On Lies of Aztec Human Sacrifice

Originally posted by phroziac
Op is right. Why cant anyone come up with evidence that isnt written in the colonial period, and why do people keep claiming the colonial writings as evidence. wtf?

Because those very same Spaniard Catholic Priests burned all but three [that we know of] original Aztec Codex.


He made the claim. He has to prove there wasn't any.

we all know that taking the heart out of the chest is an extremely complicated surgical procedure, which needs tools like surgical saws and scalpels, which Aztecs did not possess.

You do realize that obsidian is sharper then surgical steel right?link

Obsidian has been used for blades in surgery, as well-crafted obsidian blades have a cutting edge many times sharper than high-quality steel surgical scalpels, the cutting edge of the blade being only about 3 nanometers thick.[34] Even the sharpest metal knife has a jagged, irregular blade when viewed under a strong enough microscope; when examined even under an electron microscope an obsidian blade is still smooth and even. One study found that obsidian incisions produced narrower scars, fewer inflammatory cells, and less granulation tissue in a group of rats.[35] Don Crabtree produced obsidian blades for surgery and other purposes,[34] and has written articles on the subject.

So it is possible they could make the cuts but I am inclined to agree that the beating heart is just embelishment on the Spaniards part.

They took those altars, the ones that supposedly covered with blood, They put them in the museum. There might be some blood left in the cracks. Still, this would not be proof. I myself have cut myself by accident on one of those altars. Check for my DNA before jumping to conclusions. History is a myth, it changes daily.

you know what?

i just deleted my whole reply and instead im rolling with this

OP, the cardio medicine thing IS a big deal, only because you say again and again that the heart will not beat, as described.

when confronted with evidence that it will, you say that this is OFF TOPIC

you demand proof from pre colonial sources in order to describe how the time was, you then point out that there are very few such sources, and yet YOU know how things were then

of course the victor writes history, of course the spanish atrocities in CA and SA are unforgiveable, and even though all of that is true, the Aztecs could still be a bloodthirsty people.

A - the region was filled with related, yet separate, microcultures
B- the aztec had only been power in the capitol a short while
C - it is not impossible therefore to mix the grand social planning of said paradise with the obviously short sighted barbarism of a sacrificial war cult

the truth is prolly somewhere in the middle, the spanish really did bad, and the Aztec were not "noble savages"

consider Rome, if you look for a mere 5 seconds you will find things in roman history that are praiseworthy and barbaric.

so was rome civilized or barbarous? YES

Considering how big people in those regions are still idolators them being into human sacrifice back in that time is not that much of a stretch.

I mean they make idols of anything and everything. Death, drug dealers anything under the sun they make into an idol.

The extent of the human sacrifice is up for debate but that they did it.. there is enough evidence in their architecture to back it up. Even if they were just enemies being sacrficed/executed its the same deal

Originally posted by Alexander2533
reply to post by BASSPLYR

 

I'm really really sick of repeating myself.

Those aren't altars for human sacrifice, but for other offerings.

You mean those big altars that were long enough for a human being to lie down on?

For the record, I worship a Goddess with a tradition of blood sacrifice, and yes, I've actually given her some of my own blood.

To the extent that I advocate the use of blood at all, it does need to have very stringent rules attached.

a] The only person who should be offering blood, is the person who is leading the communion. Nobody else.

b] It should not be taken from an unwilling person, as that completely negates the sacrifice. It should also in no way be done to an innocent, while some pampered, psychopathic monarch or politician looks on.

c] There shouldn't be masses of it. The point of blood is not sadism. The point is the amount of energy it produces, and the tie it creates.

As far as I'm concerned, yes, the Aztecs practiced blood sacrifice, and lots of it; as have many other cultures, up to this day. Use of blood is very powerful magically, and a very, very serious act. The reason why it's so serious is because it creates a spiritual tie between giver and recipient that can be virtually impossible to break.

Look up Quetzalcoatl. One of the main reasons why he was so revered, was because he would not tolerate the presence of blood on his altar.

I wanna see these drug dealer idols lmao

Originally posted by phroziac
I wanna see these drug dealer idols lmao

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Alexander2533


I always found it quite strange in regards to the human sacrifices of the Aztecs, Incas and Mayans. However, even in Judiasm and Christianity there were many human sacrifices during a bloody period of that religion too. Most people don't know about the Jewish human sacifrices that included men, women and small children.

As for the Aztecs, they are among the oldest of the Native American Indian tribes to had arrived from Mongolia, Tibet and other Asian mountain tribes. The Aztecs were quite highly intelligent and a progressive civilization. I believe there's so much more we don't know about them but some of their culture is similar to that of the Sioux especially in ancient tribal costumes so rich in colour. The "crowns" also similar.

Interesting topic. I see a debate unfolding on the first page and i will read all coments after work. Someone mentioned something similar but i also find interesting that when we speak abut aztecs first thing what cames our mind are the sacrifices but when we speak about the church and spain its about cultre and not burning/torturing thinkers and scietists.

i really don't see a great deal of difference between sacrifice and execution. but rather it was one or the other it does not take away from the amazing depth of their knowledge of astronomy, mathematics and agriculture. in many aspects they were far ahead of their conquerors. the catholic church on the other hand are not reliable sources, unless you need a play book on destroying cultures: europe, america, middle east. good thread and very interesting

Originally posted by Alexander2533
Secondly.......... still beating hearts? Give me a break! Even to take out the heart from persons chest with an obsidian knife the Aztecs had would be a complete mess, and the possibility of it still beating is even more ridiculous, we all know that taking the heart out of the chest is an extremely complicated surgical procedure, which needs tools like surgical saws and scalpels, which Aztecs did not possess.

