Talk:Tabernacle/Archive 1

Archive 1

Catholicism

what about the tabernacle in the Chatholic Religion?

• Since this page is Tabernacle (Judaism), perhaps a new page should be made Tabernacle (Catholocism) and the Catholic part of this page moved to it? The Catholic Tabernacle,a saint place, while having roots in the structure in the OT account, should not be on a Judaism page.

If the Catholic Tabernacle has it's roots in the OT why would you want to disassociate it from Judaism? Drewdafis 19:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

It's just as much a part of the history of Christianity as it is of the history of Judaism. I am renaming this article back to "Tabernacle". A person searching for that word is most likely going to want this page. StAnselm 06:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

• Excpet that I can't. It needs an admin. So what do people think? StAnselm 06:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

• The Tabernacle is as much a part of the history of Christianity as it is of the history of Judaism.
• A person searching for the word "Tabernacle" is most likely going to want this page. StAnselm 06:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
  • StAnselm: This is not about "history of Judaism" but about the facts of a living Judaism per se as it was practiced! The Tabernacle as understood in this article is not "part" of anything real in Christianity simply because there were no "christians" at the time the Tabernacle existed (and it's contents and rituals were then also incorporated into and used for four hundred years during the First Temple and the four hundred years of the Second Temple) and used by the Jews and by the Jews only as part of what the Torah requires in the 613 Mitzvot. The use of your argument would mean that everything in Judaism could be linked to Christianity because one way or another most things in Judaism are part of "the history of Christianity" so please try to avoid supersessionist and falacious arguments. IZAK 07:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose. Tabernacle is a disambig page which links to several related articles which, while not quite as notable as this one, still need to be available to users who may not know the exact title they're searching for. The (Judaism) part of the title of this article is simply to differentiate this article from the others, and is reasonable - the tabernacle was a product of Judaism and was wholly contained within the religion. I see 3 uncited sentences mentioning the significance to christianity, which is hardly justification for a move on your first point. Daniel^C/_T+ 10:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Of course you're not going to see many references to Christianity if the title excludes it. The fact is, the tabernacle is not "wholly contained within the religion of Judaism," and so as it stands, the title is extremely biased. StAnselm 12:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

agree This article is the primary topic and would be want the vast majority of people would want if they searched, and most wikilinked [[Tabernacle]] should go here. see Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Primary topic:

"When there is a well known primary meaning for a term or phrase, much more used than any other (this may be indicated by a majority of links in existing articles or by consensus of the editors of those articles that it will be significantly more commonly searched for and read than other meanings), then that topic may be used for the title of the main article, with a disambiguation link at the top. Where there is no such clearly dominant usage there is no primary topic page."

POV issue in the article should be address separately. Jon513 14:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Why not start Tabernacle (Christianity)? A search for "Tabernacle" would find it! Best, --Shirahadasha 14:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC) An alternative would be to call the Biblical tabernacle Tabernacle (bible). Best, --Shirahadasha 14:43, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

This article is already (or should be) about Tabernacle (bible). unfortunately StAnselm has confused two separate issues. One is that this articles deals with the primary meaning of the word tabernacle and should simply be name tabernacle and the disambig page should be Tabernacle (disambiguation) (per [Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Primary topic]]). Another separate issue is that this article is needlessly focused on Judaism's view where is should be focused on the bible and various interpretations of it. As it stands now the title is encouraging editors to only focus on part of the commentaries. There are no other articles on "scholarly views of the tabernacle", and "Christian views of the tabernacle" and there shouldn't be. They all belong is one article. Once the article becomes overly large then we can consider branching into smaller sub-articles. Of course changing the name of the article does magic change its POV, but hopefully that will happen some day. Jon513 15:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's a bit unfair to say I've confused two separate issues - they are both reasons for making the move. As far as the first reason goes, I'd be happy with Tabernacle (Bible). StAnselm 01:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose (and agree with User:Daniel) because the Tabernacle first existed on its own and then its contents and rituals became the foundation for the two Jewish Temples in Jerusalem, all of which covers about 1500 years before Jesus. In fact, Christianity was created hundreds of years AFTER the Second Temple was destroyed, so User:StAnselm's "argument" is based on false logic as I have explained above. IZAK 07:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
  • This is does not represent a neutral point of view. Just because it was 1500 years before Jesus, it doesn't mean that it isn't part of Christianity. You're entitled to your own opinions about Christianity, but not everybody shares them. StAnselm 07:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
    • IZAK, Even if you feel that this article should only talk about the Jewish view this article is still the primary meaning of the word and should get the title Tabernacle with Tabernacle (disambiguation) being on the side. Jon513 15:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. IZAK 07:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: I think the whole business about whether the Tabernacle is more Jewish or more Christian is irrelevant. The question is: Why does this article need to be disambiguated at all? The alternates at Tabernacle fall into two classes; those which are unimportant compared to the subject of this article, and those which (like Mormon Tabernacle and Tabernacle Township, New Jersey) are already disambiguated from it, by English usage. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

