It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

the author of Babylon Mystery changed his mind....

page: 12
4
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
"Christ's Death Under Medical Examination : Doctors' Investigation of the Crucifixion Published in AMA Journal"


These conclusions, at least, are the findings of the most complete medical review of the agony of Christ's death ever published in a medical journal. The article containing the conclusions was published last week in the "Journal of the American Medical Assn".


LA Times


edit on 10-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

Okay, so I see you are not going to answer the questions.
Obee kaybee then.

I'll just continue on with my investigation into the latest research.....
and thanks very much for your input!


edit on 10-3-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I find it hilarious that some 2000 years after the fact, doctors are sitting around evaluating the death of Jesus, when eye witnesses at the time had him up and walking around. What doctor is going to diagnose death when the patient is up, talking, walking and eating?



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 



Eli, Eli, Lama sabachthani?


I can say that in Aramaic. ^^^


"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

'It is finished" was exclaimed in Greek, (tetelestai", meaning "paid in full".



edit on 10-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I find it hilarious that some 2000 years after the fact, doctors are sitting around evaluating the death of Jesus, when eye witnesses at the time had him up and walking around. What doctor is going to diagnose death when the patient is up, talking, walking and eating?


That was after the resurrection. Meaning, His body resurrected.

And "some doctors" you're referring to was the world's leading expert in Forensic Pathology.






edit on 10-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

So, you just skipped the rest of the post.....
right?

Okay, NuT.
Be closed to new learning, be deaf to recent translations and discrepancies. Go ahead with your anti-Occam's-razor theory.
Oh, and by all means, reject everything that doesn't support your "beliefs."



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 



Be closed to new learning



It's nothing new. I've had these arguments dozens of times for dozen years.



Especially the Gnostic arguments, It's to the point I don't even feel like going through it again for the umpteenth time. I'll find Adjensen's thread and have you read it..



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



It's nothing new. I've had these arguments dozens of times for dozen years.

So then, you're not interested in the more recent "arguments". I get it.
Okay.

It is new. When will you (or why will you not) accept the current, rather than the dozens of years ago doctrine?
edit on 10-3-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





That was after the resurrection. Meaning, His body resurrected.

And "some doctors" you're referring to was the world's leading expert in Forensic Pathology.


Folly, utter folly. How can a forensic pathology make a statement as to the death of an individual without a corpse? It's especially suspect when witnesses attest that He was walking, talking, eating and touching people. There is no forensic pathologist that would bring this type of evidence to court.


edit on 10-3-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by colbe

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by 547000
 

. . . the early church believed in the same thing Catholics now do . . .

For the simple reason that they burned all the writings they did not like.


Well, they were 1 generation removed from the apostolic fathers, who were disciples of the apostles themselves. That's extremely close to the sources themselves.


Have you ever heard of Apostolic Succession? "Close?"....tee hee.
You best explain your statement.

The Apostolic Fathers were Roman Catholic. Ignatius knew John, Ignatius
believes in the Holy Eucharist. Ignatius, third Bishop of Antioch first
used the term "Catholic."


The thread has gone down another road. The Protestant/disbeliever
protest saying and so old, Catholicism is pagan was answered in the OP. The Protestants here won't touch it. LOL.

NTT hasn't replied to his statement above either. I see it's debate with
a disbeliever whether Our Lord is divine. Stupida.....

Christians have proof. The Shroud. It was tested again recently
and their findings, Science has not come up with the UV "light" needed to make the marks on the Shroud and this was 2000 years ago. The new
study figured the amount of light needed. Sorry, I forget the amount man can produce now.

Second, we have 2000 years of eyewitness to the miracles of Christ
and the faithful, all in God's will after Jesus ascended. Miracles tested by science that can't be explained.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





That was after the resurrection. Meaning, His body resurrected.

And "some doctors" you're referring to was the world's leading expert in Forensic Pathology.


Folly, utter folly. How can a forensic pathology make a statement as to the death of an individual without a corpse? It's especially suspect when witnesses attest that He was walking, talking, eating and touching people. There is no forensic pathologist that would bring this type of evidence to court.



I hope that's a joke. That's like saying a world-class gourmet chef could not sit blindfolded at your dinner table and eat a bowl of soup and tell you what ingredients you used to make it just by the taste.

I means SERIOUSLY. Is it possible to perhaps just read the link? This was in the first paragraph of the page:


And yes, even in the case of someone brutally executed on a Roman cross two millennia ago, medical evidence can still make a crucial contribution: it can help determine whether the resurrection of Jesus—the supreme vindication of his claim to deity—was nothing more than an elaborate hoax. With Stein having impressed on me the value of forensic clues, I knew it was time to seek out a medical expert who has thoroughly investigated the historical facts concerning the crucifixion and has managed to separate truth from legend.


RESURRECTION OR RESUSCITATION?


