ERayR Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 You are right, ErayR. We probably are closer to agreement than I had thought. I appreciate your remarks about hunting and taking as a serious responsibility. THAT, IMO, is humane. I guess where we may still disagree is on the idea that killing = killing. Even the 10 commandments seem to make a distinction (looking at newer translations) when it says "Thou shalt not murder." In my view, "killing" and "murder" are two very separate things and indeed very distinct concepts. Yes, the end result is the same but the intention behind the act defines its nature. But I do see where you are coming from. I am glad you can see where I am coming from. It is the intention which we use that gives it its relativity. It is the intention that allows us to justify going so far and no farther.
carbon dioxide Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 Moses is not an author of any of the books of the Bible, and may not have existed. Orthodox Mormonism takes most stories in scripture literally, I agree. For LDS, the existence of Moses is a given. Otherwise how could a non-existent person suddenly appear to Joseph Smith on April 3, 1836. 1
Walden Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 A bad rap? If anything, Colombus enjoys too much veneration, considering the following: "Following his first voyage, Columbus was appointed Viceroy and Governor of the Indies under the terms of the Capitulations of Santa Fe. In practice, this primarily entailed the administration of the colonies in the island ofHispaniola, whose capital was established in Santo Domingo.By the end of his third voyage, Columbus was physically and mentally exhausted: his body was wracked by arthritis and his eyes by ophthalmia. In October 1499, he sent two ships to Spain, asking the Court of Spain to appoint a royal commissioner to help him govern.By this time, accusations of tyranny and incompetence on the part of Columbus had also reached the Court. Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand responded by removing Columbus from power and replacing him withFrancisco de Bobadilla, a member of the Order of Calatrava.Bobadilla, who ruled as governor from 1500 until his death in a storm in 1502, had also been tasked by the Court with investigating the accusations of brutality made against Columbus. Arriving in Santo Domingo while Columbus was away in the explorations of his Third voyage, Bobadilla was immediately met with complaints about all three Columbus brothers: Christopher, Bartolomé, and Diego. A recently discovered report by de Bobadilla alleges that Columbus regularly used torture and mutilation to govern Hispaniola. The 48-page report, found in 2006 in the state archive in the Spanish city of Valladolid, contains testimonies from 23 people, including both enemies and supporters of Columbus, about Columbus and his brothers' treatment of colonial subjects during his seven-year rule.[77]According to the report, Columbus once punished a man found guilty of stealing corn by having his ears and nose cut off and then selling him into slavery. Testimony recorded in the report claims that Columbus congratulated his brother Bartolomé on "defending the family" when the latter ordered a woman paraded naked through the streets and then had her tongue cut out for suggesting that Columbus was of lowly birth.[77]The document also describes how Columbus put down native unrest and revolt; he first ordered a brutal crackdown in which many natives were killed and then paraded their dismembered bodies through the streets in an attempt to discourage further rebellion.[78]"Columbus's government was characterised by a form of tyranny," Consuelo Varela, a Spanish historian who has seen the document, told journalists.[77] "Even those who loved him [Columbus] had to admit the atrocities that had taken place."[77]Because of their gross mismanagement of governance, Columbus and his brothers were arrested and imprisoned upon their return to Spain from the third voyage. They lingered in jail for six weeks before busy King Ferdinand ordered their release. Not long after, the king and queen summoned the Columbus brothers to the Alhambra palace in Granada. There the royal couple heard the brothers' pleas; restored their freedom and wealth; and, after much persuasion, agreed to fund Columbus' fourth voyage. But the door was firmly shut on Columbus' role as governor. Henceforth Nicolás de Ovando y Cáceres was to be the new governor of the West Indies."
