Gods to whom children are sacrificed. "Human sacrifices to Baal and Moloch in Canaan and Carthage
Children's sacrifices in the Hebrew Bible and in the Deuteronomic edition of the Book of Jeremiah.
Commentators rightly point out that in the final version of Jephthah's story, God responds with silence to Jephthah's vow to sacrifice to him the first thing he meets on his return home. Sacrifice is not God's will, but a consequence of human pride. In this context, the story of Jephthah's daughter is reminiscent of its tragedy of the Greek idea of arrogance: Jephthah is trapped by his overconfident vow and is therefore forced to sacrifice his daughter.
Another argument advanced in favor of the Israelites making child sacrifices was urns with bones found in burial caves at Gezer and elsewhere. However, it has been shown that the bones in these vessels do not show signs of combustion. Consequently, these vessels are part of a burial practice that is not associated with any type of child sacrifice, and even their dating to the Iron Age is unreliable. In fact, of all that has been discovered by archaeologists so far, there are no traces of child sacrifices carried out in Iron Age Israel.
So, in the Iron Age, the Moabites, Phoenicians, Punyans, the inhabitants of Deir Allah and the Israelites practiced child sacrifices in various forms. The Moabites, and possibly the inhabitants of Deir Allah, responded to the crisis with them, and the Phoenician-Punic and Israeli cultures performed rituals of child sacrifice on a regular basis. In Iron Age Israel, there are mainly two forms of child sacrifice: the sacrifice of the firstborn (Ex. 22:29; Ez. 20:26) and molk-sacrifice. Both ceremonies were performed regularly. For the sacrifice of the first-born, apparently, there were different customs: sometimes children of both sexes were sacrificed, and sometimes only the first-born boys. In addition, the account of Jephthah's daughter confirms that children of all ages and genders were sacrificed in fulfillment of a vow. Child sacrifices condemned in Jer. 7:31; 19: 5 and 32:35 do not refer to firstborn sacrifices or vowed sacrifices. Jer. 32:35 shows that they belong to the category molk- sacrifices, also condemned in other Deuteronomic sources.
The following sections of the article are devoted to the question of the origin of child sacrifice in Israel and the analysis of Israeli prohibitions and criticism of sacrifice, as well as the analysis of substitute victims. Such an overview will allow us to obtain more detailed information about the rituals mentioned in Jer. 7:31; 19: 5 and 32:35.
Excursion: child sacrifices in Canaan.
The languages of cultures that practice child sacrifice either directly belong to the Canaanite branch of the Northwest Semitic languages, or are otherwise related to the Canaanite language, so it can be assumed that the Phoenician, Punic, Moabite, and Israeli child sacrifices, as well as the ritual described in DAT II. traces its roots back to the Canaanite ritual of the Bronze Age. In the Late Bronze Age, such a ritual is indeed attested in several Egyptian war bas-reliefs from the times of Seti I, Ramses II, Merneptah, and Ramses III.
These bas-reliefs of Canaanite cities besieged by the armies of the pharaohs Seti I, Ramses II, Merneptah, and Ramses III were collected and studied by Anthony John Spalinger. More or less well preserved on the city walls or ramparts, the bas-reliefs show a group of dignitaries with their hands and faces directed towards heaven. One of the officials holds a vessel for burning incense, and one or two others throw dead children off the city wall. Vessels for fragrant incense were typical attributes of the divine services of Baal Hamon. The scene resembles the sacrifice of the Moabite king Mesha, described in 4 Kings. 3: 26-27. Based on biblical evidence, as well as texts from other sources, Spalinger recreates the elements of the ritual depicted on the bas-reliefs as follows:
(1) People cry out to Baal.
(2) Child sacrifices are performed.
(3) The action takes place under the pressure of circumstances, for example, the city is besieged by the enemy.
(4) On one occasion, a bag of flour was brought for the ritual.
(5) Incense censers are always present.
(6) People cry out to heaven, not to Pharaoh.
Images on Egyptian military reliefs leave no doubt that the sacrificed children were not burned, but thrown dead from the city walls. This is the difference between these scenes from the descriptions of the victims in Jer. 7:31; 19: 5; 32:35 and other Deuteronomic sources.
That the Egyptians on the bas-reliefs did not invent disgusting rituals to discredit their conquered enemies is evident from the cuneiform text found at Ugarit (RS 24.266 VI D = CTU 1.119 V 26-35). The text on the tablet tells about the ritual sacrifice of a child, which is performed when a strong enemy attacked the city.
When a strong enemy attacks your gates // warrior your walls,
Lift your eyes to Baal and say:
O Baal, if you drive away from our gates a strong enemy // warrior from our walls,
the bull, Baal, we will sanctify,
vow, Baal, we will fulfill,
the firstborn, Baal, we will sanctify,
htp is an offering, Baal, we will fulfill,
holiday, Baal, we will celebrate.
Into the sanctuary, Baal, we will rise
This way, Baal, we will go.
And Baal will hear your prayer:
he will lead a strong enemy from your gates // warrior from your walls.
The evidence leaves little doubt that the Canaanites performed child sacrifices in the Late Bronze Age, at least when their cities were besieged by a strong enemy. Based on a summary of the events of 2 Kings. 3: 26-27, we can conclude that the ritual of the Moabite king is closest to the considered Canaanite ritual of the Bronze Age. The child sacrifice described in DAT II could also be a response to extraordinary events. Thus, it seems plausible to assume that the ritual child sacrifices practiced by the heirs of the Canaanite culture are rooted in a single Canaanite ritual-prototype.
It is possible that evidence has been preserved in favor of regular child sacrifices in Canaan at the end of the Bronze Age. This practice, in turn, could have influenced the Israeli and Phoenician-Punic rites of child sacrifice. In a small abandoned temple, in the area of the modern Amman airport, several thousand fragments of human bones and several bone remains of animals were discovered. Major accumulations of bones were found in the celle of the temple and around the oven outside the structure. The bones found in a fragmented state have traces of burning, which greatly complicates their study. Some of the bone fragments probably belonged to a 14-18 year old adolescent, others to a woman in her forties. The temple has been in operation for one century, and the small number of skeletons indicate its infrequent use. Researchers believe that the main function of the ritual in the Amman temple was to cremate human bodies and scatter their remains inside the structure and possibly outside it. There seem to be two possible explanations for this location. It was either a burial temple or a temple in which human sacrifices were performed. Comparison of the condition and color of the bones from the Amman temple with the remains of a human sacrifice found in Crete suggests that the bodies of people who were recently killed were burned: Burnt bone remains are white if the flesh was bled before being burned. Thus, the victims from Crete and from the Amman temple shortly before cremation were probably killed. There is a possibility that the temple discovered at the Amman airport was dedicated to human sacrifice. In this regard, it is of great interest that a significant part of the pottery found in the area of the Amman temple is characteristic of the Mycenaean or Aegean cultures, which allows us to raise the question of whether the human sacrifices performed in the Amman temple are due to the influence of the Aegean religion. Unfortunately, there is not yet sufficient evidence to answer this question. But if the answer were yes, the differences between the Phoenician-Punic and Israelite rites of human sacrifice on the one hand, and Canaanite sacrifices on the other, could be due to the Aegean influence on Phenicia and Israel. Since, in the 13th and 12th centuries, areas of Phenicia and Israel were more influenced by the Sea Peoples than, for example, Moab or Transjordan, such a development would not be surprising.
