Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Post Reply
Posts: 837
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:15 pm
Location: England


Post by Ethan » Fri Jan 18, 2019 6:41 pm

This is a problematic name since spelled the same as the word for King, the pronunciation of Moloch is based on the Septuagint reading of Μολοχ and O is the default vowel used by the Septuagint scribes when transliterating unknown words, e.g. כדרלעמר/Χοδολλογομορ.

Leviticus 18:21 - העביר למלך "pass through the Moloch"
the Septuagint confuses מלך for Ruler thus instead reads λατρεύειν ἄρχοντι"

Jeremiah 32:35 - העביר למלך "pass through the Moloch"
ἀναφέρειν Μολοχ

2 Kings 23:10 - העביר למלך "pass through the Moloch"
διάγειν Μολοχ

The Reveal
2 Samuel 12:31 העביר אותם ב־מלכן "pass through the brickkiln'
διήγαγεν αὐτοὺς διὰ τοῦ πλινθείου

Something is odd about this verse for some manuscripts read מלכן and others read מלבן
(Brown-Driver-Briggs) brick-mould, 2 Samuel 12:31 Qr (Kt, by error, מלכן), Nahum 3:14. (pseudo-error)

Nahum 3:14 - brickkiln [πλίνθον][מלבן ,מלכן]

The name מלכן as an Aramaic ending, therefore a variant of מלכם that appear in 1 Kings 11:33 and again, the Septuagint wrongly translates as King and here it is the associate of כמוש, the guise of κάμινος "Brickkiln" the synonym of πλινθεῖον "Brickworks", the other associate is ὀπτῇσι "bake-bricks' which is תפת and κάμινος also καμινώδης which is בן־הנם also גיא־בן that becomes γηγενής "born of Gaia" synonym of γιγάντων and Τιτάν and τίτανος means "Lime" that is שיד in Hebrew and the key ingredient in a brickworks.

Amos 2:1 - He burned the bones of the king of Edom unto the lime[שיד]

העביר=ἐκπυρόω "burn too ashes, consume utterly" cf. τεφρόω "to be burnt to ashes"
2 Samuel 12:31 - העביר אותם במלכן : ἐξεπύρωσεν αὐτοὺς διὰ τοῦ πλινθείου [burnt them in the kiln]

[David's Moloch]
He brought forth the people that were therein, and put them under saws, and under harrows of iron, and under axes of iron, and burnt them in the kiln: and thus did he unto all the cities of the children of Ammon. So David and all the people returned unto Jerusalem.

שידים = Τιτάν "Lime"
מלבן, מלכן, מלך = πλινθεῖον "Brick kiln" (cf. πλαστός "form, molded")
לבן = πλίνθον "Brick"
אבן = λίθον "Stone"
העביר = ἐκπυρόω "Burn to ashes"
עפר = τέφρα "Ashes, ash-colored"

-Moloch is not a deity-
Deuteronomy 32:17 - They sacrificed unto lime [לשדים] who are no God
Psalm 106:37 - They sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto lime[לשדים]
Amos 2:1 - He burned the bones of the king of Edom unto Lime [לשיד]
Last edited by Ethan on Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Posts: 837
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:15 pm
Location: England

Re: Moloch

Post by Ethan » Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:30 pm

בני "Sons"
לבני "Bricks"

Genesis 11:3 - Let us make brick and burn them thoroughly
ויאמרו איש אל־רעהו הבה נלבנה לבנים ונשרפה לשרפה ותהי להם הלבנה לאבן והחמר היה להם לחמר
καὶ εἶπεν ἄνθρωπος τῷ πλησίον δεῦτε πλινθεύσωμεν πλίνθους καὶ ὀπτήσωμεν αὐτὰς πυρί καὶ ἐγένετο αὐτοῖς ἡ πλίνθος εἰς λίθον καὶ ἄσφαλτος ἦν αὐτοῖς ὁ πηλός

Exodus 5:7 - Ye shall no more give the people straw to make brick, as heretofore: let them go and gather straw for themselves
Exodus 5:8 - And the tale of the bricks
Exodus 5:12 - So the people were scattered abroad throughout all the land of Egypt to gather stubble instead of straw.

