Theocracy

[Tux]

Meeting of theocratic right.

In short, they want to give Christians special rights, remove liberties for non-Christians, and force Christian moral onto the nation.

[keith the dem]

1. Clarification- Their perverted version of Christianity!

What they preach has very little resemblance to what Jesus taught. True religion can not be forced on people any more than democracy can be spread by the point of a gun.

[Tux]

2. But

They want to do so since we "lost" our way. If you read history, Christians killed people for major crimes like not agreeing with Puritans, using herbal medicine, not conforming to tradition of ignorance. Christians have a history of burning people alive for not believing as they "should" and call them witches. Bible says to kill witches. If it's in the Bible, along with Christ's teachings, then it must be part of what Jesus said.

[Stunster]

3. Non-Christians

killed people for major crimes like being Christians, like not being Communists, like defending the rights of poor people, and for trying to teach others about the Christian faith. Non-Christians have a history of persecuting, torturing, and killing Christians. Ancient Jews and Romans did it, pagans did it, Native Americans did it, Muslims did it, Hindus did it, Shintoists did it, French, Spanish, Italian, and South American anticlericals did it, but none of these can match the extent to which 20th century atheists did it. In the USSR, in China, in North Korea, in Vietnam, in Cambodia, in Albania, in Spain, in Cuba, in Romania, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Laos, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Ethiopia, Greece, East Germany and elsewhere, millions of Christians were done to death by militant atheists.

Millions of Christians killed. In the 20th century. By atheists.

Just for being Christians.

I can see why atheists would prefer to focus on the Salem witch trials.

[YankeyMCC]

4. Following others...

doesn't lessen your own crimes.

And no where and at no time have "millions" of christrians been killed by atheists.

[Stunster]

6. You are wrong

And no where and at no time have "millions" of christrians been killed by atheists.

You're wrong.

The Ottawa Citizen (20 Dec. 1998) reported that 15 million Christians died in Soviet prison camps because of their faith.


Stephane Courtois, The Black Book of Communism

* Victims of Communism only: 85-100M

Rudolph J. Rummel, Death By Government

* "Democides" - Government inflicted deaths (1900-87)
o 169,198,000
o Including:
+ Communist Oppression: 110,286,000

Not included among democides:

* Wars: 34,021,000
* Non-Democidal Famine (often including famines associated with war and communist mismanagement):
o China (1900-87): 49,275,000
o Russia: (1921-47): 5,833,000

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstats.htm has loads of stats and sources on the whole history of human slaughter, in every place, by every category, and in every period. If you explore his site (it's massive), I think you'll agree that it's very fair and objective.

He cites every published figure he can for each category, and then comes to some sort of rough estimate. For the killing of witches in the 400 years from 1400 through 1800, he says Of the 15 estimates listed here, the median is 100,000. If we limit it to just the ten estimates that are cited favorably, the median falls between 50,000 and 60,000.

He cites a figure of 31,689,000 religious believers (includes Christians and Muslims) killed by atheists, and says that though the number is too high, it's "the right number of digits"---i.e. it's in the tens of millions....

David Barrett, Todd Johnson, Justin Long

* World Christian Encyclopedia (2001): This book is the standard reference work for religious statistics of all kinds, and both Britannica and the World Almanac cite from it. It has a single page <http://gem-werc.org/gd/gd16.pdf> estimating the number of martyrs since the origin of each religion:
o Muslim martyrs: 80M
o Christian martyrs: 70M
+ 20th Century: 45.4M
+ At the hands of...
# Atheists: 31,689,000

Martyrdom at Soviet hands:

* 1921-50: 15M Christians in prison camps
* 1950-80: 5M Christians in prison camps
* Orthodox: 14.5M k. by Stalin, 2.7M of them martyrs (1929-37)
* Roman Catholics (1925): 1.2M martyrs

# The Ottawa Citizen (6 Feb. 1993)

* Citing D. Barret, Our Globe and How to Reach It
o 40M Christians martyred throughout history.
o ca. 24M by secular governments and atheists
o ca. 8M k. by other Christians

Ok, one can fiddle around with definitions of Christians, and definitions of why people were killed. But yes, millions of people who were Christians were killed by atheists in the 20th century.

