Yeah, I’ve hear similar but it doesn’t track. It assumes that because the fluids are coming out of the same wound that their source must be the same. Since we’re talking about an abdominal cavity wound, that may or may not be true. Most likely it is not.
The whole point of crucifixion is to slowly drown you in your own fluids caused by shock, and produce the longest sustained amount of pain. Crucifixion is one of the most brutal deaths ever created. Anyway, all this fluid collects in the lungs and then your abdominal cavity slowly over hours and days, so there’s your water. Jesus' crucifixion was actually pretty quick as far as crucifixions go because he was already in shock due to the brutal flogging. 40 lashes was considered a near death sentence in Roman times because of the likelihood of throwing the body into shock. That’s why Paul was sentenced to 39. Plus, he requested it? Maybe.
I digress … Anyway,
There are several major organs in the abdominal cavity that require vasculature to support them as well as several large veins recycling blood up from the lower extremities back to the heart passing through the abdominal cavity as they do so. If the sword also pierced one of those arteries or veins, there’s your blood.
The fact that the fluids were described as waters and blood suggest this to be the more likely scenario. You don’t usually see them as separate when they mix as they would have appeared if they came from the same source. When mixed fluids is the case it just looks like and is most often described as discolored blood, or there will be mention of a rancid odor. Pitch blood, for example, is what people commonly referred to vomited blood from an ulcer or stomach infection: blood mixed with stomach acids and contents. Bloody pus and bloody urine or stool are other examples. I’ll stop grossing you out now.
Oh, by the way, I didn’t just pull this out of my ass. Years ago I read a breakdown of the Crucifixion by physicians. While the article focused mostly on the accuracy or not of the nails, they determined he had to have been nailed through his wrists because that’s the only way his weight could have been supported, it also was a kind of play by play determining that it took Jesus about 9 hours to die. They made a false assumption as well though, that the nails were the only thing holding him up. So, I personally think they were wrong there.
Anyways, I read this very in depth article like 30 or 35 years ago. I was a teenager at the time so there’s no way I can reference it or cite it. I have no memory of where it came from. Maybe National Geographic? I was reading a lot of National Geographic and Scientific American back then. Also spending a lot of time in hospital waiting rooms and reading third magazines.
