• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Who knows the real basis for Thanksgiving?

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
It's My Birthday!
The "Pilgrims" were known as Separatist. The Puritans, who also followed Calvin, were better know as the Nonseparating Episcopalians, who simply thought they could purge/purify the church of England of the remnants of Catholicism. The "Separatist" did not bow down to the Church of England, which was simply another offshoot of the Roman Church, with different leadership. Apparently the Roman church, in one instance, didn't concur with the English king killing one of his mates, therefore a new church of England was created out of the existing Roman church. As the English king was head of the Anglican church, the Separatist could face jail or death. They chose to go to the Netherlands, and some eventually to become the Plymouth colony.

You dont seem to know much about the CofE the closet it got to offshoot was a snapped off shoot and regrown with different bible and rites. Nor why it was created, the split was not over killing, jeez the RC church were masters of murder. The split was over divorce.

Yes so my post was correct. Thank you
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
You dont seem to know much about the CofE the closet it got to offshoot was a snapped off shoot and regrown with different bible and rites. Nor why it was created, the split was not over killing, jeez the RC church were masters of murder. The split was over divorce.

Yes so my post was correct. Thank you

The NT, a combination of the "good seed" and "tare" seed (Matthew 13:30) was the same. The abomination of rites, taken from the elder daughter of Babylon the Great, may be tweaked, but basically the same. (Revelation 17:5) Like mother, like daughter. (Ezekiel 16:44) It was the goal of the Puritans to try and break the connection. Sorry guys, nice try. The reason for the "Church of England", was for the king to get rid of his wife.
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Was it started by some religious refugees fleeing from the persecution of the Church of England, who fled to Holland, and then 40 of them took passage on a boat into the unknown America, and landed at Plymouth rock?
Did they form a communal form of government which lasted barely 1 year with about half of the group dying, before issuing plots to each member to own and grow on, and soon the community flourished, and the now flourishing community decided to thank God, and they also invited Indians to share in their new bounty, for the Indians and been helpful in teaching them basic knowledge which allowed them to survive the first winter. This is the story written by their first governor, and the guy who had organized the journey. Is that the real story, or is what you are taught in school the correct version. And why did the communal form of government fail. Apparently, according to the governor, it was because the good workers didn't want to work to provide for the lazy, and the lazy, did not want to work at all. Kind of why all communal types of governments fail, with most of the people dying or living in poverty. (Venezuela, Cuba, Mao's China, Stalin's Russia).

https://www.history.com/topics/colonial-america/william-bradford
robin williams pretty much nails it.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
It's My Birthday!
The NT, a combination of the "good seed" and "tare" seed (Matthew 13:30) was the same. The abomination of rites, taken from the elder daughter of Babylon the Great, may be tweaked, but basically the same. (Revelation 17:5) Like mother, like daughter. (Ezekiel 16:44) It was the goal of the Puritans to try and break the connection. Sorry guys, nice try. The reason for the "Church of England", was for the king to get rid of his wife.

Break the connection by denying religious freedom and killing those who disagreed with them. So not fleeing persecution but moving to where they could persecute.

Yes, divorce his wife, you said murder.
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
Break the connection by denying religious freedom and killing those who disagreed with them. So not fleeing persecution but moving to where they could persecute.

And who did the Separatist of Plymouth "persecute"? I think you are confusing the Puritan's persecution of the Quakers. Actually, the Puritans persecuted anyone who was not an Anglican. The Separatist and Puritans are not the same. What’s the Difference Between a Pilgrim and a Puritan?
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
Actually, the Plymouth Colony got along quite well with the Indians. And after they canned their venture into a type of communist type communalism, which led to death by starvation and disease, they took on a private property perspective, which led to a bounty of goods, which ended up with them giving thanks to God, and inviting their Indian friends to partake in a feast.
10 European colonies in America that failed before Jamestown - National Constitution Center

How many of these failed due to "communism"?

6. Failed Colonies, Exploration, American Beginnings: 1492-1690, Primary Resources in U.S. History and Literature, Toolbox Library, National Humanities Center
In addition, many of the first attempts at settlement north of the Caribbean failed. Roanoke, Ajacan, Fort Caroline, Sable Island, Charlesfort, Pensacola, San Miguel de Gualdape, Charlesbourg-Royal, France-Roy—all were short-lived settlements in the 1500s. A hurricane destroyed the first Pensacola settlement. Frigid winters and scurvy claimed several settlements; starving settlers abandoned others. Indians laid siege to settlements or attacked them outright. Rebellion by brutalized soldiers or starved African slaves ended two colonies. Settlers were left to their own resources when the founders left for provisions (or for good). In most cases a few surviving settlers made it back to Europe, but in one famous case—the "Lost Colony" of Roanoke in what is now North Carolina—the settlers disappeared with little trace, their fate still undetermined. Most share the dooming factors of poor planning and unrealistic appraisals of the North American environment. Simply put, settling this continent was not going to be easy.
(emphasis mine)

Doesn't sound like communism to me.

