going to mention that many theologians are happy to ascribe both the nativity stories as pure myth 
(Apologies for the hijack, btw. And further apologies for sticking to Biblehub for my citations; I don’t have my library handy at the mo.)