Unlike the Canaanite and Moabite rituals of child sacrifice and the sacrifices performed by the inhabitants of Deir Allah, Phoenician-Punic and Israeli sacrifices appear to have been a regular ritual practice. However, the Phoenician-Punic rites differed from the Israelite ones, firstly, in the age of the sacrificed children, and secondly, in the deity to whom the child was given. As shown above, there are several different types of routinely performed child sacrifices in Iron Age Israel, but none of them is evidence of a ritual performed in response to crisis events. On the other hand, a significant parallel between Israeli and Phoenician-Punic child sacrifices is seen in the fact that starting from the 6th century BC. and later, both cultures allowed for the replacement of ritualized children. At least in the post-captivity period, Israel abandoned the Phoenician-Punic religion and banned the sacrifice of children altogether. The next section discusses texts related to the substitution and ransom of prepared sacrifices, as well as verses that prohibit or strongly criticize child sacrifice, which could provide a clearer idea of what form of sacrifice is condemned in Jer. 7:31; 19: 5 and 32:35.
3. Substitution, prohibition and controversy against child sacrifice.
Along with the Punic and Phoenician cultures, the Israelite religion allows for the replacement of a child destined for sacrifice. During captivity and post-captivity times, several religious laws prescribe such substitutions. A good example is the Deuteronomic addition to the Exodus story, Ex. 13: 2, 11-13, which prescribes:
consecrate to Me every firstborn, who opens all kinds of falsehoods among the children of Israel, from man to cattle: They are mine.... And when the Lord brings you into the land of Canaan, as He swore to you and to your fathers, and He will give it to you, separate to the Lord everything that opens the falsehood; And all the firstborn of the livestock that you will have, male, to the Lord, and every donkey that opens open, replace with a lamb. and if you don’t replace it, buy it back; And you shall redeem every firstborn man of thy sons.
A similar prescription is given by the Priestly source (P) in Num. 18: 15-16:
Anything that opens a falsehood in all flesh, which is offered to the Lord, of men and of livestock, may it be yours; only the firstborn of humans must be redeemed and the firstborn of unclean beasts must be redeemed; And the ransom for them: starting from one month, according to your estimate, take the ransom five shekels of silver, according to the holy shekel, which is twenty hera.
Elsewhere, P recognizes as replacements even the Levites whom God takes for himself in place of the first-born sons:
for they were given to Me of the children of Israel: instead of all the firstborn of the children of Israel, who open every kind of falsehood, I take them to myself. (Numbers 8: 15-16).
Just like in Ezek. 20:26, first-born children, redeemed in Ex. 13: 2, 11-13; and Num. 8:16; 18: 15-16 are not limited to male children. The use of the expression פתר רחם (literally "that which opens the mother's womb for the first time") indicates that the law applies to both the first-born son and the daughter.
A possible exception to the general practice of foreclosures would be Nehem. 10: 35-36:
[And we undertook] every year to bring into the house of the Lord the first fruits of our land and the first fruits of every fruit from every tree; also bring to the house of our God to the priests who minister in the house of our God, the firstborn of our sons and of our cattle, as it is written in the law, and the firstborn of our cattle and sheep.
At first glance, this text from the book of Nehemiah does not provide a ransom option, but as Joseph Blenkinsopp rightly pointed out, "the clause -" as it is written in the law "applies to sons and cattle in general, separating from them cows and sheep intended for sacrifice ... Therefore, this clause can be considered an indirect indication of the redemption. " But there remains another important difference between Her. 10:36 and Ex. 13: 2, 11-13; Num. 8:16; 18: 15-16: in Neh. 10:36 am we are talking only about boys.
Finally, in pre-captivity times, the pre-Deuteronomic version of the sacrifice story of Isaac (Gen. 22: 1-19) confirms the substitution of other forms of sacrifice for child sacrifices. Commentators are almost unanimous that verses 15-18 (Gen. 22) are a late addition to the story of Isaac's sacrifice. The way the angel in verse 15 calls out to Abraham a second time interrupts the flow of the narrative, which only continues from verse 19. In addition to the story told in v. 1-14, art. 15-18 provide a theological interpretation of the sacrifice of Isaac in the light of promises to the patriarchs made elsewhere in the Pentateuch. Because Abraham obeyed God and was even willing to sacrifice his first-born son, he is worthy of the promises and blessings given earlier and later repeated (cf. Gen. 22:16 with Gen. 26: 3; Gen. 22:17 with Genesis 15: 3; 24:60; 32:13 and Genesis 22:18 with Genesis 13: 3; 18:18; 26: 4; 28:14). Thus, with the help of Gen. 22: 15-18, the promises and blessings given to the patriarchs become conditional, and the whole story is transformed into the idea of exceptional obedience to God. The idea that the promises to the patriarchs were made on condition of obedience to the God of Israel can be found in the book of Deuteronomy and in the Deuteronomic literature, where, like Gen. 22: 15-18, the call to obedience is exactly what divine promises are based on. Deuteronomic character of Gen. 22: 15-18 is also supported by the fact that Deuteronomy, like Gen. 22: 15-18, views the promise of land to the Jews as a divine oath (see Deut 1: 8, 15; 6:10, 18, 23; 7: 8, 13; 8: 1; 9: 5; 10:11; 11 : 9, 21; 19: 8; 26: 3, 15; 28:11; 30:20; 31: 7, 20, 21; 34: 4). Fragment of Gen. 22: 15-18 is thus also part of the Deuteronomic revision, which links the story of the sacrifice of Isaac with the rest of the Pentateuch and interprets patriarchal promises and blessings as conditional, dependent on Israel's obedience.
Thus, Gen. 22: 1-14, 19 is a pre-Deuteronomic story belonging to the non-priestly materials of the Pentateuch. How was the sacrifice of Isaac understood in this earlier account? This version of the story did not mention obedience or reward. The main idea of the story was the words of the angel addressed to Abraham (vv. 12-13).
"[The angel] said: Do not lift up your hand against the lad and do nothing against him, for now I know that you fear God and did not spare your son, your only one, for Me. And Abraham lifted up his eyes and saw: and behold behind him was a ram entangled in the thicket by his horns. Abraham went and took the ram and offered him for a burnt offering in place of his son. "(Gen. 22: 12-13)
What really matters here is the fear of God. Isaac's sacrifice does not matter, but Abraham's fear of God. However, the fear of God does not have to be expressed by the actual sacrifice of the child; God needs a ram in return. Hence the passage in Gen. 22: 1-14, 19 in its old version justifies the replacement of the sacrificed child with the sacrificial animal.
