If you're new here, you may want to get regular updates via如果你是新這裡，你可能想通過定期更新 RSS feed RSS提要 . 。 Thank you for visiting!感謝您訪問！

Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi 莫哈末Elfie Nieshaem Juferi

Among the litany of crimes Christians accuse Muslims of committing, the worship of so-called “pagan” deities is a major one.其中一長串犯罪基督信徒指責穆斯林犯下的崇拜所謂的“異教”神是一個主要的問題。 There is the claim that All?h is a “moon god”, that ar-Rahman refers to the Syrian “Rimmon” parodied in the有聲稱所有？h是“月亮神”，即氬拉赫曼指的是敘利亞“臨門”中的模仿 Bible聖經 , and the list goes on.和這樣的例子不勝枚舉。 Yet another of God's names has come under the sharp scrutiny of the Christian cyber-polemicists, and this being Maalik ().另一個神的名字已受到尖銳審議基督教網絡理論家，這是馬力克 （）。

The claim of the Christian missionaries is that Maalik is a variant of the deity Molech[1], mentioned several times in the Bible as a deity of fire and child sacrifice.該索賠的基督教傳教士是馬力克是一個變體的神摩洛[1]，多次提到的聖經是神的火災和兒童犧牲。 This article will seek to explore the notion of Molech vs Maalik, and see which usage predates which.本文將試圖探討這一概念的摩洛比馬力克，看看它的使用早於其中。

The Name Games: Molech vs. Maalik 遊戲名稱：摩洛主場迎戰馬力克

First, it should be noted that any person who claims that Maalik comes from Molech demonstrates that they are not very familiar with the Semitic languages relevant to this study.首先，應該指出，任何人誰聲稱，馬力克來自摩洛表明，他們不是很熟悉的閃米特語言相關的研究。 The attribute of God as the Ruler, the King of all creation, is one that is present in all Semitic languages.上帝的屬性為統治者，國王的所有創作，一個是目前在所有猶太人的語言。 The Arabic maalik means simply “master”, “sovereign” or “king”[2] and stems from the same MLK root as the Hebrew melekh ().阿拉伯語馬力克僅僅意味著“大師”，“主權”或“王”[2]和源於同一斯特MLK根為希伯來語melekh（）。

As for Molech, in Hebrew it is spelled precisely the same way as the Hebrew word for “king,” mem-lamed-kaf ().至於摩洛，在希伯來文的拼寫完全相同的方式希伯來文為“王”，紀念，殘廢啦，卡夫（）。 Whatever deity is being referred to in the Bible in places where “Molech” is mentioned, the spelling is exactly the same.無論是被稱為神在聖經中的地方“摩洛”提到，拼寫是完全一樣的。 So, if to call on God as the king (MLK) of the universe is to call on Molech, we must repudiate the Bible.所以，如果呼籲上帝的國王（斯特MLK）的宇宙是呼籲摩洛，我們必須拋棄聖經。 The books of Kings could have their Hebrew text repointed to say “Molechim”, id est “the followers of Molech”.這些書籍的國王可以有自己的希伯來文repointed說“Molechim”，身份證預測“的信徒摩洛”。 We should hence be wary of the Christian version of因此，我們應該警惕的基督教版本 Jesus耶穌 , the “Molech” (MLK) of the Jews, and the “Molech” (MLK) of heaven.的“摩洛”（斯特MLK）的猶太人，和“摩洛”（斯特MLK）的天堂。 When we find names in the Bible like “Elimelech”, which means “My God is King,” we should reconsider the vowels and be suspicious that it was not really “My God is Molech”.當我們發現在聖經中的名字，如“以利米勒”，意思是“我的上帝為王，”我們應該重新考慮元音，並懷疑它是不是真的“我的上帝是摩洛”。 Immediately, we see how absurd this really is.緊接著，我們看到這實在是荒謬。

The reality is that the recognition of God as king and ruler (MLK) is perfectly sensible within the monotheist framework.現實情況是，承認神的國王和統治者（斯特MLK）是完全合理的框架內的一神論。 Let it be noted that the vast majority of Jewish prayers (exempli gratia: the shacharit) begins with the following phrase:讓它指出的是，絕大多數猶太人祈禱（exempli特惠：在shacharit）開始以下列短語：

Baruch Atah YHWH, Eloheinu, Melekh ha-Olam 巴魯克Atah耶和華，Eloheinu，Melekh公頃，奧蘭
Blessed art thou O' Lord, our God, Ruler of the Universe 你有福藝術Ø'主啊，我們的上帝，宇宙的統治者

