3 stooges, maybe most influential people of all time?

I'm gonna go with Jesus or Moses. Jesus and Moses had a big time jump on Muhammad, or he'd be on top.

Well, modern presidents tend to act like stooges so maybe you're on to something here.

No problemo. I up voted you so it balances out.

Going strictly by their influence on American history and culture, the Three Stooges should be up there on Mt. Rushmore.

quote:

---

Going strictly by their influence on American history and culture, the Three Stooges should be up there on Mt. Rushmore

---

That's what I'm talking about.

quote:

---

ALL women hate them.

---

This isn't entirely true.Beautiful girl at the bank the other day did the Curly laugh about something, it surprised me,and got me thinking about this.

quote:

---

most influential people of all time?

---

My vote:

1. Johannes Gutenberg democratized data in a way never thought possible before his time.

2. Pope Alexander VI split the world between Spain and Portugal and that has had profound effects on Latin American politics and culture.

3. Since ANY religious figure (such as a Moses, Jesus or Muhammad) is debatable in a historical context, for religious influence I vote for Constantine the Great. His legitimizing Christianity made it the force in the world it is today and the traditions/customs/dogma started by the Roman Catholic Church can still be found in almost all corners of modern Christianity.

My honorable mention would go to Otto von Bismarck, whose unification of Germany was basically the real cause of two world wars and whose perversion of democracy can still be found in modern politics today. A lot of the modern world is based on what he did.

quote:

---

So what was the Umayyad Caliphate just a dream?

---

No, but Muhammad himself did not establish that caliphate. Others did it in his name after his death, one of many examples in human history where religion gave justification to war. I am not making an commentary on Islam, but the existence of the caliphate is not proof in the historical record of Muhammad as technically those in power could have made it all up as justification for their land grab.

Even if I was to give Muhammad credit for that I think what Constantine did was more influential in the long run. Islam has never had an institution that can match the scope and reach of the Vatican.

quote:

---

Jesus was a Jew and without the Romans he probably is a speck in the dustbin of history. If you look at islam as being built on one of their own, then they probably look more impressive.

---

If Muhammad was the one who actually did the nation building I would agree, but that is not the case.

Actually if we compare the two I think what early Christians did (get eaten by lions in such a convincing way that it sold an empire on your religion) is much much more impressive than when Muhammad's teachings got taken up (and manipulated) by the powers in place in that part of the world as a tool for them to expand their power. When Constantine converted it was a truly religious experience, and Rome had little direct economic benefit from his actions. Meanwhile those who built the first Islamic caliphate were pushing a religion that allowed you to steal an economic benefit from non-believers in the core teachings, and so they improved their own lot by pushing a version (their version) of his teachings.

Since any historical figure in any religion is hard to prove in a historical context (or when you do the historical record often contradicts the religious version) I think it is best to keep figures like Jesus, Muhammad or Buddha out of any discussions of historical impact.