Just a quick comment and observation on this Columbus Day.
Isn't it funny how educators want to be "fair and balanced" and "entirely truthful" about some things, but not about others?
Isn't it funny how the things they deem "need clarifying" for historical posterity are the types of things that are ultimately meaningless while they choose to leave out all the "really important" stuff?
Take, for instance, the 2009 "controversy" over Christopher Columbus. As one headline in the national news describes it this morning: A Darker Side of Columbus Emerges In U.S. Classrooms.
Here's a snapshot:
Jeffrey Kolowith's kindergarten students read a poem about Christopher Columbus, take a journey to the New World on three paper ships and place the explorer's picture on a timeline through history. Kolowith's students learn about the explorer's significance — though they also come away with a more nuanced picture of Columbus than the noble discoverer often portrayed in pop culture and legend. "I talk about the situation where he didn't even realize where he was," Kolowith said. "And we talked about how he was very, very mean, very bossy."
Forgive me, but is it really all that important for students (especially those in Kindergarten) to know that he was a "very, very mean" man? How is any of that important to a proper study on the man and his place in our nation's history? How does knowing that character flaw expand our knowledge and understanding of the man, his passions, the time period he lived in, and what drove him to the monumental discovery he made? Furthermore, aren't we all a little guilty of being that way from time to time?
Wouldn't we learn more about someone from reading about the types of books, journals, papers, and speeches he wrote? I mean, if Teachers were really so concerned about presenting historical figures accurately, then they need to portray a complete image of the person -- not just deliberately skew the presentation to the point where it's entirely negative as in this case.
That's why it's a shame that in nearly every case across the board you'll find that any discussion about Columbus' Christian faith is noticeably absent. Hardly a surprise in a nation where God was kicked out of the classroom (and most of the public arena) long ago, but genuine Columbus Historians will tell you that his Christianity is what made him the man that he was, and that it's what drove him to embark upon that dangerous mission.
Get this though. Did you know that Columbus believed his discovery of the New World was necessary in order to fulfill an ancient prophecy? Me neither!
What exactly did Christopher Columbus mean when, circa 1500 AD, he wrote about America in one of his famous letters: "God made me the messenger of the new heaven and the new earth of which he spoke in the Apocalypse of St John after having spoken of it through the mouth of Isaiah; and he showed me the spot where to find it."
A brief aside, and I hope I'm not getting ahead of myself here. His mention of America being prophesied in the Book of Isaiah was not lost on me because it was only a couple of months ago when we broached the subject here for the first time in the piece titled "Does Isaiah 18 Actually Refer To America?", which may be more relevant than ever today. In fact, we looked at that exhilarating possibility a few times on the same day back in July:
Isaiah 17 Damascus Prophecy, Isaiah 18 U.S. Prophecy
America's Destiny Found In Isaiah 18?
Back to our famous explorer. Did you also know that Christopher Columbus produced a famous book, the "Book of Prophecies", containing over 200 Biblical and Patristic passages which he compiled? Me neither! And because many of us don't know this, even fewer understand why he wrote that in the first place.
Apparently, when Columbus made his case to win support from the Vatican and the Spanish monarchy, at the center of his manifesto was a millennial prophecy about the destiny of the land that he would discover. As The Center for the Study of Religion and Society states:
To dismiss the collection, as some have, as merely a "sales-job" appealing to the highly religious nature of the Queen, however, is to miss the point. To conclude that it represents "an unfortunate, and sudden and radical, lurch from a previously rational and competent man of the world to a self-pitying and self-aggrandizing prophet," is, at best, to judge it out of context.
Biblical prophecy was a major factor in Columbus's formulations. Though largely self-taught, he was remarkably well informed on the Bible, which he believed was the foundation of all learning, explicitly or implicitly setting forth all knowledge. He employed scholarly biblical commentaries, but he also came to believe that the Holy Spirit had provided him with the illumination necessary to unlock its messages.
So, what was at the core of his Book of Prophecies? He said that a "New World" was to arise in the West to fight a final Crusade against the Arab powers of the Middle East! Wow! That's eerily consistent with the Illuminati Plan for Three World Wars too, isn't it? It also accurately mirrors the present day situation facing our world.
When you stop to think about it, it's a remarkable thought that he had because war across such a vast distance, over thousands of miles of sea and land, would have seemed highly unlikely at the time. Yet, as the new Millennium dawned, soon after the Year 2000 AD, events were set in motion that would fulfill the prophecy.
