Atheism And Cannibalism

The documents, prepared by local government offices in the 1980's, two decades after the events they describe, seem to offer a meticulous record of how Red Guards and Communist officials in one province not only tortured their victims to death but also ate their flesh.

Copies of the documents have been smuggled out of China by Zheng Yi, a prominent writer wanted by the Chinese authorities for his work for the democracy movement at Tiananmen Square in 1989. After three and a half years as a fugitive, Mr. Zheng is to arrive in New York on Wednesday. Some Ugly Details

At some high schools, students killed their principals in the school courtyard and then cooked and ate the bodies to celebrate a triumph over "counterrevolutionaries," the documents report. Government-run cafeterias are said to have displayed bodies dangling on meat hooks and to have served human flesh to employees.

"There are many varieties of cannibalism," declares one report, "and among them are these: killing someone and making a late dinner of it, slicing off the meat and having a big party, dividing up the flesh so each person takes a large chunk home to boil, roasting the liver and eating it for its medicinal properties, and so on."

The documents suggest that at least 137 people, and probably hundreds more, were eaten in Guangxi Province in southern China in the late 1960's. In most cases, many people ate the flesh of one corpse, so the number of cannibals may have numbered in the thousands. ^[9]

Everyone was invited to the feasts where they would distribute the heart and liver of the former landowner, and to the assemblies where the speaker would address the people standing in front of a row of poles on which they had impaled recently chopped-off heads.

This fascination with vindictive cannibalism, which we find again in Pol Pot's Cambodia and corresponds to a very old archetype that was broadly prevalent throughout eastern Asia, had often made its appearance during other moments of paroxysm in Chinas' history. Thus, in an era of foreign interventions, in 613, the emperor Yang (of the Sui Dynasty) took his revenge on a certain revolutionary, by persecuting even his most distant relatives: "Those who were more severely punished had to undergo the punishments of being cut into four quarters and their head exposed atop a spear, or they would be cut to pieces, pierced with arrows. The emperor had ordered the high-ranking officers to devour the flesh of the victims, piece by piece."

The renowned author Lu Xun, a sympathizer of Communism, at a moment when he no longer concurred with nationalism and anti-Westernism, wrote: "The Chinese are cannibals..."^[10]

“She was asked to take off her clothes and her body was cut open,” he wept to the court. “There was blood everywhere. … [H]er liver was taken out and was cooked for a meal.”^[11]

South Korean customs officials recently seized thousands of pills filled with powdered human baby flesh arriving from China. Since August 2011, South Korean officials have intercepted more than 17000 pills smuggled from China.

South Korean officials became aware of a horrific practice of eating aborted fetuses after Seoul Broadcasting System showed a documentary on Chinese doctors who performed abortions and then ate the fetuses. One Chinese doctor on the documentary took out fetuses from his refrigerator.^[12]

It goes without saying that cannibalism in the Soviet Union was outlawed. Those who were caught cannibalizing their fellow citizens were sent to prisons, even though cannibalism was practiced in the Gulag, as well...

While some individuals ate the bodies of the already dead, others murdered for the purpose of providing themselves with food. Gangs of children would kill adults, while adults would find children to murder and eat. Escaped prisoners might take along fellow inmates to serve as future meals – unbeknownst to the escapees' companions themselves.

Cannibalism in the Soviet Union was sometimes a result of an individual or individuals seeking revenge.^[16]

Sung Min Jeong, 44, claims that in Chongjin – a city at the tip of the North Korean coast – a shopkeeper serves up human meat.

Fears that famine-stricken North Koreans are being forced to eat human flesh heightened earlier this year following claims a man was executed for murdering his two children for food.

Fears of cannibalism in the country surfaced in 2003 too, amid testimony from refugees who claimed poor harvests and food aid sanctions had resulted in children being killed and corpses cut up for food.

According to reports, requests by the United Nations World Food Programme to access "farmers' markets" where human meat was said to be traded, were turned down by Pyongyang, citing "security reasons".

Those caught selling human meat face execution, but one source told the North Korean Refugees Assistance Fund: "Pieces of 'special' meat are displayed on straw mats for sale.

"People know where they come from, but they don't talk about it."^[21]

No, he doesn’t want to join the Donner Party. Researchers may soon be able to manufacture meat from cell lines in the lab, and Dawkins has suggested in a tweet that we could “overcome our taboo” by eating human flesh so manufactured.

