A Bridegroom of Blood
Exodus 4:18-31 has been noted by scholars as one of the most impossible, troubling, ambiguous, and perplexing passages to understand in all the Hebrew Scriptures (Durham, 1987; Embry, 2010; Howell, 2010; Margaret, 2017). Such strong language focuses on verses 24-26. The highlight of the overall passage proclaims the absolute sovereignty of God and His omnipotence even over the human heart (Ex. 4:21-23). In addition, the narrator goes through great lengths to show how important an identity in God needs to be in one’s life (Ex. 4:24-26). Often, people who read the Bible struggle with the idea of human responsibility and God’s sovereignty when compared to the specific text dealing with Moses, Zipporah, and Gershom; the text has left theologians puzzled (Chisholm, 1996). Much research has been put into this puzzling passage, and various scholars have a very different outlook on the passage.
Some of these various interpretations range from Moses being the one who God was going to kill, and others would say it was Gershom being the one the Lord wanted to kill (Childs, 1976; Durham, 1987; Embry, 2010; Margaret, 2017). Scholars offer suggestions as to why God wanted to kill Moses was due to his failure to circumcise Gershom and also a very striking parallel story with Balaam and his donkey (Embry, 2010). Others argue due to the direct context in Exodus 4:21-23 that God will strike down the firstborns of Egypt; it is Moses’s firstborn Gershom who is in danger (Cole, 1973; Howell, 2010; Stuart, 2006). There are even less popular views that Moses lied about his identity the whole time he was in Midian and the phrase “the Lord met him and sought to kill him” is explained that Moses was overcome with a suicidal depression (Reis, 1991).
What interpretation is correct? What does this passage admittedly mean? What is God trying to communicate through the narrator here? Did God want to kill Moses after he just commissioned him to free His people from slavery? A proper exegesis of the text will determine the interpretation of the passages. Moving forward, the Mosaic covenant will be presented with the importance of circumcision and the co-text of this passage will be identified. Also, the scenes, plot, and other details will be pointed out in the narrative. Furthermore, the intention of the author will be presented, and a recontextualized view will be discovered for even a contemporary setting.
The Mosaic Covenant
Before diving into the text of discussion, it is helpful to discuss the Mosaic covenant and the importance of circumcision briefly. Even though the Mosaic covenant came after this event, the passages in question highlight or shadow the sign of this covenant which is circumcision. The Mosaic covenant was the third covenant that God bestowed on to humanity. Unlike the first two covenants that were unconditional, this covenant was conditional. Arnold and Beyer (2015) say, “obedience to God’s commands brings blessing while disobedience brings failure” (p. 198; cf. Deut. 28; Ex. 19:5-8, 20). Obedience was vital to the Mosaic covenant, but it was not just a bunch of rules to follow; it was the new way of the Jewish life. Wright (2013) said,
The law was not a set of arbitrary rules to keep God happy. It was a way of life, a way of being human, a culture in a particular time and place, to show what a redeemed people under God looks like. (p. 32)
The Decalogue, law, or Sinai covenant was an agreement between God and man to obey all that God had commanded to inherit the full blessing and promises that God gave to Abraham (Macedo, 2016). The Mosaic covenant was an extension of the Abrahamic covenant, but it came with conditions. God wanted this covenant to serve as a way to set his people apart from the other pagan nations of the Earth, but this covenant also provided the means to make them holy and reflect the glory of God (Alexander, 2012). It was because of the law that God promised Israel that He would make them a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Ex. 19:6).
In addition to the promises that God gave Israel with the Mosaic covenant, He also provided the means and way for them to be forgiven of their sin. The sacrificial system was the means unto forgiveness and would serve as a type or shadow for things to come. The sacrificial system introduced the concept of just how important it was for blood to be shed for the sins one commits. This shedding of blood is captured in the sign of circumcision (Osborn & Hatton, 1999). Circumcision is the act that God’s people did to identify themselves as an Israelite child and placed them as a member of the covenant community (Howell, 2010; Ryken & Hughes, 2005). God commanded His people to do so back in the time of Abraham,
This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. (Ex. 17:10-11)
Even foreigners and sojourners who wanted to partake in the covenant blessings of God could if they believed in the one true God, Yahweh, and were circumcised (Ex. 12:43-49). Circumcision is a fundamental act that one must complete to identify themselves with the God of the Old Testament, which will be why this act is taken so seriously in the text of observation. Circumcision and the shedding of blood are key when trying to properly understand the specific text of Exodus 4:24-26.
