Bonaparte should easily be in the top 20...he was a french revolutionary he cnquered euorpe and laid down democracy abolishing monarchies in most countries
influential is by influence its not by predictions of what will happen to the world in the future, influntial men has a character of kindness.... throughout the world.............
@macky888888 The three people I listed are still influential. You say that influential men has a character of kindness, but there are a lot of people on this list that weren't kind.
“If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.” - Isaac Newton
"No idea's original, there's nothin new under the sun
It's never what you do, but how it's done"
- Nas
No *one* person is more important than another. It is all a matter of perspective and what is important to you and your situation. A list like this is arbitrary at best...
The ability to influence the whole species and be idolised is (at its core), a survival mechanism. Not absolute truth.
i kno it must be hard not to forget anyone but nicola tesla should definatly be on this list. He's the only reason we have any of the technology we do today and his advancements in electronics far overshadow mr. Thomas Edison, who's name we know in large part because of his place in society.
I dont think its 100 people that influence the world more like 200 or 300 because u forgot to mention these VERY IMPORTANT people!!
Shakespeare, St . Aquinas, Hegel, david humes, I. Kant, Nietzsche, A. Lincoln, Thomas Pane, Jeremy Bentham, Cicero, Cleopatra, King David, Mark Twain,Churchill, Roosevelt, Thomas hobbes, Adam and Eve, Dostoevsky, Mencius,Jame Joyce, Owell, Benjamin Franklin, Nero, king Herod, Horus, Zeus, Stalin, Gibbon, William james, Gandhi,Copernicus,
@gnosisandlight, I myself am a Christian, but do not follow the views of the majority of Christians. My friends are Atheists, Agnostics, Jews, Maoist Communists, Muslims and Hindus. I feel that there is no right answer, and everyone has to pick the system that works for them, or if all else fails, invent their own. for the confused, I suggest careful thinking, and scholarly debate as guides to your own personal truth. not all faithful are idiots, and not all atheists are wise.
@magicksense lol forced you joking me you must be idiotic the victories he had in battle was when al countires like the persian empire and the romans were threatened you idiot what sources do i have my friend well a university degree in middle eastern history the reason why hitler isnt on this is becuase he didnt do anything for society but make war
muhamamd gave women rights ended social slavery (where peopel were born slaves but you could still takes slaves in war)
any muslim here should not say bad about christians or jesus as christians are humans with a heart and jesus is the prophet we respect if u disrespect him uve betrayed frm the path of allah
I would categorize Justinian I under Orthodox, since the schism between the Catholic West and Greek Orthodox East didn't happen until half a millennium later. Unless you are intending "Catholic" to be describing a fully unified creedal form of Christianity.
Theists think the universe is created and ruled by a person, who has plans, ideas, and opinions, which carry the force of authority.
Deists and Atheists think the universe is not ruled by a supernatural overseer, but is instead profoundly subtle and beautiful and _natural_. Their only disagreement is whether to borrow the theists' word "god" as a label for that sense of wonder.
It boggles my mind that you would say deists are theists. You could not be more wrong.
For the record, I know i'm generalizing. In the narrow sense, atheism is just "not theism". Atheism doesn't even require naturalism. Buddhists, for example, are atheists (supernatural realm, but no theistic god). Likewise there are many ways to interpret deism (i base my definition on the opinions expressed by Einstein).
But the crux of it is this: theists think you can answer questions of purpose by appealing to an authority; deists and atheists say you have to figure it out for yourself.
"Deists are theists that accept a disinterested God."
You realize that that makes them NOT theists, right? Because in order to be a theist you have to believe god is personal, and therefore interested. I thought that was obvious from the definition, but hey.
@mrbenjamin118 Theist means you believe in God, but what is God? The definitions of God that theists believe in are those that include personal relationship with humanity (mostly). The God that deists believe in is one that created the universe, but has no involvement in it. These are two different definitions of God. So, in short, it does matter what definition of God you use.
@sorenkierkegaard2008 A god who creates but does not interfere is a deistic god. This is the definition of a deistic god. Someone who believes in this god is called a deist. You have to believe that God guides or interferes in the natural process and has a personal relationship with human beings in order to be some form of theist. Christians have to believe that God interfered so much that he impregnated someone. Deists reject this. Also, "atheist" literally means "not theist" but hey
also what about modern people wheres the inventor of internet albert einstien the first person to make a nuclear power plant? argiculture genious's how about the person who started global companies such as wallmart and mcdonalds ur list is way biased its based off of science and u dont count for things that u take for granted y would issac newton be infront of thomas edison i still cant believe u didnt put edison in top 5 that is just rediculous as well as the discover of electricity come on
wait can i get this straight benjamin franklin the inevtor of press and the discover of electricity isnt in the first 5 nor the person who discovered how to harness electricity thomas edison who ever made this is retarded u use ur phone and a light bulb everyday thomas edison made working (hard labor) at night possible u have to be kidding me do u know what social impact that caused let alone the 998 inventions
If I'm not mistaken, isn't this simply the list from Michael Hart's "100 MOST INFLUENTIAL PEOPLE"? You're not trying to pass this off as your own, are you?
Hey gnosis, not a bad list. The one thing I would change is the wording from Important to Influential. It's a small change I know but it seems to fit better to me. Of course just my opinion and I don't even know if it's possible to change the titles once they're posted.
It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam), to make it SUPERIOR OVER ALL RELIGIONS even though the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) hate (it).
Islam is a failure of a religion, how did they become number 1 on influence in history? Is it the coercion of the religion unto traditional culture of the middle east?
Trying to construct a list of the 100 most important people sounds like a difficult project. Deciding what constitutes importance reveals a person´s "biases," I think. Eg. anti-religious people are bound to devalue religious figures, and religious people are more likely to value them highly.
dont say gods! their is one! and his not jesus(bpuh)
(Quran 5:116) "And behold! Allah will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah?" He will say: "Glory to Thee! Never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, Thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, though I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden."
your muslem eh? no wonder. mary is not part of the trinity. the holy spirit is. and i believe what jesus said, mohammed said many good things but he did not say he was the son of God. the holy spirit is the third of the trinity. and God cannot say to jesus and judge him for jesus is God, he and God are one, God is jesus. and the holy spirit is God. anyone who speaks against jesus will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the holy spirit will not
i believe that muhammed did hear God and that it does continue the bible, but for me and christians alike if it speaks against christ i wont believe all of it
oh ya i forgot you guys thought that certain christians altered the bible to make jesus God. but let me tell you this, if jesus did exist he certainly was the son of God not because he died on the cross but because he said so and came back from hell on the third day. i respect islam and if i wasnt a christian i would be a muslim but lets look at the word, one who submits to God, in that case i am a muslim, so i think christians and muslims should stop fighting and deal with real problem, atheism
im not insulting islam in any way i am just curious, if muslims dont hate those "of the book" then why do they hate jews so much and want to destroy israel? i mean christians are less in the book than jews are
1st we hate zionist not jew, jews are cousins of arabs.
2nd u saw zionist they invade palistine and strike the civilian all the time,were the EU wont say somthing, so we support the case of freedom.
the 1st ppl who god send em prophets ans messangers are jew, they were killing 3 a day, they use there money and media to spread hate between religions (zionist) , god is angry for em.
but we dont care : To them be their Way, and to we mine. 109:6
why did the christians hated jews till just recentely? why did the holocaus happened? why were they prosecuated in eauropean countries? why were they treated like second class citizen in the USA? my thought is that it has nothing to do with their religion but rather they are seen as intruders in ones country. the reason why muslims hate jews is that they jews have caused many problem in mostly populated middle east.
Christians persecuted Jews because the Jews persecuted them first. So there was a natural dislike for them in the "Christianized west "i.e Europe which set the stage especially after the outbreak of Plague for the Jews to become sought after that way. This carried over from Europe to the USA. And Muslims can't stand the Jewish state because it was created and still exists through military defeats of the Muslim nations that went against it both in 1948 and later.
@superdubman999 well the reason is because the jews took there land and basically killing them with high prejudice (genociude) no matter what religion they were in that situation they would hate anyone but the fact is im muslim and i like christians and jews
@superdubman999 my firend the qu ran doesnt speka against christ we believe in christ and his teachings the only thing us muslims believe in is jesus wasnt crucified and i will tell you why if you want me to
well lets not argue about that because i am sad to say i have not read the Quran and is why im going to go buy a copy and read it.
But Christ said he came to save our sins and the jwish prophets tell of a savior to mankind born into the house of David. but many atheists say that islam is against jews, i think its just extremist fools like alqueda. Jews did treat arabs badly but so did many muslim extremists like hammas. jews are sarah and arab muslims are born from(what was her name?)
