The Most Dangerous Individual To Ever Live

The purpose of this piece is expressed in the title. As a follower of history, I have been wondering, 'Who is the most dangerous individual to ever live?'
Naturally, we think of the most destestable characters that may have lived around our times. Some may cite Hitler, or Stalin, or Pol Pot. Others may cite Amin, or Pinochet, or various war criminals, all of whom caused great damage in our lifetimes.
But to ask who the most dangerous person to ever live, well that is quite different. More often then not, it will me the masterminds behind, those who set in writing their various ideas on certain issues. It is only then that men like Hitler (or others) may take these ideas and either use them once in power, or twist them to suit his needs.
How I want this topic to go is like this:
I wish for all respondents to have a number one choice quite clearly labelled, and a runner up. Because I am the originator of this topic, I will start.
The most dangerous man to ever live:
1. Fredrich Neitczhe
2. Karl MarxWhat does this have to do with evolution. Well I sence that some may put Darwin on, due to the various negative implications of his theory. Even my first choice, Neitchze; One can argue that he relied on his concept of a super race, due to Herbert Spencer's 'survival of the fittest.'Apostle

Apostle,As a 'follower of history,' what would you say if someone put Jesus and the Apostle Paul at the top of his list, due to the way that their words have been used to justify war, genocide, and slavery through the ages?regards,
Esteban Hambre

Mr Hambre,
I would question the honesty of certain people if they did not identify those individuals as the most dangerous people who ever lived. Having said that, please understand that I would disagree with such a position, just as many would disagree with an individual who identified Darwin as the most dangerous man.
Who are your two picks?

Apostle,Surely we already know the answer; Genghis Khan. Made Hitler look like a boy scout, he tried to sweep China clean of Chinese.Mark

My votes:1. Mark Burnett: Producer of the TV show Survivor. He is to blame for all of the reality tv slop that we are forced to watch and discuss around the water cooler. I wonder if Satan is worried that Mr. Burnett has his eyes on ruliing Hades. Imagine voting off people in Hades into heaven where they have to listen to mormon missionaries for eternity. The winner gets 1 billion dollars and a chance to pose nude in National Geographic. No offense to Mormons BTW, just stop knocking on my door 2 o'clock in the afternoon on Saturdays and I will be happy.2. Rush Limbaugh: Somehow he turned blowhard rhetoric into a conservative mainstay (at least in America). I don't know if conservatives were as loud and annoying in the past, but it can't possibly get any worse than it is now. I'm surprised the Republicans aren't demanding that NASCAR races run clockwise so they aren't turning to the left so often. Those darn liberal race car drivers, they probably want gay marriages too.Honorable mention:Jerry Falwell: His oft ill thought out opinions give many christians a bad name. He seems to have compressed "compassion for non-christians" into a four letter word. I know from experience that his brand of bible-thumping is not the norm. We can all hope that his heart is in the right place, because his mouth sure isn't anywhere close.PS: sorry for the humor, but I am getting a little tired of the athiest/christian atrocities. People need to realize that evil is a human fault caused by a hunger for power which will grasp onto any ideology that facilitates their rise within that society.

Well, how about Eve? Had she not listened to the serpent, hopefully Adam wouldn't have eaten with her. And we don't know if she told Adam where she got the fruit. At any rate had they kept their hands off the tree, there'd be nobody hurt ever.Seriously, I guess I'd have to say both the prophets/messiah Jesus and Mohammed was/are responsible for inciting more bloodshed than any other persons and I don't believe I'm insulting or offending my lord and saviour, Jesus for saying so.1. Jesus, the Prince of Peace once said that he came not to bring peace, but a sword. Then he went on to explain that his gospel would be a catalyst to divide family members and others because of it being exclusive and cause of offence. He became the first victim and warned/prophesied that his followers would be hated by the world because of his exclusive gospel.2. Jesus is called the Prince of Peace because
a. Neither he nor his true desciples and converts were to kill or harm anyone physically because of what they believed or did. That is not to say they were not allowed to protect themselves, for he did tell his desciples before he died that it was ok to carry a sword. This was to protect from robbers and wild beasts, I would assume, for they traveled much on beast of burden or on foot.
b. The Biblical prophecies declare that the messiah would usher in a millenium of peace in which the "swords would be turned into plowsheres."3. Mohammed, the other inciter of bloodshed, on the other hand personally oversaw the shedding of blood for the propagation of his religion in order that Islam would become the exclusive religion at Mecca and eventually worldwide. His very close relatives and desciples all were very brutal and forced those who wanted out of Islam to remain or die. Then, of course the world is getting a look at fundamentalistic Islam via Jihad and terror as taught in the Quran, the Sunnas and the Hadiths.

