Human Sacrifice

Our Israeli correspondent MC sends this exploration of the spiritual (or anti-spiritual) qualities shared by Islam, Communism, secular humanism, and the worshippers of Moloch.

Human Sacrifice
by MC

A few weeks ago France, and to a certain extent the whole of Europe, faced what Israel faces on a daily basis: Islamo-hatred. Islam is not a religion of peace; it is not even a religion in the way that we understand the idea of a religion in the West. What it is, is a political hybrid, a totalitarian death-cult, intent on world domination.

That said, Israel’s war is not really about Islam. It is much more about secular humanism, where the innate violence of Islam is a side-issue in a nasty and vicious war between the forces of secular humanism and those of Decalogue (Ten Commandments) centered life.

Judaism acknowledges God as the creator, and the Torah as handbook for life on earth, but within that handbook is the illustration of a conflict between Cain and Abel. Abel followed the Creator’s instructions and was therefore in alignment with Creation, Cain did things his own way and came into conflict with Creation, but rather than acknowledge that he got it wrong, he made a fatal ‘ad hominem’ attack on Abel and went and built a city with walls around it to keep God out.

Political religions, such as Cain’s, tend to deify a human leader with a vision, the balance between the leader and the vision being somewhat fluid. Islam falls into the latter group, but a moribund leader/god figurehead has rendered the movement static — set in a Kaaba stone, one might say.

At the centre of the argument is the conflict of ideas about human sacrifice and the sanctity of human life. Communism in France (the French revolution) and Russia brought us a new concept in human sacrifice: mass murder as a form of secular expiation of ‘class’ guilt (which has recently evolved into ‘race’ guilt).

Islam, too, places no value on the sanctity of human life. Indeed, it glorifies ‘martyrdom’, which it idolizes as death whilst fighting the infidel (indulging in Jihad). Allah cannot abide unbelievers, and so to achieve an Islamic utopia, all unbelievers must be eliminated in the name of Allah, or rendered subordinate.

Much of the terminology of Islam is open to interpretation. For ‘unbeliever’, one must read ‘someone who does not believe my particular brand of sectarian belief’. Thus the sentence for having a difference of opinion is death.

The religions of secular humanism bring us a cross section of flexible belief, too, a belief where definitions of words lose precision depending upon religious whim. Abortion, especially ‘late’ abortion, involves the taking of human life, but in the case of the unborn child, this is not murder because the secular human religion deems an unborn child as still part of its mother, with a status no greater than that of a cancer tumour. Whilst this may be repugnant to many, it is understandable. However, what is morally screwy is that an aborted fetus, once outside of the mother is deemed to be dead, even if still alive, and although ‘dead’; is also garbage to be disposed of at the whim (or profit) of the aborter.

Cain believes that his way is best, and takes action to assert his beliefs to those around him. In doing so he kills Abel. He then denies the crime: “Am I my brother’s keeper?”. He then sets up his own community based upon his own distrust of Creation and Creator, and builds a wall around it. So, instead of trusting and relying on God, he trusts and relies on himself. He thus works out his future according to Adam’s knowledge of good and evil (arbitrary) rather the God’s Knowledge of Good and Evil (Torah).

Cain was the first secular humanist, in that he believed that his own way was better than God’s way, and the first act of secular humanism was murder.

Islam worships a desert brigand who took Cain’s secular humanism a step further and invented his own god, albeit borrowing and adapting from the existing Arabian pantheon. By this device he created a regime predicated on the base animal instincts of humanity, and which he could control by manipulating his invented god, of which he alone was the mouthpiece. Islam is not a religion as such, but like Communism, an endeavor of human creativity designed to replace Judeo-Christianity with a type of feudal elitism. In Communism the elite comprises self-defined ‘intellectuals’ who ruthlessly vie for political supremacy, but in Islam, the rulers are those whose ruthlessness and violence overcomes all others in a dog-eat-dog melee. There is not much difference between the two.

Thus, in any secular humanist regime, once the leadership dispute is settled, the ruling faction can get down to the real job of human sacrifice.

Moderate Islam/Communism is the state where there is still a leadership dispute and where, therefore, the cull has not yet started. The symptom of this state is increasing ‘political correctness’, or in the case of Islam, creeping sharia in the target societies. The regimes inveigle their way into society by shifting the Decalogue-based law away from its roots in the Bible and towards the accepted law of the regime. This weakens and divides the target society and so promotes the regimista who are eventually able to strike hard and seize absolute control (and with it rights over life and death).

