The prophecy of Jesus' bones (John19.36) (image)

Hi everyone, I hope you are all fine and happy today and everyday, Amen =)​

Well, I spent much time in reading the bible in the past months, and I noticed something in this following verse, ​

These things has happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: '' Not one of his bones will be broken'' (John 19.36) (NIV)​

However, the Christians believe that Jesus was crucified by nails in his both hands, ​

The other disciples therefore said unto him, we have seen the LORD. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. (John 20.25)​

* Put my finger into the print of the nailsè which means there were two holes in his hands, right! If so, then the bones of his hands were broken!!​

Or was the prophecy meaning not one of his legs' bones! So to be sure, where can I find this prophecy in the OT? I.e. These things has happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled'' Not one of his bones will be broken''è he is quoting it from where? Which book? Because after that verse you read: 37: And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced. è He is referring to a Book of the bible '' Zechariah 12.10'' in the OT click ​

And If I am wrong, please clarify to me.​

http://rds.yahoo.com/S=96062883/K=skeleton/v=2/SID=w/l=IVS/SIG=12fjss0k2/EXP=1138609907/*-http%3A//www.biologycorner.com/resources/skeleton_labeled.gif
and click here
Enjoy your day

​

Peace

​

​

YoursSincerely,​

CatStevens​

 

Catstevens... I still owe you a follow up on your question about 'equality' between the 'persons' of what is called the 'Trinity' nature of God.
Before I get around to the most difficult issues such as the nature of God, I thought I would address this fairly easy and simple Issue.

There is no reason to believe that piercing the hands would break any bones.
The text is not totally specific about where and how exactly the nails were punched through the hand.
We do have reason to believe (based on outside historical evidence) that Romans would drive the nail just where the wrist meets the palm and between the two bones.
They did that on purpose.
They were experts on how to torture people, unfortunately.
Even if it were to be punctured through the hand - the soldier has no reason to be fooling around trying to hold a bone in place and actually that would be needlessly difficult to do if you think about it.
(the round and wet bone would just push aside on its own. Try it yourself with a pencil if you want?)
The whole thing is entirely horrible because the Romans only need to nail it in place and tie a rope around the wrist.
The evil idea behind this is that there should be excruciating pain if the victim tries to hold up his own body weight by his arms and and hands.
However
If the does hold up his body that way - he begins to asphyxiate as the rib cage cannot expand.
Really really sick torture.
Of course, if they wanted to end the day early they would just walk up and break the leg bones.
The victim (without support of the legs holding him) really does asphyxiate and dies shortly thereafter.

In Jesus case, he passes on before the Romans decide to 'end it for him' and they dont need to bother breaking his legs.

I understand that you are asking if this is specifically what they meant by 'No Bones Broken' but I think that seems to include the legs and everything else.
There is no reason to think any others were broken either.
I realise that at the very beginning it sounds surprising when someone asks you "HOW can hands be nailed and no bones broken!?' but if you think about it (or press a pen very hard into your own hand if you want?) you realise that it is likely hand bones were not broken at all.

The very horrible truth is that the Romans were masterful at how to slaughter a human being in such a perfectly slow and painful way that they stayed alive the maximum time for maximum pain.
Notice how they did not resort to such barbaric and potentially lethal ways like just breaking all his Ribs?
After all, the victim can die from that!
Instead they took barbed flails and then they sytematically strip and rip all the flesh off the Ribs.
Horrible and Very Efficient.

Anyways, the OT reference being made is to:
Psalms 34:20 He keeps all his bones; not one of them is broken.

 

Well CatStevens, I'm no longer xtian as you are already aware, but I believe the "no broken bones" thing is asumed along the following lines ~
Traditionally, crucifixions only ended upon the death of the crucified person. But because crucifixion was not permitted during religious occasions under Talmudic Law, when a person was not dead on the evening before the religious day, the legs would be broken so that they could no longer support the body, thereby hastening death. That apparently didn't happen to the supposed jesus because he was supposedly dead after only a part of the morning and most of the afternoon on the cross, about 9 hours at the most. Compare this with a crucifixion duration of several days, and you see an anomoly in jesus' dying time. So the supposed jesus supposedly died 2 or maore days quicker than anyone else, and his legs didn't need breaking to make it happen quicker. I believe that's the orthodox take on it.

