Why are most of these posts about "Religious" leaders? Time's survey only goes to show the ignorance of the "common masses". Often it is necessary to divide political influence from religious influence but there is one category in which the two must be combined. Civilization as we know it now is run almost universally on the principle of Representative Democracy with Hebraic moral codes. The so called "Western Civilization" is the mandate for most of our modern world. How did we come to this? Emperor Constantine.
I claim that Emperor Constantine is the most influential person on the modern world. He took Roman politics and the moral principles of the Christians (who got them from the Jews) and created a civilization that exists to this day, over the vast majority of our population.
Now I, personally, abhor the phrase "Western Civilization" because of this very point. The "Western Civilization" that controlled the majority of Europe before the Romans over-ran everything was Celtic and it was a much more "civilized" moral code. Granted the old axiom of "an eye for an eye" flies in the face of Christian forgiveness, but on a political and practical level it is a much better detriment to aberrant behavior than anything our modern civilization can come up with. The Roman solution for everything was kill first and ask questions later. The Celts believed in restitution. If you stole something from someone, you either gave its value back or you worked it off. IF you killed someone in a personal confrontation you became responsible for that persons family as well as your own. The Celts "played" at war, one of the greatest sports of Celtic tribesmen was stealing each other's cattle and pretty nubile maidens. Yes people got killed in raids, but it was not all out warfare. Once the raid was finished the chiefs would get together and discuss restitution. The stealing of young maidens was for the purpose of insuring the race, marrying outside your clan opened the gene pool. Logical. Same with stealing cows or bulls, introduction of a different strain of DNA kept the stock healthy. We have no idea if the Celts understood this or were only being observant but it worked.
Once Constantine made Christianity the official religion of Rome, in my humble opinion, that's when things started to go to manure. Does it really surprise anyone that the "Dark Ages" overtook most of the known Western world very shortly after Constantine? Maybe if he had been a true believer, himself, it wouldn't have happened but he wasn't. He remained a pagan to the end of his days. Forcing all the varied temples in the Empire to convert to Christianity if they wanted to keep their doors open only opened the still infant religion to the influence of the priests of the pagan gods. So, from the second to the fifth century AD who was "running the show" in the Holy Roman Church? Ex pagan high priests. Under their influence the Roman Catholic church became an organization that held its followers with fear instead of love as Christ taught. Many of these ex pagan high priests held real political power in their heyday and that didn't change with the church until the beginning of the 18th century. Look at the deMedici popes. (Now I'm really going to step on some toes) according to the International College of Religious Scholars a "cult" is defined as : any organization whose ultimate authority is a living being" That makes the Roman Catholic church a "cult" NOT a Christian denomination. All official decisions are created or approved/vetoed by the SITTING POPE. Christ said the relationship between anyone and God was a private thing. Not even Paul said we needed a single leader to "show us the way" that leader was Christ. It's the Roman pagan priests who took over the church who made the decision that humanity was too stupid to think for itself and needed a leader and a leash.
I take this moment to apologize to our Catholic membership if I have upset you ... but read your own history with open eyes. I've said nothing that isn't historically accurate.
QUOTE (ArrwynCliona) |
Why are most of these posts about "Religious" leaders? |
This is difficult. I will say Jesus Christ has influenced mankind the most. Think of Christmas and a lot of proverbs and sayings. The Christian churches that exists today such as the Catholics who influenced and influences a lot of what happened in history.
Name: Ahjii
Comments: He was by far the most remarkable man that ever set foot on this earth. He preached a religion, founded a state, built a nation, laid down a moral code, initiated numberless social and political reforms, established a dynamic and powerful society to practice and represent his teachings, and he revolutionized the worlds of human thought and human action for all time.
The Encyclopedia Britannica calls him 'the most successful of all religious personalities of the world." Bernard Shaw said "if Muhammad (pbuh) were alive today, he would succeed in solving all those problems which threaten to destroy human civilization in our times." Thomas Carlysle was amazed as to how one man, single handedly, could weld warring tribes of wandering Bedouins into a most powerful and civilized nation in less than two decades. Napoleon and Gandhi never tired of dreaming of a society along the lines established by this man in Arabia fourteen centuries ago.
In Michael Harts book "The Most Influential Man in History" the Prophet Muhammad was labled number one, before Isaac Newton and then Jesus.
The non-Muslim verdict on Muhammad (PBUH) If a man like Muhamed were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness.
QUOTE |
George Bernard Shaw People like Pasteur and Salk are leaders in the first sense. People like Gandhi and Confucius, on one hand, and Alexander, Caesar and Hitler on the other, are leaders in the second and perhaps the third sense. Jesus and Buddha belong in the third category alone. Perhaps the greatest leader of all times was Mohammed, who combined all three functions. To a lesser degree, Moses did the same. Professor Jules Masserman Head of the State as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but, he was Pope without the Pope's pretensions, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a police force, without a fixed revenue. If ever a man had the right to say that he ruled by a right divine, it was Muhummed, for he had all the powers without their supports. He cared not for the dressings of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life. Rev. R. Bosworth-Smith Muhammad was the soul of kindness, and his influence was felt and never forgotten by those around him. Diwan Chand Sharma, The Prophets of the East, Calcutta 1935, p. l 22. Four years after the death of Justinian, A.D. 569, was born at Mecca, in Arabia the man who, of all men exercised the greatest influence upon the human race . . . Mohammed . . . John William Draper, M.D., L.L.D., A History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, London 1875, Vol. 1, pp. 329-330 In little more than a year he was actually the spiritual, nominal and temporal rule of Medina, with his hands on the lever that was to shake the world. John Austin, "Muhammad the Prophet of Allah," in T.P. 's and Cassel's Weekly for 24th September 1927. Philosopher, Orator, Apostle, Legislator, Warrior, Conqueror of ideas Restorer of rational beliefs, of a cult without images; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire, that is Muhammed. As regards all standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may well ask, is there any man greater than he? Lamartine, Historie de la Turquie, Paris 1854, Vol. 11 pp. 276-2727 It is impossible for anyone who studies the life and character of the great prophet of Arabia, who knows how he taught and how he lived, to feel anything but reverence for that mighty Prophet, one of the great messengers of the Supreme. And although in what I put to you I shall say many things which may be familiar to many, yet I myself feel whenever I re-read them, a new way of admiration, a new of reverence for that mighty Arabian teacher. Annie Besant, The Life and Teachings of Muhammad, Madras 1932, p. 4 Muhummed is the most successful of all Prophets and religious personalities. Encyclopedia Britannica I have studied him - the wonderful man - and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ he must be called the saviour of humanity. George Bernard Shaw in "The Genuine Islam" By a fortune absolutely unique in history, Mohammed is a threefold founder of a nation, of an empire, and of a religion. Rev. R. Bosworth-Smith in "Mohammed and Mohammedanism 1946." |