Shekinah Glory

[Jerry]

I just learned today that the word Shekinah (that supposedly means glory - though often they say it like Shekinah glory) that I have heard tons of writers and preachers used throughout the years is not from the Bible at all, but from the Jewish Talmud, the unbelieving Rabbinical commentary on the OT Scriptures (and commentary on their commentary - not joking).

The two main words in the Bible for glory are: for the OT is kabowd, and for the NT is doxa. There are a couple of other words, but shekinah is NOT in the Bible at all

It is not like using a non-Biblical word to describe an actual Biblical doctrine, like Trinity, rapture, incarnation - but actually is using a word that means different (ie. pagan) things, when there are perfectly good Bible words that do mean glory. Strange that people adopt something like this and then pass it on as truth.

Funny, when I posted this on Messenger to some Christians from my old church, one of the old preacher boys said he knew that, but defended it. Why use a word with pagan and kabbalistic meanings when we can use the words God gave (either the English word, or the Greek and Hebrew words actually from the Bible)? Sad.

[Jerry]

James Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible says this:

The word is not found in OT, but occurs often in other Jewish literature, always of God. The OT, particularly in certain of its writings, uses 'anthropomorphisms' freely, e.g. it speaks of God dwelling in a place or being seen. Later thought objected to this, as materializing the Divine nature; hence in the Targums (Aramaic paraphrases of the OT used, though not in their present form, by the 1st cent. a.d.) various devices were adopted to prevent popular misunderstandings. Periphrases were used for the Divine name, 'the Word' (Memra), 'Spirit,' or' 'Wisdom' being substituted. One of the most important of these was the 'Shekinah.'

I looked up Shekinah/Shechinah in the modules I had in Swordsearcher. Eye opening. It is like the name Jehovah. They didn’t want to say God’s name so they just said the Name or put the consonants instead, not His full name.

 

They didn’t want to talk about God Himself, so they made references to His Presence (capital P - I'm sure you've seen quotes from authors that have done this in the past), didn’t want to speak about God and His actual manifestations to them, so they talked about His Glory (in a way that made it something in itself).

 

Smith’s Bible Dictionary says this (the brackets are my comments to explain my understanding of what is being said): The use of the terms is first found in the Targums (their Rabbinical commentaries), where is forms a frequent periphrasis (ie. paraphrase - another term to avoid talking about something) for God, considered ITS** dwelling among the children of Israel.

 

**Either they are calling God an It here or they have elevated His glory to a status more important than Him Himself.

 

The use of this word is to keep away from the idea of God appearing physically or taking on a physical appearance - hence they can reject the Incarnation/deity of the Messiah this way. Also, to avoid ascribing any human passions to God. The Bible itself uses terms that show God identifies with our emotions, but is not sinful in His use of them - like Jesus Himself when on earth.

 

Wow, part of their explanation of this is: no man has seen God (ie. the Father) at any time, so therefore in passages where the OT says they did see God, instead of believing it was some pre-incarnate appearance of the Messiah, they believe it was His Shekinah glory - “an external, visible symbol which, because it stood for God, is called by his name.” So it is not glory surrounding God, it is a separate manifestation they prefer to God.

 

I am never going to use this word/idea - I don't need to use some term that was created by infidel Jews to make them comfortable in their rejection of the true God, and give them reasons to reject the Messiah and to put on an unbelieving twist to Bible passages.

 

For the record, these posts were put here by me to inform you of something I just learned last night and today and was pretty disgusted/alarmed by, not to debate (not to say you can't respond or give your input, I just have no reason to go around in circles on this matter beyond sharing what I came across. You can verify this information easily if you have any Bible study program or some older Bible dictionaries. I am not sure if any new ones would even cover the source of the word Shekinah/Shechinah. If needed, I can give the names of the Dictionaries and Encyclopedias in Swordsearcher that give any description on this word and/or put those quotes here.

[SureWord]

Apparently, it's a feminine name too.

[Jerry]

Yea,  perhaps. One of the articles compared the Shekinah glory to the Holy Spirit, as part of the Rabbinical idea of the Trinity (ie. the Deity, the Word, the Shekinah) - which some agree with and others don't agree with. The Targum (ie. their rabbinical commentary on their traditions) seem such a hodgepodge of everchanging apostasy and nonsense.

[HappyChristian]

Very interesting, Jerry. Thanks for posting this. Much food for thought.

[Jerry]

From what I read, it really seems like it is a term to describe a Jewish version of gnosticism. God can't be physical or connect directly to us, so let's coin a term that applies to something in the gap, a middle form that emanates from God but is not actually Him.

I don't want some representation of Him or some substitute - I want the real God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit - the one the Bible teaches me about, who created me, who provided for my salvation, and who walks with me today.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

Ok, I did a little research of my own within the Hebrew language itself.  