Says White:

But all in all, I'd say that the 20th Century numbers seem to be in the right order of magnitude (probably too high, but the right number of digits)

Not all of them were killed simply because they were Christians, to be sure. Not all of them were martyrs in a technical religious sense. But were they killed? Yes. Were they Christians? Yes. Were the killers atheists? Yes. Was it in the millions? Yes.

So you are wrong.

[Az]

7. I think the distinction

is based on the fact that they were killed in the name of Soviet Style Communism and not simply by a group of arganized atheists working for the furtherance of atheism.

Yes they may well have been atheists. But it was the conflict with their Communist beliefs that incited them to kill the Christians.

You will find this is a bit of a sore point for many atheists. Similar, though different, for liberal Christians and Catholics forever being associated with the conservative rabble that are so vocal in their name.

[Stunster]

8. Oh, well that's alright then

Look, he said that And no where and at no time have "millions" of christrians been killed by atheists.

That statement is simply false. Get it? What he said is wrong. No serious historian of Communism thinks that millions of Christians were not done to death under those regimes. It might not be 31 million. But it is in the millions.

Now, if you want to talk about motive, fine. You could argue that it wasn't atheism that motivated the persecution and slaughter of Soviet, Chinese, Vietnamese, Albanian, Cambodian etc Christians. But they were slaughtered, and the slaughtering was conceived, ordered and implemented by atheists.

I could as easily argue that all the non-Christians killed by Christian Crusaders were killed not because of their differing religion, but because Europeans just liked killing non-Europeans, or grabbing land and treasures, or just got a kick out of warring, pillage, and plunder....

And I think that would actually be closer to the truth about the Crusades than the denial that antipathy towards religion was the main reason so many Christian and other believers were killed under Communism.

[Az]

9. Its up to you how you want to interact

Do you want to communicate and exchange ideas? Or do you simply want to score points in some imaginary game?

I come her to discuss things. Did the preceding post say no atheists killed a lot of Christians? Yes. Was he wrong? Yes. But was that really the point he was trying to get across? Probably not.

The problem here is that many people falsely tie atheists to Communism as if it was inseperable. Atheism does not lead automatically to Communism. Communism places its own doctrine above all else. It behaves very much like a dogmatic authoratarian religion on its own. Historically whenever two such social structures have vied for control of a society bloodshed followed.

So be it Catholics vs Protestants or Muslims vs Buddhists or even Communism vs Christianity. When one group gains control of the reigns of power it will seek to purge other beliefs if it thinks it can accomplish it.

Atheism is not an organised dogmatic system of beliefs. As such siting atheism as the cause of death for believers is misleading. Yes atheists may have killed Christians in the Soviet Union. But it was in the name of the Soviet Union and not in the name of atheism.

[YankeyMCC]

10. You're being deliberately misleading

Az is correct to point out motivations. There has never been persecution based on religion by atheists in the scale you falsely imply.

Millions of christians may have been killed by communists but this was not part of a religious persecution which is at the core of the subject here. Millions of christians have been killed by christians too you're using statistics in a manipulative and misleading fashion.

And still your inference that the killing christians have done in the name of religion "is ok because others have done the same" is still invalid. Regardless of how many christians were killed by alleged atheists.

[Stunster]

11. Be honest

Reverse the scenario.

If those governments had been Christian theocracies, and if millions of atheists had perished at their hands, do you think that this wouldn't be used as a stick to bash Christianity, even if it could be shown that killing millions of people is actually incompatible with the basic tenets of Christianity?

It's the double standard that I'm attacking. Christians, for motives that are actually contrary to Christian teaching, have killed many. This killing is ROUTINELY trotted out by atheists and others who are antipathetic to Christianity.