Western societies are uniquely vulnerable to this infiltration and dilution. They have a tangible superiority which presents a magnificent prize, and much booty, for those who can successfully exploit it. These are settled societies where the “living is easy”, so much so that the victims are singularly unaware of the precarious nature of their bounty. Indeed, many do not even realize that they have a bounty worth protecting.

So the target society is softened up; society is split into those who are ‘allowed’ to kill and those who are not. Those who are not allowed are disarmed, and taught to be ‘soppy’, or dhimmi, watching television rather than watching their backs. Those authorized to kill are solely employed by the elite to control any dissent.

In a tolerant society where human life is deemed precious, infiltration is very difficult to control, there is just no adequate deterrent when one is not allowed to deport or execute the enemy.

We have many examples of Decalogue-based societies being undermined and destroyed. One might feature Haiti or Zimbabwe, for example, and then start to catalogue the starvation, murder and mayhem following in the wake of the revolution. These are examples of humans being sacrificed to the gods of ‘racism’, and whilst the slave revolt (in the case of Haiti) might have had some justification, the subsequent massacres of mixed race folk (or the Matabele in Zim) was a gross human sacrifice.

The Koran demands that Allah must be appeased by dismemberment, by burning alive and by the beheading of unbelievers and apostates. Communists and National Socialists sacrificed millions in labour camps, working their victims to death as a homage to Moloch.

Are we going to let this happen to our loved ones?

As a society, we tend to comfort ourselves with words. We do not call these things ‘human sacrifice’ because we tend to think in terms of today’s culture and not in terms of ancient history. We think we have evolved; we think that we are enlightened; but no, we are just deceived. Cain is still killing Abel; it is only the names that have changed.

For a few hundred years our Western society embraced biblical values, and civilization advanced rapidly. Then, like Cain, we too thought we could do better on our own, and we started to revert to Cain’s society and rules: “I did it my way”. I see little difference between the Tophet and Planned Parenthood, but that is just me, I suppose.

Our coveted Western civilization is both fragile and relatively new. World history shows us that the norm of society is both brutal and chaotic, and that life is cheap and short and extremely violent. Europe came kicking and screaming into an enlightenment, and it was for this reason that the Founding Fathers treated ‘government’ with such suspicion. Thus they embedded the idea of the biblical code of ethics into the very definition of American society. American society was intended to be a society of Abels, but the Cains have ever been ready to confound it. The pen and the telephone may yet prove to be a viable weapons of choice to sacrifice Abel once more.

MC lives in the southern Israeli city of Sderot. For his previous essays, see the MC Archives.

28 thoughts on “Human Sacrifice

  1. Excellent, MC. Although I am a “recovering Catholic”, and an agnostic, I realize that a return to Judeo-Christian morality is necessary if we in America are to survive. Even in Rome, Pope Francis appears to be embracing secular humanism, parlaying with muslims while ignoring the human sacrifices that are perpetrated daily by ISIS – a group which practices the most perfect expression of islam since mohammed packed it in.

    It is sad that so many citizens here who are Christian or Jewish have drifted so far from their moral code that they either support or turn a blind eye, a silent voice, to the human sacrifice of millions of fetuses and even viable, delivered babies. How incredible that the Left, those who belong to a religion and those who despise religion, choose self-gratification even in the face of human sacrifice.

    Collectivism, the belief that the needs (wants, actually) of the group overrides the rights, the very life of the individual, as evidenced by those who call for killing all the supporters of Trump, for example. Or that the Earth (Gaia) should only be populated by a few million people, obviously those people being the ones who love and respect “Gaia”, said people quite willing to kill off the other 7.399 billion humans. Again, as you indicate, human sacrifice.

    Our Founding Fathers told us clearly that our government would only work for those who believed in, and obeyed, Judeo-Christian morality. That only a moral people could make it work. Even deists such as Jefferson understood this.

    Today, we have only to look to the venal, immoral, corrupt members of our government, exemplified by Obama and Hillary just as completely as ISIS does islam, in order to see that our country is failing. That our Constitutional Republic no longer exists, as the rule of law has been replaced by the rule of men.

    If we cannot regain control of our government and the government schools which teach our children that it is OK to be muslim, but not OK to be Christian, that it is OK to be homosexual, but not a strong male or feminine female individual, our country will go the way of every other society/culture that preceded us.

    • If anyone ever thought that there is an essential difference between the death cult that was Nazism & the death cult that is fundamentalist Islam, they should read the latest news that an Islamic State imam has issued a fatwa authorising the killing of disabled babies at birth.

    • Unfortunately our sociological approach to life has convinced us that ethics and morality have evolved through natural selection as a form of ‘enlightened self-interest.’ If Islamic barbarity has done one thing it has eliminated THAT theory, as their society, never mind how brutal, backward and hideous, has had continuous existence since the 7th century!

