as to biblical references to this.
Amos 5 (KJB)
21 I hate, I despise your feast days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies.
22 Though ye offer me burnt offerings and your meat offerings, I will not accept them: neither will I regard the peace offerings of your fat beasts.
23 Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs; for I will not hear the melody of thy viols.
24 But let judgment run down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream.
25 Have ye offered unto me sacrifices and offerings in the wilderness forty years, O house of Israel?
26 But ye have borne the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun your images, the star of your god, which ye made to yourselves.
27 Therefore will I cause you to go into captivity beyond Damascus, saith the Lord, whose name is The God of hosts.
The Meaning of the word (note ive made bold the item i wish to point out, which is focused around Saturn, FYI Jehovah corresponds Saturn)
By: Morris Jastrow, Jr., George A. Barton
A word occurring in connection with “Siccuth” in Amos v. 26. Scholars have long been puzzled to know whether in this passage they are common nouns or proper names. “Siccuth” is probably the Assyrian “Sakkut” (Schrader, “K. A. T.” pp. 442 et seq.), an epithet of Ninib and Anu. Ninib was identified with Saturn (Jensen, “Kosmologie,” p. 136), the Assyrian name of which was “Kaiman” (“Kaiwan”). The Septuagint and Syriac readings give ground for holding that originally stood in the Hebrew text in place of (compare Barton, “Studies of Oriental Club of Philadelphia,” p. 113; and Nowack, “Kleine Propheten,” p. 143), the pointing of the latter being a Masoretic distortion on the pattern of (“abomination”). “Sakkut” and “Kaiwan” occur together in Rawlinson, “Inscriptions of Western Asia,” iv. pl. 52, col. 4, line 9, in a list of epithets (compare Zimmern, “Beitr. zur Kenntniss der Babylonischen Religion,” i. 10). Probably they were introduced together here through Babylonian influence in a verse regarded by Wellhausen (“Kleine Propheten,” ad loc.) and Nowack, on the basis of II Kings xvii. 30, as a gloss. Budde (“Religion of Israel to the Exile,” pp. 67 et seq.) regards the verse as genuine, and the Babylonian influence as potent in the wilderness. Reuss and W. R. Smith (“Old Testament and the Jewish Church,” 2d ed., p. 294) translate the two words as common nouns and find no trace of foreign worship in the verse, which they regard as genuine. This view is not so probable as the other.
there are many subjects to the Bible narrative, one simply has to question, like the exodus story or what was moses doing at the Hathor Temple in Serabit el-Khadim, why did they “burn” down pure gold, to then grind down to powder form to then eat?
why is the God of the NT so much more kinder and completely diametrically opposed to that OT God, what about the Hebrews worship of the female Goddess Asherah, yahweh female counterpart.
note in the coming weeks, i will post religion book section, which some of the greatest work’s by protestants, works concerning the jesuits, popery, etc
hope you’s are ready for some learning.