 

It's true, in the Phillipines, devout Catholics will sometimes have themselves (temporarily) crucified on Good Friday as a way of payment to God (they need something done, and they make a promise to God if it happens that they will do this or that pennance). I saw this on the National Geographic Channel, this guy wanted one of his family members to recover from a serious illness, and promised God that if they did get well that he would have himself crucified once a year for several years (i think it was 7 but I don't remember). His hands were scarred but the bones didn't break.

 

I did see a documentary on this where they had forensic types (like CSI people) studying the various tortures in history.
They even went into the horrifying details about how the Romans actually want the bones and tendons to remain in place.
(warning: this is sick)
The very idea is that the arms and/or hands cannot fall apart or rip off.
They dont want that happening.
They actually want all the ligaments, muscles and bone to stay together.
Maximum pain is achieved.

In that particular episode they had discovered new external historical evidence of Cruxifictions and, in this case the victim had been nailed through the wrist (between the two bones).
Some debate ensued because Jesus is said to have been pierced through his hands.
I dunno.
Id like to ask a Hewbrew scholar if it really isnt the same thing anyways, given that even the wrist piercing could be seen as going through basically what you could call the bottom of the hand.
Later the investigators agreed that Crucifictions did indeed change and 'perfect themselves' over the years.
The one seen in Mel Gibsons 'The Passion' would have very easily been a variation, based on what they know already.

I did see that Philipino Guy on TV too.
I think he has been doing that for a while now.
His hand heals up surprisingly well every year (they showed it) but I sure as heck would NOT say that makes it a good idea either.

 

yeah well your right in that its all applied from Old Testament with regards to Passover. Passover's sacrificial lamb is the direct connection with the Christ, the sacrificial body for final and complete atonement. All NT references are there to link and extend from the Hebrew collective. The NT offers consistent sets of thesis/proof statements such as those you have highlighted in John. These were written to show the Hebrews how it fit with regards to Talmudic law...therefore they studied the scrolls and appropriated scripture where they wanted to place a proof. In my mind the relevance of 'broken bones' is more a stumbling block than anything else. Christ said he is the ultimate stumbling block right...the stone of offense. Every man will trip on Christ--they then must get up and decide who is right. Is Christ to blame for the trip or is the man?

Anyway...if God decided his bones would not be broken...then they wouldn't have been for the sake of preserving prophesy.

"Not one of his bones will be broken" is from a Psalm.

 

Erasmus70 Mr Ree TrippinBTM & Me Miles Away
​

​

​

​

Actually I tried to press before I wrote this thread but with my finger =), but I think it will cause some scratches (tiny -not deep- holes or the like in their sides) before they will be pushed aside which means the bone is not in good shape because of that small tiny pieces which has been removed from the bone or it will cause them to separate in their ends which will cause a tiny breaking (them: the fingers' bones are long and gathered at the end of their extending towards the rest see the images in post 1, they become closer to each other at their ends) BTW, they used a nail and I think it was from a large size so it can hold or make his hands fixed to the cross with the support of the rope, Thomas said that he wanted to put his finger into the hole and he did it according to the biblical verse, so at least we can imagine the size of the nails as a (male finger size), however, regardless the above, the point is to which prophecy they were referring to, the thing which I was looking for because basically I don't believe that he was crucified plus,

and I will give a comment regarding Psalms 34:20 at the end of my response.
​

​

​

​

​

​

I don't think that they were mindful or interested whether he will die quickly or not, or to have much pain probably, because Pilate thought that he was an innocent person and doesn't deserve such punishment! He wasn't an enemy of Pilate nor was this punishment issued by Pilate as a result of a breach of the Roman's Law that was broken by Jesus.
​

​

​

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
​

​

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
​

The Sabbath starts at about 6 p.m. on Friday
​

Now let's join John 19.28-33 with Luke 23.44
​

​

And it was about the sixth (12 at noon) hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth (3 pm) hour. And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst. And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost è (i.e. he died in this time)... Now it was the day of preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jews did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down, the soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other. But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already deadè notice that they firstly broke the two men's legs which of course it took a time to do so and that happened after the destruction of the temple etc, …This man went unto Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid. And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.
​

Haven't they heard him when he said: Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit!!!! This breaking the legs' issue is so doubtful!
​

