Article on "wacky facts" in A Beka and BJU

[Aelwydd]

I was interested in the set theory quote. This was article was posted in response to it: "What do Christian Fundamentalists Have Against Set Theory?"

 

 

I could totally have a beer with this guy. His last statement:

If this sounds crazy ... you're right. It's pretty crazy. In fact, it's this kind of thinking, and my realization that it was based fundamentally on lying about everybody who wasn't a member of your religious tribe, that led me away from religion to begin with. Ironically. But there is a coherent thought process going on here, and I want you to understand that. If all you do is point and laugh at the fundies for calling set theory evil, then you are missing the point. This isn't about them being stupid. It's about who they think

you

are.

 

sums up my personal experience as an ex-fundie, and observations both past and present.

[Slartibartfast]

Wasn't there a verse in the KJV that mentions dragons, or something like them?

 

Job 40:15-24

 

15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.

 

16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.

 

17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.

 

18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.

 

19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.

 

20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.

 

21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.

 

22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.

 

23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.

 

24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares.

 

That's it.

[EthiopianFood]

Job 40:15-24

 

15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.

 

16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.

 

17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.

 

18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.

 

19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.

 

20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.

 

21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.

 

22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.

 

23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.

 

24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares.

 

That's it.

 

Thank you. :001_smile:

[Cammie]

Hmm, guess I am a bit confused. I thought that fundamentalists didn't believe in dinosaurs...that the fossil record was a test to see whether they believed in the literal Bible or a hoax perpetrated by liberals with an agenda. Now it looks like they do believe that dinosaurs existed...but that the dating of the fossil record is wrong/hoax/test. Just the fact that an animal we don't have a fossil record for (a huge, fire breathing dragon) is one that they fundamentalists want to exist...makes my head spin. I guess this is why the two sides have so little meeting ground.

[EthiopianFood]

Hmm, guess I am a bit confused. I thought that fundamentalists didn't believe in dinosaurs...that the fossil record was a test to see whether they believed in the literal Bible or a hoax perpetrated by liberals with an agenda. Now it looks like they do believe that dinosaurs existed...but that the dating of the fossil record is wrong/hoax/test. Just the fact that an animal we don't have a fossil record for (a huge, fire breathing dragon) is one that they fundamentalists want to exist...makes my head spin. I guess this is why the two sides have so little meeting ground.

 

I don't see the problem. :tongue_smilie:

 

Having come from this type of tradition (although there was never any talk of dragons), I actually just feel badly for people who are this mixed up. I respect everyone's right to believe whatever they want, but I also feel like it can be very exhausting to constantly be in a defensive position against everyone and everything. When you can't believe any piece of evidence because it's automatically considered evil... I don't know. I guess I'm glad I don't live in a world of perceived enemies anymore.

 

ETA: Cammie, I'm so jealous that you're in India right now. I just had to share. :D

[Slartibartfast]

Job 40:15-24

 

15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.

 

16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.

 

17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.

 

18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.

 

19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.

 

20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.

 

21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.

 

22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.

 

23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.

 

24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares.

 

That's it.

 

 

Well, IMO if there was other dinosaurs about it wouldn't have been intimidating to Job. It would be like, "look at that cat over there." In everything else where they are mentioned (not included in the KJV) they are specific creatures.

 

In the book of Enoch there is discussion of a battle that is to take place at the end of time between the Leviathan and Behemoth, they will then both be killed by God and the righteous will have a barbecue.

 

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/9841-leviathan-and-behemoth

 

So, IMO those are intended to be very very specific creatures and not herds of Sauropods that would have been running amok.

 

That bit didn't make it into the KJV, I wanted to mention it since the behemoth and leviathan are also brought up in Job, which is in the KJV.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Sis

[ChristyB in TN]

I could totally have a beer with this guy. His last statement:

 

sums up my personal experience as an ex-fundie, and observations both past and present.

 

Exactly! What a thoughtful and mature perspective.

[stripe]

I really don't understand why people cannot grasp the Establishment Clause.

 

Honey, they can't grasp simply adding "s," and have to complicate it with that pesky apostrophe...so....

 

I kind of associate the set theory craze with 1960s new math, so I suppose they're against that too? Well, given that Cantor went insane, maybe they're right to be scared? ;)

[Cammie]

 

ETA: Cammie, I'm so jealous that you're in India right now. I just had to share. :D

 

 

Come on over! We can have a WTM meet-up right here!

 

- Cammie

[FaithManor]

I am a survivor of 2.5 years in a fundie high school. They used A.C.E. curriculum and much of what is being pointed out in Abeka and BJU is also rampant in that curriculum too....more so than even Abeka.

