sethpayne Posted October 13, 2015 Posted October 13, 2015 What innocent people? You mean like the Aztecs? Hey Rod -- this thread is about Columbus. IIRC, Columbus never encountered the Aztecs. Rather, he encountered a very kind and peaceful people -- by his own description -- who he then enslaved and tortured.
sethpayne Posted October 13, 2015 Posted October 13, 2015 You have fee will, honor him or don't. Everyone here complaining and judging Columbus will have a chance to accuse him to his face during judgement day. Oh I'd love to have a chat with Columbus on Judgement Day. Perhaps I can hack one of his children to death and feed the remains to some hounds. Better yet, I'll chop of his hands, then hack up one of his children and then feed both his hands and his child to the dogs. All while hanging him and forcing him to watch the entire thing. 1
hagoth7 Posted October 13, 2015 Posted October 13, 2015 (edited) I'm not assuming. Christ is talking specifically with Lehi's seed. Consider verse 7 and 8. "Behold, because of their belief in me, saith the Father, and because of the unbelief of you, O house of Israel, in the latter day shall the truth come unto the Gentiles, that the fulness of these things shall be made known unto them... ...for notwithstanding they have come forth upon the face of this land, and have scattered my people who are of the house of Israel...If you're of the opinion that chapter is only speaking of Lamanites, fine.(Meanwhile, I suggest that the context, including the first several verses of that chapter, is worth considering for others who might be interested.) To such, in addition to Lamanites, are there perchance others of God's people "upon the face of this land" who have been scattered, and cast out, and trodden under foot, smitten, afflicted, slain, hated, and who have been made a hiss and a byword? Anyone? Edited October 13, 2015 by hagoth7
bluebell Posted October 13, 2015 Posted October 13, 2015 Not you personally but anyone that has been accused of something they are not guilty of will have the right to face their accuser. We can't just say whatever we want and not expect to be held accountable for it. These aren't accusations that have no evidence to support them though. Columbus kept good journals, and we have his letters. A lot of these accusations are from his own hand. We can't just pretend those primary sources don't exist because they make us uncomfortable. 1
Sevenbak Posted October 13, 2015 Author Posted October 13, 2015 If you're of the opinion that chapter is only speaking of Lamanites, fine.(Meanwhile, I suggest that the context, including the first several verses of that chapter, is worth considering for others who might be interested.) To such, in addition to Lamanites, are there perchance others of God's people "upon the face of this land" who have been scattered, and cast out, and trodden under foot, smitten, afflicted, slain, hated, and who have been made a hiss and a byword? Anyone?Well, It's a nice attempt to put words in my mouth, I'll give you that. That chapter speaks of the entire house of Israel, first the scattering, then the gathering in the last days. It then specifically addresses the seed of Lehi, to whom Jesus is speaking. There are many many more, other than the two chapters I linked to. I do hope that everyone reads them in their entirety, it's all part of the same prophetic thread. Perhaps Nephi is plainer about this without being confused about the bigger picture of the entire house of Israel. 1 Nephi 227 And it meaneth that the time cometh that after all the house of Israel have been scattered and confounded, that the Lord God will raise up a mighty nation among the Gentiles, yea, even upon the face of this land; and by them shall our seed be scattered.8 And after our seed is scattered the Lord God will proceed to do a amarvelous work among the Gentiles, which shall be of great worth unto our seed; wherefore, it is likened unto their being nourished by the Gentiles and being carried in their arms and upon their shoulders.
Sevenbak Posted October 13, 2015 Author Posted October 13, 2015 (edited) I'm going insane. I've been re caulking my teak deck for 40 days. Cut out old caulk, carve groove to a depth of 8mm, sand sides with a popsicle stick wrapped with 80 grit sand paper, mask with blue tape, caulk and wipe clean, pull tape. I'm on my last section that affects the integrity of the boat. I have sanded my finger tips off and sanded through 2 sets of gloves. I was sooooooo grateful when Home Depot started carrying XXL gloves. and I'm trying to beat El Nino. It's appears I have succeed. Any rain on the open grooves would be disastrous.. So far I've used 48 tubes of caulking and 32 rolls of blue 1 inch masking tape. It's really dried out old teak and much prayer has been involved. Now what would have been funny is if your boat was named the Pinta! Edited October 13, 2015 by Sevenbak
thesometimesaint Posted October 13, 2015 Posted October 13, 2015 but you do need to find another candidate. Columbus was the worst of the worst. I nominate the piecefull Anasazi.SEE http://archive.archaeology.org/9709/newsbriefs/anasazi.html
MiserereNobis Posted October 13, 2015 Posted October 13, 2015 Looks like Clark Hinckley, President Hinckley's son, posted an article yesterday talking about this issue. Good read. He's previously written a book on Columbus. What Mormons Should Know About Christopher Columbus and the Restoration.http://www.ldsliving.com/What-Mormons-Should-Know-about-Christopher-Columbus-and-the-Restoration/s/77060 From the article:When one accepts Columbus’s words at face value, a very different Columbus emerges from the vain, arrogant, greedy, and self-promoting man portrayed in so much of the current literature. What emerges is a man who, rather than arrogant, is unwavering in his convictions; a man not so much greedy and vain as he is interested in fairness and justice ? fairness and justice? Did Clark not read, written by Columbus himself, how Columbus treated the Natives?
