Every year Time magazine publishes its list of the world’s one hundred most influential people.(1) Of these “influencers” the magazine’s editorial staff groups them into categories of influence—from leaders and revolutionaries to builders and titans, from artists and entertainers to heroes and icons, scientists and thinkers. Interestingly enough, the magazine even includes those whose influence is deemed wholly negative. Past and present ‘honorees’ included Bernard Madoff, who stole a reported sixty billion dollars from investors and bankrupted many charitable organizations; Joaquin Guzman, the Mexican druglord behind the horrific violence that has claimed well-over fifteen thousand lives in his home country and abroad; and Abubakar Shekau, the leader of Boko Haram that has killed ten thousand people in Nigeria and neighboring countries.(2)

Defining influence seems a tricky business and the editors of Time admit this: “What is influence and how can we possibly compare the influence of an underworld druglord, for example, with a heroic 21 year old soldier who saved his company of Marines while he almost bled to death?”(3) The etymology of the word gives us some understanding of its use and of this kind of comparison. Originally, the word was used as an astrological term, denoting “streaming ethereal power from the stars acting upon the character or destiny of men.”(4) Ultimately, influence is a force or substance flowing from someone or something, which moves the heart or actions of someone else—whether for good or for evil.

For the majority of those listed, however, I suspect that their fame is their influence. In other words, influence becomes less about the one acted upon and more a reflection of an individual actor. Persons are deemed influential because of their own accomplishments; they amassed vast monetary resources or grew large media empires, held political power or oversight. Most names on the list are cultural icons of one sort or another whose influence is at best mercurial, like shooting stars their light is seen and then just as quickly fades from sight.

Each year, as I read through this issue, I always find individuals listed who I suspect are known to very few people. Had influence been determined by a vote, I suspect that most readers of Time magazine would not have deemed them influential. Their names are Brady Gustafson, Mary Scullion, and Rula Ghani. Brady Gustafson, just 21 years of age, saved his fellow Marines when they came under direct attack in Afghanistan. Though Brady himself had suffered a life-threatening injury, he fought to save his friends and fellow Marines until help arrived. Mary Scullion works tirelessly with an organization to help the homeless in Philadelphia, stating that “none of us are home until all of us are home.” As a result of her efforts, there are now less than two hundred homeless men and women in Philadelphia. Rula Ghani is now the first lady of Afghanistan, yet she is neither a Muslim nor Afghani born. From Lebanon, she has long had a less-public history of advocacy for women’s rights, particularly for access to education. According to the article, she “has already vowed to work to improve living standards for women in a country where they have historically struggled to be treated fairly.”(5)

In our society, influence generally indicates power over others—power that inevitably reflects back on the one who is influencing. But for these three individuals, influence has very little to do with their own glory. Their influence is characterized by their work on behalf of others. Indeed, their influence is not about making a name for themselves, but rather about lifting up those without names and faces who have no influence, and who most of the world will never know: homeless men and women, women and girls who are able to go to school for the first time, and small-town young men who defend in places of extreme violence and conflict. Offering their lives in this way opens up the possibility of creating lasting influence in the lives of the world’s least influential.

When Jesus spoke about true influence in his sermon on the mount, he likened it to salt.(6) Salt is not a flashy spice like cayenne pepper or nutmeg. It rarely calls attention to itself as a predominant flavor. Salt is basic. And yet, salt is essential. Without it, food is bland and tasteless, for salt enlivens all the flavors. Without it, decay and degradation ensue, for salt preserves and produces longevity. Salt assists in cleansing and healing. In recipes, salt serves all the other ingredients, by coaxing out and enhancing their fullest expression and flavor. The influence of Rula Ghani, Brady Gufstason and Mary Scullion is like salt; it may be the behind-the-scenes player in the world of ingredients, often hardly noticed, yet it is powerfully effective in creating a good result. Jesus calls his followers to be influencers in the way that salt influences a meal: often in the background, and not a self-promoting or singular flavor. The work of such influence is not unlike the work of the church in its call to implement the hope, power, and reality of Easter: it is not about the individual but the season and aroma that comes from pointing toward Christ himself, the very bread of life who is broken, given, sustaining, and changing of all life itself.

Margaret Manning Shull is a member of the speaking and writing team at Ravi Zacharias International Ministries in Bellingham, Washington.

(1) Time, “The World’s 100 Most Influential People”, Vol. 173, No. 18, May 11, 2009.

(2) Time, “The World’s 100 Most Influential People”, April 16, 2015. Accessed online April 11, 2016.

(3) Time, May 11, 2009.

(4) As noted in the Online Etymology Dictionary, http://etymonline.com/index.php?search=influence.

(5) Time, April 16, 2015. Accessed online April 11, 2016.

(6) See Matthew 5:13-16.

http://www.rzim.org/