And it came to pass on the way, in the inn, that Jehovah came upon him, and sought to slay him.
Moses is on his way back to Egypt with God's commission in hand. Then, at the lodging place, God turns on him and threatens his life. Commentators read this as discipline: something in Moses' own home had to be put right before he could face Pharaoh.
Writers agree on the trouble: Moses had not circumcised his son. God was about to honour Moses in front of everyone, while his own home dishonoured God.
God was going to put honour on Moses, but there was already something in Moses' house that dishonoured Him. God could not pass it over. How was it that Moses' sons were not circumcised? How was it that the sign of putting the flesh to death was missing in those closest to Moses? How was it that God's glory was forgotten in a matter that should always have been first in a father's heart?
The severity has a reason. Circumcision was the sign of the covenant God made with Abraham, and God Himself had set death as the penalty for neglecting it.
What happens in verses 24-26 becomes clear when we see that God was stepping in for Israel under the covenant He had made with Abraham, recorded in Genesis 17:1-14. Circumcision was the token, or sign, of that covenant. God had stated plainly that if it was not kept, the penalty would be death. Here was Moses, chosen under that covenant to be the leading figure in Israel's deliverance — and he had not obeyed the sign! As the responsible man, he faced the death penalty!
Several writers think Zipporah, a Midianite wife, had objected to the rite. Yet it is Moses whose life is threatened — and that distinction is deliberate.
Zipporah was not related to Israel by blood, so she could not have been ready for this, and the Lord had no dispute with her. It was Moses or his child, not Zipporah, whom the Lord would have killed at the inn, as the command required (Gen. 17:14). Moses' life was forfeited under that command, and it was grace that spared him.
Commentators differ on whether Moses or his child was the one in danger. What is clear is that opposition does not stop God. He reaches His end anyway — often through the very person who resisted.
A hindrance only ever comes through the flesh. When some difficulty is brought in to pull a faithful man of God away from obedience, God still reaches His end — only in a far more painful way, and often through the very person who stood in the way. What a safeguard it is, then, to be childlike and subject to the Lord! How many sorrows we escape that way!
Circumcision is read throughout as the cutting off of the flesh — a picture of death. Moses was about to announce that Israel was God's son; his own household had to carry the same mark.
Of course, if the Lord had meant to kill Moses, He could have done it with no warning at all. And it is clear He did not mean to kill him, for He had already told Moses that he would deliver Israel from Egypt. Still, the sentence of death was against Moses because he had not carried out that sentence in his own household… God had told Moses, "Israel is My son," and Moses is to be reminded that God's son Israel must also learn the truth of circumcision — the cutting off of the flesh — which stands for death itself. For there is no proper relationship with God apart from death to the flesh.
God was sending Moses to demand obedience from Pharaoh. So his own disobedience could not stand.
Those who demand obedience from others should be models of obedience themselves. The Lord dealt severely with Moses because he had failed to circumcise his son (Ex. 4:24-25). It seems he had given in to his wife over it. Until that was put right, Moses could not call Pharaoh to obey God's commands without contradicting himself.
God's requirements do not relax for a great servant. They rise.
No high place in service, no depth of knowledge of the deepest things of God, will excuse a servant for overlooking any of God's commandments. No — he must feel that since much has been entrusted to him, much will be required of him. Full obedience to God's word must mark the life and ways of even the greatest and best-taught servants.
- Commission — God had just sent Moses to Egypt. The honour He was about to give him made the dishonour at home impossible to overlook.
- Covenant — circumcision was the sign of God's covenant with Abraham, and God had set death as the penalty for neglecting it.
- Controversy — God's dispute was with Moses, the responsible man, not with his wife. His life was forfeited; grace spared him.
- Cutting — circumcision pictures the cutting off of the flesh. There is no proper relationship with God apart from death to the flesh.
- Consistency — a man sent to demand obedience from Pharaoh had to obey first. No high place in service excuses overlooking one command.
