Editing Moloch (section)

==Etymology==
[[File:Valley of Hinom PA180093.JPG|thumb|Tombs in the [[Valley of Hinnom (Gehenna)|Valley of Hinnom]], the location of the [[tophet]], just outside the city of ancient Jerusalem, where Moloch rituals were performed according to [[2 Kings]] 23:10.{{sfn|Day|2000|p=212}}]]
The etymology of Moloch is uncertain: a derivation from the root {{lang|he|mlk}}, which means "to rule" is "widely recognized".{{sfn|Schmidt|2021}} Since it was first proposed by [[Abraham Geiger]] in 1857, some scholars have argued that the word "Moloch" has been altered by using the vowels of {{lang|he|bōšet}} "shame".{{sfn|Day|2000|p=128}} Other scholars have argued that the name is a [[Qal (linguistics)|''qal'' participle]] from the same verb.{{sfn|Heider|1999|p=581}} R. M. Kerr criticizes both theories by noting that the name of no other god appears to have been formed from a ''qal'' participle, and that Geiger's proposal is "an out-of-date theory which has never received any factual support".{{sfn|Kerr|2018|p=67}} Paul Mosca, Professor Emeritus at the [[University of British Columbia]], similarly argued that "the theory that a form {{lang|he|molek}} would immediately suggest to the reader or hearer the word {{lang|he|boset}} (rather than {{lang|he|qodes}} or {{lang|he|ohel}}) is the product of nineteenth century ingenuity, not of Massoretic{{sic}} or pre-Massoretic tendentiousness".{{sfn|Mosca|1975|p=127}}

Scholars who do not believe that Moloch represents a deity instead compare the name to inscriptions in the closely related [[Punic (language)|Punic language]] where the word {{lang|xpu|mlk}} ({{lang|xpu|molk}} or {{lang|xpu|mulk}}) refers to a type of sacrifice, a connection first proposed by [[Otto Eissfeldt]] (1935).{{sfn|Heider|1999|pp=581–582}} Eissfeldt himself, following [[Jean-Baptiste Chabot]], connected Punic {{lang|xpu|mlk}} and ''Moloch'' to a [[Syriac language|Syriac]] verb {{lang|syc|mlk}} meaning "to promise", a theory also supported as "the least problematic solution" by Heath Dewrell (2017).{{sfn|Dewrell|2017|pp=127-128}} Eissfeldt's proposed meaning included both the act and the object of sacrifice.{{sfn|Stavrakopoulou|2013|p=144}} Scholars such as W. von Soden argue that the term is a [[nominalization|nominalized]] causative form of the verb {{lang|he|ylk/wlk}}, meaning "to offer", "present", and thus means "the act of presenting" or "thing presented".{{sfn|Holm|2005|p=7134}} Kerr instead derives both the Punic and Hebrew word from the verb {{lang|he|mlk}}, which he proposes meant "to own", "to possess" in [[Proto-Semitic]], only later coming to mean "to rule"; the meaning of Moloch would thus originally have been "present", "gift", and later come to mean "sacrifice".{{sfn|Kerr|2018}}

The spelling "Moloch" follows the Greek [[Septuagint]] and the Latin [[Vulgate]]; the spelling "Molech" or "Molek" follows the [[Tiberian vocalization]] of Hebrew, with "Molech" used in the English [[King James Bible]].{{sfn|Dewrell|2017|p=4}}