Ishmael is considered the Father of the Arabised Arabs
Isaac is considered the Father of the Hebrews
ishmael and issac father is Abraham
dont let atheist ppl be muslim scalar, ask a muslim not atheist who spread hate between religions by lies. u talk about hamas and quaida! my friend dont forget their are freedom fighters, they fight for their country..the religion belong to does mean nothing. been invaded.
islam CANT be against any 2 religion as it cames from SAME god. its a SIN.
@superdubman999 lol you see thr problem is jesus was a good man yes and changed the middle east but muhammad and his teachings changed the whole world india defeated the persian empire and defeated the byzantines africa he basically changed the whole western and asian world in his life time
You also failed to include Dmitri Mendeleyev. He created the periodic table of the elements. Without this there would be no modern chemistry which has made possible all the modern marvels of science that we enjoy today. He was a Russian Orhtodox.
You failed to mention Nicola Tesla, a Croation, who gave us alternating current which allowed the mass usage of electricity. Edison did not. Telsa posthumously was given credit for the discovery of the wireless, not Marconi. Tesla also created hydro electric power by harnessing Niagra Falls for production of Electricity.
I noticed something weird, the most influential scientists of all time appear as some of the most influential in history, this only shows the importance of Science in society. Newton is the most influential scientist of all time, and the second most influential in history. Thank God for the increasing popularity of Science, because 'truth is the offspring of science' (Newton) and 'then you will know the truth and the truth will set you free' (John 8:32)
Einstein = Deist, Louis Pasteur = Catholic, Darwin = Anglican, James Clerk Maxwell = Presbyterian, The Wright Brothers = United Brethren, Eddison = Congregationalist/agnostic, Alexander Graham Bell, Unitarian, That's just top 50. All after 1859
I think your message is diluted if Darwin, Einstein and Edison are your examples of great minds who held beliefs in a deity .I can list their atheistic statements if you wish... Also, I wish you would list all the known atheists from history. It's a little tricky because your great influential theistic minds found it necessary to kill them and burn their writings. So forgive them if they tried to keep it on the down low.
And I can show you where they all made theistic statements, none of the above mentioned were atheists some were deists and weak theists but not atheists. Query... if all of these great atheists were killed and their writings burned how did you come to know of them?
Since the word atheist has been used by different people through out the ages to mean any one who doesn't believe in the current sky daddy and his teachings, and history clearly shows not believing in the current popular local version of the sky daddy myth will bring the wrath of the idiotic faithful down on you. We know for a fact that many brilliant minds (branded atheists at the time) were put to death for not believing in one foolish thing or another.
So, since I have explained that many, many humans have been killed for not keeping with the orthodox views of the idiotic faithful around them. Even some on your list were threatened with death because their views on God were a little to different for their time and location. We can now safely imagine that some might go with the flow and internally hope for a more enlightened future.
Since my comment was that men on your list were threatened with death by the religious authorities for there views on God and the world. Notice I didn't say there were atheist on your list threatened. Galileo was threatened, and he had already heard what the compassionate theists had done to Bruno. The Bible says Jesus was killed by Jews for his teachings, Paul was also threatened with death for his teachings, Copernicus waited to the end of his life to publish for fear of retribution.
Darwin hesitated as well for decades before he published The Origin of Species, he was even thinking of publishing posthumous until Wallace almost bet him to the punch. Newtons unorthodox views were also held very private as were Washington's. Legend has it the early Christian church was labeled atheist by the Romans and killed. Some on your list were definitely for this kind of barbaric thinking. Muhammad, Calvin and Luther would have burnt most of your list.
Now that we see most minds were shackled by fear of the oppressive yoke of the popular theism of the day, is it any wonder ancient men didn't go around preaching against the religions of their day. It is a testament to human courage anyone said anything critical of this dangerous idea. But there were a few brave men who did, but they didn't make your list. They probably wouldn't want to be on a list with Muhammad at the top anyway.
The idiotic views and orthodox faithful about them are the very problem they have poorly addressed- to their own demise- and as a result of their own lack of shrewdness. No? You have in mind a phantom, persecuted cast of characters. Whether they spoke aloud, knowing these people were unwilling to reason about their faith or orthodoxy, is a question of wisdom and timing on their own part. You insinuate accidental genius. But, a certain greater class of genius is also circumspect of its own life.
Indeed, sir, a good many of them were Christians. That's the orthodoxy you mean, I think. How many groundbreaking scientists ought I to list, who also deemed Christianity worthy of their faith? Your argument is this: since there were people who turned Christianity into an evil thing (as Jesus predicted and warned, to his faithful, many would) it is invalidated by merit of the actions of its claimed believers. But at the same time, Atheism must disown its children until it has the right one? No?
"It appears to me (whether rightly or wrongly) that direct arguments against christianity and theism produce hardly any effect on the public; and freedom of thought is best promoted by the gradual illumination of men's minds which follows from the advance of science." Charles Darwin ( really weak theist )
"I cannot believe in the immortality of the soul... No, all this talk of an existence beyond the grave is wrong. It is born of our tenacity of life - our desire to go on living - our dread of coming to an end." Thomas Edison ( further proof that to contribute to mankind you must believe in God)
Google "Sadducees". An entire wing of Judaism that disbelieves in a an afterlife. The above says nothing about Edison's being an atheist. This is what amuses me about youtube atheists, they go about quote mining and then pretend that they made some sterling point. lol. Please find the quote where Edison disavows belief in a deity.
I have also noticed something very interesting, the majority of the beggining of the most influential people were either scientists or religious leaders? Doesn't that itself prove that Science and Religion are both pursuers of truth? Especially if Isaac Newton (most influential) Einstein (second most influential) were very religious in their sense and perspective of God.
"Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture" in February 1616,[8] and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy", forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest"
Yeah, I personally disagree that Galilei was Catholic, but Galilei fro some reason still was a Catholic for the rest of his life, I honestly see him as a protestant because he rejected the authority of the Chruch and encouraged free interpretation like Protestants of the time. Galileo in response to the Catholic Church said:
'I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God that has endowed me with sense, reason, and intellect has intended me to forgo its use.' -Galileo Galilei
And even if we did, it is still not meaningless to pursue naturalism because it explains the world in which we live in such that we can improve lives. But apparently we should believe in a deity instead of going to the hospital when dying because thinking that well die is circular logic.
Simply because Lewis does not have the imagination to realize what is actually going on doesnt force nature to conform to his intellectual limitations. Nor does denying naturalism affirm theism.
Would you bet your life that we live in the The Matrix because we could? Or if we lived in a ball on a Cats Collar? Would you stop heating food in your microwave because you cant trust that it actually gets hot? Or if you were bleeding to death, would you go to the hospital or just sit there because saving yourself is circular logic? We have no reason to believe we live in The Matrix because by definition such thinking is impossible to prove.
What? No We observe. We interpret observations. We observe further to see if those interpretations were valid. If valid, we apply those interpretations to other observations to see if it explains what we see better. If I doesnt make sense, the interpretation must change to fit what we see. There is no circular logic unless you suppose were living in The Matrix and thus cannot trust our observations.
However, such juvenile thinking is absolutely meaningless.
You need no reason to observe. You need reason to interpret. It is rather simple to prove sound reasoning by just observing its appliaction. If technology isn't proof enough, nothing could convince you otherwise.
I didn't say there would be no atheists if it atheism weren't true. I said that we are not born with any innate knowledge of deities or they would be no atheists simply because we would all know that is untrue. Not everyone believes = no innate knowledge of a deity.
If god exists, as very many believe that he does and must. Carthago delenda est!
The only way humans learn anything is through observation and experimentation - from learning to walk, learning to talk, to figuring out how to build a functional microwave. We are not born with any innate sense of knowledge or there would be no atheists. Thus, it must be concluded that religious belief is a learned behavior that came about from observations and a poor or incomplete interpretations of them.
Did you observe that the only way that knowledge is acquired is via observation? I am pretty sure that one couldn't know such a thing minus reason, ie. if observation was the only way to garner knowledge you should never have known it. Your whole point is self defeating.
This is especially apparent simply by the necessity of schooling or simple life experience. No one is born with all the knowledge of being a farmer. No one is born a minister. They must learn it.
However, the "knowledge" that a deity exists breaks down since no one can verify it. Considering the number of people claiming to be prophets, how is anyone expected to know which truth is the "Truth?" The most reasonable path is to choose the best explanation given the evidence. No belief.
I accidentally erased your last post, I was going for the reply and hit the remove. You are confusing "learn" and "observe" you can take a logic class and learn all day long with no observation as it were. One needn't observe that 1 + 1 is 2 in order to know it. Rationality is non observational, there is no needed association to the natural. BTW observation and materiality are inseparable so please don't simply inject the word observe into your rebuttal and think the issue resolved.
