Abortion and the Ancient Practice of Child Sacrifice
  
  Andrew White, M.D.
  
  Dr.  White is a 1978 graduate of the Michigan Medical School
  now in the private practice of family medicine in the  North
  Shore  of Boston. He is also currently studying for a Master
  of Divinity at Gordon-Conwell Seminary.
  
  Despite considerable biblical evidence already  summoned  to
  support   a   strong   pro-life  position,  more  scriptural
  testimony seems to be needed  to  convince  some  Christians
  that  anything  less than such a position is unbiblical. One
  objection frequently raised  to  a  dogmatic  stand  against
  abortion  is that the Bible never specifically addresses the
  issue. The reason for this omission has been pointed out  by
  the  Old  Testament scholar Meredith Mine who, commenting on
  the lack of abortion legislation in biblical law  says,  "It
  was  so unthinkable that an Israelite woman should desire an
  abortion that there was no need to mention this  offense  in
  the criminal code." 1
  
  There was, however, a rite performed in ancient Israel which
  has many parallels to the modern practice of abortion and is
  specifically  addressed in the Sciptures. It was the rite of
  child sacrifice and Moses said it was one of the "detestable
  things  the  Lord  hates" (Deuteronomy 12:31). In this paper
  the largely neglected parallels between the ancient rite  of
  child  sacrifice and the modern practice of abortion will be
  examined in detail.
  
  ARCHEOLOGICAL and EXTRA-BIBLICAL LITERARY DATA
  
  Before the biblical texts  which  address  the  practice  of
  child  sacrifice are examined, it will be helpful to draw on
  some of the archeological and extra-biblical  literary  data
  for the background they provide.
  
  In  1921  the  largest cemetery of sacrificed infants in the
  ancient Near East was discovered at  Carthage.  It  is  well
  established  that this rite of child sacrifice originated in
  Phoenicia,  ancient  Israel's  northern  neighbor,  and  was
  brought  to  Carthage by its Phoenician colonizers. Hundreds
  of burial urns filled with the cremated  bones  of  infants,
  mostly  newborns  but even some children up to age six years
  old, as well as animals have been uncovered at Carthage.
  
  They were buried there between the 8th century B.C. and  the
  fall  of  Carthage during the third Punic War in 146 B.C. On
  the burial monuments that sometimes  accompanied  the  urns,
  there  was often inscribed the name or symbol of the goddess
  Tanit, the main Phoenician female  deity,  and  her  consort
  Ba'al   Hammon.'   Infants   and   children  were  regularly
  sacrificed to this divine couple.
  
  Fulfillment of a vow was probably the most  frequent  reason
  an  infant or child was sacrificed as witnessed by the third
  century B.C. Greek  author  Kleitarchos  (paraphrased  by  a
  later writer):
  
    Out of reverence for Kronos (the Greek equivalent of Ba'al
    Hammon), the Phoenicians, and especially the Carthaginians,
    whenever they seek to obtain some great favor, vow one of
    their children, burning it as a sacrifice to the  deity if
    they  are  especially eager to gain success. 3
  
  A typical example of an inscription follows:
  
    "To our lady, to Tanit, the face of Ba'al and to our lord,
    to Ba'al Hammon that which was vowed (by) PN son of PN son
    of PN. Because he (the deity)heard  his  (the  dedicant's)
    voice   and   blessed   him.4
  
                Thus  fulfillment  of  a  vow  before or after
  obtaining a special favor from the gods, a favor that brings
  blessing  or success to the dedicant, appears to be the most
  common reason for child sacrifice. Occasionally, however, at
  times of civic crisis, mass child sacrifice was practiced as
  attested by the first century B.C. Greek historian  Diodorus
  Siculus  who  reported  the response of the Carthaginians to
  their army's defeat by Agathocles in 310 B.C.:
  
    Therefore the Carthaginians, believing that the misfortune
    had come to them from the gods, betook themselves to every
    manner of supplication of the divine powers . . .
  
    In their zeal to make amends for their omission, they
    selected two hundred of the noblest children and 
    sacrificed them publicly. 5
    
  The actual rite of child  sacrifice  at  Carthage  has  been
  graphically described by Diodorus Siculus:
  
    There was in their city a bronze image of Cronus extending
    its hands, palms up and sloping toward the ground, so that
    each of the children when  placed thereon  rolled down and
    fell into a sort ofgaping pit filled with fire. 6
  
  Plutarch, a first and second century A.D. Greek author, adds
  to the description that:
  
    the whole area before the statue was filled with a loud
    noise of flutes and drums so that the cries of wailing
    should not reach the ears of the people. 7
  
  There is conflicting evidence regarding the actual cause  of
  death  of  the  victims. Some reports suggest that they were
  burned alive 8 while other reports  suggest  that
  the   infants   and   children   were   slaughtered   first.
  9 The victims, themselves, were members  of  both
  the  wealthy  mercantile  and estate-owning class as well as
  the lower socioeconomic class as attested by the  titles  of
  the dedicants on the burial monuments. 10
  
  Occasionally,  however,  the  upper  class  would substitute
  lower class children for their own by purchasing  them  from
  the  poor  and  then  sacrificing  them  as Diodorus Siculus
  reports:
  
    in former times they (the Carthaginians) had been 
    accustomed to sacrifice to this god the noblest of their 
    sons, but more recently, secretly buying and nurturing 
    children, they had sent these to the sacrifice. 11
  
  Two inscriptions at Carthage even show that occasionally the
  parents  would  sacrifice  a defective child hoping to later
  receive a healthy one as a substitute. In one inscription  a
  man  named  Tuscus  says  that  he  gave Ba'al "his mute son
  Bod'astart, a defective child, in  exchange  for  a  healthy
  one. "1z Child sacrifice probably became a standard practice
  for  both  religious  and  sociological  reasons.   Diodorus
  Siculus suggests that the:
  
    ancient myth that Cronos did away with his own children
    appears to have been kept in mind among the Carthagians
    through this observance. 13
  
