The Mexica of Tenochtitlan (aka the "Aztecs") reportedly slaughtered thousands in honor of their deities, organizing "Flowery Wars" specifically to capture victims for sacrifice. But that was reported by the Catholic priests who accompanied the conquistadores, so .... shrug. The victors write the history, no?
The early Celts burned sacrificial victims to their Gods, but that was only a few at a time, not thousands, and while the victims were enemy warriors, they were not the reason for the war, only a beneficial extra like weevils in your bisquit.
The pagan enemies of the Israelites did wage war to capture sacrificial victims, but only a few at a time.
So, I guess your point is that we're more efficient these days? But then, we are more efficient at killing. The ancients would never have dreamed of wiping out whole towns and cities at a swoop (fell or otherwise).
I dunno, killing is killing. If you need an excuse, I suppose religion is no worse than dirt, or politics, or skin color, or any of the other idiotic reasons men have used as a causus belli.
Go figger.
2006-07-20 11:47:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Grendle 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
OK, as far as communists (socialists, whatever they call themselves)--they are anti-religion and rejected any pagan or Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Buddhist (whoever) religion already in place in their countries. But they weren't directly persecuting religion per se--they wanted people to ascribe to their state-run everybody-be-communist beliefs. It was kinda like they had their own religion, in the form of "progress" and "community involvement" and sharing and everybody conforming. Which might have been atheist but wasn't really anti-religious, if you consider a religion a group organized for common beliefs and social control and brainwashing and things like that. The government sorta was a substitute for the religions they made people give up. Yes, a lot of people died, but usually because they were rabble-rousers, or they wouldn't give up their wealth for the "greater good" or because the government stamped out the morals of religions and then their followers didn't have a good reason to be righteous and not persecute people and kill them off. Witches were usually persecuted because the government/church unit wanted to seize their property. When governments didn't allow people to profit from persecuting witches (or alleged witches, as the case may be), then witch hunts dropped off dramatically. It's all about the Benjamins, kids! (Or the coin of whatever realm the people were being persecuted.)
Pagans were usually kind of independent by nature and didn't organize Pagan Crusades or anything like that. If you're looking for analogs to the Crusades or the Spanish Inquisition or witch hunts or things of that ilk, then no, Pagans didn't really do that kind of thing. That's because Pagans had religious beliefs, which helped them be more moral because they had a sense of divine retribution or consequences for immoral actions. So Pagans and atheists aren't really in the same category.
2006-07-20 11:54:16
·
answer #2
·
answered by SlowClap 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Do you want a list?
1. The human sacrifices to Moloch (there are even references to this in the Bible)
2. The burial rituals of the Scythians when their kings died.
3. Communism in Vietnam, Korea, Russia and China.
4. Rome in the sack of Carthage.
5. Rome in the destruction of the Dacians.
6. Rome in the punitive expeditions of Tiberius in Germany.
7. Rome in (well, there are quite a few examples here).
8. The sack of Ur in the name of Enlil.
9. The campaigns of the Turks and Arabs against Byzantium.
I could cite you a hundred examples. Never ask a historian a history question. He just might answer. :)
2006-07-20 11:48:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by antirion 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hello :)
Religious Wars Mythbusting
How many people over the years have ever heard someone say the following: "More people have been killed over religion than for any other reason".
The reason is that in the 20 th Century, the bloodiest of all of the centuries, more people were killed for godless ideology than the other 19 Centuries combined. 50 million people died in WWII alone, and that was for Hitler's Nazis and for Stalin's Communists, neither of who were believers in the Almighty.
Stalin also murdered millions of his own people in Russia and the Ukraine before the war, as well as after the war.
The worldwide Communist Revolution of the 20 th century is estimated to have killed over 100 million people alone, in Cuba, Eastern Europe, Asia, etc.
Previous centuries did see a lot of killing over religion, including the Catholic Inquisition, Mohammed's conversion of the infidels, the Crusades, the Puritan witch trials, Henry the VIII's Anglican purge of English Catholics, Oliver Cromwell's killing of Irish Catholics, etc.
Numbers-wise, however, they just don't add up to what happened in the 20 th century over godless Communism and godless Nazi-ism.
A lot of atheists and other non-believers seem to live in fear of Christians taking over their lives and their property by force.
These people need to go back and take a look at the Roman Emperors and what they did to the Christians for over 300 years, until Emperor Constantine converted to Catholicism.
Those early Christians were fed to the lions alive, beheaded, and crucified by the hundreds of thousands to appease the bloodlust of the non-believers of those days.
Based on that history, maybe it's the Christians who have more to fear from the non-believers of today and tomorrow!!
===============================================
http://feudforthought.com/religiouswars.htm
In Jesus Most Precious Name..
With Love..In Christ..
2006-07-20 11:48:59
·
answer #4
·
answered by EyeLovesJesus 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The crucifixion. He paid a debt He did not owed, I owed a debt I could not pay, I needed someone to wash my sins away.
The only religion that has went in to kill & slaughter because they didn't conform to their religion are Anitchrist ones.
A few examples = Hitler was of anticrist religion. Russian leader was athiest & just as guilty as Hitler of the Holocaust. Saddam Hussain was of an Antichrist religion. Those slaugtering innocent in sudan are of an Antichrist religion. Any terrorist is of an Antichrist religion (including Timothy McVeigh & eco terrorists).
It's called piety & self righteousness & disregard for life of others who don't think like they do. Of Course The Koran allows for the guilty only to be slaughtered. Those who reject it's Allah/Koran/Mohammed, or aren't muslim enouph.
Some literature of the Christian crusades to try to retake the land from muslims has not been passed down correctly.
Israel took the promised land out of obedience to God.
2006-07-20 11:44:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by t a m i l 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Atheists: No spiritual beliefs so N/A
Pagans: The Egyptians, Persians, Medes, Babylonians, Greeks, Huns, World War II.
I'm sure there are others but that's a quick list off the top of my head.
2006-07-20 11:48:33
·
answer #6
·
answered by byhisgrace70295 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
There's the Bolshevik/Communist Revolution; the Communists were atheists (I suppose they still are). Then Stalin's government deliberately starved millions; this isn't counted as a form of warfare, but it ought to be. And Mao's Revolution was led by an atheist.
However: You could argue that these crimes were committed not in the name of atheism or any ideology, but as a simple power grab. You'd need to be very well versed in the relevant history, though.
Good question.
2006-07-20 11:50:33
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think I understand your point. Are you thinking of pagans or athiests in the modern Western world? Then obviously the answer is no. And we know what the large organized religions have caused in the name of their religions.
However, because of the way you stated your question, I think that you have to concede the point made in the previous answer. The Communists definitely identified themselves as athiests, and they did all of the things you mention.
2006-07-20 11:44:49
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ha, ha. Probably not in the name of their beliefs. What about the pillaging and plundering of Vikings? Did they have a religious agenda?
2006-07-20 11:41:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by ruletheworld 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ghengis Kahn
2006-07-20 11:49:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by Marcus R. 6
·
0⤊
0⤋