      People still practice a watered down ethics as the decline of religion is not yet beyond living memory (three generations). Morality has been replaced by Political Correctness – as though accepting someone as EQUAL, despite their desire to eliminate you, is a noble thing to do.

      Only when people are convinced of the Divine and have the proper attitude of awe towards it, will they then be deeply motivated to act for the health of their souls, as opposed to the indulgence of their senses or the massaging of their egos (of which Obama stands as the pinnacle of sanctimonious, self-serving hubris).

      We cannot perhaps revive the old religious institutions which have disgraced themselves with scandals of child abuse and corruption, although they still have a small and stalwart following.

      But we can re-examine what the Divine stands for. This would involve a severe critique of current post modern ‘philosophy’ (crap) and removing the stranglehold that Marxist ideology has exercised over political theory, historical revisionism and economics for the last 100 years!

  2. Thank you MC, what you wrote was very nicely said. I would like to wish you and yours a very Merry Christmas. That Yah Himself would come down and personally explain the Torah to us and reduce all of the Law to one simple commandment, “Love your neighbour as you do yourself,” is awesome beyond compare. I know, it easily said but kept only with great difficulty, but then the fruit of placing others ahead of yourself is man coming out of the gutter of death to a civilization where there is life and that more abundantly.
    It is therefore no wonder that the culture of death hates us. They are just plain jealous because they can’t have it their way and so they want to destroy us in a fit of childish pique as a spoiled brat would break a toy that didn’t perform the way the little brat wanted. So I will wish them a Merry Christmas as well. 🙂

    • Religion, and political Religion are mostly man made, they are like trying to swim in a sea of syrup, cloying sweetness, but sticky, oh so sticky! So much so that progress is impossible.

      The Word of Yah is more like pure lemon juice, bitter, but full of goodness; healing and beneficial to those who embrace it.

      The ‘Word’ is the Commandment of Yah which brought forth Creation, and it was made flesh and dwelt among us.

      In the LXX ‘Torah’ is translated into Greek as ‘Logos’, so one might think of Yahushua (Jesus) as Torah made flesh and dwelling among us, see Matt 5 v 17 – 20

    • “They are just plain jealous ….” Interesting: I was musing the other day about why so many Muslim immigrants to the West seem to insist on bringing the various negative aspects of their cultures with them, rather than taking advantage of the superior aspects of their new societies. There are no doubt many reasons for this but one that only recently occurred to me personally, is as follows.

      C.S. Lewis wrote that the “Gates of Hell were locked from within” – a view with which I concur (assuming Hell exists, this would be my guess as to how it operates). The denizens of Hell could, in theory, leave it at any time but in practice are unable or unwilling to make the kind of self-abandonment, and relinquishment of will, that would be necessary to leave. They might wish to be in Heaven in a vague, abstract way (after all, by definition, Heaven is pleasure/happiness – desirable things) but cannot/will not ever be ever able to choose it. So therefore, they also hate Heaven, even as they desire it, recognizing that they can never have it. They would, in fact, extend Hell into Heaven if they could, because of this hatred.

      The situation is somewhat analogous with Muslim immigrants to the West. I think many do recognize, to some extent and perhaps only at an unconscious level, the value of Western freedoms and the societal advantages of Western culture over their own. They also recognize that they themselves lack (for whatever reasons) the capacity/will to embrace those freedoms and advantages, and so they come to hate them. Like the denizens of Hell, these people will actually attempt to extend their ideological worldview – Islam – over the whole world. In their anger (despair?) they would seek to bring everyone down to the same degraded level.

      Hmm. Long-winded and probably hopelessly incoherent, but there was the ghost of an idea in there …. 😉

      • It brings to mind a stanza from a poem by Ted Hughes, “Crow’s Elephant Totem Song”:

        So through the orange blaze and blue shadow
        Of the afterlife, effortless and immense,
        The Elephant goes his own way, a walking sixth sense,
        And opposite and parallel
        The sleepless Hyenas go
        Along a leafless skyline trembling like an oven roof
        With a whipped run
        Their shame-flags tucked hard down
        Over the gutsacks
        Crammed with putrefying laughter
        Soaked black with the leakage and seepings
        And they sing: “Ours is the land
        Of loveliness and beautiful
        Is the putrid mouth of the leopard
        And the graves of fever
        Because it is all we have—”
        And they vomit their laughter.

    • Sorry, but I’d pay to watch as you try to love your muslim neighbor who belongs to (or wishes to) ISIS. islam has been in the business of killing for over 1400 years. If not infidels, then each other – wives, daughters, and even sons. It is their duty to allah, and their pious wish, to kill every infidel man or boy and rape and or kill every infidel female – of any age.