Numerous times throughout Rabbinic literature, God is recognized as King.無數次在整個拉比文學，上帝是公認的國王。 When taking this into account, we can better understand the context of the Islamic usage within a pristinely Monotheistic environment.當採取這種考慮，我們可以更好地理解伊斯蘭的使用範圍內的在pristinely一神教環境。 For example, the first time the word Maalik appears in the Qur'?n, it appears in Sura' al-Fatihah (1):4 as例如，第一次出現在單詞馬力克古蘭經'？氮，它出現在蘇拉'基地Fatihah（1）：4

maaliki yawmi ad-Deen maaliki yawmi廣告德恩
Master of the Day of Judgement[3]掌握了日判決 [3]

Now, if we were translating this verse from the Qur'?n into Hebrew, and wanted to do it in a way that is as close to the Arabic as possible, we would come up with the wholly obvious and nearly identical現在，如果我們把這一詩句從古蘭經'？ñ為希伯來文，並希望這樣做的方式，是接近阿拉伯語為可能，我們會想出的明顯，幾乎完全一致

melekh yom ha-deen melekh贖罪公頃，德恩
Master of the Day of Judgement掌握了日判決

And indeed, melekh yom ha-deen is a description of God that can be found in a standard Jewish siddur (prayer book).事實上，melekh贖罪公頃，德恩是描述上帝，可以找到一個標準的猶太siddur（祈禱書）。

The real irony, however, is not the fact that employing the MLK root is perfectly valid in a monotheist framwork; rather the ironic part of this whole debate is the fact that Molech has nothing to do with具有諷刺意味，但是，是不是事實，運用斯特MLK的根源是在一個完全有效的一神論訪真，而是頗具諷刺意味的是這整個辯論的事實，即摩洛已無關 Islam伊斯蘭教 and everything to do with YHWH.一切是與耶和華。 The cult associated with Molech was a group that recognized the role of YHWH as counselor/ruler/king, but took it to far.該邪教組織相關的摩洛這是一組的作用，承認耶和華作為輔導員 /統治者 /王，但它遠了。 It was Jews ridiculing this form of YHWH-worship that altered the vowel-pointing to slander the practice.As we note from the Jewish Encyclopedia :這是猶太人的嘲笑，這種形式的耶和華崇拜，它改變了元音，指向詆毀practice.As我們注意到從猶太百科全書 ：

From Jer.從哲。 vii.七。 31 and Ezek. 31和因埃澤克。 xx.二十。 25,26, it is evident that both prophets regarded these human sacrifices as extraordinary offerings to YHWH. 25,26，這是顯而易見的，無論先知認為這些人的犧牲，祭祀耶和華非凡。 [...] The fact, therefore, now generally accepted by critical scholars, is that in the last days of kingdom, human sacrifices were offered to YHWH as King or Counselor of the nation and that the Prophets disapproved of it and denounced it because it was introduced from the outside as an imitation of a heathen cult and because of its barbarity. [...]的事實，因此，現在普遍接受的關鍵學者，是在最後幾天的王國，人類的犧牲是提供給耶和華為國王或輔導員的國家，而且先知不贊成，因為它和譴責它是從外面引進仿製作為一個異教徒邪教，因為它的野蠻行徑。 In course of time the pointing of “Melek” was changed to “Molech” to still further stigmatize the rites.[4]在課程的時間指向“梅萊克”改為“摩洛”，以進一步羞辱的儀式。[4]

Now, some may be wondering in what sense the changing of the vowels was significant.現在，有些人可能會問在什麼意義上的元音的變化顯著。 This is explained in a theory held by a number of esteemed scholars of the Jewish religion.這是一個理論解釋了一個數字的舉行尊敬的猶太宗教學者。 And we are told that:此外，我們被告知是：

The accepted view since A. Geiger is that Molech is a tendentious misvocalization of the word melekh, “king,” the original vowels being changed and patterned after the vocalization of boshet, “shame”.[5]這種公認的看法是，既然甲蓋格摩洛是一個傾向性 misvocalization這個詞 melekh，“國王”，正在改變原有的元音和圖案後，發聲的boshet，“恥辱”。[5]

So the only reason we have the name Molech in the first place is because the Jewish authorities played yet another word game, deliberately mispronouncing the word so that it rhymed with boshet ().所以，唯一的原因，我們的名字摩洛首先是因為猶太當局發揮又一次文字遊戲，故意讀錯的字，以便它與 boshet押韻（）。

This confusion is further established when we take into account the fact that it is not clear if any particular verse in the Torah is referring to Molech or not.這種混亂是進一步確立當我們考慮到的事實，目前還不清楚是否有特定的詩句，在誦讀經文是指摩洛與否。 This is a hint towards the fact of how the concept of Molech is relatively recent:這是一個暗示對事實如何，是相對的概念摩洛最新文章：