The Hebrew word "shekinah" appears to be an adjective form of the base Hebrew verb "shahkan."  This base Hebrew verb "shahkan" is indeed found in the Hebrew Scriptures a large number of times.  The meaning for this Hebrew verb "shahkan" is:  (1) To let oneself down, to settle down (whereby it is used a number of times concerning the pillar of cloud/fire in the wilderness); (2) To lie down, especially to take rest; (3) To dwell, to abide; (4) in passive - To be inhabited, as a place; (5) in Hebrew Hiphil - To cause any one to dwell.  Since the Hebrew verb "shahkan" is used in Hebrew Scripture a number of times with reference to the pillar of cloud/fire and even with reference directly to the glory of LORD over mount Sinai, it seems that there is some Biblical ground for using the adjective "shekinah," which is derived from the Hebrew verb "shahkan," to describe the glory of the Lord on Mount Sinai and in the pillar/cloud of the wilderness.  Consider the following examples:

Exodus 24:16 -- "And the glory of the LORD abode [Hebrew verb "shahkan"] upon mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days: and the seventh day he called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud."

Numbers 9:22 -- "Or whether it were two days, or a month, or a year, that the cloud tarried upon the tabernacle, remaining [Hebrew verb "shahkan"] thereon, the children of Israel abode in their tents, and journeyed not: but when it was taken up, they journeyed."

[Jerry]

Why adopt a pagan concept (for the sake of this conversation) only vaguely connected to the Bible (and then attempted to be put into both the OT and NT passages or accounts of events), created by unbelieving rabbinic Jews to teach unbiblical things about God and to give them fodder for denying the physical incarnation/manifestation of the Messiah? We have several Bible words we can use if we want to use Hebrew or Greek words to describe God's glory - then we avoid any pagan or apostate associations with the term.

It is like when people use communion to refer to the Lord's Supper. Coming out of a Catholic background and seeing all the religious meaning associated with this word, I would rather stick with the Bible's terminology (ie. Lord's Supper or breaking of bread) and avoid all that confusion. Communion means fellowship. The NT says we have communion with other believers in the bread and the blood of Christ, but does not call the Lord's Supper communion.

1 Corinthians 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

Edited December 25, 2021 by Jerry

[Jerry]

The term Shekinah/Shechinah was a term created by the unbelieving Jewish rabbis in their commentaries on the OT and their commentaries on their commentaries. Yes, they try to say this is the Presence, etc. that is in all those OT passages (but then some of these unbelieving Jewish - nonChristian - rabbis try to insert it into the NT); however, what the targum says about the Shekinah/Shechinah is as unbiblical and apostate as you can get - AND THEY DO DEFINE WHAT THEY MEAN IN THEIR COMMENTARIES, so I am not just guessing or assuming things here. So even if they can somehow associate it with things or events in the Bible, what they are teaching about God, His presence, the Messiah, and His glory (by using this term) is as far from true Bible doctrine as you can get.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

Brother Jerry,

I was NOT at all seeking to defend the falsehood of the Jewish false teachers.  Rather, I was seeking only to present the facts for the origin of the Hebrew word "shekinah" within the Hebrew language and to present its original relationship to Old Testament Scripture.  That the usage by Jewish false teachers has tainted the word is NOT to be denied and may be sufficient enough for us to reject any usage of the word altogether.  Yet in itself the word is not corrupt, nor does its basic meaning present something false.  Using English for the sake of ease - Scripture tells us directly that "the glory of the Lord abode ["shahkan"] upon Mount Sinai."  Altering the Hebrew verb "shahkan" into its adjective form to modify the glory of the LORD simply means saying something like the following in English - the abiding glory of the Lord, or the Lord's abiding glory.

[Jerry]

I understand - but it did not come from the OT or from believing Jews, but from the Targums/Talmud first, then applied to passages in the OT and even the NT (according to all the sources I looked up). The people who created the word and applied it to the passages in the Bible never meant what Christians think it should mean.

[Jerry]

Wow, it is soooo nice to get what I believe was my God-guided research affirmed today. This is what I posted to a few friends:

Someone recently passed on the link to this video. It took me awhile to get into it, but I started watching some of his shorter videos and doing research on the speaker, Spencer Smith. He is solid, KJVonly, IFB. His videos expose the corruption in modern Christendom. This video is interesting, because he exposes how modern Christendom is getting caught up in the divine feminism, and it is influencing so many today.

AND, at 3:35 (3 hours, 35 minutes) he gets into how Shekinah (aka the supposed feminine form of God, the Holy Spirit - the view that comes from gnosticism/the Kaballah) fits into this. Hm, maybe I was onto something a few months back.

https://youtu.be/8XoSWb9esXQ

[SureWord]

A little off topic but the name "Yahweh" is of pagan origin. Yes, the Jews wrote "YHWH" but the two vowels inserted into the  translation of the word ("Jahwe" in German) was maliciously added by a anti-Semitic, atheistic, German scholar named Rudolf Kittel (who's theologian son was a Nazi) to link Jehovah to the Akkadian storm god of the name, Yahweh. He believed the Jews borrowed that god and  incorporated it into their religion.

