The Avites made Nibhaz - This was supposed to be the same as the Anubis of the Egyptians; and was in form partly of a dog, and partly of a man. A very ancient image of this kind now lies before me: it is cut out of stone, about seven inches high; has the body, legs, and arms, of a man; the head and feet of a dog; the thighs and legs covered with scales; the head crowned with a tiara; the arms crossed upon the breasts, with the fingers clenched. The figure stands upright, and the belly is very protuberant. See below.
And Tartak - This is supposed by some to be another name of the same idol; Jarchi says it was in the shape of an ass. Some think these were the representations of the sun in his chariot; Nibhaz representing the solar orb, and Tartak the chariot. See below.
Adrammelech - From אדר adar, glorious, and מלך melech, king. Probably the sun.
Anammelech - From anah, to return, and מלך melech, king. Probably, the Moloch of the Ammonites. Jarchi says, the first was in the form of a mule, the second in the form of a horse; this was probably the moon.
Nibhaz and Tartak are either gods of whom no other notice has come down to us, or intentional corruptions of the Babylonian names Nebo and Tir, the great god of Borsippa, who was the tutelar deity of so many Babylonian kings. The Jews, in their scorn and contempt of polytheism, occasionally and purposely altered, by way of derision, the names of the pagan deities. Anammelech is possibly an instance of the same contemptuous play upon words.
Adrammelech, “the glorious king,” signifies the sun. The Assyrian inscriptions commonly designate Tsipar, or Sepharvaim 2 Kings 17:24, “Sippara of the Sun.” The title “Adrammelech” has not yet been found in the inscriptions hitherto; but it would plainly be a fitting epithet of the great luminary.
The sun-god of the Babylonians, Shamas, was united at Sippara and elsewhere with a sun-goddess, Anunit, whose name may be represented in the Anammelech of the text. The Hebrews, taking enough of this name to show what they meant, assimilated the termination to that of the male deity, thus producing a ridiculous effect, regarded as insulting to the gods in question.
Because the people of God had confused ideas of the ceremonial sacrificial offerings, and had heathen traditions confounded with their ceremonial worship, God condescended to give them definite directions, that they might understand the true import of those sacrifices which were to last only till the Lamb of God should be slain, who was the great antitype of all their sacrificial offerings. 3SG 304.1
Read in context »