Identifying the Co-text
Identifying the co-text of a passage is crucial since it helps the interpreter identify new ideas of thought. The purpose of the text and the theological significance can change due to the co-text; this is why it is important to establish it at the beginning of interpretation (Vogt, 2009). Co-text passages are often referred to as pericopes, which speak of self-contained stores inside a larger narrative (DeMoss, 2001; Embry, 2010). Co-text passages have markers which identify repeated words, change in scenes, or the people who are involved. Laying these markers out is helpful when observing the co-text (Vogt, 2009).
In Exodus 4:18, there is a significant shift in scenes and characters. Previously in Exodus 3, the narrative focuses on Moses meeting God and the requests God had for Moses to instruct Pharaoh to let His people go. This narrative continues until a shift happens in Exodus 4:18. Moses’s conversation with God ends, and Moses now goes back into the mainland of Midian to inform his father-in-law that he has been asked by God to go back to Egypt (Ex. 4:18). This new co-text presents itself to the end of the chapter ending in verse 31. Although separate co-texts can be introduced for a more profound exegesis (Ex. 4:21-23, 24-26, 27-31), the focus will be the overall co-text of verses 18-31.
Scenes Throughout the Narrative
Inside the narrative of any co-text, scenes are important to identify to help with interpretation. Vogt (2009) says scenes “represent where the action takes place, who is involved, and what actually occurs” (p. 53). Identifying these elements will help the interpreter know what the author thought was important and what may not be necessary since it was not included in Scripture. The passage in question is Exodus 4:18-31. This passage has four primary scenes that take place within the co-text. The first scene is found in verses 18-20. The characters involved are Moses, Jethro, Zipporah, Moses’s son, and Yahweh. In this scene, Moses just left the presence of God at the burning bush and has now come home to ask Jethro if he can leave Midian and return to Egypt to see his brothers (Ex. 4:18). Jethro gives his approval, and Yahweh announces to Moses that all who sought to kill Moses in Egypt are now dead. Moses then takes his wife and children and starts the journey to Egypt.
The second scene deals directly with Moses and Yahweh. The exact location is not given, but God gives Moses instruction on what to do in Pharaoh’s presence and what to tell Pharaoh when he arrives in Egypt. His instructions are to show Pharaoh the miracles that God has given Moses to authenticate his message and to warn Pharaoh that if he does not let God’s children go, the firstborns of Egypt will die (Ex. 4:21-23). The third scene deals with Moses, Yahweh, Zipporah, and Moses’s son. They are at a lodging place, and in this scene, Yahweh seeks to kill someone, and Zipporah circumcises her son and tells him that he is a bridegroom of blood to her (Ex. 4:24-26).
The final scene involves Aaron, Moses, Yahweh, and the elders of Israel. This event takes place first at a mountain where Aaron and Moses meet for the first time in years and describes the events that have taken place with their God. Both of them present this to the elders of Israel, and they all believe their words and worship God. These four incredible scenes are shown inside this pericope, but the highlight of all four scenes is discovered once the plot is identified.
Discovering the Plot and Minor Details
When doing a proper exegesis on a narrative passage, identifying the plot is helpful because the climax is revealed. The climax will help the interpreter identify which details need to be unraveled the most to figure out the author’s intent (Vogt, 2009). In Exodus 4:18-31, the plot starts with Moses returning to Median to announce that he is going back to Egypt. The plot increases in intensity when Moses leaves with his family back to Egypt, and God instructs Moses what to tell Pharaoh. The climax is presented when God wants to kill someone; either Moses or Gershom, and Zipporah circumcises her son and throws the skin at either one’s leg, calling him a bridegroom of blood. The co-text concludes and decreases in intensity when Moses meets up with Aaron and informs the elders of Israel all of what the Lord had spoken. Due to the three statements within the climax, this will be the focus of the exegesis. (1) The Lord met him and sought to put him to death. (2) Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son’s foreskin and touched his leg. (3) A bridegroom of blood, because of the circumcision.
