View Single Post
Old 17-04-2009, 04:39 PM   #9
1977
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ronisron View Post
Many ancient deities are represented not only by one or more names, they are also represented by one or more images. The "Owl as Molech/Molech as Owl" information is not fodder made up on "CT" sites, the information is much older than that.

Horus, the "savior" of the Babylonian Church, is also known by Tamos. His mother is Semiramis, and she has a huge representation in image as the Statue of Liberty. Molech is worshipped as a Bull, and an Owl. This is done to protect the worshippers of said deities, to mask who or what it is that they are really praying to.
...
I have to say, I believe you're a little off base with this.
You're a little off base yourself. Yes, Tammuz was an annually dying-and-rising savior god, and was the consort of Inanna/Ishtar (this connects him with Osiris, not Horus). But he actually predates Semiramis (ruled 811 BC–808 BC) by thousands of years. This theory comes from Hislop's The Two Babylons and is fiction.

Now, who was Moloch?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Callahan, Secret Origins of the Bible, p. 310
Not only did Yahweh share his domain with a consort and even a rival, untamed goddess, it is obvious from the narratives of 1 & 2 Kings that a number of minor deities were either worshiped with him or were seen as being aspects of his nature. The one who provoked the most intense reaction on the part of the Yahwists was Moloch (or Molech). As I said earlier, in 1 Kings 11 Solomon is said to have set up an altar for a god described as "the abomination of the Ammonites" and variously called Milcom (vs. 5) and Molech (vs. 7). Leviticus 18:21 forbids devoting children by fire to Molech, and Lev. 20:1-5 demands the death sentence for any who give their children to that god. Both Ahaz (2 Kgs. 16:3) and Manasseh (2 Kgs. 21:6) are said to have burned one of their sons as an offering, presumably to Molech. And Josiah takes care not only to destroy Solomon's altar to Milcom (2 Kgs. 23:13) but to defile Topheth ("burning place" or "oven") in the Hinnom valley southwest of Jerusalem so that no one would be able to burn their son or daughter there as an offering to Molech (2 Kgs. 23:10).

The question is: Just who is Molech? In Jeremiah 19, Yahweh has the prophet go to the valley of Hinnom to pronounce doom on Jerusalem because the people have burned their sons to Baal. In Jer. 19:5 Yahweh says:

They built the high places of Baal in the valley of the sons of Hinnom, to offer up their sons and daughters to Molech, though I did not command them, nor did it enter into my mind that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

While Baal is identified with Molech in these verses it would seem to be more of a poetic device. There is an odd phrasing in the verse above that might point to the possible identity of Molech. Yahweh says that it did not enter his mind that the people should do this tiling nor did he command it. But if the people were sacrificing their children to another god then saying that Yahweh did not command it would be superfluous. It also seems rather odd that sacrificing children to Molech would profane Yahweh's name as it is said to in Lev 18:21. It could be that Molech is actually Melech, that is "king," an epithet for Yahweh himself. Thus, the reformers were trying to keep people from committing the abominable act of human sacrifice when worshiping Yahweh. In 1935 Otto Eisfeldt even proposed that the original word was molk, a technical term for human sacrifice rather than the name of a deity.

Other ideas as to Molech's identity include Chemosh, since Molech and Milcom are both called the "abomination of the Ammonites" and Jephthah refers to the god of the Ammonites as Chemosh. Another possible candidate is Melqarth, who, like Molech, was seen as an infernal deity. In Ur inscriptions refer to the Maliku as infernal deities, and at Mari a god called Muluk was the patron of vows. His name appears to be related to the Akkadian Malik, meaning "king." While no solid archaeological evidence for child sacrifice has been found in Israel, tophets, sacrificial ovens, have been found in Carthage near jars containing the partially burnt bones of both human infants and animals. The mixing of animal and human bones indicates child sacrifice along with animal sacrifice as opposed to the burial of infants in jars. John Day (1989) asserts that Molech was a local infernal deity worshiped mainly at Jerusalem. This would make sense in that, other than confusing Molech with the Ammonite Milcom, his worship is only described in the Bible as being in Jerusalem. Considering that there was a tendency in the ancient world to identify previously separate deities with each other, it could be that different localities had their own Maliku, their own local infernal deities, who were regarded as "kings" of me dead and who had to be appeased from time to time by infant sacrifice. It is quite possible that die local Molech (or Moloch) of Jerusalem was identified as an aspect of both Yahweh and Milcom. That Hinnom, the site of child sacrifice according to 2 Kings and Jeremiah, has infernal associations can be seen by the fact that even after it had been denied it continued to be associated with the underworld. In the time of Jesus it was the city dump in which fires were constantly burning. At that time it was called Gehenna, a word that became synonymous widi Hell. Part of that no doubt had to do with its fires and the dumping of rubbish, but the memory no doubt remained of its earlier reputation as a place where children were sacrificed in fire.

Last edited by 1977; 17-04-2009 at 04:56 PM.
1977 is offline   Reply With Quote