-----------------------------
Expert: Crucifixion caused pulmonary embolism, not fatal blood loss
Published on June 8, 2005 By ----- In Religion
I'm not christian,but i betcha this will piss a few christian people off....

JERUSALEM - 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’ death, traditionally believed to have occurred 3 to 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 immobilization, multiple trauma and dehydration, said Brenner, a researcher at Rambam Medical Center in Haifa.

“This fits well with Jesus’ 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.


Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.

Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jun 08, 2005

For the Doctors of the time, they probably assumed Blood loss.  That he may have died from a blood clot is immaterial to his life and cruxifiction.

And in the end, anyone can hypothesize about the cause of death, but in so doing, they affirm his life and works, even if they do not agree with his status as the Son of God.

on Jun 08, 2005
For the Doctors of the time, they probably assumed Blood loss. That he may have died from a blood clot is immaterial to his life and cruxifiction.
And in the end, anyone can hypothesize about the cause of death, but in so doing, they affirm his life and works, even if they do not agree with his status as the Son of God.


Well said, Doc...leave it to you.
If Christ died of a blood clot, it was the clotted blood at the foot of the Cross, and that's all that matters.
on Jun 08, 2005
Who cares, really? He died. Thats it. End of story.

--I take it your possibly atheist??
on Jun 08, 2005
"Who cares, really? He died. Thats it. End of story."

I don't believe that Jesus was the son of the highest being, but I would hardly say that his death was the end of the story.
on Jun 08, 2005
He said that Jesus, as a Jew from what is now northern Israel, may have been particular at risk to a fatal blood clot.


This makes about as much sense as the rest of your thread....

Thrombophilia, a rare condition in which blood has an increased tendency to clot, is common to natives of the Galilee, the researcher wrote.


As one whose second home is in the Galilee, this is the first time I ever heard anything so ridiculous.

There is no way whatsoever that any doctor can determine the cause of death of a person over 2000 years ago, especially without examining the remains, which in this case are no where to be found. It is best to dwell on the teachings of Jesus and the love He professed for his fellow human beings than to dwell on what caused his death.
I am not a Christian so I am not upset with your article, but honestly, it makes no sense whatsoever.
on Jun 08, 2005

Who cares, really? He died. Thats it. End of story.

Ah, not quite.  It was the Beginning of the story!

on Jun 08, 2005

I don't believe that Jesus was the son of the highest being, but I would hardly say that his death was the end of the story

Damn, should have read your comment first!  great minds think alike!

on Jun 08, 2005
I don't believe that Jesus was the son of the highest being, but I would hardly say that his death was the end of the story.


ain't that the truth!
on Jun 08, 2005
DISCLAIMER: I was not the one that said ["Who cares, really? He died. Thats it. End of story." ]

I have great respect for most religions,ironically least of all is catholism,namely cause of the inquisition,and other incidents...but oh well.....
on Jun 08, 2005
Kind of like saying J.F.K. died of explosive brain loss. Someone was beaten, crucified, and died. Hairsplitting "cause" in the case of this guy's hypothesis is semantics, wouldn't you say?

" have great respect for most religions,ironically least of all is catholism,namely cause of the inquisition,and other incidents...but oh well....."


One would think you would pick a religion committing atrocities NOW, instead of one whose crimes were commited 500 years ago. If you want to dwell on ancient history while people are being beheaded and victimized daily, though, rock on...
on Jun 08, 2005
One would think you would pick a religion committing atrocities NOW, instead of one whose crimes were commited 500 years ago. If you want to dwell on ancient history while people are being beheaded and victimized daily, though, rock on...


I'm not dwelling it (oh and fanatical islam is down on my list), a religion as prominent as catholism should've realized that what they were doing was wrong, look in the bible and it will tell you that...
on Jun 08, 2005
There are bad people from EVERY religion. Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Catholics, etc., etc. My cousin is a Christian and he freakin KILLED someone. There are lots of Muslims who kill in the name of their faith, and die for that faith. Even if people hail from different faiths, they're still people, and people do stupid, neurotic things, religion or not.

And it is possible to determine the cause of death from someone 2000 years ago...but really, the fact that He died is enough for me...but His death isn't the end of the story...not by a long shot.
on Jun 09, 2005
people do stupid, neurotic things

--Sadly so...thats why i think humans might end up an "endangered species" if we keep doing those types of things...
on Jun 09, 2005
Ignorance is bliss and morons thrive on it.
on Jun 09, 2005
I take it you consistently assume things that you shouldnt.

I meant exactly what I said, DEAD IS DEAD. Whether you believe thats the end of the story or not is irrelevant. It doesnt make a lick of difference if he died from exposure, blood loss, catastrophic injury, dehydration, or a blood clot.

While the theory may be interesting to ponder, it doesnt change the fact that he died, so for the life of me I don't understand why you would preface the article with this bigoted and ignorant statement


--Wasn't assuming,thats why i said Possibly...

What the hell is there to be pissed off about


I've known quite a few hard core christians that would see this and go nuts (figurativley) they would see it as blasphemy,etc...etc...
2 Pages1 2