No. Magi is not a name of God, but a term to describe an initiated magus. These people are the forerunners of what is now Zoroastrianism. They were spiritual leaders with a sort of magical training, including astrology. This is how they were able to recognize the star that foretold Christ.
Singular Magus, Plural Magi. Using this is no more sacreligious than Witch or Priest.
2006-12-07 16:05:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by Deirdre H 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
No, they were a tribe of people, not just the three wise men. That is like it is sacreligious to name something/something Egyptian:
"The Magi (singular Magus, from Latin, via Greek μάγος ; Old English: Mage; from Old Persian maguš) was a tribe from ancient Media, who - prior to the absorption of the Medes into the Persian Empire in 550 BC - were responsible for religious and funerary practices. Later they accepted the Zoroastrian religion, however, not without changing the original message of its founder, Zarathustra (Zoroaster), to what is today known as "Zurvanism", which would become the predominant form of Zoroastrianism during the Sassanid era (AD 226–650). No traces of Zurvanism exist beyond the 10th century."
2006-12-07 16:06:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by Shinkirou Hasukage 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
As I understand it, Magi is just an archaic term for a wise man. As long as you don't specifically name them Balthazar, Caspar, and Melchior, it should be fine
But really, people don't tend to complain about using those names in fiction anyway. I mean, compare the negative complaints by certain Christian groups to Chrono Trigger (which used the aforementioned magi names) to Xenogears (which had a corrupt church as one of the antagonists)
2006-12-07 16:03:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
in a story Magi?? Does G-d have something against story Magi's??
Or is he offended by the "sacreligiousness" of story Magi's??
I dont know!
David
2006-12-07 16:02:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No I don't think so because I think Magi just means wise men. Its the plural of Magus I believe.
2006-12-07 16:06:24
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, of course not. Its just a story.
2006-12-07 16:11:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, but it's a sin to misspell the word "sacrilegious", or to confuse it with the word "blasphemous".
2006-12-07 17:46:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by skepsis 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
probably
2006-12-07 16:01:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by southswell2002 3
·
0⤊
1⤋