Exodus 4:24 - On the way at a lodging place, Yahweh met Moses and wanted to kill him.
Select Bible Verse
Filter Categories
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
R
S
T
U
V
W
What does "Exodus 4:24" mean?
This verse, Exodus 4:24, is one of the more perplexing and controversial verses in the Bible. It describes a seemingly inexplicable encounter where God attempts to kill Moses. Here's a breakdown of the key elements and common interpretations:
What the Verse Says (Literal Interpretation):
"On the way at a lodging place": This places the event during Moses' journey back to Egypt with his family, after receiving God's commission to lead the Israelites out of slavery.
"Yahweh met Moses": This clearly states a direct encounter between God and Moses.
"and wanted to kill him": This is the most unsettling part. It suggests God, who just chose Moses, suddenly wants to end his life.
Possible Interpretations and Explanations:
Several interpretations attempt to explain this seemingly contradictory action by God:
1. Moses' Neglect of Circumcision: This is the most widely accepted interpretation. The surrounding verses (Exodus 4:25-26) mention Zipporah, Moses' wife, circumcising their son and touching Moses' feet with the foreskin. The interpretation suggests that Moses had neglected to circumcise his son, Gershom. Circumcision was a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham's descendants, and Moses' failure to uphold this covenant made him liable to death. By not circumcising his son, Moses was symbolically breaking the covenant, thus rendering himself unfit to be God's representative to the Israelites. Zipporah's quick action averted the disaster. The phrase "bloody husband" then can be interpreted as a term of endearment or a lament that her adherence to this religious custom saved Moses' life.
2. Symbolic Meaning: Some scholars argue that the event is symbolic rather than literal. It represents the immense burden and danger of Moses' calling. God was showing Moses the gravity of the task ahead and the potential consequences of failure. The near-death experience underscored the importance of obedience and the perilous journey he was about to undertake.
3. Proxy Punishment: Another less common interpretation suggests that God was going to punish Moses for some other transgression, and the circumcision act was a proxy, a substitute action that appeased God's wrath.
4. God Testing Moses: Some propose that this was a test of Moses' faith and obedience. By putting him in such a dire situation, God was seeing how Moses would react and whether he would remain faithful.
5. A Supernatural Attack: Some interpretations see this as a supernatural attack, perhaps by a malevolent spirit empowered by God, rather than a direct action by God himself. This is a less common view and often involves theological interpretations about the nature of evil and divine sovereignty.
6. Textual Corruption: Some scholars propose that the text may have been altered over time, or that the original meaning has been lost through translation and cultural shifts. However, there's little textual evidence to support significant alterations to this particular passage.
Why the Circumcision Interpretation is Favored:
Context: The immediate verses following the incident focus on the circumcision. This strongly suggests a direct link between Moses' predicament and the neglected ritual.
Covenant Obligation: Circumcision was a fundamental aspect of the covenant relationship between God and the Israelites. Moses, as the leader chosen to renew that covenant, needed to adhere to it strictly.
Zipporah's Actions: Zipporah's actions make little sense unless they directly addressed the reason for God's anger. Her circumcision of their son and her words, "Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me," strongly suggest that the lack of circumcision was the problem.
Important Considerations:
Theological Implications: This passage raises challenging questions about the nature of God. How can a God of love and compassion also want to kill someone he has chosen? Different theological perspectives offer different answers, often focusing on God's holiness, justice, and the consequences of disobedience.
Cultural Context: Understanding the importance of circumcision in ancient Near Eastern culture is crucial to interpreting this passage. It was a deeply significant religious practice.
Ambiguity: The passage is intentionally ambiguous, leaving room for interpretation and reflection.
In Conclusion:
While the exact meaning of Exodus 4:24 remains a subject of debate, the most widely accepted interpretation is that God was angered by Moses' failure to circumcise his son, violating a fundamental covenant obligation. This incident highlights the importance of obedience, the seriousness of God's covenant, and the challenges faced by Moses in his role as leader. The incident also highlights the important role of women in adhering to cultural norms, especially Zipporah in this case.