1+1=2 is observed and then taught. One does not come to the conclusion that 1+1=2 without observational senses simply because without those senses you cannot effectively develop of a concept of 1 or 2 in the first place. What is 1 if you cannot see, hear, taste, touch, or smell? How does one relate to such a concept without senses? And even if you could, without the ability to observe, in fact, that 1+1=2, you cannot say you know for sure. So, logic is derived from observations, hence fallacies.
"Pretending." That implies knowledge of the existence of a deity. Knowledge can only be obtained through the tools within nature simply by the reality that we are bound by the laws of the universe. You would think God understands that.
So why expect random people to have divine revelations and for what they say to be "Truth" when they often not even truthful? Why should I believe in Jesus opposed to Jose Miranda? Neither have proposed anything particularly worthy of being called revelation...
Wishful thinking is when you believe something because it feels right or is emotionally satisfying when you do not have sufficient evidence to reasonably conclude that line of thought, especially if you take action on it. Instead, it seems you are implying that atheism is wishful thinking because atheists believe there is no god because they would otherwise go to hell. Rather atheism is the rejection of deism on the basis of having no proof, or even remotely empirical evidence to support it.
Why is belief exempt from reason or facts? It's perfectly reasonable to believe something when there is at least empirical evidence to support it. Yet religions appear to claim that belief need not be supported by anything other than feelings. And I assure that many brilliant scientists did have trouble with it, although I imagine most did not fully voice their concerns as group behavior would make doing so tantamount to committing social suicide or actual suicide depending on their society.
Scientists' beliefs should only be accepted as relevant when those scientists have all the available data. Some of the greatest minds our species has ever produced believed that the world was flat or the sun revolved around the earth. They're clearly wrong, but understandably so; they didn't have the all the data we have today.
Nor does being a genius make you immune to the fallacy of wishful thinking. Anything presented must be proven regardless of source.
How would a scientist (or you) know if he had all available data? That cannot be known minus having all available knowledge at your disposal. Moreover one could never observe such a thing as having all available data and therefore falls short of your definition of "knowledge". We can infer from your above statement that a scientist's beliefs should never be accepted because he can never know that he has all available data.
That's quite the strawman. I never defined knowledge as the absolute understanding of a subject. That's religion, not science.
However, given a sufficient amount of verifiable data, one can reasonably conclude many things. This knowledge is further demonstrated when applied to create functional machines that behavior predictably.
My point was that it's absurd to believe what dead people think because the data scientists have available now is far more precise, verifiable, and reproducible.
Its no strawman at all you specifically said that a scientist's beliefs are not valid unless they have something that they couldn't possibly know that they have. Nor could they observe such a thing. What I am saying is that knowledge is a dance between the Apriori and the experiential, to suggest one or the other simply results in the undermining of one's own position, hence the scientist has professional access to only one side of the "knowledge" you laud.
You're warping all available data into all data. A scientist is not expected to see data that has not been discovered. All available data is the data literally available to him through studies, papers, etc... We should not be influenced by the beliefs of dead scientists unless their beliefs are in line with new data. The point is: "dead scientist believes this" should not be influential because they cannot change their minds given new information.
Apriori is deductive reasoning from knowledge already known or the application of posteriori conclusions to new situations. It is the application of definitions of the components to determine the definition of the result. 1must be defined, as must 2 in order for 1+1=2 to have any meaning. Posteriori is required in order to originally determine the definitions of those concepts. They may be absolute concepts, but we must still first discover them. Ultimately, the source is observation.
The cynic inside me cannot help but feel that the professed religious affiliations of many of these people was merely done to prevent themselves from being stoned or ostracized from the lack of socially acceptable alternatives.
It's an educational and interesting list though. But it doesn't do much for either argument of theism or atheism as the importance these people had(often religious in origin) has no bearing on the validity of whether or not there is a god(s).
what about if some people do oppose to me what I say but i still do have a infleuence on them . So actually it does nt matter who oppose who but who is most infleuential
It's funny how Atheists brag about who are atheists. Like they brag, Angelina Jolie is an atheists..I mean, who is that in contrast to Sir Isaac Newton or Vincent Van Gogh or Adam Smith...These are the founders of modern civilizations fact of life. One famous Christian's influence in this world dwarfs a thousand famous atheists. Thank goodness CS Lewis was an atheists but he converted to Christianity.
My reasoning is simple. The list was not compiled by me. I used Micheal Hart's list, and he listed Mohammad as 1. I disagree with Dr. Hart's reasoning there. My own list would be 1 Christ, 2 Paul the Apostle, 3 Johan Gutenberg, 4 Mohamed, 5 Isac Newton, 6 George Washington............. But it would have been unethical for me to use someone else's work and Tailor it to my tastes so I left it as was. I think everyone feels that someone deserved to be on the list but wasn't. It cannot be helped.
wat a good list truly mohammed deserves his place there as number 1!even in the books that have been writtin by christians and jews about 100 most influential people in history have put mohammed as number 1!!everyone should read his life story then ul no y he deserves that place!!
It's only because Jesus of Nazareth was a peaceful individual unlike your prophet who conquered land throughout his time and because Christian today are more worldly (sadly) than the teachings of Christ. Unlike, the majority of Islamic followers that are fundamentalists.
yh he was a peacefull man also mohammed he was no doubt!just becouse he went war doesent mean his bad or anything negative!mohammed was peace , loveing and great leader!if u read the book ul understand why he put him as number 1!yh christianity is more but (sadly) they are converting to islam alot thats y its fastest growing religion around the world (specially america) !
... You are correct in saying Islam is the fastest growing religion. However, the growth is not from CONVERSION it is from population growth (childbearing) and threatening anyone that does not hold Islamic faith. Their are very few Islamic converts from Christianity. The war of faith in America is between Secular Humanism and Christianity.
Muhammad was peace? War is the opposite of peace and Muhammad was a pervert who preyed on young children.
yh it is the fastest !not really your totally wrong its alot from CONVERSION if you check the stats out then ul c!around 10-50 thousend american (non muslims)convert every year to islam !also in stats it says by 2020 islam will be the biggest religioin in england!if u dont belive check it out!yh mohammed was peace thats why a christian writer put him as number 1!!plzzz read the book and his history then u can decide!not good to judge before your dont no anything !
No it is not. Give me the statistics site where it list converts too Islam i know it's very slim. The writer was not Christian was and is not Christian... Michael Hart is a secularist.
Muhammad was a pedophile and the only reason he ranks #1 is because he CONQUERED lands that is it.
Oh my i just thought about how ridiculous that statement is... MY oh MY. There are less than 2 million Muslims in America period. IN TOTALITY. The total number of converts yearly is more like eleven minus the million you added LOL.
Jesus shuld be first.most of those people killed millions of christians and jews. how are they important!!
thats why u people still have the same mentality today. julius sesar literally worhiped the devil and sacrificed children in his rituals.i hate this dumn looser video!!
"Most" of them killed "Millions" of Christians and Jews? Can you name the 51 that would constitute "most"? Julius Caesar died in 44 B.C nearly half a century prior to Christ's birth, not many Christians to kill there; though he was responsible for some Jewish deaths but far short of "millions". Augustus killed even fewer and was dead before the Crucifixion to boot. In fact none of the more brutal emperors (Tiberius, Gaius, Nero, Domitian) made the list, though many great Christians did.
i did not see any black people. i gess black people dont egsist in your little white brain. they are not important if they dont contribute positive to the world. jesus,john the baptist,Hail silasi, bob marley,martin luther,marcus garvey. their philosophy still influence the world today in a positive way.
most of those evildoers you mention should be forgotten.
Actually Menes appears at number 96 (hint....he was a black Egyptian). But as explained before the list is not my compilation and I would have listed Ramses along side Menes, and maybe Neco as well. But You seem to have utterly confused the terms "important" ie consequential, and good or moral. The video is not entitled "the 100 most moral people" yes? Hence Hitler made the list. Not a difficult concept to come to terms with.
whar does listing a famous persons religion have to do with anything? Many great and evil people were with and without supernatural beliefs! Besides, we live in the year 2008, not 300 BCE!
Well you could start by reading the opening portion of the vid, and then glance at the vid that it was in response to...... that could clarify some things.
thank you friend but i did. i still see no reason to pick apart their beliefs, ATHEIST or THEIST. besides it having no relevance to the individual (good people are good with or without supernatural), many are debatable.
The question is one of what a Deist is. I was correcting another vid's misunderstanding of what Deism is. Moreover most of the people on this list would disagree with you as to whether or not their religion had something to do with their greatness. And who is in a better position to know...you or they?