קש - Stubble
תבן - Straw

Isaiah 5:24 - fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff
Isaiah 33:11 - Ye shall conceive chaff, ye shall bring forth stubble
Isaiah 33:12 - The people shall be as the burnings of lime

קש - Stubble
חשש - Straw

I suspect the words to do with ἄσφαλτος (Asphalt, bitumen), πλαστός and ξύσμα( fillings, shavings) or θυσίας [חשש] "burnt-offering" or θειόω/θειώδης (Sulfur, brimstone) or τίτανος (Lime) or גביש/γύψος (Chalk, Gypsum).
In the ancient Middle East, the Sumerians used natural bitumen deposits for mortar between bricks and stones, to cement parts of carvings, such as eyes, into place, for ship caulking, and for waterproofing.[2] The Greek historian Herodotus said hot bitumen was used as mortar in the walls of Babylon.

The 1 kilometre (0.62 mi) long Euphrates Tunnel beneath the river Euphrates at Babylon in the time of Queen Semiramis (ca. 800 BC) was reportedly constructed of burnt bricks covered with bitumen as a waterproofing agent

Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:27 pm

Re: Moloch

Post by semiopen » Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:50 am

Ethan wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 6:41 pm

שידים = Τιτάν "Lime"


Deuteronomy 32:17 - They sacrificed unto lime [לשדים] who are no God
Psalm 106:37 - They sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto lime[לשדים]
Amos 2:1 - He burned the bones of the king of Edom unto Lime [לשיד]
While it is true that some real men don't need diacritical marks or vowels in Hebrew, it's not so emasculating to use them if one doesn't have expert knowledge of the language.

שֵׁד -
probably demon
This is an easy word to remember for an English speaker because it is pronounced "shade" - get it?

שִׂיד -
lime, whitewash
This is pronounced "seed" the dot on the left of the Shin makes it s instead of sh. Note the yud in the middle, which can easily get dropped.
Thus said the LORD: For three transgressions of Moab, For four, I will not revoke it: Because he burned the bones Of the king of Edom to lime. (Amos 2:1 TNK)
‎כֹּ֚ה אָמַ֣ר יְהוָ֔ה עַל־שְׁלֹשָׁה֙ פִּשְׁעֵ֣י מוֹאָ֔ב וְעַל־אַרְבָּעָ֖ה לֹ֣א אֲשִׁיבֶ֑נּוּ עַל־שָׂרְפ֛וֹ עַצְמ֥וֹת מֶֽלֶךְ־אֱד֖וֹם לַשִּֽׂיד׃
(Amos 2:1 WTT)
They sacrificed to demons, no-gods, Gods they had never known, New ones, who came but lately, Who stirred not your fathers' fears. (Deut. 32:17 TNK)
‎יִזְבְּח֗וּ לַשֵּׁדִים֙ לֹ֣א אֱלֹ֔הַ אֱלֹהִ֖ים לֹ֣א יְדָע֑וּם חֲדָשִׁים֙ מִקָּרֹ֣ב בָּ֔אוּ לֹ֥א שְׂעָר֖וּם אֲבֹתֵיכֶֽם׃
(Deut. 32:17 WTT)

Deuteronomy 32 is the Song_of_Moses

Not sure how important this is but:

‎אֱלֹ֔הַ אֱלֹהִ֖ים

is the only time this phrase appears in the bible.
Their own sons and daughters they sacrificed to demons.
(Ps. 106:37 TNK)
‎וַיִּזְבְּח֣וּ אֶת־בְּ֭נֵיהֶם וְאֶת־בְּנֽוֹתֵיהֶ֗ם לַשֵּֽׁדִים׃
(Ps. 106:37 WTT)

Been awhile since the last human sacrifice thread.

Probably just a natural misunderstanding; God wanted stupid sacrifices, not sick stupid sacrifices.

Posts: 837
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:15 pm
Location: England

Re: Moloch

Post by Ethan » Sat Jan 19, 2019 10:06 am

It was David who initiated Human sacrifice in 2 Samuel 12:31.

