Comments on: What Reading Level is “Magi”?

By: Gary Simmons

Gary Simmons — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 02:06:53 +0000

When I come out with the NIV World of Warcraft study edition, I will definitely use “wizard.”

By: Peter Kirk

Peter Kirk — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:49:30 +0000

“Wizard” will be a word well known to anyone whose reading level is high enough for Harry Potter – or perhaps misunderstood. Those up to reading “The Lord of the Rings” or even “The Hobbit” might get a better model in Gandalf. Another suggestion might be “magician”, as “magic” is of course derived from “magus” – but that might have wrong connotations of stage trickery.

By: Gary Simmons

Gary Simmons — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:26:04 +0000

Those who are into medieval fantasy would readily associate magus/magi with wizards (note the word “wize” in there!) — mysterious, usually older people who know obscure/arcane lore more ancient than even their beards.

I don’t know if thaumaturgy is actually associated with the biblical word magos, but I can at least point a small subset of the target demographic and say that at least they might get a somewhat accurate picture of what magi are.

Of course, that’s a minority that would dimly understand; the majority would be completely clueless. I agree that transliterating magoi does nothing for the 7th-grade reading level.

However, perhaps wizard (with its lexical association with wisdom) is an option to explore — for a higher reading level.

By: Mark Baker-Wright

Mark Baker-Wright — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 16:44:43 +0000

I feel compelled to quote the James Taylor song, “Home By Another Way,” as being especially appropriate here:

“Those magic men, the Magi. Some people call them wise.
Oriental. Even Kings. Well, anyway, those guys….”

By: Wayne Leman

Wayne Leman — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 16:43:25 +0000

This was also one of my first issues to email to the CEB team.

I have suggested using the tradition “wíse men” (accent on the first word) which has a different referential meaning from “wise mén” (accent on mén). At least we know from this wording who is being referred to, whereas with “magi” most English speakers don’t know who is being referred to. As Gary has mentioned, teaching can fill in what these “wíse men” did, i.e. what magi were, without using that rare word, “magi”.

By: Gary Zimmerli

Gary Zimmerli — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:18:30 +0000

Of course, you know that the Bible doesn’t say there were three of them, that is just tradition.

But maybe magi (Magi?) is better than “wise men”, because it’s more accurate, and it can provide a teaching opportunity. Maybe.

I got it downloaded, but haven’t had a chance to start reading it yet.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:15:08 +0000

As i read through it, that was my first question too. I wonder if there isn’t there a better word that actually means something besides those three guys who came to visit Jesus.