Like I said, Atheist or Theist. As for the rest of the people on this list, I'm here only to express an opinion... Besides their contributions to humankind are more interesting and aiding in history than which god they supposedly served. Copernicus is great not because he's catholic, but because he is considered the father of modern astronomy.
In addition, you neglected countless islamic philosophers/scientists from the Islamic Golden Age like Ibn Khaldun... I guess they dont matter... Or smaller religious leaders like Joseph Smith and Mahavira. I understand that you wanted to respond back to an idiot, but maybe you should just counter with their accomplishments... Or, your next video can tell everyone their shoe size, or birthdays, or maybe their favorite dessert???
I didn't actually compile the list, a quorum of scholars did. And I suppose that nobody will be completely satisfied with the contents. I am a Christian and I list Mohamed before Christ. As to the last did those individuals define themselves by their shoe sizes or the treats they enjoyed? They did derfine themselves by their Theology however.
The problem is that the level of importantance their faith is accorded them is something they decide not you or I. If you see that distinction as being as important as shoe size so be it.
I agree... yet you have decided the importance by compiling the list. I dont recall Confucius writing a book about confucism... I dont think Jesus called himself a christian... Charles Darwin wrote a book about natural selection, not faith. Their faith is part of them, but NOT why they are famous.
Whether or not you believe their theology is of more or less relevance than their accomplishments is of no consequence, they did see their faith as central to themselves. ie the subject matters themselves disagree with you.
Actually, many of the people listed did not tout their religious identity... sorry to disapoint you. however, they did promote their science and/or philosophy. if thomas alva edison had told everyone his faith, why does NO ONE know it, yet everyone knows his inventions?
Those with faiths that I could not ascertain I simply issued a "?" in place of a name. But by far and large those mentioned defined themselves by their religions affiliations. A different thing all together than "touting" them. Perhaps Edison is different than Galileo in his intensity of faith (he was), but the point of the video was not to show that every person named was overly religious, just most of them.
You fail to mention that a large portion of them changed religion instead of falling into a conservative faith... People like Jesus stood up against their faiths. People like Galileo and Darwin found answers outside their faith and it was their DISCOVERIES that made them great... I did like your video... Nice music and informative, it's just I think by defining and giving labels pushes us away... faith should bring us together... no matter what it's in.
Are you trying to prove religious people are responsible for science advancement? The idiot who made the atheist video is a moron if he attempted to proclaim atheism and rationality as the fuel of ingenuity... The truth is, amazing people come in all kinds. If your video was showing the diversity of knowledge... Then Bravo.
In addition, you neglected countless islamic philosophers/scientists from the Islamic Golden Age like Ibn Khaldun... I guess they dont matter... Or smaller religious leaders like Joseph Smith and Mahavira. I understand that you wanted to respond back to an idiot, but maybe you should just counter with their accomplishments... Or, your next video can tell everyone their shoe size, or birthdays, or maybe their favorite dessert???
thank you friend but i did. i still see no reason to pick apart their beliefs, ATHEIST or THEIST. besides it having no relevance to the individual (good people are good with or without supernatural), many are debatable.
gosh, did I miss Gauss? Euler should be on, which he was. But there is no way Decartes before Gauss or Archimedes....plus, I should be on there, as well.
fuck islam
TheHistoryGeek1 3 weeks ago
where's Bob Marley?
JUSTINyourTV 1 month ago
Islam is truth!
kasim8t3 1 month ago
Lol one day i want to do something to get my name with the all time greats
TheCaptainjuicy 1 month ago
@TheCaptainjuicy yo im gonna be the one that is gonna be one number better than you JUST TO ANNOY YOU!!!! Mwahahahahaha...
SCQM99 1 month ago
A flawed list but still good
TheCaptainjuicy 1 month ago
how come leonardo da vinci is not on the list and michelango is there around number 50, leonardo was as influential as him, maybe even more
hovsec 5 months ago
islam is great ha3
JuniorMagicBoy 6 months ago
Bonaparte should easily be in the top 20...he was a french revolutionary he cnquered euorpe and laid down democracy abolishing monarchies in most countries
kyle887923 10 months ago
Islam is the number two religion of the world and accounts for the 3rd world, sorry...
kyle887923 10 months ago
What about Mustafa Kemal Atatürk?
Norguy77 1 year ago
This is a great list, but I a bit shocked that I don't see Da Vinci, Nostradamus, and Martin Luther King and others.
sanauj15 1 year ago
influential is by influence its not by predictions of what will happen to the world in the future, influntial men has a character of kindness.... throughout the world.............
macky888888 9 months ago
@macky888888 The three people I listed are still influential. You say that influential men has a character of kindness, but there are a lot of people on this list that weren't kind.
sanauj15 8 months ago
@sanauj15 my influential people in list is only 10.
macky888888 8 months ago
I have yet to see a humanistic atheist on this list.. most of them turn out to be megalomaniac dictators
lovellespice 1 year ago
Catholics and Catholic rejects shaped the modern world.
lovellespice 1 year ago
“If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.” - Isaac Newton
"No idea's original, there's nothin new under the sun
It's never what you do, but how it's done"
- Nas
No *one* person is more important than another. It is all a matter of perspective and what is important to you and your situation. A list like this is arbitrary at best...
The ability to influence the whole species and be idolised is (at its core), a survival mechanism. Not absolute truth.
TheNotoriousTOM 1 year ago
i kno it must be hard not to forget anyone but nicola tesla should definatly be on this list. He's the only reason we have any of the technology we do today and his advancements in electronics far overshadow mr. Thomas Edison, who's name we know in large part because of his place in society.
alantate09 1 year ago
@magicksense
You wont understand if you are only going to watch videos and wont even try to learn what Muhammad (P.B.U.H) actually was.
People who rate him are the ones who have learned about him and certainly are better learned than you up until now. I dont know of the future.
pluaboect 1 year ago
@teamawesome4 I wonder if Newton would agree?
gnosisandlight 1 year ago
It has been written, Issac Newton is more important than Jesus Christ with about 1/6th to 1/7th of the time for his influence to spread.
Eat it faith, logic wins.
Teamawesome4 1 year ago
@Teamawesome4 my frd but there is certainly a religion that follows logic. try to discover it
rizwanklair786 1 year ago
I dont think its 100 people that influence the world more like 200 or 300 because u forgot to mention these VERY IMPORTANT people!!
Shakespeare, St . Aquinas, Hegel, david humes, I. Kant, Nietzsche, A. Lincoln, Thomas Pane, Jeremy Bentham, Cicero, Cleopatra, King David, Mark Twain,Churchill, Roosevelt, Thomas hobbes, Adam and Eve, Dostoevsky, Mencius,Jame Joyce, Owell, Benjamin Franklin, Nero, king Herod, Horus, Zeus, Stalin, Gibbon, William james, Gandhi,Copernicus,
Theres so much more!!
XXXXNanoXXXxxx 1 year ago
@gnosisandlight, I myself am a Christian, but do not follow the views of the majority of Christians. My friends are Atheists, Agnostics, Jews, Maoist Communists, Muslims and Hindus. I feel that there is no right answer, and everyone has to pick the system that works for them, or if all else fails, invent their own. for the confused, I suggest careful thinking, and scholarly debate as guides to your own personal truth. not all faithful are idiots, and not all atheists are wise.
peacecanhappen27 1 year ago
@magicksense lol forced you joking me you must be idiotic the victories he had in battle was when al countires like the persian empire and the romans were threatened you idiot what sources do i have my friend well a university degree in middle eastern history the reason why hitler isnt on this is becuase he didnt do anything for society but make war
muhamamd gave women rights ended social slavery (where peopel were born slaves but you could still takes slaves in war)
guerrillasindamist 1 year ago
any muslim here should not say bad about christians or jesus as christians are humans with a heart and jesus is the prophet we respect if u disrespect him uve betrayed frm the path of allah
LoveGTAandSims 1 year ago
I would categorize Justinian I under Orthodox, since the schism between the Catholic West and Greek Orthodox East didn't happen until half a millennium later. Unless you are intending "Catholic" to be describing a fully unified creedal form of Christianity.
ztwilli2 1 year ago
Theists think the universe is created and ruled by a person, who has plans, ideas, and opinions, which carry the force of authority.
Deists and Atheists think the universe is not ruled by a supernatural overseer, but is instead profoundly subtle and beautiful and _natural_. Their only disagreement is whether to borrow the theists' word "god" as a label for that sense of wonder.
It boggles my mind that you would say deists are theists. You could not be more wrong.
apieceofstring 1 year ago
For the record, I know i'm generalizing. In the narrow sense, atheism is just "not theism". Atheism doesn't even require naturalism. Buddhists, for example, are atheists (supernatural realm, but no theistic god). Likewise there are many ways to interpret deism (i base my definition on the opinions expressed by Einstein).