Put Who to Death?
Genesis 4:24 says, “at a lodging place on the way the Lord met him and sought to put him to death” (English Standard Version). The Good News Translation, the New Living Translation, and the New International Version all incorrectly translate the Hebrew word for him, הוּא (hu), as Moses. Why have scholars over the years attributed this singular third-person pronoun to Moses? Some scholars suggest after a divine mission is assigned; it usually prompts a divine encounter (Gen. 17:10; Jos. 5:13). Like Jacob and Joshua, the Lord gave Moses an important mission, but this mission required their whole household to be in good standing order (Margaret, 2017). Moses would be unable to pronounce judgment on Egypt when his own house was in error (1 Peter 4:17). This is a good observation, but when interpreting the Bible, context is the champion when determining the interpretation of a word or passage (Duvall & Hays, 2012; Klein, Blomberg, & Hubbard, 2004; Plummer, 2010).
In the immediate context, the verse before verse 24 talks about God instructing Moses to tell Pharaoh to let God’s firstborn son, Israel, free; or else God will kill their firstborn sons (Ex. 4:23). The very next verse shows how God sought to kill Moses’s firstborn son Gershom, not Moses (Cole, 1973; Howell, 2010). Stuart (2006) makes this point,
The Hb. grammar of the passage uses proleptic pronouns to refer to Gershom at first and never names Moses at all. Gershom is referred to in v. 25 finally as her son, which tells the reader who it was that God threatened to kill. The choice of the niv to include the name of Moses twice (in brackets each time) is just that: a translator’s choice, not a matter of literal translation. Its effect is to skew the reader’s attention to Moses rather than the actual referent of the pronouns, her son. (Volume 2)
Therefore, the immediate context before this narrative and the narrative to follow in the following verses points to Gershom whom the Lord wanted to kill.
Circumcision
The shedding of blood, whether in the Passover or through circumcision, always provided protection and cleansing (Sproul, 2005). Circumcision was an outward sign of an inward faith (Courson, 2005). Circumcision was the act that identified the people of God as Israelites and made them a member of the covenant community of God (Howell, 2010; Ryken & Hughes, 2005). Circumcision in those days literally made a person one of God’s first-born sons (Howell, 2010). This physical sign of blood being shed was so important because it was to shadow an event called the Passover, which would take place during the event of God taking the first-born sons of Egypt. Moses needed to have his house in order so that his family would not be mistaken during the time of judgment (Howell, 2010). If one wants to be under the covenant community and participate in the Passover, then blood must be shed (Ex. 12:43-49; Josh. 5:2-9; cf. Heb. 9:22). The entire event of Zipporah, Moses, and Gershom is a precursor of how God will save His people from the first-born judgment. Blood is shed and wiped on the leg of Gershom, and during the Passover; blood is shed and wiped on the doorposts of people’s houses (Osborn & Hatton, 1999).
When speaking about the circumcision of Moses, some scholars believe that Moses was already circumcised as an infant since he was taken care of by his mother for the first three months of his life and Pharaoh’s daughter was able to identify him as a Hebrew child quickly (Ex. 2:6). In addition, other commentators believe that if Moses was not circumcised as an infant, then he would have been partially circumcised as a child since Egyptians practiced partial circumcision (Douglas, 2006; Durham, 1987). Furthermore, once Moses fled to Midian, he would have been fully circumcised there since the Midianites practiced circumcision as part of the Midianite marriage rite (Douglas, 2006; Howell, 2010; Stuart, 2006). Due to these reasons and no evidence of Moses being circumcised later in Scripture, one can reasonably conclude that Moses was exempt from the attack made by the Lord. Why would God commission His prophet to do one of the most significant events in human history and then seek to kill him shortly after? This question has perplexed commentators, which is why the focus and main character of these verses are Gershom (Howell, 2010).
