288 replies to this topic

[Fyxe]

All I was saying is that I am no biologist, I have no actual idea (I DID point this out, by the way), but the fruit carton analogy was pointless and I was trying to show that. There must be something to what Harry said otherwise they wouldn't be able to back up his main piece of evidence. He sounded pretty sure that already dead bodies won't gush blood, and just maybe he had a point, but you dismissed it out of hand and then told me to stab myself to check.

[Alakhriveion]

All I was saying is that I am no biologist, I have no actual idea (I DID point this out, by the way), but the fruit carton analogy was pointless and I was trying to show that.

No, it wasn't.

There must be something to what Harry said otherwise they wouldn't be able to back up his main piece of evidence.

What do you mean? People can be wrong easily.

He sounded pretty sure that already dead bodies won't gush blood, and just maybe he had a point, but you dismissed it out of hand.

Because bodies DO have blood in them!

[Fyxe]

But what happens to the blood when someone dies? There's a reason they go pale and cold, and you know that the heart stops pumping blood around the system. Look, I'm just making no judgements because I simply do not know.

[Korhend]

Look decapitation kills someone instantly. According to this theory, a human wont bleed from a guiloteen. In actuallity, the blood forces out at a tremendous rate, even though the body is already dead. As for why people go pale, thats because oxygen has stopped being put into the bloodstream, blood doesn't just disapear. It takes days for a body to decompose. The whole idea is based on slipshod reasoning.

[Nevermind]

The blood coagulates when someone dies. If you cut up a body in an autopsy, you'll still get blood on you, it'll just be more like jelly-blood. So the blood remains in the body until, like the rest of the body, it decomposes into its chemicals and whatnot.

[Alakhriveion]

The blood coagulates when someone dies. If you cut up a body in an autopsy, you'll still get blood on you, it'll just be more like jelly-blood. So the blood remains in the body until, like the rest of the body, it decomposes into its chemicals and whatnot.

And an autopsy is done more than an hour after death: Standard-Issue fluid blood will escape the body when it is allowed to, regardless of the livelyhood of the body. The defense rests.

[Showsni]

The Gospel tells us that blood and water came forth from the wound. The doctors tell us that the lance in all probability pierced our Lord's right lung and then His heart, and the water which came forth was fluid from the lungs and heart. The accumulation of this fluid is normal in cases of heart failure and extreme blood loss. The lance thrust alone would have been fatal.

Besides which, if Jesus did faint on the cross he would then have died of asphyxiation - it is impossible to breathe on a cross unless you physically push yourself up by the ankles.

[Korhend]

Yes that does kinda moot the point now that you mention it. Even if he was alive when they stabbed him, they stabbed him in the side with a spear.

[Alakhriveion]

Besides which, if Jesus did faint on the cross he would then have died of asphyxiation - it is impossible to breathe on a cross unless you physically push yourself up by the ankles.

Which is why they'd often break your legs.

[Nevermind]

And an autopsy is done more than an hour after death: Standard-Issue fluid blood will escape the body when it is allowed to, regardless of the livelyhood of the body. The defense rests.

Yeah well, duh. Blood doesn't instantly coagulate in a quick snap bang done. No further questions, Your Honour.


The prophecy was meant to be that none of his bones would be broken, which is where the whole Longinus spear comes from because rather than break his legs to be sure he died, a spear was shoved into his side. And I'm guessing it wasn't a little tiny peck either.

Even if he didn't die from asphyxiation, after three days, a nice stab in the lungs would make sure he did.

[arunma]

While I don't know the technical aspects of the human body, I DO know that fruit punch doesn't clot, and it's very hard to make a carton of fruit punch die.

I'm pretty sure clotting isn't an issue. Clotting isn't merely a process of allowing blood to dry. It requires the presence of a certain clotting factor. In fact, certain people have the condition of hemophilia, and if you cut them, their blood will not clot at all. I'm fairly certain that if a person is dead, then this clotting factor will not be activated, and his blood will not clot.

