Talk:Human sacrifice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Human sacrifice:
  • Expand the lead section to 3 paragraphs or so
  • Provide citations throughout the text
Priority 2

unsigned, undated posts[edit]

Has it occured to anyone that Christian heresy trials were a vestige of human sacrifice cults in earlier religions? There must be some studies on this. I'll look into it. This page strikes me as having an occidental biased pov.

[edit]

these paragraphs have an ass-load of linked words, it harms readability. if someone really doesn't know what "mediaeval" is they can type it in themself, is my opinion.

folklore, antropology[edit]

I suggest to take also into account "The Highest Altar" by Patrick Tierny (Viking Penguin 1989). Tierny cites several Hebrew scholars on (pre-biblical?) human sacrifice (p.394 etc). The work turns to the bible as a research document, not as a set of irrelevant 'commands'. The book of Tierny also describes, convincingly, present day human sacrifice in Peru, both among villagers threaten by a flood and among drug trafficers before a big transaction. All by all it seems difficult to device a folkloric geography of human sacrifice based on written sources. One paragraph can colour centuries of a whole population, while the absence of proof is never a proof of absence... Maybe sacrifice has its origin in forefather cults of early farmers, while the value offered depends on the favour hoped for. Chicken are cheap, girls are expensive (Jephtah), boys even more (Abraham). If a modern state accepts to 'sacrifice' young men to keep borders intact, a primitive village might also accept to sacrifice a child to avoid a big loss of resources. This approach would make any research document relevant to specific socio-economic conditions, not to ethnic groups.

POV/Religious partisanism[edit]

I don't have the time to rewrite it just now, but the section about human sacrifice in the Hebrew Bible is clearly biased towards Christianity/Judaism and does not reflect the conclusions of modern secular scholarship.

If this site is not to be known as "The LORD's very own Christian Wikipedia", this should change.