Man Among the Gentiles

[CaptainM]

In honor of the upcoming federal holiday on October 10th, Christopher Columbus is DEFINITELY NOT the person the LDS Church says he is. They reference 1 Nephi 13:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

For analysis of how EVIL he was, see the documentary at https://youtu.be/SSxOiBrmzEY

For an idea on who the person was that Nephi saw, see https://onewhoiswatching.wordpress.com/ ... e+gentiles

In Christ. Best wishes…

[BuriedTartaria]

I agree with the idea that Columbus isn’t the person referenced.

[Robin Hood]

In honor of the upcoming federal holiday on October 10th, Christopher Columbus is DEFINITELY NOT the person the LDS Church says he is. They reference 1 Nephi 13:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

For analysis of how EVIL he was, see the documentary at https://youtu.be/SSxOiBrmzEY

For an idea on who the person was that Nephi saw, see https://onewhoiswatching.wordpress.com/ ... e+gentiles

In Christ. Best wishes…

I have believed for some time that this passage does not refer to Columbus.
A couple of observations:
1. It doesn't say the man is a Gentile, only that he is among them. So it could be anyone, including someone living in the US.
2. The words "many waters" was not the phrase the Nephites used to describe a large ocean. They called that the "great deep'".
Perhaps "many waters" refers to rivers or lakes, and is nothing to do with seafarers.

I don't know to whom this is referring, but I suspect it's someone we haven't thought of.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Context is important:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

13 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.

14 And it came to pass that I beheld many multitudes of the Gentiles upon the land of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were scattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.

However you want to slice or dice this, there was one man mentioned. Then more of them are mentioned, these were in captivity. I have to believe that these were our forefathers who colonized America. Who this first man is exactly... I dunno. Are people perfect? No. The Lord didn't say this man was the epitome of righteousness. I mean, look at Alma the younger.

[Robin Hood]

Context is important:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

13 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.

14 And it came to pass that I beheld many multitudes of the Gentiles upon the land of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were scattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.

However you want to slice or dice this, there was one man mentioned. Then more of them are mentioned, these were in captivity. I have to believe that these were our forefathers who colonized America. Who this first man is exactly... I dunno. Are people perfect? No. The Lord didn't say this man was the epitome of righteousness. I mean, look at Alma the younger.

But neither Columbus or those who came after were generally in captivity.
Many Puritans had been persecuted and sought a new land. Many of them went to Holland at first.
I used to live in Boston in Lincolnshire. Boston, Mass. was named in honour of the people of the English town who refused to imprison or persecute the Puritans. Many of them sailed from Boston to Holland.

Whoever the man is, it isn't Columbus. John Cobot is a better candidate in my view.

[Dave62]

Context is important:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

13 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.

14 And it came to pass that I beheld many multitudes of the Gentiles upon the land of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were scattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.

However you want to slice or dice this, there was one man mentioned. Then more of them are mentioned, these were in captivity. I have to believe that these were our forefathers who colonized America. Who this first man is exactly... I dunno. Are people perfect? No. The Lord didn't say this man was the epitome of righteousness. I mean, look at Alma the younger.

But neither Columbus or those who came after were generally in captivity.
Many Puritans had been persecuted and sought a new land. Many of them went to Holland at first.
I used to live in Boston in Lincolnshire. Boston, Mass. was named in honour of the people of the English town who refused to imprison or persecute the Puritans. Many of them sailed from Boston to Holland.

Whoever the man is, it isn't Columbus. John Cobot is a better candidate in my view.

And John Cabot's son, Sebastian, is an even better candidate.

[nightlight]

In honor of the upcoming federal holiday on October 10th, Christopher Columbus is DEFINITELY NOT the person the LDS Church says he is. They reference 1 Nephi 13:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

For analysis of how EVIL he was, see the documentary at https://youtu.be/SSxOiBrmzEY

For an idea on who the person was that Nephi saw, see https://onewhoiswatching.wordpress.com/ ... e+gentiles

In Christ. Best wishes…

Don't read about David

[Reluctant Watchman]

Context is important:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

13 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.

14 And it came to pass that I beheld many multitudes of the Gentiles upon the land of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were scattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.

However you want to slice or dice this, there was one man mentioned. Then more of them are mentioned, these were in captivity. I have to believe that these were our forefathers who colonized America. Who this first man is exactly... I dunno. Are people perfect? No. The Lord didn't say this man was the epitome of righteousness. I mean, look at Alma the younger.

But neither Columbus or those who came after were generally in captivity.
Many Puritans had been persecuted and sought a new land. Many of them went to Holland at first.
I used to live in Boston in Lincolnshire. Boston, Mass. was named in honour of the people of the English town who refused to imprison or persecute the Puritans. Many of them sailed from Boston to Holland.

