How Zipporah Saved Moses from God's Wrath
Share
Certain passages in Scripture puzzle even scholars and pastors, and Exodus 4:24-26 is one of them.
“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.”
Why did the Lord want to kill Moses? Or was he about to kill the child? And how did Zipporah save the day? What did Zipporah’s statement mean: was she rebuking Moses?
What Exactly Is Happening in Exodus 4?
Moses had been sent on a mission by God: meet his brother Aaron and, together, confront Pharaoh. In Exodus 3:10, God had told Moses to go and deliver his people from Pharaoh, but Moses resisted until “the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses” (Exodus 4:14). Moses complained “I am slow of speech and of tongue” (4:10). He was fearful that Pharaoh would not do what he said, although we would later learn that God intended to harden Pharaoh’s heart. The Lord did not intend for the Israelites to walk away in peace; their rescue was going to be a glorious one, undeniably orchestrated by God himself. Pharaoh would be defeated decisively.
Following Moses’ protests, God exclaimed “Who has made man's mouth? Who makes him mute, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?” (Exodus 4:11). Moses had doubted God’s power, but he also assumed he knew God’s purpose, overlooking the fact that God operates according to his own plans. He did all this in spite of hearing directly from the Lord, who had shown himself as a burning bush then later turned a stick into a snake and back again. He gave Moses a skin disease which he instantly cured. God’s miracles foreshadow the plagues which Egypt would soon suffer, perhaps even the final plague: death of the first-born children (depending on whom God intended to kill in Exodus 4:24, since the Hebrew text is not entirely clear on this point).
Moses’ Uncertain Character
Perhaps the plight of Israel barely touched Moses’ heart as he shepherded Jethro’s flock. Was this a reason for God’s anger? He had to inspire not only obedience, but a simple desire in Moses to remember where he came from, and that he had been saved as a baby for this very purpose. Moses murdered an Egyptian for mistreating a Hebrew, indicating that a passion for his oppressed people’s freedom had once existed. As for courage more generally, in Exodus 2 Moses cleared bullying shepherds from the well so that Jethro’s daughters could draw water.
But compare his reactionary passion with Joseph’s patient courage. His integrity and faith endured rejection, slavery, false accusation, imprisonment, until he was able to save his people from famine. He could truthfully declare that what was meant for evil God had used for good (Genesis 50:20). Yet Joseph came to this conclusion after many years of witnessing the faithfulness of God.
Reactions emanating from a personal sense of outrage are not the same as thoughtful, active faith in the living God and obedience to his instructions. Moses appears to have been compromising in this area, and as Joe Carter explains, “Moses had effectively raised his son as a Midianite.” He had not obeyed the Lord’s instructions in Genesis 17: “This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised” (v.10).
Carter talks about the differences between Midianite and Hebrew circumcision, which left their son uncircumcised long past the 8th day. If the Lord was continuing to foreshadow the coming plagues and miracles as indicated in the signs he had performed for Moses, then perhaps it was the baby who was going to die until Zipporah marked him with blood by touching the foreskin to her child. Her actions presaged the Passover, where the Israelites would mark their doors with blood.
God Strikes Moses: Zipporah Responds
With so little to go on, and much uncertainty regarding the translation of this text, scholars can only gather an approximation of what took place. If it was Moses whom the Lord intended to kill, he was probably struck with a sudden but deadly illness, seizure, or something which was obvious but prolonged enough for Zipporah to do something about it (although the same could be true if the baby had been marked for death). Paul Carter explains that “Zipporah understood immediately what was going on, and we can also infer that the attack was slow-acting enough for her to respond in some sort of atoning way.” Moreover, while the event was dramatic, it is possible that the outcome was “never intended to be fatal.” If God had wanted Moses dead, he would not have provided Zipporah with time.
But how did she know? Carter suggests that the two must have talked about Gershom’s circumcision before. While we do not know the full details of Midianite ritual and significance regarding circumcision, it was possibly a point of contention for the two. We do know from Genesis 17:10-14 the seriousness of circumcision as per the Lord’s instructions to Abraham. Zipporah must have understood, and intervened to save Moses’ life.
Carter also suggests that Zipporah’s words to Moses were not intended to be a rebuke, but perhaps a hasty paraphrase of ritualistic language. She was not supposed to perform this operation at all, since a priest would have done it, but there was little time. “She had limited options given the urgency of the situation and the incapacitation of her husband. Nevertheless, God accepted her version of the ritual because it was done in humility and faith,” Carter writes.
As for the word “bridegroom,” Carter tells us that hatan means “kinsman.” Strong’s concordance tells us that “bridegroom” in this instance can refer to a relative by marriage. The words of Midianite ritual might have simply meant to symbolize the child’s belonging to the ancestral family, or she might have even been referring to Moses: that having obeyed God, they were now united as one flesh.
What Does This Story Mean for Us Today?
How does a modern reader derive anything meaningful from such an obscure passage? One application starts with Zipporah herself: women are important in God’s kingdom work. There has been a lot of talk about the patriarchal nature of the Bible, where women fade into the background. This is one reason why we must highlight instances of female courage. The Lord often used women to boldly and bravely do what men sometimes failed to do or were unable to do. In this case, Zipporah showed insight, the ability to think on her feet, and she was brave.
But she was also a Midianite, leading to our second application: all who come to the Body of Christ by faith are welcome. There is no such thing as “inside access” to God through other means than Jesus. One is not born into the faith simply by being born to Christian parents. Zipporah did not know everything about God’s instructions, or how to carry them out with accuracy, but she was faithful. As Carter asserts, “ignorance, if it be paired with faith, is typically met with mercy.”
Zipporah’s statement about the bridegroom of blood points to the imagery of Christ, the vine, and his branches (the Disciples) who are grafted in. Zipporah was like “a wild olive shoot, grafted in among the others and now shar[ing] in the nourishing root of the olive tree” (Romans 11:17). All branches of the vine (Christ) are members of the Bride, and he is the Bridegroom – but a Bridegroom of blood, having shed his to cover the sins of all those who believe that he alone saves us from our sins to restore our relationship with the Father.
One must not forget, too, that Moses comes across as weak at times in these early chapters of Exodus, but he becomes a bold and faithful leader, one of those whom the Disciples see with Jesus in Matthew 17:3. The sanctifying work of God in the heart of a believer is often slow, but it is real and the fruit should be visible.
Conclusion
Mark Gignilliat remarks “the link between blood, averting divine wrath, and the first-born son in Exodus 4 and 12 provides the New Testament with much of its theological vocabulary and rationale for the atoning work of Jesus Christ.” He muses that it seems strange how such an odd text in the Bible can potentially be so rich in meaning, but this is the reward for patient and determined study.
Although we might be tempted to overlook such a passage owing to its difficulties, we need to persevere, even if there is no definitive answer. God’s mind and his actions are sometimes so mysterious that “even though a wise man claims to know, he cannot find it out” (Ecclesiastes 8:17). But he has shown himself to be trustworthy.
Whatever this bizarre scene is all about, its allusions to Christ remind us that the Old Testament still points to Christ. This scene is a reminder that Christ was not Plan B - he had always intended, by his sacrificial love, to provide salvation for humble and repentant sinners.
Sources
The Gospel Coalition - The Strangest Circumcision Story Ever
The Gospel Coalition - Moses, Maximus, and a Bloody Valentine
Open Bible – Exodus 4:24 cross-reference
The Bible Project – Did God Try to Kill Moses?
Photo credit: Unsplash/Ahmet Sali