  The second and third century A.D. Roman lawyer and Christian
  apologist who was a native North African and spent  most  of
  his life in Carthage, Tertullian, wrote:
  
 Saturn (the latinized African equalivant of Ba'al Hammon) did
  not spare his own children;  so,  where other  people's were
  concerned, he naturally  persisted in not sparing them;  and
  their  own parents  offered  them  to  him,   were  glad  to
  respond... 14  According  to  the  ancient  myth,
  Saturn selfishly swallowed up the first five of his children
  in order to  prevent his  destined dethronement  by  one  of
  them. 15
  
  
  [Above, the Talisman of Saturn]

  Hoping  to  gain  Saturn's  favor and thus his blessing, the
  Carthaginians worshipped Saturn by imitating him. Serving  a
  god  with ungodly attributes, the Carthaginians were willing
  to submit to his murderous demands. Indeed Saturn's  demands
  may   have   assisted   the   Carthaginians   in  their  own
  self-serving plans. For the  Syro-Palestinian  archeologists
  Lawrence  Stager  and  Samuel  Wolff suggest that "Among the
  social elite of Punic  Carthage  the  institution  of  child
  sacrifice   may  have  assisted  in  the  consolidation  and
  maintenance of family  wealth.  One  hardly  needed  several
  children parceling up the patrimony into smaller and smaller
  pieces . . . for the artisans  and  commoners  of  Carthage,
  ritual  infanticide  could  provide a hedge against poverty.
  For all these participants in this aspect of the cult, then,
  child  sacrifice  provided  `special  favors from the gods."
  16
  
  This suggestion is supported by  archeological  evidence  at
  Carthage  that the practice of child sacrifice flourished as
  never before at the height of  its  population  as  well  as
  civilization."
  
  BIBLICAL CITATIONS
  
  Child  sacrifice was not confined to Phoenicia, Carthage and
  the western Mediterranean world. It was  also  practiced  by
  the   Canaanites   and  through  the  process  of  religious
  syncretism by some Israelites.  The  earliest  reference  to
  child sacrifice in the Bible is found in Leviticus where the
  practice is address by Moses in connection with Molech:
  
    Do not give any of your children to he passed through
    (the fire) to Molech for you must not profane
    the name of your God. 1 am the Lord.
  
    (Lev. 18:21; see also 20:1-5)
  
  In I Kings 11:7, Molech is identified as "the detestable god
  of  the  Ammonites" and recent archeological evidence in the
  former territory of the Ammonites from  the  period  of  the
  Conquest  supports  biblical  testimony that child sacrifice
  was practiced in Jordan roughly contemporarily with  Moses."
  18
  
  The Hebrew word Molech is the same Semitic root as the Punic
  word mulk  which  was  found  inscribed  on  several  burial
  monuments  at  Carthage  giving  linguistic evidence for the
  continuity between the practice of child sacrifice in Canaan
  and  at Carthage. But whereas at Carthage the word refers to
  the sacrificial  offerings  including  human  sacrifice,  in
  Leviticus  it refers to the god who demands child sacrifice.
  19 The "passing through" refers to sacrificing by
  burning in a fire. 20
  
  For  this  "passing through to Molech" (same Hebrew words in
  Leviticus and Jeremiah) took place later in Israel's history
  in  the  region of the high places of Ba'al in the Valley of
  Ben Hinnom in  Jeremiah  32:35.  This  murderous  scene  was
  described  by  the  Lord  through  the  mouth of Jeremiah in
  earlier chapters:
  
    For they have forsaken me and made this a place of foreign 
    gods; they have burned sacrifices in it to gods that 
    neither they nor their fathers nor the kings of Judah ever 
    knew and they have filled this place with the blood of the 
    innocent. They have built me the high places of Ba'al to 
    burn their sons in the fire as offerings to Ba'al -
    something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter 
    my mind. So beware, the days are coming, declares the 
    Lord, when people will no longer call this place Topheth 
    (possibly derived from an Aramaic word meaning hearth or 
    fireplace but here referring to the precinct of child 
    sacrifice)' or the Valley of ben Hinnom, but the Valley 
    of slaughter.
  
               (Jeremiah 19:4-6; see also 7:31,32)
  
  The history of child sacrifice in ancient Israel  and  God's
  response  to  the practice can be uncovered by examining the
  biblical texts that address it in the Pentateuch, historical
  books and prophetic writings. In the Pentateuch, Moses warns
  the Israelites who  will  soon  enter  the  land  of  Canaan
  (Leviticus  18:3 and 20:21-24) where they will be exposed to
  the cult of Molech not to sacrifice any of their children to
  the god:
  
    The Lord said to Moses, say to the Israelites: "Any 
    Israelite or any alien living in Israel who gives any of 
    his children to Molech must be put to death. The people of
    the community are to stone him.  1 I will set my 
    face against that man and 1 will cut him off from his 
    people; for bygiving his children to Molech he has defiled
    my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. If the people of 
    the community close their eyes when that man gives one of 
    his children to Molech and they fail to put him to death, I
    will set my face against that man and his family and will 
    cut off from their people both him and all who follow him 
    in prostituting themselves to Molech.
  
    (Leviticus 20:1-5; see also 18:21)
  
  The  penalty for sacrifice to Molech is harsh, i.e., stoning
  to death (Lev. 20:2); for it is a  serious  offense  against
  the Lord.
  
  1. It defiles God's sanctuary (Lev. 20:3) and since His holy
  presence  cannot  abide  in  a  place  polluted  by  sin  it
  threatens abandonment by God of His people.
  
