• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Human Sacrifice

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
So, in the same vain as my previous thread on animal sacrifice.

What makes human sacrifice wrong? And do we already do it in modern society?

I would say, yes, we do commit human sacrifice.

Any society that has the death penalty commits human sacrifice.

I am defining han sacrifice as follows: the killing of a person or person's to fulfill some ephemeral good/goal.

In the past human Sacrifice was often of captured warrior combatants, or willing participants. And these people were sacrificed in the name of the "greater good" and dedicated to the Gods.

I see no difference to that, and killing a criminal because of some transgressions. So that we can fulfill the ephemeral goal of "Justice", "order" and "law". Just like past sacrifices were for the ephemeral Gods.

These concepts are just as fleeting and morphic as the Gods themselves. Changing with society and it's desires. Just like the desires of the Gods change with the times.
 
Last edited:

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
If reincarnation is ever somehow proven true, one might have to rethink the death penalty as well -- in such a case, life in prison would be a better punishment -- assuming that isn't banned some day, too.
 

Viker

Häxan
Death penalty. War. Fame/stardom. The US is particularly the proverbial modern Canaan (land of idolatry and human sacrifice). All of that in the name of a Hebrew deity. :D
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So, in the same vain as my previous thread on animal sacrifice.

What makes human sacrifice wrong? And do we already do it in modern society?

I would say, yes, we do commit human sacrifice.

Any society that has the death penalty commits human sacrifice.
I think this is an error of terminology.

"Sacrifice" comes from two Latin words, sacer 'sacred' and facere 'to make'. and thus is performed in relation to a deity, as an offering ─ it's the act of offering the thing to the deity that makes it sacred.

So while you can indeed have a human sacrifice in those terms, there are a whole lot of other circumstances in which a homicide occurs which doesn't qualify as a human sacrifice.

And I'd say capital punishment is an example.
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
And I'd say capital

The second definition of deity is: divine status, quality, or nature.

Divine means of, from or like God. Which is how we treat our justice system.

So I still disagree on the grounds that the concepts of "law and justice" are held in the public opinion just as dearly as a divine status or nature, or unquestionable divinity. Inerrant.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
If humans are innocent of sacrifice it means no human chooses or enacts it's terms. No murder of any kind allowed includes scientific atmospheric causes. There is no sacredness.

As human life by natural law is lived to be saved living until natural death by gods laws. Humans natural death was as gods sacrifice only as a life no longer saved.

Was the teaching. Misread as per usual. Hence no sacrifice was first. Why life was sacrificed second. Third was only natural law owned human death equally.

As in the beginning mutual equal should be the same for the end of life.

We introduced penalty meaning if you take a life you should be conscious mind subject to your own imprisonment.

To think upon your choice of owning a life lived mutually equally by law. Then how it was taken by your choice thinking first.

Humans said imprisonment was legally correct in nature's terms. As thought was used first. To contrive.

Why imprisonment to cause you to think was mutual. No longer with a family interaction was given. As the equal term. Not lying by murder penalty as murder sacrifice. But giving an equal outcome. By human choice.

Removal of a life with family.

Imprisonment was that ideal.

Now if you retrain the human memory whilst imprisoned. If you believe in reincarnation then you successfully re conditioned the memory.

Yet the sentence should be lived exact. Human behaviour proves that if leniency is given to a thinker of murder life sacrifice. The choice continues.

As humans weigh their conscious choices by others examples.

Leniency was thought worthy. The deceased however owns no say and no-one really speaks on their behalf. Hence nor should the criminal.

As human consciousness also proved our mind is affected by other living human members. Then dealing with teaching training criminal minds is important also.

Why murderers were kept separate from other criminals.
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
I think it has its uses, but not for your average Joe. I'm talking people that can do way more damage than your average Joe even knows how to do - the kind that are truly dangerous and not just mentally ill.

Anyone that is "truly dangerous" is probably mentally ill, imv
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The second definition of deity is: divine status, quality, or nature.

Divine means of, from or like God. Which is how we treat our justice system.
Still, the point of the sacrifice is the offering to the relevant god, which makes the sacrifice "sacred".
So I still disagree on the grounds that the concepts of "law and justice" are held in the public opinion just as dearly as a divine status or nature, or unquestionable divinity. Inerrant.
What we need is a new word. In Latin, 'law' is lex / leg- eg as in legal, legislate.

