What Person do you think had the most influence on history?

Next Topic: Best author??? lol strange XD

Champion wrote:LMAO for some reason I read the title as "What PERSIAN" and was about to come in here because I thought it was a race flaming thread lol

And Nihil I counter with Jesus. Jesus has had much more influence on a wider global scale than Muhammed. Although granted, after the terrorists blew up the towers it seems islam is blowing up with popularity (haha I made funny). Kinda weird that all these people who were christians are flooding to islam now, my take on it is they are a bunch of cowards who are scared and think that if they convert the mean old terrorists will leave them alone. Of course this is all subconcious in their minds, they may not even know they are cowardly.

Jesus had a great influence sure, I don't doubt that, but I think Muhammad did, he basically, through his religion, saved Graeco-Roman learning because of islamic scholarship. It is very important, also, to consider that Islam flourished during the Dark Ages. Jesus may have affected people on a broader scale, but not as heavily as Muhammad affected world history.

Nihil wrote:Next Topic: Best author??? lol strange XD

Champion wrote:LMAO for some reason I read the title as "What PERSIAN" and was about to come in here because I thought it was a race flaming thread lol

And Nihil I counter with Jesus. Jesus has had much more influence on a wider global scale than Muhammed. Although granted, after the terrorists blew up the towers it seems islam is blowing up with popularity (haha I made funny). Kinda weird that all these people who were christians are flooding to islam now, my take on it is they are a bunch of cowards who are scared and think that if they convert the mean old terrorists will leave them alone. Of course this is all subconcious in their minds, they may not even know they are cowardly.

Jesus had a great influence sure, I don't doubt that, but I think Muhammad did, he basically, through his religion, saved Graeco-Roman learning because of islamic scholarship. It is very important, also, to consider that Islam flourished during the Dark Ages. Jesus may have affected people on a broader scale, but not as heavily as Muhammad affected world history.

Saying that muhammed has had a bigger impact on western culture (the dominant culture in the world) than Jesus, and saying the Muhammed saved greco-roman learning is false. In fact, I would go as far as saying the impact of the Church itself, (thus Jesus since he started the Church), was the savior of western culture. Without the passion of religion in the europeans hearts, I do not think they could have halted the islamic onslaught the Moors (Almovarids, Almohads and later the Turks) were causing. I do not even know where to begin with your last comment, it is so false and unfounded. Jesus caused such a deeper impact on politics, the world scene, and so many other aspects of history... I don't get how you can even compare. Hell, the very dark ages you mention was BECAUSE of Jesus. The negative (and positive) influence Jesus Christ had on the world scene is vastly grander than what Muhammed has done. In fact, most people in the world did not even know who Muhammed was until recently.

I can give a myriad of examples of his influence and impact on this world. In fact, if it were NOT for jesus, Muhammed would have never even started Islam and would not have had the soap box he needed to rally support for his cause. Because it was in Jesus' name that great atrocities were committed against Arabic people at the time, leading to Muhammeds disgust (and subsequent search for God) that led him to form Islam.

Champion wrote:

Nihil wrote:Next Topic: Best author??? lol strange XD

Champion wrote:LMAO for some reason I read the title as "What PERSIAN" and was about to come in here because I thought it was a race flaming thread lol

And Nihil I counter with Jesus. Jesus has had much more influence on a wider global scale than Muhammed. Although granted, after the terrorists blew up the towers it seems islam is blowing up with popularity (haha I made funny). Kinda weird that all these people who were christians are flooding to islam now, my take on it is they are a bunch of cowards who are scared and think that if they convert the mean old terrorists will leave them alone. Of course this is all subconcious in their minds, they may not even know they are cowardly.

Jesus had a great influence sure, I don't doubt that, but I think Muhammad did, he basically, through his religion, saved Graeco-Roman learning because of islamic scholarship. It is very important, also, to consider that Islam flourished during the Dark Ages. Jesus may have affected people on a broader scale, but not as heavily as Muhammad affected world history.