bluebell Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 Why? What would it take for you to kill, with your own hands and while you are looking into their eyes, a few hundred babies, children, and pregnant women? Who would you have to become, what part of your humanity would you have to suppress, for you to be able to do that? I don't believe that men are capable of slaughtering the innocent without harming their own spirits in the process. 2
PeterPear Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 (edited) What would it take for you to kill, with your own hands and while you are looking into their eyes, a few hundred babies, children, and pregnant women? Who would you have to become, what part of your humanity would you have to suppress, for you to be able to do that?I don't believe that men are capable of slaughtering the innocent without harming their own spirits in the process.Columbus is getting a bad rap from sources from American-haters Noam Chomsky and Howard Zimm.Columbus was lied about by Europeans in the new world because he was protecting the natives.The lies reached Spain and the Monarchs sent Bobadilla to investigate, imprisoned Columbus sent him to Spain in chains then without authority appointed himself Gov. The Monarchs learned the truth and sent for Bobadilla two years later but he drowned in a storm on his return trip to Spain. All this nonsense about Columbus committing atrocities such as cutting up infants, etc are lies perpetuated by Chomsky and Zimm revising history to instigate their hatred of America and/or promoting the lies of Bobadilla. Total garbage. I cannot believe people here fall for that tripe. The lies must be taught in school now days.https://ricochet.com/archives/debunking-lies-about-columbus-the-story-of-francisco-de-bobadilla/ Edited October 17, 2015 by PeterPear
sunstoned Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 Columbus is getting a bad rap from sources from American-haters Noam Chomsky and Howard Zimm.Columbus was lied about by Europeans in the new world because he was protecting the natives.The lies reached Spain and the Monarchs sent Bobadilla to investigate, imprisoned Columbus sent him to Spain in chains then without authority appointed himself Gov. The Monarchs learned the truth and sent for Bobadilla two years later but he drowned in a storm on his return trip to Spain.All this nonsense about Columbus committing atrocities such as cutting up infants, etc are lies perpetuated by Chomsky and Zimm revising history to instigate their hatred of America and/or promoting the lies of Bobadilla. Total garbage. I cannot believe people here fall for that tripe. The lies must be taught in school now days.https://ricochet.com/archives/debunking-lies-about-columbus-the-story-of-francisco-de-bobadilla/The article you link to would be much more convincing if its claims would have been backed by citations. 1
MiserereNobis Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 Columbus is getting a bad rap from sources from American-haters Noam Chomsky and Howard Zimm.Columbus was lied about by Europeans in the new world because he was protecting the natives.The lies reached Spain and the Monarchs sent Bobadilla to investigate, imprisoned Columbus sent him to Spain in chains then without authority appointed himself Gov. The Monarchs learned the truth and sent for Bobadilla two years later but he drowned in a storm on his return trip to Spain.All this nonsense about Columbus committing atrocities such as cutting up infants, etc are lies perpetuated by Chomsky and Zimm revising history to instigate their hatred of America and/or promoting the lies of Bobadilla. Total garbage. I cannot believe people here fall for that tripe. The lies must be taught in school now days.https://ricochet.com/archives/debunking-lies-about-columbus-the-story-of-francisco-de-bobadilla/ Hmmm. Yet there is Columbus's own writings, his own journals and letters, as evidence of the atrocities he committed and his views of the natives. That's no spin -- that's a primary source. 1
Rajah Manchou Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 Columbus is getting a bad rap from sources from American-haters Noam Chomsky and Howard Zimm.All this nonsense about Columbus committing atrocities such as cutting up infants, etc are lies perpetuated by Chomsky and Zimm revising history to instigate their hatred of America and/or promoting the lies of Bobadilla.The accounts of Columbus cutting up infants etc. comes through the first-hand accounts of Bartoleme de Las Casas who knew Columbus. His father and uncles were with Columbus on his second voyage and Las Casas also went to the New World in 1502 an reported on conditions: “They attacked the towns and spared neither the children nor the aged nor pregnant women nor women in childbed, not only stabbing them and dismembering them but cutting them to pieces as if dealing with sheep in the slaughter house...They laid bets as to who, with one stroke of the sword, could split a man in two or could cut off his head or spill out his entrails with a single stroke of the pike. They took infants from their mothers’ breasts, snatching them by the legs and pitching them headfirst against the crags or snatched them by the arms and threw them into the rivers, roaring with laughter and saying as the babies fell into the water, ‘Boil there, you offspring of the devil!'”Las Casas also makes it clear that the natives they encountered were not at all a threat to the Spanish, and often tried to help them: "Of all the infinite universe of humanity, these people are the most guileless, the most devoid of wickedness and duplicity, the most obedient and faithful to their native masters and to the Spanish Christians whom they serve. They are by nature the most humble, patient, and peaceable, holding no grudges, free from embroilments, neither excitable nor quarrelsome. These people are the most devoid of rancors, hatreds, or desire for vengeance of any people in the world...They are also poor people, for they not only possess little but have no desire to possess worldly goods. For this reason they are not arrogant, embittered, or greedy...They are very clean in their persons, with alert, intelligent minds, docile and open to doctrine, very apt to receive our holy Catholic faith, to be endowed with virtuous customs, and to behave in a godly fashion. And once they begin to hear the tidings of the Faith, they are so insistent on knowing more and on taking the sacraments of the Church and on observing the divine cult that, truly, the missionaries who are here need to be endowed by God with great patience in order to cope with such eagerness. Some of the secular Spaniards who have been here for many years say that the goodness of the Indians is undeniable and that if this gifted people could be brought to know the one true God they would be the most fortunate people in the world." "Yet into this sheepfold, into this land of meek outcasts there came some Spaniards who immediately behaved like ravening wild beasts, wolves, tigers, or lions that had been starved for many days. And Spaniards have behaved in no other way during the past forty years, down to the present time, for they are still acting like ravening beasts, killing, terrorizing, afflicting, torturing, and destroying the native peoples, doing all this with the strangest and most varied new methods of cruelty, never seen or heard of before, and to such a degree that this Island of Hispaniola once so populous (having a population that I estimated to be more than three million), has now a population of barely two hundred persons." And Columbus is getting a bad rap?