When it's pointed out that atheists, for whatever motives, have killed far more Christians in the 20th century, one gets accused of being unfair and the atheists go into a huff! Talk about double standards?!?! Give me a fucking break!

It's no part of Christian theology to deny that sin is a universal phenomenon in human history, and that it affects Christians as much as others. But what gets on my tits is when atheists self-righteously rant and rave about Salem witch trials and the Crusades etc, but routinely ignore the much more enormous crimes committed not by one, but by all atheistic regimes in the 20th century, as if they never happened.

They'll froth at the mouth over prayer in schools, commandments in courtrooms, and creationism in textbooks, but won't give a second thought to what's being perpetrated by atheists in Cuba or North Korea or Tibet.

[Az]

12. Of course

Look at the terms. Its right in front of you.

A Christian Theocracy acting to kill numerous atheists is going to do so in the name of Christianity.

A Communist Society will similarly kill numerous Christians in the name of Communism.

Communism != Atheism

There are no organised political systems predicated to the doctrine of atheism. Simply because atheism has no doctrine.

There can be doctrines that are atheistic. But the atheism is not the primary intent of the doctrine.

Christianities doctrine is primarily about the doctrine of God and Jesus Christ. Thus actions taken under such conditions are in the name of Christianity.

And yes we do trot out a lot of examples of Christians killing in the name of god. Simply because belief systems seem to be required to get a large number of people to actually get up and go kill some other people. Its not something people do oridinarily. People tend to be good. They tend to do things they believe are good. Getting a large number of people to do something they don't believe is good can be very difficult and usually requires force(which of course requires getting another group of people to do something they may not consider good).

[Stunster]

13. Not so fast

Christian theocrats might kill atheists not for religious reasons, but simply because atheists were trying to overthrow the government and impose a Communist revolution. In other words, a Christian theocracy might kill to retain power, not because it wanted to slaughter nonbelievers as such.

[Az]

17. Individuals and leaders act for power

The body, the bulk of the forces doing the actual killing need something more. They need to believe they are doing good.

At the center of most conflicts you will find power and greed. But these cannot be acted on without belief to motivate their followers.

Take a look at George and Company. They wanted to attack Iraq in the worst way. Their reasons were power and greed. But there is no way they would be able to get the rest of the nation behind them on this. They needed to shift it to a matter of good vs evil. They had to get the people to believe they were doing good.

[YankeyMCC]

14. Sorry, I won't give you a f-ing break

You're contradicting your own propositions. And applying a double standard yourself.

You make the excuse that when christians kill it is "contrary" to Christian teaching. But you make no similar excuse for atheists who "kill for whatever reason."

In fact christian religions have "taught" or at least promoted the killing of non-believers. That may be contrary to what you and I think of as a true christian morals but the christian establishment(s) at various times have promoted horrible things.

So have communists and others, but I think Az is correct that communism does not equate to atheism.

And "all atheistic regimes"?!? First of all I'll say again I don't think you can equate communism with atheism (I'm going to start a thread on that) and second of all name a nation, christian or otherwise, that has not committed enormous crimes sometime in it's history?

[Stunster]

16. Well, I ain't giving you one either (n/t)

[Az]

5. To turn people against people requires belief

Be it belief in a god who deems others to be unworthy or belief in a specific social structure that places the need of soceity over the rights of individuals.

Individuals may turn to violence and other malignant actions for personal gain. But to motivate a society to kill requires a belief. People seldom march off to war unless they believe they are doing good. It requires a strong belief system to override our natural revulsion of killing our fellow humans. Yet history has provided us with ample examples of beliefs that demanded killing. Both Sectarian and Secular.

Do not confuse simple atheism with the Dogmatic claims of the USSR and China. The USSR even found itself at odds with science and evolution and refused to bend. This is not devotion to atheism (as if such a thing were possible). It is a devotion to a dogmatic creed based on the premise set down by individuals proclaiming themself to have the truth.

Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.- Andre Gide

[Lydia Leftcoast]

15. If you actually look at the history of the Soviet Union and China,

they went way past Marx's statement on religion being the opiate of the people and made active attempts to suppress it, to the point of shutting down or destroying churches, denying job promotions or educational opportunities to believers, and imprisoning believes and clergy. In China, the interpreter at one university we visited was a retired professor who had learned English in mission schools in the 1940s, but during the Maoist era, he spent 28 years in prison for being a Christian. In Latvia, the Soviets actually killed clergy just for being clergy. In East Germany, young people could either be confirmed in church or stay in school past age 14, not both.

Now, you may say that this was Soviet-style or Maoist Communism instead of atheism that caused these atrocities. You may say that it is unfair to tar all atheists with the human rights violations of the Soviets and the Maoists, and you would be right. I absolutely do not blame all atheists for Stalin and Mao. However, the fact remains that Stalin and Mao were atheists and were evidently bent out of shape by anyone who wasn't.

In this, they went far beyond the requirements of Marxism. There is nothing in Marxism that says, "Turn people into atheists by force," and yet, that's what the Soviet and Chinese Communists tried to do.

If you're going to ascribe all sorts of crimes to Christianity as a whole just because of what some alleged followers did in some times and places, then you have to recognize that whatever motivated Stalin and Mao, it was NOT the demands of Marxism, but an intolerant variety of atheism.

This is not the same as saying that atheists are evil (I don't believe that), but it is saying that atheism can be a motivation for evil, just as religion can.

[arwalden]

18. Hmmm.

In this, they went far beyond the requirements of Marxism. There is nothing in Marxism that says, "Turn people into atheists by force," and yet, that's what the Soviet and Chinese Communists tried to do.

They did? Hmmm. Interesting. -- "Be-an-atheist or else!? Stop believing right now, damn you!?"

This is not the same as saying that atheists are evil (I don't believe that), but it is saying that atheism can be a motivation for evil, just as religion can.

Are you sure about that? Can you elaborate? I'd be interested in hearing more about this. How exactly does having NO belief in deities "motivate" someone to be evil? I don't follow.

Could the evil you speak of instead be motivated by... oh... I-don't-know... a desire for political gain? Revenge against enemies? Greed? Political power? Territory? Natural resources? Military influence?

Obviously you've given this much more reflective thought that I have, so perhaps you can share your understanding with me.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

23. The motivation is most likely

"I can't stand it that someone thinks differently than I do."

That's the ultimate motivation behind all ideological persecutions.

[arwalden]

24. Then You Agree That Atheism Itself Is Not The Motivation...

... for such "evil" things?

I don't necessarily agree fully with your last statement. But just for argument's sake let's assume that evil is motivated by someone who thinks "I can't stand it that someone thinks differently than I do".

That's certainly a departure from your earlier statement where you said:

This is not the same as saying that atheists are evil (I don't believe that), but it is saying that atheism can be a motivation for evil, just as religion can.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

25. The underlying motivation is "I want everyone to think like me," but

the way of thinking can be anything, whether it's wanting everyone to be a Southern Baptist or wanting everyone to be an atheist. The actual worldview in question is irrelevant. It's just the excuse for one human being to lord it over another.

Closely related is the idea, "I want everyone to be like me," which leads to racism and homophobia.

[arwalden]

26. So There's Nothing About Atheism ITSELF That's A Motivator For "Evil"

Correct?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

28. Same is true for religion

Jesus did say, "Make disciples of all nations," but he never said, "Kill anyone who disagrees." In fact, when he sent his disciples out to preach for the first time, he told them to just move on if people were not receptive to them.

Islam is also a missionary religion, but it is supposed to respect Christians and Jews as fellow monotheists.

To paraphrase Bill Maher's words about Ann Coulter, sometimes authoritarian religious types "just make shit up" based on their cultural prejudices.