What if human meat is grown? Could we overcome our taboo against cannibalism? An interesting test case for consequentialist morality versus “yuck reaction” absolutism.^[23]

Although spanning only two sentences and consisting of just 21 words, Butler’s statement pretty much says everything that needs to be said about morality in a universe without God. In the world of the atheist “morality” has no actual significance; it is simply a word that is used to identify the “custom of one’s country,” the “current feelings of one’s peers” and personal preferences and psychological conditioning. ^[24]

As for eating my friend. If he was dead then yes I would. He is an animal, just like I am and just like you are. I would expect him to do the same if placed in that situation. Atheist

And in my own mind I would like to think I would be able to eat a fellow man who was dead or had no chance to survive to keep myself alive Atheist...

There you go. Cannibalism. I bet you can guess where this doctrine comes from. It comes from the teaching that people are nothing more than animals. This is another doctrine of atheism that we will discuss in this series. The creation story of atheism. The doctrine of evolution.

What would I do if I was faced with the choice of starvation or cannibalism? That choice will never be a part of my life. In my existential paradigm, there is always the God option. I would pray. I would expect one of three or more or a combination of things to happen. Either God would rescue me out of the predicament or He would provide me with food to eat or probably a combination of both. A third option would be a supernatural sustaining of the body until help arrives. Let me make one thing perfectly clear. Death for the Christian is a sweet release. It is entry into the heavenly. The Bible says that to die is "gain". For the Christian to resort to desecrating a corpse is to throw ones faith into reverse. For the atheist, however, it is a testimony to the barbaric nature of the religion and the need to expose it before it destroys society beyond repair.^[33]

When confronted on this issue, there is not a single atheist who would not eat human flesh when they were interviewed for the PPSimmons resource book The Atheists are Wrong. And now we are taking some heat for it. Not because we were wrong about them, but because according to them we were wrong about ourselves. They say quote "Everyone would eat another human being to stay alive" unquote...

So what kind of person are you? Have you decided that God does exist? You have been adopted into His family and you are not so desperate to keep your body alive that you would eat another human being. Or are you so scared of death that eating a frozen human carcas is more appealing to you than meeting your Maker? ^[34]

To frame our argument against the evolutionists’ misuse of homologous structures requires us to have an understanding of certain values critical to ancient persons. Roman literature of the New Testament period tells us that ‘(t)he primary test of truth in religious matters was custom and tradition, the practices of the ancients.’ In other words, old was good, and innovation was bad. Change or novelty was ‘a means value which serves to innovate or subvert core and secondary values.’

By itself, this demolishes one part of the evolutionists’ argument and makes it, clearly, a case of arbitrary imposition of modern values. In a context such as the above, ‘radically different design’ would have indicated to an ancient reader either no deity, or else a deity whose means was chaos and instability, or a deity who did not have mastery over creation.^[39]

To the best of our knowledge, the New Hebrides had no Christian influence before John Williams and James Harris from the London Missionary Society landed in 1839. Both of these missionaries were killed and eaten by cannibals on the island of Erromanga on November 20 of that year, only minutes after going ashore. Forty-eight years later John Paton wrote, "Thus were the New Hebrides baptized with the blood of martyrs; and Christ thereby told the whole Christian world that he claimed these islands as His own" (p.75).

The London Missionary Society sent another team to the Island of Tanna in 1842, and these missionaries were driven off within seven months. But on the Island of Aneityum, John Geddie from the Presbyterian church in Nova Scotia (coming in 1848) and John Inglis from The Reformed Presbyterian Church in Scotland (coming in 1852) saw amazing fruit, so that by 1854 "about 3,500 savages [more than half the population] threw away their idols, renouncing their heathen customs and avowing themselves to be worshippers of the true Jehovah God" (p. 77). When Geddie died in 1872, all the population of Aneityum was said to be Christians.^[42]

Here are two or three men who land on a savage island. Its inhabitants posses no literature and have no written language. They regard the white man as their enemy and have no desire to be shown "the error of their ways." They are cannibals by instinct and little better than the brute beasts in their habits of life. The missionaries who have entered their midst have no money with which to buy their friendship, no army to compel their obedience and no merchandise to stir their avarice. Their only weapon is "the Sword of the Spirit," their only capital "the unsearchable riches of Christ," their only offer the invitation of the Gospel. Yet somehow they succeed, and without the shedding of any blood gain the victory. In a few short years naked savagery is changed to the garb of civilization, lust is transformed into purity, cruelty is now kindness, avarice has become unselfishness, and where before vindictiveness existed there is now to be seen meekness and the spirit of loving self-sacrifice. And this has been accomplished by the Bible! This miracle is still being repeated in every part of the earth! What other book, or library of books, could work such a result? Is it not evident to all that the Book which does exert such a unique and unrivaled influence must be vitalized by the life of God Himself? ^[43]