Posted on 06/08/2005 4:41:38 AM PDT by echoBoomer
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - An Israeli researcher has challenged the popular belief that Jesus died of blood loss on the cross, saying he probably succumbed to a sometimes fatal disorder now associated with long-haul air travel.
Professor Benjamin Brenner wrote in The Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis that Jesus's death, traditionally believed to have occurred 3-6 hours after crucifixion began, was probably caused by a blood clot that reached his lungs.
Such pulmonary embolisms, leading to sudden death, can stem from immobilisation, multiple trauma and dehydration, said Brenner, a researcher at Rambam Medical Center in Haifa.
"This fits well with Jesus's condition and actually was in all likelihood the major cause of death by crucifixion," he wrote in the article, based on religious and medical texts.
A 1986 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association mentioned the possibility that Jesus suffered a blood clot but concluded that he died of blood loss.
But Brenner said research into blood coagulation had made significant strides over the past two decades.
He said recent medical research has linked immobility among passengers on lengthy air flights to deep vein thrombosis, popularly known as "economy-class syndrome" in which potentially fatal blood clots can develop, usually in the lower legs.
Brenner noted that before crucifixion, Jesus underwent scourging, but the researcher concluded that "the amount of blood loss by itself" would not have killed him.
He said that Jesus, as a Jew from what is now northern Israel, may have been particular at risk to a fatal blood clot.
Thrombophilia, a rare condition in which blood has an increased tendency to clot, is common to natives of the Galilee, the researcher wrote.
© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.
Huh?
I know what I believe. You were saying I believe the Cross just makes salvation possible, which is silly.
It is the opposite...I believe the Cross accomplished something. That is a cornerstone of Calvinism.
Kyew kyew kyew, that's a good'un.
There is no sin, either, if one looks at the logical conclusions of Calvinism. Your sins are purely beyond your control, so why would God punish you for them?
Why don't you take a break?
Maybe it is for the Presbyterians. When I was in college, a friend and I wanted to see the inside of this truly gorgeous old Gothic Presbyterian Church tucked away in a very wealthy neighborhood. We politely walked up to enter, and...well, before I could even step through the door, the guy in charge escorted my Lebanese Catholic ass out of there faster than I could say Amen.
This is your "logical system":
I don't believe he is a puppetmaster.
He is unthwartable because for the 50TH TIME....SCRIPTURE SAYS SO.
God is not a puppetmaster and yet He is absolutely unthwartable. That is your self-contradicting statement. Either explain how this is "logical" or refrain from using that term.
SD
Um, the elect have to be Christians, and since they are Christians, the Holy Spirit lives inside of them and changes them.
You can't be a "bad" person (i.e. non-Christian if I think that is what you are getting at) and be elect.
You can't be a "bad" person (i.e. non-Christian if I think that is what you are getting at) and be elect
Define "BAD"
You believe you have reduced or modeled God's behavior based on this circular little rhetorical world you believe in. But in the process, you've departed from God and turned instead to a petty little god of your own creation who destines some to damnation. It's so terribly sad for you to live ignorant of the fact that God will not be defined by you, or Calvin, or any earthly cult leader. Won't happen. Can't be done.
I hope Calvin was more specific than that.
Again, just because something seems incompatible doesn't mean it is.
God is much bigger than you can understand Him, sooth.
I allow him to be beyond my comprehension. I know it seems contradictory, but I also know that God doesn't have contradiction.
You have a firm disconnect between the idea of potentiality and actual reality. You are not "saved." You might very well end up in Heaven. Then you will be saved.
But right now you are a sinful human just like the rest of us. The Cross allows us to be perfected through the grace flowing from the One True Sacrifice.
If I drop a rock into a pond, the ripples carry outwards. Even though the rock-throwing is "finished," the effects of the wave occur later in time.
This doesn't mean the rock or the rock thrower are not responsible for the waves, or that I believe the waves are my own doing. The question of whether something is "finished" in a timeline does not mean its effects do not carry outwards.
SD
Again, a completely circular argument. Furthermore, it limits what God can and cannot do. What makes you think that God cannot make someone elect, make them a Christian and at the same time make them an evil sinner? God's will is always done, right?
You can't be a "bad" person (i.e. non-Christian if I think that is what you are getting at) and be elect.
Why not? Isn't it up to God to decide who is and isn't elected?
But you've also claimed that God is perfectly logical. How does that work if God exists as a bunch of paradoxes?
Ping!
If you are going to plead the ineffability of God and His Plan (a stance I can completely understand), then please refrain from invoking the "logic" of your own position on predestination and please, please refrain from your utter earnestness in your own correctness.
SD
Please hurry up and define "BAD"
for me so I will be sure and not cross
that line.
Where'd he go?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.