a reply to: Sigrun
Molech/Moloch was one of the watchers from Mt. Hermon in the days of Jared [Yered]. About 469 years after Adam or 3301 BCE ---
Dr. Stephen Pidgeon in his Eth Cepher gives a great understanding of this watcher who is indeed one of the gods of Abraham's era.
Who Is Molek ------------
Friday, February 2, 2018 at 12:00 AM
We have often talked about the worship of Molek. For instance: Vayiqra (Leviticus) 18:21 And you shall not let any of your seed pass through the fire
to Molek, neither shall you profane את eth-the name of your ELOHIYM: I am YAHUAH.
When we take a look at the concordance we find that the definition of Molek (מֶלךְ) is “the chief deity of the Ammonites” (Strong’s H4432).
Of course, this is not the root. Malak (מַלךְ) is the root. A careful examination shows that both words are spelled mem, lamed, kaf sofit – in
both instances. Malak means to reign; or, inceptively, to ascend the throne. Compare with melek (מֶלךְ) (Strong's H4428), meaning king. We can
see here, how we might find that the word Molek would mean king, or royalty of the Ammonites. However, we get that extra leap from king to deity
somehow, in the contexts where this word appears.
Vayiqra (Leviticus) 20:2-5
Again, you shall say to the children of Yashar’el: Whoever he be of the children of Yashar’el, or of the strangers that sojourn in Yashar’el,
that gives any of his seed to Molek; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones. 3 And I will set את eth-my
face against that man and will cut him off from among his people; because he has given of his seed to Molek, to defile את eth-my sanctuary, and to
profane את eth-my holy name. 4 And if the people of the land do any way hide את eth-their eyes from the man, when he gives of his seed to Molek,
and not kill him: 5 Then I will set את eth-my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and את eth all that go a
whoring after him, to commit whoredom with Molek, from among their people.
Melekiym Ri’shon (1 Kings) 11:7
Then did Shalomah build a high place for Kemosh, the abomination of Mo’av, in the hill that is before Yerushalayim, and for Molek, the abomination
of the children of Ammon.
Here, in this passage, we see a further exposition of this name Molek, now calling him the abomination of the children of Ammon. None of these
describe Molek as a deity, so one might wonder how the Strong’s interpreters reached the conclusion that Molek was a deity.
Melekiym Sheniy (2 Kings) 23:10
And he defiled את eth-Topheth, which is in the valley of the children of Hinnom, that no man might make את eth-his son or את eth-his daughter to
pass through the fire to Molek.
Yirmeyahu (Jeremiah) 32:35
And they built את eth-the high places of Ba`al, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause את eth-their sons and את eth-their
daughters to pass through the fire to Molek; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause
את eth-Yahudah to sin.
Before we abandon this inquiry, let us also consider another deity here:
Malkam or Milcom (ַמְלָכם) (Strong’s H4445), which the concordance tells us is “the national idol of the Ammonites;” its root being
either melek, (ֶמֶלךְ) (H4428), meaning king, or Molek (ֹמֶלךְ), an Ammonite deity. Malkam is called the abomination of the Ammonites in
Melekiym Ri’shon (1 Kings) 11:5; the elohiym of the children of Ammon in Melekiym Ri’shon (1 Kings) 11:33; and the abomination of the children of
Ammon in Melekiym Sheniy (2 Kings) 23:13.
Tsephanyahu (Zephaniah) 1:4-5
I will also stretch out my hand upon Yahudah, and upon all the inhabitants of Yerushalayim; and I will cut off את eth-the remnant of Ba`al from this
place, and את eth-the name of the Kemariym with the priests; 5 And them that worship the host of heaven upon the housetops; and them that worship
and that swear by YAHUAH, and that swear by Malkam;
We have another word here, which is worthy of consideration, and that is the word malak (מְלָאךְ) (Strong's H4397). This word is generally
interpreted as a messenger of YAH, an angel (but also, a prophet, priest, or teacher). We note here the same spelling, with one exception: that is, we
have mem, lamed, and kaph sofit, but there is the inclusion of aleph (א) within, giving it a divine signature. Now, let us suppose you would like to
make reference to these same angels who had lost their divine appointment, the divine signature. Would you not spell it without the aleph?
Consider also the term for watcher found in Daniy’el, which is iyr (עיר) (Strong's H5894), generally interpreted as a watcher, i.e. an angel (as
guardian). The Watchers, described in the Cepher Chanok would then be iyriym (עירים), but then again each such watcher may be described also as
an angel (malak) (מְלָאךְ), or in the plural malakiym (מְלאָכְים). However, if they were fallen watchers, whose divine signature had
been removed, would they not be malak (ֹמֶלךְ) and in the plural malakiym (מְלָכם)?
What therefore is the warning given in Yirmeyahu 32, concerning passing through the fire to Molek? Let’s examine a couple of key words more closely.
The word used for pass through is this word ‛âbar (עַבר) (H5674), although the complete presentment is (להעביר) which is l’h’abiyr
(עבוּר) H5668), which is the passive participle of H5674; and is generally interpreted to mean crossed, i.e. (abstractly) transit; used only
adverbially, on account of . . ., in order that . . ., because of . . ., and so on. When reviewing the passage in Ivriyt (Hebrew) we discover that
the word fire does not appear, and that the passive participle abiyr (rather than abar) appears with the prefix to and the prefix the. The passage is
then better stated thusly:
Yirmeyahu (Jeremiah) 32:35
And they built את eth-the high places of Ba`al, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to transit את eth-their sons and את eth-their
daughters to Molek; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause את eth-Yahudah to sin.
Notwithstanding the use of the passive participle, let’s consider the root word ‛âbar (עַבר) (H5674) for a more complete understanding of
that which is being discussed. Abar means to cross over; used very widely of any transition (literally or figuratively; transitively, intransitively,
intensively or causatively); specifically, to cover (in copulation): to alienate, alter, to bring (over, through), to carry over, to overcome, to
conduct (over), to convey over, to translate, or to turn away. Now, using these interpretations, we discover that Molek, may in fact be a malak – an
angel or watcher, but without a divine signature, i.e., a fallen watcher. Malkam, or Malkam may not be a proper name, but rather, the plural of
Molek/Malak, that is, Malakiym, i.e., fallen watchers.
Tsephanyahu (Zephaniah) 1:5 And them that worship the host of heaven upon the housetops; and them that worship and that swear by YAHUAH, and that
swear by Malakiym! (i.e., fallen watchers!). Molek; Malak; Melek; they are all spelled the same. Yet in this instance, we may have a toxic blend to
give us the king (melek) of the watcher (malak) who fell (molek).
What is, then, transiting your children to Molek? Is it not giving your children to the ways of the fallen one? And what are his ways?
edit on 3-4-2018 by Seede because: wron deity named