      Do you really want to love your neighbor who is told by his most “religious” leaders that it is OK to have anal sex with an infant? And who goes ahead and does it?

      Loving your neighbor is acceptable with those who don’t desire your death, but you will never get muslims (those true to the word and the spirit of islam, the qur’an and hadith) to stop their killing, their murders. Once they no longer wish to kill non-muslims, they are no longer muslim. Once they stop killing their daughters for “dis-honoring” their families, or for abusing their wives, or for stoning rape _victims_ to death, they will no longer be muslims.

      The ones who live next door who smile and wave hello are thrilled when airliners fly into buildings, Israeli children are killed in Israel, and when ISIS beheads or burns people alive. If not – and I submit there are few who do not – then they aren’t muslims, no matter what they think to call themselves. And any true muslims will agree with what I have written here.

      • Re-reading this, I want to add that when I speak of “allah”, I am referring to the fictional being mohammed created and called “allah”. I should probably use quotes around that word every time I use it.

  3. I am stunned at the synchronicity of this essay. “What synchronicity?” you may ask.

    On the way home from a meeting with a few fellow quilters this evening approx. 30 minutes ago, I heard a snippet of news on KCBS radio station that the Prez feels that a “coalition of moderate Islamic states” must support the West’s efforts against ISIS.

    Before I could even inhale, the announcer said that these “moderate Islamic states” would be led by Saudi Arabia….

    I went nuts in my car, saying quite loudly to no one in particular, “Saudi is NOT NOT NOT a moderate state! It’s Wahhabi!”

    And probably a major funder of ISIS.

    The next news item concerned the sustained fall of the price of oil due to falling demand, allegedly because of “mild winter conditions” across the United States. I don’t know; I haven’t followed temps everywhere, but north Texas has taken it in the ear this year: floods, snow, wind storms, etc. And don’t forget Houston’s floods, either. My response to no one in particular on this was, “The less we need to import from Saudi, the better.”

    Yes, Islam doesn’t value human life at all, esp. female human life and the lives and integrity of children. Please remind me, if possible:

    ==> Why do we keep doing business with KSA, the most repressive regime I can think of in the Islamic world? (Maybe I’m missing some regimes, but…) <==

  4. Cain was the first secular humanist, in that he believed that his own way was better than God’s way, and the first act of secular humanism was murder.

    Fantastic quote!

  5. A very thoughtful and accurate summary of those who prey on others enslaving those who believe in the Bible or simply butchering them by the tens of millions.

  6. I’m reminded of the old joke about the British Conservatives, “The Party that promises you a golden yesterday”. Not all biblical and other religious values are/were good.

  7. Wonderful piece, MC. I wish you peace in the coming year! One thing that strikes me in the distinctions made among the so-called ‘Abrahamic’ faiths (I say so-called because one of them doesn’t have the same stories about Abraham as the other two) is that Jews and Christians recognise that Man was made in the image of God–not only does Islam not share the same creation story, but it would also, I believe, consider it an insult to Allah to suggest that mere creations could in any way reflect the divine image. This, I think, accounts for the contempt in which Islam holds the so-called infidels.

  8. This is the definitive essay on Islam & other man-made political religions MC. It should be given the widest possible distribution.

    My only (very minor) criticism is that perhaps more could be said about Moloch. Moloch was an ancient child-devouring god in what is now the Holy Land, & the Palestinians continue to feed their children to Moloch. It’s as if Moloch never went away. This tells us something we need to know about the true nature of allah.

  9. The question of course becomes what are we to do? For we have no politicians who will speak out so clearly as MC.

    Look at all those who in their rush to Cuba “forget” or by now never knew, such is history cleansed in the present day, that the present Cuba was built on the murders of thousands and thousands of Cubans, many who supported the revolution at first. And President Slick gets away with his anodyne support for reconciliation, when since there were no demands by Obama on Cuba he has once again reconciled America going along with evil. [Just for the record I am not necessarily against the “opening” for it may lead to relief and more for the Cuban people. But it is the absence of the true history of Castro’s gulag and this all people should know, though Comandante Obama of course chooses to brush it aside.] And those in Congress stay silent while Iran plays out their dream of conquest by testing long range rockets which has to do with Obama favoring Iran becoming a regional power. And yet no Republican or libertarian is relentlessly pounding the gavel to call him out on this obvious fact. If nothing else give Harry Reid one thing, he relentlessly pounds the gavel, though in his case it is for his left wing views. But at the end of the day there is no end of the day because he is back there the next day doing it again. Where is the politician who will call out Obama day in and day out for his lies?