I think that the breaking the legs thing and the prophecy of it plus the holes in the hand aren't mentioned except in the Gospel of John!
​

+ Click + the bible was written after Jesus' ascension (after three centuries as I read in somewhere I believe) so I think they studied the OT very well before writing it probably! And yeah they were influenced by Paul's teaching and conceptions before writing the bible probably! I don't know but I think some of the NT events and words were made up and changed deliberately just to fit them with the OT prophecies! That's what I found after my disputations in my thread [Is God 1 or 3?] and I cold be wrong.
​

​

I believe that he meant something else with that, but I am not sure of which verse you are talking about exactly.
​

​

​

​

1. (NIV) Psalms 34 (of David. When he pretended to be insane before Abimelech, who drove him away, and he left)è accordingly the speaker in verse 20 is David.
​

​

2. I can't consider this verse 20 as a prophecy it is a general speech! (KJV) Psalms 34.11-22:
​

11. Come, ye children, hearken unto me: I will teach you the fear of the LORD. 12. What man is he that desireth life, and loveth many days, that he may see good? 13. Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips from speaking guile. 14. Depart from evil, and do good; seek peace, and pursue it. 15. The eyes of the LORD are upon the righteousè the righteous is he who keeps his tongue from evil, does good, seeks peace è (v.13), and his ears are open unto their cry. 16. The face of the LORD is against them that do evil, to cut off the remembrance of them from the earth. 17.The righteous cry, and the LORD heareth, and delivereth them out of all their troubles. 18. The LORD is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit. 19. Many are the afflictions of the righteous: but the LORD delivereth him out of them all. He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is brokenè so who will follow the instructions of verse 13, he is then a righteous and not one of his bones will be broken by the enemies, it is a general thing!) Evil shall slay the wicked: and they that hate the righteous shall be desolate.
​

Read further more Psalms 37.1-26 specially verse: 25 it is a general matter, I don't think he is talking about a particular futuristic person!
​

If I am wrong or misunderstood the verse, I would like you to correct me
​

Have a nice peaceful and faithful day, Amen
​

​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

​

 

One of the problems with you 'Muslim Style' posts, CatStevens, is that you interject dozens of assertions or questionable theories throughout them.
It becomes to complicated to unravel and separate all the knots and twists and added assertions and 'questions' that most people cant be bothered.

Later you can say "well.. none of them seem to have an answer so this tells me there is no answer for it"

This is a diservice to yourself.
Its almost as if you are deliberately making a maze between yourself and any answers you might not want.

Staying on the original topic:
Psalm 34:20 would be best explained by a Hewbrew scholar but my understanding from reading it at face value or from what Im told is speaking of a Person.
However,
What I was saying was that Psalm 34:20 is what is being refered to when mentioned in the Gospel.
(and if Im wrong someone correct me?)

Now after that, its almost impossible to get any sort of answer/question going with you because on the one hand you will ask "If this is true then lets look at the facts"
But in the next sentence you now change the argument and say:
"Well of course its not really facts but a Hoax that was perperated 3 centuries later"

So since you believe the entire text around the Crucifiction is actually a lie written long after by liars and cheats purposely changing Gods word then why quote parts of Thomas putting his finger in the wound?

You see how Im saying you might want to start with a Premise then STAY WITH IT until that same issue is discussed?

Dont START by asking "Lets suppose this scripture is telling us facts"
then HALFWAY IN when everyone is abiding by YOUR premise you change the rules and say "But I dont believe these are facts anyways"

This goes against your own Book anyways.
The Koran makes it clear that the Bible is from Allah and that is cannot be corrupted.
So how do you come up with a story that it has been corrupted in the third century??

By the way.. there is no good reason to think the Injeels were written centuries later.
Why?
Just because you want to say that?
I can just say the Koran was writting in 1,700 ad if I feel like it.
Why not.. thats all you have done.

But like Muhammed says - The Bible including the Gospels are known in the time he writes the Koran, Allah acknowledges them, states they are Divine revelation and then makes it very clear that his divine revelation CANNOT be corrupted.

So what is you stand on this?
That will help us to get a more defined and workable position to argue from.
Not just being 'all over the place' like we are now.

 

Christ was Cruxficed On a T the nails were threw his wrist and the nails went threw the sides of his ankle *kinda like where achilles tendon thing is i think*.

