Why did God Seek to Kill Moses?

WHY DID GOD SEEK TO KILL MOSES IN EXODUS 4:24-25?

By Ezekiel Kimosop

TEXT 

24 And it came to pass on the way, at the encampment, that the Lord met him and sought to kill him. 25 Then Zipporah took a sharp stone and cut off the foreskin of her son and cast it at Moses’ feet, and said, “Surely you are a husband of blood to me!” 26 So He let him go. Then she said, “You are a husband of blood!”—because of the circumcision [Exodus 4:25-26, NKJV].

PASSAGE ANALYSIS 

This brief text of Scripture has puzzled theological scholars and Bible readers. It is without doubt a difficult passage given that it is a brief juxtaposition to the passage of context of Exodus 4:18-31 which describes Moses's return to Egypt in furtherance of the divine assignment that God had given him earlier in Exodus 3. In Exodus 4, Moses bade farewell to Jethro, his father in law and saddled his family on a donkey. 

The Bible reports that while Moses was on encampment in the course of his journey to Egypt, God met him and sought to kill him! This is a startling statement! Why did God seek to kill Moses at this point? At what point in time did Moses offend God? 

The Bible is silent on details. It does not offer any constructive information on this incident and this leaves the reader making wild guesses. Was Moses perhaps guilty of a transgression after God commissioned him? Was his standing with God the subject of contention at this point? Why would God seek to harm His servant and why did Zipporah, Moses' wife, react in the manner she did? How could she possibly circumcise Moses' son in the presence of the boy's father? Did Moses perhaps deliberately ignore this covenant ritual? 

Given Zipporah's action in circumcising the son in a knee jerk manner and throwing the foreskin at Moses' feet, we can perhaps infer that Moses was guilty of a cardinal sin. It is highly likely that he failed or neglected to circumcise his son in accordance with the command of Genesis 17:10-12.

There are a number of theological suppositions that have been advanced by scholars to explain this strange incident.

Some say Zipporah may have initially prevailed on Moses to leave one of their sons uncircumcised until adult age as was the custom among her Midianite people who are said to circumcise a groom on the eve of marriage. This theory is speculative and does not appear to find the direct support of Scripture. Bible historians say Midianites did not circumcise infants. Could this explain Moses' inadvertence?

The second and most plausible reason advanced by scholars is that Moses may have been influenced by Egyptian pagan culture under which he grew up in Pharaoh's courts. It is instructive that the Egyptians never circumcised their sons and this may explain why Moses had ignored this crucial Hebrew rite.

There is also a difficult side to the interpretation of this passage which we shall briefly examine below.

Some Bible scholars suggest that some Hebrew translations of this passage are theologically wanting. They cite the NIV among other dynamic thought equivalent translations as an example where the mention of Moses in v.24 is not consistent with the literal rendering of the original Hebrew text.

The Young Literal Translation (YLT) which is an old literal translation of the Hebrew text does not mention Moses in v.24 and this leaves the identity of the male pronoun open to theological inquiry. Some argue that it may have referred to the son rather than to Moses himself. This would imply that Moses may not have been the subject of God's wrath in this context and that God sought to kill the boy probably to teach Moses a lesson! Could God have confronted the son in this context if he was indeed an infant?

Whatever the case, Moses was ultimately responsible for performing the circumcision rite on his sons in accordance with Hebrew culture and Levitical ritual law. It is therefore not conclusively clear from the passage why Moses neglected this rite. It is however instructive that any Hebrew male who was not circumcised could not be counted as a legitimate member of God's covenant people (Joshua 5:2-9).

God considered it a reproach to have uncircumcised people among the Israelites (Joshua 2:9). Scripture reveals that the Israelites did not circumcise their males between their departure from Egypt and their entry into the promised land! This could explain the significance of the second generation Gilgal circumcision recorded in Joshua 5.

We can conclude that God was perhaps angry with Moses for being a bad example to the Hebrew community that he was about to lead out of Egypt. However, it is still not clear why Zipporah had to carry out the rite on the son yet this was the responsibility of the household head!

MORAL LESSONS 

We can deduce from this incident is that God is sorely displeased by our deliberate acts of omission. When we appreciate that a particular act or omission is sinful, we should expect God's punishment for the dereliction of duty unless we repent and do things right. Of course we are saved by grace alone and not by works but God has His expectations and divine standards for dealing with His covenant people.

The Bible says in Romans 14:23 that whatever is not [done] from faith is sin. Moses should have done better than neglect a duty that he knew was based on God's express command.

We also learn that God is not a respecter of persons. He punishes the low and the mighty alike. Despite Moses' towering prophetic stature, he was not immune to God's chastisement. The dereliction of his covenant obligations earned him God's wrath. 

Elsewhere in Scripture, we learn that Moses' sister Miriam, who was a prophetess in her own right, was chastised by God after she crossed the red line and questioned Moses' prophetic authority while confronting him over a domestic dispute that pitted Moses against his two siblings (Numbers 12). Miriam suffered leprosy and was isolated from the wilderness camp for seven days. She should have known better. Aaron apparently expressed remorse for his transgression and God graciously spared him.

In another incident, Nadab and Abihu, the two sons of Aaron were instantly consumed by God's wrath after they dishonored the LORD while burning incense. Both instantly died under God's judgment. God commanded Aaron not to mourn their deaths (Leviticus 10:1-7). 

We serve a righteous and holy God whose ways are above our ways. Only the blood of Jesus Christ justifies in His divine presence and shields us from His holy and righteous wrath. 

Finally, we learn from our passage of context that our moral discretions in life can precipitate catastrophic consequences if left unchecked. God demands unqualified obedience and His standards cannot be lowered to suit ours. We ought to arise by His enabling grace and submit to Him in truth so that we may walk in obedience to Him in our journey of faith. This does not suggest that we can attain perfection before God while under the sun. When we seek forgiveness from God, Scripture assures us that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from sin and restores us into fellowship with God (1 John 1:8-10).

We should therefore discern God's mind through the holy Scriptures and by the illumination of the Holy Spirit who dwells in us.  We should act with diligence as we serve God, knowing that we are His vessels that serve Him at His divine pleasure and for His glory. 

How is your walk with God? Do you submit to His leading each day?

Shalom 

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2019