Saying that muhammed has had a bigger impact on western culture (the dominant culture in the world) than Jesus, and saying the Muhammed saved greco-roman learning is false. In fact, I would go as far as saying the impact of the Church itself, (thus Jesus since he started the Church), was the savior of western culture. Without the passion of religion in the europeans hearts, I do not think they could have halted the islamic onslaught the Moors (Almovarids, Almohads and later the Turks) were causing. I do not even know where to begin with your last comment, it is so false and unfounded. Jesus caused such a deeper impact on politics, the world scene, and so many other aspects of history... I don't get how you can even compare. Hell, the very dark ages you mention was BECAUSE of Jesus. The negative (and positive) influence Jesus Christ had on the world scene is vastly grander than what Muhammed has done. In fact, most people in the world did not even know who Muhammed was until recently.

I can give a myriad of examples of his influence and impact on this world. In fact, if it were NOT for jesus, Muhammed would have never even started Islam and would not have had the soap box he needed to rally support for his cause. Because it was in Jesus' name that great atrocities were committed against Arabic people at the time, leading to Muhammeds disgust (and subsequent search for God) that led him to form Islam.

I'm not talking about culture, I'm talking about history, affecting events throughout history. The world isn't just that tiny swap of land we call Europe. And Champ, that is history, war is history, itd really doesn't matter what religion you are. besides, the Romans had one of the most unstoppable war machines, and they didn't have Jesus. The Arab scholars did in fact save Graeco-Roman learning, by preserving their scripts and translating them into languages for the Europeans to read. Also, they didn't stop the "onslaught" of the Moors, only in the Reconquista of Spain later finished by Isabella and her husband, drove the Moors out of the Iberian peninsula, but, look, all historic references point to the Moors positive influences too, their sharing of technology and culture. The dark ages were not caused by Jesus, they were caused by nomadic peoples from Asia, who helped the Roman Empire collapse, which was another big thing that lead to the dark ages, and the institution of feudal systems in the lack of a central authority.

People don't need to know who Mohammed is to feel his influence on history. Saying that Jesus had a greater influence because he himself influenced Islam is not particularly well reasoned, because, by extension of that same logic, I could say that the very first Homo Erectus had the greatest impact on history because, if not for him, then where would Homo Sapiens be now?

Your stretching your arguments wayyyy too far. And not presenting anything superior. You are attributing the advancement of learning that the Moors gave, to one man, when you shouldnt. Mohammed didnt give Greco Roman this. The moors did. Not Mohammed. The Moors. Your arguing against his points by presenting points of the same value, instead of elevating it.

Nihil wrote:

Champion wrote:

Nihil wrote:Next Topic: Best author??? lol strange XD

Champion wrote:LMAO for some reason I read the title as "What PERSIAN" and was about to come in here because I thought it was a race flaming thread lol

And Nihil I counter with Jesus. Jesus has had much more influence on a wider global scale than Muhammed. Although granted, after the terrorists blew up the towers it seems islam is blowing up with popularity (haha I made funny). Kinda weird that all these people who were christians are flooding to islam now, my take on it is they are a bunch of cowards who are scared and think that if they convert the mean old terrorists will leave them alone. Of course this is all subconcious in their minds, they may not even know they are cowardly.

Jesus had a great influence sure, I don't doubt that, but I think Muhammad did, he basically, through his religion, saved Graeco-Roman learning because of islamic scholarship. It is very important, also, to consider that Islam flourished during the Dark Ages. Jesus may have affected people on a broader scale, but not as heavily as Muhammad affected world history.

Saying that muhammed has had a bigger impact on western culture (the dominant culture in the world) than Jesus, and saying the Muhammed saved greco-roman learning is false. In fact, I would go as far as saying the impact of the Church itself, (thus Jesus since he started the Church), was the savior of western culture. Without the passion of religion in the europeans hearts, I do not think they could have halted the islamic onslaught the Moors (Almovarids, Almohads and later the Turks) were causing. I do not even know where to begin with your last comment, it is so false and unfounded. Jesus caused such a deeper impact on politics, the world scene, and so many other aspects of history... I don't get how you can even compare. Hell, the very dark ages you mention was BECAUSE of Jesus. The negative (and positive) influence Jesus Christ had on the world scene is vastly grander than what Muhammed has done. In fact, most people in the world did not even know who Muhammed was until recently.

I can give a myriad of examples of his influence and impact on this world. In fact, if it were NOT for jesus, Muhammed would have never even started Islam and would not have had the soap box he needed to rally support for his cause. Because it was in Jesus' name that great atrocities were committed against Arabic people at the time, leading to Muhammeds disgust (and subsequent search for God) that led him to form Islam.

