Forsaken the Foreskin

[The Sum of Awe]

In 4:24-4:26 God was about to kill Moses because he did not perform a circumcision to his son.

How is this just?

 

[Sleeppy]

Post the chapter, if you can.. Or the relevant verses.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Post the chapter, if you can.. Or the relevant verses.

24 At a lodging place on the way, the Lord met Moses[a] and was about to kill him. 25 But Zipporah took a flint knife, cut off her son’s foreskin and touched Moses’ feet with it. “Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me,” she said. 26 So the Lord let him alone. (At that time she said “bridegroom of blood,” referring to circumcision.)

(Source: Biblegateway)

 

[Huey09]

From my understanding I though circumcision was a jewish custom and marked jewish men as...well jews. Not doing so Moses defied the covenant and rules that he himself passed down. Its like a king getting away with committing crimes that he passed laws against, hypocrisy. I think a few chapters before Moses killed a few jews who went astray and brought idols back to camp. Why wouldn't he get the same?

 

[Sleeppy]

God has no reason to personally come and kill people who aren't circumcised. Everyone should know that by now. The story was either fabricated- or Moses' overly zealous brothers came to police the covenant given by Abraham. But there should be other interpretive options out there.

 

[Huey09]

God has no reason to personally come and kill people who aren't circumcised. Everyone should know that by now. The story was either fabricated- or Moses' overly zealous brothers came to police the covenant given by Abraham. And there should be other interpretive options out there.

There should be other interpretation. And maybe God was some overzealous jews who thought moses was in the wrong. Who's to say? But I think at worst it was a spirit servant of God and at best the religious police.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

There should be other interpretation. And maybe God was some overzealous jews who thought moses was in the wrong. Who's to say? But I think at worst it was a spirit servant of God and at best the religious police.

Would be hard to support that claim, as in this case God was the burning bush.

 

[Sleeppy]

There should be other interpretation. And maybe God was some overzealous jews who thought moses was in the wrong. Who's to say? But I think at worst it was a spirit servant of God and at best the religious police.

You're right; only God knows the truth.


I'm not sure why Moses' wife would be the quicker between them to perform (or remember to perform) that sacrifice on her son. I also do not know why it was necessary to then place the sacrificed foreskin, and blood, onto Moses' feet.. Or how Zipporah could've known these things and reacted so quickly, as to delay God's intention.. The only plausible option for me, says people came to dictate these things to Moses and Zipporah- or they were going to kill them and throw them out.

 

[Sleeppy]

Would be hard to support that claim, as in this case God was the burning bush.

An angel of the LORD spoke from the bush. But, you're right; there are numerous times where the Israelites (seemingly) placed the Most High on Earth. --However, when Jacob had wrestled an angel of the LORD, and been renamed Israel, he named the place as if he had seen God face to face. Penuel is the name of the place he wrestled the angel.

 

[Skwim]

Relevant verses.

Genesis 17:11 KJV
And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your [Abraham] foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.


Exodus 4:24-25 KJV
24And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD met him [Moses], 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.​

 

[Koldo]

God has no reason to personally come and kill people who aren't circumcised. Everyone should know that by now. The story was either fabricated- or Moses' overly zealous brothers came to police the covenant given by Abraham. But there should be other interpretive options out there.

How come?
We are talking about Moses here. Not a random dude.

 

[Koldo]

An angel of the LORD spoke from the bush. But, you're right; there are numerous times where the Israelites (seemingly) placed the Most High on Earth. --However, when Jacob had wrestled an angel of the LORD, and been renamed Israel, he named the place as if he had seen God face to face. Penuel is the name of the place he wrestled the angel.

Actually, it was god himself who spoke from the bush.

 

[Sleeppy]

Actually, it was god himself who spoke from the bush.

And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush; and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. And Moses said: 'I will turn aside now, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt.' And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said: 'Moses, Moses.' And he said: 'Here am I.'


I wasn't there... I won't say I know for sure.

 

[Akivah]

The story was either fabricated- or Moses' overly zealous brothers came to police the covenant given by Abraham. But there should be other interpretive options out there.

24. Now he was on the way, in an inn, that the Lord met him and sought to put him to death. 25. So Zipporah took a sharp stone and severed her son's foreskin and cast it to his feet, and she said, "For you are a bridegroom of blood to me." 26. So He released him. Then she said, "A bridegroom of blood concerning the circumcision."

Yes, the rabbis have other opinions on these verses. Rashi said G-d sought Moses, because Moses had neglected to circumcise his son Eliezer. Because he neglected it, he was to be punished with death. However, Rabbi Jose said Moses did not neglect it, but reasoned: Shall I circumcise him and go forth on the road? It will be dangerous for the child for three days. Shall I circumcise him and wait three days? The Holy One, blessed be He, commanded me, “Go, return to Egypt.” Moses hurried to Egypt intending to circumcise Eliezer upon his return. Moses was threatened with death because first he busied himself with the details of his lodging.