Bridegroom of Blood
What about the obscure phrase that Zipporah uses, “a bridegroom of blood” (Ex. 4:26)? The Hebrew word for bridegroom is חָתָן (ḥātān), and when used in a noun form, it usually is defined as a son-in-law or one who is related by affinity (Howell, 2010; Osborn & Hatton, 1999; Stuart, 2006). Since it has been established that in context, the focus of the narrative in these verses rests with Gershom, the statement Zipporah makes is directed at her son (Stuart, 2006). Gesenius and Tregelles (2003) say, “it is customary for women to call a son when he is circumcised, the bridegroom. Those who apply these words to Moses and not to the child seem to have made a great mistake” (p. 52). Howell (2010) masterfully highlights the importance of this statement being directed at Gershom,
The best way to understand Zipporah's statement is that she is simply making a comment about her relationship to Gershom as she understands it. In other words, now that Gershom is circumcised, he is in fact a relative by means of blood to Yahweh and to her. Zipporah's identity with the covenant community was wrapped up in her marriage to Moses. Moses was a blood relative because of genealogy and circumcision. Because Zipporah obviously could not be circumcised according to the Israelite custom of cutting the foreskin, her identity with Israel existed through her identity with Moses. Zipporah was considered a member of the people of Israel because of her marriage to a circumcised Israelite. Now that Gershom was circumcised, he too was a member of the people of Israel. Therefore, it is reasonable that Zipporah would say, you are a relative by means of blood to me. (pp. 73-74)
With Zipporah’s decisive act, she not only saves her son from certain death, but she also proclaims his newly found identity with Yahweh through the event of circumcision.
The Narrator’s Intent
One thing to remember about the genre of narratives is they usually do not try to focus on every detail and event of the characters, but rather focus on communicating a theological truth or purpose (Vogt, 2009). One of the most significant truths about God in this passage is His sovereignty and the importance of one being truly identified in Him. God desires His people to be all in for His kingdom. He does not want people who are not willing to obey his commandments and think they have a better plan than what the Lord has laid out. As God’s people seek to carry out God’s plan, they need to trust Him with their lives and be completely identified with Him.
Furthermore, the narrator is undoubtedly communicating the importance of circumcision. Moses and all of Israel have been disconnected from God and the covenantal promises. The narrator is now connecting the promises back to Israel and sealing them with the sign of circumcision. Now that the narrator’s intent has been revealed, the interpreter can now look to recontextualize the passage.
Recontextualize the Passage
Recontextualizing a passage is a crucial final step when interpreting a passage. This process involves looking at what the passage meant for the intended people towards whom the passage is being directed but then taking those passages’ principles and applying them to our modern culture (Duvall & Hays, 2012). Not only was it necessary for Israel to identify themselves with God through the sign of circumcision, the New Covenant demands believers today to be identified to God through the sign of baptism (Ryken & Hughes, 2005). Believers today are circumcised at heart internally and externally identified in baptism (Col. 2:11, 12; Jer. 6:10; Rom. 2:28). Even though Christians are saved by grace alone, a manifestation of that grace that has taken over our lives is shown by our obedience (Jas. 2:17, 26). God does not change; He is concerned about our identity since it cost His only Son His life. Christians need to rest in the sovereignty of God and live their lives according to the Words of God. To be set apart from the culture of today is a vital part of our witness and participation in the Kingdom of God.
Another application that could be drawn out of the text is to warn Christians that after God commissions His people, it is usually followed by immediate trials and tests to prepare them for what is to come. God certainly did this in Moses’s life, but Scripture is also littered with such examples. (1) Noah is preserved through certain destruction and is tested after he left the ark (Gen. 9:1-20). (2) Jacob, who will be named Israel wrestles with the Lord and immediately goes out to meet his brother Esau (Gen. 32-33). (3) Moses again goes through a similar experience when he received the commandments from God but comes down the mountain to see the people participating in idolatry (Ex. 31-32). (4) Jesus, the Lord and King even experiences this once He is baptized and immediately is sent to the wilderness and is tempted by Satan (Luke 3-4:12; Matt. 3-4; Mark 1:9-12). (5) The great apostle Paul has an encounter with Jesus Christ Himself and is immediately blinded after the encounter (Acts 9:1-19). Other examples can be given, but the point that one should take home is after a divine encounter and commission from the Lord, one needs to be ready for trials and testing.
