Total Posts:54|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Pros/Cons of religious figureheads

Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 3:22:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Can we have a non-biased, non-sarcastic list of pros and cons of the various religious leaders? It'd be quite interesting to see what people think of them as having done, good or bad.

1. Jesus
2. Buddha
3. Muhammad

These seem to be the most contentious :) You can add other people too if you want.
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 3:31:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 3:22:34 PM, Indophile wrote:
2. Buddha
3. Muhammad
How many people here know much about them? I do not blame you, but asking DDO'ers to describe them is rubbish, especially asking about a description of the latter.

My position on the beloved Prophet (peace be upon him) is clear, but as for Buddha, it would have been nice if some of his sayings were more preserved. That is, if he could have done something more at preserving them. I don't think he was as most people think today.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 3:37:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 3:31:00 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 3/7/2011 3:22:34 PM, Indophile wrote:
2. Buddha
3. Muhammad
How many people here know much about them? I do not blame you, but asking DDO'ers to describe them is rubbish, especially asking about a description of the latter.

My position on the beloved Prophet (peace be upon him) is clear, but as for Buddha, it would have been nice if some of his sayings were more preserved. That is, if he could have done something more at preserving them. I don't think he was as most people think today.

They need not describe them all. Just the ones they know.

Incidentally, preserving the teachings, kind of presupposes an unchanging society. Don't you feel that new problems need new solutions? Preservation works best for historical purposes, and not if used for strict following.

Also, if you don't think he was as most people think today, how do you think he was then?
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 3:41:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 3:37:24 PM, Indophile wrote:
They need not describe them all. Just the ones they know.
Yes, but it's not hard to predict what they will write as something they think they know.

Incidentally, preserving the teachings, kind of presupposes an unchanging society. Don't you feel that new problems need new solutions? Preservation works best for historical purposes, and not if used for strict following.
Preservation of some teachings, i.e., the core ones, is great, but others are flexible and can be changed accordingly to how a society needs them.

Also, if you don't think he was as most people think today, how do you think he was then?
I do no have much evidence of this, but what his sayings indicate is that he was a man of high morals, possibly a theist, and not as arrogant as he might seem to be according to some Buddhist scriptures. I think he was humble. But, his original teachings are in vain, and there are only fragments of them today.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 3:46:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 3:22:34 PM, Indophile wrote:
Can we have a non-biased, non-sarcastic list of pros and cons of the various religious leaders? It'd be quite interesting to see what people think of them as having done, good or bad.

1. Jesus

It would be good if we could have some of his direct teachings, the fact that we do not must be worrying for Christians. It is very unlikely he was anything remotely similar to what Christians protray him as.

2. Buddha

Fairly indifferent.

3. Muhammad

A blood soaked terrorist.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 3:53:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Mirza, pretty much the only people who don't think Muhammad was a warlord/terrorist/conquerer are muslims since tbh, there isn't really too many positive things that could be said about him.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 3:56:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 3:53:14 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Mirza, pretty much the only people who don't think Muhammad was a warlord/terrorist/conquerer are muslims since tbh, there isn't really too many positive things that could be said about him.
I can give you billions of readings on non-Muslims writing about him. The only people who say that he was a warlord of injustice are the unlettered ones who should be ashamed of themselves. They can't put up to a debate, and if they do, we will see how far they will go. No wise historian ever disputes that the beloved Prophet never waged war for no reason. In fact, I would like to see one person even from this site just describe 1/10 of his life. Nobody will do it.

"I wanted to know the best of one who holds today's undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of humankind (...) I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle" - Ghandi
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:00:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 3:49:48 PM, Mirza wrote:
As you can see, my prediction was right. Let us see if the above joke above wants to be put in a formal debate.

Yes, yes I do. As you know.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:01:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 4:00:26 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/7/2011 3:49:48 PM, Mirza wrote:
As you can see, my prediction was right. Let us see if the above joke above wants to be put in a formal debate.