The "cross" actully looked like this |--|--- The first | For his hands and the secound | for his feet, he stratled the cross.

They have never found an actual cruxfic. They've found * i think * one cruxfic related death that had evidence to it *and the nail was threw his ankle* and accient garffiti shows Christ on a |----|-- type "cross"

I love NGC channel

 

Yeah, but was the "T" cross strung from a tree as was roman practice, or was it free-standing as christians imagine?

 

Depends, it was likely that the | of the cross was in the ground already *so they could reuse it with out having to put it up* so he only carried the __. In this show they went through and reneacted the whole thing from start to finish just about and it is possible for a man carrying the top half to his "stake" more or less, then being lifted onto the base with about three people's help. The base had a slot for the top to sit in too. Very intresting show. I'm not to sure what it was called now.

 

I'm of a differerin view ~ that the "I" was a tree, and the cros-beam was carried to the tree where it was hoisted up using ropes after the dude was nailed to it. After that, the feet were nailed to the sides of the tree trunk to prolong the death ~ that's the conclusion of the archeologists who examined the corpse of the crucified man with the nails through the ankles. Bloody Ouch!! or what?

 

The show I watched might of been the same show as you. But the tree was cut into a beam correct?

 

Well 'Tree' or 'Beam' or 'Pole' or 'Stake' is really all the same thing here.
Basically its a tree trunk sticking out of the ground and how its been cut is no big deal really.
In the Gospels you clearly have it explained that Jesus carried the 'Cross' to the site.
Again, dont really need to work up to much on the wording here.
Cross Beam.
The 'Crossing Part'
The piece that goes across, etc.

I understand that some have imagined (for the sake of artistic license) that maybe the entire Beam AND Cross were attached beforehand.
Well whatever.. this is just artistic interpretations and not meant to be taken, included in the Bible itself and then refered to as Biblical Revelation.
Nobody thinks Jim Caveizal is what Jesus 'actually looked like' either.

In Gibsons movie he has the 'tree' part of the mechanism removed from the ground before the cross beam is attached.
Then its raised.
Well fine.
Others have the Tree in place already, then the Cross is hoisted up.
No big.

Keep in mind, for a long time the 'naysayers' were using the Crucifiction as yet another thing that was 'Unproveable' since there was no actual external evidence of Cruxifiction apparatus.
It been recently that they have indeed found apparatus, historical evidence and as pointed out - remains of people who were crucified.
So again - external evidence does indicate that the Gospel writers are talking about real things, in real places, in real times.

 

Erasmus70 ​

!!!! Click here and here and read the members' posts here ​

The crucifixion matter has happened but wasn't Jesus that one who was crucified as I believe, and when I quoted that thing ''Thomas' finger'' you know why! To imagine the probable size of the nail, if the Christians believe in the entire bible then I should quote to them from the bible to support my proof, however, I said the point is I wanted to know to which prophecy they were talking about or referring to! I want to know more about Christians' belief about God, their conceptions about God, Jesus, crucifixionetc, they say that they have proofs yet I found nothing in the bible! Why is that!Instead,I find so many similar teachings to Islam; Jesus (pbuh) is my prophet as well!If a Muslim denies Jesus, John the Baptist, Mary, or the disciples then he IS NOT A MUSLIM, he is OUT of Islam's area. I have the utter right to discuss biblical issues, if someone writes something wrong about Muhammad (pbuh) I have the right to defend him and to show the truth if there was a misunderstanding from the writer, it is the same with bible, as a Muslim I believe in God (the father), Jesus, the holy Spirit, Moses, David, Solomon, Mary, Isaac etc​

Jesus is one of the most closest prophet to me to my heart, I tried several times to meet him, (he is alive) but I failed read this I just got one message from him which I want and prefer to keep it and don't share it, however I decided to be Jesus' disciple in the future (after his return) I think if I am really want to be so then I should at least make the others who loves him as well (Christians) to know the true Jesus as I claim! (you might consider me), well, I spent (and still so) days and nights in reading the bible, and I have these bunch of Christians booklets and TV channels, lectures, websites etc yet I didn't find anything till today which points that Jesus was God or the son of God literally! Or something that confirms the Christians' conception of God and Jesus and the crucifixion etc!
Christians think that they are right; Muslims think that they are right also the Jews do so, who claims such thing should give a proof, again, Jesus is my prophet too! Jehovah is my God too, I should defend them, shouldn't I because Jesus has never claimed to be God and never will do so; I won't let all his efforts which he made to be useless! And I mean by defend them (by showing the reality of them and their message as I claim!)

