Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Zuriel

"The Lord was smart in not putting into the inspired word the month or day of his fleshly birth..."

Based on the Tradition (including, of course, the Holy Scriptures), the Church has determiend that our Lord was born on December 25, A.D. 1 (Julian). You did not know this?

Are you familiar with the Holy Thorn of Glastonbury?
If not, click on http://hocna.org/defense/thorn.htm


22 posted on 07/31/2005 4:38:19 PM PDT by Graves (Remember Esphigmenou - Orthodoxy or Death!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: Graves

**Based on the Tradition**

Sometimes I see that there are 'Traditionists' that gladly use science to try to prove a scriptural or 'Traditional' theology.

So, using science, I believe it has been proven that during Dec. thru mid-March the pastures in the high elevations (say, a 20 mile radius around Bethlehem) would have been dormant, even 2,000 yrs ago. Science and historical records have proven that the climate has changed very little over that span. Shepherds would no longer have been in the fields watching the flocks by night. The flocks would be in pens and fed forage, and the shepherds in their homes when the angels sang.

Note how cool it must have been in late March-early April when Peter tried to warm himself by a fire, and the cock was crowing.

I borrowed a book on this very subject years ago, but I will have to research the name.


24 posted on 07/31/2005 5:48:26 PM PDT by Zuriel (Acts 2:38,39....nearly 2,000 years and still working today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | 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