The sacrifice of Isaac itself is characterized as a burnt offering (עלה). And although the phrases used in Deuteronomic literature and priestly sources to describe child sacrifices (העביר, שרף באש) are not used in Gen. 22: 1-14, 19, and Abraham wants to stab Isaac before giving it up on fire, the fact that Isaac must be burned brings the described ritual closest to molk- sacrifice.
The differences between Gen. 22: 1-14, 19 and molk- sacrifice, caused, most likely, by insufficient knowledge of the details of the ritual molk- sacrifices from the original narrator (author), or from a late editor.
Since the non-priestly materials of the Pentateuch are very difficult to date, hardly more can be said about the date of the original history than that it may be from a pre-captivity period. This means that, with the possible exception of Gen. 22: 1-14, 19, in ancient Israel, evidence of the substitution of a child sacrifice appears at the same time as in the Phoenician and Punic cultures, i.e. in the 6th century BC
In contrast to the Phoenician and Punic cultures, in Israel since the time of exile, child sacrifice has been generally prohibited. If there is any historical certainty in the brief note of 2 Kings. 23:10, then child sacrifice in Israel was first abolished during the religious reform of King Josiah, although it is possible that his followers revived this practice. Israel's rejection of child sacrifice is well documented in the Deuteronomic controversy against them, as well as in the laws mentioned at the beginning of this article. The same prohibition on child sacrifice can also be found in the post-captive Holiness Code (Lev. 17-26), which states the following (Lev. 18:21; cf. Lev. 20: 2-5):
Do not give up your children to the service of Moloch, and do not dishonor the name of your God. I am the Lord.
Consideration of all the prohibitions on child ritual sacrifice shows that the only forbidden and condemned form of this practice was molk-sacrifice. Although the law prescribing child sacrifice in Ezek. 20:25 - 26 is assessed negatively, there is no actual prohibition on the offering of the first-born. This, however, does not mean that the firstborn were still sacrificed to Yahweh during the captivity or post-captivity period. On the contrary, instead of prohibiting the sacrifice of the firstborn, Jewish religious legislation provided for ransom, after which the prohibition of this type of sacrifice became unnecessary.
It can be concluded that in the Late Bronze Age, in the event of crises and emergencies, the inhabitants of Canaan practiced child sacrifices. Excavations of a temple at Amman airport suggest that, in addition to the sacrifice of children in emergency situations, regular human sacrifices have also taken place due to Aegean influence. Some Iron Age cultures, heirs of the Canaanite tradition, such as the inhabitants of Deir Allah, Phenicia, Israel and Moab, continued the practice of child sacrifices, but formed their own specific forms. Israel sacrificed children to Yahweh until the end of the pre-captivity period. At least three different forms of child sacrifice can be observed in captive Israel: child sacrifice in fulfillment of a vow, molk-the sacrifice, and the sacrifice of the firstborn children. The firstborn sacrifice concerned either only the firstborn-boys, or also the first-born daughters. The rest of the forms of child sacrifice in Israel were not gender-specific. At the very end of the captivity period, both Deuteronomic and non-Deuteronomic sources allow for the replacement of first-born children with sacrificial animals and prohibit other forms of child sacrifice. Starting with the reforms of King Josiah, this process intensified during the captivity period, excluding from the religion of Israel as pagan what was once an integral part of the cult of Yahweh. The laws of the priestly source undoubtedly reflected the triumph of the polemics of the Deuteronomic school. In the Israeli literature of the captivity period and later, there is no longer any evidence of the sacrifice of children.
4. Children's sacrifices in the deuteronomic edition of the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah.
How does the story of child sacrifice in Israel's religion compare with the three quotes from the Deuteronomic edition of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 7:31; 19: 5; 32:35) regarding child sacrifice? Obviously, the verses of Jer. 7:31; 19: 5 and 32:35 do not refer to firstborn sacrifices, emergency sacrifices, or votive sacrifices. Therefore, in these verses, as in other passages in Deuteronomic literature, the child sacrifices of which the Deuteronomic editor of Jeremiah accused the Israelites is molk- sacrifices. This is confirmed by the phrase למלך ("how molk-sacrifice ") in Jer. 32:35. In my opinion, all the data on child sacrifices for Yahweh before the captivity period, as well as passages such as Genesis 22: 1-19, make it quite plausible that molk-the sacrifice, mercilessly denounced in Jer. 7:31; 19: 5 and 32:35, was dedicated to Yahweh. But why, then, in Jer. 19: 5 and 32:35 say that the children were given as a sacrifice to Baal?
The specificity of the use of the name Baal in the book of Jeremiah helps to answer this question. On the one hand, the name Baal is mentioned in various layers of the book of Jeremiah when Israel is accused of honoring other gods (Jer. 7: 9; 9:13; 11:13, 17; 23:13). Some of these references go back to the prophet Jeremiah himself, others form the Deuteronomic or later editorial layers of the book. On the other hand, the name Baal could be used for polemical purposes, as a term associated with syncretism and pagan piety. In this manner, the name Baal is often used to denounce certain religious practices in the Yahweh cult. The word Baal is thus part of the anti-language and serves as a metaphor that discredits anything that is opposed to monolatric or henotheistic Yachvism. For example, in Jer. 2: 8, the prophets, opponents of Jeremiah, are accused of speaking prophecies in the name of Baal, although such texts as Jer. 28 shows that they were in fact the prophets of Yahweh. Moreover, the person accused of worshiping Baal (Jer. 2:23) claims that he did not follow Baal's footsteps. And in the Deuteronomistic verse Jer. 9:13 explains that he who follows Baal's footsteps follows the stubbornness of his heart, but not the law of Yahweh. Here, Baal is likened to the stubbornness of a condemned person.
How is the name Baal used in Jer. 19: 5 and 32:35? In these two verses, the meaning of Baal's appearance lies in the words of Yahweh - "which I did not command or say." The explanation that Yahweh did not call for child sacrifice suggests that someone was actually claiming otherwise. Otherwise, why would Yahweh clarify that he did not command the children to be sacrificed to Baal? Moreover, although Jer. 7: 16-20, Israel and accused of worshiping other gods, Jer. 7:31 talks only about the heights of Tophet, not about Baal. In Jer. 7: 21-26, 7:31 the controversy continues against the Israelite cult of Yahweh. If the child sacrifices mentioned in Jer. 7:31 were intended for Baal, it would be more appropriate for a Deuteronomic editor who writes a temple speech to put Jer. 7:31 after Jer. 7: 16-20 to continue the controversy against Israel's worship of the goddess of heaven and to condemn child sacrifices in honor of Baal. Also, like Jer. 19: 5 and 32:35, Jer. 7:31 stresses that Yahweh did not command the sacrifice of children. Thus, the verse of Jer. 7:31 should be understood as a condemnation of the Israelites, who actually sacrificed their children in honor of Yahweh. In turn, the statement in Jer. 19: 5 and 32:35, that Israel sacrificed children in honor of Baal, is a polemical move to reduce the Yahweh sacrifice to a non-Yahweh sacrifice. The Deuteronomic edition of Jeremiah discredits child sacrifices in honor of Yahweh, portraying them as sacrifices to Baal. This move fits well with attitudes toward child sacrifice elsewhere in Deuteronomic literature (see, for example, Deut. 12:31; 18:10).