It is unfortunate that the discussion got side-tracked into questions of whether the tabernacle is Christian, Jewish, both or neither, which are entirely beside the point. It is clear to me from the above that this is the primary meaning of "tabernacle", and must therefore be at tabernacle. Determining the best disambiguating term would only be necessary if that were not the case. This article has been renamed from Tabernacle (Judaism) to Tabernacle as the result of a move request. I have also moved the current disambiguation page back to tabernacle (disambiguation), where it belongs. --Stemonitis 10:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Tachash

Support - I'm not 100% certain of what's been going on at Talk:Tachash aka "badger skins (?)," but does look like an article creation by a sockpuppet, and does look like like the best treatment is that the page has been closed down and redirected here. Good. Still, the section here might want to add that rabbinical and Christian interpretation has been divided, and that the Septuagint has δέρματα ὑακίνθινα, per source Natan Slifkin, Joel A. Linsider, Gila Weinberg Sacred Monsters: Mysterious and Mythical Creatures of Scripture 2007 Page 56 "Rabbi Yehudah said: [The tabernacle cover was made from] taynin, and it was named after its color. According to the Korban Ha-Edah commentary, this means that the cover was made from ordinary goat skins, but which were colored with a dye called taynin. This finds support in the twelfth-century Sefer Ha-Aruch, which relates the name ...... The Septuagint also follows this view, rendering “the skins of the tachash” as dermata hyacintha, hyacinth-blue dyed leather." Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:52, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Sir, the word "tachash" in Biblical Hebrew means literally "dark" or "darkened". Traditional interpretations of the meaning of this word is what it is - traditional interepretations. I'm going to stay away from this due to all edit wars here, but just consider this as an FYI. Aleksig6 (talk) 19:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I just now came to this Talk page to suggest that the info/data in Slifkin, Hewlett and Enc. Judaica might be combined into a separate brief article—until I read Talk:Tachash refd. above by User:In ictu oculi. The edit-warring there just blew me away! Instead, I would now argue that in view of the past notorious rep. of article Tachash/Taḥash the current refs. in this current article Tabernacle (Organization) are good enough for the curious reader, especially since the texts cited can be accessed online at Google Books (not Encyclopaedia Judaica, though). Their inclusion addresses the suggestions made above by In ictu oculi. I'm with Aleksig6 on this, and I won't even offer to write a new article "Taḥash" briefly summarizing data from those sources. To use a quote from Talk:Tachash: "...now stay away!" (Someone might try it about 5 years from now, but not right now. It's way too soon.) --Humaniphilon (talk) 20:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Please indulge a newbie. I stumbled on the old Tachash article by chance, and was deeply impressed by the depth of knowledge displayed. While I have not checked all the references of course, what I do know of the subject leads me to respect the article as a whole, and it is a very great pity that it should be obscurely listed. What I am suggesting to you experienced editors is that the Tachash article is unarchived, with links between it and Tabernacle. Philostorgius (talk) 14:33, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Christian Churches/Chapels in Wales

Ok, it seems the whole disambig, Xtian vs Judaism, etc, debate above has already covered the fact that the article misses out some sort of Christian meaning of Tabernacle.

Just to add some background that might be useful, here in Wales "Tabernacle" is used both as a preferable term for church or chapel by Protestant, Baptist, and other Xtian sects, as in Tabernacle, or The Tabernacle, Machynlleth. It is also sometimes used as a descriptive or honorific term as in Tabernacle English Baptist Church

Just google [Tabernacle + Wales] and you get a picture of how common it is. --Myfanwy 11:54, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Separate this article.

This article should definitely be separated into at Mishkan article and a Tabernacle (Christian) article. The 2 theologies do not mix, even though one is a reform movement arising out of the other. At present, this article looks like it's been taken over by Evangelicals and Mormons. -- Moses would not approve. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ManyFireflies (talk • contribs) 21:03, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

• • Who are you to speak for Moses?--Epictatus (talk) 07:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Relationship to the Golden Calf

" Maimonides asserts that the Tabernacle and its accoutrements, such as the golden Ark of the Covenant and the golden Menorah were meant as "alternates" to the human weakness and needs for physical idols as seen in the Golden Calf episode." What does this mean by "alternates"? alternates to blatant acts of avodah zarah? As there is no reference I can't look it up. --Teacherbrock (talk) 19:20, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Were the Israelites led or accompanied by the Tabernacle?

Regarding 62.228.21.64's amendment: The text clearly states that the Israelites were led by this device - which biblical text or secondary reference states this?
BobKilcoyne (talk) 04:22, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I have amended the text, as the Israelites were not 'led' by this device: they were 'led' by cloud and fire.
BobKilcoyne (talk) 04:11, 30 June 2015 (UTC)