So instead of a sacrifice we could have a legifice.

But a better word might be 'lawful killing' ─ legiticide, perhaps?
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
Still, the point of the sacrifice is the offering to the relevant god, which makes the sacrifice "sacred".
What we need is a new word. In Latin, 'law' is lex / leg- eg as in legal, legislate.

So instead of a sacrifice we could have a legifice.

But a better word might be 'lawful killing' ─ legiticide, perhaps?

We had Gods of Law at one point. (Tyr, YHWH, for instance). Their names need not be invoked anymore for it to still be a sacrifice to them.

Legiticide, and legifice are an interesting approach to it though.

Really my main goal with this thread though (and the animal sacrifice thread), was to point out that we are really still no different then our ancestors who did sacrifice to deities. We just don't consider them gods usually/anymore.

I was recieving a lot of flak last week for being a Pagan Polytheist because our/my ancestors would have been ok with sacrifice, so that must mean that we want to bring those things back.
 

paradox

(㇏(•̀ᵥᵥ•́)ノ)
I think this is an error of terminology.

"Sacrifice" comes from two Latin words, sacer 'sacred' and facere 'to make'. and thus is performed in relation to a deity, as an offering ─ it's the act of offering the thing to the deity that makes it sacred.

So while you can indeed have a human sacrifice in those terms, there are a whole lot of other circumstances in which a homicide occurs which doesn't qualify as a human sacrifice.

And I'd say capital punishment is an example.
you're correct, human sacrifice is exclusive to religion.
 

Hermit Philosopher

Selflessly here for you
So, in the same vain as my previous thread on animal sacrifice.

What makes human sacrifice wrong? And do we already do it in modern society?

I would say, yes, we do commit human sacrifice.

Any society that has the death penalty commits human sacrifice.

I am defining han sacrifice as follows: the killing of a person or person's to fulfill some ephemeral good/goal.

In the past human Sacrifice was often of captured warrior combatants, or willing participants. And these people were sacrificed in the name of the "greater good" and dedicated to the Gods.

I see no difference to that, and killing a criminal because of some transgressions. So that we can fulfill the ephemeral goal of "Justice", "order" and "law". Just like past sacrifices were for the ephemeral Gods.

These concepts are just as fleeting and morphic as the Gods themselves. Changing with society and it's desires. Just like the desires of the Gods change with the times.

As long as it’s not done “in any God’s name” (for that would be to deceive oneself) and instead, is seen for what it is - a self-interested act (or view) of fear - then, it’s one that oneself is responsible for having committed (or had).


Humbly
Hermit
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
As long as it’s not done “in any God’s name” (for that would be to deceive oneself) and instead, is seen for what it is - a self-interested act (or view) of fear - then, it’s one that oneself is responsible for having committed (or had).


Humbly
Hermit

I don't do anything out of "fear" of my gods.
And I also don't think I'm self-deluded.
But I digress.

"In the name of the Law" is just as much a Deity, as "in the name of Tyr God of Law." Adding the word God of to it doesn't make it any more or less a Deity then the fact that we worship our Laws in the ephemeral name of "Truth, and Justice".
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Don't worry, I won't. Moreover, now it is unlawful, and one who indulges in it will get at least a life in jail if not a death sentence. It is not unheard of in India even in this age. Generally, to get a male child, a treasure or in hope of getting occult powers. Superstition.

"Currently human sacrifice is very rare in modern India. There have been at least three cases through 2003–2013 where men have been murdered in the name of human sacrifice."
Human sacrifice - Wikipedia
(Aup's note: It is not that rare. Tourists should not put their faith in sadhus while trekking in Himalayas)
 
Last edited:

Hermit Philosopher

Selflessly here for you
"In the name of the Law" is just as much a Deity, as "in the name of Tyr God of Law." Adding the word God of to it doesn't make it any more or less a Deity then the fact that we worship our Laws in the ephemeral name of "Truth, and Justice".

Personally, I cannot recall ever thinking that I’m doing this or that “in name of the law”. But by “we”, perhaps you mean as in “a society”? Does society “worship” its laws though…? I’m not sure…


Humbly
Hermit
 
Top