[Az]

29. Doctrine is a tricky thing

Its all about the interpretation. The OT is pretty much filled with God's chosen people waging war on those that don't get it. Some would even argue that they are supposed to kill anyone that does disagree. There are even instructions on how best to kill some people.

Remember Jesus did not banish the OT. He merely suggested that it was unreasonable to expect people to live up to the standards set in it. He never said that the positions stated in the OT were wrong. Thus stoning a child for rebellious behaviour is still good. Destroying a nation for abandoning god is still moral. Its just that Jesus didn't expect people to be able to live up to these standards.

[arwalden]

30. No... There's No "Same" About It...

Unlike Christianity, there is nothing about atheism itself to "twist" or "misinterpret". Atheism itself is simply is an absence of belief in deities.

I thought we were approaching a point that we could agree upon, but now your message seems to be evasive by making a logical fallacy. I'd really like a straightforward answer from you. Please answer my question directly.

Do you agree that there is nothing about atheism ITSELF that is the cause or motivation for doing evil?

[Az]

19. As I mention

in the new thread. It isn't so much that existing Communist systems aim for atheism. Rather its that they seek to drive out any potential comepetition to their doctrine. Anything that may challenge their claim to define truth is sought out and demolished.

This isn't so much and advocacy of an atheistic notion. Rather it merely leaves the individuals with an absense of alternate beliefs (including gods) which in the end is a definition of atheism.

What I am trying to say is that removal of opposing beliefs is the goal not imposition of an atheistic position. It just so happens that atheism is merely the absense of a belief.

[immoderate]

20. I would not equate the worshipers of...

Stalin, Mao, or Hitler with atheists. And you don't know that they were really atheists individually. When churches were reopened in these respective countries, those "atheists" flocked back to the church in droves. Implies that religious beliefs were secretly held by those who overtly denied it while killing.

--IMM

[Lydia Leftcoast]

22. The vast majority of Soviet and Chinese never actually participated

in the persecutions. They most just said, "Oooh-kaay, that's how it is" and kept their heads down, sort of like the "kakure Kirishitan" of pre-modern Japan, who had been converted to Christianity by the Portuguese missionaries and who pretended to be Buddhists when the shogun decreed that every family had to officially affiliate itself with a Buddhist temple.

My guess is that the people who did the persecuting (mostly KGB or their counterparts in other countries) are not religious today, not unless they have undergone a conversion experience, which, I suspect, most of them have not.

[immoderate]

27. and I would think that their beliefs fall out on the same curve...

as everybody else. Most studies I've seen put the number of non-religious at about 15% of the population. I think if you rounded up the Germans, Soviets, or Chinese of whatever time frame, they would test out the same.

Possible exception: northern European countries where theism is de-emphasized, a higher number might cop to non-religion. I think the real numbers are hard to know because people (some) are dishonest about themselves on this topic.

--IMM

[YankeyMCC]

21. Thanks for actually..

Giving a thoughtful fact based response.

And certainly there have been atheists that have done bad things. And you're right that we shouldn't equate all christians or all muslims with those who have done horrible things in the name of their religion.

You point call the people who have committed crimes in the name of christianity "alleged followers". Ok, this means they are twisting the beliefs of chritianity.

And you point out that the atheists who's crimes you are listing are twisting the beliefs of communism NOT atheism. So they are "alleged followers" of communism not atheism. There is nothing to follow in "atheism".

[Stunster]

33. Read Lenin on religion, and his orders to shoot religious believers (n/t)

[YankeyMCC]

36. Way to miss the point n/t

[Tux]

31. So....

Just for being Christians.
I can see why atheists would prefer to focus on the Salem witch trials.
First, I'm not an atheist.
Second, have you ever heard of the Inquisition? Or how early Christians kill Gnostics not long after the Bible was formed? Or when Unitarians were burned alive in England for disbelieving the Trinity? Or when the Salem witch trials spread across New England were almost a hundred Christians were burned alive?

If that is the peace and love Jesus taught, I'd hate to see his teachings of hatred.