But the crux of it is this: theists think you can answer questions of purpose by appealing to an authority; deists and atheists say you have to figure it out for yourself.
apieceofstring 1 year ago
"Deists are theists that accept a disinterested God."
You realize that that makes them NOT theists, right? Because in order to be a theist you have to believe god is personal, and therefore interested. I thought that was obvious from the definition, but hey.
chuckinator0 2 years ago
@chuckinator0
Actually theist simply means you believe in God, it doesn't matter if they are interested or not.
mrbenjamin118 1 year ago
@mrbenjamin118 Theist means you believe in God, but what is God? The definitions of God that theists believe in are those that include personal relationship with humanity (mostly). The God that deists believe in is one that created the universe, but has no involvement in it. These are two different definitions of God. So, in short, it does matter what definition of God you use.
chuckinator0 1 year ago
No, the original definition fits. A god is there, but he leaves us the keys and drops us hints. "Not theists"? Not quite the same as an atheist.
sorenkierkegaard2008 1 year ago
@sorenkierkegaard2008 A god who creates but does not interfere is a deistic god. This is the definition of a deistic god. Someone who believes in this god is called a deist. You have to believe that God guides or interferes in the natural process and has a personal relationship with human beings in order to be some form of theist. Christians have to believe that God interfered so much that he impregnated someone. Deists reject this. Also, "atheist" literally means "not theist" but hey
chuckinator0 1 year ago
also what about modern people wheres the inventor of internet albert einstien the first person to make a nuclear power plant? argiculture genious's how about the person who started global companies such as wallmart and mcdonalds ur list is way biased its based off of science and u dont count for things that u take for granted y would issac newton be infront of thomas edison i still cant believe u didnt put edison in top 5 that is just rediculous as well as the discover of electricity come on
6nich 2 years ago
wait can i get this straight benjamin franklin the inevtor of press and the discover of electricity isnt in the first 5 nor the person who discovered how to harness electricity thomas edison who ever made this is retarded u use ur phone and a light bulb everyday thomas edison made working (hard labor) at night possible u have to be kidding me do u know what social impact that caused let alone the 998 inventions
6nich 2 years ago
If I'm not mistaken, isn't this simply the list from Michael Hart's "100 MOST INFLUENTIAL PEOPLE"? You're not trying to pass this off as your own, are you?
smb12321 2 years ago
Hey gnosis, not a bad list. The one thing I would change is the wording from Important to Influential. It's a small change I know but it seems to fit better to me. Of course just my opinion and I don't even know if it's possible to change the titles once they're posted.
louvsco 2 years ago
you said"Islam is a failure of a religion, "
Ans: i think you are bluffing !
[chapter:The Repentance][verse:33][Holy Quran]
It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam), to make it SUPERIOR OVER ALL RELIGIONS even though the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) hate (it).
minooo44 2 years ago
Islam is a failure of a religion, how did they become number 1 on influence in history? Is it the coercion of the religion unto traditional culture of the middle east?
ogirv101 2 years ago
Trying to construct a list of the 100 most important people sounds like a difficult project. Deciding what constitutes importance reveals a person´s "biases," I think. Eg. anti-religious people are bound to devalue religious figures, and religious people are more likely to value them highly.
AnthonyBlunt 2 years ago
and uhh.....luther was never lutheran
superdubman999 2 years ago
lol why is muhammed 1? wouldnt jc be 1? i mean without jc europe would be like frikin mexico right now under the rule of muhammedens or russians.
superdubman999 2 years ago
u idiot mohamed or jesus or moases or ibrahame or the 247000 prophet were had the same goal! spread god message!
ALGfunk 2 years ago
but which one is Gods real message?
superdubman999 2 years ago
GOD(english) allah(arabic) alluhim(hebrew)
PS; in arabic allah have 99names!
utubeit
u see,when the factory make a machine, must go wiv a manual. its the same in religion.
ALGfunk 2 years ago
lol i was joking, but you have strange accent, and i meant that Gods message for christians is that jesus is the Christ
superdubman999 2 years ago
dont say gods! their is one! and his not jesus(bpuh)
(Quran 5:116) "And behold! Allah will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah?" He will say: "Glory to Thee! Never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, Thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, though I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden."
ALGfunk 2 years ago
"They have truly disbelieved those who say God is one of a trinity" Surah 5:73 [5]
"Say not Trinity.. ...Allah is only one God" Surah 4:171 [4]
ALGfunk 2 years ago
your muslem eh? no wonder. mary is not part of the trinity. the holy spirit is. and i believe what jesus said, mohammed said many good things but he did not say he was the son of God. the holy spirit is the third of the trinity. and God cannot say to jesus and judge him for jesus is God, he and God are one, God is jesus. and the holy spirit is God. anyone who speaks against jesus will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the holy spirit will not
superdubman999 2 years ago
haha god kill him self for the sin of his creation,,,, soun wired! read well the books of god again!
quran continue the bible , dosnt cancel it!
ALGfunk 2 years ago
i believe that muhammed did hear God and that it does continue the bible, but for me and christians alike if it speaks against christ i wont believe all of it
superdubman999 2 years ago
he never (mohamed) say one word on christ jesus(PBUH) ...
GOD or ALLAH send a book afte the corruption of the NT..... like he send jesus(pbuh) to ppl of Israel
and quran(recitation) is the last one, wich make it the last word or decision of god Almighty !
ALGfunk 2 years ago
oh ya i forgot you guys thought that certain christians altered the bible to make jesus God. but let me tell you this, if jesus did exist he certainly was the son of God not because he died on the cross but because he said so and came back from hell on the third day. i respect islam and if i wasnt a christian i would be a muslim but lets look at the word, one who submits to God, in that case i am a muslim, so i think christians and muslims should stop fighting and deal with real problem, atheism
superdubman999 2 years ago
i never fight ppl of the book, its forbidden(sin),and u will never ever find a Muslim cursing christians or jew!
in Islam the shirk (associate Salomone in worshiping ) is the BIGGEST SIN!
thats why allah said
Surah 112. Al-Ikhlas (The Unity, Sincerity, Oneness Of Allah)
In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
1. Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
2. Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
3. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
4. And there is none like unto Him.
ALGfunk 2 years ago
im not insulting islam in any way i am just curious, if muslims dont hate those "of the book" then why do they hate jews so much and want to destroy israel? i mean christians are less in the book than jews are
superdubman999 2 years ago
1st we hate zionist not jew, jews are cousins of arabs.
2nd u saw zionist they invade palistine and strike the civilian all the time,were the EU wont say somthing, so we support the case of freedom.
the 1st ppl who god send em prophets ans messangers are jew, they were killing 3 a day, they use there money and media to spread hate between religions (zionist) , god is angry for em.
but we dont care : To them be their Way, and to we mine. 109:6
btw, jew who made the NT(corruption)
ALGfunk 2 years ago
why did the christians hated jews till just recentely? why did the holocaus happened? why were they prosecuated in eauropean countries? why were they treated like second class citizen in the USA? my thought is that it has nothing to do with their religion but rather they are seen as intruders in ones country. the reason why muslims hate jews is that they jews have caused many problem in mostly populated middle east.
samana1fromsomalia 2 years ago
Christians persecuted Jews because the Jews persecuted them first. So there was a natural dislike for them in the "Christianized west "i.e Europe which set the stage especially after the outbreak of Plague for the Jews to become sought after that way. This carried over from Europe to the USA. And Muslims can't stand the Jewish state because it was created and still exists through military defeats of the Muslim nations that went against it both in 1948 and later.
Karlwootwoot 1 year ago
@superdubman999 well the reason is because the jews took there land and basically killing them with high prejudice (genociude) no matter what religion they were in that situation they would hate anyone but the fact is im muslim and i like christians and jews
guerrillasindamist 1 year ago
@superdubman999 my firend the qu ran doesnt speka against christ we believe in christ and his teachings the only thing us muslims believe in is jesus wasnt crucified and i will tell you why if you want me to
guerrillasindamist 1 year ago
well lets not argue about that because i am sad to say i have not read the Quran and is why im going to go buy a copy and read it.
But Christ said he came to save our sins and the jwish prophets tell of a savior to mankind born into the house of David. but many atheists say that islam is against jews, i think its just extremist fools like alqueda. Jews did treat arabs badly but so did many muslim extremists like hammas. jews are sarah and arab muslims are born from(what was her name?)
superdubman999 2 years ago
Ishmael is considered the Father of the Arabised Arabs
Isaac is considered the Father of the Hebrews
ishmael and issac father is Abraham
dont let atheist ppl be muslim scalar, ask a muslim not atheist who spread hate between religions by lies. u talk about hamas and quaida! my friend dont forget their are freedom fighters, they fight for their country..the religion belong to does mean nothing. been invaded.
islam CANT be against any 2 religion as it cames from SAME god. its a SIN.