[Nevermind]

No, but after the cells die, it coagulates, rather than clotting.

[Alakhriveion]

Right, but not immediately after death. The issue here is whether liquid blood can escape the body through a wound after the heart has stopped. It obviously can. Physics, yo.

[arunma]

Right, but not immediately after death. The issue here is whether liquid blood can escape the body through a wound after the heart has stopped. It obviously can. Physics, yo.

And physics just happens to be my specialty. Yes it is possible that blood would come out of Jesus' side. In fact, I'd say it's almost definitely a correct account, since we're dealing with a spear wound. That said, I don't think the blood and water would "gush" out as some people here imagine. And that's not how all Christians imagine it either. In the recent movie The Gospel of John, the filmmakers had the blood and water ooze out of Jesus' side, rather than come out with a high pressure, as in The Passion of the Christ.

So yes, blood and water would come out, but it probably would gush out.

[Korhend]

and the possibility that it wouldn't come out much at all? As in, a slight trickle to nilch?

[Nevermind]

Possible due to an unknown problem with the body, but not probable

[Korhend]

Ah but Harry-Hermoine made a blanket statement

It is known to every man that from a 'dead' body, blood cannot possibly not gush out as the hearts stop working

In this time her statement has been wittled down from it being impossible for any other occurance, to a me possibility, not even a probability. To defend my claim I have put forth science, reason, rhetoric and annectdotal evidence. She has put forth nothing but her own assertions and insults. I have been accused for "dismis(ing her) claims out of hand". But when I responded to Harry-Hermoine's claim with my reasoning she responded

Korhend, it saddens me to know that you have no idea on what you talk about, but 'defend' it regardless.

She offered no further evidence and has yet to do so since or prior asside from with her own assertions. So who really is dismissing possibilities out of hand? I'm perfectly willing to accept other peoples reasoning as long as they can defend it with some modicum of reason and scientific reasonability, which Harry-Hermoine's claim has fallen far short of. She's welcome to come into this argument at any time and disprove physics to defend her stance. To get a clearer veiw on who is providing what to this argument, I made a graphic:

Attached Files

•  lopsided.jpg   36.48K   18 downloads

[Nevermind]

Lmao. You smartass. You should do up a pie chart, that'd just top things off completely.

[Reflectionist]

Lost sheep means the human race. Sorry to bust your bubble... you know, the whole, Jew and Gentile thing...

ah, and don't forget that Jesus said to 'Go and make disciples of all nations'

fun, even John 3:16 proves everything you said wrong... "For God so loved the WORLD..."

So, personally, I can not see how you come up with such accusations... we already proved that Jesus died.

And yet, you said, that as a Muslim, you don't believe Jesus went to the cross... but you argue that he didn't die while he was on it? If anything, Jesus either died on the cross, or he didn't die, off the cross. There's no way to get around that one... blood loss, asphixiation, even though I didn't say that right... and don't forget getting beaten almost to death by centurions.

BtW, Pilate wanted to save his own skin, remember? He was torn between his loyalty to Caeser, which would say do what was requested of him.. and his loyalty to his wife, who wanted Jesus alive at all costs.

[arunma]

Yes, i am muslim. But if you must know majority of muslims beleive that Jesus never went on the cross, and he went physcially up to heaven and is right there as we speak and will come down one day to wage war.

[/size]
Yes, I know. Actually, Khuffie (the owner of these forums) is a Muslim, and he got me interested in studying Islam about a year ago. So I'm aware of what Muslims believe about the crucifixion, but thanks anyway.

Why don't you answer the question that WHY on earth did Jesus not go to the lost sheep of Israel, somethign he promised to do so?

Jesus did go to Israel. In fact, Israel was the only people he went to. For three years he ministered to the Israelites, and the entire Gospel details this account.

You want to know what i think is illogical? Giving you arguements from the Holy Quran!!!

Fair enough.

I mean, you beleive Prophet Muhammad, God Forbid, 'made-up' the Holy Quran and not God's word. Why would i want to quote that here, and wait for your insults on my beloved prophet?

