[adiaireton8]

Indeed. Luke's intention in 2:7 in including 'prwtotokon' is not to imply that Mary gave birth to subsequent children, but to refer back to the Old Testament, where the firstborn has the birthright (as we see with Esau and Jacob, and in the blessing of Joseph's two sons), and belongs to God (as we see in God's command to Moses in Ex 13:1-2). The purpose of including that term in Luke 2:7 is to show that Christ has that birthright and belongs to God, not that He had siblings.

-A8

[Blogger]

Okay, let me understand this a bit... you are saying that I should read the text ""And she gave birth to her firstborn, a son (who really was an only son but I, Luke, the person so interested in historical accuracy, threw it in here to really emphasize that Jesus has the birthright of the firstborn [not to be confused with eldest son which is the usual meaning of prototokon] and belongs to God even though I already said that He was conceived of the Holy Spirit in a supernatural way and Mary was a virgin, and...well, now that I've cleared that up...) She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn" "

Why would such an interpretation be necessary if Jesus was her only son? If Jesus was the only Son of God (which He was), there is no need to emphasize the rights of the firstborn - for the inheritance is His.

Interesting interpretation there A8.
With that. I'm going to bed.