 

I ran as far as I could from that school as soon as I could. The hardest thing for me was that as a teen I read voraciously at the public library and since I loved history, zoned in on primary source material. So when I discovered that the "facts" in my history paces were WAY OFF, I'd bring the primary source material to school and question the "supervisors". This always ended with me being punished for my rebellious soul that was going to lead me straight to H*ll.

 

OH, I have another one with Abeka...I don't know if it is still in there, but their world history book used to claim that Christopher Columbus was not only the first European on U.S. soil :001_huh: (let's start by learning geography people), but also that his sole reason for heading west was to spread the gospel, such was his concern for the souls of men. :tongue_smilie: Years ago, when I found that little number, I did call the publisher and asked a customer service rep why they included such misinformation as fact in their materials and I was told I needed to get saved! :glare: That was the response.

 

I don't know if they ever took it out of their materials. The above mentioned school, which is still open and doing FAR worse than the public school at providing basic instruction, would jump at the chance to take public monies so they could expand their facility. :ack2:

 

Faith

[snowbeltmom]

The above mentioned school, which is still open and doing FAR worse than the public school at providing basic instruction, would jump at the chance to take public monies so they could expand their facility. :ack2:

 

Faith

 

Yikes.:eek: This thread has been a real eye-opener.

[kalanamak]

Hmm, guess I am a bit confused. I thought that fundamentalists didn't believe in dinosaurs...that the fossil record was a test to see whether they believed in the literal Bible or a hoax perpetrated by liberals with an agenda.

 

I've heard in person (twice, once in Kansas in the 70s and once out here in the 90s) was that the fossils were put there by God to test people's faith.

[Mrs Mungo]

I've heard in person (twice, once in Kansas in the 70s and once out here in the 90s) was that the fossils were put there by God to test people's faith.

 

But, that necessitates believing that God is in the habit of telling lies. Isn't the other guy the deceiver, the master of lies, etc?

[amey311]

The only non-evolutionary thing I was ever told by someone about dinosaurs was that carbon dating is inaccurate because of the Great Flood. I made it to adulthood before realizing that many people believe in a Young Earth. Until that time I really thought EVERYONE believed in Old Earth and that the Biblical creation story was allegorical/not a literal 7 days or whatever.

[Farrar]

I just like that Mother Jones compiled this handy homeschool curricula are really out there reference guide for us. I always had heard this stuff is in there, but this is handy quotes to which I can refer.

 

Speaking of out there, Louisiana's new school law seems completely out there. I was trying to wrap my head around it. Is it that *every* public school in Louisiana is now a privatized charter? Because, wow. Dh and I were talking about it and saying that we thought that might work here in DC (40% of all public schools are now charters here anyway) because you'd end up with types of schools that run the gauntlet (there are a lot of choices if you can luck out on the lottery) and people would have real choices, plus there is plenty of public transportation to take kids cross-city to said schools. But in Louisiana, apparently this is not working. If individual families want to use BJU or A Beka, then fine, but if you didn't have another option? Oy.

[Zebra]

Every single curriculum I have used has been "wacky" in some way.

 

And, FWIW there is this idea out there that the Great Depression was worse than it was. People had a very tough time, no doubt. But you can't compare it to something like the Holocaust.

 

Show me a curriculum without crazy errors in it, and.....well, I'll do nothing because it's impossible :lol:.

[FaithManor]

But, that necessitates believing that God is in the habit of telling lies. Isn't the other guy the deceiver, the master of lies, etc?

 

 

Oh yes, you nailed it. Beliefs on the matter aren't really compatible with reason. The fundie school I went to had a pastor say that fossils were put their by the devil to deceive people. However, the deacons weren't really pleased with him and made him retract it because they didn't like the "power of creation" being ascribed to satan. Then they really didn't know what to do...either God was a deceiver or satan could make fossils nad bury them in rock layers and .......it was a real brain bender for them.

 

I never really told my parents about the cr*p that was shoveled to us until I graduated. I just assumed they knew. Bad assumption on my part. They really didn't know and would have pulled me out of the school had they understood it. Sigh...I just silently suffered while filled in the blanks in the workbooks with the "facts" they wanted to hear while simultaneously looking for answers elsewhere. I'm actually very, very grateful that the bulk of my education, to that point, had been public school. I was an excellent reader and mathematician so anything that I wasn't being taught correctly at the fundie school, I could teach myself on my own time at the library.

 

Faith

[Kathryn]

The only non-evolutionary thing I was ever told by someone about dinosaurs was that carbon dating is inaccurate because of the Great Flood. I made it to adulthood before realizing that many people believe in a Young Earth. Until that time I really thought EVERYONE believed in Old Earth and that the Biblical creation story was allegorical/not a literal 7 days or whatever.