But why does the Deuteronomic editor of Jeremiah even mention child sacrifices? And why does he associate the Israelite temple cult with the practice of child sacrifice in Jer. 7: 21-34? It is possible to answer these questions by knowing the dating of the Deuteronomic edition of the book of Jeremiah, as well as its goals and the goals of its opponents. I have shown above that the Deuteronomic editor at Jer. 14:13 argues with the prophets (Hag. 2: 9 and Zech. 8:19), and Jer. 14: 10-16 criticizes the sermons of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah and the theology of Zion. This, in turn, means that Jeremiah's Deuteronomic editor wrote shortly or during the rebuilding of the Jerusalem Temple in 520-515. BC. In my opinion, the editor of the book of Jeremiah had a double purpose: on the one hand, he explains the Babylonian exile as a consequence of Israel's behavior in pre-captivity times, and on the other hand, he argues about the advisability of restoring the Jerusalem Temple, discussing the consequences to which brought the theology of Zion in 597 and 587. BC. According to the Deuteronomic editor Jeremiah, it was the hopes for the magical protection of Jerusalem through the temple and sacrificial worship that became one of the reasons for the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC. In the temple theology of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, the editor sees a revival of this idea, according to which the sacrificial cult gave hope to stop calamities, such as hunger (Hag. 1: 2-11; 2: 15-19). Once the temple is built, the nations will come to Mount Zion (Zech. 8: 20-23) with their treasures (Hag. 2: 7-9).
Author Jer. 7:22 protests against the sacrificial worship associated with these hopes: for I did not speak to your fathers and did not give them a commandment on the day on which I brought them out of the land of Egypt, about burnt offering and sacrifice.
The Lord of Israel did not command the sacrificial worship of the temple, but he asked obedience from his people (Jer. 7:23). Israel should not rely on the temple and not on the sacrifices performed in it, not from them, and Israel will not receive salvation through magic rituals. Instead, he, Israel, must follow the commandments given to him. Thus, the Deuteronomic editor Jeremiah's polemic against child sacrifice is an argument against the resurgent Jerusalem cult and theology of Zion. Child sacrifices serve as an example to him of what a sacrificial cult is capable of going to achieve the goal of salvation and protection.
This demolition of the Jerusalem cult by means of child sacrifices is found elsewhere. Likewise, the Deuteronomic Addendum to Micah (6: 6-8) compares the sacrificial worship of the Jerusalem temple to child sacrifices:
“With what should I appear before the Lord, bow down before the God of heaven? Should I stand before Him with burnt offerings, with one year old calves? But is it possible to please the Lord with thousands of rams or innumerable streams of oil? Shall I give him my firstborn for my transgression, and the fruit of my womb, for the sin of my soul? Oh man! you are told what is good and what the Lord requires of you: to act justly, to love works of mercy and to walk humbly before your God. "
European royals throw kiddie parties for fun
Judy Byington. Translation from English http://beforeitsnews.com/celeb ...
The International Common Law Court of Justice uncovers the crimes of the global organization of the Ninth Circle Satanic ministers. It includes members of the most influential royal courts in Europe, the hierarchs of the Vatican, the highest ranks of governments and special services. A single line of succession is revealed that connects the servants of the satanic cults of the past, the black magicians of the SS of the Third Reich and representatives of the modern world elite.
This is one of a series of articles compiled from witness statements given to the International Common Law Court in Brussels. Five international judges reviewed evidence of rape, torture and murder of children and kidnapping committed by members of the world's elite, members of the Cult of the Ninth Circle of Satanic Child Sacrifices. Regular sacrifices within the framework of this cult took place in the catacombs under the Catholic cathedrals of the Vatican, on private estates and forest estates, at state military bases in Belgium, Holland, Spain, Australia, Ireland, France, England and the United States. At least 34 mass graves of children have been found in Ireland, Spain and Canada - and governments, members of the Royal Court of England, and representatives of the Catholic Church are obstructing excavation and examination of these graves. The following were named as the protagonists of the Cult of the Ninth Circle: the current Pope Francis, the former Pope Ratzinger; Anglican, United Church of Canada, Catholic Church; church cardinals; members of European royal courts, including Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip; officials from Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, the military, members of governments including the CIA, senior government officials, ministers, judges, politicians and businessmen from the United States, Belgium, Holland, Canada, Australia, France, Ireland and the United Kingdom.
The teenagers were drugged, stripped naked, raped, and then hunted as wild animals and killed. Eyewitnesses told about this, giving testimony to the International Common Law Court in Brussels. The woman was the fourth eyewitness to testify about these hunting activities of representatives of the world elite involved in the Cult of the Ninth Circle of Satanic Child Sacrifices. A former member of the Ndrangheta crime syndicate, also known as the Octopus, testified that the victims for such hunting entertainment came from Dutch and Belgian juvenile detention centers (juvenile colonies).
The woman said:
“In 2004, I happened to be an unwitting witness to the torture, rape and murder of drug-intoxicated children by a group of Dutch dignitaries. I was taken to hunt in Belgium, not far from Brussels. There I saw how two boys and a girl between the ages of 14 and 16 were killed while hunting them. This hunt was especially closely guarded by the Dutch Royal Guard. I was told that King Albert of Belgium was present. "
Four eyewitnesses confirmed that when they were still children or adolescents, they were used in such a hunt as live targets and trophies. There they and other children were raped, some were killed. The penises of the murdered boys were cut off and hung on the wall as hunting trophies in one of the palaces in Holland. Some of these hunting activities took place on the grounds of the palace of Beatrix, Queen of Belgium.
The therapist from Holland Toos Neyenhuis told,
http://youtu.be/-A1o1Egi20c
that at the age of four she witnessed the murder of children, in which the former Pope Ratzinger, the Dutch Catholic cardinal and Prince Bernard, the father of Queen Beatrix and the founder of the Bilderberg Club, took part. Another witness confirmed: “I saw Josef Ratzinger kill a girl. All this happened in a French castle in the fall of 1987, it was monstrous, horrible and happened repeatedly. Ratzinger and Bernard were among these very famous people who took part in the murders. "
In Ireland, Spain and Canada, 34 mass graves of children have been discovered and evidence of their connection to the activities of members of the Ninth Circle Cult has emerged. The largest such burial is at a boarding school for Indian children of the Iroquois tribe in Brantford, Ontario. It was discovered in 2008, but the Catholic Church, the Canadian government and representatives of the English crown closed the ongoing excavation and identification process.