Stargazer Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 (edited) Chris wasn't stupid. He knew from the ancient Greeks that the earth was round and approximately 25,000 at the equator. He thought(knew) he was going to the Orient. The western hemisphere just got in the way. I agree, but apparently he was working from an estimate of the extent of the Asian continent that was woefully off. He thought the distance across the Atlantic to the Indies was something like 3,700 miles, not the actual 7,700 miles. No ship of the 15th century could possibly have carried enough provisions to cross that wide an ocean without some resupply in the middle, so his voyage would have been utterly doomed -- but fortunately, as you point out, the Americas were in the way. Edited October 17, 2015 by Stargazer
Rajah Manchou Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 I agree, but apparently he was working from an estimate of the extent of the Asian continent that was woefully off. He thought the distance across the Atlantic to the Indies was something like 3,700 miles, not the actual 7,700 miles. No ship of the 15th century could possibly have carried enough provisions to cross that wide an ocean without some resupply in the middle, so his voyage would have been utterly doomed -- but fortunately, as you point out, the Americas were in the way.But if a 15th century ship could not have survived a 7,700 mile voyage then could the Lehites and Mulekites have survived voyages that were twice as long (14,000 miles against the current) across the Pacific 2000 years earlier?
ERayR Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 (edited) What would it take for you to kill, with your own hands and while you are looking into their eyes, a few hundred babies, children, and pregnant women? Who would you have to become, what part of your humanity would you have to suppress, for you to be able to do that? I don't believe that men are capable of slaughtering the innocent without harming their own spirits in the process. I agree with you and I do not think it possible for me to kill children. To do so would be the end of a full nights sleep for the rest of my life but what makes you think it is any easier for God? My question is why would it be easier for God to do it directly than to have men as intermediaries? Edited October 17, 2015 by ERayR
bluebell Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 I agree with you and I do not think it possible for me to kill children. To do so would be the end of a full nights sleep for the rest of my life but what makes you think it is any easier for God? My question is why would it be easier for God to do it directly than to have men as intermediaries?Because God has a perfect understanding of death and the joy and peace that lays beyond it. Death truly is just a door for God. It's not so for us. Not to say that God does not suffer for the pain and sorrow that mortality brings us. But He is infinitely more able to cope with horror than we humans are.
Storm Rider Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 Hmmm. Yet there is Columbus's own writings, his own journals and letters, as evidence of the atrocities he committed and his views of the natives. That's no spin -- that's a primary source. Do you have the allegations that were written in his journals? I am not aware of them; I am ignorant of the subject.
MiserereNobis Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 Do you have the allegations that were written in his journals? I am not aware of them; I am ignorant of the subject. They have been pointed out in multiple posts on this thread...