Whoever the man is, it isn't Columbus. John Cobot is a better candidate in my view.

He is talking about the Gentiles who fled Europe and the very reason why we engaged in the Revolutionary War.

[Robin Hood]

Context is important:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

13 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.

14 And it came to pass that I beheld many multitudes of the Gentiles upon the land of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were scattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.

However you want to slice or dice this, there was one man mentioned. Then more of them are mentioned, these were in captivity. I have to believe that these were our forefathers who colonized America. Who this first man is exactly... I dunno. Are people perfect? No. The Lord didn't say this man was the epitome of righteousness. I mean, look at Alma the younger.

But neither Columbus or those who came after were generally in captivity.
Many Puritans had been persecuted and sought a new land. Many of them went to Holland at first.
I used to live in Boston in Lincolnshire. Boston, Mass. was named in honour of the people of the English town who refused to imprison or persecute the Puritans. Many of them sailed from Boston to Holland.

Whoever the man is, it isn't Columbus. John Cobot is a better candidate in my view.

He is talking about the Gentiles who fled Europe and the very reason why we engaged in the Revolutionary War.

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

You’re joking, right? We fought a WAR with Great Britain. What more “captivity” do you want? What greater cause is there in the world than religious liberty?

[nightlight]

Context is important:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

13 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.

14 And it came to pass that I beheld many multitudes of the Gentiles upon the land of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were scattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.

However you want to slice or dice this, there was one man mentioned. Then more of them are mentioned, these were in captivity. I have to believe that these were our forefathers who colonized America. Who this first man is exactly... I dunno. Are people perfect? No. The Lord didn't say this man was the epitome of righteousness. I mean, look at Alma the younger.

But neither Columbus or those who came after were generally in captivity.
Many Puritans had been persecuted and sought a new land. Many of them went to Holland at first.
I used to live in Boston in Lincolnshire. Boston, Mass. was named in honour of the people of the English town who refused to imprison or persecute the Puritans. Many of them sailed from Boston to Holland.

Whoever the man is, it isn't Columbus. John Cobot is a better candidate in my view.

He is talking about the Gentiles who fled Europe and the very reason why we engaged in the Revolutionary War.

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

[briznian]

Context is important:

12 And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

13 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.

14 And it came to pass that I beheld many multitudes of the Gentiles upon the land of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were scattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.

However you want to slice or dice this, there was one man mentioned. Then more of them are mentioned, these were in captivity. I have to believe that these were our forefathers who colonized America. Who this first man is exactly... I dunno. Are people perfect? No. The Lord didn't say this man was the epitome of righteousness. I mean, look at Alma the younger.

But neither Columbus or those who came after were generally in captivity.
Many Puritans had been persecuted and sought a new land. Many of them went to Holland at first.
I used to live in Boston in Lincolnshire. Boston, Mass. was named in honour of the people of the English town who refused to imprison or persecute the Puritans. Many of them sailed from Boston to Holland.

Whoever the man is, it isn't Columbus. John Cobot is a better candidate in my view.

He is talking about the Gentiles who fled Europe and the very reason why we engaged in the Revolutionary War.

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

Whether they were in actual bondage or not, if you read the text of the Declaration of Independence, the tone of the writing sure sounds as if the colonists felt like they were in captivity.

Sentences like:

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism...

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

[Jamescm]

I don't know if Christopher Columbus is who is referred to in the Book of Mormon, but he wasn't as evil as oft made out to be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEw8c6TmzGg

[Robin Hood]

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

You’re joking, right? We fought a WAR with Great Britain. What more “captivity” do you want? What greater cause is there in the world than religious liberty?

You're conflating two different things.
You're claiming they fled Europe to escape captivity... but they didn't because they were still in captivity in the new world and had to have a war to get out of it.
So perhaps you could clarify what you mean. What was the nature of the captivity from which they fled in Europe?

[Reluctant Watchman]

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

You’re joking, right? We fought a WAR with Great Britain. What more “captivity” do you want? What greater cause is there in the world than religious liberty?

You're conflating two different things.
You're claiming they fled Europe to escape captivity... but they didn't because they were still in captivity in the new world and had to have a war to get out of it.
So perhaps you could clarify what you mean. What was the nature of the captivity from which they fled in Europe?

Oh my goodness... some people. SMH.

[Robin Hood]

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

You’re joking, right? We fought a WAR with Great Britain. What more “captivity” do you want? What greater cause is there in the world than religious liberty?

You're conflating two different things.
You're claiming they fled Europe to escape captivity... but they didn't because they were still in captivity in the new world and had to have a war to get out of it.
So perhaps you could clarify what you mean. What was the nature of the captivity from which they fled in Europe?

