Be careful what you read! The King James version was translated in the 16th century. That's why there was no room at the Inn. There were no inns in
that part of the world, then Jesus born in a stable! Lol who do you think rode horses in bethlehem.
Roman Cavalry, well to do people often had horses even then and many travellers used donkey's or ass or even camels.
So they DID have stables.
They did indeed have Inn's, an inn in todays terms is a hostel or perhaps a modern equivalent would be a hotel/motel were you rent a room and pay for
food, water and other essential amenity's, Jerusalem was the heart of the Jewish faith and people made regular pilgrimages there so there was a
booming trade in inn's to cater to these paying travellers come to the temple, the basic concept of the INN goes back as far as ancient Nineveh or
perhaps even earlier, probably even earlier actually since we are finding ruined city's that may predate that one by a very huge amount of time and
the old fertile crescent model is out of the window, big city's have travellers and travellers need somewhere to stay, a business opportunity in any
age and certainly they existed in Ancient China and Japan as well and likely India too.
Here is a bit about ancient inn's in the holy land at the time of Jesus (and quite possibly even naming the very inn in Bethlehem were he was
The KJV translation is actually a very good translation, they got a few things not perfect but still most scholars today agree the translation was
excellent even though by our terms the form of English used in it is antiquated today.
So YES they DID HAVE STABLES and of course the roman garrison's had them as well, just a hop and skip away in Egypt thousands of years earlier they
had huge stables for the Pharaoh's chariot horses and his chariots.
You seem to be of the opinion it is an incorrect book, you know there was a guy that read it literally and went and found sites from the old and new
testament, his name was Ron Wyatt and he was an amateur archaeologist and by profession a dental technician but mostly he was a man of faith and
His reward for finding sites that fit the bible perfectly was to have Atheists, Archaeologists, Historians call him everything from a liar to a fool
to downright attempts to character assassinate him.
But also Remember many of there fraternity's arose in the so called Age of Reason when a war on the Church was orchestrated that is still going on
today and were and are members of secret society's but by no means all of course (another subject and a rather complex one), look at the divide
between Christian scholars often with impeccable credentials and decades of experience yet people are so brainwashed they would rather take the word
of an establishment lackey whom has often never set foot out of his campus office or is limited to perhaps a handful of excavations back when he was a
student and knows nothing but what he has read in a book so by comparison Ron Wyatt was a genuine expert as he spent YEARS and YEARS and YEARS of his
life searching, excavating and bringing it to the public to glorify God.
What about the Crossing of the red sea.
Or the blood of Christ on the ark of the covenant, suppressed for both political and religious reasons as well as rubbing up those that want to paint
the bible as false the wrong way.
The Israeli Authority's whom later sealed the entrance Wyatt had dug with a steel plate, concrete and rubble as well as taking a bulldozer to the
crucifixion holes at the REAL Golgotha directly above the grotto were the Prophet Jeremiah had placed the ark 500 years before Christ was crucified
there at first sent some men believed to be devout descendants of the tribe of Levi, Rabbi's to recover the ark, the Lord would NOT let them near it
for had they recovered it they would have then began animal sacrifice and desecrated the blood of Christ still upon the top of the ark were it poured
when it flowed down from his crucified body and down the crack in the rock of Golgotha which had opened at the same time as the temple veil was rent
showing the Ark of the covenant was NOT in the temple (since it had been hidden by Jeremiah to keep it from the Babylonians whom destroyed a previous
temple 500 years earlier) - because it was below THE LAMB OF GOD (the Crucified Jesus Our LORD) slain from the foundation of the world for our sin's
(and taking our place to deliver us from our sin's), so as they walked into the cave they got little further than twenty or so yards and ALL OF THEM
had brain haemorrhages and dropped dead, the Authority's had to ask Mr Wyatt to recover there body's.
A Jewish Messianic church from the first century.
edit on 9-2-2022 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)
a reply to: LABTECH767
Read your post with interest and watched the links but what stands out the most is your constant reference to the bible! So put 16th century stables
and inns aside for a moment and let’s explore the bible. So for the most part the people who know the most about history are the people who were
there at the time. We get that knowledge from such writings as the Jewish records or the Roman chronicles, not from those who tried to interpret it a
few hundred years later. It’s a bit like the art critic telling us really what the art is meant to say, when actually the artist knows better. Sadly
the Church of Rome hijacked the Christian story. for example the gospels you and christians rely on were decided upon at the council of Carthage in
397AD. So what about the gospels of Philip, Thomas, Mary and Mary Magdalene? We’ll if you know your bible studies you’ll know they were
rediscovered 1500 years after they were buried and hidden. But despite being excluded, early Christian’s still referenced them, books like the
gospel of truth and the gospel of the Egyptians were actually mentioned in writings such as Clement of Alexandria, Iranious of Lyon. So have you
contemplated why the gospels chosen were added to your present day bible? Because they needed a narrative to control the population one with the fear
of hell and damnation. The people who were there at the time make no mention of Jesus being born of a virgin that he was the one and only son of god.
