Which non-Christians do you think contributed the most to mankind's well-being?

[Lucian Hodoboc]

Name some people who were not Christians and whom you think contributed the most to the well-being of mankind. Share your thoughts on the benefits that those people brought to humanity.

 

[Lamb]

Why do you ask? I mean, they can do all they want to help mankind but their acts are not considered "good" by God if they aren't done by faith in Him.

 

[rstrats]

Why do you ask? I mean, they can do all they want to help mankind but their acts are not considered "good" by God if they aren't done by faith in Him.

Why is it necessary to know why he asks in order for someone to respond to his post?

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

Why do you ask?

I'm not sure of the reasons.

I mean, they can do all they want to help mankind but their acts are not considered "good" by God if they aren't done by faith in Him.

Perhaps. I am not fully convinced of that.

 

[Lamb]

Why is it necessary to know why he asks in order for someone to respond to his post?

Because of my 2nd point. God doesn't consider works to be good unless they're done by those who have faith. Our works are tainted with our sin so only the blood of Jesus can make works good.

 

[Bluezone777]

I would say us being sinners distorts our ability to see what doing or even being good actually is. To God, anything short of perfection isn't good and we aren't perfect so we fail to be good and if we fail to be good then what should make us even think we can do good when we aren't even good to begin with?

Even the redeemed in Christ struggle to do good because their body is still under sin's curse and is at war against the spirit so even much of what the redeemed do isn't good when they let their body/mind lead them astray. It is why it says " The righteous shall live by faith" because to do and be good means having faith in God and Jesus even when the body/mind gives a convincing argument to do the opposite. A good example is when Jesus goes out of way to delay his return to Lazarus until he was most certainly dead which wouldn't make sense from a sinner's perspective but God had a bigger plan and it involved Lazarus being dead to do it. Jesus couldn't raise him from the dead if he was still alive when he arrived to show he had the power over death by raising him from death to life.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Seems to me that it would be easier to name Christians who contributed to the well being of mankind. I would guess that some in the libertarian camp insofar as they held off the growth of government have helped mankind. Sadly there are not enough of them to stop the growth of government.

 

[Albion]

Seems to me that it would be easier to name Christians who contributed to the well being of mankind.

Probably so, but that would be to change the reason for the question. Even then, it still wouldn't answer the question as it was asked--which ones contributed the most?

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Probably so, but that would be to change the reason for the question. Even then, it still wouldn't answer the question as it was asked--which ones contributed the most?

Right, but I think we will have a hard time coming up with any non-Christians who made major contributions to the well being of mankind. I can think of some who are the total opposite, such as Stalin.

 

[rstrats]

Because of my 2nd point. God doesn't consider works to be good unless they're done by those who have faith. Our works are tainted with our sin so only the blood of Jesus can make works good.

I still don't see why someone needs to know Lucian Hodoboc's reason for asking in order for them to name some people who were not Christians that they think contributed the most to the well-being of mankind.

 

[Lamb]

I still don't see why someone needs to know Lucian Hodoboc's reason for asking in order for them to name some people who were not Christians that they think contributed the most to the well-being of mankind.

Because I want to know where he's going with this.

 

[rstrats]

Because I want to know where he's going with this.

I just don't see why you need to know where he's going with this topic in order for you to name some people who were not Christians that you think contributed the most to the well-being of mankind.

 

[Albion]

Right, but I think we will have a hard time coming up with any non-Christians who made major contributions to the well being of mankind. I can think of some who are the total opposite, such as Stalin.

You know, I tried looking up different lists of "famous ____s" in history, thinking that I'd find a lot of non-Christians who did wonderful things for the benefit of all mankind, and almost the whole of what I got were lists of people who either were Hollywood-type celebs, patently evil rulers such as you mentioned in your post, or a few--and I do mean few--scientists, none of whom is associated with the really famous discoveries. It was a huge but disappointing surprise to me.