In 2013, the ICLCJ International Court of Justice found Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip guilty of removing 10 children from a Catholic boarding school in Kamloops, British Columbia (Canada) in 1964.
In the first two weeks of 2014, court witnesses identified Dutch and Belgian royals involved in the rape and murder of Mohawk children and newborn babies. Bernard and King Hendrick, consort of Queen Wilhelmina of Holland, were named.
The late Prince Johan Frizo and his wife Mabel Wyss Smith, former ministers, the Commander-in-Chief of the Dutch Army, the Secretary of the Dutch State Council, Queen Beatrix, Queen's Governor, and other business and political leaders of the world, some from the United States, were present as victims of the hunting fun with children. As one eyewitness said, “Of course, the current King Willem Alexander and King Philip and their wives know about these crimes and the murders of children. And they are not doing anything to investigate and stop it. "
In January 2014, the brother of the King of Holland, Prince Johan Frizo, fell into a coma and passed away after three websites appeared on the Internet.
http://capoditutticapi007.blog ...
in Dutch, who published information about Friso's participation in this hunt for children. An eyewitness said: “This information was published on the Internet after years of trying to get the Netherlands Department of Politics and Justice to deal with criminals. Nobody did anything to stop them, probably because Queen Beatrix and King Albert did not allow these investigations to take place.
The palace of Queen Beatrix in the Netherlands was named, on the territory of which hunting entertainment with the murder of children took place. Two witnesses named former Pope Joseph Ratzinger and Queen Beatrix's father, the late Prince Bernard, as having participated in the child sacrifices. Both are known to be Nazi sympathizers.
The ICLCJ received several documents from the archival records of the Jesuits about the cult of child sacrifice called the Knights of Darkness. This cult was created in 1933 jointly by the Jesuit Order and the Nazi Waffen SS. According to archival records, Josef Ratzinger was one of the "Knights of Darkness" during his work as assistant SS chaplain at the Ravensbrück concentration camp in Germany. Ratzinger took part in the rituals of child sacrifice, in which children from camps and children of political prisoners were used.
Another document titled Magisterial Privilege shows that such child sacrifices were a traditional practice in the Vatican.
A witness from San Diego, California, claimed that she was taken to the catacombs near the Vatican, where she saw a three-year-old boy under the influence of drugs was sacrificed.
In this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
the witness tells how he became an eyewitness of another satanic rite of sacrifice in the same catacombs of the Vatican.
An Irish police investigator told the ICLCJ last week that about 800 babies had been "buried" in a Catholic nun's septic tank. Their bodies were decapitated and dismembered, suggesting that they were killed in the process of performing Satanic child sacrifices.
In the past two months, the ICLCJ has heard this gruesome testimony of rape, torture and murder of children by the hierarchs of the Catholic Church, members of European royalty and other members of the world's elite. The ritual sites of this Ninth Circle Satanic Child Sacrifice Cult are the catacombs beneath Catholic cathedrals, including the Vatican cathedrals, military establishments, private estates and woodlands in Belgium, Holland, Spain, Australia, France, England and the United States.
Representatives of the ICLCJ court are amazed at the newly discovered circumstances, but the testimony of new witnesses is expected, who will provide information about the rituals of the Cult of the Ninth Circle. It was discovered that the Cult of the Ninth Circle is associated with international criminal groups involved in drug trafficking, kidnapping and exploitation of children. Five international judges and 27 court judges are expected to continue their hearings for a year due to the complexity of the crimes.
An amnesty was offered to citizens or employees of the Vatican, the English crown, churches and governments who are ready to testify under oath or evidence that will help to get punishment for the indicated representatives of the world elite suspected of committing these crimes. Monetary awards of up to € 10,000 or $ 13,600 have also been assigned, which will be paid by the ICLCJ for assistance in the investigation.
The ICLCJ has over 450 staff members in 51 teams in 13 countries. Local groups operate in the common organizational space of the International Tribunal for Crimes of the Church and State (ITCCS).
Many became interested in a demon named Bagul after watching the movie "Sinister", because there this creature appeared as an antihero, instilling fear and forcing young children to commit terrible deeds. After that, the demon received the soul of such a child and took him to his retinue. But what does mythology say about a creature like Bagul? Is it a demon or a deity? And was that really what the ancient people called him?
Bagul in the movie "Sinister"
First, let's get to know Bagul from a closer look. According to the legend voiced by one of the heroes - the professor - Bagul is a demon. Mythology claims that children were sacrificed to him. This ancient rite was characteristic of the Scandinavian peoples, but the mystical creature began to manifest itself in the United States, moreover, from about the 60s of the last century.
Once every few years, under strange circumstances, a family was killed in one of the states. At the same time, each time they found the bodies of all its members, with the exception of one child. The disappearance was investigated, but neither the body nor the boy or girl was found. In the same way, it was not possible to find the killer. They stopped writing about the incident in the press, police reports gathered dust in the precincts, and after a few years everything was repeated again.
What does demonology say?
The field of knowledge that studies evil spirits claims that the Norse demon Bagul is just an invention of Hollywood filmmakers. In fact, no religion knew a creature with that name. Bagul is not mentioned in any source, although demons and gods to whom children were sacrificed so that they could be fed with their souls existed.
Thus, in the culture of the Aztecs, cruel acts of violence against children may have been committed. In the last century, a burial was discovered, which prompted researchers to similar conclusions. The remains of 42 children were buried in it. According to some indications, experts have concluded that this is a ritual murder. Perhaps the sacrifices were intended for the ancient god Tlaloc, the patron saint of rain, capable of bestowing fertility.
The Carthaginians also gave the souls of their babies to the gods, so that they would contribute to their success in trade and other matters. This assumption was made by scientists after the remains of 200 boys and girls were found. According to Plutarch's records, children from wealthy families, as well as sole heirs, were especially prized by the gods.
Moloch - the prototype of Bagul?
So, in ancient cultures, sacrifices of children sometimes took place. But the cases described above indicate that people did this to appease the gods. And what about the demons? How did these creatures manifest themselves in the fantasy of the creators of the movie Sinister? Let's try to figure it out.
In the cinema, Bagul is a demon who takes the souls of children. Perhaps his prototype could be Moloch - the deity of the Moabites, which was mentioned in the Bible. The sacrifice rite was truly terrible. A child was placed in the hands of a statue of Moloch (depicted as a man with a bull's head), and a fire was made below. The baby's cries were drowned out by ritual chants ...