2 Samuel 12:3
Therefore gather the rest of the people together, and encamp against the city, and take it: lest I take the city, and it be called after my name.
And David gathered all the people together, and went to Rabbah, and fought against it, and took it.

2 Samuel 12:30 [1Ch 20:2]
And he took their king's crown from off his head
ויקח את־עטרת־מלכם מעל ראשו
καὶ ἔλαβεν τὸν στέφανον Μελχολ τοῦ βασιλέως αὐτῶν ἀπὸ τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ

Jeremiah 49:1
why then doth their king[מלכם] inherit Gad, and his people dwell in his cities?
ἔστιν αὐτοῖς διὰ τί παρέλαβεν Μελχομ τὸν Γαδ καὶ ὁ λαὸς αὐτῶν ἐν πόλεσιν αὐτῶν ἐνοικήσει

Jeremiah 49:3
for their king[מלכם] shall go into captivity
Μελχομ (Septuagint)

Amos 1:15
And their king[מלכם] shall go into captivity,

Jeremiah 43:9
Take great stones in thine hand, and hide them in the clay in the brickkiln[מלבן] which is at the entry of Pharaoh's house in Tahpanhes[δάφνη] (δάφνη = στεφάνη = στέφανον = עטרת/קדקד = γογγύλος, στρογγύλος)

Jeremiah 2:16
Also the children of Noph and Tahapanes have broken the crown of thy head.

Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:27 pm

Re: Moloch

Post by semiopen » Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:33 am

Human sacrifice is one of those topics that goes in and out of fashion, more of an amusing sideline.

I think Teraphim is/are an important concept to understand.
According to Genesis 31, Rachel takes the teraphim belonging to her father Laban when her husband Jacob escapes. She hides them in a saddle bag and sits on them when Laban comes looking for them, and claims that she cannot get up because she is menstruating. From this it can be deduced that they were small, perhaps 30–35 cm.[4] Her exact motive in doing so is subject to controversy amongst the commentators: Some argue she took the teraphim in order that her father not have idolatrous paraphernalia, while others explain that she wanted to use them herself.[5]
In 1 Samuel 19, Michal helps her husband David to escape from her father Saul. She lets him out through a window, and then tricks Saul's men into thinking that a teraphim in her bed is actually David. This suggests the size and shape is that of a man.[6] It also refers to "the" teraphim, which implies that there was a place for teraphim in every household. Van der Toorn claims that "there is no hint of indignation at the presence of teraphim in David's house."[7] However, the same word is used in 1 Samuel 15:23 where Samuel rebukes Saul and tells him that "presumption is as iniquity and teraphim". Here the idea is that rebellion is just as bad as teraphim, the use of which is thus denounced as idolatry. Others explain that the teraphim in this context refer to decorative statues, not to idolatrous ritual items.[8]
The teraphim were outlawed in Josiah's reform (2 Kings 23:24), but are mentioned again in Hosea 3:4, where it says that "the Israelites will live many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred stones, without ephod or teraphim." As in the narrative of Micah's Idol the teraphim is closely associated with the ephod, and both are mentioned elsewhere in connection with divination;[1] it is thus a possibility that the Teraphim were involved with the process of cleromancy.

In Zechariah 10:2 it states: "For the teraphim utter nonsense, and the diviners see lies; the dreamers tell false dreams, and give empty consolation. Therefore the people wander like sheep; they are afflicted for want of a shepherd."
Rachel and the Teraphim is probably the clearest story.

Vayetzei: Rachel and Leah show us a thing or too, but we have to look closely to notice -

The link is Rabbi Sylvia Rothschild's rather vanilla take on this story.

The teraphim was probably a human head that was used for oracular purposes; the idea being that it would speak. Rachel sat on it so that Laban wouldn't hear it speak. The possibility that she was menstruating while she sat on it to muffle it's voice is remarkable on many different levels.