 

[Angelina1239]

Name some people who were not Christians and whom you think contributed the most to the well-being of mankind. Share your thoughts on the benefits that those people brought to humanity.

A very good question.

David Attenborough is such an excellent man who certainly has contributed significantly to our understanding and preservation of nature and our planet. Who could fail to think well of him.
I feel disappointed for his sake that he is not a Christian. At least I don't think he believes. Could it be this dear man will never enter heaven? I fear so, according to our Lord Jesus and the Bible.

Stephen Fry, such a talented man who has contributed to the arts hugely, angrily denies God.

Yet of course there are so many great Christian men and women who have changed our world for the better.

No matter what a person has done though, if they refuse to accept Jesus Christ as Saviour, they cannot enter heaven. This is what Christ Himself makes clear.

 

[Albion]

The "problem," as I saw it, was that we weren't asked about non-Christians who did good things. Instead, it was about people who "contributed the most to the well-being of mankind."

Now, that challenge is a big one. And although I found a lot of good people who did some good, I also found on my search that it's hard to find anyone who "fits the bill" unless we forget about the "contributed THE MOST to the well-being of (THE WHOLE OF) mankind."

There are a few who probably qualify, and I expect that I overlooked some who might qualify, but there don't seem to be many.

 

[Angelina1239]

The "problem," as I saw it, was that we weren't asked about non-Christians who did good things. Instead, it was about people who "contributed the most to the well-being of mankind."

Now, that challenge is a big one. And although I found a lot of good people who did some good, I also found on my search that it's hard to find anyone who "fits the bill" unless we forget about the "contributed THE MOST to the well-being of (THE WHOLE OF) mankind."

There are a few who probably qualify, and I expect that I overlooked some who might qualify, but there don't seem to be many.

I see your point actually.
People who truly furthered the good of mankind.

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

The "problem," as I saw it, was that we weren't asked about non-Christians who did good things. Instead, it was about people who "contributed the most to the well-being of mankind."

Now, that challenge is a big one. And although I found a lot of good people who did some good, I also found on my search that it's hard to find anyone who "fits the bill" unless we forget about the "contributed THE MOST to the well-being of (THE WHOLE OF) mankind."

There are a few who probably qualify, and I expect that I overlooked some who might qualify, but there don't seem to be many.

I didn't ask for a limited list of people. I don't understand what is making you confused.

 

[Albion]

I didn't ask for a limited list of people. I don't understand what is making you confused.

Your question didn't confuse anyone. The question, however, was so narrowly framed that it seems there are hardly any non-Christians who meet the standard. Can you understand that?

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

Your question didn't confuse anyone. The question, however, was so narrowly framed that it seems there are hardly any non-Christians who meet the standard. Can you understand that?

No, I do not. To me, it doesn't seem narrowly framed at all. The question is simple: which people, who did not adhere to the Christian beliefs, brought the most or the highest contribution to humanity?

For example, the guys who invented the treatment for Tuberculosis were Jews and/or agnostic (according to the online sources I've read). You could say that finding a cure for an illness that killed millions of people for several centuries is a big contribution to humanity. Were there other people who contributed even more? Perhaps. What one understands by "a high contribution" is subjective.

The requirements of this thread are subjective.

 

[Albion]

No, I do not. To me, it doesn't seem narrowly framed at all. The question is simple: which people, who did not adhere to the Christian beliefs, brought the most or the highest contribution to humanity?

You don't think that asking who "brought the most or the highest contribution to humanity" doesn't narrow the possible qualifiers to a handful at best? I'm surprised, but that's the way you wrote the question, and you just reiterated it here and now. And you might also take another look at the title of your thread.

For example, the guys who invented the treatment for Tuberculosis were Jews and/or agnostic (according to the online sources I've read). You could say that finding a cure for an illness that killed millions of people for several centuries is a big contribution to humanity. Were there other people who contributed even more? Perhaps. What one understands by "a high contribution" is subjective.

Except that that isn't what you asked.