Dear do you believe that there is only one truth, i.e. if there are two conflicting events - verses, the only one can be true, both can never be true, when I assume a verse is intact in the bible but another verse contradicts it, what do you call this! accordingly the fact is, only one of them is a true intact verse and the other one is wrong or we misunderstood one of the verses which they both give us the same conception, or both of them are wrong etc, you said the Christ was crucified I said no the Jews say he still didn't come yet! Who is saying the truth then! If I do not have salvation because salvation comes "only through the blood of the lord Jesus". "All my good works are like filthy rags" or if will not believe in Jesus as God then I will not enter into eternal life yet Jesus in both bible and Quraan is saying something else in how to enter into eternal life! ​

Quraan:Say… verily, (either) we or you rightly guided or in plain error.​

Quraan…Is there any God with Allah? (The father) say: ''Bring forth your proofs, if you are truthful''. ​

Dear, believing in God isn't a simple thing right! I mean after this life there is an eternal life (eternal Hell) or (eternal Paradise) so this is really so important and significant issue, we should think about it and dispute it till we reach the sure truth, if we are following our parents' religion blindly!

​

Oh dear! Allah has stated in the Holy Quraan that he revealed the Gospel to Jesus this is very true, yet he says too that it was corrupted by the hands of men deliberately after Jesus' ascension… and I didn't come up with that story that the bible has been corrupted in the third century! I am telling you what I read, go and read the non-Muslims investigators' results regarding the bible issue, there isn't the Gospel of Jesus there is the Gospel of Mark, Matthew, John etc which has been written after Jesus' ascensions, one of the researches I believe says that after three centuries the bible were written, why do think that there are 3 Gospels, it was only one! and I believe that it isn't like the one which was with Jesus at all, because the Gospels are including events of what has happened during Jesus' life etc, The four Gospel in some verses give us different events of the same event! Who is saying the truth, however, this isn't our issue anyway.

​

​

Yours Sincerely,​

​

Cat Stevens​

 

Erasmus70
​

would you quote that please!​

​

Allah stated in Quraan:​

​

say (O Muslims), '' we believe in Allah and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and to [the offspring of the twelve sons of Jacob] and that which has been given toMosesè (Torah)andJesusè (Injeel-Gospel), ….''Accordingly, Jesus and Moses are prophets of Allah and the Gospel and the Torah have been revealed to them from Allah.​

​

What happened was that all of these prophets (before Muhammad) were not well received by themajorityof the people, for instance they startedtampering[corrupting] with the teachings of Moses and Jesus peace be upon them. That is why Allah has sent Muhammad with the last Message (i.e. the Quraan) to bring all of mankind back to the true belief and to worship one God, without partners or intermediaries.​

​

[NIV]Matthew: 15: 3:​

​

And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? … 6: … Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.7: You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you8:These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.9:they worship me in vain; their teaching are but rules taught by men.​

​

​

​

Jeremiah 8. 4-8… declares the LORD Almighty.' 4 "Say to them, 'This is what the LORD says:" 'When men fall down, do they not get up? When a man turns away, does he not return? 5 Why then have these people turned away? Why does Jerusalem always turn away? They cling to deceit; they refuse to return.6 I have listened attentively, but they do not say what is right. No one repents of his wickedness, saying, "What have I done?" Each pursues his own course like a horse charging into battle. 7 Even the stork in the sky knows her appointed seasons, and the dove, the swift and the thrush observe the time of their migration. But my people do not know the requirements of the LORD. 8 " 'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?9 The wise will be put to shame; they will be dismayed and trapped. Since they have rejected the word of the LORD, what kind of wisdom do they have?​

​

​

Jeremiah6. 10:To whom can I speak and give warning? Who will listen to me? ​

​

Their ears are closed so they cannot hear. The word of the LORD is offensive to them; they find no pleasure in it.​

​

​

​

​

​

Jeremiah14. 14 Then the LORD said to me, "The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I have not sent them or appointed them or spoken to them. They are prophesying to you false visions, divinations, idolatries and the delusions of their own minds. 15 Therefore, this is what the LORD says about the prophets who are prophesying in my name: I did not send them​

