Moloch

[Et in Arcadia ego]

Take it somewhere else, m'kay?

Take the truth somewhere else?
Is that your response when someone calls you occultists on your BS and Historical Revisionism?

Who the fuck do you think you're talking to crack-head?

[Eldritch]

Exactly who are you calling an "occultist," John?

I'm calling someone who has the username "Eldritch", an occult term, which, when used as an adjective, refers to "the operation of supernatural influences", an occultist or occultist sympathizer.

I practice no religion whatsoever, nor do I have any particular allegiance to a religious and/or occult group.

Many people here, perhaps most, feel similarly I would imagine.

BS.
You, like a few other posters here, are anti-Christian and pro-pagan.
That constitutes a belief system.

One, in fact, built on pretty lies, which none of its adherents can defend.

You don't know me, John. Nor does it much appear that you know what you're talking about.

[Occult Means Hidden]

Mayan priests slitting the throats of children, as chronicled by cave drawings and first hand accounts.[/i]

Aztec pagans. Not Mayan Pagans. Christians love to mix up different civilizations because they aren't Christian...

These "first hand accounts" refer to the Aztecs, as their accounts were recent enough to be recorded...

by Europeans... A people looking for (or creating) justified reasons to wipe out an entire population.

[Sepka]

I'm calling someone who has the username "Eldritch", an occult term, which, when used as an adjective, refers to "the operation of supernatural influences", an occultist or occultist sympathizer.

By that reasoning, someone who uses the name 'Nemo' obviously can't exist...

[Occult Means Hidden]

Funny how occultists always want to whitewash pagan human sacrifice and demonize Christians who mention it as liars.

This is the original "Burning Man".
Pagans set fire to the Wicker Man and burned humans alive, as a sacrifice to their gods.


Deal with the truth and stop believing pretty lies.

Talk about historical revisionism...

A picture drawn in the, maybe, 18th century is supposed to illustrate how "pagans" sacrificed innocents a millenia earlier? 1,000 years earlier? Maybe more?

The pagans were the ones sacrificed in ritual. They were the ones gathered, by all probability, and by all- actually proven accounts, as the ones who were sacrificied, i.e. Cathars, late Roman Inquisitors, Spanish Inquisitors, Irish-St.Patrick-Columbines, etc. etc.

[Et in Arcadia ego]

"Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius"

translated:

"Kill them all! Surely the Lord discerns which ones are his"

- Papal legate Arnaud-Amaury refering to Christians embedded with Cathars in the Albigensian Crusade(Genocide)
______________

Shove that one up your ass, Nemo!

[Sepka]

A picture drawn in the, maybe, 18th century is supposed to illustrate how "pagans" sacrificed innocents a millenia earlier? 1,000 years earlier? Maybe more?

Actually, the custom of burning victims alive in the wicker man was described by Caesar in "The Gallic Wars". There's a fair amount of contemporary documentation for the practice.

[Et in Arcadia ego]

A picture drawn in the, maybe, 18th century is supposed to illustrate how "pagans" sacrificed innocents a millenia earlier? 1,000 years earlier? Maybe more?

Actually, the custom of burning victims alive in the wicker man was described by Caesar in "The Gallic Wars". There's a fair amount of contemporary documentation for the practice.

Indeed, but what's THAT got to do with Moloch? Vlad Tepes roasted all his country's indigents, but that's got nothing to do with Moloch either..

[Sepka]

Indeed, but what's THAT got to do with Moloch? Vlad Tepes roasted all his country's indigents, but that's got nothing to do with Moloch either..

No more relevant than the Albigensian Crusade, I'll admit. Topic drift is one of the chief curses of this board, along with rudeness.

For what it's worth, I think the 'passing through the fire to Moloch' referenced in the Old Testament probably meant passing infants unharmed through a fire to sanctify them to Moloch, and later generations interpreted the ambiguity in the most lurid possible manner. I haven't really got much evidence to offer, though. The issue's provoked a huge ongoing dispute among Biblical archeologists, you know. Searching on 'Moloch' and 'Tophet' will get you started.

