Norse Sacrifice:
Quote:
Sacrifice could comprise of inanimate objects, animals or humans. Amongst the Norse, there were two types of human sacrifice; that performed for the gods at religious festivals, and retainer sacrifice that was performed at a funeral. An eye-witness account of retainer sacrifice survives in Ibn Fadlan's account of a Rus ship burial, where a slave-girl had volunteered to accompany her lord to the next world. Reports of religious sacrifice are given by Tacitus, Saxo Grammaticus and Adam of Bremen.
The Heimskringla tells of Swedish King Aun who sacrificed nine of his sons in an effort to prolong his life until his subjects stopped him from killing his last son Egil. According to Adam of Bremen, the Swedish kings sacrificed males every ninth year during the Yule sacrifices at the Temple at Uppsala. The Swedes had the right not only to elect kings but also to depose them, and both king Domalde and king Olof Trätälja are said to have been sacrificed after years of famine.
Odin, the chief god of the Norse, was associated with death by hanging, and a possible practice of Odinic sacrifice by strangling has some archeological support in the existence of bodies perfectly preserved by the acid of the Jutland (later taken over by the Daner people) peatbogs, into which they were cast after having been strangled. One of the most notable examples of this is the Bronze Age Tollund Man. However, we possess no written accounts that explicitly interpret the cause of these stranglings, which could have other explanations, such as being a form of capital punishment.
|
Pretty tame in the long run, really. I believe most sacrifices were to be honoured among the gods rather than desired/required by the gods. But yeah, my point was that over time, all association with gods have generally required some level of "life sacrifice" to "appease the gods", which was often closer to "appease the godly". Whether it be the slaughter of animals or virgins to the providing temples with your best produce and sons/daughters for "use" of the priests. Today's religions are, in the long run, no different on many of those levels but are much more secretive about it. I know you were arguing that someone making the case that religion OKs child rape is completely asinine, but I am presenting that these sorts of things have always been associated with gods and religions (and, let's be honest, humanity) that there could be many who see that as a very valid argument - particularly when you look at one catholic church and its inability to even deal with any of their rapists, er, priests beyond moving them to a new seat of power.
It's like scolding the dog for killing chickens by moving it into the coop.