I'm not talking about culture, I'm talking about history, affecting events throughout history. The world isn't just that tiny swap of land we call Europe. And Champ, that is history, war is history, itd really doesn't matter what religion you are. besides, the Romans had one of the most unstoppable war machines, and they didn't have Jesus. The Arab scholars did in fact save Graeco-Roman learning, by preserving their scripts and translating them into languages for the Europeans to read. Also, they didn't stop the "onslaught" of the Moors, only in the Reconquista of Spain later finished by Isabella and her husband, drove the Moors out of the Iberian peninsula, but, look, all historic references point to the Moors positive influences too, their sharing of technology and culture. The dark ages were not caused by Jesus, they were caused by nomadic peoples from Asia, who helped the Roman Empire collapse, which was another big thing that lead to the dark ages, and the institution of feudal systems in the lack of a central authority.

People don't need to know who Mohammed is to feel his influence on history. Saying that Jesus had a greater influence because he himself influenced Islam is not particularly well reasoned, because, by extension of that same logic, I could say that the very first Homo Erectus had the greatest impact on history because, if not for him, then where would Homo Sapiens be now?

FACT A > The most influential government in political affairs in the world during the past 300 years = the Anglo UK/USA alliance.

FACT B > The most influential entity in political affairs governing the world for 1000+ years before that = The catholic church.

The catholic church has influenced not only europe, but Africa, the Americas (both north and south) and Asia. In fact, it has influenced the entire globe. Islam cannot say that. The church has influenced morals, government charters and constitutions, just as Islam has but on a greater scale.

I think NOW is the time of Islam. It seems to be on the rise, and sadly the more violence it creates by its extremists the more cowards are flooding to the ranks of it in fear of being murdered by terrorists etc (the old adage, if you cant beat them, join them). I think the shape of the political/cultural scene in the next few hundred years may very well be influenced moreso by Islam than Christianity, but to make the claim that Muhammed has had a greater influence on this globe to date than Jesus is inane.

O.K, who spread Christianity the most? Jesus or St. Paul and Peter? Christianity was spread by the disciple Paul the most, and, further more, developed in its theology mainly by him, after all, he is one of the most important authors in the new testament. In fact, Mohammed established a combination of religion and secular values in a state. Just look at Akbar the great. The Arabian conquests still influence history today, more general, those conquests of the three great Islamic Empires.

Muslim empires reigned supreme in nearly all of Asia in just a few centuries, seeking the Dar Islam, and, thus, spread ideas, culture, and inventions, which, at the time, were more advanced than europe. Never before had one person affected such a grand swath of land and people. Now realize, unlike Jesus, Mohammed was the main synthesizer of the ideas of Islam, while, like said before Jesus was mainly processed by his disciples, like Paul of Tarsus. Since Mohammed explicitly set down Islamic law, unlike Jesus, he thus affected all these people in their lands.

If nearly a third of the inhabited world is in Asia, then how can you say that Mohammed has not changed history the most? His word made empires and their laws, his, again, EXPLICIT word set down the idea of a unified Muslim culture.

Its ok that the Church influenced the world, but it did not so dramatically influence world history as Islam.

Jesus did not conquer nearly half the world through his word. The church influences the policies of the world, but, most of those morals are found in the Old testament, Mohammed, in fact, keeps those morals and builds upon them, like Christianity, except, he builds on top of Christianity.

Dray The Fingerless wrote:Your stretching your arguments wayyyy too far. And not presenting anything superior. You are attributing the advancement of learning that the Moors gave, to one man, when you shouldnt. Mohammed didnt give Greco Roman this. The moors did. Not Mohammed. The Moors. Your arguing against his points by presenting points of the same value, instead of elevating it.

If it weren't for the Mohammed, where would the Moors be? Mohammed moved civilizations and, through his teachings, Muslims, like the Moors, did these things, spreading learning etc. Cordoba, for example, was one important Islamic learning center.

Then i reiterate your St Peter and Paul argument against you. You said it wasnt Jesus, it was the apostoles. I said it was the Moors, not Mohammed. Same thing.