Yes, yes I do. As you know.
Sure, please challenge me to a debate on that.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:04:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 3:56:44 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 3/7/2011 3:53:14 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Mirza, pretty much the only people who don't think Muhammad was a warlord/terrorist/conquerer are muslims since tbh, there isn't really too many positive things that could be said about him.
I can give you billions of readings on non-Muslims writing about him. The only people who say that he was a warlord of injustice are the unlettered ones who should be ashamed of themselves. They can't put up to a debate, and if they do, we will see how far they will go. No wise historian ever disputes that the beloved Prophet never waged war for no reason.

And neither do I. He had plenty of good reasons. He wanted land, wealth, wives, slaves and power.

In fact, I would like to see one person even from this site just describe 1/10 of his life. Nobody will do it.

No, you want someone to read a single Islamic source on his life and parrot back the most blinkerdly sympathetic interpretation of it.

"I wanted to know the best of one who holds today's undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of humankind (...) I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle" - Ghandi

Ghandi was a fvcking prat.

But in any case I am sorry I insulted your prophet. I fully believe what I said, but none the less I apoligise for the offense it caused.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:05:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 3:46:48 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/7/2011 3:22:34 PM, Indophile wrote:
Can we have a non-biased, non-sarcastic list of pros and cons of the various religious leaders? It'd be quite interesting to see what people think of them as having done, good or bad.

1. Jesus

It would be good if we could have some of his direct teachings, the fact that we do not must be worrying for Christians. It is very unlikely he was anything remotely similar to what Christians protray him as.
They don't seem much worried though! And how do you think he was, if not like he is portrayed as?

2. Buddha

Fairly indifferent.
Hmm. Is it because of the non-intrusive nature of his teachings?

3. Muhammad

A blood soaked terrorist.
That is a con for sure! No pros?
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:05:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 4:01:05 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 3/7/2011 4:00:26 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/7/2011 3:49:48 PM, Mirza wrote:
As you can see, my prediction was right. Let us see if the above joke above wants to be put in a formal debate.

Yes, yes I do. As you know.
Sure, please challenge me to a debate on that.

I've been waiting for a challenge from you for months. In any case it can wait till after the tournament.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:07:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 4:04:52 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
And neither do I. He had plenty of good reasons. He wanted land, wealth, wives, slaves and power.
Sure, and I want a debate on that.

No, you want someone to read a single Islamic source on his life and parrot back the most blinkerdly sympathetic interpretation of it.
Sure, I can turn into a (or many) non-Islamic source(s) if you wish. Debate.

Ghandi was a fvcking prat.
OK, but I did not praise Ghandi, thank you.

But in any case I am sorry I insulted your prophet. I fully believe what I said, but none the less I apoligise for the offense it caused.
Sure, and if I call you the worst names and apologize, then that is it? Maybe you should ask about him before drawing conclusions?
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:08:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 4:04:52 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/7/2011 3:56:44 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 3/7/2011 3:53:14 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Mirza, pretty much the only people who don't think Muhammad was a warlord/terrorist/conquerer are muslims since tbh, there isn't really too many positive things that could be said about him.
I can give you billions of readings on non-Muslims writing about him. The only people who say that he was a warlord of injustice are the unlettered ones who should be ashamed of themselves. They can't put up to a debate, and if they do, we will see how far they will go. No wise historian ever disputes that the beloved Prophet never waged war for no reason.

And neither do I. He had plenty of good reasons. He wanted land, wealth, wives, slaves and power.

In fact, I would like to see one person even from this site just describe 1/10 of his life. Nobody will do it.

No, you want someone to read a single Islamic source on his life and parrot back the most blinkerdly sympathetic interpretation of it.

"I wanted to know the best of one who holds today's undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of humankind (...) I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle" - Ghandi

Ghandi was a fvcking prat.

But in any case I am sorry I insulted your prophet. I fully believe what I said, but none the less I apoligise for the offense it caused.

Since you are insulting him, it's okay for you. But Mirza has no excuses to misspell the name as he is citing him favorably.

It's GANDHI, not Ghandi.....Almost half the world doesn't seem to know the correct spelling of that name!!
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:09:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 4:05:57 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/7/2011 4:01:05 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 3/7/2011 4:00:26 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/7/2011 3:49:48 PM, Mirza wrote:
As you can see, my prediction was right. Let us see if the above joke above wants to be put in a formal debate.

Yes, yes I do. As you know.
Sure, please challenge me to a debate on that.

