Is Abraham the most influential human being in world history?

Jun 2019
29
Southeast Asia
#1
Abraham from the Bible is the single most influential person in history. What is your opinion on this?

Isn't it strange that 1 person with his family going out from Mesopotamia more than 3000 years ago would result in more than half of the world population worshiping the same God he worship (in their opinion at least)?

Many empires fell, yet this belief that result not from an empire, culture or nation, just a family, manage to survive through all those years.

Even we disregard his historicity, it is still remarkable that starting from the Jews (from which Christianity appear) and then the Arab (without Judaism and Christianity, Islam wouldn't have any base), both not remarkable, large or have a long history compared to their surrounding culture, manage to make half of Eurasia follow their religion.

Is it because either religion group like the Indian religion didn't have their own holy war?
 
Apr 2019
294
India
#2
Abraham from the Bible is the single most influential person in history. What is your opinion on this?

Isn't it strange that 1 person with his family going out from Mesopotamia more than 3000 years ago would result in more than half of the world population worshiping the same God he worship (in their opinion at least)?

Many empires fell, yet this belief that result not from an empire, culture or nation, just a family, manage to survive through all those years.

Even we disregard his historicity, it is still remarkable that starting from the Jews (from which Christianity appear) and then the Arab (without Judaism and Christianity, Islam wouldn't have any base), both not remarkable, large or have a long history compared to their surrounding culture, manage to make half of Eurasia follow their religion.

Is it because either religion group like the Indian religion didn't have their own holy war?
Once Buddhism was followed by half of the world and Buddhism has no concept of 'holy war'. So he must be one of most -'influential' person in the world. Buddha is a historical person and Buddhism has been gaining many new adherents in west.
On the other hand Hinduism doesn't even has concept of proselytizing.
Abrahmics faiths have been mostly spread through the sword and rest by missionary work. These faiths have been used as social and political tools to get domination of the world.
If not for the concept of 'apostasy' and general intolerance for other religions many people would've abandoned them. It's pity that even in 21st century 'apostasy' is punishable 'crime' in many parts of the world.
Christianity is mostly sold out in 3rd world countries woth the aid of 'money' and 'education'.
 
Jun 2019
29
Southeast Asia
#3
Buddha is certainly one of the most influential religious figure.

I would say he is very similar to Jesus, both go contrary to their contemporary religion, both of their religion spread through missionary work and both their religion end up with more follower from culture outside their origin. Maybe it is because of the universalism in both of their religion?

However, while Buddhism is once very influential in India and China, they are not completely adopted in India, East Asia and Southeast Asia, which really make it harder to know if half of the world really follow Buddhism. Meanwhile Abrahamic religion pretty much dominate Western Eurasia, not only in spirituality, but also culture.

Also for this thread, just ignore the way the Abrahamic religion expand even if it is spread with violence or sold out with money and education, the resulting influence is what would be observed. Right now the number of Christian in China is increasing, who force those people to convert to Christianity?

Anyway it is irrelevant for this discussion, influence is influence whether it is with violence or peaceful means.
 
Likes: Edratman
Apr 2019
294
India
#4
Buddha is certainly one of the most influential religious figure.

I would say he is very similar to Jesus, both go contrary to their contemporary religion, both of their religion spread through missionary work and both their religion end up with more follower from culture outside their origin. Maybe it is because of the universalism in both of their religion?

However, while Buddhism is once very influential in India and China, they are not completely adopted in India, East Asia and Southeast Asia, which really make it harder to know if half of the world really follow Buddhism. Meanwhile Abrahamic religion pretty much dominate Western Eurasia, not only in spirituality, but also culture.

Also for this thread, just ignore the way the Abrahamic religion expand even if it is spread with violence or sold out with money and education, the resulting influence is what would be observed. Right now the number of Christian in China is increasing, who force those people to convert to Christianity?

Anyway it is irrelevant for this discussion, influence is influence whether it is with violence or peaceful means.
I think there are only a few similiarities between Christianity and Buddhism. But Jesus's teachings mirror many of Buddha's teachings.
Christianity is a strict monotheistic tradition while Buddha was an agnostic.
The reason why they were not that popular in their respective native cultures is also different. Popularity of a religion depends upon it's patrons. Jesus's historicity has not been established but his patrons belonged to different culture than him. On the other hand Buddha was not the first one to go contrary to the established beliefs in his native country. Infact going against the norms was quiet popular and differences were tolerated if not appreciated. On top of that Buddha built his ideas upon pre-existing ideas of his time so his followers faced tough competition from other sects. Buddhism got royal patronage in India for many centuries and flourished but the patronage was also available for other sects.
All in all it was tougher for Buddhism.
As I've said earlier that Christianity was used as a political and social tool so it's natural that it has transformed the host cultures in every possible way. On the other hand Buddhism was not hostile to outward influences.
 

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
3,188
Australia
#6
Aside from Abraham being fiction - a story , all the religions you cited came out of Zoroastrianism. Judaism was mostly developed during 'the captivity', imported home , hid some scrolls in a cave and then 'rediscovered' them - badun-tssshhh .

I even heard a rabbi admit that.
 
Likes: Futurist
Mar 2019
1,477
KL
#7
Abrahamic religions are probably much later phenomenon than indic religions, buddhism was propagated as early as ashokan periods, in ashoka period, buddhism reached afghanistan and southern india, and probably buddhist monks were already travelling to central asia and SEA. again, buddhism reached afghanistan because of the mauryans in the first place/conquest.

the success of abrahamic religion depends on geo political situation created by a, colonialism by western europeans who were christians and b, arabs, who just swept through entire persian and byzantine empires and completely decimated the two older regional powers, and next came the wave of the turks who completely descimated buddhism and hinduism from the region.

so these two waves are important during medieval and late medieval period in order to understand the propagation of abrahamic religion, these happened long after probably more than a thousand years after spread of buddhism.

buddhism lost to islam in indonesia and malaysia, lost to islam in central asia etc.

buddhism was probably also the first to develop monastic culture, there existed gurukula culture and it was buddhist onastic culture which really propagated buddhism and institutionalized the religion on a much grander scale.

the muslim arabs used the same tools which indians used prior, trade and spread of indic religion.

both of these religions also spread because kings accepting their religions just as other kings did during indian periods which also helped propagating the religion.

regards
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,745
SoCal
#8
Aside from Abraham being fiction - a story , all the religions you cited came out of Zoroastrianism. Judaism was mostly developed during 'the captivity', imported home , hid some scrolls in a cave and then 'rediscovered' them - badun-tssshhh .

I even heard a rabbi admit that.
Yeah, did Abraham actually exist?
 
Likes: Edratman
Aug 2014
1,249
pakistan
#9
large or have a long history compared to their surrounding culture, manage to make half of Eurasia follow their religion
and much of Africa. It is estimated that Muslims and Christians form 85% population of Africa.

In my opinion, Abrahamic religions are so successful and widespread because it originated in Middle east, which is center of ancient world.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,745
SoCal
#10
and much of Africa. It is estimated that Muslims and Christians form 85% population of Africa.

In my opinion, Abrahamic religions are so successful and widespread because it originated in Middle east, which is center of ancient world.
The success of Christianity in Africa in relatively recent, no? I mean, Ethiopia has an ancient Christian community, but most of the Africans who are Christians had their ancestors converted to Christianity sometime during the last several centuries, no?
 
Likes: Azad67

Similar History Discussions