Well, I'm thankful that we aren't living in some pagan Indian tribal community never having heard the gospel, collecting scalps and having to run the gauntlet for Okee.
You know what that sounds like you're saying? It sounds like unless the early settlers wiped out entire tribes we would currently be living in Indian communities? If the Puritans didn't slaughter Indians so Abraham Lincoln could start a holiday over one meal between the two future combatants, the Gospel wouldn't of been preached to these Indians? Wait, the record shows that the Puritans not only converted the Wampanoag, but later murdered the Indians that they had given the Gospel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias
Or that we aren't still stuck in the 'Old Country' having our friends and family burnt at the stake for 'heresy'.
No we are in the new country were you are burnt at the stake on the Internet and left alive to see the damage.
__________________ "all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
~Declaration of Independence
I'm not going to feel guilt for something that happened years ago. I am going to enjoy the day with my family and be thankful! There are thousands of things we can manufacture guilt for but I try not to.
__________________
Those who say it cannot be done should not interrupt the people doing it. ~Chinese Proverb
When I was young and clever, I wanted to change the world. Now that I am older and wiser, I strive to change myself. ~
I'm not going to feel guilt for something that happened years ago. I am going to enjoy the day with my family and be thankful! There are thousands of things we can manufacture guilt for but I try not to.
so what you're saying is that you didn't vote for Obama?
I bet you are also thankful you didn't live during the Battle of Washita River to see the cavalry mowing down your wife and children under the hoofs of their horses.
Anyway, we can mosey all the way through time of the early history of this nation and point to different occurrences, like the Puritans hanging Quakers in Boston because they refused to conform.
Yet we don't celebrate (not that I know of ) any holiday that was started during a meal with Quakers, who years later ended up swinging from a rope in Boston.
Israel had (and still does) a national holiday celebrating the supernatural devastation of Egypt, including the mass killing (by God) of every firstborn in the land.
You know what that sounds like you're saying? It sounds like unless the early settlers wiped out entire tribes we would currently be living in Indian communities? If the Puritans didn't slaughter Indians so Abraham Lincoln could start a holiday over one meal between the two future combatants, the Gospel wouldn't of been preached to these Indians? Wait, the record shows that the Puritans not only converted the Wampanoag, but later murdered the Indians that they had given the Gospel.
Sorry, not a democrat, so not buying your revisionist history. In any event, the Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away. Blessed be the name of the Lord.
Quote:
No we are in the new country were you are burnt at the stake on the Internet and left alive to see the damage.
I guess you would have preferred living under the tyranny of pagan savagery or the tyranny of religious hegemony, then.
You are certainly free to move somewhere more to your liking.
We may examine representative incidents by following the geographic route of European settlement, beginning in the New England colonies. There, at first, the Puritans did not regard the Indians they encountered as natural enemies, but rather as potential friends and converts. But their Christianizing efforts showed little success, and their experience with the natives gradually yielded a more hostile view. The Pequot tribe in particular, with its reputation for cruelty and ruthlessness, was feared not only by the colonists but by most other Indians in New England. In the warfare that eventually ensued, caused in part by intertribal rivalries, the Narragansett Indians became actively engaged on the Puritan side.
Hostilities opened in late 1636 after the murder of several colonists. When the Pequots refused to comply with the demands of the Massachusetts Bay Colony for the surrender of the guilty and other forms of indemnification, a punitive expedition was led against them by John Endecott, the first resident governor of the colony; although it ended inconclusively, the Pequots retaliated by attacking any settler they could find. Fort Saybrook on the Connecticut River was besieged, and members of the garrison who ventured outside were ambushed and killed. One captured trader, tied to a stake in sight of the fort, was tortured for three days, expiring after his captors flayed his skin with the help of hot timbers and cut off his fingers and toes. Another prisoner was roasted alive.
The torture of prisoners was indeed routine practice for most Indian tribes, and was deeply ingrained in Indian culture. Valuing bravery above all things, the Indians had little sympathy for those who surrendered or were captured. Prisoners, unable to withstand the rigor of wilderness travel were usually killed on the spot. Among those—Indian or European—taken back to the village, some would be adopted to replace slain warriors, the rest subjected to a ritual of torture designed to humiliate them and exact atonement for the tribe's losses. Afterward the Indians often consumed the body or parts of it in a ceremonial meal, and proudly displayed scalps and fingers as trophies of victory.
Despite the colonists' own resort to torture in order to extract confessions, the cruelty of these practices strengthened the belief that the natives were savages who deserved no quarter. This revulsion accounts at least in part for the ferocity of the battle of Fort Mystic in May 1637, when a force commanded by John Mason and assisted by militiamen from Saybrook surprised about half of the Pequot tribe encamped near the Mystic River.
The intention of the colonists had been to kill the warriors "with their Swords," as Mason put it, to plunder the village, and to capture the women and children. But the plan did not work out. About 150 Pequot warriors had arrived in the fort the night before, and when the surprise attack began they emerged from their tents to fight. Fearing the Indians' numerical strength, the English attackers set fire to the fortified village and retreated outside the palisades. There they formed a circle and shot down anyone seeking to escape; a second cordon of Narragansett Indians cut down the few who managed to get through the English line. When the battle was over, the Pequots had suffered several hundred dead, perhaps as many as 300 of these being women and children. Twenty Narragansett warriors also fell.
