battle progressed Moabite cities were ruined, good tracts of land were filled with stones, trees were cut down and springs were stopped up. When King Mesha found himself penned up in the city of Kir-hareseth with the battle going against him, he, with seven hundred men, unsuccessfully tried to break through to the king of Edom. Finally he took his firstborn son and offered him up as a burnt sacrifice upon the wall. For this or some other reason there “came to be great indignation against Israel” and the siege was abandoned.—2 Ki. 3:6-27.

As this humiliating defeat did not take place on foreign soil but brought devastation to the land of Moab, reasonably a considerable period of time would have been required for recovery. So it seems likely that it was at an earlier date during Jehoshaphat’s reign that Moab combined with the forces of Ammon and the mountainous region of Seir to attack Judah. By Jehovah’s intervention the three armies turned on one another and destroyed themselves. (2 Chron. 20:1, 22-24) Some scholars believe that this event is alluded to at Psalm 83:4-9.—Compare 2 Chronicles 20:14 with the superscription of Psalm 83.

In subsequent years enmity continued between Moab and Israel. After the death of the prophet Elisha marauding bands of Moabites regularly invaded Israel. (2 Ki. 13:20) About two centuries later, in Jehoiakim’s time, similar Moabite bands contributed to the ruin of Judah during its final years. (2 Ki. 24:2) With the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E. Jews sought refuge in Moab, returning to Judah when Gedaliah was appointed governor.—Jer. 40:11, 12.

After the exile

After an Israelite remnant returned from Babylonian exile in 537 B.C.E. some married Moabite wives. But at Ezra’s admonition they dismissed these wives and their children (Ezra 9:1, 2; 10:10, 11, 44) Nehemiah found a similar situation, many Israelites having taken Moabite wives.—Neh. 13:1-3, 23.

MOAB IN PROPHECY

In harmony with its long history of opposition to Israel, Moab is mentioned among the hard-set enemies of Jehovah’s people. (Compare Isaiah 11:14.) Condemned for reproaching Israel and for pride and haughtiness, Moab was finally to become a desolation like Sodom. (Zeph. 2:8-11; see also Jeremiah 48:29.) Already at the close of the ninth century B.C.E. Amos wrote that Moab would suffer calamity for “burning the bones of the king of Edom for lime.” (Amos 2:1-3) While some take this to mean that 2 Kings 3:26, 27 refers to King Mesha’s offering up, not his own son, but the firstborn of the king of Edom, this is an unlikely inference. One Jewish tradition, though, does link the event mentioned by Amos with the war waged against Mesha and claims that sometime after this conflict the Moabites dug up the bones of the king of Edom and then burned them for lime. But the Bible record provides no basis for determining the time involved.

Isaiah (chaps. 15 and 16), apparently around the time of King Ahaz’s death and while Assyria dominated in the eighth century B.C.E., referred to one Moabite city after another as being in line for calamity. He concluded with the words: “And now Jehovah has spoken, saying: ‘Within three years, according to the years of a hired laborer, the glory of Moab must also be disgraced with much commotion of every sort, and those who remain over will be a trifling few, not mighty.’”—Isa. 16:14.

From historical records the fulfillment of the prophecies of Isaiah and Amos cannot be placed precisely in the stream of time. However, there is evidence that Moab did come under the Assyrian yoke. Assyrian King Tiglath-pileser III mentions Salamanu of Moab among those paying tribute to him. Sennacherib claims to have received tribute from Kammusunadbi the king of Moab. And Assyrian monarchs Esar-haddon and Ashurbanipal refer to Moabite Kings Musuri and Kamashaltu as being subject to them. There is also archaeological evidence that many places in Moab were depopulated about the eighth century B.C.E.

Jeremiah’s prophecy of the seventh century B.C.E. pointed to the time when Jehovah would hold an accounting against Moab (Jer. 9:25, 26), doing so by means of the Babylonians under King Nebuchadnezzar. (Jer. 25:8, 9, 17-21; 27:1-7) Numerous Moabite cities were to be reduced to a desolation. (Jer. chap. 48) Apparently when Judah experienced the execution of Jehovah’s judgment by means of the Babylonians, the Moabites said: “Look! The house of Judah is like all the other nations.” For thus failing to recognize that the judgment was really God’s and that the inhabitants of Judah were his people, the Moabites were to experience disaster and thereby ‘come to know Jehovah.’—Ezek. 25:8-11; compare Ezekiel 24:1, 2.