Garden Girl Posted October 13, 2015 Posted October 13, 2015 From the article: ? fairness and justice? Did Clark not read, written by Columbus himself, how Columbus treated the Natives? Not only Columbus in his time... but Father Junipero Serra as he established the missions along the California coast. He had little regard for the natives... I was somewhat surprised that Serra was chosen for Sainthood(?) if I understood the action correctly... yes, he was instrumental in developing the area and bringing Catholic Christianity via the missions to the wilds of the California frontier, but historians are divided, as with Columbus. GG 3
Damien the Leper Posted October 13, 2015 Posted October 13, 2015 Dr. James W. Loewen discusses Columbus in his book "Lies My Teacher Told Me" in the chapter "1493: The True Importance of Christopher Columbus".There are far less truths in the narrative than omissions, half truths, lies, etc.
hagoth7 Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Well, It's a nice attempt to put words in my mouth...That wasn't my intent. If I misunderstood you, I apologize.
Sevenbak Posted October 14, 2015 Author Posted October 14, 2015 That wasn't my intent. If I misunderstood you, I apologize.No, it's ok. I gave entire chapter links which speak of the whole of scattered Israel. But it's the specific references to the seed of Lehi on this land in those links that is important in this discussion. The Lamanites being treated so badly by the Gentiles was foretold by God, even planned, because of His "wrath" towards them. That justice remains with God, not us, to judge the why's and wherefores. Frankly, Columbus isn't here to defend himself or his name. The same could be said about any controversial figure throughout history, including Joseph Smith. We know what happens when bits of his own words are taken, and layered with those of his enemies. We've seen that constantly in anti Mormon literature. As has been stated here by others, one day we'll know the truth from his own face, but we also need to be very careful about revisionist history. 2
Zakuska Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 (edited) During Columbus's third voyage, he encountered hostility from other Spaniards in Hispaniola, who felt deceived by Columbus's promises of riches. On several occasions, Columbus attempted to ally with the rebellious Taínos and Caribs against other Spaniards. Others, returning separately from America, accused him before the royal court of poor governance.[2] The king and queen sent royal administrator Francisco de Bobadilla to Hispaniola in 1500, and upon his arrival (23 August), Columbus and his brothers were arrested and sent back to Spain in chains[3] Upon arriving in Spain, he regained his liberty, but he lost a great deal of his prestige and his power.[4]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleitos_colombinosThe same childhood friend reported in a letter that Columbus had provided one of the captured indigenous women to him. He wrote, "While I was in the boat, I captured a very beautiful Carib woman, whom the said Lord Admiral gave to me. When I had taken her to my cabin she was naked—as was their custom. I was filled with a desire to take my pleasure with her and attempted to satisfy my desire. She was unwilling, and so treated me with her nails that I wished I had never begun. But—to cut a long story short—I then took a piece of rope and whipped her soundly, and she let forth such incredible screams that you would not have believed your ears. Eventually we came to such terms, I assure you, that you would have thought that she had been brought up in a school for whores."[59]Facilitated rape?!Columbus correctly interpreted the enormous quantity of fresh water that the Orinoco delivered into the Atlantic Ocean as evidence that he had reached a continental landmass. As he sailed the Gulf of Paria, he observed the diurnal rotation of the pole star in the sky, which he erroneously interpreted as evidence that the Earth was not perfectly spherical, but rather bulged out like a pear around the new-found continent.[5] He also speculated that the new continent might be the location of the biblical Garden of Eden. He then sailed to the islands of Chacachacare and Margarita. He sighted Tobago (which he named "Bella Forma") and Grenada (which he named "Concepción").Intresting... i wonder if Joseph Smith had read any of Columbus's writings/?In poor health, Columbus returned to Hispaniola on 19 August, only to find that many of the Spanish settlers of the new colony were in rebellion against his rule, claiming that Columbus had misled them about the supposedly bountiful riches of the New World. A number of returning settlers and sailors lobbied against Columbus at the Spanish court, accusing him and his brothers of gross mismanagement. Columbus had some of his crew hanged for disobedience. He had an economic interest in the enslavement of the Hispaniola natives and for that reason was not eager to baptize them, which attracted criticism from some churchmen.[68] An entry in his journal from September 1498 reads: "From here one might send, in the name of the Holy Trinity, as many slaves as could be sold ..."[citation needed]Columbus was eventually forced to make peace with the rebellious colonists on humiliating terms.[69] In 1500, the Crown had him removed as governor, arrested, and transported in chains to Spain (see "Accusations of tyranny during governorship" section below). He was eventually freed and allowed to return to the New World, but not as governor.Started slavery in the new world!.