Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Gamecock; Iscool
Words like seems, doubtful, probably.

Going back to this point....we have a whole body of tradition based on this verse:

Luk 2:7 And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.

1. It's surmised that there were animals all around him.
2. It's surmised that he was in a freestanding structure.
3. It's surmised that they were turned away from a public lodging place.
There are many other assumptions that are made concerning the whole story. Leaving off "assumed" and "speculated" from the traditional story doesn't make the traditional explanation any truer. It's tradition.

67 posted on 12/21/2013 6:33:33 AM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]


To: DouglasKC

And all of these arguments do nothing but take away from the fact that God took on human flesh.

Doesn’t matter one bit if there were animals there or not.


70 posted on 12/21/2013 8:11:14 AM PST by Gamecock (Celebrating 20,000 posts of dubious quality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson