Atheism's Twentieth Century Death Toll

[McCulloch]

You really want to play that numbers game, with atheism's 100,000,000 death toll last century?

Are there 100,000,000 deaths in the twentieth century attributable to atheism? Please list.

[East of Eden]

dianaiad wrote:

The story does go that Joseph had some problems with that. He got visited by an angel, too. I don't know about you, but that would settle the matter for ME. What anybody else thinks is, well irrelevant, wouldn't you say?

I would ask the angel for identification. It might be irrelevant to anyone today, but according to Jewish law (commanded by God) at the time, not being a virgin at her marriage would have required Mary to be stoned to death by the entire community, who probably would not have believed her "God" story. No wonder they ran off to Bethelem.

Uh, problem. Mary and Joseph were promised...'as good as' married. Mary getting pregnant wasn't a problem; that sort of thing happened. Joseph would have simply married her a bit early and nobody would have thought a thing about it. The problem was with Joseph, and Joseph only. If HE would not accuse her, then it wasn't anybody else's business.

OK I have collected some stuff on the Virgin Birth which I won't bother to pursue here, since it is very far from the subject of this thread, except to say that the virgin birth was doubted or even unknown to many of the early Chistians, such as St. Paul, and was only made a required belief by more recent theologians.

Wrong, that doctrine was believed from the earliest days of the church:

"Very important in the history of the early church's belief in the virgin birth is the testimony of its early fathers. In 110 AD, Ignatius wrote in his Epistle to the Ephesians, "For our GOD Jesus Christ was...conceived in the womb of Mary...by the Holy Ghost."

"Now the virginity of Mary, and He who was born of her...are the mysteries most spoken of throughout the world, yet done in secret by GOD." Ignatius received his information from his teacher, John the apostle.

"We have further evidence," writes Clement F. Rogers, "which shows that the belief of Christians in the Virgin Birth was attacked by those outside. Cerinthus, for example, was the contemporary and opponent of St. John. It was said that the Evangelist, meeting him in the public baths, cried out, 'Let us flee lest the bath fall in while Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is here." He [Cerinthus' taught, Irenaeus tells us, that our LORD was born of Joseph and Mary like other men."

Another of the post-apostolic writers, Aristides in 125 AD, speaks of the virgin birth: "He is Himself Son of GOD on high, who was manifested of the Holy Spirit, came down from heaven, and being born of a Hebrew virgin took on His flesh from the virgin...He it is who was according to the flesh born of the race of Hebrews, by the GOD-bearing virgin Miriam."

Justin Martyr in 150 gives ample evidence to the concept of Jesus' miraculous birth. "...Our Teacher Jesus Christ, who is the first-begotten of GOD the Father, was not born as a result of sexual relations...the power of GOD descending upon the virgin overshadowed her, and caused her, while still a virgin, to conceive...For, by GOD's power He was conceived by a virgin...in accordance with the will of GOD, Jesus Christ, His Son, has been born of the Virgin Mary." (Apology 1:21-33; Dialogue with Trypho the Jew)

"The first great Latin-speaking Christian was the converted lawyer Tertullian. He tells us that not only there was in his days (ca AD 200) a definite Christian creed on which all churches agree, but he also tells us, its technical name was a tessera. Now things only get technical names when they have been established for some time. He quotes this creed four times. It includes the words 'ex virgine Maria' (of the Virgin Mary)."

Josh McDowell

Here's a slightly off-topic bonus from the same author:

"If God became man, then we would expect Him to:

Have an unusual entrance into life.
Be without sin.
Manifest the supernatural in the form of miracles.
Have an acute sense of difference from other men.
Speak the greatest words ever spoken.
Have a lasting and universal influence.
Satisfy the spiritual hunger in man.
Exercise power over death."

Apparently Christians today are more gullible than their early counterparts were. Even many more modern Christians see it only as a myth. Here is an 1823 quote from Thomas Jefferson, who many Christians like to claim as a Christian founder of our country:
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."

I'll believe Ignatius over Jefferson, who was a flake among the Founders when it came to religion.

[JohnPaul]

East of Eden wrote:

I'll believe Ignatius over Jefferson, who was a flake among the Founders when it came to religion.