It doesnt matter either way who delivered the message. It's about what the cause is, and Jesus started the cause. Thus anything Paul may have done, credit due where its due, was done in Jesus' name and thus it's Jesus who was the influential one. Your ramblings are merely confused, over-thinking on the subject. I do not even doubt a muslim would deny Jesus, thus far in history, has had a bigger impact on world affairs and history than Muhammed.

If I had to make a choice, I would go for Gaius Marius. He reformed the Roman Military by letting citizens with no lands become soldiers (thus increasing the soldier base by quite a bit), eliminated the less effective formations, and restructered the Legions into Cohorts, allowing for a single person to lead more people through proper delegation.

Beyond that, the civil war that occured when he returned to Rome set something of a precedent of being more loyal to individual Generals than to Rome itself, which helped form the mentality necessary for the Empire, while also setting precedents of Civil wars that weakened Rome in its later years.

Basically, he was responsible for spreading Roman culture and for removing Rome itself. Without him, Rome as a republic might still exist, but probably not covering as much as it had during its peak of conquest.

Listen, St. Peter developed the Christian theology far more than Christ actually did, Mohammed developed Islam like St. Peter and served the purpose of a religious leader but also instituted revolutionary secular reforms within a religious government, a fantastic trend that was a precursor to the fully secular government.

Mohammed encouraged the Islamic scholarship, I don't think Jesus ever said anything like that, you see, and Jesus never said, go develop my theology. He just said, spread my word, different from interpreting it.

Another problem that is dividing us is the fact that you guys seem to be thinking purely in Western terms. World history is more than the west.

Nihil wrote:Listen, St. Peter developed the Christian theology far more than Christ actually did, Mohammed developed Islam like St. Peter and served the purpose of a religious leader but also instituted revolutionary secular reforms within a religious government, a fantastic trend that was a precursor to the fully secular government.

Mohammed encouraged the Islamic scholarship, I don't think Jesus ever said anything like that, you see, and Jesus never said, go develop my theology. He just said, spread my word, different from interpreting it.

Another problem that is dividing us is the fact that you guys seem to be thinking purely in Western terms. World history is more than the west.

No, "St." Peter did no such thing. The Church made claims of doctrine through peters name via the Pope which had nothing to do with the Bible or Christ. Mostly everything Paul and the other later writers of the New Testament was mere iterations of Christs commands and laws. Tell me Nihil, when was the last time you actually read the Bible? How many times have you read it because I have twice, not to mention I have studied it with multiple religions in my spiritual quest I was on when I was younger. So what is your expertise on the subject? I can literally claim to be a bible scholar practically, since I spent 4 years of my life studying it almost 8 hours a day.

I can't speak for what Muhammeds ultimate purpose is, since I have not studied the Quran in any fashion near as I have the Bible, but I know for a fact Christ preached a heavenly Kingdom, a government above Earthly affairs and thus had no place on the Earth. Christians are subject to that government first, and secular governments secondary. In other words, as long as a governments laws do not conflict with Gods, then a Christian is duty bound by Christian principle to follow them as a respectful member of society (IE: "Render caesars things to caesar and Gods things to God" and many other scriptures). But once a law or rule was put in place defying Christian law, the Christian was obligated to not participate in the law, even to the point of Martyrdom (which is consistant with the entire Bible, an example being Daniel and his refusal to bow down to the Babylonian idol and subsequently being tossed in a fiery furnace and later a lions pit for his refusal to break his integrity for politics or other religions). Most of the early Christians (the true ones) died as a result of this. It was not until the marriage of "Church and State" and thus destroying the meaning of the Kingdom of Heaven that the Church bent its rules and laws to conform to the government, instead of the other way around as Christ demanded. You see, Christians are a part of a heavenly government, one which cannot be warred upon or touched by mankinds secular governments.

This is not about western terms, this is about who had the greatest influence. Man for man, event for event, chain reaction cause and effect to chain reaction cause and effect if you truly have studied history and NOT JUST WESTERN (I find it insulting you think my knowledge is limited to just western culture).

First off:


From wiki:

Thirteen epistles, or letters, in the New Testament are attributed to Paul. Within these epistles other letters are referenced that do not appear in the Bible, such as a Laodicean epistle.[Col. 4:1] His authorship of six of the thirteen is questioned by some scholars,[7] three of which are widely thought not to be his work.[8] Paul's influence on Christian thinking arguably has been more significant than any other New Testament author.[7] Augustine of Hippo developed Paul's idea that salvation is based on faith and not works.[7] Martin Luther's interpretation of Paul's writings heavily influenced Luther's doctrine of sola fide.