ALGfunk 2 years ago
@superdubman999 lol you see thr problem is jesus was a good man yes and changed the middle east but muhammad and his teachings changed the whole world india defeated the persian empire and defeated the byzantines africa he basically changed the whole western and asian world in his life time
christianity for the most part stayed in europe
guerrillasindamist 1 year ago
William Shakespeare was William Shakespeare, not Edward de Vere -- get over it!!!
ZZemme 2 years ago
how can i be in the 100 :P
DARKinspirati0n 2 years ago
I like the music. What is it?
AnthonyBlunt 2 years ago
You also failed to include Dmitri Mendeleyev. He created the periodic table of the elements. Without this there would be no modern chemistry which has made possible all the modern marvels of science that we enjoy today. He was a Russian Orhtodox.
joliettraveler 2 years ago
You failed to mention Nicola Tesla, a Croation, who gave us alternating current which allowed the mass usage of electricity. Edison did not. Telsa posthumously was given credit for the discovery of the wireless, not Marconi. Tesla also created hydro electric power by harnessing Niagra Falls for production of Electricity.
joliettraveler 2 years ago
I noticed something weird, the most influential scientists of all time appear as some of the most influential in history, this only shows the importance of Science in society. Newton is the most influential scientist of all time, and the second most influential in history. Thank God for the increasing popularity of Science, because 'truth is the offspring of science' (Newton) and 'then you will know the truth and the truth will set you free' (John 8:32)
ogirv101 2 years ago
How many after 1859.
MichaelSJLH 2 years ago
Einstein = Deist, Louis Pasteur = Catholic, Darwin = Anglican, James Clerk Maxwell = Presbyterian, The Wright Brothers = United Brethren, Eddison = Congregationalist/agnostic, Alexander Graham Bell, Unitarian, That's just top 50. All after 1859
gnosisandlight 2 years ago
I think your message is diluted if Darwin, Einstein and Edison are your examples of great minds who held beliefs in a deity .I can list their atheistic statements if you wish... Also, I wish you would list all the known atheists from history. It's a little tricky because your great influential theistic minds found it necessary to kill them and burn their writings. So forgive them if they tried to keep it on the down low.
MichaelSJLH 2 years ago
And I can show you where they all made theistic statements, none of the above mentioned were atheists some were deists and weak theists but not atheists. Query... if all of these great atheists were killed and their writings burned how did you come to know of them?
gnosisandlight 2 years ago
Since the word atheist has been used by different people through out the ages to mean any one who doesn't believe in the current sky daddy and his teachings, and history clearly shows not believing in the current popular local version of the sky daddy myth will bring the wrath of the idiotic faithful down on you. We know for a fact that many brilliant minds (branded atheists at the time) were put to death for not believing in one foolish thing or another.
MichaelSJLH 2 years ago
Well if there were many name 10.
gnosisandlight 2 years ago
So, since I have explained that many, many humans have been killed for not keeping with the orthodox views of the idiotic faithful around them. Even some on your list were threatened with death because their views on God were a little to different for their time and location. We can now safely imagine that some might go with the flow and internally hope for a more enlightened future.
MichaelSJLH 2 years ago
Which atheist on the list did this happen to?
gnosisandlight 2 years ago
Since my comment was that men on your list were threatened with death by the religious authorities for there views on God and the world. Notice I didn't say there were atheist on your list threatened. Galileo was threatened, and he had already heard what the compassionate theists had done to Bruno. The Bible says Jesus was killed by Jews for his teachings, Paul was also threatened with death for his teachings, Copernicus waited to the end of his life to publish for fear of retribution.
MichaelSJLH 2 years ago
Darwin hesitated as well for decades before he published The Origin of Species, he was even thinking of publishing posthumous until Wallace almost bet him to the punch. Newtons unorthodox views were also held very private as were Washington's. Legend has it the early Christian church was labeled atheist by the Romans and killed. Some on your list were definitely for this kind of barbaric thinking. Muhammad, Calvin and Luther would have burnt most of your list.
MichaelSJLH 2 years ago
Now that we see most minds were shackled by fear of the oppressive yoke of the popular theism of the day, is it any wonder ancient men didn't go around preaching against the religions of their day. It is a testament to human courage anyone said anything critical of this dangerous idea. But there were a few brave men who did, but they didn't make your list. They probably wouldn't want to be on a list with Muhammad at the top anyway.
MichaelSJLH 2 years ago
The idiotic views and orthodox faithful about them are the very problem they have poorly addressed- to their own demise- and as a result of their own lack of shrewdness. No? You have in mind a phantom, persecuted cast of characters. Whether they spoke aloud, knowing these people were unwilling to reason about their faith or orthodoxy, is a question of wisdom and timing on their own part. You insinuate accidental genius. But, a certain greater class of genius is also circumspect of its own life.
sorenkierkegaard2008 1 year ago
Indeed, sir, a good many of them were Christians. That's the orthodoxy you mean, I think. How many groundbreaking scientists ought I to list, who also deemed Christianity worthy of their faith? Your argument is this: since there were people who turned Christianity into an evil thing (as Jesus predicted and warned, to his faithful, many would) it is invalidated by merit of the actions of its claimed believers. But at the same time, Atheism must disown its children until it has the right one? No?
sorenkierkegaard2008 1 year ago
"It appears to me (whether rightly or wrongly) that direct arguments against christianity and theism produce hardly any effect on the public; and freedom of thought is best promoted by the gradual illumination of men's minds which follows from the advance of science." Charles Darwin ( really weak theist )
MichaelSJLH 2 years ago
Again Darwin's expressing his views about the best way to advance our understanding says nothing about his being an atheist....find the quote please.
gnosisandlight 2 years ago
"I cannot believe in the immortality of the soul... No, all this talk of an existence beyond the grave is wrong. It is born of our tenacity of life - our desire to go on living - our dread of coming to an end." Thomas Edison ( further proof that to contribute to mankind you must believe in God)
MichaelSJLH 2 years ago
Google "Sadducees". An entire wing of Judaism that disbelieves in a an afterlife. The above says nothing about Edison's being an atheist. This is what amuses me about youtube atheists, they go about quote mining and then pretend that they made some sterling point. lol. Please find the quote where Edison disavows belief in a deity.
gnosisandlight 2 years ago
I have also noticed something very interesting, the majority of the beggining of the most influential people were either scientists or religious leaders? Doesn't that itself prove that Science and Religion are both pursuers of truth? Especially if Isaac Newton (most influential) Einstein (second most influential) were very religious in their sense and perspective of God.
ogirv101 2 years ago
1! ,mohamed(PBUH)
ALGfunk 2 years ago
Galileo Galilei catholic ?
haha
WIKI :
"Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture" in February 1616,[8] and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy", forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest"
eutuve 2 years ago
Yeah, I personally disagree that Galilei was Catholic, but Galilei fro some reason still was a Catholic for the rest of his life, I honestly see him as a protestant because he rejected the authority of the Chruch and encouraged free interpretation like Protestants of the time. Galileo in response to the Catholic Church said:
'I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God that has endowed me with sense, reason, and intellect has intended me to forgo its use.' -Galileo Galilei
ogirv101 2 years ago
How did any of that show him to be anything other than Catholic? His Catholicism is an established fact.
gnosisandlight 2 years ago
i think there would be motherfucker named Jozef Vissarionovic Stalin
robo1945 2 years ago
mohammed is the best
msqtr2 2 years ago
(Cont)
And even if we did, it is still not meaningless to pursue naturalism because it explains the world in which we live in such that we can improve lives. But apparently we should believe in a deity instead of going to the hospital when dying because thinking that well die is circular logic.
Simply because Lewis does not have the imagination to realize what is actually going on doesnt force nature to conform to his intellectual limitations. Nor does denying naturalism affirm theism.
AcornHunter 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(Cont)
Would you bet your life that we live in the The Matrix because we could? Or if we lived in a ball on a Cats Collar? Would you stop heating food in your microwave because you cant trust that it actually gets hot? Or if you were bleeding to death, would you go to the hospital or just sit there because saving yourself is circular logic? We have no reason to believe we live in The Matrix because by definition such thinking is impossible to prove.
(Cont)
AcornHunter 2 years ago
What? No We observe. We interpret observations. We observe further to see if those interpretations were valid. If valid, we apply those interpretations to other observations to see if it explains what we see better. If I doesnt make sense, the interpretation must change to fit what we see. There is no circular logic unless you suppose were living in The Matrix and thus cannot trust our observations.
