Hitler proclaimed himself a Catholic and Stalin was a seminarian at one time. Both claimed to be biblical adherents. I agree with you that they had no business calling themselves Christian. But then, neither did Queen Victoria or King Leopold and both killed even more people than either of these 20th century murderers while proclaiming themselves children of Christian Providence. There is no question that Marxist atheists like Mao, Pol Pot, and others committed atrocities. But this does not mean Christians or Christian professing types were not among those criminals.
What it does mean, gopher, and why it is brought up in the first place, is that if you look closely you will discover that the great myth of religion being the cause of all wars, yadda, yadda, a convenient way for people to close their minds off because the truth is never that simple, and the greatest numbers of people in any century killed by governments of any kind for any reason are by far done by anti-Christian, anti-Jewish atheists who did so in large measure in the name of atheism, not entirely, but in large measure.
But let us play the odds.
We do know that the Christian faith of whatever stripe, denounces genocide, denounces killing anyone on the basis of their religion or lack thereof.
(If Christianity was intolerant as it is hyperventilatingly described by some, where did all the atheists come from in Canada, or America, or western Europe for that matter? They should have all been eliminated by now! Think!)
Why does Christianity denounce genocide, or murder for that matter? There is a very good reason, found in the faith itself for those who care to look. Each person is valued intrinsically because of their humanity. This comes from a belief that God values each individual for their humanity.
Now, on the other side. If every person is a mere collection of chemicals animated by electrical impulses and only the result of an accident of the universe, completely random, where is that intrinsic value? It seems to me that it would be quite easy to convince oneself and cohorts with the power of life and death, under that value system, to eliminate large numbers of those human beings for whatever reason came to mind.
Looking back over history, at the actual numbers, it is clear that Christians or those who claimed to be Christians, have violated their own faith and committed murder, even mass murder on occasion. But it is important to recognize that it was indeed a violation.
On the other hand, the Stalins and Pol Pots and Maos of the world were violating what? Their belief system? If so, how so?
So, if I am a betting man, regardless of my own faith or lack thereof,
the odds of survival are better under Christians than atheists, because most of the time, when Christians are following their faith, they will not annihilate me as simply a random collection of cells, even though I might think that is all that I really am, simply because their faith teaches them that I am intrinsically valuable as a human being.
A common mistake by the religious is that just because people think religion is bunk doesn't mean they are atheists. I believe in the Creator and spirituality but I think religion breeds contempt for everybody who doesn't believe their brand of belief system. In other words: separation. To me spirituality is a belief in a deity without religious dogma. It is the dogma that is dangerous not the teachings behind it.
Well, cliffy, you do have a problem then don't you? "It is the dogma that is dangerous, not the teachings behind it." That is a dogmatic statement if I ever heard one. The fact is, you have dogmas that you live by. Everyone does. If you had to re-think everything every morning when you got up you would never leave the house.
You just don't like the dogmas of certain organized religions. Fair enough. But dogma itself is not the problem. Perhaps you just want what C.S.Lewis described as a "tame" God. One that you can define for yourself and who doesn't interfere with your life and your particular moral values. A guilt free life perhaps for a time but if you really think about it long and hard, what's the point of believing in a God at all? That is where a lot of people have realized that agnosticism at minimum (hardly logically tenable) or atheism is probably the more realistic position to take. Perhaps that is why many just presume atheism where someone denounces religion.
But hey, the original Christians were denounced as atheists (cannibals too) by the Romans, so you are in good company.