Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Kadosh is word pagan??
#1
Recently I was researching the Hebrew word "Kadosh" and even then he was convinced that it is used for the Spirit of the Creator! But scouring the internet you may find that this name seems to me is from a deity named QudShu. There are books that testify to this and here is the site I saw:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://books.google.com.br/books?id=TffrTUyCD6QC&pg=PA497&dq=a+male+prostitute+is+called+a+kadesh+in+Hebrew&hl=pt-BR&sa=X&ei=WBYnT9XWC6ra0QHUs8yACQ&ved=0CFkQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=a%20male%20prostitute%20is%20called%20a%20kadesh%20in%20Hebrew&f=false">http://books.google.com.br/books?id=Tff ... ew&f=false</a><!-- m -->


<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://books.google.com.br/books?id=z10-Xz9Kno4C&pg=PA155&dq=a+male+prostitute+is+called+a+kadesh+in+Hebrew&hl=pt-BR&sa=X&ei=WBYnT9XWC6ra0QHUs8yACQ&ved=0CFMQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=a%20male%20prostitute%20is%20called%20a%20kadesh%20in%20Hebrew&f=false">http://books.google.com.br/books?id=z10 ... ew&f=false</a><!-- m -->


Someone has to prove that this is not so?
Reply
#2
I have little to no knowledge on this issue. However the little I do find suggests that "kodesh" is an adjective meaning "holy" (Someone more knowledgeable, please correct me if I am mistaken). As for QudShu, I find this from Wikipedia...
Quote:Qetesh is a Sumerian goddess adopted into Egyptian mythology from the Canaanite religion, popular during the New Kingdom. She was a fertility goddess of sacred ecstasy and sexual pleasure.

From the Semitic root Q-D-?, meaning "Holy." Her other names are Quadshu, Qudshu, Qodesh, Qadesh, Qadashu, Qadesha, Qedeshet, Kedesh and Kodesh.[1] Her city of worship was Kadesh[2]

I am wondering if the use of it as a name necessarily must disqualify it for use as an adjective? From what little I know, when people speak of the Kodesh, or Ruach haKodesh, it is not really used as a name so much as a descriptive title.

But then again, I could be completely mistaken. <!-- sHuh --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/huh.gif" alt="Huh" title="Huh" /><!-- sHuh -->
Reply
#3
Hi Everyone,

It's helpful to remember that the Hebrews came from pagan Semitic stock in Mesopotamia, otherwise the scriptures would be lying to us. Abraham's father was an idol-maker, right? That means a lot of different things. First and foremost, they didn't just fly down in a spaceship from Mars ... their language didn't magically change when they crossed the Euphrates on their way to the Promised Land. They retained the Sumerian, Akkadian and Aramaic words their parents and grandparents before them spoke. That included words like "El" for "god", Qudash for "holy", etc.

If you look at the Hebrew calendar, it contains the same names for months that were named for pagan Sumerian/Akkadian/Aramean deities. (eg., Tammuz) The names of constellations and even the sun (Shamash) are the names of their respective pagan gods.

These things are an affirmation of the biblical text, not an accusation against it.

+Shamasha Paul
Reply
#4
Paul Younan Wrote:Hi Everyone,

It's helpful to remember that the Hebrews came from pagan Semitic stock in Mesopotamia, otherwise the scriptures would be lying to us. Abraham's father was an idol-maker, right? That means a lot of different things. First and foremost, they didn't just fly down in a spaceship from Mars ... their language didn't magically change when they crossed the Euphrates on their way to the Promised Land. They retained the Sumerian, Akkadian and Aramaic words their parents and grandparents before them spoke. That included words like "El" for "god", Qudash for "holy", etc.

If you look at the Hebrew calendar, it contains the same names for months that were named for pagan Sumerian/Akkadian/Aramean deities. (eg., Tammuz) The names of constellations and even the sun (Shamash) are the names of their respective pagan gods.

These things are an affirmation of the biblical text, not an accusation against it.

+Shamasha Paul

<!-- s:bigups: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/bigups.gif" alt=":bigups:" title="Big Ups" /><!-- s:bigups: -->
Reply
#5
Shalom chaver Paul!


Excuse my ignorance, but I did not understand well what you wanted to say.

I'm not convinced that getting Kadosh is not a name of a deity, even if the language of those regions have somehow been maintained. But do not rule out that the opposite can be true also.

For as the scribes heard it stirred in the scriptures so biased (Trinity), who assures us that they did not include names of pagan deities in the same?