 

Me too. It was in a college history (NOT hosiery as iPad wanted to correct me) course that I learned about Ussher's chronology and the whole class was similarly shocked at such thinking. I was also taught in archaeology courses that when dinosaurs were first discovered, some people thought the fossils were a hoax. And that when dating them (and with geology in general), some Christians didn't believe the timeline that science gives us, thinking it was a hoax, a trick by God (I'm as baffled by that as Mrs. Mungo), or inaccurate because of the Noah flood. Before that, all I had encountered was an eighth grade classmate arguing about the Big Bang (but not actual time).

 

It wasn't until I started homeschooling and looking at resources that I found out that people REALLY think that dinosaurs and humans hung out together and that the Bible tells us about dragons.

[nmoira]

I could totally have a beer with this guy. His last statement.

She. :) Maggie Koerth-Baker is science editor at Boing Boing and is one of my favourite science writers.

[mommaduck]

I know Answers in Genesis claims legends and artwork with St George and the Dragon and other dragon tales as "proof" that man walked with dinosaurs.

 

Wacky.

 

Bill

Yes, well, many of us don't consider St George a legend. Legendary, yes. a legend or myth, no.

[kalanamak]

 

Speaking of out there, Louisiana's new school law seems completely out there. I was trying to wrap my head around it. Is it that *every* public school in Louisiana is now a privatized charter?

 

If that is true I can just imagine this as the first step to a lot of corrupt people licking their lips to get on the gravy train.

[oasis]

Wasn't there a verse in the KJV that mentions dragons, or something like them?

 

If you run a KJV search for verses containing the word "dragon", here are the resulting verses:

 

Deuteronomy 32:33 Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps.

 

Nehemiah 2:13 And I went out by night by the gate of the valley, even before the dragon well, and to the dung port, and viewed the walls of Jerusalem, which were broken down, and the gates thereof were consumed with fire.

 

Job 30:29 I am a brother to dragons, and a companion to owls.

 

Psalms 44:19 Though thou hast sore broken us in the place of dragons, and covered us with the shadow of death.

 

Psalms 74:13 Thou didst divide the sea by thy strength: thou brakest the heads of the dragons in the waters.

 

Psalms 91:13 Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet.

 

Psalms 148:7 Praise the LORD from the earth, ye dragons, and all deeps:

 

Isaiah 13:22 And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged.

 

Isaiah 27:1 In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

 

Isaiah 34:13 And thorns shall come up in her palaces, nettles and brambles in the fortresses thereof: and it shall be an habitation of dragons, and a court for owls.

 

Isaiah 35:7 And the parched ground shall become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water: in the habitation of dragons, where each lay, shall be grass with reeds and rushes.

 

Isaiah 43:20 The beast of the field shall honour me, the dragons and the owls: because I give waters in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert, to give drink to my people, my chosen.

 

Isaiah 51:9 Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the LORD; awake, as in the ancient days, in the generations of old. Art thou not it that hath cut Rahab, and wounded the dragon?

 

Jeremiah 9:11 And I will make Jerusalem heaps, and a den of dragons; and I will make the cities of Judah desolate, without an inhabitant.

 

Jeremiah 10:22 Behold, the noise of the bruit is come, and a great commotion out of the north country, to make the cities of Judah desolate, and a den of dragons.

 

Jeremiah 14:6 And the wild asses did stand in the high places, they snuffed up the wind like dragons; their eyes did fail, because there was no grass.

 

Jeremiah 49:33 And Hazor shall be a dwelling for dragons, and a desolation for ever: there shall no man abide there, nor any son of man dwell in it.

 

Jeremiah 51:34 Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon hath devoured me, he hath crushed me, he hath made me an empty vessel, he hath swallowed me up like a dragon, he hath filled his belly with my delicates, he hath cast me out.

 

Jeremiah 51:37 And Babylon shall become heaps, a dwellingplace for dragons, an astonishment, and an hissing, without an inhabitant.

 

Ezekiel 29:3 Speak, and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, Pharaoh king of Egypt, the great dragon that lieth in the midst of his rivers, which hath said, My river is mine own, and I have made it for myself.

 

Micah 1:8 Therefore I will wail and howl, I will go stripped and naked: I will make a wailing like the dragons, and mourning as the owls.

 

Malachi 1:3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.

 

Revelation 12:3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.

 

Revelation 12:4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

 

Revelation 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

 

Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

 

Revelation 12:13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.

 

Revelation 12:16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

 

Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

 

Revelation 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

 

Revelation 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

 

Revelation 13:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.

 

Revelation 16:13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.

