Comments on: The Quick 10: The 10 Richest People Ever

By: King

King — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 07:50:00 +0000

There was a book i read that said king Solomons wealth was over a thrillion and a half…The richest man that ever lived. I have to find the book.

By: mark

mark — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 03:24:00 +0000

I always find it a bit annoying when someone refers to a billionaire as very generous when they give large sums to charity. Giving 100 billion dollars to a worthy cause when you have 110 billion is not all that noble. But giving $3000 dollars to charity when you make only $30,000, now THAT’s generosity.

By: Philip

Philip — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 17:32:00 +0000

Could you expand on that list. And does Ben Franklin mean “the” Benjamin Franklin?

By: Todd S

Todd S — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:21:42 +0000

Noah,

In archeology, the absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence.

While there may be no solid historical proof (name written in stone, for instance) for Solomon, there may be proof of his father, David.

From the wonder that is Wikipedia:

“An inscription found at Tel Dan and dated c.850-835 BC has been interpreted as containing the phrase ‘House of David’ (ביתדוד); the Mesha Stele from Moab, and from a similar time, may contain the same phrase;…”

I would hazard to say that the existence of the father would be valid proof of the existence of the son.

Since you begin your argument by addressing it to Creationists I am going to guess that you believe in the validity of the whole of Evolutionary theory. Part of the theory posits transitional forms. Forms that are, for the most part, without solid evidence (no skeletal or fossil remains). So by your reasoning, if no historical evidence exists for these then they do not exist. Do I have that correct?

By: Noah

Noah — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 01:01:51 +0000

Dear creationists, there is NOT historical evidence of King Solomon (independent of the biblical accounts/tales). Nothing indisputably of Solomon’s reign has been found… So please, just check for other names for this list. We are talking about REAL people.

By: Kinglink

Kinglink — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:04:45 +0000

shadrach, if you look closely it’s adjusted based on the GDP of the country, and then adjusted for inflation and put translated to the dollar amount you see. So a lot of that is taken into account. As for Solomon, the issue might be how do you compare him as we don’t have the GDP of his country at the time, nor an accurate account of exactly how many assets he controlled.

By: shadrach

shadrach — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 20:35:57 +0000

It’s very interesting to look at these people based on dollar amounts, but really dollar amounts hardl mean anything when there are hundreds of years between, even with inflation and whatnot factored in. I think it’s more interesting to consider the people that control the largest percentage of world wealth. Having several billion dollars in today’s world is a big deal, but it’s a little different from a single man/king owning something like 75% of the world’s wealth, such as with Witty’s example of Solomon. Can you imagine? Of course, it was also Solomon who says “Vanity Vanity, all is Vanity and chasing after wind.”

By: Witty Nickname

Witty Nickname — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 19:57:11 +0000

What about Soloman? Surely he would crack the list somewhere. Even if you don’t believe in the Judeo/Christian faith The Bible is accepted by Historians as an accurate depiction of Ancient Israel. Soloman was given a Biblical reputation of having some Bling Bling.

By: Phineas Gage

Phineas Gage — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 19:48:06 +0000

I mean make Alexander III one of the richest people ever. My head hurts.

By: Phineas Gage

Phineas Gage — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 19:47:01 +0000

My thinking might be a little off here, but if Nicholas II inherited his fortune from his father Alexander III wouldn’t that make Nicholas II one of the richest people ever?