Christopher Columbus: Saint or Scoundrel? Part 2

Part 2. Christopher Columbus. Was Columbus a terrorist? Absolutely not.

There is far more evidence to equate Columbus with Homeland Security than there is to suggest that the Native Americans across the board were anti -terrorist groups.

Even a slight reading into the life of Columbus will show that he came to the New World for three things. 1. Evangelism.

2. Trade. 3. Alliances. Columbus was deeply inspired by the adventures of Marco Polo.

All Europeans knew trade with the Far East was treacherous. If a European wanted silk, he or she would have to finance a trip around either the

Horn of Africa or a voyage through Islamic lands. Remember, the Crusades were still going on at this point and Catholic -Islamic relations were hostile.

Columbus wanted to make wealth for the Church by trading with the Far East and thereby finance a final crusade to once and for all end

Islamic terrorism. Sadly, we're still reaping the consequences of this shortcoming. Friar John A.

Hardin points this out in a speech entitled Christopher Columbus, the Catholic. What is not commonly known is that the growing power of the followers of Muhammad had closed the normal pathway from Europe to the

Orient, in God's providence. This is what occasioned the search for another way to the Indies.

Most historians claim that this was the dominant motive for Columbus going west so that the wealth of the

East might be found. The Book of Prophecies, written by Columbus, shows the opposite. Commercial interests were certainly prominent in the minds of others, but Columbus had deeply spiritual interests at heart.

It was surely part of God's mysterious design that Columbus should have planted the truth faith in the New World at the same time that Islam was overrunning

Africa, the Near East, and was being driven out of Southern Europe. Columbus was also hoping to convert the

Far East to Christianity through evangelism and thereby gain allies by which to resist the Islamic Jihad.

In a letter to Pope Alexander VI, he said, I trust that by God's help

I may spread the holy name and gospel of Jesus Christ as widely as possible. While I haven't studied enough to know whether Columbus was a true follower of Christ, I do know that evangelical historian

David Barton has mentioned before that he believes Christopher Columbus was, in fact, equivalent to an evangelical.

When Columbus first set foot in the West Indies, he actually thought he had made it to the Far East, as evidenced by the fact that some people still call

Native Americans Indians today. The question is, why would Columbus steal from and subjugate people he wanted to trade an alliance with?

The answer is, he didn't. Despite what Hollywood actors and actresses would have you believe as evidenced by this year's

Reconsider Columbus Day campaign, the ugly truth is, the great explorer never participated in the actions of the conquistadors.

Tommy DeSono shed some light on this in his article, The Truth About Christopher Columbus. DeSono introduces us to the source of all the confusion.

His name was Francisco D. Babadilla, who lied about Columbus in order to gain his job as governor of Hispaniola.

In 1500, the King and Queen sent him to North Africa to investigate claims that Columbus wasn't being fair to the

European settlers, which means Columbus was protecting the Indians. So, D. Babadilla came here and in just a few short days did his investigation, with no telephone or motorized vehicles to help him, and promptly arrested

Columbus and his brothers for Indian mistreatment and sent them back to Spain for trial. It was two years before Columbus was able to be reinstated as governor again.

Regarding the allegations made against Columbus in reference to the slave trade, DeSono writes, one of his boats crashed in Haiti.

He had no room for 39 men, so he started a colony there. Columbus came back a year later to find that the

Taino Indians killed all of them and took them where they fell. Columbus went to war with the

Tainos and took 500 of them as prisoners of war, not slaves. They were released after the war.

If Columbus wasn't guilty of slavery or Indian mistreatment, surely he must have been at least a land grabber, right? Aren't all

Europeans? Once again, syndicated blogger Alexander Marriott asked the question, What was there to steal?

The land was not in use, evidenced by the pathetic level of any kind of progress, intellectual or material, on the part of nearly all

Indian tribes, despite thousands of years in lands, up to great plenty, and separated from the other people of the world, who could have potentially mettle with them.

Michael Berlineer, writer for the Capitalist magazine, makes the statement, Prior to 1492, what is now the

United States was sparsely inhabited, unused, and undeveloped. I assume this would equally apply to the

West Indies. So what is the legacy of Christopher Columbus? In a letter to King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, contained in the

Book of Prophecies, authored by the man himself, in 1502, Columbus makes this assertion,

At this time I have seen and put in study to look into all the scriptures, which are lord open to my understanding.

I could sense his hand upon me so that it became clear to me that it was feasible to navigate from here to India, and he gave me the will to execute the idea.

I have already said that for the execution of the enterprise of the Indies, neither reason nor mathematics nor world maps were profitable to me, rather the prophecy of Isaiah was completely fulfilled, and this is what

I wish to report here for the consideration of your Highnesses. Columbus was a man of virtue, a hero if you will.

With noble goals and faith in God, he sailed the uncharted ocean depths discovering what today we call home, and opening the possibility for western civilization to make inroads in a new continent.