IF there was to have been guest room as the article states, maybe they were turned away because villagers and family members believed that Joseph and Mary had lived in sin and had created a child out of wedlock. It may explain rudeness and non-welcoming attitudes. Also, with the Romans staying in and occupying the village, customs may have had to change, albeit temporarily.
I’ve read, who knows where, that the inn was more like a hostel and the couple may not have wanted to have their child born in the open with people of all ages and sexes looking on.
I don’t hold much stock in anything Herbert W. Armstrong’s group says, though.
Maybe...
It may explain rudeness and non-welcoming attitudes. Also, with the Romans staying in and occupying the village, customs may have had to change, albeit temporarily.
I'm not certain how they would have known the situation.
I don’t hold much stock in anything Herbert W. Armstrong’s group says, though.
What gph posts (and spams) is inaccurate at best and malicious at worst...
See: United Church of God
I've read that also, and it makes perfectly good sense.
I also read somewhere that Mary and Joseph settled in a sukkah or booth, Jesus being born during the Feast of Tabernacles. Apparently it was common for out-of-town guests to move into booths left purposely for them. And the manger could have been a "shelf" where food was left for the guests. What better fulfillment of the prophecy that God would one day tabernacle with His people than for Jesus to be born in a sukkah, and what better place for the Bread of Life to be placed than a "food shelf"?
Actually, word on the street is that Joseph was a cigarette smoker...which might explain the difficulty in obtaining accomodations.