Why did the LORD seek to kill Moses in Exodus 4:24? Exodus 4:24—The Text “Now at a lodging place on the way, the LORD met Moses and sought to kill him.” (Exodus 4:24) --- Immediate Narrative Setting • Moses has just left Midian to return to Egypt as Yahweh’s appointed deliverer (Exodus 4:18–23). • Yahweh has declared Israel “My firstborn son” (4:22) and warned that the judgment on Pharaoh’s firstborn will mirror any refusal to release Israel. • The very next verse records Yahweh confronting Moses with mortal intent. --- Primary Cause: Covenant Violation 1. Genesis 17:10–14 institutes circumcision as the perpetual sign of the Abrahamic covenant: “Any uncircumcised male…shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.” 2. Moses’ firstborn, Gershom (Exodus 2:22), had not been circumcised on the eighth day. The penalty for covenant breach—being “cut off”—falls on the head of the responsible covenant guardian, Moses. 3. Exodus 4:25–26 shows Zipporah remedying the lapse: “So Zipporah took a flint knife, cut off her son’s foreskin, and touched it to Moses’ feet, saying, ‘Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me.’ … So the LORD let him alone.” --- Why Such Severity? Seven Inter-Connected Reasons 1. Covenantal Consistency The deliverer of the covenant people must himself submit to covenant stipulations. As Yahweh is about to slay Egypt’s firstborn for covenant defiance, He cannot overlook similar disobedience in His own representative (cf. Leviticus 10:3). 2. Priestly Leadership Paradigm Moses will function as mediator (Exodus 19:3). Priestly figures who violate holiness regulations incur death (e.g., Nadab and Abihu, Leviticus 10:1–2). The precedent protects Israel from presuming upon grace. 3. Typological Foreshadowing Blood-shedding through circumcision anticipates Passover (Exodus 12) and ultimately the cross (Colossians 2:11–14). Moses’ near-death and the substitutionary blood act vividly prefigure salvation by substitutionary sacrifice. 4. Divine Instruction in Immediate Obedience Forty years earlier Moses had acted impulsively (Exodus 2:12); now he hesitates on a direct command. The incident crystallizes a lifelong lesson that partial obedience endangers mission effectiveness. 5. Spiritual Leadership and Family Headship First-line accountability in biblical anthropology locates covenant stewardship with the male head (Genesis 18:19; Ephesians 6:4). Neglect at home disqualifies public ministry (1 Timothy 3:4–5). Yahweh corrects Moses before public launch. 6. Circumcision of Heart Principle Physical circumcision symbolizes inward consecration (Deuteronomy 10:16; Romans 2:29). Moses’ lapse exposes an uncircumcised area of his own heart, rectified through crisis and repentance. 7. Legal-Evidentiary Integrity of Scripture The episode’s inclusion—embarrassing to Israel’s hero—exemplifies the criterion of embarrassment that undergirds historical credibility. Ancient Near-Eastern heroic literature omits such flaws; Torah reports them, attesting honesty. --- Early Jewish and Christian Interpretation • Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: stresses Moses’ neglect of circumcision. • Philo, On the Life of Moses, II.69: highlights covenant obligation. • Origen, Homilies on Exodus 5: views event as lesson that “no one disobeys God with impunity.” • Augustine, Contra Faustum 19.26: notes typology toward Christ’s redeeming blood. --- Archaeological and Cultural Corroboration • Middle-Bronze-Age flint blades discovered in a Midianite burial context (Timna Valley, Israel Antiquities Authority, 2014) demonstrate contemporaneous circumcision practice with stone knives—as Zipporah used. • Egyptian execration texts (c. 1900 BC) denounce nomadic Semites, paralleling social tension Moses will confront. --- Chronological Note Using a conservative Ussher-style chronology, Moses departs Midian c. 1446 BC (1 Kings 6:1; Judges 11:26). The timing fits a 430-year sojourn (Exodus 12:40) and places the circumcision incident within a literal historical framework rather than mythic abstraction. --- Summary Answer The LORD sought to kill Moses because Moses had violated the covenant stipulation of circumcision for his son. As the chosen mediator poised to confront Pharaoh with divine judgment on firstborn sons, Moses himself stood under the same covenant penalty. Zipporah’s swift act of circumcision and application of blood satisfied the covenant requirement, sparing Moses and typologically foreshadowing salvation through substituted blood. The incident teaches the necessity of complete obedience, the priority of family holiness, and the consistency of God’s covenant dealings, all while reinforcing the Scripture’s historical reliability. |
    |