  2.  It  profanes God's holy name making God appear less than
  the holy God that He is by inferring that He is  a  God  who
  desires, or at least permits, child sacrifice.
  
  3.  God  knew that the practice of child sacrifice to Molech
  was a form of  spiritual  prostitution  (Lev.  20:5).  God's
  relationship  to  His  people is a close personal one with a
  human analogy in the sexual intimacy of  marriage.  God,  of
  course,  expects  the  exclusive commitment of marriage, not
  the pick-and-choose relationships of prostitution.
  
  4. In Deuteronomy, God through Moses rejects child sacrifice
  even  if  allegedly  done  in the worship and service of God
  Himself (Deut. 12:29-31). In reference  to  the  nations  of
  Canaan  that  Israel  was  about  to  invade  and dispossess
  (12:29)  and  the  worship  of  their  gods  (12:30),  Moses
  commands:
  
    You must not worship the Lord your God in their way 
    because in worshipping their gods, they do all kinds 
    of detestable things the Lord hates. They even burn 
    their sons and daughters in the fire as sacrifices to 
    their gods.
  
    (Deuteronomy 12:31)
  
  With  remarkable  discernment  Moses  recognized  that  such
  unacceptable service can sometimes begin not as a  conscious
  determination  to do ungodly things but as an "ensnaring" by
  other nations and their gods (12:30).
  
  Two of Moses' admonitions against child sacrifice are  found
  in  the  stipulation  section of the loosely covenant treaty
  form of Leviticus 1821  (Lev.  18:21)  and  the  more  rigid
  covenant  treaty  form  of  Deuteronomy 23 (Deut.
  12:29-31). In the covenants made between God and Israel, the
  Lord  expected  His  people  to  obey  the  civil, moral and
  religious stipulations.  His  commands  were  to  be  obeyed
  because  of allegiance to His Lordship and out of a sense of
  gratitude for His great acts of redemption (Lev. 18:2,3  and
  Deut. 5:1,2,6 and 12:1).
  
  Failure  to  obey  the covenantal stipulations is failure to
  give God full allegiance as  Lord  and  failure  to  respond
  appropriately to His gracious acts of redemption.
  
  Disregarding the covenant stipulations is a serious offense,
  some of which, including child sacrifice, are so grievous as
  to  be punished by capital punishment which is to be done by
  the entire community (Lev.  20:2,3).  If  the  offense  goes
  undetected  by  the community, God Himself threatens to "set
  my face against" and "cut off" the offender  (Lev.  20:3)  -
  probably a threat of premature death. 24
  
  So  detestable  to  God  is  child  sacrifice  that  He even
  threatens to set His face against and  cut  off  those  who,
  though  not participants in the practice, "close their eyes"
  to the crime (Lev. 20:4,5). Further, the  warning  not  only
  applied  to  God's  covenant people but to any non-Israelite
  living in Israel (Lev. 20:2). Child sacrifice was not one of
  the  many  tribal  customs  aliens  who lived in Israel were
  permitted to practice.
  
  In these Pentateuchal passages dealing with child  sacrifice
  the  offense  is  recognized  as  a  sin  in  at least three
  different ways. As noted above it was seen as a sin  against
  God,  i.e.  in defiling His sanctuary, in profaning His holy
  name, in spiritual prostituting to  Molech  and  in  ungodly
  worship  of  the  Lord Himself. But child sacrifice was also
  perceived as a sexual sin and/or sin against the  family  as
  well  as  a  sin against the community. In Leviticus 18 (see
  also Lev. 20:9ff) the stipulation against child sacrifice is
  listed  among  various  sexual  sins,  e.g. incest (18:6ff),
  adultery  (18:20),  homosexuality  (18:22)  and   bestiality
  (18:23).  It  is  not  obvious from the immediate context of
  Leviticus 18 and 20 why child sacrifice is linked to various
  illicit  sexual practices. It is probable, however, that the
  worship of Molech not only involved child sacrifice but  the
  pagan   custom  of  cultic  prostitution.  In  Isaiah  57:9,
  "Molech" (Melech in Hebrew. But it must be  remembered  that
  vowel  notation was a later addition by Masorete scholars to
  the received consonantal text). is mentioned. Earlier in the
  chapter  "those  sacrificing  their  children" (57:5b) is in
  parallel with "those burning with lust"  (57:5a).  They  are
  also  described  in  57:3 as "offspring of the adulterer and
  the prostitute." The Hebrew word for adulterer is  masculine
  while  the  prostitute  is  feminine,  indicating  that  the
  children are the offspring of an  adulterous  father  and  a
  prostituting  mother.  But  the  phrase  is  not to be taken
  literally. Rather, the declared attributes  of  the  parents
  are  in fact used to characterize the offspring themselves."
  The  connection   between   child   sacrifice   and   cultic
  prostitution is even clearer in Ezekiel where we read:
  
    And you took your sons and your
    daughters whom you bore to me and sacrificed them as food
    to the idols. Was your prostitution not enough?  You
    slaughtered my children and made them pass through (the 
    fire) to the idols.
                        
    (Ezekiel 16:20,21)
  
  Thus  the  Old Testament scholar Moshe Weinfeld links cultic
  prostitution with child  sacrifice  in  Isaiah  and  Ezekiel
  saying, "The children born of cultic prostitution associated
  with Molech were  presumably  delivered  to  the  idolatrous
  priests,  even  as  the  offspring of a regular marriage may
  have been handed over to Molech." 26  Given  that
  some  of  the  children  offered  to  Molech  were conceived
  illegitimately during  adulterous/prostituting  affairs,  it
  seems probable that child sacrifice offered a convenient way
  to dispose of the  consequences  of  these  aberrant  sexual
  practices.
  