Then Zipporah took a stone and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, A bloody husband indeed art thou to me!
On the road to Egypt, God met Moses and threatened his life, and his wife acted to save him. Why did Israel's deliverer stand under a death sentence, and what did she mean by calling him a husband of blood?
The trouble did not start on that road. It reaches back to a covenant God made with Abraham.
This episode is explained when we see that God was stepping in on Israel's behalf. He was acting under the covenant He had made with Abraham, recorded in Genesis 17:1-14. Circumcision was the sign of that covenant. God had stated plainly that if circumcision was not kept, the penalty was death. Here was Moses, chosen to be the chief actor in Israel's deliverance under that covenant, and he had not obeyed the sign! As the responsible person he was subject to the death penalty!
God was about to honour Moses in public. First He dealt with what was wrong at home.
God was going to put honour on Moses, but there was already a dishonour to Him in the house of Moses. God could not pass over that. … It appears that the wife had something to do with the matter. … There is never a hindrance except through flesh. A difficulty may come in to distract a faithful man of God from obedience. But God still reaches His end — only in a far more painful way, and often through the very one who obstructed. … But this endangered Moses; for God had the controversy with him — not with his wife. Moses was the responsible person, and God held to His order. … Public work can only rightly follow when all is well at home.
She speaks these words to Moses. Older translations render them "a bloody husband". One writer hears in them a woman who has bought her husband back.
Then Zipporah is forced to do herself what she hated, and the reproach was removed. The words "Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me!" were addressed to Moses. She had been forced, as it were, to purchase him again by the shedding of the blood of her beloved son. She received him back as one who had been in the realm of death, and was joined to him anew.
The cutting carries a lesson for parents, and the scene has a clear end.
Zipporah's task of performing circumcision on her son was clearly unpleasant, and she tells Moses he is a husband of blood to her. But it is never a pleasant task to press home on our children's hearts and consciences the lesson of death to all that is of the flesh. We may shrink from the sight of blood being shed, but we must be reminded that "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins" (Heb. 9:22). Only when Zipporah had circumcised her son did the Lord let Moses go.
Moses was carrying a message of death to Pharaoh and a message of life to Israel. One writer links the inn to that errand.
It is no light matter to be the Lord's servant. No ordinary education will qualify a man for such a position. Nature must be put in the place of death and kept there. … If Zipporah refuses to circumcise her son, the Lord will lay His hand on her husband; and if Moses spares the feelings of his wife, the Lord will "seek to kill him". The sentence of death must be written on nature. If we try to avoid it in one way, we shall meet it in another.
Why would God strike the man He had just sent? The answer lies in the character of the God who delivers.
Whatever the power of Him who delivers may be, circumcision must be found in the man who shares in that deliverance and is used as its instrument. For the Saviour-God is a God of holiness. He delivers in holiness and in judging sin. Acting in holiness, He does not tolerate sin in those who work with Him and stand in contact with Him. … God cannot use the flesh in the fight against Satan. He cannot tolerate it Himself, for He is in His place in judgment. Satan too would have power over it, and rightly so. So God puts it to death Himself, and He has done this for us on the cross.
Some writers read Zipporah as a picture of the church.
She was united to Moses during the time of his rejection. From this scene we learn that the Church is called to know Christ as the One related to her "by blood". … Her relationship with Christ is founded on blood. Showing the power of that relationship must involve death to nature. "In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ" (Col. 2:11).
- Sign. God gave Abraham circumcision as the sign of His covenant. The penalty for ignoring it was death.
- Responsibility. God's controversy was with Moses, not Zipporah. He was the responsible man, though his wife had a hand in the delay.
- Delay. Putting the sign off did not avoid it. Zipporah still had to do the thing she hated, and it cost her far more pain.
- Blood. Her cry marks a husband bought back by the shedding of blood and received again from the realm of death.
- Release. Only when the flesh was cut off did the Lord let Moses go. Order at home comes before public work.
And he let him go. Then she said, A bloody husband -- because of the circumcision.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.