From http://www.fordham.edu/campus_resources/enewsroom/archives/archive_1384.asp

During the fourth century when both men were active, the shaping of Christian theology entered what Father Daley called a Pauline age, where the figure and writings of Paul took on enormous importance. John Chrysostom was a devotee who believed Paul to be the founder of Christianity, he said.


Also Champ, you are overreacting, the entire continent of Asia has been influenced by jesus in a very limited fashion.

Another thing, the church didn't "bend" its rules, Christians were always for a ruler who was "fair, just, and wise" which, in reality, is what EVERYONE wants as a ruler! lol. Just look at Solomon, he was hardly secular.

What great event was ever caused by christianity besides the fragile holy roman empire and the crusades?

Besides, most scholars agree that Mohammed had the most influence on world history and that position is easily defendable.

This is getting redundant fast.

Thirteen epistles, or letters, in the New Testament are attributed to Paul. Within these epistles other letters are referenced that do not appear in the Bible, such as a Laodicean epistle.[Col. 4] His authorship of six of the thirteen is questioned by some scholars,[7] three of which are widely thought not to be his work.[8] Paul's influence on Christian thinking arguably has been more significant than any other New Testament author.[7] Augustine of Hippo developed Paul's idea that salvation is based on faith and not works.[7] Martin Luther's interpretation of Paul's writings heavily influenced Luther's doctrine of sola fide.

Jesus christ was not an author. What you are saying is like a writer of a biography should be given credit for the life of the person he is writing about. Thats inane and I do not even know why I am countering this argument.

During the fourth century when both men were active, the shaping of Christian theology entered what Father Daley called a Pauline age, where the figure and writings of Paul took on enormous importance. John Chrysostom was a devotee who believed Paul to be the founder of Christianity, he said.

None of those men were "original style" Christians. Of course some religions may claim they were, and they did things in Christs name but their teachings stray from the Bible which is pretty clear on basic doctrines those very men defied (such as the laughable anti-biblical idea of Paul being the founder of Christianity). If you had been paying attention earlier, which you seem to not do and just post without checking your facts, you would realize that Christianity, in its Apostle like form given by christ ended half way into the first century AD. I don't understand why you are even bringing this up to waste my time with.

Also Champ, you are overreacting, the entire continent of Asia has been influenced by jesus in a very limited fashion.

Bullshit. The church has been involved in Asia over 600 years now if not more. Can't say the same of Islam (at least not in the far east orient). In fact, much of western culture was spread via the church and its power for millenia, thus China absorbing western culture as it is now, can be attributed to christianity (heck even some islamic countries are absorbing western culture). And to deny Christianities ties to the influence and spread of western culture is to deny history.

Another thing, the church didn't "bend" its rules, Christians were always for a ruler who was "fair, just, and wise" which, in reality, is what EVERYONE wants as a ruler! lol. Just look at Solomon, he was hardly secular.

What? Again. True christians do not care for secular government. They merely exist under its rule because they recognize God has allowed governments to exist to bring order to man until the coming of Gods kingdom here on earth. That is biblical. Anything else is not biblical. The bible brings a message of a heavenly kingdom, not to put our trust in men and their kingdoms (and look at all the blood shed caused by sided with a government, something a true christian should abhor and abstain from). And like I said, any doctrines created after the canonical writings ending with Revelation usually contradict the Bibles message. The apostasy of christianity started very early in its formation, and Paul even warned of this. This has NOTHING to do with Christs influence though, so I do not even know why we are wasting time on this.

I'm going to ask you to please stay on topic, I really do not want to have to keep answering redundant statements.

What great event was ever caused by christianity besides the fragile holy roman empire and the crusades?

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

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

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

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

http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Catholic_History/For-The-Missions-Of-Asia-7.htm

Not to mention the church itself set the foundation for what Muhammed went through, inspiring him to create Islam. Thus Islam itself can be attributed to Christianity, and thus all its acoomplishments can be linked to it.

Plus we have the fact that "Christianity" or those claiming to be Christian make up the largest religious population currently, and has for the past millenia.

Besides, most scholars agree that Mohammed had the most influence on world history and that position is easily defendable.

