What historical evidence supports the practices mentioned in Psalm 106:37? Text and Immediate Context Psalm 106:37 : “They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to demons.” Verse 38 continues, “They poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was polluted with blood.” The psalmist is recounting Israel’s historic slide into the Canaanite rite of child sacrifice (“mōlek/milkom” worship, Topheth cult), a practice repeatedly condemned in the Torah and the Prophets (Leviticus 18:21; 20:2-5; Deuteronomy 12:31; 2 Kings 16:3; 21:6; Jeremiah 7:31; Ezekiel 16:20-21). Biblical Corroboration Across the Canon The identical practice is documented in multiple strata of Scripture: • Pre-monarchic: Israel warned (Leviticus 18:21). • Monarchy: Ahaz “made his son pass through the fire” (2 Kings 16:3). • Late monarchy: Manasseh (2 Kings 21:6), Judah (Jeremiah 7:30-32). • Exilic/Early post-exilic reflection: Psalm 106, Ezekiel 16:20-21. Consistency across legal, prophetic, narrative, and poetic genres demonstrates unanimous Scriptural testimony. Ancient Near Eastern Textual Evidence 1. Ugarit (14th c. BC): Tablets KTU 1.65 and 1.91 list human offerings, including firstborn sons, to please deities in crisis. 2. Phoenician-Punic stelae (7th–2nd c. BC): Inscriptions from Carthage, Motya, and Nora explicitly record mlk-offerings “to our lord Baal-Hammon and to our lady Tanit.” 3. Neo-Assyrian annals: Ashurbanipal’s campaign reports mention “ritually burning their children” by conquered Arabian tribes, paralleling the biblical fire motif. Classical Literary Testimony • Diodorus Siculus, Library 20.14 (1st c. BC): “…in a bronze statue of Cronus, children were placed upon the outstretched hands and rolled into the gaping furnace below.” • Plutarch, De Superstitione 13 (c. AD 100): “The Phoenicians, even to our day, sacrifice their newborns.” • Philo of Byblos (preserved by Eusebius, Prep. Evang. 1.10): details Canaanite fathers offering firstborn to Baal. These independent Greco-Roman observers locate the rite in the same cultural sphere Scripture names (Phoenicia/Canaan). Archaeological Corroboration 1. Tophet of Carthage (Salammbo). • 18,000+ urns (8th–2nd c. BC) containing cremated remains of infants—average age 2–3 months. • Carbonized bone under 800 °C; charcoal residue; animal bones in substitute “vow-redeemed” deposits exactly paralleling Leviticus 27:9-10 substitution laws. 2. Tophets at Motya (Sicily), Sant’ Antioco & Nora (Sardinia), and Tas-Silġ (Malta). • Identical urn, stela, and mlk-inscription profile links back to mother-city Tyre/Sidon, confirming regional continuity with biblical Canaan. 3. Gezer High Place (Level III, 14th–13th c. BC). • Excavator R. A. S. Macalister uncovered 150 urns beneath masseboth (standing stones) with infant bones and burn marks. 4. Lachish (Stratum III, Judean monarchy). • Infant skeletons found in foundation deposits, some calcined, contemporaneous with Ahaz/Hezekiah era. 5. Jerusalem’s “Valley of Ben-Hinnom” (Topheth). • 7th–6th c. BC ceramic jars with infant remains and extensive ash layers; site fits Jeremiah’s geographic polemic (Jeremiah 7:31). Forensic and Osteological Studies Harvard team (P. Smith & L. Stager, 2018) analyzed Carthage long-bone growth plates, confirming purposeful perinatal killing, not mere infant mortality burial. Elevated strontium isotopes align with intentional burning rather than natural cremation. Synchronism With the Biblical Timeline • Earliest Tophet levels begin c. 800 BC, precisely when Kings/Chronicles record Judah’s relapse. • Peak Carthaginian use c. 400 BC corresponds to Phoenician diaspora, explaining persistence after Israel’s exile. Addressing Skeptical Alternatives Claim: Urns equal infant cemeteries. Response: • Uniform cremation, specialized “sacred precinct” location, votive inscriptions, and absence of older children/adults contradict ordinary burial customs. • Animal-for-child substitution urns (lamb or kid bones) fit Levitical redemption pattern, not secular burial. Ethical and Theological Implications The stark horror of child sacrifice frames: 1. God’s holiness—absolute prohibition (Leviticus 20:2-5). 2. God’s mercy—He substituted Himself: “Christ… was delivered over for our trespasses” (Romans 4:25). 3. Modern application—valuing all human life, confronting contemporary equivalents that devalue the unborn. Conclusion Multiple, mutually reinforcing lines—biblical texts, cognate ancient literature, epigraphic formulae, classical historians, and targeted archaeological sites—validate that the child-sacrifice rituals condemned in Psalm 106:37 were practiced historically exactly where and when Scripture says they were. The convergence of data affirms the Bible’s accuracy, vindicates the prophetic warnings, and magnifies the God who abhors the shedding of innocent blood and offers redemptive grace through the once-for-all sacrifice of His Son. |
    |