Well yes, that is what I believe, though I would have put it more politely than that. Anyway, no one here is going to insult Mohammed. It's more or less against the rules to directly insult the religions of others, or their figures. That includes both Mohammed and Saint Paul, and any other apostle whom you think is a liar.

Jesus himself prophcised he would come out of the heart of the Earth ALIVE (just like Jonas).

But you've misinterpreted the sign of Jonah. First of all, the sign of Jonah refers to the three days Jesus spent in the earth, not the state of Jonah's body inside the fish. Secondly, even if we were to go with this ultra-literal interpretation of the sign of Jonah, it's more probable that Jonah died in the sea and was raised back to life. It's not possible to survive for three days without water.

This is not an ordinary statement concidering most christians beleive he never went an foudn them, instead *escaped* to heaven three days later.

Actually, Christians do believe that Jesus went to the "lost sheep of Israel." These so-called lost sheep were the people that Jesus ministered to for three years.

You must be aware that Matthew, John, etc etc were not eye witnesses of the crucifixion yeah?

Actually, Saint Matthew and Saint John were eyewitnesses to the crucifixion. They were among the twelve original apostles.

I do sincerely beelvie that Jesus said not to go the Lost Sheep, and i quoted a verse of his, INSTRUCTING HIS APOSTLES....not to go to the gentiles, but Saint Paul did, and he did preach amongst them.

Jesus instructed his twelve apostles not to go to the Gentiles when he sent them on an initial ministry. After he was resurrected from death, he did tell them to preach to the Gentiles. This ordinance is at the end of every one of the Gospels.

If i state so, witht he bible as my proof, what crime have i commiited?

[size=2]The problem is that you're taking Bible verses out of context, and you're picking and choosing what parts of the Bible to believe, and what to omit. I'm aware that Muslims believe the Bible is flawed and corrupted. That's fair enough. But if that is so, then you ought not to use the Bible as a source of information, because you don't know what parts are accurate, and what parts aren't. Do you see my point?

[Showsni]

To say he was 'dead' could and does mean that he merely fainted, as the rest of the other versus show.

Had he fainted, then he would have died, since it is impossible to breathe on a cross whilst unconscious.

[Reflectionist]

So when Jesus said he is not sent BUT to the lost sheep, he was clarifying (for you in particular) that his religion is not for aliens?

In response, if you were driving down the lake in a jet ski, and the wheel came off, would it take the same amount of pancakes to cover a doghouse?

[Nevermind]

So when Jesus said he is not sent BUT to the lost sheep, he was clarifying (for you in particular) that his religion is not for aliens?

Well, unless you're able to get hold of an alien Bible telling of Jesus' travels to their planet OR show me some reference in our own Bible to the existence of extraterrestial beings, then yeah, I don't think His religion is for aliens.

But then again, if God can put Himself into a human form to save humans, why would He sent that same human form to an alien race?

It's not possible to survive for three days without water.

I always thought one could survive 5-6 days without water?

[Nevermind]

The Gentiles were always the non-Jewish people o.o

Nowadays it's basically been incorporated into use by a person who is part of a specific religion to refer to someone who is not. According to Judaism, Hinduism, and Mormonism, a Gentile is a non-Jew, non-Hindu, and a non-Mormon, respectively.

However, in the Bible, it is referring to those not of the Jewish faith.

If He did in fact say not to go to the Gentiles, but to the Lost Sheep of Israel, then He would have been saying don't go to the non-Jewish, but to the Jewish that have been mislead or corrupted. Lost (misguided) Sheep (Followers) of (of) Israel (Judaism).
However, I'd like to see the verse myself, rather than take your word for it.

I read the verse about the Lost Sheep and such, and if you keep going, He says to the woman that she has great faith, and her daughter was healed. She was a Canaanite.

And what the hell is all that about seeing things as they are and not escaping? You're the one who made up all that stuff about the aliens o.O