Particularly appealing to Columbus was Joachim's prediction that the prophesied messiah-emperor who would retake the Holy Land (the coming Antichrist), would come from Spain. Hmmm...Javier Solana or Jose Zapatero perhaps?
Not unlike others of his time, the basic elements of Columbus's apocalyptic vision included the appearance of an emperor-messiah, the conversion of all people in the world to Christianity, the final recovery of the Holy Land from the "infidels", the advent of the Antichrist, and the second coming of Christ. Also common was his belief that Christ's Second Coming was imminent. What was unique about Columbus's vision was his deep seated belief that he had been chosen by God to play a key role in this inexorably unfolding cosmic drama.
Even more unique was the fact that he wasn't just some pompous individual who believed he was the center of the universe and on a mission from the Most High. That is to say that he was far from being a delusional crackpot. Columbus was conversant, largely through secondary sources, with prominent ancient and medieval theologians and cosmographers. His letters and notes refer to Augustine, Ambrose, Venerable Bede, Roger Bacon, Thomas Aquinas, and others. Most useful to him, however, were the fifteenth century works of Pierre d'Ailly, especially his Image mundi, in which Columbus made some 898 marginal notes, and the writings of Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini (Pope Plus ID. Columbus's 861 postils in Plus II's Historia rerum ubique gestarum are the earliest evidence we have of Columbus's evolving eschatology. They have been dated to 1481, some twenty years before he began work on his Book of Prophecies.
The point is that he wasn't just some Christian, fringe lunatic who spent way too much time out at sea that he lost his own bearings so to speak. This is a guy who was grounded in God's Word, and who was well-versed in the writings of other famous religious scholars and theologians.
How many of us were ever taught this growing up? Of course, we all know that this is what happens when Liberalism marries Multiculturalism and lives in a home called Political Correctness. Still, it's another sad commentary on the state of our Public Education System, and it makes my stomach turn at the thought of how distorted history will be when it's presented to us "Christian Truthers" in the Re-Education Classes at Camp FEMA.
One final thought. Remember how Columbus wrote how God showed him the spot where to find the New World? Well, what if Columbus was a sort of minor prophet in a sense? If so, and this was his one and only "prophecy" (about being led by God -- through a clear vision -- to discover the New World), then given what we're told about how to test a prophet to see if they're truly from God (Deuteronomy 13:1-4; Deuteronomy 18:22; Numbers 24:4; Daniel 10:8; Daniel 10:17; Jeremiah 28:9; Matthew 7:20; 1 John 4:1-2; 1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 5:20-21; 2 Peter 1:19; Revelation 19:10), wouldn't that mean that he was right?
For all I know, he never made any other "prophecies" prior to (or after) this one that failed to pass so if he's batting one-for-one, then we know what that means. If the mysterious Christopher Columbus was a sort of minor prophet used by God, then it makes perfect sense why atheists and secularists would hide any information about all of this.
Columbus' prophecy would not only further prove the existence of God, but it would point to the coming reality that us students of Bible prophecy already know fully well -- that the Tribulation will involve a World War III with the nations of the Middle East.
You know, now that I think of it, that's probably why they want to demonize this man. If he did all these horrible things they say he did, and he was a fanatical, fundamental Christian at the time, then it supports the meme that ALL CHRISTIANS are like this, and are therefore a threat to society at large. Now I get it.
As The Center for the Study of Religion and Society concluded:
That Columbus could not convince others of the prophetic importance of his accomplishments proved disappointing, but he would be bewildered to learn that later historians would dismiss the importance of his eschatology. To most, it is not a flattering reflection on the Admiral of the Ocean Sea, but it does take us one step closer to reality.
Amen! A reality that the world will be forced to face one day whether they want to or not.
Keep looking up!
What We're Praying/Talking About
Our faith in action, or our small contribution in trying to apply what we're taught in Hebrews 5-6 and James 2:17-26 for the benefit of our dear brothers and sisters within the Body of Christ...
Look Up Fellowship Media [LUFM]
Fair Use Statement
This is a personal blog, but I've been told that I need to include a formal statement of this nature. So, here goes. This website may contain copyrighted material, the use of which may not have been authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of cultural, economic, environmental, human rights, political, religious, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml”. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use," then you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.