Only because he is the the Quran. Otherwise it's be Muhammad by a landslide.
Is your question historically important or famous? Big difference.
There are more Christians than there are Muslims in this world, bruh.
Only because he is the the Quran. Otherwise it's be Muhammad by a landslide.
Is your question historically important or famous? Big difference.
Which Muhammad we talking about that is not real?Jesus and Muhammed and fucking Moses were not real mang.
Next you'll be telling me Vishnu and fucking Ra are real too
Jesus was real, he was in Roman official document as some cult leader, some people is drunk when they said he is fake. Mohammed existence was not even a doubt, dude.
I've found both your posts funny.I was trying to have the most ignorant post in this thread but I see that I have my work cut out for me.
AreYouForReal.jpgIs that it? I'm sure a lot of people were called Jesus back then. You can't just thread that needle.
Da fuq Muhammed is real too.
Is Vishnu and that elephant guy real too? There might be some ancient documents talking about vishnu from back then.
The only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and that, between one and three years later, he was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate
It's Jesus. An argument for anyone else is like discussing which star is brightest while the sun is up (No pun intended). He's penetrated every culture, there are governments and moral structures that rest on his ideas. We count years by him. People who don't even think he existed use his name 20 times a day as an exclamation and give each other presents on his birthday. No contest.
This is a very bad post.Jesus and Muhammed were actually real people? I thought they were characters in the bible, not actually real people.
If this was most famous literary works Bible etc.
It's like someone giving Batman as an answer.
I agree, western figures area probably known in a lot more countires, because western culture has a homogeneous core, especially when we talk about something like the roman empire. However, even though asian cultures don't share as many important figures, the ones they do might be known to a lot more people due to the huge amount of people who live in the region. I'm not saying Mao is more famous than jesus, but that he's probably more famous than a lot of other people we may think. For instance I find it somewhat hard to believe that he's not famous in India, it's kind of hard not to learn about the man who governed your neighbouring country for more than 30 years.Yeah but "Asia" is a pretty heterogeneous place. Sure Mao's a big deal in China. But is he in India? "Western" figures have the advantage of appearing or getting referenced in Western media, which gets exported further than, say, Malaysian media does.
He is probably one of the best contenders for the title, but saying he is the most famous because of language bound expressions or how you count the years are not the best reasons. In the western world we may say we are in 2017 AD, but in some eastern languages it's 2017 western time or something like that, they don't relate the year to jesus but to our calendar itself. And it's the same for christmas, non-christian countries may celebrate christmas, but that doesn't mean they know a thing about jesus, they just know about a western tradition of exchanging gifts in a specific date in december.It's Jesus. An argument for anyone else is like discussing which star is brightest while the sun is up (No pun intended). He's penetrated every culture, there are governments and moral structures that rest on his ideas. We count years by him. People who don't even think he existed use his name 20 times a day as an exclamation and give each other presents on his birthday. No contest.
I think buddha is also a good contender, even though the number of buddhist practicioners is not even close to christians or muslims. Buddha is known to a lot of people in China, Japan and India even if they practice other religions. Also, if I'm not mistaken there even used to be a buddhist calendar used by countries in southeast asia.Uhh actually how about Buddha, known by majority of East and Southeast Asia, including 1st and 2nd most populous countries
Jesus. It's not even close, not even if you count the entire world including the East.
On Hitler, how relevant was WWII in the Eastern world? Do Chinese and Indians and Southeast Asians care that much about it aside from what involved Japan? Maybe most educated people in the East are still aware of what happened in Europe, but it's probably not studied like it is in the West. With Jesus on the other hand, there are plenty of Christians in the Eastern world, and any Muslim who has read the Quran is aware of Jesus.
I'm not saying Mao is more famous than jesus, but that he's probably more famous than a lot of other people we may think. For instance I find it somewhat hard to believe that he's not famous in India, it's kind of hard not to learn about the man who governed your neighbouring country for more than 30 years.
Yay another person said it. Though he only applies if you dont count Jesus, Muhammond or Buddha. Outside of those major religious figures Genghis Khan was a man known and feared in East Asia,India,Middle East, Russia and his name traveled all the way to Western Europe. He established one of the largest empires on the planet and his horde quite possible caused the Black Death to move into europe which was one of the starting points of the Rennaisance.Genghis Khan
When people say buddha they are referring to Siddhartha as opposed to other buddhas like Amida.Just to be clear, when y'all are saying "Buddha" you mean the OG buddha, right? Gautama Buddha? I only ask because, for the longest time, I wasn't exposed to Buddhism and my idea of who "Buddha" was was way off base. It took an embarrassingly long time before I discovered that there was more than one Buddha, and that the Buddha I always pictured wasn't the original.
I don't know if my anecdote ties in to the discussion very well, or if my experience is atypical, but it may be a point of confusion for westerners that there are multiple buddhas and the most famous buddha is referred to by title instead of his name.