You make my point, LM, loud and clear. Falwell and his kind, preach the offensive gospel of Jesus, whose gospel causes offense. You depict the hatred that Jesus spoke of for Christians and Christianity, even the Falwell kind which preaches no violence at all, which helps the needy, unwed mothers and the poor, and which preaches the gospel of peace. You hate Christianity for what it teaches, like don't bed down other than one's own wife, honor and love the god, Jehovah, the god of those awful Ten Commandments, and so forth. When people who hate Christians find themselves where there's no protecting Constitution, they kill, kill, kill those hated Christians as did the communists of last century. Thus, Jesus came to bring a sword via his gospel of peace.

1. Me.
2. You.
Anything that anyone does can be dangerous, including god him/herself regardless if you believe in him/her.

quote:

---

You make my point, LM, loud and clear. Falwell and his kind, preach the offensive gospel of Jesus, whose gospel causes offense. You depict the hatred that Jesus spoke of for Christians and Christianity, even the Falwell kind which preaches no violence at all, which helps the needy, unwed mothers and the poor, and which preaches the gospel of peace.

---

You notice that I said "compassion for non-christians", which he sometimes has little of. Do remember something about him saying that 9/11 was because of gays, etc. Not the kind of tripe that I normally associate with the loving christians that I know. He does give christians a bad name amongst non-christians, which is too bad.

1. Which is better, LM, the kisses of an enemy, or the wounds of a friend? Compassion for non-Christians means warning them of the consequences of their sin and showing them how to avoid those disastrous consequences. At least that is compassionate in the eyes of a devout Christian. Non-compassion would be to say nothing and leave the "lost" be "lost" wouldn't it?2. Falwell had the judgement of Sodom and Gomorrah as well as the scriptures in mind when he made his comments concerning 9/11. He believes that the soverign god, Jehovah does not wink at open rebellion to the principle of family that he has instituted for his intelligent creature, man to observe. Nations who forget him the true god, suffer the consequences and that likely is taking the hedge of protection which he allows for good nations away. Thus, the first enemy attack directly on our own free soil turf on 9/11. The blessings we've enjoyed from God are diminishing and will soon be gone if we continue the slippery slide morally that we're on. Falwell should never have appologized about his statement but explained his reason for stating it. Of course if he had wanted to do that, the media would not likely have covered it.

And as with Jesus it may bring the danger to one's own as well as one's own self, and like the Baptist Christian missionaries who were shot dead in Iraq the other day by Islamics, knowing full well they couldn't even preach their gospel unless asked, they just wanted to help out and were working on the water supply system for the Iraqis, I understand.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

I'm going to jump in here early to nip this in the bud. The topic of this thread is "The Most Dangerous Individual To Ever Live". I'm not sure of his reasoning behind the OP, but it is clearly stated as an historic opinion thread.Buz, lately, it seems that every thread you participate in becomes a hate mongering rant against Islam. Confine it to your thread, already started about this opinion... http://EvC Forum: Fundamental Biblical Christianity and Fundamental Islam Fundamentally 180% OppositesThis thread with the same feel has about 15 or so posts left on it also... http://EvC Forum: History's Greatest Holocaust Via Atheistic Ideology

---

AdminAsgara
Queen of the Universe

Yeah but whoop, according to you they're going to heaven. You can believe in the situation in Iraq, you can believe in Christianity, or you can believe in Islam. Whichever, people still died. Still, danger doesn't constitute death. Christians don't fear death do they? Getting shot is painless, from what I've heard from friends I have in the army. The Shinto Buddhist soldiers from Japan 'just wanted to help out' yet Christians condemn them to hell for being 'non-believers'. My friends from Thailand, who are Theravada Buddhists were waiting for anyone who wanted enlightenment from the killing. No-one came because the Iraqis were mainly Islamic. Warzones are not the place to brainwash people. True missionaries know the risks they undertake. Christians will die for their religion. As will the followers of Islam. You pays your money and yous make you're choice.

With all due respect, Asgara, I see no one refuting my point that both of these individuals have been the reason for much bloodshed for the reasons I've given. Why are you trying to deprive me of this valid point. If and when I say false things about Islam, that's one thing, but if what I post is true, that's quite another. Where is my point here off topic?Btw, Asgara, are you going to now go after all the Christian bashers here on EvC who incessantly rant hate towards Christianity, some of which just isn't so? Why are you giving Islam a free ride? Why don't you refute the points I've made and then go after me?

Asgara, can you name any one person in history who has been the reason for more bloodshed, hate, war and violence/danger than these two individuals, subjects of my point?