They rebounded quickly once they went to private property.
Which of these groups spent thousands of years in the Americas with capitalism?

ERIC - Native American Traditional Economic Values and Systems: Some Dispersed Samples., 1976-Apr

Findings supported the hypothesis, indicating in each case that: (1) the socioeconomic and political structure was based on the extended family and/or clan; (2) land was communally owned by the group (extended family, clan, or village); (3) there was relative economic equality (with exception of the Makah who had slaves); (4) there was an obligation to share one's material goods with the less fortunate within the ethnocentric "in" group; (5) there were leadership roles which were not absolute or domineering; (6) there was some form of consensus; (7) the virtue of sharing and generosity was universal; (8) there were higher and better defined ideals when legends contained a recent spiritual leader; (9) the traditional stage had not included money or any dominant medium of exchange; (10) there was strong emphasis on self-discipline and self-denial especially among Mohawk, Hopi, and Sioux. (JC)

They rebounded quickly once they went to private property.
And it wasn't their property.

The kingdom of God results in everyone having their own plot and own fig tree (Micah 4:4).
Why would I want figs? I don't like figs. My dog Sarah loves them, but I hate them. Capitalism would want customers to have what they want, right?

Those that hang onto Peter and his heir the pope, will be "cut off" (Isaiah 22:15-25).
Why? You should be praising a religious denomination that is so into capitalism it sold grace in heaven. :p

Yes, divorce his wife, you said murder.
Divorced. Beheaded. Died. Divorced. Beheaded. Survived.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
It's My Birthday!

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
Why would I want figs? I don't like figs. My dog Sarah loves them, but I hate them. Capitalism would want customers to have what they want, right?

The "kingdom of God", whereas everyone has their own vines and fig trees (Micah 4:4), would be for the righteous, and the wicked, those who love mammon, would most likely be too lazy and without knowledge to grow their own food, and most probably wouldn't make it into that kingdom. There would not be any stores/merchants/Canaanite (Zechariah 14:21) "in the house of the LORD". Although it is possible your dog might survive on fallen figs.
 

Sleeppy

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
Apparently the Plymouth Separatist took the unknown writer of Acts 2:44 seriously, and around half died of disease and starvation as a result. They rebounded quickly once they went to private property. The kingdom of God results in everyone having their own plot and own fig tree (Micah 4:4). Those that hang onto Peter and his heir the pope, will be "cut off" (Isaiah 22:15-25).

New American Standard Bible Micah 4:4
Each of them will sit under his vine And under his fig tree, With no one to make them afraid, For the mouth of the LORD of hosts has spoken.

OK. Tues, I should have enough time to explain to you what's lacking in your argument.
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
The "kingdom of God", whereas everyone has their own vines and fig trees (Micah 4:4), would be for the righteous, and the wicked, those who love mammon, would most likely be too lazy and without knowledge to grow their own food, and most probably wouldn't make it into that kingdom. There would not be any stores/merchants/Canaanite (Zechariah 14:21) "in the house of the LORD". Although it is possible your dog might survive on fallen figs.
Blessed are the hungry, for they shall be filled.

But you still have to work for it, like on earth. Is this like the Egyptian afterlife, where life just goes on as normal? Still have servants, bills to pay, etc?

I thought the entire point of going to heaven was to have suffering relieved. If I still have to shovel stuff, God can keep it. What's He going to do to me, kill me?

I'm already dead at that point.
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
Blessed are the hungry, for they shall be filled.

But you still have to work for it, like on earth. Is this like the Egyptian afterlife, where life just goes on as normal? Still have servants, bills to pay, etc?

I thought the entire point of going to heaven was to have suffering relieved. If I still have to shovel stuff, God can keep it. What's He going to do to me, kill me?

I'm already dead at that point.

I think the expression would be you are among the walking dead. The quote you misquoted is Matthew 5:6, is "blessed are those that hunger for righteousness". As for the kingdom of heaven, at hand, it is already here. You are either walking among the dead, the "many", or walking among living, the "few". The kingdom of God, the millennium, which is at the door (Matthew 24:33) & Ezekiel 37, simply puts a new king in place, whereas the survivors among the nations will be ruled with a "rod of iron" (Revelation 19:15). It will be the sons of Jacob, who will have productive gardens (Malachi 3:11). As for "suffering", there will be trees in Jerusalem for healing (Revelation 22:2).