  Another  possible  reason  for grouping child sacrifice with
  illicit sexual practices is that they are all  sins  against
  the  family.  Of the sexual sins listed together in 20:l0ff,
  the Old Testament scholar Walter Kaiser, Jr.,  says:  "Every
  assault  against  an  individual  here  is simultaneously an
  attack on the very existence of the family." 27
  
  Kaiser sees these sexual sins all as sins against the family
  since  they  disrupt  normal  family  relationships.  It  is
  possible then that child sacrifice,  which  was  clearly  an
  assault against the family, came to be associated with other
  stipulations that protected the family. Since the family was
  the  foundation  of  Israelite  society,  any  threat to the
  family was a threat to the  community  as  well.  Thus,  the
  community  was  to  be  vigilant  in  guarding  against  the
  practice and was  to  take  the  severest  community  action
  against any offenders, i.e., stoning to death.
  
  Despite  the  covenantal  stipulations  and warnings against
  child sacrifice, Scripture records that some Israelites  did
  in  fact  practice child sacrifice. Of Ahaz, the 8th century
  B.C. king of Judah, we read:
  
    He walked in the ways of the kings
    of Israel and even made his son pass through the fire,
    following the detestable ways of the nations the Lord
    had driven out before the Israelites. 
  
        (2 Kings 16:3)
  
  Sadly Ahaz's grandson Manasseh followed in his footsteps  (2
  Kings  21:6). But these accounts of child sacrifice were not
  isolated as  recorded  by  Jeremiah  (see  above).  Being  a
  prophet  of God it was Jeremiah's obligation to prosecute on
  behalf of God the covenant lawsuit  against  those  who  had
  broken the covenant. The evidence against the Israelites was
  incontestable for it was publicly visible  to  all.  As  the
  Lord's mouthpiece, Jeremiah testifies against Judah:
  
    They have set up their detestable idols in the house that
    bears my Name and have defiled it They have built the high
    places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn 
    their sons and daughters in the fire - something 1 did not 
    command nor did it enter my mind.
  
       (Jeremiah 7:30,31;  see also 19:4,5)
  
  Because  of  this  offense  for  which Israel is corporately
  responsible,  Jeremiah  predicts   disaster   (7:32-34   and
  19:1-3),  6-15).  If  only the people would repent, disaster
  could be thwarted (Jeremiah  18:5-11).  But  the  Israelites
  were  a  "stiff-necked" people who would not listen to God's
  words (Jer. 9:15; see also  18:12;  cf  18:5-11).  They  had
  forsaken  their  God  to serve other gods even to the extent
  that they would sacrifice their own children  spilling  "the
  blood  of  the  innocent"  (Jer.  19:4). Mannaseh's grandson
  Josiah had  tried  to  bring  about  reformation  among  the
  Israelites.  After renewing the covenant between God and His
  people (2 Kings 23:1-3), Josiah:
  
    desecrated Topheth which was
    in the Valley of Ben Hinnom, so no one could use it
    to make his son or daughter pass through the fire
    to Molech.
  
       (2 Kings 23:10)
  
  But Josiah's reformation was  short-lived  as  evidenced  by
  Jeremiah's  prophetic  witness (see above). God used Rome to
  judge Carthage  in  146  B.C.,  bringing  an  end  to  child
  sacrifice  there. Hundreds of years earlier God used Babylon
  to judge Israel when the  Babylonians  destroyed  Jerusalem,
  leveling God's temple which signified God's just abandonment
  of His people, and  leading  Israel  into  captivity.  While
  exiled  in  Babylon,  Ezekiel  reminded the two prostituting
  sisters Oholah (representing Samaria in  Ezekiel  23:4)  and
  Oholibah  (representing  Jerusalem)  of  the reason they had
  been exiled. In confronting the two with  "their  detestable
  practices" the Lord through Ezekiel said:
  
    they have committed adultery and blood is on their hands. 
    They committed adultery with their idols, they even made 
    the children they bore to me pass through the fire) as 
    food for them.
  
    (Ezekiel 23:36,37)
  
  Idolatry  had  not  disappeared  by New Testament times, but
  took on a broader meaning. Commenting on- the New  Testament
  authors'  understanding  of  idolatry,  Herbert  Schlossberg
  notes that "a man can place anyone or anything at the top of
  his  pyramid  of  values,  and  that  is  ultimately what he
  serves. The ultimacy of that service profoundly affects  the
  way he lives." 28
  
  Physical  idols  were  still  common in New Testament times,
  e.g. I  Corinthians  8:4,5.  However,  in  Pauline  theology
  idolatry  is  also  recognized as any worshipping or serving
  the creature rather than the Creator which is equivalent  to
  exchanging the truth of God for a lie (Romans 1:25 cr 1:23).
  29
  
  Placing  anything  above  the  Creator  and  His  truth   is
  idolatry,  for  in  this  idolatry  the creature's erroneous
  value judgments are substituted for  the  Creator's  correct
  ones.  Sadly,  people know the truth but suppress it (Romans
  1:18). For God has revealed His nature, power and laws  both
  in  the  visible  world and in the hearts and consciences of
  humanity (Romans 1:19,20, 2:14,15).  But  mankind  is  on  a
  downward  spiral  of  depravity  and destruction that begins
  with devaluing the Creator  and  His  truth  and  ultimately
  leads  to  an  outpouring  of  God's just wrath at the final
  judgment (Romans 1:24-32, 2:5,8,9,12). Even now  mankind  is
  experiencing  God's  wrath  as  He  gives  men  over  to the
  consequences of their sin (Romans  1:27,26,28).  Apart  from
  God's  gracious  intervention, all mankind faces the present
  and future revelation of God's just wrath. But as recipients
  of  God's  righteousness  through  faith in Christ Jesus, we
  have been justified  (Romans  1:17,  3:21-28).  Having  been
  justified  by  His grace, our lives must not be conformed to
  his world's idolatrous values  but  be  transformed  by  the
  renewing of our minds to God's perfect will (Romans 12:2).
  
