Exodus 4:24-26 | EXPLAINER..

Book of Exodus

Now & then ~ when reading the Bible.. A momento of confusion hits from outta nowhere.. Such is the case in Exodus 4:24-26. Well?? Today.. I looked it up and found out that, I AM SO NOT ALONE!! That particular verse has been the subject of thought for MANY A SCHOLAR.. & EVEN misinterpreted.. Turns out - they were thinking too hard! 😩 I just hate when that confusion hits me.. After all - the Bible says in Isaiah that the Word is so simplistic, yea, that even a fool cannot err within 😲 Upon looking today - I found a site that explains the whole thing! KJVToday.com writes...

What exactly is happening in the passage about the circumcision of Moses' son in Exodus 4:24-26?

"24 And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD met him, and sought to kill him. 25Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me. 26 So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision." (Exodus 4:21-26, KJV)

Many have been taught that in Exodus 4:24-26 God is seeking to kill Moses, and in response Zippora circumcised her son to avert God's wrath. This is supported by a midrash (Jewish interpretation) in the Book of Jasher (Sepir Ha Yasher) 79:8-12 (which is not the authentic Book of Jasher mentioned in the Old Testament). The Exodus passage also refers to the term, "bridegroom of blood," in many translations. This passage has perplexed many students of the word over the years.

  • Why did God seek to kill Moses?

  • How did circumcision avert God's wrath?

  • Why did Zipporah circumcise her son rather than letting Moses do it?

  • What exactly is a "bridegroom of blood"?

These questions address deep cultural, theological and soteriological issues. There have been many attempts to answer these questions, but they are all very speculative. There is no scriptural basis for taking the life of a father who does not circumcise a son. Punishment for failing to be circumcisedfalls upon the child, not the father (Genesis 17:14). Moreover, the failure to be circumcised is punishable by exclusion from the Abrahamic covenant, not death (Genesis 17:14). If God sought to kill Moses for his sin of murder, as some scholars speculate, there is nothing about circumcision that atones for sin. Circumcision is a covenant, not a sacrifice that atones for sin. These speculative answers flirt with unscriptural principles.

The problem is not with the answers, but with the questions. People are asking the wrong questions because they are reading the passage incorrectly in faulty translations. When the passage is read correctly in the King James Bible, the pass