Conclusion
A proper exegesis has been presented of Ex. 4:18-31 by giving a brief overview of the Mosaic covenant and highlighting the importance of circumcision. Exodus 4:24-26 remains unique, and the context seems to be misplaced. By identifying the co-text, scenes, plot, and details of the text; this process helps illuminate the authors real intent of what the narrator was trying to communicate. In light of all the points given in the exegesis of the Exodus 4 passage, the highlight of the narrative flow of the passage pertaining to Gershom of whom God wanted to kill makes the most sense. As one continues in the narrative, the primary highlight of the Exodus 4 narrative is to focus on the firstborn son of Egypt being taken that prompts the release of God’s people out of slavery. This was predicted by God before Moses even went to Egypt (Ex. 4:21-23), and now with the near-death experience with Gershom, the connection is made obvious once death actually does take place with Egypt’s firstborn (Howell, 2010). Furthermore, the relationship between blood and circumcision point the reader forward to the grand event of the Passover (Howell, 2010). When interpreting the text in this manner being driven by the context, the narrator’s intent is easily relatable to our current culture. Just as it was thousands of years ago, believers today can rest in the sovereignty of God as they fold under all the covenant commandments left for them to read in His inspired Word.
References
Alexander, T. D. (2012). From paradise to the promised land: An introduction to the Pentateuch (Third Edition). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
Arnold, B. T., & Beyer, B. E. (2015). Encountering the Old Testament: A Christian survey (3rd ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
Childs, B. S. (1976). The Book of Exodus: A critical, theological commentary. Louisville: The Westminster Press.
Chisholm, R. B., Jr. (1996). Divine hardening in the Old Testament. Bibliotheca Sacra, 153(612), 410–434. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001014804&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Cole, R. A. (1973). Exodus: An introduction and commentary (Vol. 2). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Courson, J. (2005). Jon Courson’s application commentary: Volume one: Genesis–Job. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
DeMoss, M. S. (2001). In Pocket dictionary for the study of New Testament Greek. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Durham, J. I. (1987). Exodus (Vol. 3). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.
Duvall, J. S., & Hays, J. D. (2012). Grasping God’s Word: A hands-on approach to reading, interpreting, and applying the Bible (Third Edition). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Embry, B. (2010). The endangerment of Moses: Towards a new reading of Exodus 4:24-26. Vetus Testamentum, 60(2), 177–196. doi: https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rlh&AN=48779499&site=eds-live&scope=site
Gesenius, W., & Tregelles, S. P. (2003). Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
Howell, A. J. (2010). The firstborn son of Moses as the “relative of blood” in Exodus 4.24-26. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 35(1), 63–76. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/0309089210378962
Klein, W. W., Blomberg, C., & Hubbard, R. L. (2004). Introduction to Biblical interpretation. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
Macedo, B. (2016). Covenant theology in the thought of John Calvin: From the Mosaic covenant to the new covenant. Fides Reformata, 21(1), 121-148. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=120342111&site=eds-live&scope=site
Margaret, M. T. (2017). Tsipporah, her son, and the bridegroom of blood: Attending to the bodies in Exodus 4:24-26. Religions, 8(10), 205. doi: https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edb&AN=125986624&site=eds-live&scope=site
Osborn, N. D., & Hatton, H. A. (1999). A handbook on Exodus. New York: United Bible Societies.
Plummer, R. L. (2010). 40 Questions about interpreting the Bible. (B. L. Merkle, Ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic & Professional.
Reis, P. T. (1991). The bridegroom of blood: A new reading. Judaism, 40(3), 324. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9709292054&site=eds-live&scope=site
Ryken, P. G., & Hughes, R. K. (2005). Exodus: saved for God’s glory. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.
Sproul, R. C. (Ed.). (2005). The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version. Orlando, FL; Lake Mary, FL: Ligonier Ministries.
Stuart, D. K. (2006). Exodus (Vol. 2). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.
Wright, C. J. H. (2013). Learning to love Leviticus: Even those passages about shellfish, mixed fibers, and animal sacrifices. Christianity Today, 57(6), 31–34.