 

Revelation 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

[PrairieSong]

 

OH, I have another one with Abeka...I don't know if it is still in there, but their world history book used to claim that Christopher Columbus was not only the first European on U.S. soil :001_huh: (let's start by learning geography people), but also that his sole reason for heading west was to spread the gospel, such was his concern for the souls of men. :tongue_smilie: Years ago, when I found that little number, I did call the publisher and asked a customer service rep why they included such misinformation as fact in their materials and I was told I needed to get saved! :glare: That was the response.

 

To be honest, his log DOES mention spreading the faith.

 

" Your Highnesses, as Catholic Christians, and princes who love and promote the holy Christian faith, and are enemies of the doctrine of Mahomet, and of all idolatry and heresy, determined to send me, Christopher Columbus, to the above-mentioned countries of India, to see the said princes, people, and territories, and to learn their disposition and the proper method of converting them to our holy faith; and furthermore directed that I should not proceed by land to the East, as is customary, but by a Westerly route, in which direction we have hitherto no certain evidence that any one has gone."

 

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/columbus1.asp

 

However, I bet the fundamentalists textbooks don't mention that he was a Catholic. ;)

[Mrs Mungo]

If you run a KJV search for verses containing the word "dragon", here are the resulting verses:

 

Most of those are allegorical, for sure. And none of them say anything like, "and on the road to Damascus we came upon a dragon."

 

To be honest, his log DOES mention spreading the faith.

 

" Your Highnesses, as Catholic Christians, and princes who love and promote the holy Christian faith, and are enemies of the doctrine of Mahomet, and of all idolatry and heresy, determined to send me, Christopher Columbus, to the above-mentioned countries of India, to see the said princes, people, and territories, and to learn their disposition and the proper method of converting them to our holy faith; and furthermore directed that I should not proceed by land to the East, as is customary, but by a Westerly route, in which direction we have hitherto no certain evidence that any one has gone."

 

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/columbus1.asp

 

However, I bet the fundamentalists textbooks don't mention that he was a Catholic. ;)

 

Or all the slavery. Or massacres. Or that he was mainly looking for gold. Or, apparently, that he never put so much as a big toe on North America.

 

From the initial contract:

"that of all and every kind of merchandise, whether pearls, precious stones, gold, silver, spices, and other objects and merchandise whatsoever, of whatever kind, name and sort, which may be bought, bartered, discovered, acquired and obtained within the limits of the said Admiralty, Your Highnesses grant from now henceforth to the said Don Cristóbal [Christopher Columbus] ... the tenth part of the whole, after deducting all the expenses which may be incurred therein."

 

On his fourth voyage, he wrote, "Gold is most excellent; gold is treasure, and he who possesses it does all he wishes to in this world."

 

After his initial voyage, he wrote of the natives:

 

"they are artless and generous with what they have, to such a degree as no one would believe but him who had seen it. Of anything they have, if it be asked for, they never say no, but do rather invite the person to accept it, and show as much lovingness as though they would give their hearts."

Later in the letter, he said:

"their Highnesses may see that I shall give them as much gold as they need .... and slaves as many as they shall order to be shipped."

 

 

And spreading the church hardly meant spreading the *faith*. In fact, if they did not readily accept the church as their supreme ruler, then:

"We shall take you and your wives and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and as such shall sell and dispose of them as their Highnesses may command; and we shall take away your goods, and shall do all the harm and damage that we can."

 

 

This was often read to native groups upon landing, without translation. It was just another way of excusing their behavior.

 

[Retired]

I debated with myself about posting on the anti Christian thread.

 

I personally don't use Bob Jones or Abeka. I see they are from a whats it called revisionist mind set. There history is colored in the frame that America was filled with savages that the nice European brought religion and saved the world.

 

I'm a Christian and just don't fall in the mindset that religious folks that called themselves Christian did the right thing

 

I will also step out that I'm a young earth Christan which means there was a possibility of dinosaurs and humans on the earth at the same time.

 

It doesn't mean I'm wacky. It means I have read the bible and other scientific journals and believe the possibility. Iam not a backwood dumb person. I'm not wacky. I've a couple of nursing degrees from secular universities.

 

I guess we need to bring up some other religious textbooks and let me pick things out I don't agree with and call them wacky or disturbing.

 

I can tell you several religions I don't agree with and know for a fact many of you practice these religions but I don't bring up the books and point out what I see as disturbing believes

 

I also believe in the voucher program. I've been paying tax dollars into a system that teaches a religion of secular humanism. I dislike a lot of stuff in those textbook. Why should I have to continue to pay for them? I think that the secular folks should pay for some of my books;)

 

 

:leaving:

[kalanamak]

Every single curriculum I have used has been "wacky" in some way.

