Baal-Moloch, and burnt incense to foul idols. Truly was Hinnom "moaning,"* and rightly was its

name Gehinnom [valley of Hinnom - Gehenna], adopted as that for the place of final suffering.

* This is the probable meaning of "Hinnom," although the name seems originally to have been that

of a person.

And it is one of those strange coincidences that the hill which rises on the south side of this spot

was that "potter's field," the "field of blood," which Judas bought with the wages of his betrayal,

and where with his own, hands he executed judgment on himself. History is full of such

coincidences, as men call them; nor can we forget in this connection that it was on the boundary -

line between the reigns of Jotham and Ahaz that Rome was founded (in 752 B.C.), which was

destined to execute final judgment on apostate Is rael.

Nor was this all. Not only did Ahaz burn incense in that accursed place where he offered his own

son* as a burnt sacrifice to Baal-Moloch, but a similar idolatrous worship was offered on the high

places,** on the hills, and under every green tree ( 2 Chronicles 28:4; 2 Kings 16:4).

* In 2 Kings 16:3 only one son is mentioned as passed thr6ugh the fire. This seems the more likely

(comp. 2 Kings 3:27; 21:6), and the plural in Chronicles is probably only a generalization. When

in 2 Kings we read that he "made his son pass through the fire," this may be either a technical

expression, or it may refer to one of the original ideas or purposes of these sacrifices: that of

lustration by fire. And possibly the practice may not always have been the same, and h ence the

original expression retained. But from the parallel passage in Chronicles there cannot be a doubt

that, in this instance, as in those afterwards recorded, the unhappy victim was literally burnt. That

those "passed through the fire" were really burnt, appears from a comparison of Jeremiah 32:35

with 7:31, and of Ezekiel 16:21 with 23:37. On the question whether the children were only

passed through the fire or burnt in it the Rabbis have expressed different opinions. In Yalkut on

Jeremiah 7:31, (ii. p. 61. col. d.) we have a realistic description of the brass figure of Moloch,

hollow and filled with fire, with an ox's head and human arms into which the children were laid.

This seems to agree with the account of the Carthagenian rite (Diodor. Sic. 20. 14). Into the large

literature on the subject this is not the place to enter. To the present writer it has often seemed

more learned than clear. For our purpose it is more important to notice that, according to Psalm

106:37, Ezekiel 16:20, the victims see m to have been first slain and then burnt. It would thus be a

terrible counterpart of the Old Test. burnt sacrifices. Josephus (Ant. ix. 12, 1) also states that Ahaz

had actually burnt his son.

** The "high places" were those on which there was a sanctuary or chapel (... ) - "the hills," those

on which only an altar was reared.

Thus, in regard to form - the many sanctuaries in opposition to the one place of worship - as well

as to substance and spirit, there was direct contrariety to the institutions of the Old Testament.

Indeed, it may not be without use here to mark that in the surroundings of Israel, exclusive unity

of worship in one central temple, as against many sanctuaries, was absolutely necessary if a pure

monotheism was to be preserved and the introduction of heathen rites to be avoided.

But the idolatry introduced by Ahaz was to be carried to all its sequences. A despotic edict of the

king, while at Damascus, in singular contrast to the weakness displayed towards his foreign

enemies, ordered a new altar for the Temple after the pattern sent to Jerusalem of one, no doubt

devoted to an Assyrian deity, which he had seen in Damascus and approved. He was obeyed by a

servile high-priest. When Ahaz returned to his capital sacrifices were offered by him on the new

altar,* probably thankofferings for his safe arrival.

* It does not, however, necessarily follow that Ahaz himself offered the sacrifices in the sense of

discharging priestly functions although 2 Kings 16:13 seems rather to lead up to this.