When the gentleman said about the “revelation of the Magi” being that all religions had Christ in them, and then when he was asked about it, he said that is what he sees in this just-translated story. (Of course, I don’t see that at all.)
It seemed to me to be so overly dramatized, and also the fact that they mentioned this book was in the Vatican archives, and that it was so different from the verses in Scripture.
This is just another intellectual way of putting a different cast on what is in Scripture; another way of trivializing what we believe.
*“Triviliazing”? * That’s not at all what I heard. It was clearly stated that Christ was the heart of all religions – the revelation for that being the Magi’s discovery of The Star, The Star being unique in its light-producing qualities, and then the pictorial representation of Christ as embedded in the center of that Star, and the communication that He has shown himself to others throughout the ages (even up to then).
Star=Light and lightsource=The Light =Christ, Universal reality and center of all religions=. Christ, Timeless (also not dissimilar to Christ the Alpha and Omega – theology derived form the Fourth Gospel). Pretty profound, if one follows the symbol trail.
The excerpt did not go into a whole theological exploration of that; it was only a segment; plus, it seems that the possibilities were controversial enough for primetime audiences, for the producers to just leave it right there.
I don’t find the introduction of theological concepts from a discovered/translated manuscript to be “overly dramatizing,” but to each her own. I only think that the introduction was overly prolonged.
I appreciate your input on what you got out of it. I am probably so used to hearing disparaging items about religion in the media that I took the worst angle. (To me it sounded like all religions are the same anyway, what is the big deal.)