[smiths]

if moloch is simply the historical name for human sacrifice of other humans via ritual burning,

then it has everything to do with vlad, pagans, christians and maybe even the holocaust

[Et in Arcadia ego]

Indeed, but what's THAT got to do with Moloch? Vlad Tepes roasted all his country's indigents, but that's got nothing to do with Moloch either..

No more relevant than the Albigensian Crusade, I'll admit.

Err..that response wasn't born of a vacuum, you know..

Thanks for your input.

[Jeff]

Topic drift is one of the chief curses of this board, along with rudeness.

And this one's been drifting a while, and getting ruder. So let's get back to the topic, everybody, or start one you prefer.

[Doodad]

Indeed, but what's THAT got to do with Moloch? Vlad Tepes roasted all his country's indigents, but that's got nothing to do with Moloch either..

No more relevant than the Albigensian Crusade, I'll admit. Topic drift is one of the chief curses of this board, along with rudeness.

For what it's worth, I think the 'passing through the fire to Moloch' referenced in the Old Testament probably meant passing infants unharmed through a fire to sanctify them to Moloch, and later generations interpreted the ambiguity in the most lurid possible manner. I haven't really got much evidence to offer, though. The issue's provoked a huge ongoing dispute among Biblical archeologists, you know. Searching on 'Moloch' and 'Tophet' will get you started.

Your biggest piece of proof for that view would be the fact that archeology has not produced one single artifact related to an entity named Moloch or anything like it. There is the Incirli Stele which suggests the term may mean "first born son."

[smiths]

thers also the phoenician era child tombs with the letters mlk cut onto them, or so i read anyway

[John E. Nemo]

Mayan priests slitting the throats of children, as chronicled by cave drawings and first hand accounts.[/i]

Aztec pagans. Not Mayan Pagans. Christians love to mix up different civilizations because they aren't Christian...

These "first hand accounts" refer to the Aztecs, as their accounts were recent enough to be recorded...

by Europeans... A people looking for (or creating) justified reasons to wipe out an entire population.

No, I meant the Mayans.
Like most occultists, you don't know shit about what you're talking about, because you've been indoctrinated with pretty lies.

Maybe you should put down the Harry Potter books and read a newspaper sometime.
I know it's a big scary world out there, but you're gonna have to face it sometime.

BTW, that goes double for you, et in Arcade Games, you useless ocultist assclown.
Fuck you sideways, you little crackhead bitch.

http://www.livescience.com/history/huma ... 50123.html

Evidence May Back Human Sacrifice Claims
By Mark Stevenson, Associated Press

MEXICO CITY (AP) -- It has long been a matter of contention: Was the Aztec and Mayan practice of human sacrifice as widespread and horrifying as the history books say? Or did the Spanish conquerors overstate it to make the Indians look primitive? In recent years archaeologists have been uncovering mounting physical evidence that corroborates the Spanish accounts in substance, if not number.

Using high-tech forensic tools, archaeologists are proving that pre-Hispanic sacrifices often involved children and a broad array of intentionally brutal killing methods.

For decades, many researchers believed Spanish accounts from the 16th and 17th centuries were biased to denigrate Indian cultures, others argued that sacrifices were largely confined to captured warriors, while still others conceded the Aztecs were bloody, but believed the Maya were less so.

"We now have the physical evidence to corroborate the written and pictorial record,'' said archaeologist Leonardo Lopez Lujan. He said, "some 'pro-Indian' currents had always denied this had happened. They said the texts must be lying.''

The Spaniards probably did exaggerate the sheer numbers of victims to justify a supposedly righteous war against idolatry, said David Carrasco, a Harvard Divinity School expert on Meso-American religion.
But there is no longer as much doubt about the nature of the killings. Indian pictorial texts known as "codices,'' as well as Spanish accounts from the time, quote Indians as describing multiple forms of human sacrifice.

