? A large part of humanity worships the One True Living God of the Jews, a divinity with a decidely spotty record when it comes the protection of His own chosen people, to whom various horrible disasters happened with depressing regularity, both in mythology (e.g., abject slavery in a fictional Egypt) and, most sadly, in real history (Babylonian exile, complete Roman victory followed by forced dispersal, violent persecution throughout Europe, culminating with the terrible mass murders perpetrated by National-Socialist Germany). (And other peoples who adopted that God did not fare much better.)

@AlexP While I mostly agree with your comment, I think Incognito's question refers to an actual, real deity, which would make the connundrum harder. The Abrahamic deity might be protected (paradoxically) by the doubt that he exists at all.

The constraints for this deity (the backstory) make it difficult to design an explanation for the question's premise. While there are those who might worship a deity who can't keep promises, there have to be other reasons... and all the ones I can think of are negated by this backstory.

As an aside, this seems like a super inefficient way to grow the population. Normal population growth is exponential - doubling the population size every generation will turn 1000 people into 1,000,000 over 10 generations. With this system, you get 5 new people every year, so assuming a generation is 30 years, you'll turn 1000 people into 2500 over 10 generations.

Are still births the only failures of those deities?

Futurama offers one example: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godfellas . The Shrimpkins suffered grievously at the hands of their their Metal Lord, but they worshipped.

90% stillborn rate will probably be significantly offset by an absurdly low infant mortality rate due to perfect immunity to disease, especially if that includes a complete lack of any congenital disorders. Sane management of the safety of the children could actually probably reduce the infant mortality rate among live births for these people to less than 0.1% ignoring natural disasters (for reference, the average rate in 2018 IRL was about 2.9% of live births).

Where do the humans come from? Do they co-exist with the children of the avatars of the godess? Who inseminates them (the same could be asked of Her Highnes Mother Mary, giving birth to our one and only savior Jesus of Nasareth, His Name be praised! Who the f..k f..ked Mary?)

@NuclearHoagie You mean 25000.

Arguably the Christian resurrection tale makes Jesus a zombie

"How can society be convinced into worshiping a consistently failing deity?" - Have you not been following United States politics over the last five years or so?

You are misusing the term "immaculate conception", which has nothing to do with conception without intercourse or virgin birth. Read more about it at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaculate_Conception . The term you want is parthenogenetic conception or parthenogenesis or asexual reproduction. "The Immaculate Conception" is Catholic dogma that holds that Mary, from the moment of HER conception, was free of "original sin" and was thus a suitable vessel to carry the son of God in her womb. Nothing to do with HIS conception.

A 10% success rate could still be pretty good if the survivors are significantly superior to the "ordinary" children being born. People continue to play the lottery with a far lower success rate.

@DawoodibnKareem - you mean the amount of people in USA worshipping communist/socialist ideas that failed utterly (murdering more people in a century than nazis in the process)?

@DawoodibnKareem I'm sure the poster is aware of beliefs in recent U.S. politics. The issue is not knowing that happens, but understanding why it happens and why these people are not being entirely irrational. Many rational people simply can't get into the heads of people with beliefs they consider "crazy" to understand why they do what they do even when they understand the evidence against their beliefs. More in my answer.

@AlexP worth noting that the abrahamic God explicitly told said people that bad things like that (being conquered etc) would happen to them if they disobeyed Him/worshipped other gods, which they did. He didn't promise to keep them safe no matter what

@IsaacMiddlemiss: What other gods were they worshiping in the first century of the common era? Or in the 20th? And then leave aside the original chosen people and consider the numerous other people who adopted Him afterwards (under the new law set forth by Paul) and were then visited with plagues, murderous wars and other such unpleasantness.

@AlexP first century they rejected Jesus, His son. Whether or not you believe Jesus actually was divine (presumably you don't), God was consistent in this regard. Many Christians see this as a strong factor behind the conflict and trouble Jews have had ever since, up to and including the current Palestine conflict. As for others who, as you say, suffer even though they are Christians: again, God never promised safety/security on earth, but in heaven afterwards - Paul and Jesus clearly warn that persecution will come precisely because people follow Christ.

@IsaacMiddlemiss: That's convenient, isn't it? If I think about it, it could be a good answer to the question... (And yes, I know all this. The question was asked in the spirit of performance in the real world, fictional as it may be. But religion, any religion, is about more than the material world around us; that's why I commented what I commented: to draw attention that if we confine ourselves to performance in the material world then a very large and very important family of religions appear less than efficient.)

@AlexP this is getting a bit lengthy for a comment thread, but my point summarized is that OP's question is about a failing deity, not simply a deity whose followers still suffer bad things. It would only be a failure if said deity had promised those bad things wouldn't happen, which the Christian God did not do - quite the opposite, in fact.