Moloch is sometimes called not just a deity, but a demon. However, some researchers are inclined to assume that this mythical character never actually existed. And in general, child sacrifices were a rarity among ancient peoples, and the word mlk (Milk, Moloch), found in scientific treatises of those times, could only reflect the very term of the transfer of the baby's soul to one or another deity.
Bagul and children in the movie "Sinister"
Let's go back to the famous horror movie again. In it, children fell into Bagug's clutches only after they committed terrible crimes. In fact, it was they who killed their family members, and then left the demon to serve. After that, the task of these little black souls was to recruit new henchmen for Bagul. Dead children came into contact with the living, those who themselves were soon to kill their relatives, and convinced them that it was simply necessary to do this. Bagul himself remained in the shadows for the time being. Perhaps he was afraid to scare his future victim.
The children from the retinue were afraid of Bagul. “He will come, he will be displeased,” they sometimes said, before dissolving in horror in the dark corners of the house. Why the demon scared to death the already dead children, unfortunately, is not clear, since this moment was left behind the scenes in the film.
Why is Bagul scary?
This Scandinavian demon (again, as stated in the film) has been forgotten by people for centuries. Perhaps he was hunting somewhere in the wilderness, and then something brought him to the United States of America. As a monster from Hollywood horror films, he can hardly be considered the scariest one. He actually does not appear in public, remains on the sidelines and almost does not participate in what is happening. Moreover, he does not even suddenly jump out of the corner shouting "Boo!" and does not make terrible faces.
But as an archetype, Bagul symbolizes an inevitable grievous loss. He takes first the mind of a loved one, a small child, and then the soul, and for a snack he still has several human lives.
Bagul is a child-eater demon that didn't really exist. But this does not make this creature less frightening.
I spoke to you incessantly, spoke from early morning, and you disobeyed Me. I sent to you all my servants, the prophets, I sent from the early morning, and said: turn each one from his evil way and correct your behavior,and do not follow in the footsteps of other gods to serve them ; and you will live in this land that I gave to you and your fathers (Jer. 35:14, 15).
This is how the prophet Jeremiah called on behalf of the God of Israel, who in many ways typified the coming Messiah, Jesus Christ - both by his bitter destiny, and by the words about the New Testament that God will conclude in the future with the people, and by the amazing words of denouncing the people - the Old Testament church - in that, that they misunderstand what God requires of them.
The Sacrifice of the Firstborn as Part of the "People's Faith"
Service to other gods - what was it? And did Ancient Israel really believe that it serves other gods, and not YHWH (YHWH), the True God, Who was revealed to Moses? Didn't religious and pious people then think that their religious and ancient customs are exactly what without which it is impossible to serve God, and that Jeremiah is himself a blasphemer corrupting the people, denouncing pious customs and prophesying about captivity and exile and desecration Temple, and for this they laughed at him, tortured him and condemned him to death by starvation in filth, from which he was saved by the grace of man and God?
And when you say all these words to them, they will not listen to you; and when you call them, they will not answer you. Then say to them: Behold the people who do not listen to the voice of the Lord their God and do not receive instruction! Truth was no more from them; it was taken away from their mouth. Cut off your hair and cast it, and lift up a lamentation on the mountains, for the Lord rejected and forsaken the generation that incurred His wrath. For the sons of Judah do evil in my sight, says the Lord; They have set up their abominations in the house, which is called by my name, to defile it; And they made the heights of Tophet in the valley of the sons of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in fire, which I did not command and which did not enter my heart.
Therefore, behold, days are coming, says the Lord, when they will no longer call this place Tophet and the valley of the sons of Hinnom, but the valley of murder, and in Tophet they will be buried for lack of space. And the corpses of this people will be food for the birds of the air and the beasts of the earth, and there will be no one to drive them away. And I will cease in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem the voice of triumph and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride; because this land will be a desert (Jer. 7: 24-34).
Yes, the sacrifices of firstborn children, and perhaps not only firstborns, were common among captive Israel, and it was this terrible custom that caused the greatest indignation of the prophets.
But the worst thing about this custom was that those who followed it sincerely believed that God had commanded this, and that this was completely sincere and normal piety.
Just as people who bring apples for the Transfiguration to consecrate, Easter cakes for Easter and who stand in line for Epiphany and Epiphany water two days in a row sincerely believe, while still having time to dive into the ice-hole - this is a manifestation of true faith, without this religion is not real!
But how cute and funny are the apples, Easter cakes, and even an ice-hole in comparison with the valley of the sons of Hinnom, "Gehenna of Fire" with the terrible Tophet! Indeed, the popular faith has become not as cruel as it was thousands of years ago ...
That popular faith, which the prophets fought against and which was not shared by true believers who did not kneel before Baal (1 Kings 19:18), is called in science "folk Yahvism" and consists in the fact that under the name of YHWH, God revealed to Moses in the bush, the God of Abraham, the God who saved Israel from Egypt, the people worshiped various local deities of the Canaanite land, sincerely believing that this is real faith, and there is nothing abnormal here. This faith was shared by the closest relatives and neighbors of the Jews, the Canaanites, who are very close to them in language and customs, and are practically inseparable from them, and the inhabitants of Ugarit, and the Phoenicians, the inhabitants of Tire and Sidon, who, being merchants and sailors, mastered the coast of North Africa , the islands of Sicily and Sardinia and the coast of the Iberian Peninsula.
In “popular Yahvizm” it was sincerely believed that the main thing is to be fruitful and multiply, well, in the end, this is such a commandment from God from Eden! And how can you argue? And God gives the fruit of the womb. Of course! And this fruit must be offered as a sacrifice to Him. Then the rest of the offspring will be blessed and plural.
The voice of the law and the substitute victim
It was so difficult to fight this popular faith that the ancient legislators, the heirs of Moses, took a different path: they were used to sacrificing first-borns from this wild, terrible and disgusting custom in the eyes of God, without forbidding sacrifice at all (this could not be understood - how is it: to prohibit the sacrifice?), But insisting on substitutionary sacrifices as a commandment and the institution of God.
Sanctify to Me every firstborn, who opens every kind of falsehood among the children of Israel, from man to cattle., [because] they are mine (Ex. 13: 2). And when the Lord [your God] brings you into the land of Canaan, as He swore to you and to your fathers, and He will give it to you, - Separate to the Lord everything [male] that opens the falsehood; and all the firstborn of the cattle that you will have, male, [dedicate] to the Lord but for every donkey that opens [the womb], replace with a lamb; and if you don’t replace it, buy it back; And you shall redeem every firstborn man of thy sons.(Ex. 13: 11-13). Do not hesitate to bring me the first fruits of your threshing floor and of your winepress; Give me the firstborn of your sons; Do the same with your ox and your sheep. For seven days let them be with their mother, but on the eighth day give them to me(Ex. 22: 29-30).