[Stunster]

34. The median total

of deaths attributable to the Inquisition is 32,000, from 12 estimates (most of which are far lower than 32,000).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=10715&mesg_id=11396

The same source cited in that post agrees that tens of millions of Christians and other religious believers were done to death under Communism.

Would it be a good answer to a Jew who mentions the Holocaust that Jews over a period of centuries may have killed 32,000 people?

[Jim__]

37. Ummmm - much as I hate to be technical ...

If, as you claim, (the) median total of deaths attributable to the Inquisition is 32,000, from 12 estimates, it is not possible that most of the estimates were below 32,000.

In the case of 12 estimates the median is defined as the average of the sixth and seventh highest estimates; that is, by definition, exactly half of the estimates are below 32,000 - or, in the case where the 6th and 7th highest estimates are both exactly 32,000, then one less than half are below that.

[Stunster]

38. Here's the relevant text

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#SpanInq

He may indeed be misusing the word 'median'.

I don't think it makes a difference to the point I was making, except that if we use the term correctly, then the figure is even lower than 32,000.

[Jim__]

39. The text doesn't really clarify the issue

I couldn't find anything that clarifies exactly what the text is referring to. But, take your claim that there are 12 estimates. The 2nd and 3rd estimates seem to be covering different periods - Pulgar, before 1490 and the unnamed Catholic historian the period after 1480. So, maybe their combined total is one estimate (this would make the median estimate 31,912).

But, then, some of these estimates are for the number of people burned to death. It's not clear from the source whether these estimates are claiming that all the people killed in the Spanish Inquisition were burned death - if not, they are not estimates of the total number killed.

Some of the estimates are only for the number of people killed by Torquemada, so, they don't seem to cover the entire period of the Spanish Inquisition.

Then, the 2 high estimates are for 350,000 and 250,000 people killed. There is no explanation for the huge discrepancy in the estimates. With that type of discrepancy, it's valid to ask where it comes from. Were the high estimates made at a significantly different time in history? Have these claims invalidated the low estimates; or, conversely, have the low estimates invalidated the high estimates? Or, is the discrepancy due to the figures actually representing different events (different periods, different methods of killing) - the source doesn't say.

It doesn't look to me like the author of that page tried to ascertain the accuracy of these estimates, just found a bunch of estimates and published them. It would be interesting to know why there is this wide discrepancy. But, right now, I wouldn't put a lot of weight on those numbers.

[Stunster]

40. The issue is clear enough

Unless one is going to claim that the Spanish Inquisition executed tens of millions of people, it's not remotely in the same league as an example of mass killing compared to that carried out in the 20th century by atheists.

If you read the site's author's methodology, you'll see that what he does is report every published source he can find for numbers killed in each of the very many categories of mass killings he covers. And talking of killings of religious believers by atheists, he thinks a published figure (in excess of 31,000,000) may be on the high side, but it's the "right number of digits". I.e., the documentary evidence for that category points to a number in the tens of millions. But he may be a little out of date on the Spanish Inquisition, for on June 9th, 1995, the BBC documentary, The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition was aired on Ancient Mysteries. The top figure for deaths the program gave was 5000.

The program is discussed here.

"What is documented is that 3000 to 5000 people died during the Inquisition's 350 year history."

[Jim__]

41. The more numbers you cite, the less clear it becomes

Your citations now have the number of deaths as being anywhere between 2,000 and 350,000. When estimates vary over 2 orders of magnitude, I don't believe we have a very clear picture.

[Stunster]

42. I think you're being disingenuous (n/t)

[Jim__]

48. Your opinion doesn't change the facts

And the citations for the number of deaths in the Spanish Inquisition are all over the board, from your cited source they range from 2,000 to 350,000.

Your "method" for determininng the accuracy seems to be which numbers suit your preferred version. Certainly, you have not cited anything that gives specific reasons for doubting the accuracy of the the estimates of 250,000 and 350,000. Your main source has qualifiers on the other numbers (type of death, range of years that do not cover the complete event). If someone is seriously interested in the truth, and encounters such broad discrepancies, they either have to do further research to determine the accuracy of the various estimates, or admit that the data is inconclusive.

