Conference taveng::bagels

Thanksgiving is NON-DENOMINATIONAL.  It is an expression of thanks to 
the fact of having survived.  It is a time of unity and outreach.  
the fact that the Pilgrims and the Indians sat down together at a 
feast in friendship establishes the nature of the holiday.

It is a time for family to get together.  It is one of the truly 
great holidays that I wish all the world would share.  Perhaps then 
we would not have need for the subject of the numerically preceding 
note.

I strongly identify as being a Jew and am active in my temple's 
brotherhood board.  I celebrate Thanksgiving and enjoy it almost as 
much as my other favorite holiday -- Pesach.  Both are a time for 
family and a time to give thanks for all the blessings we have and 
the freedom we enjoy.

Shelly (Sheldon)

BTW - There is NO association of Thanksgiving with any religion other 
than its celebrants observe their own religions and the majority 
(because it is American) happen to be Christians.

My family, like that of Shelly (.1), celebrates Thanksgiving. However, I can
understand (and perhaps, explain) the objections of the Orthodox community.
One big problem of being a Jew in a non-Jewish world is that assimilation
means the end of Judaism. Therefore, there is a Jewish law to not follow the
customs of the gentiles, especially where those customs relate to religious
observances or are in conflict with Jewish customs. There is also a doctrine
requiring a Jew to not *appear* to violate Jewish law. Since a Thanksgiving
observance *appears* to be a non-Jewish religious observance, the (ultra?)
Orthodox avoid it entirely.

As to football, the main objection is that it commonly conflicts with the
Sabbath (sundown Friday to Saturday evening). The same might apply to baseball
because the World Series often falls during the High Holy Days. Another
possible objection to football is that the chance of injury is too high and
violates Jewish law concerning taking good care of yourself. I let my son play
football, so I guess my personal objections aren't very strong.

Dave

>  Since a Thanksgiving
> observance *appears* to be a non-Jewish religious observance, the 
> (ultra?) Orthodox avoid it entirely.

How does it *appear* to be a religious observance?  That is totally 
beyond me.

Shelly

If Thanksgiving isn't at least quasi-religious in nature, then
why do so many churches and synagogues participate in ecumenical services
on that day? Also consider the name of the holiday, "Thanksgiving".
To Whom are we giving thanks?

Bear in mind, I'm trying to explain someone else's position. I think I've
got it, but it wouldn't be the first time I was wrong.

Dave

>To Whom are we giving thanks?

Well, of course the early settlers were giving thanks to the G-d of
Abraham for all His goodness to them.

Abraham Lincoln also expressed thanks to G-d in the proclamation when
it was declared a national holiday.

Today, in our secularized schools, the children are left to believe
that the settlers were giving thanks to the Indians and are encouraged
to thank each other rather than the Creator of all things and Giver of
all that is good.

/john

John, I think that's pushing it a tad.  We give thanks (to God, to 
friends, to family, to life....).  

Why ecumentical?  Precisely because it is NOT a religious holiday 
and so will "offend noone?" to give thanks for our blessings.  It is 
a convenient time for all the religions to express their brotherhood.

This is what Abraham Lincoln wrote in 1863, on the occasion of proclaiming
Thanksgiving to be a national holiday:

	"It is the duty of nations as well as of men to owe their
	 dependence upon the overruling power of G-d; to confess
	 their sins and transgressions in humble sorrow, yet with
	 assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy
	 and pardon; and to recognize the sublime truth, announced
	 in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that
	 those nations are blessed whose G-d is the Lord."

Surely, "confessing of sin" [if such a concept exists within Judiasm] 
as mentioned in Lincolns speech is something we do on Yom Kippur ?

Also, not having too much idea about Thanksgiving [not being american] I can see 
that celebrating your country's festivals [which will prodominantly be 
christian] can lead to an undermining of Judiasm and strengthening of 
assimilation.  Most festivals will be, or have roots in Christianity, this is 
very much the case in England.

Pete

from 1481.5:

>Well, of course the early settlers were giving thanks to the G-d of
>Abraham for all His goodness to them.

Last I checked (with the caveat that I had a public school education, 
which immediately makes me suspect), the "early settlers" were, to a person,
believers in the Nazarene, and therefore were unlikely to be addressing
the "G-d of Abraham" as opposed to "G-d the father". 

So I appreciate the explication in 1481.7:
>This is what Abraham Lincoln wrote in 1863, on the occasion of proclaiming
              ^^^^^^^
>Thanksgiving to be a national holiday:
Boy, those "early settlers" certainly were prescient! :-)  Not to mention
that, if you have been following the discussion in mail.jewish, you see
it noted that a crowd of Native Americans was also present -- they certainly
didn't even know the either deity.

btw, I find the discussion of this issue on mail.jewish to be cogent
enough for me wrt differing opinions on whether American Jews should be
celebrating Thanksgiving. Personally speaking, I'm revving up to do the
Turkey thing with my family in New Joisey...

    As always, when in doubt, ask your friendly local rabbi!
    
    I discussed this issue with the Rabbi at Bais Chabad in Framingham, MA.  
    This is not just an Orthodox synagogue, but also Lubavich.  He said that 
    there are no objections for the Jews to celebrate the Thanksgiving.  The 
    same attitude is at my kid's school, Maimonides School (in Brookline)
    which is also Orthodox.
    
    Leo

>assimilation.  Most festivals will be, or have roots in Christianity, this is 
>very much the case in England.
    
