MOLOCH or MOLECH (in Hebrew, with the doubtful ex ception of I Kings xi. 7, always "the Molech"), the name or title of the divinity which the men of Judah in the last ages of the kingdom were wont to propitiate by the sacrifice of their own children. The Hebrew consonants might simply be read "the king" (melek), an appellation for the supreme deity of a Semitic state or tribe: the traditional pronunciation (MoX6x), which goes back as far as the Septuagint version of Kings, probably means that the old form was perverted by giving it the vowels of bosheth "shame," the contemptuous name for Baal (q.v.).
The phrase employed in speaking of these sacrifices is that of dedication—"to make one's son or daughter pass through (or by means of) fire to (the) Molech" (2 Kings xxiii. io; but else where without the words "through fire" Lev. xviii. 2 I) It appears from Jer. vii. 31, xix. 5; Ezek. xvi. 20 seq., that this phrase de notes a human holocaust, and not a mere consecration to Molech by passing through or between fires. We learn from 2 Kings iii. 27 that the piacular sacrifice of his son and heir was the last offering which the king of Moab made to deliver his country. Even the Hebrew historian ascribes to this act the effect of rous ing divine indignation against the invading host of Israel. Ahaz's sacrifice of his son (2 Kings xvi. 3) may have been an isolated act of despair; but in the 7th century, however, when religion was transformed into servile fear (Mic. vi. I sqq.), the example of Manasseh (2 Kings xxi. 6) did not stand alone, and Jeremiah and Ezekiel frequently refer to the "high places" for the sacrifice of children by their parents which rose beneath the very walls of the temple from the gloomy ravine of Hinnom or Tophet (Jer. xxxii. 35; Ezek. xvi. 18 sqq., xxiii. 37). The children ap
parently were not burned alive ; they were slain and burned like any other holocaust (Ezek. loc. cit.; Isa. lvii. 5), their blood was shed at the sanctuary (Jer. xix. 4; Ps. cvi. 38).
The horrid ritual was so closely associated with Yahweh wor ship (Ezek. xxiii. 39) that Jeremiah protests that it is not of Yahweh's institution (vii. 31, xix. 5). So too the idea of sacri ficing the firstborn to Yahweh is rejected in Micah vi. After all, such a sacrifice could only be paid to the supreme deity; and Manasseh and his people never ceased to acknowledge Yahweh as the God of Israel. Thus the way in which Jeremiah (Jer. xix. 5), Leviticus (xviii. 21, xx. 2-5) and the author of Kings, seem to mark out the Molech or Baal as a false god, distinct from Yahweh, is precisely parallel to the way in which Hosea speaks of the golden calves or Baalim. In each case the people were worshipping Yahweh under the title of Molech or Baal; and the prophet refuses to admit that this is so, because the worship itself is an apostasy to heathenism. Note, also, the explanation at tempted in Ezekiel xx. 25 seq., 31. The seat of the cult appears to have been at Jerusalem, and the period during which it flour ished does not favour any strong Phoenician influence. Nor does it seem to be of Babylonian origin. On the whole, the biblical tradition that the Molech-cult was Canaanite and indigenous (Deut. xii. 29 sqq., xviii. 9 seq.) holds the ground. See HEBREW