The Jewish historian Josephus writes that, in the fifth year after desolating Jerusalem, Nebuchadnezzar returned to war against Coelesyria, Ammon and Moab and thereafter attacked Egypt. (Antiquities of the Jews, Book X, chap. IX, par. 7) Regarding archaeological confirmation of the desolation of Moab, The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (Vol. 3, p. 418) observes: “Archaeological exploration has shown that Moab was largely depopulated from ca. the beginning of the sixth century, and in many sites from ca. the eighth century. From the sixth century on, nomads wandered through the land until political and economic factors made sedentary life possible again in the last centuries B.C.”—Compare Ezekiel 25:8-11.

Later, in fulfillment of Jeremiah 48:47, Cyrus, the conqueror of Babylon, likely permitted Moabite exiles to return to their homeland.

The accurate fulfillment of the prophecies concerning Moab cannot be denied. Centuries ago the Moabites ceased to exist as a people. Today what are considered to have been such Moabite cities as Nebo, Heshbon, Aroer, Beth-gamul and Baal-meon are represented by ruins. Many other places are now unknown.

The sole explanation for the disappearance of the Moabites as a people is provided by the Bible. Noted the Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed., Vol. XVIII, p. 632): “Israel remained a great power in religious history while Moab disappeared. It is true that Moab was continuously hard pressed by desert hordes; the exposed condition of the land is emphasized by the chains of ruined forts and castles which even the Romans were compelled to construct. The explanation of the comparative insignificance of Moab, however, is not to be found in purely topographical considerations. Nor can it be sought in political history, since Israel and Judah suffered as much from external movements as Moab itself. The explanation is to be found within Israel itself, in factors . . . to be found in the work of the prophets.”

In view of the disappearance of the Moabites as a people, the inclusion of Moab at Daniel 11:41 among nations in the “time of the end” (Dan. 11:40) is logically to be regarded in a figurative sense. Seemingly the Moabites represent hard-set enemies of spiritual Israel.

MOADIAH

(Mo·a·diʹah) [Jehovah summons, or, perhaps, assembly of Jehovah].

A priestly paternal house of which Piltai was the head in the days of Joiakim. (Neh. 12:12, 17) It has been suggested that “Moadiah” is a variation of the name “Maadiah” and that Moadiah is the same person as the priest Maadiah who accompanied Zerubbabel to Jerusalem after the Babylonian exile.—Neh. 12:1, 5.

MODESTY

[Heb. tsa·nuʹaʽ; Gr., ai·dosʹ].

These terms are effectively rendered by the English “modesty.” (Prov. 11:2; Mic. 6:8; 1 Tim. 2:9) Tsa·nuʹaʽ conveys the idea of one who is retiring, modest or humble. (A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament by Brown, Driver and Briggs, p. 857) Ai·dosʹ used in a moral sense expresses the thought of reverence, awe or respect for the feeling or opinion of others or for one’s own conscience and so expresses shame, self-respect, a sense of honor, sobriety and moderation. (A Greek-English Lexicon by Liddell and Scott, p. 36) Comparing ai·dosʹ with the more common Greek word for “shame” (ai·skhyʹne; 1 Cor. 1:27; Phil. 3:19), lexicographer Trench is quoted as saying that ai·dosʹ is “the nobler word, and implies the nobler motive: in it is involved an innate moral repugnance to the doing of the dishonourable act, which moral repugnance scarcely or not at all exists in aischune.” He states that “aidos would always restrain a good man from an unworthy act, aischune would sometimes restrain a bad one.” (W. E. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Vols. I, p. 78; IV, p. 17) Thus, the conscience is especially involved in the restraining effect implied in ai·dosʹ.