 

Wacky has degrees. A jay-walker and a murderer are both law-breakers, but we do see a difference in degrees.

[FaithManor]

To be honest, his log DOES mention spreading the faith.

 

" Your Highnesses, as Catholic Christians, and princes who love and promote the holy Christian faith, and are enemies of the doctrine of Mahomet, and of all idolatry and heresy, determined to send me, Christopher Columbus, to the above-mentioned countries of India, to see the said princes, people, and territories, and to learn their disposition and the proper method of converting them to our holy faith; and furthermore directed that I should not proceed by land to the East, as is customary, but by a Westerly route, in which direction we have hitherto no certain evidence that any one has gone."

 

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/columbus1.asp

 

However, I bet the fundamentalists textbooks don't mention that he was a Catholic. ;)

 

No they don't mention that fact! But, my point was that it was listed as his "sole" reason to go...sorry folks. That doesn't hold up...he went to find a shipping route to the orient. Money was his motivation.

 

As for spreading the gospel, well....I guess I have a different version of how that ought to be presented. From his own writings,

 

"In the name of the Holy Trinity, we can send from here all the slaves and brazil wood which could be sold."

 

Doesn't sound like evangelism to me. Not arguing with you, just stating that it is a total misrepresentation of Columbus to claim that he wanted to "spread the gospel". He wanted to make a buck! In his day, he was the most prolific slave trader - sending more than 5,000 indigenous peoples to their doom in Europe. I'm pretty certain the proper method of "converting" the peoples isn't capture or put to the sword.

 

Off topic - I HATE COLUMBUS DAY!!!!!!

 

Faith

[Kathryn]

Most of those are allegorical, for sure. And none of them say anything like, "and on the road to Damascus we came upon a dragon."

 

 

 

Or all the slavery. Or massacres. Or that he was mainly looking for gold. Or, apparently, that he never put so much as a big toe on North America.

 

From the initial contract:

"that of all and every kind of merchandise, whether pearls, precious stones, gold, silver, spices, and other objects and merchandise whatsoever, of whatever kind, name and sort, which may be bought, bartered, discovered, acquired and obtained within the limits of the said Admiralty, Your Highnesses grant from now henceforth to the said Don Cristóbal [Christopher Columbus] ... the tenth part of the whole, after deducting all the expenses which may be incurred therein."

 

On his fourth voyage, he wrote, "Gold is most excellent; gold is treasure, and he who possesses it does all he wishes to in this world."

 

After his initial voyage, he wrote of the natives:

 

"they are artless and generous with what they have, to such a degree as no one would believe but him who had seen it. Of anything they have, if it be asked for, they never say no, but do rather invite the person to accept it, and show as much lovingness as though they would give their hearts."

Later in the letter, he said:

"their Highnesses may see that I shall give them as much gold as they need .... and slaves as many as they shall order to be shipped."

 

 

And spreading the church hardly meant spreading the *faith*. In fact, if they did not readily accept the church as their supreme ruler, then:

"We shall take you and your wives and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and as such shall sell and dispose of them as their Highnesses may command; and we shall take away your goods, and shall do all the harm and damage that we can."

 

 

This was often read to native groups upon landing, without translation. It was just another way of excusing their behavior.

 

 

:iagree: I was about to go look for more Columbus quotes but you beat me to it. His actions and other words betray his true motives.

[oasis]

Most of those are allegorical, for sure. And none of them say anything like, "and on the road to Damascus we came upon a dragon."

 

:iagree:

[PrairieSong]

Most of those are allegorical, for sure. And none of them say anything like, "and on the road to Damascus we came upon a dragon."

 

 

 

Or all the slavery. Or massacres. Or that he was mainly looking for gold. Or, apparently, that he never put so much as a big toe on North America.

 

From the initial contract:

"that of all and every kind of merchandise, whether pearls, precious stones, gold, silver, spices, and other objects and merchandise whatsoever, of whatever kind, name and sort, which may be bought, bartered, discovered, acquired and obtained within the limits of the said Admiralty, Your Highnesses grant from now henceforth to the said Don Cristóbal [Christopher Columbus] ... the tenth part of the whole, after deducting all the expenses which may be incurred therein."

 

On his fourth voyage, he wrote, "Gold is most excellent; gold is treasure, and he who possesses it does all he wishes to in this world."

 

After his initial voyage, he wrote of the natives:

 

"they are artless and generous with what they have, to such a degree as no one would believe but him who had seen it. Of anything they have, if it be asked for, they never say no, but do rather invite the person to accept it, and show as much lovingness as though they would give their hearts."

 

Later in the letter, he said:

 

 

 

"their Highnesses may see that I shall give them as much gold as they need .... and slaves as many as they shall order to be shipped."