Teancum Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 The native Americans were doomed anyway. The world was expanding. If the Europeans did not come to the Americans, it would have been the Chinese or Japanese or someone else. The natives would have been taken out by the diseases they carried. History is about one dominant group take over another group. The native Americans had a good run but their time was running out.Holy smokes! You cannot be serious in this post. I suggest you read Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fate of Human Societies. Most certainly not were the native Americans doomed had the people mudering and exterminating them taken a more, well, humane approach. Sure human history is a bloody mass of tribes, village, cities, city states and eventually nations conquering and subduing one another. Hopefully some day we can move beyond that. I wonder if you would be so causal if it was militant Islam's day to rise up and obliterate the West. Maybe the United States is doomed as well.Why Columbus and many European conquerors did was evil and simply wrong even by the standards of their day and age. 1
thesometimesaint Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 But if a 15th century ship could not have survived a 7,700 mile voyage then could the Lehites and Mulekites have survived voyages that were twice as long (14,000 miles against the current) across the Pacific 2000 years earlier? While we don't know the exact route that the Lehites used a good argument can be made that coast surfing, with stops to resupply, around the Indian and Pacific Oceans will get you to the New World in about a year. 2
sethpayne Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 I agree with you and I do not think it possible for me to kill children. To do so would be the end of a full nights sleep for the rest of my life but what makes you think it is any easier for God? My question is why would it be easier for God to do it directly than to have men as intermediaries? I think that's the real point, ERayR. I'm not sure God would ever command the slaughter of innocents. I know that this calls several scriptural stories into question but we all know that scripture is often in error due to the influence of men. 1
bluebell Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 Columbus is getting a bad rap from sources from American-haters Noam Chomsky and Howard Zimm.Columbus was lied about by Europeans in the new world because he was protecting the natives.The lies reached Spain and the Monarchs sent Bobadilla to investigate, imprisoned Columbus sent him to Spain in chains then without authority appointed himself Gov. The Monarchs learned the truth and sent for Bobadilla two years later but he drowned in a storm on his return trip to Spain.All this nonsense about Columbus committing atrocities such as cutting up infants, etc are lies perpetuated by Chomsky and Zimm revising history to instigate their hatred of America and/or promoting the lies of Bobadilla. Total garbage. I cannot believe people here fall for that tripe. The lies must be taught in school now days.https://ricochet.com/archives/debunking-lies-about-columbus-the-story-of-francisco-de-bobadilla/ There will always been disagreement by historians on different points. That's what makes history fun (and maddening!). However, we have primary sources (that means sources from Columbus himself or people with first hand knowledge of events) that support what those 'America haters' are saying. 1
Zakuska Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 So god sends a "destroying angel" and kills all first born in Egypt. Then you question wether or not he would command Moses and Joshua to fulfill the same role?
ERayR Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 So god sends a "destroying angel" and kills all first born in Egypt. Then you question wether or not he would command Moses and Joshua to fulfill the same role? There seems to be a lot of the details omitted.
bluebell Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 So god sends a "destroying angel" and kills all first born in Egypt. Then you question wether or not he would command Moses and Joshua to fulfill the same role? I do. I question lots of it, like the parts where God is o.k. with the Israelites saving all the virgins so they can be given to Israelite men, and the parts where God says that rape is only a problem if the man refuses to marry the girl after he rapes her. I believe that God loves His daughters and the innocent way more than the OT teaches He loves them. 2
sethpayne Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 So god sends a "destroying angel" and kills all first born in Egypt. Then you question wether or not he would command Moses and Joshua to fulfill the same role? I don't believe God ever did that. It is an important story for the people of Israel and reminded them to follow YHWH. But I don't think the story has any basis in history for the simple fact that the God of the NT - the Father Jesus prayed to -- would never have caused such a cruel and immoral act. 1
Teancum Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 So god sends a "destroying angel" and kills all first born in Egypt. Then you question wether or not he would command Moses and Joshua to fulfill the same role?A Mythical story at best. Justifying killing in the name of God, especially the killing of innocents has led and still leads to all sorts of atrocities if the name of God. Time to move beyond such nonesense. 1
Zakuska Posted October 18, 2015 Posted October 18, 2015 I don't believe God ever did that. It is an important story for the people of Israel and reminded them to follow YHWH. But I don't think the story has any basis in history for the simple fact that the God of the NT - the Father Jesus prayed to -- would never have caused such a cruel and immoral act.The God jesus prayed to is going to burn how many at his coming?
halconero Posted October 18, 2015 Posted October 18, 2015 My question is why do we (collective "we" of Mormons) feel the need to read Columbus into the verses in Nephi? We know that the Spirit would wrought upon a man far removed from the Lehites who would then travel to them. This eventually results in the spread of the Gospel among them. That's it.I personally feel that given the context you just as easily read Bartolome de las Casas into the text rather than Columbus. 2
Recommended Posts