  PARALLELS OF ABORTION AND CHILD SACRIFICE
  
  At  the  risk  on  the  one  hand  of  pointing  out obvious
  parallels and on the  other  hand  of  suggesting  parallels
  which  some  may  say  are  forced,  we  compare the ancient
  practice of child sacrifice  with  the  modern  practice  of
  abortion.  However,  before  going  any further it should be
  noted  that  the  parallels  between  the  two   have   been
  recognized   for   centuries.   Tertullian,   for   example,
  commenting on the Roman practice of infanticide by comparing
  it   to   the   Carthaginian  practice  of  child  sacrifice
  admonishes:
  
    there is no difference as to
    baby killing whether you do it
    as a sacred
    rite or just because you choose to do it.
  
  In the  same  context  Tertullian  describes  the  Christian
  attitude towards both abortion and infanticide saying: 
  
    For us murder is once for all forbidden; so even the child
    in the womb,  while yet the mother's blood is still being
    drawn on to form the human being, it is not lawful to
    destroy. To forbid birth is only quicker murder. It makes
    no difference whether one take away the life once born or
    destroy it as it comes to birth. He is a man, who is  to
    be a man, the fruit is always present in the seed.30
  
                The most obvious parallel between the rite  of
  child  sacrifice  and  the practice of abortion is the sober
  fact that the parents actually  kill  their  own  offspring.
  There are however many other parallels. At Carthage the main
  reason for  sacrificing  a  child  was  to  avert  potential
  dangers  in a crisis or to gain success through fulfilling a
  vow. Today  many  times  when  a  woman  faces  an  unwanted
  pregnancy,  abortion  eems to be the only way to resolve the
  crisis  she  finds  herself  in.  The  potential  danger  to
  reputation, education, career, etc., become overwhelming. To
  avert the seemingly terrifying consequences  of  carrying  a
  pregnancy to term, the woman may turn to abortion as a means
  of escape. Another woman may experience  much  less  of  the
  anxiety and fear that accompany a crisis. She may simply see
  the  pregnancy  as  an  intrusion  into   her   self-serving
  lifestyle  and  an  obstacle  in  the way of the road to her
  success. Sadly this woman's offspring must be sacrificed  so
  that  she  can continue uninterrupted with her plans for the
  future.
  
  It is no secret that in American society extramarital sexual
  intercourse  (fornication and adultery) is the cause of most
  pregnancies that end in abortion. Pregnancy is a  risk  many
  are  willing to take knowing that any undesired consequences
  can be eliminated by abortion. The  theologican  Carl  Henry
  recognizes  this  fact  in  calling abortion "the horrendous
  modern immolation of millions of fetuses on the alter of sex
  gratification.""  As  suggested  earlier, child sacrifice in
  Canaan may have been a convenient  way  to  dispose  of  the
  consequences  of  the  illicit  sexual  practice  of  temple
  prostitution associated with the cult of Molech. If so,  the
  modern  practice  of  men  irresponsibly  engaging in sexual
  intercourse with women to whom they do not intend to  commit
  themselves  and  provide for parallels the wayward Israelite
  man  engaging  in  extramarital  relations  with  a   temple
  prostitute.  In  both  cases the men leave the women to bear
  the consequences of their  aberrant  sexual  practices.  New
  England  Christian  Action  Council  executive director John
  Rankin rightly calls  this  irresponsible  behavior  of  men
  towards   women   as   "the   ultimate   male   chauvinism."
  32
  
  As noted earlier, child sacrifice may have been a  means  of
  population  control at Carthage. At present around the world
  abortion is sanctioned, even encouraged, by  some  societies
  as a means of population control.
  
  In  China,  communist  party  agents  actually  impose great
  social and economic  pressure  on  couples  to  abort  their
  offspring  if  they already have one child. In this country,
  the sanctions are more subtle.  Presumably,  Medicaid-funded
  abortions  afford the poor equal access to medical care, but
  one wonders whether  some  wealthy  policy  makers  hope  to
  control  population growth among the poor under the guise of
  good will. In this there is an intimation of a  parallel  to
  the  Carthaginian  practice of the wealthy buying the poor's
  offspring to sacrifice in place of their own children. Apart
  from  state funding, occasionally both the rich and the poor
  will abort later pregnancies if they feel their families are
  large  enough.  As at Carthage, socioeconomic concerns often
  play a prominent role in the decision.
  
  Sometimes the Carthaginians sacrificed defective children in
  exchange  for  healthy  ones.  It  is  now  standard medical
  practice to  do  an  amniocentesis  at  an  early  stage  of
  pregnancy when congenital abnormalities
  
  are  suspected.  If  an impairment is confirmed, the parents
  are advised to consider terminating the pregnancy. To  carry
  to  term  and raise a defective child is not expected of the
  parents since they can exchange the frail one they now  have
  for   a   healthy   one   in  the  future.  In  some  states
  obstetricians who fail to advise their patients of the  need
  for   an   amniocentesis   can   be  successfully  sued  for
  malpractice on the legal grounds that the delivered  infants
  are "wrongful life." 33
  
  Even  the actual rite of child sacrifice has modem parallels
  in the medical techniques used to perform abortions. In  the
  saline  abortion the dying infant is chemically burned as it
  thrashes  about  for  minutes  to   hours   before   finally
  succumbing.  In  the  suction  abortion the loud whir of the
  vacuum pump muffles the sound of the mother  crying  out  in
  pain  and  sadness  and the ripping and gushing sound of the
  infant being tom piecemeal from the womb.
  