Victims had their hearts cut out or were decapitated, shot full of arrows, clawed, sliced to death, stoned, crushed, skinned, buried alive or tossed from the tops of temples.

Children were said to be frequent victims, in part because they were considered pure and unspoiled.

"Many people said, 'We can't trust these codices because the Spaniards were describing all these horrible things,' which in the long run we are confirming,'' said Carmen Pijoan, a forensic anthropologist who found some of the first direct evidence of cannibalism in a pre-Aztec culture over a decade ago: bones with butcher-like cut marks.

In December, at an excavation in an Aztec-era community in Ecatepec, just north of Mexico City, archaeologist Nadia Velez Saldana described finding evidence of human sacrifice associated with the god of death.
"The sacrifice involved burning or partially burning victims,'' Velez Saldana said. "We found a burial pit with the skeletal remains of four children who were partially burned, and the remains of four other children that were completely carbonized.''

While the remains don't show whether the victims were burned alive, there are depictions of people -- apparently alive -- being held down as they were burned.

The dig turned up other clues to support descriptions of sacrifices in the Magliabecchi codex, a pictorial account painted between 1600 and 1650 that includes human body parts stuffed into cooking dishes, and people sitting around eating, as the god of death looks on.

"We have found cooking dishes just like that,'' said archaeologist Luis Manuel Gamboa. "And, next to some full skeletons, we found some incomplete, segmented human bones.'' However, researchers don't know whether those remains were cannibalized.

In 2002, government archaeologist Juan Alberto Roman Berrelleza announced the results of forensic testing on the bones of 42 children, mostly boys around age 6, sacrificed at Mexico City's Templo Mayor, the Aztec's main religious site, during a drought.

All shared one feature: serious cavities, abscesses or bone infections painful enough to make them cry.

"It was considered a good omen if they cried a lot at the time of sacrifice,'' which was probably done by slitting their throats, Roman Berrelleza said.

The Maya, whose culture peaked farther east about 400 years before the Aztecs founded Mexico City in 1325, had a similar taste for sacrifice, Harvard University anthropologist David Stuart wrote in a 2003 article.

In the late 19th and early 20th century, "The first researchers tried to make a distinction between the 'peaceful' Maya and the 'brutal' cultures of central Mexico,'' Stuart wrote. "They even tried to say human sacrifice was rare among the Maya.''
But in carvings and mural paintings, he said, "we have now found more and greater similarities between the Aztecs and Mayas,'' including a Maya ceremony in which a grotesquely costumed priest is shown pulling the entrails from a bound and apparently living sacrificial victim.

Some Spanish-era texts have yet to be corroborated with physical remains. They describe Aztec priests sacrificing children and adults by sealing them in caves or drowning them. But the assumption now is that the texts appear trustworthy, said Lopez Lujan, who also works at the Templo Mayor site.

For Lopez Lujan, confirmation has come in the form of advanced chemical tests on the stucco floors of Aztec temples, which were found to have been soaked with iron, albumen and genetic material consistent with human blood.

"It's now a question of quantity,'' said Lopez Lujan, who thinks the Spaniards -- and Indian picture-book scribes working under their control -- exaggerated the number of sacrifice victims, claiming in one case that 80,400 people were sacrificed at a temple inauguration in 1487.
"We're not finding anywhere near that ... even if we added some zeros,'' Lopez Lujan said.

Researchers have largely discarded the old theory that sacrifice and cannibalism were motivated by a protein shortage in the Aztec diet, though some still believe it may have been a method of population control.

Pre-Hispanic cultures believed the world would end if the sacrifices were not performed. Sacrificial victims, meanwhile, were often treated as gods themselves before being killed.

"It is really very difficult for us to conceive,'' Pijoan said of the sacrifices. "It was almost an honor for them.''