In this ancient and complex passage, “sanctify” means “sacrifice” (as it stands in the original), and that is why the child must be ransomed and in no case should be sacrificed, as was customary in the land of Canaan. That is why circumcision was established on the eighth day as a replacement for the bloody sacrifice (Gen. 17: 10-14), without which, as without the ancient "paternal" piety, most of the ancient Jews could not live, even such noble ones as Jephthah.
But people still did not listen to the priests and prophets, and the cry of Jeremiah seemed to be filled with despair of God himself, as before a new flood - but after all, He swore not to direct a flood, and there are no less abominations on earth! Why do you kill your children as a sacrifice to Me? I did not command this and it did not come to my heart!
“Well, of course! - answered Jeremiah and other zealots of piety, the guardians of "popular Yahvism". - For a long time we have such customs. And the forefather Abraham himself made a sacrifice. So what if he replaced the ram - he had no desire to bring a ram! It means that such sacrifices are pleasing to God, he will bless us and multiply us like the sand of the sea, we will be fruitful and multiply ”.
And then already the priest-prophet, Ezekiel raises his voice and speaks of the invented commandments that are displeasing to God and not given by Him -
... they have not kept my statutes, and have rejected my commandments, and have broken my sabbaths, and their eyes turned to the idols of their fathers. And he allowed them unkind institutions and decrees from which they could not be alive and allowed them to be defiled by their sacrifices, when they began to pass every first fetus of the womb through the fire to destroy them ... this is what else your fathers blasphemed about me, treacherously against me ... (Ezek. 20: 24-27)
In the Church Slavonic translation, the core of this passage sounds much sharper and more frank:
And give themmy commandments are not kindand My justifications, they shall not dwell in them either (Ezek. 20:25).
“Yes, if you want, if you want, continue to consider“ leading the firstborn through the fire ”as My commandment,” as if YHWH says in despair. - But you should know, people - I'm not like you. If you are stubborn and stubborn and do not want to admit your mistakes, do not want to admit that it is you who have not heard and understood Me, then I have the power to take your blame upon Me! Yes, it was I who gave you a bad, unkind commandment, and now I am canceling it! Do you hear? I will cancel! Stop doing these atrocities in My Name! "
The "Dark Twin" of the Old Testament Church
The remarkable and profound church writer Sergei Fudel talked a lot about the existence in history of the "dark twin of the Church." The roots of this phenomenon are inexplicable, like any evil, but, as you can see, they can be traced in the Old Testament, the time when God was in the midst of His people, as it sometimes seems to us when reading these ancient books. God stayed, but the people, the Old Testament church, did terrible things.
They forgot God, their Savior, who had done great things in Egypt, wondrous in the land of Ham, terrible near the Red Sea ... They cleave to Baalfegor and ate the sacrifices of the soulless ..., mingled with the pagans and learned their deeds; they served their idols ... and sacrificed their sons and their daughters to demons; they shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and their daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was defiled with blood (Psalm 105: 21, 22, 28, 35-38).
And even when the Babylonian captivity deprived the Jews and Israelites of both their homeland and the Temple, they, with a full desire to repent and bring God all the most precious, compose a touching and terrible psalm-prayer:
With what should I appear before the Lord, bow down before the God of heaven? Should I stand before Him with burnt offerings, with one year old calves? But is it possible to please the Lord with thousands of rams or innumerable streams of oil? Is itI will give him my firstborn for my transgression, and the fruit of my womb for the sin of my soul ? (Micah 6: 6-7)
The Prophet Micah sadly quotes this prayer of his fellow tribesmen - they seem to sort out the sacrificial gifts and again return to the most effective sacrifice: firstborn.
But for this sin they went into captivity!
And the Lord said to me: Son of man! do you want to judge Ogola and Oholiva? tell them their abominations; for they have committed adultery, and the blood is on their hands, and have committed adultery with their idols,and their sons, whom they bore to me, through the fire they sent them to eat (Ezek. 23: 36-37).
And the prophet Micah exclaims almost in despair - how can you fight this ineradicable popular faith, popular Yahvism?
Oh man!told you what is good and what the Lord requires of you : to act justly, love works of mercy and humbly walk before your God (Micah 6: 8).
It must be said that the Canaanite people expected from the king that in case of danger he would sacrifice his firstborn. This is what King Mesa (Mesha) did.
And the king of Moab saw that the battle was overpowering him, and took with him seven hundred men wielding a sword, to make his way to the king of Edom; but they couldn't.And he took his firstborn son, who was to reign in his place, and offered him up as a burnt offering on the wall. ... and they (the Israelites) departed from him and returned to their land (2 Kings 3: 26-27).
Surprisingly, the terrible sacrifice of the pagan is not condemned - as if the attackers see that the most powerful sacrifice has been made, and that further battle is useless.
King Manasseh, who came to the Jewish throne as a boy (fate saved him from becoming a victim as the firstborn of the king) and ruled successfully for 50 years, concluded a profitable vassal agreement with the warlike and dangerous Assyria, from the very beginning of his reign decided that religion is very important , and no reforms are needed. Popular, paternal piety is what will save the country. Manasseh canceled the religious reforms of his father Hezekiah and, in fact, made "popular Yahvism" the state religion, from which even the temple worship was not spared - he installed the idol of Astarte, the wife of the "god" of "popular Yahvism" in the Temple!
He also “led his children through the fire” (2 Kings 21: 6, Jer. 32:35) - in terms of performing religious rituals for the welfare of the country, he did not stop at anything. He believed that this is the correct faith, and God helps him. And in fact - prosperity for half a century, rest and peace, trade and prosperity! Here it is, the power of real religion!
... Millennia later, during the crisis of Byzantium, desperate people will run to the grave of Constantine Copronymus, a brilliant politician, victorious warrior and fierce iconoclast, and will shout - "Rise, save the dying empire!" - the memory of him lived for more than a century and a half. The heretic emperor was more successful than the Orthodox emperors.
And the pious young king, the grandson of the wicked Manasseh, the beautiful Josiah, who returned the country to monotheism and true faith in YHVH, the One God, who abolished the savagery of “popular Yahvism,” ruled for a short time and died absurdly ...
“Deeply practical, by no means poetic, people liked to rely on fear and disgust. As always in such cases, it seemed to them that the dark forces would do their job. But in the psychology of the Punic peoples, this strange pessimistic practicality has grown to incredible proportions. In the New City, which the Romans called Carthage, as in the ancient cities of the Phoenicians, the deity who worked “without fools” was called Moloch; apparently, it did not differ from the deity known by the name of Baal.
The Romans at first did not know what to do with it and how to call it; they had to turn to the most primitive ancient myths in order to find its faint resemblance - Saturn, devouring children. But the admirers of Moloch are by no means primitive. They lived in a developed and mature society and did not deny themselves either luxury or sophistication. They were probably much more civilized than the Romans. And Moloch was not a myth; in any case, he was eating quite realistically. These civilized people appeased the dark forces by throwing hundreds of children into the blazing furnace. To understand this, try to imagine how Manchester businessmen, with sideburns and top hats, go on Sundays to admire the toasting of babies ”(GK Chesterton,“ The Eternal Man ”).
