For follow-up discussion and general commentary on the topic. Comments are sorted chronologically.
Larry Truelove
I do not believe Jesus literally sweated blood at Gathsemene. While the Greek language permits such an interpretation, it does not demand it.
Since it is admitted by all to be a very rare condition, that would argue for the least likely interpretation. Isn't it just as likely that great duress would cause normal copious flows of sweat from his body? If his sweat flowed like blood, wouldn't his disciples take note of it? Isn't it as equally likely that a medical doctor like Luke should describe an unusual but not rare phenomenon?
Ted Beaton
Well Luke 22:44 says "And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground." Note the words "as it were great drops of blood". They aren't saying his sweat was blood. They are saying " as if they were great drops of blood", in other words big drops like if someone was bleeding.... not necessarily the color of blood. The description is the size of the drops. So, I'm not sure he really sweated blood either. On the other hand, I think it is immaterial. Maybe he did maybe he didn't, it doesn't matter.
Stephen Wicker
In all of the translations of the Bible that I own, and there are several of them, the text in Luke NEVER says that Jesus sweated blood; it plainly says that his sweat was LIKE great drops of blood. The verse is plainly a SIMILE, a figure of speech that serves as an illustration. I have read all sorts of opinions that purport to explain this verse by stating that Jesus was suffering from some sort of blood-separation or blood-thinning in order that the pains of scourging and crucifixion would be heightened. But none of these "explanations" fits the clear meaning of the text, which remains a simile.
Danny Hickman
No, I don't think the writer wants us to think Jesus had some rare condition that caused Him to sweat hemoglobin. He says it was "as if" He was sweating blood. If the writer was telling us Jesus sweated blood, he would have said it more plainly than he said it. Clearly, he's using hyperbole.
Jesus' blood was shed for the sins of mankind. He didn't sweat blood. I, for one, think it's unchristian to claim that Jesus' blood was shed in any way except on the cross.