The fact that the Septuagint of the Pentateuch (which was the first to be translated by the Greek translators) translates molekh as “king” (archon) seems to also indicate that at the time of the translation of the Torah the reading molekh instead of melekh was yet unknown.[6]事實上，在七十的五經（這是第一個被翻譯成希臘文翻譯）翻譯molekh為“國王”（執政官）似乎也表明，當時的翻譯的聖經閱讀molekh而不是melekh是未知的。[6]

This passage is making to an interesting part of the Bible.這段話正為一個有趣的部分聖經。 Consider the Hebrew of Leviticus 18:21:考慮希伯來利未記 18:21：

Now, where the vowels are can make a world of difference.現在，那裡的元音，都可以使世界不同。 If we vocalize the verse the way it is done today, we get umizzarakha lo titen lehabir lamolekh , or “thou shall not offer thy seed to serve Molech”.如果我們說出詩句的方式完成的今天，我們得到umizzarakha螺titen lehabir lamolekh，或“你不提供你的後裔，為摩洛”。 Of course, if we vocalize as “melekh”, we get a totally difference sentence.當然，如果我們發聲的“melekh”，我們得到一個完全不同刑期。 This is relevant when we taken into account how the Septuagint (the pre-common era Greek translation) renders the verse:這是相關的，當我們考慮如何譯本（前共同時代希臘翻譯）呈現的詩句：

Kai apo tou spermatios sou ou doseis latreuein archonti 啟阿波頭spermatios搜神記歐doseis latreuein archonti
And thou shalt not give thy seed to serve a ruler你必不給你的種子，為尺子

Ebed-Melech : The Servant of “The King” or Molech? 以別的-米勒 ：僕人的“國王”或摩洛？

The idea of a servant of MLK versus a servant of Molech becomes more interesting when we take into account the story of the Ethiopian slave Ebed-Melech in the book of Jeremiah.這個想法的一個僕人斯特MLK與僕人的摩洛變得更有趣，當我們考慮到奴隸的故事，埃塞俄比亞以別的，米勒在書中耶利米。 In the 37th chapter of the book of Jeremiah, the prophet it thrown into a pit.在第37章的書耶利米，先知它扔進一個坑。 In the 38th chapter, it is Ebed-Melech (a non-Jew) who helps Jeremiah.在第38章，以別的是，米勒（非猶太人）誰幫助耶利米。 The story has an implication of conversion here, as the prophet even receives a revelation proclaiming that Ebed-Melech will be protected by God since he put his faith in the Lord (Jeremiah 39:16-18).這個故事有含義的轉換在這裡，正如先知得到一個啟示，甚至宣稱以別的，米勒將得到保護神，因為他把他的信仰，在主（耶39:16-18）。

The name Ebed-Melech , in the most literal translation, means “servant of MLK.” This could mean “servant of Molech”, but no person would ever assume as such.該名稱以別的，米勒 ，在最直譯，意思是“僕人斯特MLK。”這可能意味著“僕人摩洛”，但沒有人會永遠這樣認為。 The name was actually recognized as having a dual meaning by the great Rabbis.這個名字實際上是公認的具有雙重意義的大拉比。 In a sense, Ebed-Melech is the king's slave and just another Ethiopian eunuch in a state of bondage; however in another sense he is a servant of the King of the universe (melekh ha-olam), the ruler of the Day of Judgement (melekh yom ha-deen).從某種意義上說，以別的，米勒是國王的奴隸，只是另一個埃塞俄比亞太監在一個國家的束縛，但在另一種意義上，他是一個僕人國王的宇宙（melekh公頃，奧蘭），統治者的日判決（melekh贖罪公頃，德恩）。

Now we shall take a look at how Ebed-Melech is translated in Targum Onqelos, the Aramaic translation of the text which often weaves in a number of traditions in a subtle fashion.現在我們來看看如何以別的，米勒是翻譯成根Onqelos，阿拉姆語翻譯的文本，往往在一個數字編織的傳統，一種微妙的方式。 When Ebed-Melech is first introduced in the Bible, in Jeremiah 38:7, he is described simply as follows:當以別的，米勒首先介紹了聖經，在耶利米書 38:7，他簡單地描述如下：

Ebed Melekh ha-Kushi 以別的Melekh公頃，串
Ebed-Melech the Ethiopian以別的 -米勒的埃塞俄比亞

The Targum to this verse is quite crafty in employing a clever usage of double meanings.本節的根是一個很聰明狡猾聘請使用雙重意義。 Ebed-Melech's ethnicity is left out, definite articles are introduced, and the name of the King is positioned in an odd manner.以別的 -米勒的種族不寫出來，一定有文章介紹，在國王的名字被放置在一個奇怪的方式。 The end result will be最終結果將是

