Only fifty years ago, students were taught that Native Americans were “weak barbarians” (Mann 14) imprisoned in an unchanging environment because they were uncivilized, childish, lazy and incapable of any societal development. and therefore devoid of any history. Our view of the past from 1491 to 1607 has since been excessively revised. Today, historians know that Native Americans were not vicious savages but complex people deeply influenced by the intended and unintended consequences of European imperialism. Moving from a revisionist perspective to a consensual perspective on the colonization of the Americas would amount to teaching our children the absurdity that was taught only a few decades ago. Undeniably, this era brought many fortunes – including the discovery and birth of our nation – but also countless negative consequences that must never be forgotten, especially for Native Americans. Cultural, social, economic, political, and religious differences between European settlers and Native Americans stoked animosity and fueled an era of exploitation that left a profound impact on the indigenous peoples of North America: ignoring differences or subsequent conflicts between the two distinct societies. and calling European imperialism a “mutual misunderstanding” would be extremely disrespectful to the Native Americans who were the oppressed victims of that era. While this article argues for the revisionist perspective of European colonization of the Americas, it is important to begin by understanding the fundamental differences between the interpretive themes of conflict and consensus. The most significant difference is that conflict historians emphasize class, ethnic, racial, and political differences... middle of paper... a greater advantage. In the process of native conversion to Christianity, indigenous people contributed ideas that reshaped church practices, and new forms of Native American Christianity emerged in both regions. These new branches of Christianity, however, had nothing to do with Native American opposition to the new religion or the conflict that followed as Europeans attempted to gain followers for the Church. The differences in ideology and resistance against the Christian Church cannot be denied, regardless of the seemingly "positive" results of imposing its religion on another culture. Powhatan's brother was particularly opposed to sending native children to Christian schools, and preserving their religious beliefs would soon become a reason for the massacre of hundreds of native tribes (Henretta, Hinderaker, Edwards and Self). 52).