Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: hinckley buzzard

You’re quite correct, of course, about there being no scriptural predicate for a horse. The last time I posted this story a commenter made the same point and added that the Roman occupiers very probably would have barred the Jews from owning or riding horses.

So, if Paul was in fact riding, a donkey would have been his conveyance. To an artist, though, a horse is sexier.


10 posted on 04/17/2023 8:49:13 AM PDT by Hebrews 11:6 (“And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.” Acts 2:47 -- It's still true!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Arlis
Recapitulating in post #10 your excellent point made here.
11 posted on 04/17/2023 9:08:28 AM PDT by Hebrews 11:6 (“And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.” Acts 2:47 -- It's still true!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Hebrews 11:6

He would not have been riding a 17th century “high horse” in any event! Roman horses (assuming because he was a Roman Citizen he was authorized to have one - Acts 22:27) were lighter in weight and finer in the head (more like Arabians).


12 posted on 04/17/2023 9:33:10 AM PDT by AnAmericanMother (Ecce Crucem Domini, fugite partes adversae. Vicit Leo de Tribu Iuda, Radix David, Alleluia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | 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