Talk:Blood ritual

The Jesus bit is opinion, not fact!

…

Oh yeah? -Dan 05:47, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, get over yourself! It's unneccessary every time Jesus or God or Buddha or Muhammed are mentioned to worry about offending atheists and using weasel words. If you don't believe in Christianity, it's not true; if you do, it is. And beside, the sentence begins "In Christian tradition...", making the whole sentence a fact, not an opinion. You've got POV, my friend. 212.2.182.169 17:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

However, when that comment was made, it did not start with "In Christian tradition", making it merely obsolete. --OGoncho 20:26, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Writing Style

This article needs to be rewritten to conform to proper Wikipedia reference citing format. Currently it's formatted like a high school paper with a source section instead of links and tags. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.59.95 (talk) 21:23, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Philosopher's Stone

Should probably mention philosopher's stone and alchemy. Generally the idea is blood, placenta or fetus is the main ingredient. Stories of resurrection attributed to philosopher's stone might really be talking about blood ritual. The promise of collective resurrection was tied to ideas about alchemy. The Egyptian weighing of the heart ceremony at death comes to mind, there's also things saying the heart would be used to make philosopher's stone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C56:6D00:310:0:3D77:52A3:24B5 (talk) 19:16, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]