RUBBISH.

Who are these scholars? Please lets get some names and actual quotes specifically citing Muhammed being more dominant culturally and historically on the world scene than Christ. I would love to check the references or maybe you just pulled that "fact" out of your ass?

george lucas

































































JK XD XD XD

One does not joke about Lord Lucas. Lord Lucas is your god and your king. Lord Lucas is all.

wtf XD

Champion wrote:This is getting redundant fast.

Thirteen epistles, or letters, in the New Testament are attributed to Paul. Within these epistles other letters are referenced that do not appear in the Bible, such as a Laodicean epistle.[Col. 4] His authorship of six of the thirteen is questioned by some scholars,[7] three of which are widely thought not to be his work.[8] Paul's influence on Christian thinking arguably has been more significant than any other New Testament author.[7] Augustine of Hippo developed Paul's idea that salvation is based on faith and not works.[7] Martin Luther's interpretation of Paul's writings heavily influenced Luther's doctrine of sola fide.

Jesus christ was not an author. What you are saying is like a writer of a biography should be given credit for the life of the person he is writing about. Thats inane and I do not even know why I am countering this argument.

During the fourth century when both men were active, the shaping of Christian theology entered what Father Daley called a Pauline age, where the figure and writings of Paul took on enormous importance. John Chrysostom was a devotee who believed Paul to be the founder of Christianity, he said.

None of those men were "original style" Christians. Of course some religions may claim they were, and they did things in Christs name but their teachings stray from the Bible which is pretty clear on basic doctrines those very men defied (such as the laughable anti-biblical idea of Paul being the founder of Christianity). If you had been paying attention earlier, which you seem to not do and just post without checking your facts, you would realize that Christianity, in its Apostle like form given by christ ended half way into the first century AD. I don't understand why you are even bringing this up to waste my time with.

Also Champ, you are overreacting, the entire continent of Asia has been influenced by jesus in a very limited fashion.

Bullshit. The church has been involved in Asia over 600 years now if not more. Can't say the same of Islam (at least not in the far east orient). In fact, much of western culture was spread via the church and its power for millenia, thus China absorbing western culture as it is now, can be attributed to christianity (heck even some islamic countries are absorbing western culture). And to deny Christianities ties to the influence and spread of western culture is to deny history.

Another thing, the church didn't "bend" its rules, Christians were always for a ruler who was "fair, just, and wise" which, in reality, is what EVERYONE wants as a ruler! lol. Just look at Solomon, he was hardly secular.

What? Again. True christians do not care for secular government. They merely exist under its rule because they recognize God has allowed governments to exist to bring order to man until the coming of Gods kingdom here on earth. That is biblical. Anything else is not biblical. The bible brings a message of a heavenly kingdom, not to put our trust in men and their kingdoms (and look at all the blood shed caused by sided with a government, something a true christian should abhor and abstain from). And like I said, any doctrines created after the canonical writings ending with Revelation usually contradict the Bibles message. The apostasy of christianity started very early in its formation, and Paul even warned of this. This has NOTHING to do with Christs influence though, so I do not even know why we are wasting time on this.

I'm going to ask you to please stay on topic, I really do not want to have to keep answering redundant statements.

What great event was ever caused by christianity besides the fragile holy roman empire and the crusades?

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

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

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

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

http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Catholic_History/For-The-Missions-Of-Asia-7.htm

Not to mention the church itself set the foundation for what Muhammed went through, inspiring him to create Islam. Thus Islam itself can be attributed to Christianity, and thus all its acoomplishments can be linked to it.

Plus we have the fact that "Christianity" or those claiming to be Christian make up the largest religious population currently, and has for the past millenia.

Besides, most scholars agree that Mohammed had the most influence on world history and that position is easily defendable.

RUBBISH.

Who are these scholars? Please lets get some names and actual quotes specifically citing Muhammed being more dominant culturally and historically on the world scene than Christ. I would love to check the references or maybe you just pulled that "fact" out of your ass?

First off: being an author of those letters, key word, letters! which means that they expressed his views and ideas on christianity, further developed the ideas of christianity.