OK. I'll go with Jefferson. Now let's talk about Minerva springing full-grown from the brain of Jupiter. Do you believe that too? If not, why not? I can probably dig up ancient writings from people who did, if you insist. You can forget about the "dressed in armor" bit. I agree that part is a little unbelievable for a newborn.

There are dozens more such miraculous God-births to discuss, all of them fully supported by ancient writings.

[East of Eden]

East of Eden wrote:

I'll believe Ignatius over Jefferson, who was a flake among the Founders when it came to religion.

OK. I'll go with Jefferson. Now let's talk about Minerva springing full-grown from the brain of Jupiter. Do you believe that too? If not, why not? I can probably dig up ancient writings from people who did, if you insist. You can forget about the "dressed in armor" bit. I agree that part is a little unbelievable for a newborn.

There are dozens more such miraculous God-births to discuss, all of them fully supported by ancient writings.

Really, did these dozens fulfill prophecy, perform miracles and rise from the dead? The fact there are other conflicting religions means they can't all be true, but it does not mean there cannot be one objectively true religion. Strange that all cultures have a religion, isn't it? You'd almost think God implanted the idea on man's heart. Yes, some men don't believe, but then some don't care about sex or food either.

[JohnPaul]

dianaiad wrote:

I think that if male obsession could be turned down to thinking about sex once every half hour instead of every five minutes, we'd still procreate.

You just don't realize what a burden it is for us.

[dianaiad]

dianaiad wrote:

I think that if male obsession could be turned down to thinking about sex once every half hour instead of every five minutes, we'd still procreate.

You just don't realize what a burden it is for us.

Poor bo...er, babies.

[JohnPaul]

East of Eden wrote:

Strange that all cultures have a religion, isn't it? You'd almost think God implanted the idea on man's heart.

If it was your God who implanted the idea, why did he spread so many different gods around through a majority of the human race? That doesn't fit very well with his vain and jealous nature shown in his first commandment: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

Wrong, that doctrine was believed from the earliest days of the church...

This is an apologist claim that cannot be supported with evidence. We know that the doctrine was believed fairly early on because of the gospels, but before the gospels? We cannot know with any certainty that the virgin birth was taught from the earliest days of the church and no evidence exists to show that it was. Since the earliest Christian documents we have make no mention of the virgin birth, it remains entirely possible that the virgin birth was a later invention.

The arguments you copy from Josh McDowell (who is a theologian, not a biblical scholar) do not address the earliest days of the church. At best he presents an claim (with no supporting evidence) that Ignatius (presumably of Antioch?) was told about it from John. When, in the 60s? This sort of vague conjecture based on hearsay of hearsay is hardly enough substance upon which to declare one interpretation of historical events "wrong."

[100%atheist]

To the question posed by the title.

How can atheism cause anything? Atheism is a lack of belief in a deity, not a world view or doctrine or system of belief.
[center]How can ATHEISM cause anything at all?[/center]

After Ms. Diana lost interest in depating the OP topic, this thread turned into a random rambling topic. I don't think anyone here still has any non-yet-refuted argument for atheism causing any death.

[Cephus]

Really, did these dozens fulfill prophecy, perform miracles and rise from the dead? The fact there are other conflicting religions means they can't all be true, but it does not mean there cannot be one objectively true religion. Strange that all cultures have a religion, isn't it? You'd almost think God implanted the idea on man's heart. Yes, some men don't believe, but then some don't care about sex or food either.

Can you prove any of that stuff actually happened? It's easy to just make sweeping claims about it, but to produce objective evidence for any of it is much more difficult. Unfortunately, you, like all theists, have nothing but a bunch of hand-waving and empty claims. Faith is nothing to be proud of.

[JohnPaul]

You really want to play that numbers game, with atheism's 100,000,000 death toll last century?

Are there 100,000,000 deaths in the twentieth century attributable to atheism? Please list.

Before we can talk about numbers, we need a little clarification. Does God count as a theist? What about all the deaths caused by what the insurance companies call an "act of God," or what the obituaries call "called home"? Are these deaths to be counted as due to theism?