However, such juvenile thinking is absolutely meaningless.
(Cont)
AcornHunter 2 years ago
Comment removed
AcornHunter 2 years ago
You need no reason to observe. You need reason to interpret. It is rather simple to prove sound reasoning by just observing its appliaction. If technology isn't proof enough, nothing could convince you otherwise.
I didn't say there would be no atheists if it atheism weren't true. I said that we are not born with any innate knowledge of deities or they would be no atheists simply because we would all know that is untrue. Not everyone believes = no innate knowledge of a deity.
AcornHunter 2 years ago
If god exists, as very many believe that he does and must. Carthago delenda est!
The only way humans learn anything is through observation and experimentation - from learning to walk, learning to talk, to figuring out how to build a functional microwave. We are not born with any innate sense of knowledge or there would be no atheists. Thus, it must be concluded that religious belief is a learned behavior that came about from observations and a poor or incomplete interpretations of them.
AcornHunter 2 years ago
Did you observe that the only way that knowledge is acquired is via observation? I am pretty sure that one couldn't know such a thing minus reason, ie. if observation was the only way to garner knowledge you should never have known it. Your whole point is self defeating.
gnosisandlight 2 years ago
This is especially apparent simply by the necessity of schooling or simple life experience. No one is born with all the knowledge of being a farmer. No one is born a minister. They must learn it.
However, the "knowledge" that a deity exists breaks down since no one can verify it. Considering the number of people claiming to be prophets, how is anyone expected to know which truth is the "Truth?" The most reasonable path is to choose the best explanation given the evidence. No belief.
AcornHunter 2 years ago
I accidentally erased your last post, I was going for the reply and hit the remove. You are confusing "learn" and "observe" you can take a logic class and learn all day long with no observation as it were. One needn't observe that 1 + 1 is 2 in order to know it. Rationality is non observational, there is no needed association to the natural. BTW observation and materiality are inseparable so please don't simply inject the word observe into your rebuttal and think the issue resolved.
gnosisandlight 2 years ago
1+1=2 is observed and then taught. One does not come to the conclusion that 1+1=2 without observational senses simply because without those senses you cannot effectively develop of a concept of 1 or 2 in the first place. What is 1 if you cannot see, hear, taste, touch, or smell? How does one relate to such a concept without senses? And even if you could, without the ability to observe, in fact, that 1+1=2, you cannot say you know for sure. So, logic is derived from observations, hence fallacies.
AcornHunter 2 years ago
"Pretending." That implies knowledge of the existence of a deity. Knowledge can only be obtained through the tools within nature simply by the reality that we are bound by the laws of the universe. You would think God understands that.
So why expect random people to have divine revelations and for what they say to be "Truth" when they often not even truthful? Why should I believe in Jesus opposed to Jose Miranda? Neither have proposed anything particularly worthy of being called revelation...
AcornHunter 2 years ago
Wishful thinking is when you believe something because it feels right or is emotionally satisfying when you do not have sufficient evidence to reasonably conclude that line of thought, especially if you take action on it. Instead, it seems you are implying that atheism is wishful thinking because atheists believe there is no god because they would otherwise go to hell. Rather atheism is the rejection of deism on the basis of having no proof, or even remotely empirical evidence to support it.
AcornHunter 2 years ago
Why is belief exempt from reason or facts? It's perfectly reasonable to believe something when there is at least empirical evidence to support it. Yet religions appear to claim that belief need not be supported by anything other than feelings. And I assure that many brilliant scientists did have trouble with it, although I imagine most did not fully voice their concerns as group behavior would make doing so tantamount to committing social suicide or actual suicide depending on their society.
AcornHunter 2 years ago
But people shouldn't just listen.
Scientists' beliefs should only be accepted as relevant when those scientists have all the available data. Some of the greatest minds our species has ever produced believed that the world was flat or the sun revolved around the earth. They're clearly wrong, but understandably so; they didn't have the all the data we have today.
Nor does being a genius make you immune to the fallacy of wishful thinking. Anything presented must be proven regardless of source.
AcornHunter 2 years ago
How would a scientist (or you) know if he had all available data? That cannot be known minus having all available knowledge at your disposal. Moreover one could never observe such a thing as having all available data and therefore falls short of your definition of "knowledge". We can infer from your above statement that a scientist's beliefs should never be accepted because he can never know that he has all available data.
gnosisandlight 2 years ago
That's quite the strawman. I never defined knowledge as the absolute understanding of a subject. That's religion, not science.
However, given a sufficient amount of verifiable data, one can reasonably conclude many things. This knowledge is further demonstrated when applied to create functional machines that behavior predictably.
My point was that it's absurd to believe what dead people think because the data scientists have available now is far more precise, verifiable, and reproducible.
AcornHunter 2 years ago
Its no strawman at all you specifically said that a scientist's beliefs are not valid unless they have something that they couldn't possibly know that they have. Nor could they observe such a thing. What I am saying is that knowledge is a dance between the Apriori and the experiential, to suggest one or the other simply results in the undermining of one's own position, hence the scientist has professional access to only one side of the "knowledge" you laud.
gnosisandlight 2 years ago
You're warping all available data into all data. A scientist is not expected to see data that has not been discovered. All available data is the data literally available to him through studies, papers, etc... We should not be influenced by the beliefs of dead scientists unless their beliefs are in line with new data. The point is: "dead scientist believes this" should not be influential because they cannot change their minds given new information.
AcornHunter 2 years ago
Apriori is deductive reasoning from knowledge already known or the application of posteriori conclusions to new situations. It is the application of definitions of the components to determine the definition of the result. 1must be defined, as must 2 in order for 1+1=2 to have any meaning. Posteriori is required in order to originally determine the definitions of those concepts. They may be absolute concepts, but we must still first discover them. Ultimately, the source is observation.
AcornHunter 2 years ago
The cynic inside me cannot help but feel that the professed religious affiliations of many of these people was merely done to prevent themselves from being stoned or ostracized from the lack of socially acceptable alternatives.
It's an educational and interesting list though. But it doesn't do much for either argument of theism or atheism as the importance these people had(often religious in origin) has no bearing on the validity of whether or not there is a god(s).
AcornHunter 3 years ago
what about if some people do oppose to me what I say but i still do have a infleuence on them . So actually it does nt matter who oppose who but who is most infleuential
pakiweb 3 years ago
I agree Hitler was religious of a sort. He was a type of Neo Pagan. A pre-Christian German. A walking embodiment of Wagner's Opera's.
gnosisandlight 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What is the music called?
UNFFwildcard 3 years ago
I can sympathize with the arguement made by this video, but the list is ridiculous
jesse1018 3 years ago
Thanks, but the list is the argument, and mean nothing beyond refuting the videos it was made in response to.
gnosisandlight 3 years ago
Oh no.. One person disagrees with billions !!
What shall we do !!!
halibender 3 years ago
To hailbender:
Right, because billions of people were polled for the making of this list. You've got to be kidding me. At least gnosis's comment makes sense.
jesse1018 3 years ago
Yeah.. 2 billion Muslims might side with you that their Prophet isn't the greatest man to ever live.
Go and fuck your uncle
halibender 3 years ago
YOU BIASED, ONLY TWO PEOPLE FROM ISLAM? HOW ABOUT 'ALI' (shea)
bengali2007babu 3 years ago
Interesting. Just over half of the people listed in this video belong too some form of Christianity. Yet, Muhammad is #1 lol.
cdpopham 3 years ago
It's funny how Atheists brag about who are atheists. Like they brag, Angelina Jolie is an atheists..I mean, who is that in contrast to Sir Isaac Newton or Vincent Van Gogh or Adam Smith...These are the founders of modern civilizations fact of life. One famous Christian's influence in this world dwarfs a thousand famous atheists. Thank goodness CS Lewis was an atheists but he converted to Christianity.
eatingwithhands 3 years ago
My reasoning is simple. The list was not compiled by me. I used Micheal Hart's list, and he listed Mohammad as 1. I disagree with Dr. Hart's reasoning there. My own list would be 1 Christ, 2 Paul the Apostle, 3 Johan Gutenberg, 4 Mohamed, 5 Isac Newton, 6 George Washington............. But it would have been unethical for me to use someone else's work and Tailor it to my tastes so I left it as was. I think everyone feels that someone deserved to be on the list but wasn't. It cannot be helped.
gnosisandlight 3 years ago
wat a good list truly mohammed deserves his place there as number 1!even in the books that have been writtin by christians and jews about 100 most influential people in history have put mohammed as number 1!!everyone should read his life story then ul no y he deserves that place!!
afzddon 3 years ago
It's only because Jesus of Nazareth was a peaceful individual unlike your prophet who conquered land throughout his time and because Christian today are more worldly (sadly) than the teachings of Christ. Unlike, the majority of Islamic followers that are fundamentalists.
cdpopham 3 years ago
yh he was a peacefull man also mohammed he was no doubt!just becouse he went war doesent mean his bad or anything negative!mohammed was peace , loveing and great leader!if u read the book ul understand why he put him as number 1!yh christianity is more but (sadly) they are converting to islam alot thats y its fastest growing religion around the world (specially america) !
afzddon 3 years ago
... You are correct in saying Islam is the fastest growing religion. However, the growth is not from CONVERSION it is from population growth (childbearing) and threatening anyone that does not hold Islamic faith. Their are very few Islamic converts from Christianity. The war of faith in America is between Secular Humanism and Christianity.