For those not lazy, working with one's hands is a blessing. Sitting on a couch 24/7 would be a curse. And the "servants" will be the "strangers" who "attach themselves to the house of Jacob.(Isaiah 14:2). While the couch sitters may want to die, they will be unable for 5 months (Revelation 9:6).
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
Your OP mentions communism.

The history link that I included in the OP refers to the original living arrangement set up by the Pilgrims, which was a communist type of communal system, which was scrapped due to the deaths by starvation and sickness the system caused. They went to a system where everyone was given a piece of land to grow on, and the resulting bounty caused them to have a Thanksgiving, to thank God. It appears that the lazy in a communal system kind of brought the whole thing crashing down.
 

Sleeppy

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
The history link that I included in the OP refers to the original living arrangement set up by the Pilgrims, which was a communist type of communal system, which was scrapped due to the deaths by starvation and sickness the system caused. They went to a system where everyone was given a piece of land to grow on, and the resulting bounty caused them to have a Thanksgiving, to thank God. It appears that the lazy in a communal system kind of brought the whole thing crashing down.
The "kingdom of God", whereas everyone has their own vines and fig trees (Micah 4:4), would be for the righteous, and the wicked, those who love mammon, would most likely be too lazy and without knowledge to grow their own food, and most probably wouldn't make it into that kingdom. There would not be any stores/merchants/Canaanite (Zechariah 14:21) "in the house of the LORD". Although it is possible your dog might survive on fallen figs.

You've begun separating the truth, but have not recognized all of it. You also ingested certain falsehoods.

So let's start with the truth you attest to:

Matthew 6:24

None is able to serve two lords, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will hold to the one, and despise the other; ye are not able to serve God and Mammon.

Let's not negate the qualifiers:

1) Matthew 6:14-15

For, if ye may forgive men their trespasses He also will forgive you -- your Father who [is] in the heavens; but if ye may not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

2) Matthew 6:19-21

Treasure not up to yourselves treasures on the earth, where moth and rust disfigure, and where thieves break through and steal, but treasure up to yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth disfigure, and where thieves do not break through nor steal, for where your treasure is, there will be also your heart.

3) Matthew 6:25

Because of this I say to you, be not anxious for your life, what ye may eat, and what ye may drink, nor for your body, what ye may put on. Is not the life more than the nourishment, and the body than the clothing?

4) Matthew 6:32-33

For all these do the nations seek for, for your heavenly Father doth know that ye have need of all these; but seek ye first the reign of God and His righteousness, and all these shall be added to you.


So what does the equation say?

Psalm 24:1

To [the Father] is the earth and its fullness; the world and the inhabitants in it.


Jeremiah 27:5

Thus do ye say unto your lords, I -- I have made the earth with man, and the cattle that are on the face of the earth, by My great power, and by My stretched-out arm, and I have given it to whom it hath been right in Mine eyes.


There is no private property; mankind (with the animal kingdom) are stewards:

Luke 16:1-13
And he said also unto his disciples, 'A certain man was rich, who had a steward, and he was accused to him as scattering his goods; and having called him, he said to him, What [is] this I hear about thee? Render the account of thy stewardship, for thou mayest not any longer be steward. And the steward said in himself, What shall I do, because my lord doth take away the stewardship from me? To dig I am not able, to beg I am ashamed: -- I have known what I shall do, that, when I may be removed from the stewardship, they may receive me to their houses. And having called near each one of his lord's debtors, he said to the first, How much dost thou owe to my lord? And he said, A hundred baths of oil; and he said to him, Take thy bill, and having sat down write fifty. Afterward to another he said, And thou, how much dost thou owe? And he said, A hundred cors of wheat; and he saith to him, Take thy bill, and write eighty. And the lord commended the unrighteous steward that he did prudently, because the sons of this age are more prudent than the sons of the light, in respect to their generation. And I say to you, Make to yourselves friends out of the mammon of unrighteousness, that when ye may fail, they may receive you to the age-during tabernacles. He who is faithful in the least, [is] also faithful in much; and he who in the least [is] unrighteous, is also unrighteous in much; if, then, in the unrighteous mammon ye became not faithful -- the true who will entrust to you? And if in the other's ye became not faithful -- your own, who shall give to you? No domestic is able to serve two lords, for either the one he will hate, and the other he will love; or one he will hold to, and of the other he will be heedless; ye are not able to serve God and mammon.'

THERE'S MORE.. I WILL FINISH TOMORROW
 
Top