 

 

And spreading the church hardly meant spreading the *faith*. In fact, if they did not readily accept the church as their supreme ruler, then:

 

 

"We shall take you and your wives and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and as such shall sell and dispose of them as their Highnesses may command; and we shall take away your goods, and shall do all the harm and damage that we can."

 

 

This was often read to native groups upon landing, without translation. It was just another way of excusing their behavior.

 

 

 

Sure, I know about the gold and the slavery, etc. I didn't say that spreading the faith was his "sole reason", but that he wrote about it in his log.

 

It's hard not to see all this through twenty-first century lenses. To us that behavior is horrendous and inexcusable. How did they excuse it, do you think? Do you think they saw it as being as horrible as we do now?

[PrairieSong]

No they don't mention that fact! But, my point was that it was listed as his "sole" reason to go...sorry folks. That doesn't hold up...he went to find a shipping route to the orient. Money was his motivation.

 

As for spreading the gospel, well....I guess I have a different version of how that ought to be presented. From his own writings,

 

"In the name of the Holy Trinity, we can send from here all the slaves and brazil wood which could be sold."

 

Doesn't sound like evangelism to me. Not arguing with you, just stating that it is a total misrepresentation of Columbus to claim that he wanted to "spread the gospel". He wanted to make a buck! In his day, he was the most prolific slave trader - sending more than 5,000 indigenous peoples to their doom in Europe. I'm pretty certain the proper method of "converting" the peoples isn't capture or put to the sword.

 

Off topic - I HATE COLUMBUS DAY!!!!!!

 

Faith

 

No, he never said "spreading the faith" was his sole reason. Obviously it wasn't. I still think it's interesting that the A Beka and Bob Jones people hold him up as a missionary when he was a Catholic, and they are extremely anti-Catholic.

[TravelingChris]

One of my best friends in college grew up very poor and was one of the few white children in an NE inner city school system. One day we were talking with a number of friends about Montana. She piped up about Montana having lots of black people. That struck the rest of us as a really strange joke so we asked her about it since Montana is one of the whitest states. (We were in Chicago). Turns out that she didn't have really American History in high school- she had Black American History- and so western expansion focused only on stories of black soldiers and black cowboys. From this, she had the mis-impression that the west (not Pacific west) was full of black people.

 

There is a lot wrong in a lot of school texts and what is being taught.

[Mrs Mungo]

I debated with myself about posting on the anti Christian thread.

 

Are you calling this thread anti-Christian?

 

 

I personally don't use Bob Jones or Abeka. I see they are from a whats it called revisionist mind set. There history is colored in the frame that America was filled with savages that the nice European brought religion and saved the world.

 

I'm a Christian and just don't fall in the mindset that religious folks that called themselves Christian did the right thing

 

Agreed.

 

I will also step out that I'm a young earth Christan which means there was a possibility of dinosaurs and humans on the earth at the same time.

 

It doesn't mean I'm wacky. It means I have read the bible and other scientific journals and believe the possibility. Iam not a backwood dumb person. I'm not wacky. I've a couple of nursing degrees from secular universities.

 

Opinions and facts are not equal. I am a Christian. I recognize the fact that there is little evidence to support my faith. If people think it's wacky that I believe in Jesus Christ as my redeemer, so be it. I sort of think it's wacky to believe that a series of spontaneous, beneficial genetic mutations gave us everything from tulips to whales. It is hard for me to imagine that happening without a guiding hand, so to speak. Even over millions of years, it's statistically extremely unlikely.

 

BUT, there is actual physical evidence that supports one theory (using this term loosely, sorry science-types) of the age of the earth and not the other. If someone insisted to you that they believed that illness was caused by bad humours and that their child's epilepsy was caused by too much phlegm in their system, how would you feel about that?

 

I guess we need to bring up some other religious textbooks and let me pick things out I don't agree with and call them wacky or disturbing.

 

These aren't opinions with which someone can disagree in most cases. It is a FACT that the KKK *from its beginnings* was a RACIST organization that committed hate crimes. An alternative history does not *exist*.

[Kathryn]

Are you calling this thread anti-Christian?

 

 

 

Agreed.

 

 

 

Opinions and facts are not equal. I am a Christian. I recognize the fact that there is little evidence to support my faith. If people think it's wacky that I believe in Jesus Christ as my redeemer, so be it. I sort of think it's wacky to believe that a series of spontaneous, beneficial genetic mutations gave us everything from tulips to whales. It is hard for me to imagine that happening without a guiding hand, so to speak. Even over millions of years, it's statistically extremely unlikely.