Muhammad was peace? War is the opposite of peace and Muhammad was a pervert who preyed on young children.
cdpopham 3 years ago
yh it is the fastest !not really your totally wrong its alot from CONVERSION if you check the stats out then ul c!around 10-50 thousend american (non muslims)convert every year to islam !also in stats it says by 2020 islam will be the biggest religioin in england!if u dont belive check it out!yh mohammed was peace thats why a christian writer put him as number 1!!plzzz read the book and his history then u can decide!not good to judge before your dont no anything !
1.MOHAMMED
afzddon 3 years ago
No it is not. Give me the statistics site where it list converts too Islam i know it's very slim. The writer was not Christian was and is not Christian... Michael Hart is a secularist.
Muhammad was a pedophile and the only reason he ranks #1 is because he CONQUERED lands that is it.
cdpopham 3 years ago
LOL !! What about the 11 Million Americans who are over the age of 21, who convert each year ??
Allahu Akbar
halibender 3 years ago
Yes, make up fallacious statistics and post them. Then LOL. You beat me.
cdpopham 3 years ago
Oh my i just thought about how ridiculous that statement is... MY oh MY. There are less than 2 million Muslims in America period. IN TOTALITY. The total number of converts yearly is more like eleven minus the million you added LOL.
cdpopham 3 years ago
Jesus shuld be first.most of those people killed millions of christians and jews. how are they important!!
thats why u people still have the same mentality today. julius sesar literally worhiped the devil and sacrificed children in his rituals.i hate this dumn looser video!!
ashantilongislant 3 years ago
"Most" of them killed "Millions" of Christians and Jews? Can you name the 51 that would constitute "most"? Julius Caesar died in 44 B.C nearly half a century prior to Christ's birth, not many Christians to kill there; though he was responsible for some Jewish deaths but far short of "millions". Augustus killed even fewer and was dead before the Crucifixion to boot. In fact none of the more brutal emperors (Tiberius, Gaius, Nero, Domitian) made the list, though many great Christians did.
gnosisandlight 3 years ago
yea man!! true word. i have that video
they all ack like black people dont exist too.
ashantilongislant 3 years ago
i did not see any black people. i gess black people dont egsist in your little white brain. they are not important if they dont contribute positive to the world. jesus,john the baptist,Hail silasi, bob marley,martin luther,marcus garvey. their philosophy still influence the world today in a positive way.
most of those evildoers you mention should be forgotten.
ashantilongislant 3 years ago
what about mahatma gandhi?
Ko252 3 years ago
yes! definately and nelson mandela
ashantilongislant 3 years ago
Actually Menes appears at number 96 (hint....he was a black Egyptian). But as explained before the list is not my compilation and I would have listed Ramses along side Menes, and maybe Neco as well. But You seem to have utterly confused the terms "important" ie consequential, and good or moral. The video is not entitled "the 100 most moral people" yes? Hence Hitler made the list. Not a difficult concept to come to terms with.
gnosisandlight 3 years ago
Good list
bluerayshark 3 years ago
Good video. Think this is the list by the historian M. Hart (The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History by Michael H. Hart)?
OneGodNoPartners 3 years ago
u dont have GHANDI AND MLK JR ON TOP TEN WOW!?!!!?!?
jakeGOW360 3 years ago
whar does listing a famous persons religion have to do with anything? Many great and evil people were with and without supernatural beliefs! Besides, we live in the year 2008, not 300 BCE!
kfherrmann 4 years ago
Well you could start by reading the opening portion of the vid, and then glance at the vid that it was in response to...... that could clarify some things.
gnosisandlight 3 years ago
thank you friend but i did. i still see no reason to pick apart their beliefs, ATHEIST or THEIST. besides it having no relevance to the individual (good people are good with or without supernatural), many are debatable.
kfherrmann 3 years ago
The question is one of what a Deist is. I was correcting another vid's misunderstanding of what Deism is. Moreover most of the people on this list would disagree with you as to whether or not their religion had something to do with their greatness. And who is in a better position to know...you or they?
gnosisandlight 3 years ago
Like I said, Atheist or Theist. As for the rest of the people on this list, I'm here only to express an opinion... Besides their contributions to humankind are more interesting and aiding in history than which god they supposedly served. Copernicus is great not because he's catholic, but because he is considered the father of modern astronomy.
kfherrmann 3 years ago
In addition, you neglected countless islamic philosophers/scientists from the Islamic Golden Age like Ibn Khaldun... I guess they dont matter... Or smaller religious leaders like Joseph Smith and Mahavira. I understand that you wanted to respond back to an idiot, but maybe you should just counter with their accomplishments... Or, your next video can tell everyone their shoe size, or birthdays, or maybe their favorite dessert???
kfherrmann 3 years ago
I didn't actually compile the list, a quorum of scholars did. And I suppose that nobody will be completely satisfied with the contents. I am a Christian and I list Mohamed before Christ. As to the last did those individuals define themselves by their shoe sizes or the treats they enjoyed? They did derfine themselves by their Theology however.
gnosisandlight 3 years ago
I am not attacking any faith, only the importance it plays in illustrating 100 famous minds.
kfherrmann 3 years ago
The problem is that the level of importantance their faith is accorded them is something they decide not you or I. If you see that distinction as being as important as shoe size so be it.
gnosisandlight 3 years ago
I agree... yet you have decided the importance by compiling the list. I dont recall Confucius writing a book about confucism... I dont think Jesus called himself a christian... Charles Darwin wrote a book about natural selection, not faith. Their faith is part of them, but NOT why they are famous.
kfherrmann 3 years ago
Whether or not you believe their theology is of more or less relevance than their accomplishments is of no consequence, they did see their faith as central to themselves. ie the subject matters themselves disagree with you.
gnosisandlight 3 years ago
Actually, many of the people listed did not tout their religious identity... sorry to disapoint you. however, they did promote their science and/or philosophy. if thomas alva edison had told everyone his faith, why does NO ONE know it, yet everyone knows his inventions?
kfherrmann 3 years ago
Those with faiths that I could not ascertain I simply issued a "?" in place of a name. But by far and large those mentioned defined themselves by their religions affiliations. A different thing all together than "touting" them. Perhaps Edison is different than Galileo in his intensity of faith (he was), but the point of the video was not to show that every person named was overly religious, just most of them.
gnosisandlight 3 years ago
You fail to mention that a large portion of them changed religion instead of falling into a conservative faith... People like Jesus stood up against their faiths. People like Galileo and Darwin found answers outside their faith and it was their DISCOVERIES that made them great... I did like your video... Nice music and informative, it's just I think by defining and giving labels pushes us away... faith should bring us together... no matter what it's in.
kfherrmann 3 years ago
Are you trying to prove religious people are responsible for science advancement? The idiot who made the atheist video is a moron if he attempted to proclaim atheism and rationality as the fuel of ingenuity... The truth is, amazing people come in all kinds. If your video was showing the diversity of knowledge... Then Bravo.
kfherrmann 3 years ago
In addition, you neglected countless islamic philosophers/scientists from the Islamic Golden Age like Ibn Khaldun... I guess they dont matter... Or smaller religious leaders like Joseph Smith and Mahavira. I understand that you wanted to respond back to an idiot, but maybe you should just counter with their accomplishments... Or, your next video can tell everyone their shoe size, or birthdays, or maybe their favorite dessert???
kfherrmann 3 years ago
why is my name not in nthe list ?
Fahedinho 4 years ago
Sorry it was 101.
gnosisandlight 4 years ago
thank you friend but i did. i still see no reason to pick apart their beliefs, ATHEIST or THEIST. besides it having no relevance to the individual (good people are good with or without supernatural), many are debatable.
kfherrmann 3 years ago
gosh, did I miss Gauss? Euler should be on, which he was. But there is no way Decartes before Gauss or Archimedes....plus, I should be on there, as well.
kenrubes 4 years ago