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_ColumbusOn his way back to Spain to stand trial for accusations of abuse of Spaniard colonists, he wrote a letter to the nurse of the son of Ferdinand and Isabella, pleading his case. Among it he wrote:"Now that so much gold is found, a dispute arises as to which brings more profit, whether to go about robbing or to go to the mines. A hundred castellanos are as easily obtained for a woman as for a farm, and there are plenty of dealers who go about looking for girls; those from nine to ten are now in demand, and for all ages a good price must be paid." [122] human sexual trafficing.Columbus' treatment of the Hispaniola natives was even worse; his soldiers raped, killed, and enslaved with impunity at every landing. When Columbus fell ill in 1495, soldiers were reported to have gone on a rampage, slaughtering 50,000 natives. Upon his recovery, Columbus organized his troops' efforts, forming a squadron of several hundred heavily armed men and more than twenty attack dogs. The men tore across the land, killing thousands of sick and unarmed natives. Soldiers would use their captives for sword practice, attempting to decapitate them or cut them in half with a single blow.[113]The historian Howard Zinn writes that Columbus spearheaded a massive slave trade; in 1495 his men captured in a single raid 1500 Arawak men, women, and children. When he shipped five hundred of the slaves to Spain, 40% died en route.[47] Historian James W. Loewen asserts that "Columbus not only sent the first slaves across the Atlantic, he probably sent more slaves – about five thousand – than any other individual... other nations rushed to emulate Columbus."[114]When slaves held in captivity began to die at high rates, Columbus switched to a different system of forced labor: he ordered all natives over the age of thirteen to collect a specified amount (one hawk's bell full) of gold powder every three months. Natives who brought the amount were given a copper token to hang around their necks, and those found without tokens had their hands amputated and were left to bleed to death.[47][115]More attrocities. Edited October 15, 2015 by Zakuska
Rajah Manchou Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 Facilitated rape?!Started slavery in the new world!.human sexual trafficing.More attrocities.The interpretation of 1 Nephi 13:12-13 has always felt off to me. I don't believe that God could have had any part in guiding a man to a New World to introduce such horrors. Verse 13 doesn't quite fit either: "And it came to pass that I beheld the Spirit of God, that it wrought upon other Gentiles; and they went forth out of captivity, upon the many waters."Captivity? Not really: "It’s fair to say that the Pilgrims left England to find religious freedom, but that wasn’t the primary motive that propelled them to North America. Remember that the Pilgrims went first to Holland, settling eventually in the city of Leiden. There they encountered a religious tolerance almost unheard of in that day and age. Bradford and Edward Winslow both wrote glowingly of their experience. In Leiden, God had allowed them, in Bradford’s estimation, “to come as near the primitive pattern of the first churches as any other church of these later times.” God had blessed them with “much peace and liberty,” Winslow echoed. If a longing for religious freedom had compelled them, they probably never would have left. But while they cherished the freedom of conscience they enjoyed in Leiden, the Pilgrims had two major complaints: They found it a hard place to maintain their English identity and an even harder place to make a living. In America, they hoped to live by themselves, enjoy the same degree of religious liberty and earn a “better and easier” living." linkWho went to America to escape captivity? If anything, almost every nation in the New World was built by millions of native American and African slaves in captivity. America's True History of Religious Tolerance
Meadowchik Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 The interpretation of 1 Nephi 13:12-13 has always felt off to me. I don't believe that God could have had any part in guiding a man to a New World to introduce such horrors. Verse 13 doesn't quite fit either: "And it came to pass that I beheld the Spirit of God, that it wrought upon other Gentiles; and they went forth out of captivity, upon the many waters."Captivity? Not really: "It’s fair to say that the Pilgrims left England to find religious freedom, but that wasn’t the primary motive that propelled them to North America. Remember that the Pilgrims went first to Holland, settling eventually in the city of Leiden. There they encountered a religious tolerance almost unheard of in that day and age. Bradford and Edward Winslow both wrote glowingly of their experience. In Leiden, God had allowed them, in Bradford’s estimation, “to come as near the primitive pattern of the first churches as any other church of these later times.” God had blessed them with “much peace and liberty,” Winslow echoed. If a longing for religious freedom had compelled them, they probably never would have left. But while they cherished the freedom of conscience they enjoyed in Leiden, the Pilgrims had two major complaints: They found it a hard place to maintain their English identity and an even harder place to make a living. In America, they hoped to live by themselves, enjoy the same degree of religious liberty and earn a “better and easier” living." linkWho went to America to escape captivity? If anything, almost every nation in the New World was built by millions of native American and African slaves in captivity. America's True History of Religious Tolerance With or without the deliberate atrocities, the native Americans were doomed at any point any modest number of Europeans came over. They did not have the immunity to the European-born diseases, so millions, an estimated 90 percent of the civilization, perished, and likely a majority of their story and advancements lost to history. So if God would allow such a horrible genocide to be possible by accident, it makes me wonder what other things he might allow if they serve a higher and more eternal purpose.
