Paganism in Christianity

[TCSQ]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

SHEKINAH [shuh KIGH nuh] (dwelling) — a visible manifestation of the presence of God (also spelled Shechinah and Shekhinah). Although the word is not found in the Bible, it occurs frequently in later Jewish writings. It refers to the instances when God showed Himself visibly, as, for example, on Mount Sinai (Ex. 24:9–18) and in the Holy of Holies of the tabernacle and in Solomon’s Temple. The Shekinah was a luminous cloud that rested above the altar in the place of worship and lit up the room. When the Babylonians destroyed the Temple, the Shekinah glory vanished. There was no Shekinah in the temples rebuilt later under Zerubbabel and Herod.

Found this sub topic kind of interesting as since coming into the Apostolic Faith have from the beginning heard that term "The Shekinah Glory" NEVER thought to question its origin. But now that you bring it up, found this link that shows the etymology of the word IN scripture. I will post the link and check it out .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekinah

[TCSQ]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

SHEKINAH [shuh KIGH nuh] (dwelling) — a visible manifestation of the presence of God (also spelled Shechinah and Shekhinah). Although the word is not found in the Bible, it occurs frequently in later Jewish writings. It refers to the instances when God showed Himself visibly, as, for example, on Mount Sinai (Ex. 24:9–18) and in the Holy of Holies of the tabernacle and in Solomon’s Temple. The Shekinah was a luminous cloud that rested above the altar in the place of worship and lit up the room. When the Babylonians destroyed the Temple, the Shekinah glory vanished. There was no Shekinah in the temples rebuilt later under Zerubbabel and Herod.

Yeah, just as I thought. The hebrew word Shakan ***IS*** in the text of the Old Testament. It is the basis for the word we translate Tabernacle, and means to abide, dwell, etc.

SOooooooooo We couldn't say that Shekinah was ever a name or title of God, such as El Olam or Jehovah Tsidkenu, BUT we certainly can use it in its BIBLICAL meaning which reflects the abiding dwelling presence OF Jehovah among his people.

You know what now causes me a little question? How did THIS term find its way into 20th century pentecostal terminology?

I mean, surely the preachers out in podunk california in 1948 were NOT Kabbalists! (Were they???) just kidding.

[TCSQ]

Shakan

The base of the word under discussion "Shekinah" I would say that since the word in Kabbalist and Talmudic usage has taken on almost personhood (Kabbalism could outdo trinitarianism ANYDAY) I would say that on the one hand it is CORRECT to say it is NOT in the text of the Old (ShekinAH) but rather is an EXTRA Biblical word. However its ROOT "Shakan" IS repeatedly.

If Shekinah is a form of the word, rather than a mutation of the word (For example changing the word Present into PresenCE to grammatically use it in speech) then I would see no problem with even saying it is BIBLICAL although you may indeed say that that specific FORM of the word is NOT in the text.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by TCSQ

Found this sub topic kind of interesting as since coming into the Apostolic Faith have from the beginning heard that term "The Shekinah Glory" NEVER thought to question its origin. But now that you bring it up, found this link that shows the etymology of the word IN scripture. I will post the link and check it out .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekinah

Originally Posted by TCSQ

Yeah, just as I thought. The hebrew word Shakan ***IS*** in the text of the Old Testament. It is the basis for the word we translate Tabernacle, and means to abide, dwell, etc.

SOooooooooo We couldn't say that Shekinah was ever a name or title of God, such as El Olam or Jehovah Tsidkenu, BUT we certainly can use it in its BIBLICAL meaning which reflects the abiding dwelling presence OF Jehovah among his people.

You know what now causes me a little question? How did THIS term find its way into 20th century pentecostal terminology?

I mean, surely the preachers out in podunk california in 1948 were NOT Kabbalists! (Were they???) just kidding.

Originally Posted by TCSQ

Shakan

The base of the word under discussion "Shekinah" I would say that since the word in Kabbalist and Talmudic usage has taken on almost personhood (Kabbalism could outdo trinitarianism ANYDAY) I would say that on the one hand it is CORRECT to say it is NOT in the text of the Old (ShekinAH) but rather is an EXTRA Biblical word. However its ROOT "Shakan" IS repeatedly.

If Shekinah is a form of the word, rather than a mutation of the word (For example changing the word Present into PresenCE to grammatically use it in speech) then I would see no problem with even saying it is BIBLICAL although you may indeed say that that specific FORM of the word is NOT in the text.