    ...and in turn, Christianity's roots are in Judaism.  There are secular 
    holidays that I don't celebrate, but I do celebrate the Feasts of
    Israel.
    
    Mike

>...the early settlers ... were unlikely to be addressing
>the "G-d of Abraham" as opposed to "G-d the father"

The early settlers saw no difference between the G-d of Abraham and
G-d the father.  No opposition at all.

>a crowd of Native Americans was also present -- they certainly
>didn't even know either deity.

"either"?  There is only one G-d.  And the early settlers certainly
were at work teaching the Native Americans about Him.

/john

Let's put this to bed.

The issue is TODAY -- not 375 years ago, nor even 130 odd years ago.
TODAY, Thanksgiving is totally non-sectarian, with NO ties to ANY 
religion.  It is in the SAME class as celebratring July 4 -- where we 
give THANKS for living in a free country.  It is better than the 
fourth in that we also emphasize the family at that time.

Assimilation -- it is NOT a black or white phenomenon.  Yes, there 
are dangers to the preservation of Judaism as we know it in a TOTAL 
assimilation.  The beauty of our society, however, is that we can, 
indeed, have both.  I for one am totally assimilated yet I am Jewish 
to the core.  I am sure I am not alone.  (Again, I realize the 
dangers in the total perspective).

One thing we should keep in mind (and I do NOT speak here for the 
Orthodox).  A rule of life is that there is a certain black and 
white.  That which does not grow, dies.  In that light, I believe, we 
should not constantly put up roadblocks to "preserve" the instance of 
the religion as it is/was at some particular point in time.  For a 
religion to survive it, too, must grow.  We must capture the best and 
evolve toward an even greater presence.  These are my views and why I 
feel most comfortable in the Reform movement of Judaism.

Shelly

    The G-d of Abraham is the same yesterday, today, and forever.  Why
    should our faith in Him evolve if He doesn't?
    
    Mike

OK, He is the same.  We, however, are not.  As we grow and our 
understanding of everything increases, so too must our interaction 
change to reflect that increased knowledge.  Thousands of years ago 
we were children and so He spoke to us as children and expected us to 
react as children.  Perhaps now we have reached adolescence.  We 
approach adulthood so He speaks to us now as potential adults and 
expects us to react accordingly.

I never said God changes.  I said that RELIGION must evolve if it is 
to stay alive and vibrant.  We should not cast ourselves into a stone 
mold because if we do we (Judaism) will calcify and crumble.  Judaism 
should be alive and grow to reflect our increased knowledge of the 
universe.  

As I said, I do not speak for the Orthodox.

I hope that answers the "why" of your question.

Shelly

    Thanks for the clarification, Shelly.  I agree with what you say too. 
    May G-d grow us all up in the knowledge of Him.
    
    Mike

re .15:

Interestingly, your view is the opposite of the traditional view that the
further we get from giving of the Torah at Mt. Sinai, the less we understand.

Re .17:   As I said, that is why I do NOT speak for the Orthodox and 
why I feel most comfortable in the Reform.  We have two different 
approaches to the truth as we see it.  ---  yet there is tremendous 
commonality.

    re: .12
    
    > The early settlers saw no difference between the G-d of Abraham and
    > G-d the father.
    
    I know that they and you did/do not see a difference.  Most of us do.
    
    As traditional prayerbooks say: "G-d of Abraham, G-d of Isaac & G-d of
    Jacob".  All of the interpretations that I have seen of this explain
    that each of the three patriarchs had a different view of their diety. 
    Therefore, why are all so-called non-traditional interpretations
    considered wrong or false.  Many of the sages revered now were
    considered heratics or lunatics in their day.
    
    Just my opinion,
    Mark

>    > The early settlers saw no difference between the G-d of Abraham and
>    > G-d the father.
>    
>    I know that they and you did/do not see a difference.  Most of us do.

Who do you speak for when you say "us"?  The Psalmist who called God
"Father"?  The Prophets who did likewise?  The chief rabbi in Jerusalem,
Rome, or Boston?

>    Therefore, why are all so-called non-traditional interpretations
>    considered wrong or false.

Isn't this the characteristic of a conservative religion based on a continuing
tradition of inherited truth in past revelation, as opposed to an evolving
religion with major new revelations?  The difficulty is deciding what is a
new revelation and what is a legitimate development of existing tradition.

/john

There's no chief rabbi of Boston (or any other American city that I know of).

"God the Father" has a Christian ring to it.  Can you give specific cites
for "God the Father" (as opposed to "our Father") in a Jewish context?

>"God the Father" has a Christian ring to it.

That may be true, but the expression was first used in this discussion
by a Jew.

>Can you give specific cites for "God the Father" (as opposed to "our Father")
>in a Jewish context?

I wouldn't dare to try.  On the other hand, "Our Father" is the single most
common way that Christians refer to the God of Israel.  The early settlers
would have said "Our Father" much more often than "God the Father".

Does a "Christian ring" mean "a different God" to most of those (still trying
to find out who they are) that Mark meant when he said "us"?

Isn't it the position of most Jewish scholars that Christians are _not_
worshipping another god?  I realize there are some radicals who believe
that Christian theology is idolatry, but if I remember this being discussed
on mail.jewish some time ago, reputable (ymmv) orthodox scholars consider
the charge of idolatry to be without sufficient justification and do recognize
that Christians worship the G-d of Abraham even if they don't agree with all
aspects of the Christian understanding of Him.

/john

Proverbs 30:4-6
    Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the
 wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath
 established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's
 name, if thou canst tell?
 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust
 in him.
 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.