BEFORE GOD

With regard to modesty, in the sense of a proper estimate of one’s own self, the Scriptures give much counsel. “Wisdom is with the modest ones,” says the proverb. This is because the person manifesting modesty avoids the dishonor that accompanies presumptuousness or boastfulness. (Prov. 11:2) He is following the course approved by Jehovah and is therefore wise. (Prov. 3:5, 6; 8:13, 14) Jehovah loves and grants to such one wisdom. One of the requirements for gaining Jehovah’s favor is ‘to be modest in walking with him.’ (Mic. 6:8) This involves a proper appreciation of one’s position before God, recognizing one’s sinful state as contrasted with Jehovah’s greatness, purity and holiness. It would also mean that one should recognize himself as a creature of Jehovah, altogether dependent on Him and subject to His sovereignty. Eve was one who failed to appreciate this. She stepped out for complete independence and self-determination. Modesty would have helped her to dismiss from her mind the thought of becoming “like God, knowing good and bad.” (Gen. 3:4, 5) The apostle counsels against overconfidence and presumptuousness, saying, “Keep working out your own salvation with fear and trembling.”—Phil. 2:12.

IN WHAT TO BOAST

Boastfulness is the opposite of modesty. The rule is: “May a stranger, and not your own mouth, praise you; may a foreigner, and not your own lips, do so.” (Prov. 27:2) Jehovah’s own words are: “Let not the wise man brag about himself because of his wisdom, and let not the mighty man brag about himself because of his mightiness. Let not the rich man brag about himself because of his riches. But let the one bragging about himself brag about himself because of this very thing, the having of insight and the having of knowledge of me, that I am Jehovah, the One exercising loving-kindness, justice and righteousness in the earth; for in these things I do take delight.”—Jer. 9:23, 24; compare Proverbs 12:9; 16:18, 19.

GOD’S REGARD FOR MODEST ONES

The apostle Paul shows God’s regard for the modest ones and also cites his own conduct in the congregation as exemplary of such modest attitude. He wrote to the Christians at Corinth: “For you behold his calling of you, brothers, that not many wise in a fleshly way were called, not many powerful, not many of noble birth; but God chose the foolish things of the world, that he might put the wise men to shame; and God chose the weak things of the world, that he might put the strong things to shame; and God chose the ignoble things of the world and the things looked down upon, the things that are not, that he might bring to nothing the things that are, in order that no flesh might boast in the sight of God. . . . just as it is written: ‘He that boasts, let him boast in Jehovah.’ And so I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come with an extravagance of speech or of wisdom declaring the sacred secret of God to you. For I decided not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ, and him impaled. And I came to you in weakness and in fear and with much trembling; and my speech and what I preached were not with persuasive words of wisdom but with a demonstration of spirit and power, that your faith might be, not in men’s wisdom, but in God’s power.”—1 Cor. 1:26–2:5.

‘DO NOT GO BEYOND THE THINGS WRITTEN’

Later in Paul’s letter, he emphasized the need for modesty on the part of all, just as he himself had displayed modesty, a proper evaluation of himself. The Corinthians had fallen into the trap of boasting in certain men, such as Apollos, and even in Paul himself. Paul corrected them, telling them that they were fleshly, not spiritual, in doing this, and said: “Now, brothers, these things I have transferred so as to apply to myself and Apollos for your good, that in our case you may learn the rule: ‘Do not go beyond the things that are written’ [that is, do not go beyond the limits that the Scriptures set for humans in their attitude toward one another and toward themselves], in order that you may not be puffed up individually in favor of the one against the other. For who makes you to differ from another? Indeed, what do you have that you did not receive? If, now, you did indeed receive it, why do you boast as though you did not receive it?” Keeping this in mind will prevent haughtiness and boastfulness in regard to oneself or another as to family descent, race, color or nationality, physical beauty, ability, knowledge, mental brilliance, and so forth.—1 Cor. 4:6, 7.

JESUS CHRIST’S EXAMPLE

Jesus Christ is the finest example of modesty. He told his disciples that he could not do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beheld the Father doing, and that his Father is greater than he is. (John 5:19, 30; 14:28) Jesus refused to accept titles not due him. When a ruler called him “Good Teacher,” Jesus replied: “Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God.” (Luke 18:18, 19) And he told his disciples that, as slaves to Jehovah, they should not feel puffed up over things accomplished in his service, or because of their worth to God. Rather, they should have the attitude, when they had done all the things assigned to them, that “we are good-for-nothing slaves. What we have done is what we ought to have done.”—Luke 17:10.