 

BUT, there is actual physical evidence that supports one theory (using this term loosely, sorry science-types) of the age of the earth and not the other. If someone insisted to you that they believed that illness was caused by bad humours and that their child's epilepsy was caused by too much phlegm in their system, how would you feel about that?

 

 

 

These aren't opinions with which someone can disagree in most cases. It is a FACT that the KKK *from its beginnings* was a RACIST organization that committed hate crimes. An alternative history does not *exist*.

 

I'm just going to follow you around and click this guy: :iagree:

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Since this thread began I have been wondering how many homeschooling parents of today were educated with Abeka curriculum, themselves, whether as homeschoolers or in private schools. I guess I should also wonder how many homeschooling parents are BJU grads.

 

Because if it is a significant percentage, that might explain the homeschooling conventions of today.

 

Anyone have any data on this?

[TravelingChris]

My dh and I are always perplexed by those who say that God tricked us with things like carbon dating or dinosaurs or what have you. We have used BJU and Abeka books in the past. Not the history books, and not any books that denigrated set theory. In fact, I believe that BJU has set theory in third grade math (I used this almost 18 years ago so I may be wrong about the grade). I have used some BJU science. I am Old Earth so we don't use the earth science text and have skipped a few portions. But I had no problem using BJU Chemistry and thought it was a very good text.

[oasis]

I'm just going to follow you around and click this guy: :iagree:

 

 

LOL! I was thinking the same thing. :D

[LucyStoner]

I debated with myself about posting on the anti Christian thread.

 

I personally don't use Bob Jones or Abeka. I see they are from a whats it called revisionist mind set. There history is colored in the frame that America was filled with savages that the nice European brought religion and saved the world.

 

I'm a Christian and just don't fall in the mindset that religious folks that called themselves Christian did the right thing

 

I will also step out that I'm a young earth Christan which means there was a possibility of dinosaurs and humans on the earth at the same time.

 

 

 

Honestly, if I were a conservative Christian, this sort of stuff would offend me even more than it does now because I would feel it was painting me in a bad light.

 

Defending slaughter, slavery, the KKK attacking the Depression etc has more to do with politics and cultural mindset than with religion. There is nothing godly about making excuses for lynching and the like.

 

This is not an anti-Christian thread. It is an anti-bad information thread.

[Mrs Mungo]

Sure, I know about the gold and the slavery, etc. I didn't say that spreading the faith was his "sole reason", but that he wrote about it in his log.

 

It's hard not to see all this through twenty-first century lenses. To us that behavior is horrendous and inexcusable. How did they excuse it, do you think? Do you think they saw it as being as horrible as we do now?

 

Did *who* see it as horribly as "we" do now? The Indians certainly did. The abuses of Cortes were written down by the natives. There were various people throughout history, whether soldiers or priests or lawyers or politicians who have violently fought against injustices of all sorts. Did some people see it as wrong? Yes. Did all of the people see it as wrong? No. There are horribly racist people alive today, they aren't justified in their racism just because it might be something that they grew up with.

[I.Dup.]

It was so freeing during RCIA when we found out that Catholics can actually believe in evolution and that science and religion don't have to be at odds.

[Parrothead]

 

This is not an anti-Christian thread. It is an anti-bad information thread.

:iagree:

[stripe]

Or all the slavery. Or massacres. Or that he was mainly looking for gold. Or, apparently, that he never put so much as a big toe on North America.

 

I was just reading about explorers' diaries in which they chronicled the lascivious native women who "defiled themselves" with the European men. Yeah.

 

I think many people have serious misgivings about homeschooling because they think it's all a ploy to keep children uninformed about anything other than a very narrow and selective interpretation of what happened.

[amey311]

Re: Columbus. My initial thought on why he would change his mission from "Bringin' back the riches!" to "Spreading thine holy Word" would be salesmanship or knowing his audience. Not everyone would be okay with just enlarging coffers. They may have also needed a "humanitarian" aspect to the trip.

 

You know, like "woohoo! Monsanto is giving seeds to poor African nations!" but we'll tell shareholders that it's to tap another market that will dependent on our seeds only. On one hand - increasing market share. On the other, humanitarian.

[FaithManor]

No, he never said "spreading the faith" was his sole reason. Obviously it wasn't. I still think it's interesting that the A Beka and Bob Jones people hold him up as a missionary when he was a Catholic, and they are extremely anti-Catholic.

 

 

Well, I can't presume to know what they think because I can't get inside their heads. However, one possibility is that the whole discovery of the Americas and the colonizing thereof, largely by white Europeans had to be recast in some positive light because they see the U.S. as a "city on a hill" or at least a God-ordained nation based on principles in the OT and NT. It can't be one more colony built on the oppression of the indigenous people unless that oppression was somehow Godly too. So it's either convenient to ignore facts or just reinvent the wheel and then claim that everyone else was wrong.