Nice try, but you're swinging way too far out there to be making a viable point.

The word "Shekinah" is the "BASIS" for "Tabernacle"? How about the word "Tabernacle" is the basis for "Shekinah"?

If you want to start talking about root words, we could say most any word is in the Bible. But that is not the issue here, is it? What is being discussed is whether the actual word "Shekinah" is ever found in the Bible. THAT IS THE ISSUE. And you admitted that it is not. Consequently we could NOT say that “Shekinah was ever a name or title of God,” because it NEVER WAS. Also, did you read what I said about some churchs using the name “Sophia” for God’s name? That name, they claim, is in the Bible also. It is from the root meaning “wisdom.” So, how about it? Are you willing to make the same claim for their name as you do for this one? Same argument, same results?? I certainly hope not.

Where—again—do we find Shekinah readily used? In Jewish mysticism...think about it..."JEWISH" mysticism.... So why do you find Hebrew influence in that word? Because it derives from JEWISH mystics.

Why make this any harder than it needs to be? The word is not in your Bible, plain and simple. Why is this important? Well, because God says it’s important. When the Children of Israel made their golden calf, they did so to represent the “gods” that brought them out of Egypt, and to use during a feast to the LORD (Ex 32:4-5). You know the opinion God had about that. He is a jealous God. No other is to be worshipped before Him. The Bible is laden with examples of God’s feelings about this. Surely from these you can see why God takes issue with men calling Him names that originate from mystics and feminist-influenced church members?

New Age is really open to saying God has many names and many beliefs, but they are all the same. It is Christianity—true Christianity—that stands opposed to such nonsense. We are the ones who stand and shout that “the Bible says” there is no other God than One, and that His name is “Jesus”!

[TCSQ]

[QUOTE=TK Burk;585902]Nice try, but you're swinging way too far out there to be making a viable point.

The word "Shekinah" is the "BASIS" for "Tabernacle"? How about the word "Tabernacle" is the basis for "Shekinah"?



No sorry if you misunderstood me, I meant that the ROOT word shakan is the root for the word translated tabernacle, or so says the Strongs Reference work o nCrosswalk. Its merely a matter of the etymology or development of the word. I dont see a problem there do you, I mean it is just a point of historical linguistic evolution, certainly I am not making any kind of doctrinal point, kind of unaware if some IS contending for such a thing.

If you want to start talking about root words, we could say most any word is in the Bible. But that is not the issue here, is it? What is being discussed is whether the actual word "Shekinah" is ever found in the Bible. THAT IS THE ISSUE. And you admitted that it is not. Consequently we could NOT say that “Shekinah was ever a name or title of God,” because it NEVER WAS.


I think if you read my post you will see that I made that very same observation.

I am so sorry, if you think I am joining a "Fray" please reread my post, merely caught a glimpse of this and it hit me as to why ***I*** have heard the word used in ultra conservative preaching since 1972 and it was certainly not new then. As to any other point than a mere identifying of the root word shakan in the hebrew text I am not doing that other than giving its definition and how ***I*** could see validly using a form of that word to imply or refer to the abiding presence of God among us, I would not be alone in doing that with many preachers MUCH greater than I doing so historically, and really I must be missing something because evidently this is a minor hot button issue.

Also, did you read what I said about some churchs using the name “Sophia” for God’s name? That name, they claim, is in the Bible also. It is from the root meaning “wisdom.” So, how about it? Are you willing to make the same claim for their name as you do for this one? Same argument, same results?? I certainly hope not.



Yes if you mean do I have the ability to use a word as a word rather than embuing it with some kind of personality or seperate god person or what have you. But to use the word as a word rather than a name, if it is the CORRECT use of the word, and it does not contradict the Bible I have no problem with that. I would not be a muslim that feels that I can only use words found in one language in the Quran. I dont hesitate to use lots of words that are most definitely NOT in the Bible to discuss the Bible or doctrines of the Biblem and I am sure that you do not either. But again, evidently I am missing something because apparently you identify me as contending for something I think is going right over my head here.


Where—again—do we find Shekinah readily used? In Jewish mysticism...think about it..."JEWISH" mysticism.... So why do you find Hebrew influence in that word? Because it derives from JEWISH mystics.


Well I have no problem with using vocabulary common to the language the Bible was written in. Certainly am not embracing promoting or condoning what you label Jewish (and by the way you put "JEWISH" in quotes ...does that imply that something being JEWISH makes it unnaceptable to be considered?)