This is my concern about it.
Reply
#6
Hey, guys.

I hope you don't mind my barging in like this, but having come across this issue before, I just thought I might put my two cents in. I can't say that I'm particularly well-versed in either Peshitta Aramaic or Hebrew, but I have read texts on the religious practices of the Assyro-Babylonians that touched upon concepts similar to the ones being discussed. It feels a bit strange broaching this topic on a site dedicated to the Bible, but here it goes.

One particular book explains that the Akkadian word "qadishtu", transliterated as "holy one", was used as a title for cult or temple prostitutes. The Hebrew equivalent of this word is "qadeshah" (note the Q-D-S root) which means the same. Both were thought to play a religious/sexual role in Babylonia, which I think that parallels nicely with Qetesh/Qadesh being the Sumerian goddess of sexual pleasure and sacred ecstasy. Also, the male counterpart, "qadesh", is translated as "sodomite" in the KJV. So, yes. There is definitely some sort of pagan connection there.

But that's not to say that Judaism and Semitic Christianity are pagan religions in any way. As has been previously said, these languages developed gradually over a very long period of time (the written record for both Hebrew and Aramaic goes back at least 3000 years, so try to imagine just how long people have been speaking them), and retained many of the words used prior to the rise of Abrahamic religion. Just to prove it: I know for a fact that the title given to Saints in the ACoE is "Qadisha" (m.) or "Qadishta" (f.). These words still mean "holy one", but are used in a completely different way.

I guess the idea here is that languages develop in (very) interesting ways.

My apologies if anything I said was incorrect!
Reply
#7
Doublethink Wrote:Hey, guys.

I hope you don't mind my barging in like this, but having come across this issue before, I just thought I might put my two cents in. I can't say that I'm particularly well-versed in either Peshitta Aramaic or Hebrew, but I have read texts on the religious practices of the Assyro-Babylonians that touched upon concepts similar to the ones being discussed. It feels a bit strange broaching this topic on a site dedicated to the Bible, but here it goes.

One particular book explains that the Akkadian word "qadishtu", transliterated as "holy one", was used as a title for cult or temple prostitutes. The Hebrew equivalent of this word is "qadeshah" (note the Q-D-S root) which means the same. Both were thought to play a religious/sexual role in Babylonia, which I think that parallels nicely with Qetesh/Qadesh being the Sumerian goddess of sexual pleasure and sacred ecstasy. Also, the male counterpart, "qadesh", is translated as "sodomite" in the KJV. So, yes. There is definitely some sort of pagan connection there.

But that's not to say that Judaism and Semitic Christianity are pagan religions in any way. As has been previously said, these languages developed gradually over a very long period of time (the written record for both Hebrew and Aramaic goes back at least 3000 years, so try to imagine just how long people have been speaking them), and retained many of the words used prior to the rise of Abrahamic religion. Just to prove it: I know for a fact that the title given to Saints in the ACoE is "Qadisha" (m.) or "Qadishta" (f.). These words still mean "holy one", but are used in a completely different way.

I guess the idea here is that languages develop in (very) interesting ways.

My apologies if anything I said was incorrect!

Incorrect or not, I can certainly say it made plenty of sense. <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->
Reply
#8
Shalom doublethink

Its very good explanation and very reflective!
Would you post the name of the book you mentioned?
I think we should continue research on this, because despite the good explanation, I understand that it is prudent to continue researching how good custome orders.
It was interesting if we knew any findings arquiol?gico too. For where man often put his hand, we must keep the back foot.
Sorry for being a demanding person.
Reply
#9
Thanks, guys!

PM Saunders, I'm glad I helped to explain a few things. Semitic languages aren't exactly a walk in the park.

Regarding my sources: The book was entitled 'The Babylonians', by H.W.F Saggs, an ancient historian and lecturer in Semitic languages - specifically Akkadian. The book is quite a good read, and certainly very informative. It explores many aspects of Assyrian and Babylonian culture, and a significant portion of the book is dedicated to religion.

I agree with the need to continue research on this topic. There is a great deal more to learn, and I can quite confidently say that I don't know half of it.

Don't apologise for being demanding, BenEfraym - evidence is crucial. That said, I'm not sure I can provide you with firm archaeological proof to support my previous post, but there is certainly some literary evidence I could bring up.

If you were to read 'The Histories' of Herodotus, for example, you'd find that he discusses a very interesting Assyrian custom in which young girls prostituted themselves at the temple of the love/sex/war goddess Ishtar (or Astarte, with whom Qetesh was associated) prior to marriage. The idea, I think, is that they were paying some sort of due to the goddess by assuming the role of a cult prostitute. Pretty horrific, yes.