 

By the way, I am still a Christian. A strong Jesus follower as a matter of fact, so my comments are not anti-Christian. It's just that I survived, literally, a fundie situation using one of these curriculums and in the 30 years the school has been open, it's been a total disaster. A recent survey of "alumni" found that most are not in fact Christians any more. The reinterpretation of history did not preserve their faith or disciple them or whatever. Most are now atheist or agnostic.

 

When released to the real world, when confronted with primary source documents, when faced with actual facts, they became confused, disenchanted, and angry. That is the report from more than 75% of the graduates. And yet, knowing it doesn't work, that sugar-coating the truth is not producing "satisfactory" results, the administration marches on with the same curriculum and yes celebrates that Louisiana went ahead with the vouchers and they hope it happens here. They will take the money. To be honest, I expect a lot of drivel from the PS down the street and given that the average public school science middle school text has been found to average 200 gross factual errors, I'm not happy that my money gets used for that either. But, no good end comes from "The State" using state funds to help establish any religion and from my perspective, using my tax dollars to fund curriculums that cast the KKK in good light, or Aparteid as beneficial, or claims the Great Depression was over-blown so they can double hate FDR - I'm no fan of his in particular by the way; I'm not a fan of a lot of presidents' policies but that doesn't make it moral to spread lies, misinformation, and half truths just because I don't agree with them! - or Columbus was a just and wonderful Christian or......I don't want my money used for that. Because in the end, all it does is cast aspersions on Christ, it works against Him not for Him.

 

Faith

[PrairieSong]

Did *who* see it as horribly as "we" do now? The Indians certainly did. The abuses of Cortes were written down by the natives. There were various people throughout history, whether soldiers or priests or lawyers or politicians who have violently fought against injustices of all sorts. Did some people see it as wrong? Yes. Did all of the people see it as wrong? No. There are horribly racist people alive today, they aren't justified in their racism just because it might be something that they grew up with.

 

Sorry, Mrs. Mungo, I wasn't clear. I meant did the perpetrators see it as being as wrong as we do now. No, I don't think it's justifiable AT ALL, just that we see it so differently a few hundred years later. And thanks for that link.

[Kathryn]

Honestly, if I were a conservative Christian, this sort of stuff would offend me even more than it does now because I would feel it was painting me in a bad light.

 

Defending slaughter, slavery, the KKK attacking the Depression etc has more to do with politics and cultural mindset than with religion. There is nothing godly about making excuses for lynching and the like.

 

This is not an anti-Christian thread. It is an anti-bad information thread.

 

:iagree: I'm the OP. I'm a Christian. I don't like that "wacky" claims like these are purported to represent the Christian religion. They don't. They represent one very narrow worldview.

[Tenaj]

Did anyone notice that the original post pulled out one-sentence excerpts from the texts? I'll bet I could do the same thing with all kinds of secular textbooks and they would look completely different from the original intent.

[oasis]

I think many people have serious misgivings about homeschooling because they think it's all a ploy to keep children uninformed about anything other than a very narrow and selective interpretation of what happened.

 

I think this is true, although the people who think this way aren't giving enough credit to the children being homeschooled (as far as thinking the kids will always believe what is being taught.)

 

I was homeschooled, and taught with some selective interpretations. As I grew up, I learned more for myself, and formed my own opinions.

[Mrs Mungo]

Sorry, Mrs. Mungo, I wasn't clear. I meant did the perpetrators see it as being as wrong as we do now. No, I don't think it's justifiable AT ALL, just that we see it so differently a few hundred years later. And thanks for that link.

 

But, there were always some people on the "other side" (for lack of a better generic term) who horrified and saddened by injustice and travesties. I know there was an example of one of the guys who was with Pizarro or Cortes...?...I can't find it right this second, and I'm having a brain cramp. Plus, I have to go to a meeting in about...oh, a minute and I'm not ready to go.

 

But, as later examples?

 

Here is one soldier's account of the Trail of Tears:

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-newnation/4532

 

Here is the story of Wilbur Wilberforce:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/wilberforce_william.shtml

 

These were people who viewed these things as *wrong* when they were happening. So, the whole "product of their time" argument doesn't wash for me. There have always been people who thought these things were wrong.

[FaithManor]

Since this thread began I have been wondering how many homeschooling parents of today were educated with Abeka curriculum, themselves, whether as homeschoolers or in private schools. I guess I should also wonder how many homeschooling parents are BJU grads.

 

Because if it is a significant percentage, that might explain the homeschooling conventions of today.

 

Anyone have any data on this?

 

That would be an interesting study to conduct, wouldn't it?

 

Faith