Additionally, the Lord Jesus Christ, when a perfect man on earth, was superior to his imperfect disciples and also possessed great authority from his Father. Yet he was modest in dealing with his disciples, considerate of their limitations. He employed delicacy in training them and propriety of speech toward them. He did not put upon them more than they could bear at the time.—John 16:12; compare Matthew 11:28-30; 26:40, 41.

IN DRESS AND OTHER POSSESSIONS

In instructing the overseer Timothy as to seeing that proper conduct was observed in the congregation, Paul said: “I desire the women to adorn themselves in well-arranged dress, with modesty and soundness of mind, not with styles of hair braiding and gold or pearls or very expensive garb, but in the way that befits women professing to reverence God, namely, through good works.” (1 Tim. 2:9, 10) Here the apostle does not counsel against neatness and good, pleasing appearance, for he recommends “well-arranged dress.” But he shows the impropriety of vanity and ostentatiousness in dress—calling attention to oneself or to one’s means of life thereby. Also modesty as relating to respect for the feeling of others and to self-respect and a sense of honor is involved. The Christian’s manner of dress should not be shocking to decency, to the moral susceptibilities of the congregation, causing offense to some. This counsel as to dress would give further light on Jehovah’s attitude toward the proper view and use of other material possessions that a Christian may have.—See HUMILITY.

MOLADAH

(Mo·laʹdah) [birth, origin].

One of the cities in southern Judah allotted to Simeon. Moladah remained in the hands of this tribe at least down till David’s reign. (Josh. 15:21, 26; 19:1, 2; 1 Chron. 4:24, 28, 31) After the exile Judeans resettled the site.—Neh. 11:25, 26.

Tell el-Milh, about fourteen miles (22 kilometers) E-SE of Beer-sheba, is often presented as a possible identification for Moladah.

MOLECH

(Moʹlech) [probably, meʹlekh (king) with the vowels of boʹsheth (shame) to denote abhorrence; possibly the same as Malcham (Jer. 49:1, 3; Zeph. 1:5), Moloch (Acts 7:43; compare Amos 5:26), Malcam (2 Sam. 12:30; 1 Chron. 20:2) and Milcom (1 Ki. 11:5, 33)].

A deity particularly associated with the Ammonites. (1 Ki. 11:5, 7, 33) At Jeremiah 32:35, Molech is referred to in parallel with Baal, suggesting, if not an identification, at least some connection between the two. Numerous authorities regard “Molech” as a title rather than the name of a specific deity, and, therefore, the thought has been advanced that the designation “Molech” may have been applied to more than one god.

It is generally agreed that the Malcam referred to at 2 Samuel 12:30 and 1 Chronicles 20:2 is the idol image of the Ammonite god Milcom or Molech, although the Hebrew term could be rendered “their king.” (Compare AV; AS.) Earlier in the Biblical account the Ammonite king is referred to by his name “Hanun” (2 Sam. 10:1-4); hence, it is reasonable to conclude that the name “Hanun” rather than “Malcam” would have appeared in the Scriptural record if the king rather than the idol were intended. Also, it is thought unlikely that a king would have worn a crown weighing about seventy-five pounds (c. 34 kilograms). For the same reason it has been suggested that David placed Malcam’s crown on his head only temporarily, perhaps to denote his victory over the false god. According to the reading of the Targum, which has been adopted by numerous translators, the crown had only one precious jewel. This has given rise to the view that it was the precious jewel, rather than the crown itself, that came to be on David’s head.

CHILD SACRIFICE TO MOLECH

God’s law to Israel prescribed the death penalty for anyone, even an alien resident, who would give his offspring to Molech. (Lev. 20:2-5) Nonetheless, apostate Israelites, both in the kingdom of Judah and in the ten-tribe kingdom, passed their offspring through the fire.—2 Ki. 17:17, 18; Ezek. 23:4, 36-39.