Oh my goodness... some people. SMH.

So you don't have an answer.
Thought not.

[Reluctant Watchman]

So you don't have an answer.
Thought not.

Probably a good reason you live in England.

[Durzan]

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

You’re joking, right? We fought a WAR with Great Britain. What more “captivity” do you want? What greater cause is there in the world than religious liberty?

How about liberty in general, of which religious liberty is an appendage?

[Reluctant Watchman]

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

You’re joking, right? We fought a WAR with Great Britain. What more “captivity” do you want? What greater cause is there in the world than religious liberty?

How about liberty in general, of which religious liberty is an appendage?

General liberty was part of the separation, but the core of it was religious liberty.

[Robin Hood]

So you don't have an answer.
Thought not.

Probably a good reason you live in England.

Still waiting.

[Being There]

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

You’re joking, right? We fought a WAR with Great Britain. What more “captivity” do you want? What greater cause is there in the world than religious liberty?

You're conflating two different things.
You're claiming they fled Europe to escape captivity... but they didn't because they were still in captivity in the new world and had to have a war to get out of it.
So perhaps you could clarify what you mean. What was the nature of the captivity from which they fled in Europe?

you've been in England too long under her majesty rule. ,
but maybe things will change, now that she's dead.

[Robin Hood]

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

You’re joking, right? We fought a WAR with Great Britain. What more “captivity” do you want? What greater cause is there in the world than religious liberty?

You're conflating two different things.
You're claiming they fled Europe to escape captivity... but they didn't because they were still in captivity in the new world and had to have a war to get out of it.
So perhaps you could clarify what you mean. What was the nature of the captivity from which they fled in Europe?

you've been in England too long under her majesty rule. ,
but maybe things will change, now that she's dead.

I think many Americans don't understand the British constitutional monarchy. Why would they!
The monarch is of no consequence to most Britons. The king reigns with the permission of parliament and has no real influence on our everyday lives. None at all.
Thankfully, the monarch is required to be strictly a-political. When we look across the pond at the shenanigins surrounding US presidents past and present, we are mostly thankful our head of state is above and outwith all of that nonsense.
For some reason, many Americans assume they're the only ones who have freedom. Magna Carta anyone?

[Reluctant Watchman]

So you don't have an answer.
Thought not.

Probably a good reason you live in England.

Still waiting.

If you can’t see that the colonists were living in religious “captivity”, then I don’t know what to tell you. They separated themselves and fought a war (sure that did happen here in the Americas), but they won. They liberated themselves from their captors. If you disagree, then fine. We don’t agree. But what I don’t see as an argument is the fact that the Gentiles came to the Americas and that is what is prophesied in the BoM. If you can find another people that fit this description, I’m all ears.

[Reluctant Watchman]

You’re joking, right? We fought a WAR with Great Britain. What more “captivity” do you want? What greater cause is there in the world than religious liberty?

You're conflating two different things.
You're claiming they fled Europe to escape captivity... but they didn't because they were still in captivity in the new world and had to have a war to get out of it.
So perhaps you could clarify what you mean. What was the nature of the captivity from which they fled in Europe?

you've been in England too long under her majesty rule. ,
but maybe things will change, now that she's dead.

I think many Americans don't understand the British constitutional monarchy. Why would they!
The monarch is of no consequence to most Britons. The king reigns with the permission of parliament and has no real influence on our everyday lives. None at all.
Thankfully, the monarch is required to be strictly a-political. When we look across the pond at the shenanigins surrounding US presidents past and present, we are mostly thankful our head of state is above and outwith all of that nonsense.
For some reason, many Americans assume they're the only ones who have freedom. Magna Carta anyone?

I’m glad you guys could learn a thing or two from the Constitution.

Unfortunately most Americans don’t value it much these days.

[InfoWarrior82]

Those that "fled" Europe and went to the colonies weren't in captivity. They wanted religious liberty, but it's a bit of a stretch to say they were captive.

You’re joking, right? We fought a WAR with Great Britain. What more “captivity” do you want? What greater cause is there in the world than religious liberty?

You're conflating two different things.
You're claiming they fled Europe to escape captivity... but they didn't because they were still in captivity in the new world and had to have a war to get out of it.
So perhaps you could clarify what you mean. What was the nature of the captivity from which they fled in Europe?

Their complaint wasn't that they didn't like their their country or culture. They simply wanted to be free to practice their religion as they saw fit. And leaving was the only way to be able to do that. But empires are jealous beasts, aren't they? They can't let go. I'd say that the revolutionary war was just a continuation of the colonization that occurred prior.