Discussion Questions

David Bercot says the Magi were Zoroastrian priests involved in divination and astrology—usually a negative category in Scripture—so what does God’s “invitation” of the Magi to Jesus reveal about His purposes and His power over darkness? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the Magi were astrologers and diviners (usually seen as wrong in the Bible), what does God leading them to Jesus show about His plans and His power over darkness?

The chapter claims early Christians (and likely Jews) viewed “east” symbolically as the realm of light and God, and “west” as darkness and Satan; how does that symbolism reshape the way you read the Magi’s statement, “We saw his star in the east,” and what does it suggest about how God teaches through creation (sunrise/light)? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If early believers saw “east” as light and God, and “west” as darkness and Satan, how does that change what you hear in “We saw his star in the east,” and what might it say about God teaching through creation like sunrise and light?

Bercot highlights early Christian use of the Septuagint in reading prophecies like Zechariah 6:12 (“Behold a man, the East is His name”) and Numbers (“a star out of Jacob”); what are the implications—good and dangerous—of building messianic meaning on Septuagint wording that many modern Christians never notice? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What are the good and risky parts of using the Septuagint’s exact wording to find prophecies about the Messiah, especially when many Christians today never notice those wording details?

John Chrysostom and Origen argue the “star” could not be a normal celestial body because it led first to Jerusalem and then to a specific dwelling in Bethlehem; what does it change about your view of God’s guidance if the “star” was an angelic/supernatural being rather than an astronomical event? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the “star” was a supernatural guide (like an angel) instead of a normal star, how would that change the way you think about God guiding people?

Bercot describes Herod as an Edomite proselyte, politically installed by Rome, threatened by a true “King of the Jews”; how does that historical background sharpen the chapter’s portrayal of worldly power, insecurity, and the kind of “kingship” Jesus represents? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does knowing more about Herod’s background make the story clearer about insecure human power, and about what kind of King Jesus is?

Matthew reports that “all Jerusalem was troubled” at news of the Messiah’s birth; what does this reaction expose about the human ability to desire God’s promises in theory but feel threatened when God actually acts—and where do you see that same instinct in your own faith or church culture? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Why might people want God’s promises in theory but feel upset when God actually starts acting, and where do you see that same reaction in yourself or your church?

The chapter argues Jesus may have been born in a cave (Justin Martyr, Origen, later the Church of the Nativity) and notes this is “trivia” yet historically weighty; how should serious Christians weigh tradition and early testimony on details Scripture doesn’t spell out, and what does this reveal about how God entered real, physical history? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How much weight should Christians give to early tradition about details the Bible doesn’t clearly say (like Jesus being born in a cave), and what does that show about Jesus entering real human history?

Bercot notes the Magi “worshiped” Jesus (proskuneō), which could mean worship of God or honor given to a king; how do you interpret the Magi’s posture and gifts in light of that ambiguity, and what might it reveal about God drawing people who don’t yet fully understand Christ’s identity? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Since the Magi’s “worship” could mean honoring a king or worshiping God, how do you understand what they did, and what might it show about God drawing people who don’t fully understand who Jesus is yet?

The early Christians saw the slaughtered infants as the first martyrs—“they died for Jesus,” even “in place of Jesus,” and possibly among the first to meet Him when He descended to Hades; what emotions or objections does that reading provoke, and what does it reveal about early Christian assumptions regarding martyrdom, suffering, and God’s mysterious providence? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How do you feel about the idea that the murdered babies were the first martyrs who died “for” Jesus, and what does that tell you about how early Christians thought about suffering and God’s hidden purposes?

Bercot argues Matthew’s “spoken by the prophets” (plural) about Jesus being called a Nazarene is not a missing quotation but a general fulfillment tied to “Nazarite” (set apart/holy), and he critiques modern quotation marks driving confusion; how does this discussion challenge modern habits of reading prophecy (and Bible translation choices), and what would it mean in practical terms to treat “set-apart holiness” as central to Jesus’ identity—and therefore to His followers? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does the “Nazarene” discussion challenge how we read prophecy and Bible translations, and what would it look like day to day if Jesus (and His followers) are meant to be “set apart” and holy?