So beware of using "Shekinah Glory" and "Yahweh" in your speech.

[Jerry]

I agree 1000%!!!

One, it is only a certain stream of manuscripts that did not have vowels in God's name - because the Jews removed them do to not liking to use such a holy name; the same as not wanting to see or speak about God and instead seeking a manifestation emanating from Him (ie. the Shekinah) - the preserved Hebrew Masorretic text does contain vowels.

Two, it is admitted by scholars that the name Yahweh was created by adding the vowels from Adonai to the Tetragrammaton (which is what those four letters indicating the name of God are called). So Yahweh was made up - though I have read material indicating it was a name of the moon God as well. (I see you addressed this above as well - I was skimming through your post and actually missed that sentence, sorry.)

Three, the word Jehovah (or the so-called name "Yahweh") are not the only names in the Bible with the initial letters. There are other Bible names using the YH beginning, and in English they are: Jehoshua, Jehoiakim, Jehoida, Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, Jehonab, Jehoahaz, Jehosheba, Jehoash, Jehoahaz, Jehozabad, Jehoaddan, Jehoiachin.

Now, if the letters used in Yahweh were actually true, then all these other Bible names using the same consonants would be translated as: Yahworam, Yahwoshaphat, Yahwoida, Yahwoiakim (or something similar); yet we NEVER find any modern translations using those spellings of Bible names, NEVER hear any preachers or teachers using those names or spellings of Bible names in their sermons and teachings.*

*I will clarify, I do not know what Hebrew Roots heretics do or if they change the spelling of Bible names, like they do with the name of God and of Jesus - AND (no joke) every single Hebrew Roots group has their own spelling of the names of God/Jesus, and I am sure each individual group that has their own Hebrew Roots Bible comes out with their own variant spellings too.

Edited February 19, 2022 by Jerry

[Jerry]

I have heard people say this in the past or read in some books. This is from William Newell on Revelation 1. Fits in with the pagan/unbelieving term Shekinah, or thinking God has both male and female attributes or characteristics.

 

After writing this note, I found to my horror, but I confess not to my surprise, the following: "In order to corroborate the doctrine (of sex in deity) just mentioned, certain Theosophists have invented a new derivation for the Hebrew Shaddai, which in our versions is correctly rendered 'Almighty.' They suppose it to be connected with a word shad, which signifies a woman's breast.** But such a derivation is impossible, and, so far as we are aware, has never been proposed by an unbiased scholar. More than one Christian scholar has taken up this Theosophical derivation of Shaddai, and explained the word as meaning first 'full-breasted,' and then 'bountiful.' The irreverent use of one of the grandest titles of the Most High should have checked them." (Pember: THE CHURCH AND THE MYSTERIES. Page 413.) The Babylonian doctrine of "the motherhood of God," source of all abominations, is what is subtly brought in here. The true derivation of Shaddai is Hebrew, yDv from root ddv to be strong, mighty: in adjective form used only of God (Gesenius). To miss this meaning of The Almighty is to endanger the consent of our hearts to His righteous judgments.

 

--------

** My comments: After I texted this quote to a friend, he pointed out that the statue of Diana (of the Ephesians) is covered with breasts and is often referred to as the many breasted god. The beliefs and portrayal of Diana is is one of the sources for the divine feminism coming into the church, so it is no surprise that somewhere along the way, false believers would want to add this to our view of the true God.

 

Some may ask why does this matter? Truth matters. I would rather reject the error and cling to the truth and be blessed by my Lord than to be willingly or unknowingly clinging to some error just to fit in with the religious crowd or "Christians" who just do not know their Bibles.

 

This matters because it actually came close to home recently. A little over a week ago, I was speaking with my brother about something - including Mark Lowry referring to the Holy Spirit as "She" and agreeing with some pagan on a video that the Holy Spirit is also referred to as Sophia!! - and my brother brought up some conversations with his girlfriend about God having male and female attributes, and that she knows some people that refer to the Holy Spirit as a female (like The Shack does). All I could think of at that time was the definition of El Shaddai I had heard many times through the years. Didn't want to go there as that would have truly confused the issue! So I focussed on: Yes, God created mankind, male and female and our emotions, etc. - BUT He has always revealed Himself (all three members of the Godhead) as male to us, never as female - even if He has what some may refer to as feminine attributes (compassion, mercy, etc.). But seeing now where some of this confusion came from and what type of people tried to redefine the Bible and add it to Biblical Christianity, I am glad to have this error exposed.

 

And the great thing was, I was studying out a commentary on Revelation, not even looking to expose any possible error in my life or in the world, just wanting to dig in deeper as my preacher is covering Revelation on Sunday morning. This came up - but fit in with my previous research, and it is eye-opening, for sure.