The ‘passing through the fire’ to Molech has been regarded by some as signifying a purification ritual by means of which children were devoted or dedicated to Molech; others understand this to mean actual sacrificing. That the Canaanites and apostate Israelites did sacrifice their children there can be no question. (Deut. 12:31; Ps. 106:37, 38) King Ahaz of Judah “proceeded to burn up his sons [son, Syriac Peshitta Version] in the fire.” (2 Chron. 28:3) The parallel passage, at 2 Kings 16:3, reads: “Even his own son he made pass through the fire.” This indicates that ‘passing through the fire’ is at least sometimes synonymous with sacrificing. Likely, however, the worship of Molech was not always and everywhere the same. For example, King Solomon, under the influence of his foreign wives, built high places to Molech and other deities, but not until the time of Ahaz is mention made of child sacrifice. (1 Ki. 11:7, 8) Undoubtedly if this abhorrent practice had existed earlier, it would have been denounced along with the other forms of idolatry existing during the reigns of the various kings. For this reason some commentators favor the view that the expression ‘to pass through the fire’ originally applied to a purification ritual and later came to signify actual sacrifice.

The “passing” to Molech mentioned at Leviticus 18:21 (NW ftn., 1953 ed.) evidently refers to devoting or dedicating children to this false god. This text has been variously translated: “You must not dedicate any of your children to the service of Molech.” (AT) “Thou shalt not give any of thy seed to make them pass through the fire to Molech.” (AS) “Thou shalt not give any of thy seed to be consecrated to the idol Moloch.” (Dy) “You must not allow the devoting of any of your offspring to Molech.”—NW.

Ahaz and Manasseh are the only Judean kings referred to as making their offspring pass through the fire. However, with the impetus given by these two kings to child sacrifice, the practice apparently became entrenched among the Israelites in general. (2 Ki. 16:3; 21:6; Jer. 7:31; 19:4, 5; 32:35; Ezek. 20:26) The children, at least at times, were first killed, rather than being burned alive.—Ezek. 16:20, 21.

King Josiah defiled Topheth, the chief center of Molech worship in Judah, in order to prevent anyone from making his offspring pass through the fire. (2 Ki. 23:10-13) But this did not eradicate the practice for all time. Ezekiel, who began serving as a prophet about fifteen years after the death of Josiah, mentions it as occurring in his day.—Ezek. 20:31.

The view has been advanced that the Molech to whom children were sacrificed had the form of a man but the head of a bull. The image is said to have been heated red hot and the children cast into its outstretched arms, thus to fall into the flaming furnace below. This conception is largely based on the description of the Carthaginian Kronos or Moloch given by the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus of the first century B.C.E.

MOLE RAT

This translates the Hebrew word hhoʹledh, and the animal that it designates was unclean for food. (Lev. 11:29) Although numerous translations render hhoʹledh as “weasel” (AS, AV, RS), there is a basis for preferring “mole rat.” In Arabic, a language related to Hebrew, a very similar word, khuld, means “mole rat.” Also, hhoʹledh may be related to a post-Biblical Hebrew term signifying “dig” or “hollow out.” This would harmonize with the mole rat’s characteristic digging.

The mole rat is a rodent measuring eight inches (c. 20 centimeters) or more in length. It resembles a short-legged, tailless and neckless cylindrical lump of soft, thick fur, generally a yellowish gray-brown color. The head is recognizable by the furless muzzle and two pairs of large protruding teeth.

Mole rats live in underground communities and dig subterranean sleeping quarters and large storage chambers. These creatures subsist on vegetable matter, primarily on roots and bulbs. Thus they differ from true moles, which feed on insects and earthworms, and are not considered native to Palestine.

MOLID

(Moʹlid) [begetter].

A man of Judah and descendant of Hezron through Jerahmeel. Molid was the son of Abishur by his wife Abihail.—1 Chron. 2:4, 5, 9, 25-29.

MOLTEN SEA

(or, Copper Sea).

When the temple was constructed during Solomon’s reign, a “molten sea” replaced the portable basin of copper used with the earlier tabernacle. (Ex. 30:17-21; 1 Ki. 7:23, 40, 44) Built by Hiram, a Hebrew-Phoenician, it was evidently called a “sea” because of the large quantity of water it could contain. This vessel, also of copper, was “ten cubits [c. 14.6 feet or 4.4 meters] from its one brim to its other brim, circular all around; and its height was five cubits [c. 7.3 feet or 2.2 meters], and it took a line of thirty cubits [44 feet or 13.4 meters] to circle all around it.”—1 Ki. 7:23.