Secondly: you just called bullshit on your "favorite" christian society, the Jesuits, here is the source of the quote: http://www.fordham.edu/campus_resources/enewsroom/archives/archive_1384.asp which as you can see, shows that Paul of Tarsus elaborately developed christian theology in its present form. Also, you should know, being a self-proclaimed biblical expert that Paul of Tarsus was alive during Jesus' time. Also, you are arguing, now, about "real" "apostle form" christianity. It doesn't matter, its christianity, and Paul of Tarsus had the greatest influence on its spread and theological development.

Thirdly: what major event of any significance or cultural renaissance or blending took place in Asia as a result of Christianity? Rather, the imperial intentions of the age of exploration spread western culture.

Fourthly: you brought up the church "bending" its rules, don't point fingers at me.

Fifthly: the dark ages were a result from, again, *sigh*, from Nomadic Asian peoples who put pressure upon the empire's borders and farther provinces, also, the inability to control such a large empire, as represented through the tetrarchs.

Sixthly: the protestant reformation was a major religious event, it had some, limited, influence in the thirty year's war, because, as it is correctly said, there are too many factors to specifically call one the primary motive.

seventhly: THE RENAISSANCE was based on the RESURGENCE of GRAECO-ROMAN learning! lol, the Muslim scholars, encouraged by their religion, Muhammad's emphasis on study and scholarship, they preserved knowledge and Greek texts and translated them into latin for their compatriots in the west. also, there was a renewed emphasis on humanism and Secularism! not very christ like. Although, it should be noted that this gave rise to the protestantism, paradoxically if you ask me.

eighthly: I attributed the reconquista to Muslims! Cause and effect, NOT effect and cause.

Ok and finally

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_100

well if you think about it, george lucas did influence the world big time, it enhanced the belief of life in space and all that good stuff

Nihil you are just twisting facts and figures as your typical self, and like someone who is desperately trying to prove a point which is unfounded and based in nothing, and that is that Muhammed had more influence than Jesus when he knows he is wrong and has for some sociopathic reason decided to debate against the clear and obvious truth. I am not even going to continue this debate, your redundant dance back to minor issues not even pertaining to the original point is tiresome and you are a poor debater who merely copies and pastes shit from google.

This is the final verdict:

You are wrong.

I am right.

Hey, I may have mixed up names, that is, the names and the actions thus respective to them. But, I'm pretty sure it is all factually accurate. If I'm ever in doubt I see if there is anything to corroborate the statement. W/e u are as entitled to your opinion as I am. But, I believe Jesus himself had little influence in the theological development of his religion. Considering that his message, though laid out was not as theologically developed as Mohammed's, especially concerning his premature death.

Nihil wrote:Hey, I may have mixed up names, that is, the names and the actions thus respective to them. But, I'm pretty sure it is all factually accurate. If I'm ever in doubt I see if there is anything to corroborate the statement. W/e u are as entitled to your opinion as I am. But, I believe Jesus himself had little influence in the theological development of his religion. Considering that his message, though laid out was not as theologically developed as Mohammed's, especially concerning his premature death.

You lose.

That is a fact , not an opinion.

I was talking about who had the most influece in history

I think the people that influence history most would be the people that write or document it. Also the people that pick what news to report and what not to report. History is only history if you take the time to read it and understand it from more then one angle. Most americans think an inch deep and a mile wide. They want to know so many things but just enough to act like they know what their talking about. Like when watching tv you watch a show till a commercial comes on then you change it. You know theirs people starving dafur but not the reasons why. Certain events in history capture your attention from others, most of the time its things like 9/11, or huge battles, or assassinations, or revolts, or natural disasters and inventions you rarely hear about things like that being prevented or the small people who prevent bad history being made. I think every person influences history, weather they do something to manipulate and event or someone who sits home and does nothing when they could be out making a difference somewhere making history instead of reading it. But then again some Vietnamese Buddhist believed in change through inaction (the change they believed in was political and the conditions of life during the 20th century)

What is the point of history if you cant learn from it and adapt and overcome?

Champion wrote:Nihil you are just twisting facts and figures as your typical self, and like someone who is desperately trying to prove a point which is unfounded and based in nothing,...when he knows he is wrong and has for some sociopathic reason decided to debate against the clear and obvious truth. your redundant dance back to minor issues not even pertaining to the original point is tiresome...

Typical and why i do not even try to debate Nihil any more and rarely venture in to the rancor pit. Which is sad cause i do love a good debate.

show me a fact I twisted then?