Abdaa D'Malkaa Tsidiqiyah Abdaa德Malkaa Tsidiqiyah

What does this signify?這意味著什麼？ Well, firstly with the introduction of the definite articles, it is no longer “servant of MLK,” but rather “servant of THE MLK.” The last word, tsidiqiyah is a play on the name of the King specific to the story, Zedekiah.嗯，首先介紹了與定冠詞，它不再是“僕人斯特MLK”，而是“僕人的斯特MLK。”最後一句話，tsidiqiyah是一出戲的具體名稱國王的故事，西底家。 However, the key part is the fact that it stems from the tsadeq-dalet-qof () root.不過，關鍵的部分是事實，即它源於 tsadeq -德萊 - qof（）根。 This is the same root in Arabic () that gives us names like sadiq () and siddiq (), of which the former means “true”, “truthful”, “sincere, et.這是同根（阿拉伯文），讓我們的名字一樣薩迪克（）和西迪克（），其中前者是指“真實”，“真實”，“真誠，等。 al.[7], while the latter means “honest” “righteous” and “upright”[8]基地。[7]，而後者的意思是“誠實”，“正義”和“正直”[8]

Thus, by working with the three-dimensional nature of Hebrew, the Targumist takes Ebed-Melech the Ethiopian and makes subtle changes that speak of his true place in a subtle fashion.因此，通過與三維性質希伯來語，Targumist需要以別的，米勒埃塞俄比亞和微妙變化，使他真正地談論在一種微妙的方式。 He is not just a king's Ethiopian slave, but rather the servant of The King, and is also righteous and upright before God.他不僅是一個國王的黑人奴隸，而是國王的僕人，也是正義和正直的上帝面前。 So, if we were going to try and understand this in Islamic terms, this non-Jewish convert to the monotheism propagated by Jeremiah could be renamed as因此，如果我們要了解一下這個伊斯蘭而言，這種非猶太轉換為傳播一神教的耶利米可改名為

Abdul-Maalik as-Siddeeq 阿卜杜勒馬力克為- Siddeeq

Clearly, we see how ironic this is now!顯然，我們看到具有諷刺意味的是現在！ The point of this hermeneutic approach to the book of Jeremiah was simply meant to show that the Islamic use of the name “Maalik” has nothing to do with “Molech”, rather it is perfectly in line with the monotheism of the Biblical prophets.這一點的方法來詮釋耶利米書只是為了表明，伊斯蘭使用的名稱“馬力克”已無關“摩洛”，而這是完全符合的一神教，聖經先知。

Conclusion 結論

We have thus seen how this name-game of Maalik vs Molech by the Christian missionaries is simply pointless, mainly because in the Semitic context, the word maalik is commonly employed, whether it is to the God of the Jews or to respective pagan deities.我們現在看到這個名稱的遊戲中，馬力克比摩洛由基督教傳教士，只是毫無意義的，主要是因為在猶太人的背景下，這個詞是常用的馬力克，無論是上帝的猶太人或異教徒，以各自的神。 In other words, to accuse the Muslims of calling upon the pagan deity “Molech” simply because Muslims refer to God as al-Maalik is a shot in the missionary's own foot, as the Jewish literature commonly calls upon God as ha-Melekh, which is the equivalent of the Arabic al-Maalik.換句話說，指責穆斯林的呼籲異教神“摩洛”僅僅因為穆斯林是指上帝基地馬利克是一個鏡頭在傳教士的自己的腳，因為猶太文學普遍呼籲上帝公頃，Melekh，其中是等效的阿拉伯語基地馬利克。

And only God knows best.而且，只有上帝知道最好的。

References 參考資料

[1] See Lev. [1]見列弗。 1821; 20:2-5; 1 Kings 11:7; 2 Kings 23:10 and Jer. 1821; 20:2-5; 1國王 11時 07分; 2國王 23:10和耶。 32:35 32:35

[2] JM Cowan (Ed.), The Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic , p. [2] JM科安（編），漢斯韋漢弗詞典現代阿拉伯文寫 ，第 922 922

[3] A. Yusuf Ali, The Holy Qur'?n: Text, Translation and Commentary [3]答：優素福阿里， 神聖的古蘭經'？ñ：文本，翻譯和評注

[4] Under “Moloch (Molech)”, The Jewish Encyclopedia , (KTAV, 1905), Vol. [4]根據“火神（摩洛）” 的猶太百科全書 （KTAV，1905年），第一卷。 viii, p.八，山口 653 653

[5] Under “Moloch, Cult of”, Encyclopaedia Judaica , (Keter, 1971), Vol. [5]在“火神，邪教的” 猶太百科全書 （海科特，1971），第一卷。 12, p. 12，第 230 230

[6] Encyclopaedia Judaica , op. [6] 猶太百科全書 ，同前。 cit., p.同前。山口 231 231

[7] The Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic , op. [7]漢斯韋漢弗詞典現代阿拉伯文寫 ，同前。 cit., p.同前。山口 509 509

[8] ibid. [8] 同上。