Sanpitch Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 (edited) And who was it that created the Small Pox, Malaria and Influenza viruses? Edited October 15, 2015 by Sanpitch
Sevenbak Posted October 15, 2015 Author Posted October 15, 2015 With or without the deliberate atrocities, the native Americans were doomed at any point any modest number of Europeans came over. They did not have the immunity to the European-born diseases, so millions, an estimated 90 percent of the civilization, perished, and likely a majority of their story and advancements lost to history.So if God would allow such a horrible genocide to be possible by accident, it makes me wonder what other things he might allow if they serve a higher and more eternal purpose.I have to wonder... In this age of revisionism and political correctness, how it is that the story of Joshua and the Israelites conquering the promised land and anahilating thousands of women and children by command of the Lord, isn't ripped out of every printed bible in the world...
bluebell Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 I have to wonder... In this age of revisionism and political correctness, how it is that the story of Joshua and the Israelites conquering the promised land and anahilating thousands of women and children by command of the Lord, isn't ripped out of every printed bible in the world... I think many people assume that this is one of the 'not translated correctly' (or just not recorded correctly by the Israelites) part of the bible. I mean, if you were commanded to kill babies and children in the name of God, even if you really truly believed it was God's will, would you be able to do it? And if you did, what kind of person would you become after doing that a few hundred times? Even if i believed that God sometimes commanded the death of children, I have a hard time believing that He would command good moral people to kill them, knowing what it would do to them emotionally and mentally. 1
ERayR Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 I think many people assume that this is one of the 'not translated correctly' (or just not recorded correctly by the Israelites) part of the bible. I mean, if you were commanded to kill babies and children in the name of God, even if you really truly believed it was God's will, would you be able to do it? And if you did, what kind of person would you become after doing that a few hundred times? Even if i believed that God sometimes commanded the death of children, I have a hard time believing that He would command good moral people to kill them, knowing what it would do to them emotionally and mentally. I mean, if you were commanded to kill babies and children your own son in the name of God, even if you really truly believed it was God's will, would you be able to do it? A test that I may fail but then I am not Abraham or . . . .
bluebell Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 I mean, if you were commanded to kill babies and children your own son in the name of God, even if you really truly believed it was God's will, would you be able to do it? A test that I may fail but then I am not Abraham or . . . . But Abraham didn't actually kill his son. The Israelites actually did kill babies and children and pregnant women. If this happened today and we read about it in the paper, is there anything that would convince you that God was behind it? 2
sethpayne Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 I mean, if you were commanded to kill babies and children your own son in the name of God, even if you really truly believed it was God's will, would you be able to do it? A test that I may fail but then I am not Abraham or . . . . It's a good think Abraham is a mythic figure and that this story is likely ahistorical. 1
MiserereNobis Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 But Abraham didn't actually kill his son. The Israelites actually did kill babies and children and pregnant women. If this happened today and we read about it in the paper, is there anything that would convince you that God was behind it? Makes me think of ISIS...
thesometimesaint Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 I have to wonder... In this age of revisionism and political correctness, how it is that the story of Joshua and the Israelites conquering the promised land and anahilating thousands of women and children by command of the Lord, isn't ripped out of every printed bible in the world... That man has for a very long time now did atrocious things and blamed it on God.