​

​

​

Jeremiah23.36 But you must not mention 'the oracle of the LORD ' again, because every man's own word becomes his oracle and so you distort the words of the living God, the LORD Almighty, our God.​

​

​

​

Quraan: 2:85: … Then do you believe in a part of the Scripture and reject the rest?​

​

​

​

Quraan:… inspite of the fact that a party of them used to hear the Word of Allah, then they used to change it knowingly after they understood it?...Know they not that Allah knows what they conceal and what they reveal, … then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, this is from Allah, … Woe to them for what their hands have written…​

​

​

​

Allah told us that the Torah and the gospel have been corrupted; therefor Allah has sent Muhammad with the last Message (i.e. the Quraan) And Muhammad is the prophet of God and there are prophecies in the bible about him (pbuh) ​

​

​

​

Quraan: 15:9: Verily, I, it is I who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. Quraan) and surely I will guard it (from corruption).​

​

For Muslims the Qur’an is the last but not the only holy book revealed by Allah to mankind through His messengers. It is, however, the only holy book which remained intact from the time of its revelation until the present time. No addition, deletion, or interpolation found its way into the Qur’an.​

​

​

​

Quraan: 27:76: Verily, this Quraan narrates to the Children of Israel most of that in which they differ.​

​

​

​

Matthew; 21: 43: Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.​

​

​

​

John 4.21-34: (Jesus) saith unto her,Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Fatherè (see he said father not the son and the Holy Spirit, he only mentioned the father!). Ye worship ye know not what:è (Mithra probably , Christians are worshipping Mithra and they don't know!, for more information about Mithra click here and read posts #121 & 122 ) we know what we worship… and now is, when the true worshippersshall worship the Father…for the Father seeketh such to worship him.​

​

Acts 17:18… He è (Paul) seems to be advocating foreign gods.​

​

Please don't take off the topic again.​

​

Have a nice peaceful and faithful day, Amen​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

 

Kris?
​

​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

 

Well I see your second-to-last reply was taking the subject even further and further off-topic and into another forty five different topics.
Once again, totally confusing, self-contradictory and with so many offshoots and twists that its nearly impossible to deconstruct without a bag of tools and a long weekend.

Anyways... what exactly are you saying here:
Catstevens wrote: "The other disciples therefore said unto him, we have seen the LORD. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. (John 20.25) * Put my finger into the print of the nailsè which means there were two holes in his hands"

I think its pretty obvious here that there was a nail print (hole) in both the right and left hand.
So thats two.
Then Thomas refers to the would that Jesus received in his side (when he was speared by the Soldier).

So what are you confused about here Catstevens?

 

Actully you can argue that the wrist and hand can both be called "hand"

 

Erasmus70 ​

are you talking about my replys here in this thread to you, if so, then it goes without saying that you are very right, because you took off the topic by some of your comments and as a response from me on these comments I will took off the topic naturally by commenting on irrelevant comments to the main topic which was written by you!!!! And yeah, there are members who I won't name them, who are taking off the topic in my threads mostly! And of course I won't comment on their irrelevant comments all the time and always, some times I ignore it especially when I am not in mood or don't have the time to do so or when they write it sarcastically è (actually they don't want to read or don't care about what your response is gonna be)……​

Oh man! Catstevens is not confused about anything here! How many times should I repeat why did I quote that?? Would any member volunteer to copy or quote my response for this!​

I got my goal from this topic (to which prophecy they were referring to) I gonna board the peace train, would you like to join me, you're very welcome dude =)​

……………………………………………………………..
​

Cause out on the edge of darkness, there rides a peace train
Oh peace train take this thread, come take me home again
​

…………………………………………
​

Oh peace train sounding louder
Glide on the peace train
Come on now peace train
…………………………………………
​

Everyone jump upon the peace train
Come on now peace train
​

Get your bags together, go bring your good friends too
Cause it's getting nearer, it soon will be with you
​

Now come and join the living, it's not so far from you
And it's getting nearer, soon it will all be true
​

Now I've been crying lately, thinking about the world as it is
Why must we go on hating, why can't we live in bliss
​

Cause out on the edge of darkness, there rides a peace train
Oh peace train take this country, come take me home again
​

Enjoy your day
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​