21. To Molech. The obscure pagan rite described by the phrase, “pass through the fire to Molech,” is here mentioned for the first time. Other statements dealing with the same practice are found in Lev. 20:2-5; 2 Kings 23:10, and Jer. 32:35. The “Molech” of 1 Kings 11:7, who is describedas the god of the Ammonites, is probably the “Milcom” of 5 and 33 of the same chapter, and of 2 Kings 23:13.
But who is Molech? Generations of theologians have been puzzled by this word. Some have thought that Molech (molek) stands for the Canaanite god Mekal, who is attested by inscriptions, and that the last two consonants have become inverted. Other scholars, however, have given the following interpretation: The word “Molech” (molek) has the same consonants in Hebrew as the word for “king” (melek). In ancient Hebrew, only the consonants were written, in this instance, mlk. The insertion of different vowels thus resulted in a different word. Therefore, according to these scholars, who reflect the ancient Jewish tradition, “Molech” was not the name of a deity, but the designation of any god, who could be called “king” in the same sense as God was called “king” by the Hebrews (see Ps. 5:2; 10:16; etc.). They also accepted the Jewish tradition that the ancient Hebrews reserved the title melek, “king,” for the true God, and pronounced the consonantal group of letters, mlk, when applied to Canaanite gods, with the vowels, “o” and “e,” as found in the word bosheth “shame,” thus creating the word molek. This title for a pagan god was thought to mean “shame-king” in contrast to the melek, the true King of heaven and earth. This explanation of the word “Molech” has been widely held in theological circles.
In 1935 O. Eissfeldt published his findings in regard to certain Punic inscriptions of Carthage in North Africa of the period from 400-150 , in which the terms “molk of sheep” and “molk of man” are used to describe animal and human sacrifices (Molk als Opferbegriff im Punischen und Hebräischen und das Ende des Gottes Moloch). Since the Punic language is closely related to Hebrew, Eissfeldt explained the Hebrew word molek to mean “vow” or “pledge.” Thus the Biblical passages usually translated, “pass through the fire to Molech,” should be rendered, “as a molech,” that is, as the fulfillment of a pledge to a pagan god.
Many scholars have been inclined to accept Eissfeldt’s explanation. However, the excavation of the city of Mari, in Mesopotamia, has furnished texts in which G. Dossin found a god named Muluk, who was worshiped in the Middle-Euphrates region in the 18th century (Revue d’ Assyriologie, 35, 178, [1938], 1). Also the gods of Sepharvaim, Adrammelech (attested in Mesopotamian inscriptions as Adad-milki) and Anammelech, to whom children were sacrificed by fire (2 Kings 17:31), apparently had some connection with the god Muluk, as the last half of their names reveal.
In the light of this latest evidence Molech seems to have been a particular pagan god, one to whom children were offered as burnt sacrifices, so that the traditional translation, “pass through the fire to Molech,” can be considered as correct. The name of this god, however, was later also applied as a technical term for certain animal and human sacrifices as is revealed by the Punic inscriptions of Carthage.