Jesus. It's not even close, not even if you count the entire world including the East.
On Hitler, how relevant was WWII in the Eastern world? Do Chinese and Indians and Southeast Asians care that much about it aside from what involved Japan? Maybe most educated people in the East are still aware of what happened in Europe, but it's probably not studied like it is in the West. With Jesus on the other hand, there are plenty of Christians in the Eastern world, and any Muslim who has read the Quran is aware of Jesus.
Guys. 1 is Jesus and 2 is Muhammad. Like flat out. There's not even room to debate it really.
People mentioning stuff like Hitler, yeah he's well known and certainly up there but he doesn't touch Jesus or Muhammad. You can go to every continent on Earth and vast swaths of people know exactly who both of them are. From children to the elderly.
Jesus beats out Muhammad because he is a figure in both Christianity and Islam so both are familiar with him.
Reasonable, but who would you pick if you had to choose right now?I agree, western figures area probably known in a lot more countires, because western culture has a homogeneous core, especially when we talk about something like the roman empire. However, even though asian cultures don't share as many important figures, the ones they do might be known to a lot more people due to the huge amount of people who live in the region. I'm not saying Mao is more famous than jesus, but that he's probably more famous than a lot of other people we may think. For instance I find it somewhat hard to believe that he's not famous in India, it's kind of hard not to learn about the man who governed your neighbouring country for more than 30 years.
He is probably one of the best contenders for the title, but saying he is the most famous because of language bound expressions or how you count the years are not the best reasons. In the western world we may say we are in 2017 AD, but in some eastern languages it's 2017 western time or something like that, they don't relate the year to jesus but to our calendar itself. And it's the same for christmas, non-christian countries may celebrate christmas, but that doesn't mean they know a thing about jesus, they just know about a western tradition of exchanging gifts in a specific date in december.
I think buddha is also a good contender, even though the number of buddhist practicioners is not even close to christians or muslims. Buddha is known to a lot of people in China, Japan and India even if they practice other religions. Also, if I'm not mistaken there even used to be a buddhist calendar used by countries in southeast asia.
Buddha might be as big.
Indeed, illiteracy and how far one can get in their own education influence a lot in this discussion, I didn't consider that before. Unfortunately that doesn't apply only to asian countries, latin america and african countries also have lots of problems regarding education. Here in Brazil the illiteracy rate is not as high as what you have mentioned for india, I believe our illiteracy rate is around 9%, but that refers only to illiteracy, if you consider functional illiteracy it gets a lot worse and it goes up to 27%. Considering that, historical figures tend to be a lot less known and at the same time christian figures have an advantage, as most people from rural areas tend to be more religious around here.It's pretty easy to not know about Mao if you're a subsistence dirt farmer without a first grade education tho. This starts to get uncomfortable but something like 30% of Indians are illiterate. Pakistan and Bangladesh are significantly worse. I don't wanna say those people don't "count" for purposes of this discussion, but I have no intuition for what their cultural literacy would be.
When people say buddha they are referring to Siddhartha as opposed to other buddhas like Amida.
Michael Jackson if we talking real people. Otherwise Jesus.
I think that depends on who is doing the talking.
Like, why? Is it because it is offensive to your no-religion! rules of life to acknowledge his existence, even if it's only purely academical?
I think the character Jesus was probably based off of a real guy, but I think most of the stories about him are just things that were made up.
Muhammad existed for sure.
The real answer is Ronald McDonald. McDonald's brand is so strong worldwide and there are lots of people who don't care about religion but everybody gotta eat..
So who is the most famous wrestler in human history?
Bruno Sammartino, Ric Flair, Hulk Hogan, Steve Austin, John Cena or Roman Reigns?
Dwayne doesn't count.
I think one thing that throws that off a bit, is that a lot of people aren't actually aware of who Ronald McDonald is. Most people that know the brand couldn't tell you anything whatsoever about the man and don't probably know his first name even.
The brand McDonald's is huge. The person McDonald himself? Not at all really
Tell me, what age is it? and since which event do we count?
There is your answer.
So who is the most famous wrestler in human history?
Bruno Sammartino, Ric Flair, Hulk Hogan, Steve Austin, John Cena or Roman Reigns?
Dwayne doesn't count.
Taking Brakke's argument into account and my lack of knowledge about the culture in many asian countries and their rural areas, I would pick jesus as the safest bet. I imagine the rest of latin america is somewhat like Brazil when it comes to rural areas, so even if people didn't get too far in school most of them probably know about Jesus, Mary and the saints because of the strong catholicism in our culture. On the other hand I'm not so sure if, for instance, rural areas in India would all know about buddhism or if they would be an hinduism only kind of place depending on the region.Reasonable, but who would you pick if you had to choose right now?