I've been waiting for a challenge from you for months. In any case it can wait till after the tournament.
1. That has not been about the beloved Prophet.
2. That was not for months.
3. I waited for you to give a detailed explanation about this exact topic for longer than you waited for my debate challenge about something else (which I debated with someone else, and same sort of debates are later on my plans).

Wait for however long you want. I am not going to be here for too much long, so either bring the question up in a thread I will create soon, or debate earlier.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:11:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
@ C_N

You got my point, further discussion on PM if you wish, but I am not ranting more here.

@ Indophile

You got my short viewpoints, and I told you what would happen.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:12:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 4:07:27 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 3/7/2011 4:04:52 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
And neither do I. He had plenty of good reasons. He wanted land, wealth, wives, slaves and power.
Sure, and I want a debate on that.

Sure, it can wait till after the tournament.


No, you want someone to read a single Islamic source on his life and parrot back the most blinkerdly sympathetic interpretation of it.
Sure, I can turn into a (or many) non-Islamic source(s) if you wish. Debate.

No, you will spend the entire time whining that the sources used are biased.


Ghandi was a fvcking prat.
OK, but I did not praise Ghandi, thank you.

But in any case I am sorry I insulted your prophet. I fully believe what I said, but none the less I apoligise for the offense it caused.
Sure, and if I call you the worst names and apologize, then that is it? Maybe you should ask about him before drawing conclusions?

Why would I ask you about Muhammed? Why wouldn't I just turn to actual history. I am not apoligising because I believe myself to be wrong, I am apoligising that I insulted your psychological crutch.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:20:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
1. Jesus

Pro: Could perform a few miracles. Had a decent ethical system. Liked to drink alcohol. Immortal.

Con: Commanded worship. Believed he could redeem sins by dying.

2. Buddha

Pro: Wields Transcendental Intelligence, advanced cognitive abilities, and super-knowledge. He was a mere human being, but with his super-cognition he was more powerful than all the devas and even God, the omnipotent creator himself.

He could teleport anywhere in the entire Multiverse.

He could disappear from even the all-seeing Brahma using void-meditation.

He wielded intellectual superiority and influence over the extraterrestrials from 50,000 worlds.

Con: None

3. Muhammad

Pro: His teachings seek to be fairly clear and consistent and nicely wrapped up into one book. Possessed strength, courage, and strategical ability.

Con: He's lesser than the other two having no notable abilities. His teachings are violent and so is he.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:24:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
@indophile

How are the Buddha's teachings unintrusive? Not sure what you mean by that?
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:28:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 4:24:01 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
@indophile

How are the Buddha's teachings unintrusive? Not sure what you mean by that?

In that they tend to be bent more towards inner spiritual enlightenment and not worried that much about the rest of the world :)

Or am I wrong there?
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 4:39:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 4:28:58 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 3/7/2011 4:24:01 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
@indophile

How are the Buddha's teachings unintrusive? Not sure what you mean by that?

In that they tend to be bent more towards inner spiritual enlightenment and not worried that much about the rest of the world :)

Or am I wrong there?

You'd be surprised, lol.

the Buddha: "Preach it, make it known, establish it, open it, minutely explain it, and make it clear-until they, when others start vain doctrines, shall be able to vanquish and refute them, and so to spread the wonderworking truth abroad. I shall not die until the pure religion of truth shall have become successful, prosperous, widespread, and popular in all its full extent-until, in a word, it shall have been well proclaimed among men!" [Mahaparinibanna Sutta]
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Jarjar3000
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 5:06:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Jesus: Changed the world with His message.

Buddha: Don't really know much about him, Ignorant.

Muhammad: A Sinner, just like everyone else.
Ohh Lord How you love me, you change my heart and soul, renewing my mind into something I could never imagine, You make me strong when I am weak, you encourage me when I'm despaired, You stick by me when everyone deserts me, You are my Lord You are my God.

Charles: I'm not a Christian because I'm afraid of hell, I'm a Christian because I love Jesus.

Geolaureate: The Pope
He looks like a Sith lord, I don't trust him.

