Draining Blood

[Augustine3]

I noticed the New Living Translation Bible says in Exodus 12:22 “Drain the blood into a basin” while the other translations do not have this.

The reason why I bring this up is because I was just thinking Jesus was completed drained of blood demonstrated by the soldier spearing His side. Also the Eucharistic offering Jesus’ body and blood, isn’t this also a symbolic reference to Christ being drained of His blood? Any thoughts with these parallels?

 

[Publisher]

I guess my question would be…do dead men bleed? And didn’t blood and water come from his side where it was located in the “heart sack”? So…not total blood loss. If he was dead…wouldn’t the blood receded to the lower extremeties? I am not Catholic…but I think you may be taking the typology a little too far by claiming Jesus was drained of blood…crucifixtion did not cause a man to bleed out…men died of affixiation…blood loss may have been a factor…but total exsanguination?

 

[edward_george]

Why anyone would be reading the NLT is a mystery. It’s not a translation in any meaningful sense of the word, but a paraphrase, oftentimes reflecting the doctrinal biases of the ones paraphrasing it. The RSV-CE renders the passage thus:

Take a bunch of hyssop and dip it in the blood which is in the basin, and touch the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood which is in the basin; and none of you shall go out of the door of his house until the morning.

The structure of that phrase even according to the Hebrew (which is followed very closely by the RSV) is nothing like “drain the blood into a basin;” the word “drain” doesn’t even occur in the passage. If I were you I’d get a decent translation like the RSV or even the Douay (although there are some that are better than it due to the fact that it was rendered according to what was available to scholars and linguists centuries ago, and more has become available now–including better textual methods and better manuscripts to work from).

-ACEGC

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I guess my question would be…do dead men bleed? And didn’t blood and water come from his side where it was located in the “heart sack”? So…not total blood loss. If he was dead…wouldn’t the blood receded to the lower extremeties? I am not Catholic…but I think you may be taking the typology a little too far by claiming Jesus was drained of blood…crucifixtion did not cause a man to bleed out…men died of affixiation…blood loss may have been a factor…but total exsanguination?

Note that His whole body was a raw bleeding mass from the scourging.

Also, note that He died much quicker than was expected in a crucifixion.

43 Joseph of Arimathea, a respected member of the council, who was also himself looking for the kingdom of God, took courage and went to Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. 44 And Pilate wondered if he were already dead; and summoning the centurion, he asked him whether he was already dead. *

Mark 15:43-44

 

[Acerunner]

I thought the common understanding was that Christ didn’t die from the actual crucifixion, but from receiving a spear through his paracardium which is actually filled with both water and blood.

 

[Agape_Thom]

Why anyone would be reading the NLT is a mystery. It’s not a translation in any meaningful sense of the word, but a paraphrase, oftentimes reflecting the doctrinal biases of the ones paraphrasing it.
-ACEGC

In fact, the NLT is a translation. I’ll leave it to others to debate its accuracy and value.

The Living Bible is a paraphrase. Many people confuse the two works.

 

[edward_george]

In fact, the NLT is a translation. I’ll leave it to others to debate its accuracy and value.

The Living Bible is a paraphrase. Many people confuse the two works.

Mea culpa. It evidently was translated with a heavily “dynamic equivalence” approach, a “thought-for-thought approach.” Problem with that is that if the translator gets heavy-handed with it, is it the author’s thoughts or the translator’s?

-ACEGC

 

[Publisher]

Note that His whole body was a raw bleeding mass from the scourging.

Also, note that He died much quicker than was expected in a crucifixion. Mark 15:43-44

If you wish to believe that his body was drained of blood…I have no issue with that…I personally do not find it a reasonable assumption, nor do I see it even inferred from scripture…but I’m not Catholic.

 

[Mintaka]

Re: catching some of the Passover lamb’s blood in a basin, this is why you have old Crucifixion pictures with Mother Church catching Jesus’ blood in a chalice. But there’s a difference, because the type is not the same thing exactly.

Jesus was not slaughtered exactly like a Passover Lamb or exactly like a kosher butcher would do it. There are serious historical and theological reasons why this was not so.

(I know you don’t mean anything bad by it, but you are treading perilously close to “the blood libel” and all the infection of the imagination which that implies. Be careful and prudent, and step back to the realities of Jesus on the Cross.)

It is very very difficult to drain a human of most of his blood, contra what you see in vampire movies. We aren’t built like livestock is. Surface wounds, like those produced by the scourging and crown of thorns, wouldn’t do it. Three hours on the Cross wouldn’t do it.

 

[Carrie1]

lolhttp://www.cleaningcassette.com