Your posts give no indication that you've done this research. You appear merely to have accepted what is convenient to the case you wish to make.

[Behind the Aegis]

35. References

Please cite sources where Jews persecuted, tortured, or killed Christians. I am REALLY interested in what you would be able to produce.

As for European pagans, some did kill Christians, it was usually over land. The Romans even tolerated Christians until they (the Christians) started trying to convert everyone.

As for your comment about I can see why atheists would prefer to focus on the Salem witch trials. This makes NO sense. Thousands were murdered in Europe as witches. So, why would atheists focus on 19 individuals? You seem to be pre-occupied with 'numbers killed.' In recent history, most conquering and destruction of native peoples have been in the name of Christianity.

[Stunster]

43. Here's one

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians

[Behind the Aegis]

44. Did you read it?

I found this VERY interesting...Much of the Christian propaganda about Jews needs to be read with an eye to its intended audience and its intended effect. Almost EVERY single thing in both accounts of Jews persecuting Christians comes from the Bible! I didn't see one reference other than the Bible! I also love this line from your source: ..., since Jews never expected Gentiles among them (even visitors in their synagogues) to observe Jewish law. Can the same be said of most Christian sects?

Want to compare persecution of one religion by another? Try a search on Christian persecution of Jews!

Christians have the power in this nation and many others. There are quite a few good ones out there, but there are also quite a few who are EVIL!

On edit: I said this before: "In recent history, most conquering and destruction of native peoples have been in the name of Christianity.
" Do you deny this?

[Stunster]

45. Did you read it?

"In pre-Islamic Yemen, a Jewish king called Dhu Nuwas came to power and persecuted Christians in his realm, and massacred Christian communities in Najran in about 524; apparently this was intended as retaliation for Byzantine persecutions of the Jews"

[Behind the Aegis]

46. I read that...and even more!

"Though the Yemenite nationalist forces under Dhu Nuwas included Jews, pagans, and Christians, Ethiopian propaganda painted the punishment of Najran as a Jewish religious, anti-Christian action and called for a "righteous war" against Yemen." Dhu Nuwas

"It describes the city as a hotbed of Christian agitation against the king, ending in a revolt in which some Jews were killed. Christian sources acknowledge that the king requested Najran's residents to surrender and live in peace, attacking the city only upon their refusal to do so." http://www.jewishworldreview.com/010198/yemen1.html">Battle at Najran

It appears that this story has many versions. Including one in the Qu'aran that are disputed by their OWN scholars. Some say the ones killed were leading a rebellion based on the Ethiopian rule, others say the king wanted the city back in the fold. One Christian site spoke of over "2000 martyrs", but even their records indicate as few as 200 were killed. Many of the tortures prescribed have changed over the centuries, many even being disputed because of archaeological evidence found, that does not support a wide-spread massacre.

Although, 200 killed (even if in a military coup) is too many, this hardly serves as an example of constant persecution by Jews against Christians. And although you said; Non-Christians have a history of persecuting, torturing, and killing Christians; is true. It seems that one is more likely to find examples of "Christians {having} a history of persecuting, torturing, and killing Non-Christians."

[Stunster]

47. Here's some more

There was no Jewish state and hence no Jewish army from the end of the bar Kochba revolt circa 130CE until the 20th century, so it's not too surprising that Jews did not kill large numbers of Christians during the interval. But it seems possible that the bar Kochba revolt included some deliberate killing of Christians by Jews. The whole revolt is discussed here.

