“And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn” (Luke 2:7, ESV).

Source: www.worldmag.com

The significance of Jesus’ birth is important. Jesus was born to ultimately be God’s sacrificial lamb. The law required that a lamb without blemish be offered as a sin offering for the people twice every day. So in order for Christ to fulfill the requirement of the law he had to be born "the lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world." John 1:29

 

For centuries Passover lambs were raised in Bethlehem? In those shepherds’ fields outside Bethlehem, a very special breed of sacrificial lamb was raised and nurtured to be brought to Jerusalem at Passover to be slaughtered to cover the people’s sins.And the shepherds were keeping their watch by night.

 

“The hills around Bethlehem were home to the thousands of lambs used in ritual worship in the Temple. Everyone in Israel recognized Bethlehem as being synonymous with sacrificial lambs.” (Harold Smith) The shepherds that night were probably even keeping watch over sacrificial lambs. The words “swaddling cloth and manger” were very significant to them, words they used on the job quite often.

 

There is a reason Jesus was born in a manger and wrapped in swaddling clothes.

 

When lambs intended for sacrificing were born they were cared for differently than other lambs. They were laid in a manger and wrapped in swaddling cloths to make sure that they did not injure themselves by falling, or thrashing around, because a sacrificial lamb had to be perfect, without spot or blemish. The shepherds knew where to find swaddling cloth and a manger and when they got there they found Jesus just as the angel had described.

Our sacrificial lamb wrapped in swaddling cloth, lying in a manger, prepared for death even at His birth.

 

So friends where else would you expect the sacrificial lamb to be born?

 

God made a way in a manger so that we might have a way back to God.

See on Scoop.it – Eagle Views

In recent years, some historians and archaeologists have claimed that King David of the Bible was an entirely fictional character. Others contend that the narratives of David’s kingdom found in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles are inaccurate embellishments of history.

“The most popular legends about David are the creation of generations who lived long after him,” wrote Jacob Wright of Emory University in an online article. “David’s slaying of Goliath, his exploits in the court of Saul, his relationship to Jonathan and Michal, his fate as a fugitive, his military triumphs abroad, his affair with Bathsheba, his civil war with Absalom, his succession by Solomon—all these colorfully depicted episodes were created by later generations of writers.”

However, an artifact currently on display at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York directly challenges these allegations. Known as the Tel Dan Stela, the artifact is a ninth-century B.C. stone slab that features carefully-incised Aramaic text. The artifact’s inscriptions commemorate an Aramean king’s military expeditions and reference both the “king of Israel” and the “king of the House of David.”

Source: christiannews.net

I get amused when archaeologists find yet another artifact that supports the biblical record and proves the skeptics wrong. Naturally the skeptics won’t ever admit they are wrong but will continue to look for ways to  discredit any credible evidence that disproves their theories.

 

Truth has a way of proving itself. Truth will win out in the end. Remember that one day every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord.

See on Scoop.it – Eagle Views

“It’s a very different Army than the one I came into.”

Source: www.ijreview.com

If you thought your boss was tough to work for, how would you like to work for this guy?

See on Scoop.it – Eagle Views

Two Pa. Legislators Indicted for Voter ID Bribes in a Case the State AG Refused to Prosecute,

Source: canadafreepress.com

You see folks voter fraud is the primary reason democrat lawmakers are against voter ID laws. They will even go as far as to accept bribes to vote against it. A word to the wise though, you do not have to pay these guys to vote against voter ID they are all in, but they will take your money nevertheless.

See on Scoop.it – Eagle Views