The bible is silent about any sons of Laban except -
Now he heard the things that Laban's sons were saying: "Jacob has taken all that was our father's, and from that which was our father's he has built up all this wealth." (Gen. 31:1 TNK)
‎וַיִּשְׁמַ֗ע אֶת־דִּבְרֵ֤י בְנֵֽי־לָבָן֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר לָקַ֣ח יַעֲקֹ֔ב אֵ֖ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר לְאָבִ֑ינוּ וּמֵאֲשֶׁ֣ר לְאָבִ֔ינוּ עָשָׂ֕ה אֵ֥ת כָּל־הַכָּבֹ֖ד הַזֶּֽה׃
(Gen. 31:1 WTT)

‎בְנֵֽי־לָבָן (son(s) of Laban) can be singular or plural, I think the translators make this plural because of the context like ‎לְאָבִ֑ינוּ (our father). For the purposes of my argument, it is better (or simpler) to consider it singular. After all, if Laban had many sons why did he need Jacob to work for him?

My understanding of this is that Laban's son was sacrificed as an infant and his head became the Teraphim. So the words of Laban's son were the words of the Teraphim. A lot of attention is spent on the question of why Rachel stole the Teraphim. It is useful to keep in mind that the Teraphim was probably her brother, or at least her sacrificed brother's head. That seems to be enough extenuating circumstances for her to cop a plea deal on the theft charge.

Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:27 pm

Re: Moloch

Post by semiopen » Mon Jan 21, 2019 9:14 am

There is one other reference to Laban's sons.
But that same day he removed the streaked and spotted he-goats and all the speckled and spotted she-goats -- every one that had white on it -- and all the dark-colored sheep, and left them in the charge of his sons. (Gen. 30:35 TNK)
‎וַיָּ֣סַר בַּיּוֹם֩ הַה֙וּא אֶת־הַתְּיָשִׁ֜ים הָֽעֲקֻדִּ֣ים וְהַטְּלֻאִ֗ים וְאֵ֤ת כָּל־הָֽעִזִּים֙ הַנְּקֻדּ֣וֹת וְהַטְּלֻאֹ֔ת כֹּ֤ל אֲשֶׁר־לָבָן֙ בּ֔וֹ וְכָל־ח֖וּם בַּכְּשָׂבִ֑ים וַיִּתֵּ֖ן בְּיַד־בָּנָֽיו׃

(Gen. 30:35 WTT)

Regarding the Rabbinical take on the nature of teraphim - ... 1-teraphim
The word "teraphim" is explained by the Rabbis as meaning "disgraceful things" (Yer. 'Ab. Zarah ii. 41b; Tan., Wayeẓe). It is rendered "ẓalmanaya" or "ẓilmanaya" (= "images") by the Targumim of Onḳelos and pseudo-Jonathan to Gen. xxxi. 19, 34, and by the Targum of Jonathan in the other parts of the Bible, except in connection with the image of Micah (Judges xvii. 5; xviii. 14, 18, 20), where it is rendered "dema'in" (= "likenesses"). The nature of the teraphim is much discussed by ancient commentators. According to Targ. pseudo-Jonathan to Gen. xxxi. 19, the teraphim were made of the head of a man, a first-born, which, after the man had been slain, was shaved and then salted and spiced. After a golden plate on which magic words were engraved had been placed under the tongue, the mummified head was mounted on the wall, and it spoke to the people. This legend is more fully developed in Pirḳe R. El. xxxvi., where it is said that after the head had been displayed on the wall, lighted candles were placed round it; the people then prostrated themselves before it, and it talked to them.
In this case, Laban would presumably have sacrificed his first born son.

The "disgraceful things" definition is presumably derived from Terefah .
Terefah (Hebrew: טְרֵפָה‬, lit. "torn by a beast of prey"; plural טריפות treifot)
The Jewish Encyclopedia article continues -
Ibn Ezra (on Gen. l.c.) records two definitions of "teraphim"; namely, (1) a copper dial by means of which one might ascertain the exact time, and (2) an image made by astrologers at a certain time and under the influence of certain stars, which caused it to speak. Ibn Ezra himself favored the latter interpretation, it appearing from I Sam. xix. 13, 16 that the teraphim had the shape of a man. Naḥmanides (on Gen. l.c.), however, thinks that while the teraphim of Laban might have been idols, those of I Sam. l.c. were not, inasmuch as there could have been no idols in David's house. He thinks that in general teraphim were astrological tables by means of which one might learn future events (comp. Ḳimḥi on I Sam. l.c.). The "Sefer ha-Yashar" (section "Wayeẓe," pp. 46b-47a, Leghorn, 1870), after having repeated the description which Pirḳe R. Eliezer gives of the teraphim, declares that they were made of gold or silver, in the image of a man and at a certain moment, and that by the influence of the stars they revealed the future. It adds that the teraphim of Laban were of the latter description.

