Welcome back to our spiritual journey through the Scriptures. Today, we're diving into one of the most perplexing and enigmatic passages in the Old Testament: Exodus 4:24-26. Often referred to as a "textual riddle" by scholars, this brief episode interrupts the grand narrative of Moses' call to lead Israel out of Egypt. It raises profound questions about God's intentions, human obedience, and the deep symbolism embedded in ancient rituals. As we exegete this text using the English Standard Version (ESV), we'll highlight key Hebrew words and phrases, explore their meanings, and draw spiritual lessons for our lives today. Why would God, having just commissioned Moses as His chosen deliverer, seemingly turn against him? And what on earth does "bridegroom of blood" signify? Let's unpack this step by step, seeking wisdom from the original language and historical context, while reflecting on how it points to God's relentless pursuit of covenant faithfulness.
To set the stage, recall the broader context. In Exodus 4, God has appeared to Moses at the burning bush, overcoming his objections and equipping him with signs and wonders. God even appoints Aaron as Moses' spokesman to ease his fears. As Moses heads back to Egypt with his family, his wife Zipporah and their sons, God reminds him of the mission: "And the Lord said to Moses, 'When you go back to Egypt, see that you do before Pharaoh all the miracles that I have put in your power. But I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go. Then you shall say to Pharaoh, "Thus says the Lord, Israel is my firstborn son, and I say to you, 'Let my son go that he may serve me.' If you refuse to let him go, behold, I will kill your firstborn son" (Exodus 4:21-23, ESV).
Then, abruptly, we encounter verses 24-26: "At a lodging place on the way, the Lord met him and sought to put him to death. Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son's foreskin and touched Moses' feet with it and said, 'Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me!' So he let him alone. It was then that she said, 'A bridegroom of blood,' because of the circumcision" (ESV).
At first glance, this seems incoherent. God has just empowered Moses for a divine mission, so why threaten his life now? The placement feels odd, sandwiched between God's instructions and Moses' reunion with Aaron. Scholars like John Durham in his Word Biblical Commentary note that this "digression" underscores a critical theme: obedience to God's covenant must precede any great work. Spiritually, it reminds us that God's call isn't a free pass; it demands personal holiness and alignment with His commands. As we delve deeper, we'll see how this episode foreshadows the Passover, where blood averts death, pointing ultimately to Christ, our ultimate "bridegroom of blood" who redeems us through His sacrifice.
The Ambiguities: Who Did God Seek to Kill, and Why?
Let's begin our exegesis by addressing the first significant uncertainty: Who is the "him" that the Lord "met" and "sought to put to death"? The ESV, like most translations, assumes it's Moses, as he's the central figure in the narrative. However, the Hebrew text is ambiguous, using only pronouns: "the Lord met him (wayyipgəšēhû) and sought (wayəbaqqēš) to put him to death (ləhămitô)." The verb "met" (pāgaš) implies a confrontational encounter, often hostile in the Old Testament (e.g., Genesis 32:1; Exodus 5:3). "Sought to put him to death" (biqqēš ləmîtô) conveys intent but not completion; God is pressing a point, not arbitrarily executing.
Could the target be Moses' son, Gershom (mentioned in Exodus 2:22)? After all, it's the son's foreskin that's circumcised in verse 25. Some interpreters argue this, suggesting God's anger targets the uncircumcised child as a symbol of covenant neglect. However, the broader context favors Moses. He's the protagonist, the one resisting God's call earlier (Exodus 4:13-14). Gershom is peripheral, barely mentioned. As Durham observes, "Moses is the center of Yahweh’s attention everywhere else." Spiritually, this highlights how leaders bear responsibility for their households. God's confrontation with Moses echoes the principle in 1 Timothy 3:4-5, which states that one must manage their family well to lead God's people.