    So we go on and hope in America that the next generation of students will understand what the animals in Animal Farm are, and will understand what 1984 is all about, before Orwell slowly disappears from the shelves.

    And by the way if I am permitted to say, I sent some money to “Help for Sderot,”which as noted is the Israeli city that MC is from. That’s the city that has had thousands and thousands of rockets shot at it. From what I can tell is money well spent.

    Mike from Brooklyn

  10. I’ll add my thanks to MC for this article. It reflects very well many of my thoughts but which I could not have described anywhere near as clearly as you have done.

  11. MC.
    here is one of your multiple phrases touching the same note –

    “Cain was the first secular humanist, in that he believed that his own way was better than God’s way, and the first act of secular humanism was murder.”

    So, let as compare that with some (two) of the defining statements of secular humanism

    “Humanism is ethical. It affirms the worth, dignity and autonomy of the individual and the right of every human being to the greatest possible freedom compatible with the rights of others.”

    “Humanism is a response to the widespread demand for an alternative to dogmatic religion. The world’s major religions claim to be based on revelations fixed for all time, and many seek to impose their world-view on all of humanity. Humanism recognizes that reliable knowledge of the world and ourselves arises through a continuing process of observation, evaluation and revision.”

    this is taken from Amsterdam Declaration

    there is absolutely nothing there about “someone’s own way” conflated with “murder”.

    the only conclusion I draw from that comparison, is that by some reason you try misrepresenting humanism as some sort of destructive egoistic nihilism.

    why is that needed?

    • Because the REALITY of history, as opposed to the secular theology, is that humanism and murder are inextricably linked…..

      When I hear secular humanists debate and acknowledge this linkage rather than live in denial of it, I might begin to give some credence to your claims.

      By all means submit an article justifying your claims, but political declarations have to be backed up by historical realities – Cain declared “am I my brother’s keeper?” having murdered his brother, to me, the Amsterdam Declaration has the same credibility. Actions always speak louder than words.

  12. Excuse me but “secular theology”, and “humanism and murder are inextricably linked” remind me only “nothing to do with islam” and “religion of peace”.
    The same type of deceptive declamation.

    When, where and who exactly was “murdered” in the name of secular humanism?
    What “Actions” are you talking about?

    If that is only about abortion issue – yes there is ethical problem here, that is to be resolved by our evolving moral rules.
    But, secular humanist is not the one who supports unrestraigned abortion.
    Far from that. I don’t support it.
    There is nothing in Amsterdam Declaration that falsifies humanism by opposition to abortion.

    As to the question of “credibility” – well, when you add conspiracy theories to blood libel propaganda, it really looks beautiful.

    Also, repeated mentioning of “Cain” doesn’t bring anything serious arguments wise.
    Not more than reciting Bhagavad Gita or Egyptian Book of the Dead.

    These “Historical realities” you want to see, – are all in front of your eyes.
    All technological wonders of the West, – computers, electronics, space exploration, live-saving medical technology, new drugs, materials, biotech, cheep air travel, and “cheep stuff” in general – and more in arts, music, cinema – the whole modern world was and is created mostly by “secular humanists”, despite they didn’t and don’t care about label.

    I think you are plain wrong when trying to deny these realities.

  13. When I hear secular humanists debate and acknowledge this linkage rather than live in denial of it, I might begin to give some credence to your claims.

  14. OK – but you were excessively tough on them in advance.

    I think after looking at the issue along the lines I do, you may find worth revisiting it at some stage, with less subjective approach.

    You are keen writer, so it would be good.
    After reasding your essay, I even felt some sort of archaic pride for a moment, – wow, I even didn’t know that I belong to the caste of such gorgeous, bloodthirsty monsters.
    “Future must not belong to those who slander The Prophets of Secular Humanism”.

  15. To use a Biblical analogy, when Jesus was telling his followers how to distinguish true from false teachers. He said, “by their FRUITS ye shall know them”, in other words, what do their teachings actually produce? We probably all agree that the leftists (Communists, Nazis, Progressives) as well as muslims, all talk a good game in many ways, but what happens to people when they really get control? With three out of the four, the result has been mass murder, and the progressives simply haven’t attained to the level of control that the other three have reached.
    As for the progress of science, and technology, historically and functionally it rests on the assumption that external reality has unchanging rules that one can discover. This assumption is consistent with the Judeo-Christian worldview, and was shared to some extent by the Ancient Greeks and Romans, but the above mentioned groups don’t share it at all on a philosophical level, though individuals that belong to them might still use methodologies based on the assumption as a matter of expediency.

Comments are closed.