  Finally, the flourishing of abortion in modern America, like
  child  sacrifice  in  ancient Carthage, at the height of its
  civilization is an unmistakable parallel. The words  written
  by  P.  Mosca at the conclusion of his doctoral dissertation
  dealing with  child  sacrifice  might  well  be  written  of
  abortion  today,  ".  . . it is impossible to deal with this
  subject at any length without coming to terms with the human
  dimension:  how  could  a culture so well developed morally,
  intellectually and materially  tolerate  so  'abominable'  a
  custom? How could a sophisticated people sanction what seems
  to be such a barbaric practice for so long a  time?  How  at
  the  most  visceral  and  critical level could human parents
  bring  about  the   destruction   of   their   own   child?"
  34
  
  One  religious  truth  emerges  in  comparing  ancient child
  sacrifice to modem abortion, i.e., people  become  like  the
  gods/God  they  worship.  The Carthaginians worshipped Ba'al
  Hammon, equivalent to Kronos and  Saturn.  Not  surprisingly
  they became like him, willing to sacrifice their children to
  avert  potential  danger   and   gain   success   in   their
  self-serving   endeavors.  Modern  autonomous  man  worships
  himself and is willing to abort his own offspring  in  order
  to  resolve crises and achieve his own goals. In serving the
  idolatrous  self,  men  become  more  and  more   like   the
  self-serving  idol  they  worship, i.e. sinful man. They are
  willing to disregard any of God's gracious laws in order  to
  accomplish  their  own ends. In their self-idolatry men have
  set  themselves  on  a  downward  spiral  of  depravity  and
  destruction from which only God's gracious mercy can deliver
  them.
  
  In contrast to  those  who  worship  themselves,  those  who
  worship  the  holy  God become holy. God sets Himself before
  His people  as  the  standard  of  righteousness,  "Be  holy
  because I the Lord your God am holy" (Lev. 19:2). In serving
  this righteous God, men and women become more and more  like
  Him in righteousness. Of course, even the holy people of God
  have faith not in their own righteousness, but in the saving
  work of their righteous Lord, Jesus Christ.
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  
  Since   there  are  many  parallels  between  ancient  child
  sacrifice and modern abortion, it is reasonable to  conclude
  that  the  attitude  of  our unchanging God towards abortion
  today is similar to His attitude towards child sacrifice  in
  the  past.  What  then  can  we  rationally surmise is God's
  judgment regarding  the  practice  of  abortion  both  among
  Christians and those who are not His people?
  
  Like  child  sacrifice  in  ancient  Israel, the practice of
  abortion by Christians is spiritual prostitution to an idol,
  defiles  God's  sanctuary  and  profanes  His holy name. God
  alone is the Author of life and it  is  not  the  creature's
  prerogative  to question the Creator's wisdom in bringing to
  life a  fellow  human  being  at  conception.  Whenever  men
  disregard  their  Creator's  wise judgment by destroying His
  innocent creation, they are serving another god.  They  are,
  in   fact,   spiritually   prostituting  themselves  to  the
  idolatrous self whom they believe  is  wiser  in  its  value
  judgments.  Some  values  which  are  put forward to justify
  abortion are clearly idolatrous, e.g., the mother's right to
  choose,  which is placed at the top of the pyramid of values
  by those who call themselves  pro-choice.  Other  idolatrous
  values  are  more  subtle,  e.g.,  empathy  for  a  mother's
  suffering in  the  midst  of  the  crisis  arising  from  an
  unwanted  pregnancy  or concern for the quality of life of a
  defective fetus. Both of these  later  values  are  good  in
  themselves  but  become  idolatrous  when  they abrogate the
  Creator's wise judgment in creating human life. It is not as
  though  God  fails  to realize in creating some human beings
  that they may become a source of conflict  in  an  unplanned
  conception  or  that  a  handicapped person will indeed face
  difficulties.
  
  Whenever  Christians  disregard  the  Creator's  true  value
  judgments,  they  dethrone  God  and by their sin defile the
  temple in which He dwells, the temple of their own body (see
  I Corinthians 6:19). Dethroned and defiled by the idolatrous
  sin of abortion, God
  
  threatens to abandon the wayward Christian unless  there  is
  repentance.  For  God  will  not  dwell in a temple in which
  another god is enthroned and a sanctuary  polluted  by  sin.
  And the Christian who approves of or participates in the sin
  of abortion not only affects himself but he  profanes  God's
  holy name. People intuitively know that a man's attitude and
  behavior reflect his values. The Christian claims that God's
  authoritative  Word  determines  his  values. If a Christian
  then speaks or acts in away that is contrary to  that  Word,
  he  brings  dishonor  to God's name. For to those who do not
  know God, the Christian is their chief witness to  the  Word
  of God. And the Christian who approves of or participates in
  the practice of abortion is testifying to the world that his
  God  condones  the  practice. He is in reality bearing false
  witness, for by his attitude and behavior he infers that the
  Creator consents to His creatures destroying innocent fellow
  creatures. This false witness actually implies  through  his
  testimony  that God is at odds with Himself. For in creating
  a human being God has clearly judged it to be of  value.  If
  God  approved  of  abortion,  He would be essentially saying
  that his value judgments are sometimes wrong.
  
  Many Christians who accept or take part in the  practice  of
  abortion have not made a conscious decision to sin and bring
  dishonor to God by condoning idolatrous  values.  Regardless
  of  the  motive,  however, these Christians are unacceptably
  serving  God.  Indeed  God  hates  the  detestable  sin   of
  abortion. For not only is abortion a sin against God and His
  innocent creation but it is a sin  against  the  family  and
  community   as   well.  Scripture  throughout  teaches  that
  children are a  blessing  from  the  Lord  and  that  loving
  nurture  is  the  godly  response  of  parents  toward their
  offspring. Abortion is the rejection of the  God-given  role
  to  parent  His  creation.  For an unmarried woman unable to
  cope with the doubly difficult role of single parenting, the
  child  may  be  God's  gift  through  her to a barren couple
  within the community. Whether God's blessing is received and
  lovingly  nurtured  by  the  biologic  parents  or  given to
  adoptive parents, the birth of a child is a blessing to  the
  family and community.
  