There is a video online that shows a person who died from a motorcycle accident. That person's heart was somehow ejected from their body, and it was laying on the ground next to them, still beating. The heart was completely separate from the body, mind you.

So much for that delicate procedure required. Apparently the truth is that enough force and with certain injuries, a heart can be removed completely from the body and be laying on a road still beating.

It wasn't even just for a few seconds. The video was a minute or so long, and it was beating that entire time. I kid you not. I will not link the video. Search for it yourself if you don't believe me. If you can't find it, I can give the link by message.

In related news, if a man's leg or arm is amputated, he can sometimes still feel it, even though it isn't there.

Makes us wonder about the nature of life and electricity.

Just for the common sense approach....if you cut off someone's head, I can see that as a "sentence" to death.

If you rip their heart out, uhh, then I'd say that's pretty much a sick sentence or a human sacrifice.

Why go through the trouble of having a special place to do it way up top...and why go for the heart?

Seems to be very obvious to me what it is...

reply to post by Alexander2533


Great Post A#

you have done well...for it surely gets old reminding people that their intricate arguments are based upon fabrications of "his"tory!
there was a more recent post, though this is also good : disinfo tactics

~may all souls be free~

Originally posted by Vitruvian

OP Mel Gibson, from what I understand had a lot of research done for this movie.

Mel Gibson and his father are Opus Dei. Please research this Catholic cult before responding........Gibson's reputation as a spokesman for the elite follows him. His movie about the so-called life of "The" Christ is a pure macabre fabrication as was the movie that supposedly is an accurate portrayal of the Mayan culture of death (not Aztecs) - APOCALYPTO ....... but still produced with the power elite's agenda in mind nonetheless.......Mel Gibson is a story teller for the power behind the power elite.........he's not much different than Oliver Stone and his phoney version of 9/11 (and JFK) which was also perfectly suited to the needs of the power elite.

If you want to look at an absolutely pathetic depiction of history, then take 10000 BC, as an example. Produced by the evil clown, entertaining garbage with malicious subliminal intent.

Very few people want to watch Mel Gibsons movies, because they depict reality far too accurately.

reply to post by bjarneorn

Mel is pretty damn good IMO.

He did convey the apocalyptic state their society was in but I think he failed to show that it was the exception and not the norm for them.

They made the leaders seem to deceive the people by knowing when the eclipse happened. They made the elite seem foul and opulent. That was not the case. They were a highly structured society with deep seeded concepts of personal honor and respectful coexistence. It was a strong community. The leadership was actually good. They followed what would resemble Confucianism´s Kingship through goodness. The empowering aspect of people following a person they believe in.


another concept that is lost of cultures from that part of the world is that of "being Olmec" that is:
To be good in learning, to be civil, to be noble/ altruistic, and other such interpretations that all cultures there had to some degree. The Olmec, mother civilization of all these cultures were a benevolent people who were the source of all religion and scientific understanding. Each culture had a noble and exceptional start and reference.

If they were or not barbaric later does not take away from this fact. They have had leaders be recorded to take on a "state of Olmecization", like saying a European culture is barbaric for not being "Romanized", just in the reverse of the understanding. These leaders would pop up and improve living conditions, education, and stop bad practices like sacrifice and war for profit.

They would die out and re-emerge but always there was a leader to pop up that took on an Olmec title or name and ruled in their spirit.

This stinks of more Marxist revisionism. The Aztecs were one of the most blood-thirsty cultures that this world has ever produced. Blood sacrifice is a sure way to get God's attention in a negative way. All cultures that practice this will be destroyed, including the abortion culture we are living in now.

OH and by the way, Oops modern science verifies meso-american human sacrifice.

Researchers in Mexico had noticed what they believed were fossilized blood stains on stone knives as long as 20 years ago. But the institute said it took a methodical examination using a scanning electron microscope to positively identify the human tissues on 31 knives from the Cantona site in the central Mexico state of Puebla.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

But the speculation to support the modern aborigine worship and the demoralization of christian civilization I'm sure is satisfying. Your KGB programmers would be delighted at their success.

Originally posted by SevenThunders
This stinks of more Marxist revisionism. The Aztecs were one of the most blood-thirsty cultures that this world has ever produced. Blood sacrifice is a sure way to get God's attention in a negative way. All cultures that practice this will be destroyed, including the abortion culture we are living in now.

Agreed, ironically enough.

reply to post by SevenThunders


You have allot to learn. what you have been told....is a lie,

Yes they had sacrifice like your culture did as well. You are not a heathen that deserves to be eliminated....Right?

Why judge them without READING the source material or witness accounts. Why trust someone else's opinion?

reply to post by Alexander2533


Very interesting thread OP, yeah, I think its rather odd story to think about an advance civilization, who were capable building zigurats to do such rituals. Beheadings and ripping hearts alike. They did it both of them? Really? Come on....

Although there is not a closed possibility they never did it in small scale. All I say is, there is alway a possibility. But the possibility of a small Spanish fleet conquering an entire Ameroindian civilization is also questionable. And black propaganda, like that one about slavery being used by Lincoln, seems to be something of common use to justify warfare. Not to mention weapons of mass destruction in the Iraqi war. Oh i just did......

Just look at the propaganda posters they made in the 2nd world war. Rediculous, they could sell that as a Darkhorse comic series, already.

So, I think it makes sense that Cortez needed a moral issue to support Vaticans campaign. Afterall they came in the name of Catholicism and Jesus, they pronounciated it out loud. To conquer barbaric tribes and convert them to creed god. Read as: to conquer other rich civilizations to rob off their natural wealth, in the end. S & F for you OP.