Child sacrifices - customs and symbols
... About the victims of the children of Western Semites, we have information obtained with the help of archeology .
"An offering to Lord Baal Hammon, the vow that Idnibal, the son of Abdeshmun, made, the sacrifice molk of a man from his flesh, the Lord heard his voice and blessed him" - this is one of the many hundreds of inscriptions that can be read on Phoenician dedicatory steles. At the base of the stele there is a vessel with the remains of a burnt baby. Sometimes two - a child 2-3 years old and a newborn. Sometimes - the remains of a child and a lamb, or a kid, or birds. And less often - only the remains of young animals - a substitutionary sacrifice for the firstborn.
Judging by these inscriptions, the devout Phoenicians asked for some kind of mercy from their god (for example, Baal-Hammon) or the goddess (Tanit), promising, if God fulfilled his request, to give him the fruit of the womb, which would be conceived and born. And so they did - the child conceived after the fulfillment of what was asked of the gods became the currency with which these gods were paid.
The whole pregnancy was a preparation for the sacrifice - it was necessary to order a stele, emboss the inscription, prepare a place for sacrifice and burial ... A whole event for the family! It was attended by adults, successfully survived children ... But it happened that the "ordered by God" child was born stillborn, and it was necessary to bring "blood for blood, flesh for flesh, soul for soul." In this case, the older child replaced the living victim, and the stillborn one was also buried with a brother or sister ... Children were euthanized or killed before burning - the analysis of their bones shows that the victim did not move in the fire. Then the ashes and bones were carefully collected in a vessel and buried under a stele with an inscription.
Steles dedicated to Tanith and Baal Hammon
An image has come down to us related to a ritual feast at which the gods sit at the table and eat the firstborn brought. It is located in Spain, in Pozo Moro, and dates back to about 500 BC.
Other symbols indicating the sacrifice of children are also very specific: they are a crescent moon and a disc (symbols of Tanit and Baal), a vessel that looks like an amphora or a bottle - but sometimes you can distinguish the head, and then it becomes clear that this is a swaddled baby prepared for sacrifices. There are also images of a lamb.
But the most striking, perhaps, is the image of the right hand, palm raised up and turned towards the viewer. This palm is always the right one. There are many such images on steles, but they are also found in Canaan.
Image in Pozo Moro
Among the Egyptian images, one has survived, which is considered a sacrifice in the besieged Palestinian city of Ashkelon, it refers to the wars of Merneptah or Ramses II. The people raise their hands to the sky, and on the wall, a bearded man cures to the deity, holding an incense burner in his left hand, and raises his right in a characteristic gesture that is already familiar to us: palm forward. Nearby, another man holds the lifeless bodies of two children. Tsar Mesha was undoubtedly not the first in his tradition to defend the welfare of the country with child sacrifices.
There is an image where a male priest carries a baby with his left hand, and raises his right in this characteristic gesture.
The texts of Ugarit describe the sacrifice of a boy, probably the royal heir, called the "Branch", doomed to sacrifice to the gods "Elohim" and "Shaddaim". "Shaddaim", obviously, these are the underground gods, the sacrifice to them ensured a good afterlife for the father and the whole family of the sacrificial child. He was called the "groom" who must lie on the eternal bed of stone. Interestingly, there is an overlap in the Semitic roots for "groom" and "circumcision." Circumcision replaced the bloody sacrifice of a child among the pre-captive Jews, in contrast to their relatives, close in language and culture, other Western Semites.
This Phoenician and West Semitic custom lasted a long time and was known in the first centuries of our era. Thus, Eusebius Pamphilus in his book "The Gospel Preparation" tells, relying on the words of a Phoenician priest, that the Phoenicians have a legend about Kronos, whom they call El, and who was an earthly king who sacrificed his only-begotten son, Jeduda, during the siege ...
Such customs shocked not only the Romans - they shocked both the Egyptians, who did not make human sacrifices, and the Eastern Semites, the inhabitants of Mesopotamia, for whom human sacrifice was something ancient and out of the ordinary, and they did not make child sacrifices (although they could throw an unwanted child to the mercy of fate or kill an ugly child by drowning him in the Euphrates after the ritual in order to remove the curse that such a child brought for their sins, and then bring a cleansing sacrifice for sin).
The fiery sacrifice of the first-born, which was supposed to either bring prosperity and abundance, or unite the world of the living with the world of the dead, or save from the danger of war, was alien to the peoples, among whom was the captive Israel ...
Repentance That Preserved the People
And the preaching of priests and teachers about repentance, about the need to return to the True God, and not to the “fatherly tradition,” “popular Yahvizm,” caused not only complete repentance of the Jews, but also such tender care for newborn children that the Greeks were surprised her. Only two peoples did not throw children to the mercy of fate - the ancient Egyptians and the ancient Jews. For the Semites - the inhabitants of Mesopotamia, throwing away children was normal and natural (some children, of course, were adopted, but many died). This repentance preserved Israel as a people.
But the land, which received "innocent blood" shed by the zealots of the popular religion, was defiled. And this desecration, even after returning from Captivity, could not be removed by any ritual, not a single sacrifice - they simply did not exist for such a case. It was impossible to atone for a great sin ... Children who were supposedly sacrificed to God by a terrible mistake cannot be brought back to life.
Only the Only Begotten Son, the Firstborn, the Beloved Son of the Father, brought His great Sacrifice for all.
Before hell you tied you Immortal, and you killed death, and you raised the world, and with your babies I will praise Thee Christ, like the winner, calling You this day: Hosanna to the Son of David. Not to anyone else, speech,Babies will be slaughtered, for the Baby Mary: but for all the babies and elders, One is crucified. Not to whom the sword will fit on us: Your ribs will be pierced with a spear. The same rejoicing verb: blessed is the coming Adam, call out (Service of the Entry of the Lord into Jerusalem, ikos, ch. 6).
And not in the fire of the altar devouring the dead bodies of children, but in the life-giving fire of the Resurrection He, the Risen One, the Firstborn from the dead, the Son of David, the Son of God, the Son of Mary, shone.
The ox and the horse are watching silently -
So it was from time immemorial.
Like a consuming fire
So His God is powerful.He will fall asleep on the altar,
Of the firstborn of men,
The fruits of tens of thousands of bosoms,
The depths and waters of the sea.How terrible it is to fall into the hands of God,
Fire is His face.
Power, glory, strength, power -
To the throne of One.In the last, shining day
Step - to You, with You -
He's out of the grave, all on fire
Killed and Alive.
In writing this essay, I relied on the monograph: Francesca Stavrakopoulou. King Manasseh and Child Sacrifice. De Gruyter, Berlin, New York, 2004.