The idea that Jesus never really died on the cross can be found in the Koran, which was written in the seventh century—in fact, Ahmadiya Muslims contend that Jesus actually fled to India. To this day there’s a shrine that supposedly marks his real burial place in Srinagar, Kashmir.



It takes less than 4 minutes to read the entire excerpt of the interview.


Here


edit on 11-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 01:01 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 




I hope that's a joke. That's like saying a world-class gourmet chef could not sit blindfolded at your dinner table and eat a bowl of soup and tell you what ingredients you used to make it just by the taste.


Nope, not joking. this line of reason is total folly.

You analogy doesn't work. There is no soup at the table. The gourmet chef has to guess what's in the soup he has not tasted.

There is no corpse to analyze. The Centurian who beat Jesus had no personal beef with him, and we don't know if the Centurian took mercy with Jesus or not. We know that he choose not to break his legs.

We know he was still bleeding, after being taken down off the cross, and therefore, alive. And, we know that he was seen walking around, talking to people and eating.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 



The Centurian who beat Jesus had no personal beef with him


He probably had no beef with most everyone. He didn't need "beef", it was his J.O.B. "It takes less than 4 minutes to read the entire excerpt of the interview."



And, we know that he was seen walking around, talking to people and eating.


That was after the resurrection, not before.




edit on 11-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



It's nothing new. I've had these arguments dozens of times for dozen years.

So then, you're not interested in the more recent "arguments". I get it.
Okay.

It is new. When will you (or why will you not) accept the current, rather than the dozens of years ago doctrine?


There is nothing new wild, why don't you trust me when I say that? 1,800 years later and Gnostics are still trying to squeeze their cult into the first century.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 



Nope, not joking. this line of reason is total folly.


*sigh*

"“What does hypovolemic shock mean?” I asked.

“Hypo means ‘low,’ vol refers to volume, and emic means ‘blood,’ so hypovolemic shock means the person is suffering the effects of losing a large amount of blood,” the doctor explained. “This does four things. First, the heart races to try to pump blood that isn’t there; second, the blood pressure drops, causing fainting or collapse; third, the kidneys stop producing urine to maintain what volume is left; and fourth, the person becomes very thirsty as the body craves fluids to replace the lost blood volume.”

“Do you see evidence of this in the gospel accounts?”



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





“Do you see evidence of this in the gospel accounts?”


Nope. All I see are desperate grasps, speculation and guesses to support a supernatural theory when "Occam's Razor" easily supports his survival.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 



"Occam's Razor" easily supports his survival.


The medical doctors say the exact opposite. Fail. Christ was in hypovolemic shock before He even began His journey to Golgatha. It's a miracle He even made it to the site of the crucifixion without passing out completely. He potentially lost between 30-40% of His blood supply during and after the scourging. Quite often people never survived that punishment itself, let alone being crucified on top of it.

Jesus was very strong. As a carpenter who walked everywhere He went.




edit on 11-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 04:04 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 07:14 AM
link   
I will demonstrate why it's vitally important to see what the professionals have to say, doctors. An excerpt from the book, "The Case For Christ", by Lee Strobel. Taken from chapter 11, titled "The Medical Evidence, Was Jesus' Death a Sham and Resurrection a Hoax?, from pgs 202-203. "


THE CAUSE OF DEATH

"Once a person is hanging in the vertical position," he replied, "crucifixion is essentially an agonizingly slow death by asphyxiation."

"The reason is that the stresses on the muscles and diaphragm put the chest into the fully inhaled position; basically, in order to exhale, the individual must push up on his feet so the tension on his muscles and diaphragm for a moment. In doing so, the nail would tear through the foot, eventually locking up against the tarsal bones."

"After easing the muscle tension briefly enough to exhale the victim could relax and take another breath in as they slumped back down. Again, he'd have to press himself back up to exhale, scraping his open back on the hewn wood every time. This would go on and on until complete exhaustion would take over, and the person would no longer be able to push up anymore to breathe.

As the person's breathing slows down more and more he goes into what we call "respiratory acidosis", which means the carbon dioxide in his blood is dissolved as carbonic acid , causing the acidity of the blood to increase. This in turn leads to an irregular heartbeat. In fact, with his heart beating erratically, Jesus would have known internally he was at the moment of death, which is when he would have been able to say, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." And then he died of cardiac arrest.

"Even before he died, and this is very important, because of the hypovolemic shock from the scourging beforehand, it would have contributed rapidly to heart failure, resulting in the collection of clear fluid in the membrane around the heart , called a pericardial effusion, as well as around the lungs which is called a pleural effusion."






edit on 11-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   
This constant argument is pointless, futile, and nothing but folly. Your doctors weren't there. They CAN"T know what really happened. They have no body, corpse! They can only speculate and guess. There is no scientific proof for these wild claims. And, you continue to ignore the FACT that Jesus was up and walking around, talking and eating. Any doctor who takes this fact and still diagnoses death, is a quack!

How about we get these same doctors to attest as to how it was, scientifically, that Jonah DIDN"T die after 3 days in the belly of the whale.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join