Charles0103: Just like my God, my faith won't change.
Charles0103
Posts: 523
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2011 5:38:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 3:22:34 PM, Indophile wrote:
Can we have a non-biased, non-sarcastic list of pros and cons of the various religious leaders? It'd be quite interesting to see what people think of them as having done, good or bad.

1. Jesus

Pros: A lot, but I'll keep it short. He transformed the world with his teachings of unconditional love, died for our sins, and forgave the men that killed Him. And He wanted us to have a relationship with Him and His father. And not to mention He promised us a place in heaven if we follow Him.

Cons: None.

2. Buddha

Pros: His teachings are sincere and are good advice and all. I mean, he teaches about peace and balance of the universe and all which I guess is all nice and good.

Cons: The Buddhism religion contradicts Christianity and Jesus's teachings with the whole reincarnation and no God thing.

3. Muhammad

Pros: I guess he had some good teachings and all.

Cons: He ran around killing people and his followers followed his example.

Moses:

Pros: Delivered the Israelites outta Egypt. Great man of God

Cons: Disobeyed God a couple times, so he wasn't able to go to the promised land.


These seem to be the most contentious :) You can add other people too if you want.
"And so I tell you, keep on asking, and you will receive what you ask for. Keep on seeking, and you will find. Keep on knocking, and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives. Everyone who seeks, finds. And to everyone who knocks, the door will be opened." Jesus in Luke 11:9-10
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2011 5:03:02 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 3:22:34 PM, Indophile wrote:
Can we have a non-biased, non-sarcastic list of pros and cons of the various religious leaders? It'd be quite interesting to see what people think of them as having done, good or bad.

1. Jesus
TRUE, ONLY begotten Son of the Living God..
2. Buddha
Technically a philosopher but FALSE anyway..
3. Muhammad
FALSE prophet, thrice proved deceiver and blood thirsty tyrant to boot..

These seem to be the most contentious :) You can add other people too if you want.
The Cross.. the Cross.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2011 5:05:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/8/2011 5:03:02 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 3/7/2011 3:22:34 PM, Indophile wrote:
Can we have a non-biased, non-sarcastic list of pros and cons of the various religious leaders? It'd be quite interesting to see what people think of them as having done, good or bad.

1. Jesus
TRUE, ONLY begotten Son of the Living God..
2. Buddha
Technically a philosopher but FALSE anyway..
3. Muhammad
FALSE prophet, thrice proved deceiver and blood thirsty tyrant to boot..

These seem to be the most contentious :) You can add other people too if you want.

*ahem*
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2011 5:05:57 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/7/2011 3:22:34 PM, Indophile wrote:
Can we have a non-biased, non-sarcastic list of pros and cons of the various religious leaders? It'd be quite interesting to see what people think of them as having done, good or bad.

1. Jesus
2. Buddha
3. Muhammad
4. Ignatious Creek

These seem to be the most contentious :) You can add other people too if you want.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2011 5:07:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/8/2011 5:05:23 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 3/8/2011 5:03:02 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 3/7/2011 3:22:34 PM, Indophile wrote:
Can we have a non-biased, non-sarcastic list of pros and cons of the various religious leaders? It'd be quite interesting to see what people think of them as having done, good or bad.

1. Jesus
TRUE, ONLY begotten Son of the Living God..
2. Buddha
Technically a philosopher but FALSE anyway..
3. Muhammad
FALSE prophet, thrice proved deceiver and blood thirsty tyrant to boot..

These seem to be the most contentious :) You can add other people too if you want.

*ahem*

Glass of water, Thaddeus?
The Cross.. the Cross.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/8/2011 5:22:05 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/8/2011 5:07:53 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 3/8/2011 5:05:23 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 3/8/2011 5:03:02 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 3/7/2011 3:22:34 PM, Indophile wrote:
Can we have a non-biased, non-sarcastic list of pros and cons of the various religious leaders? It'd be quite interesting to see what people think of them as having done, good or bad.

1. Jesus
TRUE, ONLY begotten Son of the Living God..
2. Buddha
Technically a philosopher but FALSE anyway..
3. Muhammad
FALSE prophet, thrice proved deceiver and blood thirsty tyrant to boot..

These seem to be the most contentious :) You can add other people too if you want.

*ahem*

Glass of water, Thaddeus?

Thanks. I needed that.