Posts: 837
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:15 pm
Location: England

Re: Moloch

Post by Ethan » Mon Jan 21, 2019 7:39 pm

I . of tables, vessels, etc., three-legged
II. tripod, i.e. three-legged cauldron, used as a mixing vessel
III. placed as votive gifts in temples, esp. in that of Apollo at Delphi
IV. given as prizes, in Crete used as currency,
V. from a tripod the Delphic Priestess delivered her oracle
VI. A cauldron containing the boiled pieces of Dionysus that is given to Apollo for burial, who "stowed it away beside his tripod" at Delphi

Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:27 pm

Re: Moloch

Post by semiopen » Wed Jan 23, 2019 7:45 am

The bible attests to human sacrifices to Baal (lord, master, owner) and Moloch (King). I don't think Moloch as a name (mlk) is different than "king". There is also some evidence that sacrifices were performed for [wiki]El_(deity)[/wiki] but not from the bible to my knowledge.

Pidyon_haben might have some kind of relationship to sacrificing the first born.
The pidyon haben (Hebrew: פדיון הבן‬) or redemption of the first-born son[1] is a mitzvah in Judaism whereby a Jewish firstborn son is "redeemed" by use of silver coins from his birth-state of sanctity, i.e. from being predestined by his firstborn status to serve as a priest.
What is Pidyon Haben?
The ceremony derives from a series of biblical passages that portray God as laying claim to the first-born of both animals and human beings. Exodus 22:28-29 sets forth the command clearly: "You shall give Me the male first-born among your children. You shall do the same with your cattle and your flocks." The practical interpretation of this commandment led to the practice of dedicating all first-born things to God by bringing them to the Kohanim, the priests. First-born animals were offered as special sacrifices, while first-born sons entered the priesthood or priestly service.
That's pretty weird from a non human sacrifice perspective. One might figure that sacrificing a first born son would be counter productive from a survival of the species standpoint. But making him a priest instead would appear to be worse - the guy gets a life time vacation from real work?

From the biblical evidence it appears that child sacrifice was fairly well known during first temple times. For example - Tophet
In the Hebrew Bible, Tophet or Topheth (Hebrew: תוֹפֶת‎; Greek: Ταφέθ; Latin: Topheth) was a location in Jerusalem in the Gehinnom where worshipers influenced by the ancient Canaanite religion engaged in the human sacrifice of children to the gods Moloch and Baal by burning them alive. Tophet became a theological or poetic synonym for Hell within Christendom.

The traditional explanation that a burning rubbish heap in the Valley of Hinnom south of Jerusalem gave rise to the idea of a fiery Gehenna of judgment is attributed to Rabbi David Kimhi's commentary on Psalm 27:13. He maintained that in this loathsome valley fires were kept burning perpetually to consume the filth and cadavers thrown into it.[1]
A bit of an inconvenient truth that Tophet is in Jerusalem but the term is used generally for Phoenician settlements.
The tophet (also topheth) was a sacred precinct usually located outside cities where sacrifices and burials were made, especially of young children, in rituals of the Phoenician and then Carthaginian religion. The tophet is the most evident cultural export from Phoenician cities to their colonies throughout the Mediterranean and they have been a valuable source of information on burial practices and even Mediterranean trade via the habit of using imported pottery as funerary urns to store the ashes of the deceased.
Quite possibly the practice was followed by some citizens of Israel and Judah in first temple times, but I think there is no hard archaeological evidence for it. The discussions seem to be centered around the Phoenicians as far as Canaanites go.

Post Reply