Why the anger? The text doesn't explicitly state this, but the inference points to circumcision, the covenant sign instituted in Genesis 17:9-14. Abraham's descendants must bear this mark, or be "cut off" from the people (kārat, the same verb used for "cut off" the foreskin in verse 25). Moses, born in Egypt under Pharaoh's genocidal edict (Exodus 1-2), may never have been properly circumcised. His parents hid him to save his life; revealing him as Hebrew via circumcision could have been fatal. Raised in Pharaoh's court, he might have undergone Egyptian-style circumcision, a partial slit, not full removal, as evidenced by archaeology and Egyptology.
This ties into Joshua 5:2-9 (ESV): "At that time the Lord said to Joshua, 'Make flint knives and circumcise the sons of Israel a second time.' So Joshua made flint knives and circumcised the sons of Israel at Gibeath-haaraloth... For all the people who came out had been circumcised, but all the people who were born on the way in the wilderness after they had come out of Egypt had not been circumcised... And the Lord said to Joshua, 'Today I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from you.'" The "second time" (šēnît) suggests the first circumcision, for those born in Egypt, was inadequate, perhaps Egyptian-style. Scholars like Jack Sasson (in JBL 85, 1966) argue Egyptian circumcision was partial, performed on adults, and possibly imported from Syria. Thus, it didn't fulfill God's command for complete removal (Genesis 17:11: "You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins").
If Moses bore this "reproach of Egypt" (Joshua 5:9), God demands correction before he leads Israel. Having lived in Midian, where Zipporah's Kenite/Midianite kin likely knew Yahweh and practiced circumcision (as her quick action shows), Moses had ample opportunity. His neglect? Perhaps resistance, mirroring his earlier excuses. God won't let His deliverer enter Egypt unmarked by the covenant. Spiritually, this challenges us: Are there "reproaches" from our past, unresolved sins or compromises, that God insists we address before advancing in His purposes? Like Moses, we might flee our "Egypt" (bondage), but God calls us back transformed.
Zipporah's Heroic Act: The Circumcision and the Touch
Enter Zipporah, Moses' Midianite wife (Exodus 2:21). In verse 25: "Then Zipporah took a flint (ṣôr) and cut off (wattikrōt) her son's foreskin (ʿorlat benāh) and touched (wattaggaʿ) Moses' feet (raglāyw) with it." The "flint" or sharp stone recalls Joshua 5:2, emphasizing ritual purity over metal tools. "Cut off" (kārat) echoes the covenant-cutting in Genesis 17, symbolizing separation unto God.
The ambiguity persists: Whose son? The Hebrew says "her son," likely Gershom, the elder (Exodus 2:22; 18:3 mentions Eliezer, but context favors one child here). Why circumcise the son if Moses is the issue? And what about "touched his feet"? The ESV inserts "Moses'" for clarity, but Hebrew reads "touched his feet" (raglāyw), the pronoun could refer to Moses, the son, or even the Lord (though unlikely).
Crucially, "feet" (raglayim) is a Hebrew euphemism for genitals in several contexts. Deuteronomy 28:57 speaks of afterbirth coming "from between her feet" (mibbên ragleyhā), clearly the birth canal. Ezekiel 16:25 describes prostitution as "spreading your feet (pissēq raglayik)" to passersby, exposing genitals. Ruth 3:4,7 has Ruth "uncovering his feet (margəlōtāyw)" while Boaz sleeps, a subtle marriage proposal involving exposure. As Durham notes, this euphemism fits perfectly: Zipporah isn't tossing the foreskin at literal feet (odd and unhygienic); she's symbolically transferring the circumcision to Moses' genitals.
This act isn't standard ritual, it's improvisational, a "proxy circumcision." Moses couldn't be circumcised now; it would incapacitate him (Genesis 34:25 shows men weakened post-circumcision), delaying the urgent mission. God wants Moses in Egypt immediately (Exodus 4:27-28 shows Aaron en route). So Zipporah circumcises Gershom, less disruptive, as the child isn't central to the trip, and applies the bloody foreskin to Moses, atoning by association. Verse 26: "So he let him alone" (wayyirpef mimmennû), God relents (rāpâ, to slacken or withdraw). Spiritually, Zipporah emerges as a heroine, interceding like a priest. Her Midianite background (linked to Kenites, Yahweh-worshipers per Judges 1:16) equips her with knowledge of the rite. This foreshadows women's roles in salvation history, as seen in Rahab or Mary, and reminds us that God uses unlikely agents to fulfill His covenant.