Rashi said that "For you are a bridegroom of blood to me" means You were a cause that my bridegroom would almost be murdered. You are to me the slayer of my bridegroom.

So He released: [I.e.,] the angel [released] him. After this, then Zipporah understood that it was because of the circumcision that the angel had come to slay Moses. She said, “A bridegroom of blood concerning the circumcision”: My bridegroom would have been murdered because of the delay of the circumcision.

 

[Sleeppy]

How come?
We are talking about Moses here. Not a random dude.

God is no respecter of persons, as far as I can currently tell. I didn't exist with Moses to confirm how special he was. But if you believe the events as they are described, your position makes the most sense. Moses is like a king to the sons of Abraham; Abraham had a covenant containing both curses and blessings. The king is either prevented from being cursed, or cursed entirely with his people.

 

[Sleeppy]

24. Now he was on the way, in an inn, that the Lord met him and sought to put him to death. 25. So Zipporah took a sharp stone and severed her son's foreskin and cast it to his feet, and she said, "For you are a bridegroom of blood to me." 26. So He released him. Then she said, "A bridegroom of blood concerning the circumcision."

Yes, the rabbis have other opinions on these verses. Rashi said G-d sought Moses, because Moses had neglected to circumcise his son Eliezer. Because he neglected it, he was to be punished with death. However, Rabbi Jose said Moses did not neglect it, but reasoned: Shall I circumcise him and go forth on the road? It will be dangerous for the child for three days. Shall I circumcise him and wait three days? The Holy One, blessed be He, commanded me, “Go, return to Egypt.” Moses hurried to Egypt intending to circumcise Eliezer upon his return. Moses was threatened with death because first he busied himself with the details of his lodging.

Rashi said that "For you are a bridegroom of blood to me" means You were a cause that my bridegroom would almost be murdered. You are to me the slayer of my bridegroom.

So He released: [I.e.,] the angel [released] him. After this, then Zipporah understood that it was because of the circumcision that the angel had come to slay Moses. She said, “A bridegroom of blood concerning the circumcision”: My bridegroom would have been murdered because of the delay of the circumcision.

This is an isolated event, for Moses; correct? No one is currently being killed for (ignorantly) delaying their child's circumcision? Were there others besides Moses who encountered the same threat?

 

[Smart_Guy]

In 4:24-4:26 God was about to kill Moses because he did not perform a circumcision to his son.

How is this just?

Hmm, hard to digest. But you know, the bible went through many translations. Maybe something got too deep between the lines before we reached to this one?

I think there is a different interpretation to it if we get the original text.

Just my opinion and I could be wrong.

Oh, and by the way, circumcision is found in Islam too and it is an obligation for boys only.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Robert Alter suggests:

One may infer that both the deity here and the rite of circumcision carried out by Zipporah belong to an archaic -- perhaps even pre monotheistic -- stratum of Hebrew culture, though both are brought into telling alignment with the story that follows. The potently anthropomorphic and mythic character of the episode generates a crabbed style, as thou the writer were afraid to spell out its real content, and thus even the referents of pronominal forms are ambiguous. Traditional Jewish commentators seek to naturalize the story to a more normative monotheism by claiming that Moses has neglected the commandment to circumcise his son (sons?), and that is why the Lord threatens his life. What seems more plausible is that Zipporah's act reflects an older rational for circumcision among West Semitic people the the covenantal one enunciated in Genesis 17. Here circumcision serves as an apotropaic device, to ward off the hostility of a dangerous deity by offering him a bloody scrap of the son's flesh, a kind of symbolic synecdoche of human sacrifice. The circumciser, moreover, is the mother and not the father as enjoined in Genesis. The story is an archaic cousin of the repeated biblical stories of life-threatening trial in the wilderness, and, as modern critics have often noted, it corresponds to the folktale pattern of a perilous rite of passage that the hero must undergo before embarking on his mission proper. …

 

[metis]

In 4:24-4:26 God was about to kill Moses because he did not perform a circumcision to his son.

How is this just?

There are a great many verses like this in essentially all scriptures if they're assumed to be both 100% divinely inspired and absolutely inerrant.

 

[kashmir]

What I want to know is it purely coincidental to why circumcision was done, or did they know the health and sexual benefits, or what the heck.

I cant see some deity really giving a hoot about it, or was it because Jewish people were advanced to understand why we do it and because the Gentiles did not, it was something the deemed spiritual, after all they all prayed to the same deity?

The scripture really says nothing beyond exclusiveness that man felt, when writing the scripture.

What was actually going on and where the circumcision act even came from is what I want to know.