Exodus 4:24 - On the way at a lodging place, Yahweh met Moses and wanted to kill him.
What does "Exodus 4:24" mean?
This verse, Exodus 4:24, is one of the more perplexing and controversial verses in the Bible. It describes a seemingly inexplicable encounter where God attempts to kill Moses. Here's a breakdown of the key elements and common interpretations:
What the Verse Says (Literal Interpretation):
"On the way at a lodging place": This places the event during Moses' journey back to Egypt with his family, after receiving God's commission to lead the Israelites out of slavery.
"Yahweh met Moses": This clearly states a direct encounter between God and Moses.
"and wanted to kill him": This is the most unsettling part. It suggests God, who just chose Moses, suddenly wants to end his life.
Possible Interpretations and Explanations:
Several interpretations attempt to explain this seemingly contradictory action by God:
1. Moses' Neglect of Circumcision: This is the most widely accepted interpretation. The surrounding verses (Exodus 4:25-26) mention Zipporah, Moses' wife, circumcising their son and touching Moses' feet with the foreskin. The interpretation suggests that Moses had neglected to circumcise his son, Gershom. Circumcision was a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham's descendants, and Moses' failure to uphold this covenant made him liable to death. By not circumcising his son, Moses was symbolically breaking the covenant, thus rendering himself unfit to be God's representative to the Israelites. Zipporah's quick action averted the disaster. The phrase "bloody husband" then can be interpreted as a term of endearment or a lament that her adherence to this religious custom saved Moses' life.
2. Symbolic Meaning: Some scholars argue that the event is symbolic rather than literal. It represents the immense burden and danger of Moses' calling. God was showing Moses the gravity of the task ahead and the potential consequences of failure. The near-death experience underscored the importance of obedience and the perilous journey he was about to undertake.
3. Proxy Punishment: Another less common interpretation suggests that God was going to punish Moses for some other transgression, and the circumcision act was a proxy, a substitute action that appeased God's wrath.
4. God Testing Moses: Some propose that this was a test of Moses' faith and obedience. By putting him in such a dire situation, God was seeing how Moses would react and whether he would remain faithful.
5. A Supernatural Attack: Some interpretations see this as a supernatural attack, perhaps by a malevolent spirit empowered by God, rather than a direct action by God himself. This is a less common view and often involves theological interpretations about the nature of evil and divine sovereignty.
6. Textual Corruption: Some scholars propose that the text may have been altered over time, or that the original meaning has been lost through translation and cultural shifts. However, there's little textual evidence to support significant alterations to this particular passage.
Why the Circumcision Interpretation is Favored:
Context: The immediate verses following the incident focus on the circumcision. This strongly suggests a direct link between Moses' predicament and the neglected ritual.
Covenant Obligation: Circumcision was a fundamental aspect of the covenant relationship between God and the Israelites. Moses, as the leader chosen to renew that covenant, needed to adhere to it strictly.
Zipporah's Actions: Zipporah's actions make little sense unless they directly addressed the reason for God's anger. Her circumcision of their son and her words, "Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me," strongly suggest that the lack of circumcision was the problem.
Important Considerations:
Theological Implications: This passage raises challenging questions about the nature of God. How can a God of love and compassion also want to kill someone he has chosen? Different theological perspectives offer different answers, often focusing on God's holiness, justice, and the consequences of disobedience.
Cultural Context: Understanding the importance of circumcision in ancient Near Eastern culture is crucial to interpreting this passage. It was a deeply significant religious practice.
Ambiguity: The passage is intentionally ambiguous, leaving room for interpretation and reflection.
In Conclusion:
While the exact meaning of Exodus 4:24 remains a subject of debate, the most widely accepted interpretation is that God was angered by Moses' failure to circumcise his son, violating a fundamental covenant obligation. This incident highlights the importance of obedience, the seriousness of God's covenant, and the challenges faced by Moses in his role as leader. The incident also highlights the important role of women in adhering to cultural norms, especially Zipporah in this case.