Sevenbak Posted October 16, 2015 Author Posted October 16, 2015 I think many people assume that this is one of the 'not translated correctly' (or just not recorded correctly by the Israelites) part of the bible. I mean, if you were commanded to kill babies and children in the name of God, even if you really truly believed it was God's will, would you be able to do it? And if you did, what kind of person would you become after doing that a few hundred times? Even if i believed that God sometimes commanded the death of children, I have a hard time believing that He would command good moral people to kill them, knowing what it would do to them emotionally and mentally.Not translated correctly? Really? All of them? We don't have to understand God's ways, but we do have to understand they are NOT our ways. Deut. 20:16-1716 But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee: Josh. 10:29-40 28 ¶And that day Joshua took Makkedah, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and the king thereof he utterly destroyed, them, and all the souls that were therein; he let none remain: and he did to the king of Makkedah as he did unto the king of Jericho.29 Then Joshua passed from Makkedah, and all Israel with him, unto Libnah, and fought against aLibnah:30 And the Lord delivered it also, and the king thereof, into the hand of Israel; and he smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein; he let none remain in it; but did unto the king thereof as he did unto the king of Jericho.31 ¶And Joshua passed from Libnah, and all Israel with him, unto Lachish, and encamped against it, and fought against it:32 And the Lord delivered Lachish into the hand of Israel, which took it on the second day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein, according to all that he had done to Libnah.33 ¶Then Horam king of aGezer came up to help Lachish; and Joshua smote him and his people, until he had left him none remaining.34 ¶And from Lachish Joshua passed unto Eglon, and all Israel with him; and they encamped against it, and fought against it:35 And they took it on that day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein he utterly destroyed that day, according to all that he had done to Lachish.36 And Joshua went up from Eglon, and all Israel with him, unto Hebron; and they fought against it:37 And they took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and the king thereof, and all the cities thereof, and all the souls that were therein; he left none remaining, according to all that he had done to Eglon; but destroyed it utterly, and all the souls that were therein.38 ¶And Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, to aDebir; and fought against it:39 And he took it, and the king thereof, and all the cities thereof; and they smote them with the edge of the sword, and utterly destroyed all the souls that were therein; he left none remaining: as he had done to Hebron, so he did to Debir, and to the king thereof; as he had done also to Libnah, and to her king.40 ¶So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the avale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded. Joshua 11:10-15 10 ¶And Joshua at that time turned back, and took Hazor, and smote the king thereof with the sword: for Hazor beforetime was the head of all those kingdoms.11 And they smote all the souls that were therein with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying them: there was not any left to breathe: and he burnt Hazor with fire.12 And all the cities of those kings, and all the kings of them, did Joshua take, and smote them with the edge of the sword, and he utterly adestroyed them, as Moses the servant of the Lord commanded.13 But as for the cities that stood still in their strength, Israel burned none of them, save Hazor only; that did Joshua burn.14 And all the spoil of these acities, and the cattle, the children of Israel took for a prey unto themselves; but every man they smote with the edge of the sword, until they had destroyed them, neither left they any to breathe. Joshua 621 And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ***, with the edge of the sword.24 And they burnt the city with fire, and all that was therein: only the silver, and the gold, and the vessels of brass and of iron, they put into the treasury of the house of the Lord.27 So the Lord was with Joshua; and his fame was noised throughout all the country. Num. 21:33-3534 And the Lord said unto Moses, Fear him not: for I have delivered him into thy hand, and all his people, and his land; and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon.35 So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land. Deut. 232 Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to fight at Jahaz.33 And the Lord our God delivered him before us; and we asmote him, and his sons, and all his people.34 And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain: Deut 32 And the Lord said unto me, Fear him not: for I will deliver him, and all his people, and his land, into thy hand; and thou shalt do unto him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon.6 And we utterly destroyed them, as we did unto Sihon king of Heshbon, utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city. Deut 20:16-1816 But of the acities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee: Josh. 825 And so it was, that all that fell that day, both of men and women, were twelve thousand, even all the men of Ai.26 For Joshua drew not his hand back, wherewith he stretched out the spear, until he had utterly destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai.27 Only the cattle and the spoil of that city Israel took for a prey unto themselves, according unto the word of the Lord which he commanded Joshua.28 And Joshua burnt Ai, and made it an heap for ever, even a desolation unto this day.
Sevenbak Posted October 16, 2015 Author Posted October 16, 2015 That man has for a very long time now did atrocious things and blamed it on God.It wasn't just Joshua. Moses did the same thing before Joshua, just as atrocious by today's standards. Moses is included in the above references. In fact, a lot of what Joshua did was because Moses commanded him, first having been commanded by God.
Recommended Posts