  Often abortion is the evil solution to the consequences of a
  sexual sin. Whether a pregnancy results from fornication  or
  adultery,  where  the  mother is a guilty participant in the
  sin, or a pregnancy results from rape or incest,  where  the
  mother  usually  is  the  guiltless victim of another's sin,
  abortion is an ungodly solution. For the Sovereign  Redeemer
  is  able  to  bring  about  good where there was evil. A new
  creation resulting from a sexual  sin  is  an  extraordinary
  witness to this redemptive truth.
  
  Sadly  many  Christians  refuse  to completely submit to the
  Lordship  of  the  Creator  and  fail  to   appreciate   the
  redemptive  power  of  their  God  to save man from the full
  consequences of sin. The defective fetus is  the  victim  of
  that  original  sin  which  resulted  in  the  fall  of  all
  creation. A mother may be the victim of her own or another's
  sexual  sin  or  the victim of corporate societal sin, e.g.,
  unjust poverty. In all of these situations abortion  has  no
  redeeming  character;  for  God  never deals with sin or its
  consequences  by   countering   it   with   sin   but   with
  righteousness. The unhealthy child should be loved and cared
  for more not less because  of  its  weakness.  The  pregnant
  woman  should  be  counseled  to  do what is right and given
  assistance in every possible way to support a godly decision
  to  nurture in her body God's creation during its first nine
  months of life. Christians must always affirm, both by  word
  and  deed,  the sovereignty of the Creator and recognize His
  power to righteously redeem mankind from the results of sin.
  
  Up to this point we  have  been  trying  to  discover  God's
  attitude   towards   abortion  among  Christians,  based  on
  Scripture's  testimony  of  His   attitude   towards   child
  sacrifice  among  the  Israelites.  We  now  turn  to  God's
  judgment  regarding  abortion  among  those  who   are   not
  Christians  and the Christian response to the practice among
  them.
  
  As previously noted in the theocratic nation of Israel, some
  non-Israelite  customs  were  tolerated and some, like child
  sacrifice, were not. Today God's people in the United States
  do  not  live  in  a  theocracy;  rather,  they  live  in  a
  democratic state. As such, Christians must determine,  based
  on  the  principles  of  God's  law, when they should become
  actively involved in the democratic process to restrict  the
  behavior  of  some  individuals  in  the  interest  of other
  individuals  and  society-at-large  and  when  they   should
  tolerate different values and customs. Abortion is clearly a
  practice which is intolerable and must be restrained by  the
  state.  For  abortion  is  the  denial  of  the  inalienable
  God-given right to life" of an innocent human being  and  it
  is  an  attack  at the very foundation of our society, i.e.,
  the family and community. Even many of  those  who  are  not
  Christians acknowledge that abortion is wrong. For God's law
  is written on the hearts of men and  women  to  which  their
  conscience  bears  witness  (see  Romans  2:14). Others have
  suppressed   God's   truth   by   substituting   their   own
  self-serving idolatrous values. The truth of God's power and
  divinity have been revealed in creation (see Romans 1:18ff).
  But  men  and  women  have  suppressed  this truth and their
  rejection of this revelation of God is  clearly  evident  in
  the  sin of abortion. For scarcely is the power and divinity
  of God more clearly seen than in His creative power bringing
  to  life  each  human being, everyone made in His own divine
  image (see Genesis 1:27). No  man-made  technology  has  the
  power  to  create  life, much less a human life stamped with
  the  divine  imprimatur.   Rather,   through   the   medical
  technology  of  abortion mankind rebels against the creative
  power   of   the   Almighty   by   destroying   the   divine
  image-bearers. No, abortion is not acceptable as practice by
  Christians or non-Christians and must not  be  tolerated  by
  this  or  any  other  society. Those individuals who fail to
  heed God's law by condoning abortion will surely face  God's
  judgment  if  they  remain impenitent. Even those who do not
  condone abortion but fail to take  action  against  it  will
  face judgment. For as noted previously in Leviticus both the
  Israelite who sacrificed his child to Molech and  those  who
  closed  their eyes to the sin faced the judgment of God. And
  if a society as a whole persistently rejects God's  laws  it
  will  surely  corporately  face  God's judgment. The city of
  Carthage and the nation  of  Israel  are  but  two  of  many
  historical  testimonies  to  the  outpouring  of God's wrath
  against unrelenting corporate sin.
  
  Something is happening  in  this  land  which  God  did  not
  command  nor  did  it  enter  His mind - this place is being
  filled with the blood of the innocent. So beware, for  blood
  is  on our hands and God will set his face against us unless
  we repent and are cleansed by his merciful forgiveness.
  
  This is what the Lord says:
  
    Look I am preparing a disaster for you and devising a plan
    against you. So turn from your evil ways, each one of you, 
    and reform your ways and your actions.
  
    (Jeremiah 18:11)
  
  Oh, that we might not respond like ancient Israel.
  
    It is no use. We will continue with our
    own plans, each of us will follow the stubborness
    of his evil heart.
  
    (Jeremiah 18:12)
  
  References
  
  1. Kline, M.G., "Lex Talionis and the Human Fetus,"  Journal
  of the Evangelical Theological Society, 1977, p. 193.
  
  2. Harden, D., The Phoenicians,
  
  1962, p. 88.
  
  3. For translation see Mosca P.G.,
  
  Child  Sacrifice  in Caananite and Israelite Religion, Ph.D.
  dissertation, Harvard University, 1975, p. 22.
  
  4. Stager, LE. and Wolff, S.R., "Child Sacrifice at Carthage
  - Religious Rite or Population Control?",
  
  Biblical Archaelogy Review, Jan./Feb. 1984, p. 45.
  
