Cults of Personality

Christmas morning I came across a preacher on TV trying to make the point that "Jesus Christ was the single most important person in all of history." He used as his first argument in support of this the fact that our calendar is separated BC and AD. I thought, "Oh, poor argument. That can easily be dismissed as an arbitrary imposition by a ruler with power to impose."

Even the argument that a great church with an historical impact on western civilization is, I think, a poor argument for the thesis that Jesus was the most important person in all of history. First, other major religions based on the cult of personality (Budhha, Islam) can make the claim that in their spheres of the world they had comparable impact. Second, it could easily be argued that the Catholic church that ruled over western civilization bore little resemblence to Jesus himself.

All this got me thinking. One thread of thought was whether it's possible to argue that "Jesus was the most important person in history" without ultimately relying on the premise that he was God incarnate. In other words, dismiss that premise and the claim of "most imporant" is reduced to "one of the most important." Proving the premise is impossible. We've had this discussion many times. That's the nature of "faith".

But the other thread that went through my mind was this: has there ever been a case in all of history where the life of one person has had such a broad impact when that one person never had claim to military or political power.

This is the aspect of Jesus that I find the most compelling ("interesting" or "intriguing"): there is no reason history should note his presence at all. None. An unknown nobody from a small dusty town in a remote output of the Roman Empirse. A short period of cult status among a handful of people. Then a shameful execution. I'm certain hundreds of people throughout history -- people we know nothing about -- fit that description.

When my mind scans history -- as I know history, which is admittedly not all that well -- I am left with nobody else who has had such an impact when they had no claim to military or political power. Other martyrs have had an impact, but nothing along the lines of Jesus.

Note: I would think that Buddha comes closest to matching the impact. Some might say Ghandi or Martin Luther King, Jr., but I'd argue that history was marching in the direction of both of their causes anyway. And besides, they had benefit of the birth of mass media and governmental institutions (Britian and the U.S.) who were generally disinclined towards snuffing out such people. Had Ghandi been resisting Josef Stalin, he would have disappeared from the scene early, and without a trace ... never to be heard from again. The same for any disciples who might wish to carry on the cause.

So I go back to my basic inquiry. Is there anyone in history who has had such an impact when working with so little to begin with? Ultimately this begs the question: Why didn't Jesus just fade into obscurity? He should have. A rag-tag bunch of post crucifixion followers somehow avoid the wrath of the Jewish authorities and crucifixion themselves to go out and start a movement based on a message that is fundamentally contrary to the selfish instincts of mankind. It's all so improbable.

To me, this is the central argument for the importance of Jesus. But it's not really much of an argument as it is a ponderable leading to a personal conclusion.