Back to the 16th century there were no stables in Bethlehem! Please show us all the old Hebrew or Greek sentence mentioning a stable and Inn come to
that. Who told you the KJV translation was accurate a bible reading scholar I would imagine.
originally posted by: CJS4life
Only begotten? A term that was King James created and not forgotten.
"Only begotten" is a difrect translation of the Greek word MONOGENOUS, which is found in John ch1 v14. The Nicene Creed picked it up from John.
The "King James version" came one thousand and six hundred years later. It was NOT the original source of Christian teaching. If you haven't been
taught well enough to grasp that point, that might explain some of your difficulties.
I've been through the "adolescent rebellion" stage of religious life myself. I understand where it comes from. But you need to be more patient. If you
go looking for difficulties and expect them to be answered all in one go, that won't happen.
There is no doubt that politics and control may have flavoured some parts of the translation such as the wrongly put into place rule by divine right
concept when in fact Christ is the King no other to Christians but in that I will argue against all authority's that try to say otherwise as even the
catholic and orthodoxy have used similar arguments to place kings onto thrones over people.
But the argument for is that Jesus said "If My kingdom were of this world" and the Argument against those false king's is "Our king is Jesus so they
are NOT our King's".
Many in the protestant world insult or deny Mariam (Mary) as Queen yet King Solomon's own Mother was the Queen as was the way in ancient Israel for
Jewish monarch's the Mother of the king was QUEEN or the Queen Mother and like Solomon said to his mother "Ask anything of me and I shall not deny you
it", this made the Queen MOTHER of the King the second most powerful person in the kingdom.
Jesus is the King of Heaven so his Mother MARIAM or MARY is the Queen MOTHER of HEAVEN and we ask her to intercede for us with her Son for as Solomon
said "Ask Anything of me and I shall not deny you it". aleteia.org...
So this is also the reason why ALL the early Christian church's venerated and asked intercession of the Virgin Mary.
"Behold your mother" (I am your king so she is your Queen as she is My mother), "Behold your Son" (they are my subjects - flock - of my body
sacrament - and you my mother are Queen mother over them), my interpretation but I think pretty close.
But despite any reservations you may have about the KJV remember this it is still a very GOOD interpretation but there stem's the problem most
reading it have no basis by which to interpret it but there own current or whatever period they lived in Contextual approach, they were reverse
painting THERE World onto the writings and trying to interpret them that way a fault that most Protestants have fallen into instead of trying to
understand it in the context of the time it was written though in fact it was Written for ALL AGES including our own, evil is still even if they
parade it under a rainbow flag, children are still abused even if some sicko's want to justify that in our ever darker world and devil worshippers and
pagans still attack the truth because it is not THERE truth.
Alongside that you have to remember that modern Scholars are hard pushed to find many errors but there are of course a few tiny niggling but mostly
agreed as acceptable translations and other bibles NOT derived from it are in perfect accord as far as this is concerned.
So the bible was NOT invented by King James Scholars but actually the old testament is in perfect accord (barring one or two tiny translation
niggles) with the Septuagint a very ancient Greek Translation that some believe predates Christianity actually of the Hebrew Scriptures while the New
Testament is perfectly in accord with scriptural copy's around the world including the Syriac, first and second century they are perhaps the first
church outside the land of Judea and have remained in existence since St Peter and other Apostles founded it in Damascus, there writings were so close
to the Catholics that the larger half broke away and joined the catholic church just a few century's ago, the Ethiopian Orthodox also independent of
the west to both Christians AND Jewish believers were many texts lost in the west actually survive to this day including the book of Enoch whom
believe in there cannon they are descended from Ethiopian Converts to Judaism dating back to the time of the Queen of Sheba and that there royal
lineage was actually descended from the son of Sheba and David, there are monastery's there dating back MORE than two thousand years such as on the
island of Elephantine in Lake Tana were the transition from Hebraic to Christian worship is proven by the presence of ancient Jewish Alters and other
So I would point out that your reservations are unfounded BUT there are better more modern translations out there.
edit on 17-2-2022 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)
ask 5 people and get 5 different answers likely.
Personally, it's a guide, not a history book. Stories to teach morality and reinforce God's love.
The best part, everyone is right, since nobody can prove differently.
It is personal experience, personal choice, and personal belief.
My simple, insignificant, and humorous example.
I have lived the majority of my life in rural areas. I have no idea why, but one of the scenes that always stood out for me in the children's classic
"Charlotte's Web", was the ballooning scene.
In all my years, and there are quite a few of them, I never saw a spider ballooning. I had heard about them, but never personally experienced one. I
knew they were a possibility. But to be honest, I didn't see how they could be worth thinking about. Until the day the day I was standing out by my
pond and one approached and surrounded me.
I saw it coming. I had no idea what it was at first. My curiosity kept me firmly planted, until my brain finally registered what it was. When my brain
clicked in, I was amazed. I thought it was beautiful, funny, and terrifying all at the same time. My first instinct was to be baptized.
When I went back and watched this clip of "Charlotte's Web", almost every utterance made by each of the characters, strongly resonated with me.
This is my simple way of trying to explain what one could say a Biblical experience may be like.
The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of AboveTopSecret.com.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.