Why make this any harder than it needs to be? The word is not in your Bible, plain and simple. Why is this important? Well, because God says it’s important.

Where does God say the usage or non usage of a word is important depending on wether that word can be found in the Bible? I have never heard that idea before outside of Isalm, the Quran and the Arab language. I dont think you are contending for something like THAT are You? No certainly not, I think you are contending AS I WOULD BE that the concept evidently Kabbalistic in origin that there is an almost semi fourth person or whatever number of the Godhead implied by the terms shekinah or sophia. That would be something I am ADAMANTLY in agreement with you about.


When the Children of Israel made their golden calf, they did so to represent the “gods” that brought them out of Egypt, and to use during a feast to the LORD (Ex 32:4-5). You know the opinion God had about that. He is a jealous God. No other is to be worshipped before Him. The Bible is laden with examples of God’s feelings about this. Surely from these you can see why God takes issue with men calling Him names that originate from mystics and feminist-influenced church members?


I see, so this is a GENDER issue! Sorry did not know that. However you are aware of the many traits or types of those traits of God such as milk giver, wisdom etc that do have a connotation of the feminine rather than masculine nature of man dont you? Part of the problem I think in that area is that the moment you begin to asscribe THOSE traits to God it becomes repulsive because immediately the subconscious equates those traits with genitalia. But God is a spirit who as David lets us know is able to be BOTH Father AND Mother to him. Surely you know the definition of El Shaddai? How can you desire the sincere milk of the Word? Milk production is a female trait NOT a masculine one. But again it is a trait and not an anatomical issue. Anyway probably opening up for gales of who knows what from who knows where...

http://www.gospeltrail.com/Study/God/elshaddai.htm

New Age is really open to saying God has many names and many beliefs, but they are all the same. It is Christianity—true Christianity—that stands opposed to such nonsense. We are the ones who stand and shout that “the Bible says” there is no other God than One, and that His name is “Jesus”!


Well you will not get an argument out of me on that one. I think we are just on two different avenues here on the shekinah thing and I have come in on the middle of something. Sorry

[TCSQ]

[QUOTE=TK Burk;585902]Nice try, but you're swinging way too far out there to be making a viable point.

The word "Shekinah" is the "BASIS" for "Tabernacle"? How about the word "Tabernacle" is the basis for "Shekinah"?

Well for the sake of argument in one way I would have no problem with that OTHER thanit would be faulty facts as shekinah has evolved from shakan rather than Mishakan, but would YOU have a problem with it?

[Evang.Benincasa]

[QUOTE=TCSQ;585989]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Nice try, but you're swinging way too far out there to be making a viable point.

The word "Shekinah" is the "BASIS" for "Tabernacle"? How about the word "Tabernacle" is the basis for "Shekinah"?

Well for the sake of argument in one way I would have no problem with that OTHER thanit would be faulty facts as shekinah has evolved from shakan rather than Mishakan, but would YOU have a problem with it?

Excuse me but how long have you studied Hebrew and Aramaic?

[TCSQ]

[QUOTE=Evang.Benincasa;586078]

Originally Posted by TCSQ

Excuse me but how long have you studied Hebrew and Aramaic?

Well I think this would actually be MY quote , at least the second half the first half being the quote of whoever I was replying to.

And I have dabbled in Hebrew and Aramaic as well as Arabic for years (actually lived in the Arabic/Aramaic/ Hebrew speaking world for close to twenty, but of course that would be Modern Hebrew as well as Modern Aramaic and there are differences granted.) But the SOURCES that I drew my quote above from are pretty much renowned and credible sources, including the Strongs Hebrew/Chaldeean reference.

I am wondering am i coming in in the middle of a discussion of someone trying to establish a goddess shekinah type deal? Because that is NOT what I am alluding to, merely presenting some definitions of the word and its etymology from some pretty reputable and widely credited sources.

But I am not tense about any of this, still just trying to figure out what I have stepped into here....

[mfblume]

We cannot ascertain the purity of a term due to the root word from which it is derived. Imagine doing that in English!

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by TCSQ

I mean, surely the preachers out in podunk california in 1948 were NOT Kabbalists! (Were they???) just kidding.

Any Podunk Pentecostal never came up with anything, lol. They borrow from others and often misuse it.

Are you "borned" again? lololol