Whilst Herodotus' reliability is doubtful (there is not a single piece of archaeological evidence from Babylonia to corroborate these claims, which were considered ridiculous even in ancient times), it is likely that there is a grain of truth to what he wrote. Probably, Herodotus caught wind of the Assyrian/Babylonian practice of sacred prostitution, and created a piece of sensationalist fiction to go along with it. The Greeks, who had a long history of antagonism with the Near East, had a lot of very negative, and at times even cartoonish ideas about the nations of that area. You need look no further than Aeschylus' 'The Persians' to know what I'm talking about. Therefore, it's not hard to imagine them accepting such stories as fact, or at least as rumour.

The Assyrian archaeological record, however, sheds some light on the matter. Notably, Sumerian and Babylonian law stipulated that part of a man's estate be set aside as a dowry or inheritance for his daughter if she was a qadishtu, or priestess. Furthermore, she was entitled to annual support - in the form of money - from each of her brothers. The sum was something like six copper minas. There are Old Assyrian legal records that testify to this.

Further evidence survives in the form of Old Assyrian marriage contracts. One particular contract forbids a man from marrying another woman in his home town, but allows him to 'take' (or 'marry') a qadishtu-woman from the city of Ashur (Saggs). Qadishtu-priestesses were not permitted husbands, but they could enter into temporary sexual relationships for money (i.e. prostitution). This practice shares similarities with Nikah Mut'ah (Temporary Marriage) in Shi'a Islam.

There are also instances of religious festivals where the qadishtu played an important role. These were mainly fertility rites, e.g. the hieros gamos or 'Sacred Marriage', which ensured the flooding of the rivers and an abundant harvest every year.

In a nutshell - yes, the qadishtu were real. The etymological connection is also pretty salient.

So...yeah. I think that's it. Sorry for babbling on about this for so long, but I hope this answers your questions. Again, I hate the fact that I'm discussing idol-worship and paganism on a site dedicated to the everlasting Word of God (I feel especially bad considering it's the Ba'uta d'Ninwaye) but it's only for the purpose of education. I hope God can forgive me!

Regards,

Doublethink.
Reply
#10
Double think,

Awesome post, it's akin to the word we use shweekha, we use this term in the liturgy and I am certain it has a positive meaning (Shamasha Paul may shed light on this) but if I call you shweekha based on the modern Assyrian usage of the term, it would imply a negative connotation.

Or in the English, the word gay meant happy, it now means homosexual.

With the term qadisha, it was used to label holy people even though we now realize they were far from being holy. This in no way implies a pagan connection to Christianity.
Reply
#11
Thanks, Alan. I'm happy you found it useful.

As to the word 'shwikha' - I'm quite sure it has a positive meaning in Syriac. I think it means something like 'holy', but I'm not one hundred per cent certain. Syriac isn't my strong point! Regarding its usage in Modern Assyrian - you're absolutely right. If you were to call me 'shwikhta', I wouldn't be very happy. As a matter of fact, I was shocked when I first heard that word used to describe a Saint. Funny how meanings change, isn't it?

Basically, the same thing happened with the 'Q-D-S' words mentioned above. It's pretty amazing, though, if you think about it. These words have been used for the past 3,000 years, and they've barely changed. Even the context in which they're used today isn't completely different to what it was: religion. Granted, the religions in question are light-years apart, but you get my meaning.

You can't expect languages to magically change just because the faith of the native speakers does. The important thing is that we no longer practice paganism today. We're Christian through and through! Thank God!
Reply
#12
For me from linquistic point of view "kadosh" means 100% dedication to something.
I just try to look at context all the time.
Reply
#13
Hi all, sorry for my late response.

Yes, in the ancient tongue....Shweekha means "Glorified" (from the root Sh-b-kh), and yes I am (unfortunately) aware of the modern slang version of it with the negative connotation!

+Shamasha
Reply
#14
IPOstapyuk Wrote:For me from linquistic point of view "kadosh" means 100% dedication to something.
I just try to look at context all the time.


Shlama,


although i have no problem with the word qadosh, i've been using "set-apart" in my personal translations of Scripture merely to try to capture a closer meaning of the term into English, and just recently was thinking of switching to "dedicated" and the applicable inflections as i like the sound of it better. so now i come here and read your post and think i'll do just that!! <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)