There may be a few more instances. The Latvian Jewish historian Simon Dubnov wrote that:

"in 556, during bouts in the circus in Caesarea, the Samaritans, assisted by Jewish youths, attacked the Christians. The Christians were beaten soundly. Several churches were razed and Stephanus, the governor of Palestine, was killed ... In Antiocha ... in 608, the local Jews rebelled; since they predominated in numbers they killed many Christians, including the patriarch Anastasias, whose body they dragged through the city streets ... In other localities (Scytopolis, for instance) the Jews were hostile toward the Christians. During commercial transactions, they would not even accept money directly from the hands of a Christian; they had to throw their coins into water, where the Jews would then retrieve them." {DUBNOV, p. 24-25 v. 2}

When the Persians invaded Palestine in 614, Jews joined as "auxiliaries" in slaughtering Christian neighbors. "Jewish warriors," , "along with Persians, now assaulted numerous Christian churches (a church legend exaggerates the number of dead to 90,000). Many churches, including the one of Christ's grave, were razed to the ground ... In hostile acts towards Christians the Jew did not lag behind the Persians. Bitter resentment ... found an outlet in atrocities." {DUBNOV, p. 216, v. 2} According to a Christian monk of the times, Strategius of Mar Saba, Jews bought "a large number" of Christian prisoners from the Persians, "who they then slaughtered just as one might buy cattle to slaughter." {SCHAFER, p. 192} "Even as the Persians were approaching Palestine, the Jews appear to have risked an open revolt against the Christians and allied themselves with the Persians." {SCHAFER, p. 140} The Persians were soon driven out, however, by Heraclius of Christian Byzantium. When a Jewish leader, Benjamin of Tiberias, was asked why he had previously justified the cruelties against Christians, the Jewish patriot is reported to have answered, "Because they were the enemies of my religion." {DUBNOV, p. 218, v.2}

Dubnov, Simon. History of the Jews: From the Roman Empire to the Early Medieval Period, Vol. 2, South Brunswick, NY, Thomas Yoseloff, London, 1968 Who is Dubnov?

Schafer, Peter. The History of the Jews in Antiquity. The Jews of Palestine from Alexander the Great to the Arab Conquest. Harwood Academic Publishing, 1995 Who is Schafer?

More in this interesting article:
http://iupjournals.org/jss/jss4-2.html

Couple of other interesting tidbits are 1) Julian the Apostate, Emperor of Rome between A.D. 361 and 363 and fourth successor of Constantine, who oppressed Christians even as he tried to help Jews rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem, and 2) Nero, according to some Rabbinic sources, becoming a convert to Judaism. His wife Poppea was apparently inclined to Judaism. It has been suggested, though I regard it as dubious, that Nero's persecution of Christians in Rome was suggested by Poppea.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=192&letter=N
http://womenshistory.about.com/cs/romanempire/p/p_poppaea.htm

Of course, nobody in their right mind could accuse Jews of the kind of large-scaling perpetrated by Christians. But at least some of the latter is simply a consequence of Christians holding political power for most of the relevant periods. When Christians were removed from political power, as happened with Communism, large-scale killing reached unprecedented proportions.

So, I don't think any of this proves very much, other than that there's a pervasive tendency towards wickedness among human beings. People with a variety of religious beliefs and none have all done despicable things.

[distantearlywarning]

32. These people are totally delusional.

"Judeo-Christian moral consensus where rape and illegitimacy are rare, marriage and child-rearing are valued, and prisons are converted into museums."

Um. Yeah. As though every human being in America will suddenly wake up and abandon their basic predatory nature, overcome all their addictions, let go of all their baggage, and move to the suburbs to raise rugrats in little ticky-tacky houses. Ah...if only we could pass that bill allowing ministers to preach politics! Our nation would be perfect and everybody would love one another!

After all, when Jesus walked the earth, there were no evil acts, crime, sexual immorality, or...er...ok, maybe not!

Um. Ok. Well, during the dark ages, when man relied solely on the church for guidance in all matters, people were happy, healthy, and...hmmm...er...

Well, during the 1950's, nobody ever had sex before marriage! Right? Right....?

DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH, FUNDIES! (Your own ministers will be the first ones in the closet with their mistresses...)