The Bridegroom of Blood: Symbolism and Spiritual Depth
Now, the cryptic declaration: "Surely you are a bridegroom of blood (ḥătan-dāmîm) to me!" (verse 25), repeated in verse 26: "A bridegroom of blood, because of the circumcision (lammûlōt)." The phrase "bridegroom of blood" (ḥătan dāmîm) is unique, combining ḥātan (son-in-law or bridegroom, implying a marital alliance) with dām (blood, often referring to sacrificial blood).
Scholars like Terence Mitchell trace this to ancient Near Eastern customs where circumcision was a pre-marital rite, ensuring covenant fidelity. In Israel, it marked males as Yahweh's from infancy (Genesis 17:12), thereby preventing intermarriage (Deuteronomy 7:3). For Zipporah, a non-Israelite marrying into the covenant, Moses' improper status threatened the legitimacy of their union. By this proxy act, she declares him her legitimate "bridegroom of blood", blood-sealed, covenant-bound husband.
Durham explains: Circumcision as a "premarital rite" transfers via the son's blood, making Moses "fit" without delay. The repetition in verse 26 emphasizes causation: "because of the circumcision" (lammûlōt, plural, possibly alluding to both literal and symbolic acts). Sasson adds that Egyptian partial circumcision invalidated Moses; this "atones" it.
Spiritually, this points to profound truths. Blood averts death, echoing the Passover lamb (Exodus 12) and ultimately Christ's blood (Hebrews 9:22: "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness"). Moses, like us, faces divine wrath for covenant neglect, but intercession and blood save him. The "bridegroom" motif evokes Christ as the Church's Bridegroom (Ephesians 5:25-27), whose blood purifies us. God's "intent to kill" isn't capricious; it's corrective, demanding holiness. As Walter Kaiser notes, "Obedience completely established, everything moved forward."
Did God truly intend to kill Moses? The text says "sought" (biqqēš), implying pursuit, not inevitability. It's a divine confrontation, like Jacob's wrestling (Genesis 32:24-32), to refine. Moses emerges marked, ready. For us, it warns: God's call exposes hidden compromises. Yet, grace prevails, Zipporah's act saves, as Christ's does for us.
Broader Implications and Spiritual Applications
This passage, though obscure, weaves into Exodus' tapestry. It parallels Pharaoh's refusal to release God's "firstborn" (verse 23) with God's threat to Moses' household, underscoring that Israel must embody covenant obedience. Thematically, it bridges the burning bush (God's holiness) and the plagues (judgment on Egypt), showing even Moses isn't exempt.
Historically, Midianite/Kenite Yahweh worship (Exodus 18:1-12; Numbers 10:29) provides insight into Zipporah's actions. Archaeology confirms flint tools for ritual circumcision, persisting post-metal age for purity.
Spiritually, reflect: What "covenant signs" mark us today? Baptism and communion echo circumcision, outward signs of inward grace (Colossians 2:11-12). Like Moses, we might neglect them, rationalizing delay. But God demands wholeness before mission. Leaders, especially, face scrutiny, with family obedience being a primary concern (1 Timothy 3). Yet, hope abounds: God's anger turns to mercy through blood. This episode humanizes Moses, showing his flaws, encouraging us in ours.
In our fractured world, where covenants (marriages, promises) break easily, "bridegroom of blood" calls us to blood-bought fidelity. Christ's blood seals our eternal marriage to Him (Revelation 19:7-9). May we, like Zipporah, act boldly to align with God's will.
No comments:
Post a Comment