A number of recent historians have charged the Puritans with genocide: that is, with having carried out a premeditated plan to exterminate the Pequots. The evidence belies this. The use of fire as a weapon of war was not unusual for either Europeans or Indians, and every contemporary account stresses that the burning of the fort was an act of self-protection, not part of a pre-planned massacre. In later stages of the Pequot war, moreover, the colonists spared women, children, and the elderly, further contradicting the idea of genocidal intention.
A second famous example from the colonial period is King Philip’s War (1675-76). This conflict, proportionately the costliest of all American wars, took the life of one in every sixteen men of military age in the colonies; large numbers of women and children also perished or were carried into captivity. Fifty-two of New England’s 90 towns were attacked, seventeen were razed to the ground, and 25 were pillaged. Casualties among the Indians were even higher, with many of those captured being executed or sold into slavery abroad.
The war was also merciless, on both sides. At its outset, a colonial council in Boston had declared "that none be Killed or Wounded that are Willing to surrender themselves into Custody." But these rules were soon abandoned on the grounds that the Indians themselves, failing to adhere either to the laws of war or to the law of nature, would "skulk" behind trees, rocks, and bushes rather than appear openly to do "civilized" battle. Similarly creating a desire for retribution were the cruelties perpetrated by Indians when ambushing English troops or overrunning strongholds housing women and children.
Before long, both colonists and Indians were dismembering corpses and displaying body parts and heads on poles. (Nevertheless, Indians could not be killed with impunity. In the summer of 1676, four men were tried in Boston for the brutal murder of three squaws and three Indian children; all were found guilty and two were executed.)
The hatred kindled by King Philip’s War became even more pronounced in 1689 when strong Indian tribes allied themselves with the French against the British. In 1694, the General Court of Massachusetts ordered all friendly Indians confined to a small area. A bounty was then offered for the killing or capture of hostile Indians, and scalps were accepted as proof of a kill. In 1704, this was amended in the direction of "Christian practice" by means of a scale of rewards graduated by age and sex; bounty was proscribed in the case of children under the age of ten, subsequently raised to twelve (sixteen in Connecticut, fifteen in New Jersey). Here, too, genocidal intent was far from evident; the practices were justified on grounds of self-preservation and revenge, and in reprisal for the extensive scalping carried out by Indians.
We should be thankful we live in a country that had Pilgrims and Puritans for its Founders, rather than either the Vatican or some heathen tribal chiefs.
After all, if it weren't for the Puritans and Pilgrims, there wouldn't be an America, no internet, no AFF. No Holiness movement, no Pentecostal Revival, and most likely no YOU.
I do realise some have drank the Kommie Kool-aid and hate America, its heritage and its history, but such people aren't living in reality and wouldn't want to anyway.
Now, before all you turkey eating, cider swallowing, football watching Thanksgivingites get upset, please consider this....
Isn't celebrating Thanksgiving in the U.S. like setting aside a day in Germany to celebrate the Holocaust? I know that no one (that I know of) on this forum is celebrating the genocide of the American Indian when they sit down with family and friends to engorge themselves with cranberries smothered in gluten. No, but isn't it something to ponder that after six decades of landing at Plymouth Rock, the Europeans had forever destroyed a culture that had inhabited the area for thousands of years prior to the arrival of the Mayflower? I mean, who was really thankful? It sure wasn't the Indians, because in 1620 the Europeans landed on Plymouth Rock, then 55 years later by 1675, the Puritans would almost decimate the entire Wampanoag tribe.
A tribe which included more than 30,000 people with a highly organized governmental system. They were reduced to no more than 2,000 Indians at the end of what would be called "King Philip’s War." King Phillip was known by his people as Metacomet, the son of Chief Massasoit who would welcome the Pilgrims to the New World (old world to the Indians) Metacomet would fight a war against the Puritans who were trying to move Wampanoag off their happy hunting grounds. Yet, as most Indian vs the paleface situations go, Metacomet lost.
Yet, the Puritans wanted to send a message to every Indian in New England just what can happen if they decide to get uppity. They decapitated Metacomet "King Phillip," his head was piked at the entrance of Fort Plymouth where it remained for TWO decades.
Now, I would also like to add here, that Metacomet "King Phillip" was what the Puritans called a "Praying Indian" meaning, he was a convert to the Puritan form of Christianity, he was baptized into their faith. But alas this didn't deter the Europeans who set their buckled shoes on Plymouth Rock from later on killing the Indians they once baptized. So, with all that being said, may you all have a wonderful day of fellowship and light fun. But please remember as you sink your teeth into that turkey drumstick which MeeMaw took such loving care and time to cook (98.00 bird?) to reflect and to be really thankful, not just on November 27th, but every day of the year. Because you might just be living on some land that was once inhabited by a tribe who no longer lives there. Maybe they we marched from one state to another (force marches, perish the thought) maybe you even live near an area where a massacre took place, or even by the res. Be thankful that you are free to live where you want to live, and practice your religion, ( or not practice) however you like. So, have a nice day, and spend that day wisely.
The absolute ignorance of history and the bible by some in our generation astonishes me at times.
First, fact is there are NO true "natives" of any land. Period.
Different tribes of mankind have moved from one area to another killing each other in the process - it's called "sin" and EVERY man and woman has that nature at birth. One can read about it in this book called the "Bible."
The absolute ignorance of history and the bible by some in our generation astonishes me at times.
First, fact is there are NO true "natives" of any land. Period.
Different tribes of mankind have moved from one area to another killing each other in the process - it's called "sin" and EVERY man and woman has that nature at birth. One can read about it in this book called the "Bible."
And, you're cool with that?
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Linear Mode