  5.  Siculus,  Diodorus,  The Library of History, Book XX:14,
  The Loeb Classical Library.
  
  6. Ibid.
  
  7.  Plutarch,  De  superstitione  171,  The  Loeb  Classical
  Library.
  
  8.   Mosca,   P.G.,   op.  cit.,  p.  27,  Mosca  translates
  Kleitarchos' paraphraser from Scholia to Plato's
  
  Republic as follows: "There stands in their midst  a  bronze
  statue  of Kronos, its hands extended over a bronze brazier,
  the flames of which engulf the child. When the  flames  fall
  upon  the  body, the limbs contract and the open mouth seems
  almost to  be  laughing  until  the  contracted  body  slips
  quietly  into  the  brazier.  Thus  it is that the `grin' is
  known as `sardonic laughter,' since they die laughing."
  
  9. de Vaux, R., Studies in Old Testament  Sacrifices,  1964,
  p.  81.  de Vaux says that slaughter preceding the cremation
  "has  been  well  established  by  J.   Guey   in   melanges
  d'archeologic et d'histoire, 1937, pp. 94-99."
  
  10.  Stager,  L.E.  and  Wolff,  S.R., op. cit., pp. 45, 47,
  citing P.G. Mosca's epigraphic work documented in his  Ph.D.
  dissertation op. cit.
  
  11. Siculus, Diodorus, op. cit., See also Plutarch op. cited
  where he says "Those who had  no  children  would  buy  some
  little  ones  from  poor  people and cut their throats as if
  they were so many lambs or young birds."
  
  12. Kennedy, C., "Queries/Comments,"
  
  Biblical Archeologie Review, May/June 1984, p. 20, citing J.
  Feuvier's article "Une Sacrifice d'Enfant chez les Numides,"
  Annuaire de l'Institut de Philogic et d'Histoire  Orientales
  et Slave, 1953.
  
  13. Siculus, Diodorus, op. cit.
  
  14.  Tertullian,  Apologeticus  IX:  4  The  Loeb  Classical
  Library.
  
  15. Hamilton, E., Mythology,
  
  1940, pp. 65, 66.
  
  16. Stager, L.E. and Wolff, S.R., op. cit., pp. 50,51
  
  17. Ibid., pp. 40-42. The archeologic  evidence  to  support
  their  conclusion is the greater proportion of human remains
  to animal remains in the most recent burial urns.
  
  18. Wenham, G.J., The New International  Commentary  on  the
  Old  Testament  - The Book of Leviticus, 1979, p. 259. There
  are text critical problems with I Kings 11:7. It may be that
  
  Milcum should be substituted for Molech in this verse (see I
  Kings 11:5, 33 in Hebrew)
  
  19.  Some  scholars  suggest that some uses of Molech in the
  Old Testament may have originally been used to refer to  the
  live  sacrificial  offerings  like  Punic mulk. e.g., Mosca,
  P.G., op. cited, for summary see conclusions of chapter  two
  and three.
  
  20.  Some  scholars unconvincingly suggest that the "passing
  throught to Molech" was a ritual "passing  through"  without
  active  sacrifice. e.g., Snaith, N.H., "The Cult of Molech,"
  Vetus Testamentum, 1966, vol. 16, pp. 123, 124. For the best
  refutation  of this view see Mosca, P.G., op. cited, esp. p.
  152; also see the Jeremiah passages quoted in this paper.
  
  21. Smith, W.R., Lectures on the Religion  of  the  Semites,
  1901,  p. 377. Note the reference to the fire pit of Topheth
  in Isaiah 30:33.
  
  22. Wenham, G.J., op. cit., p. 249.
  
  23. Kline, M.G., The Treaty of the  Great  King,  1963,  pp.
  79-83.
  
  24. Wenham, G.J., op. cit., pp. 285, 286.
  
  25. Whybray, R.N., Isaiah 40-66: New Century Bible, 1975, p.
  202.
  
  26. Weinfeld, M.,
  
  Ugarit-Forschungen IV,  1972,  p.  144.  Translation  by  P.
  Mosca, op. cited, p. 143.
  
  27. Kaiser, W.C., Jr., Toward Old Testament Ethics, 1983, p.
  124.
  
  28. Schlossberg, H., Idols for Destruction, 1983, p. 6.
  
  29. Romans 1:23 and 1:25b  mutually  inform  each  other  as
  indicated  by the identical Greek verb translated "exchange"
  and parallel sentence structure.
  
  30. Tertullian, Apologeticus IX.- 6,8.
  
  31. Henry, C. in reviewing G. Jone's book Brave New  People,
  1985, see book cover.
  
  32. Rankin, J.C.,
  
  Contrabortion, June 1984, pg. 1.
  
  33.
  
  Schmidt,  S.M.,  "Wrongful  Life,"  Journal  of the American
  Medical Association, Oct. 28, 1983, Vol. 250, pp. 2209-10.
  
  34.
  
  Mosca, P., op. cit., pp. 273, 274.
  
  35.
  
  The Declaration of Independence  of  the  United  States  of
  America, July 4, 1776.
  
  Note: Scripture quotes are the New International Version.
  
  Acknowledgements
  
  Credit  is due to Gary Pratico, Ph.D., for his assistance in
  directing  me  to   extrabiblical   literary   sources   and
  archeologic data regarding child sacrifice.
  
  Credit  is  due to Gordon Hugenberger, Ph.D., candidate, and
  Hilton Terrell, M.D., for grammatical and stylistic help.
  

Freemasonry must die, or liberty must die." -- Charles G. Finney

---

FREEMASONRY IS KABBALISTIC, NOT CHRISTIAN!
VISIT TALMUDUNMASKED.COM FOR MORE INFORMATION.