Introduction to Exodus 4:24–26: A Mysterious and Puzzling Encounter

                      Introduction to Exodus 4:24–26: A Mysterious and Puzzling Encounter

Exodus 4:24–26 is one of the most intriguing and enigmatic passages in the Bible. After God calls Moses to lead the Israelites out of Egypt, something unexpected happens on His journey back to Egypt.

At first glance, this story can leave readers puzzled. Why would God, who had just commissioned Moses to deliver His people, suddenly seek to kill him? And why does Zipporah’s swift act of circumcision resolve the crisis? Understanding this passage requires exploring its cultural, covenantal, and theological context.

This moment emphasizes the importance of covenant obedience—specifically the covenant of circumcision given to Abraham in Genesis 17. Some scholars suggest that Moses had neglected to circumcise his son, which was a serious breach of covenant law. Zipporah’s quick action not only saves Moses’ life but also highlights her key role in ensuring Moses’ mission can move forward.

In this blog, I propose that Moses was never circumcised as Israelite or at least he had received an Egyptian circumcision as a baby. The Bible does not explicitly state why Moses was not circumcised before being sent down the Nile, but there are several possible reasons to consider. See below:

Fear of Egyptian Authorities
The Israelites were enslaved in Egypt, and it is possible that the Egyptians monitored or restricted their religious practices, including circumcision. Moses' mother, Jochebed, may have feared that circumcising him would expose him as an Israelite and put him in danger.


Urgent Decision
Jochebed had to act quickly to save Moses from Pharaoh’s decree to kill Hebrew baby boys (Exodus 1:22). She might not have had the opportunity to circumcise him before placing him in the basket.


Age of Circumcision and Care
The command for circumcision was given to Abraham (Genesis 17:12), requiring it on the eighth day. If Moses was already a few months old when he was placed in the basket, Jochebed may have hesitated to circumcise him due to the risks of infection or complications without proper care.


Blending In with Egyptians
Since he was being placed in a situation where an Egyptian might adopt him, Jochebed might have intentionally left him uncircumcised so that he would not immediately be identified as a Hebrew. This would increase his chances of survival in Pharaoh’s household.


Egyptian Influence on Israelite Practices
Some scholars suggest that circumcision might not have been consistently practiced by all Israelites in Egypt. If some groups had neglected the practice, Moses' family might have been among them. Methods of circumcision varies between both Egyptians and Israelites. The Egyptian procedure involved either making a longitudinal cut or removing a triangular section of the foreskin. To them, it was a social or religious marker. In contrast, the Israelites' procedure entails the complete removal of the foreskin, which represented their divine covenant between themselves and God.

The later account in Exodus 4:24-26, where Zipporah circumcises their son, suggests that Moses himself might not have been circumcised or at least had one like an Egyptian.

In reference to Exodus 4:24-26, I believe God sent the Angel of the Lord (reflecting the principle of agency) to strike Moses due to his disobedience regarding both his own circumcision and that of his son. This aligns with Moses’ attitude earlier in Chapter 4 and in the previous chapter, where he seemed to look for excuses to avoid taking full responsibility. Moreover, as a leader chosen by God, Moses was held to a higher level of accountability, as reflected in passages like James 3:1 and Luke 12:48. Ultimately, Moses' complacency toward his calling led to God's severe response.

Rabbi Tamah Davis-Hart explains that Zipporah had to demonstrate great courage in acting swiftly, as the ritual was traditionally performed by men. Moses had neglected this important rite, and now the family was on their way back to Egypt. Had Moses circumcised himself or had Zipporah carried out the procedure, Moses would not have been able to continue the journey, as he would have needed time to rest and recover. See Genesis 34:25. Therefore, Zipporah took the initiative to perform the circumcision on their son and symbolically on Moses.

When examining the original Hebrew text, the name Moses does not appear in the phrase translated as “touched Moses’ feet.” Instead, the text simply says “touched feet.” This suggests that Zipporah could have taken the foreskin and touched either Moses or her son. Regarding the term “feet,” while it’s not part of the circumcision ritual, the Hebrew word for “feet” (regel) is also used as a euphemism for genitals or genital function, and even sexual exposure (see Judges 3:24; 1 Samuel 24:3; Ezekiel 16:25; Ruth 3:4,7). Thus, the phrase in Exodus 4:25 makes sense only if Zipporah circumcised her son, which she did. She then symbolically transferred that circumcision to Moses by taking the foreskin and touching Moses' genitals. Acting in faith, she intervened, and God spared Moses' life.

With this act, the family was allowed to move forward, now protected, and Moses was aligned with God’s Covenant. This alignment enabled him to fulfill his role in glorifying God by acting as His messenger, bringing the plagues upon Pharaoh and Egypt.

In a similar way, Joshua 5 describes how the second generation of Israelites were circumcised before entering the Promised Land. It is unclear whether they had been circumcised in the Egyptian manner prior to this. However, the Israelites needed to undergo the proper circumcision in order to enter the Promised Land. In the same vein, the Holy Spirit performs a spiritual circumcision of the heart for believers under the New Covenant, enabling them to enter the true Promised Land in 70AD—Heaven.

Source: https://rabdavis.org/gershom-and-the-circumcision-shmot-exodus-424-6/


***Below are two different translations. One has God coming after Moses while the other has the Angel of the Lord.***

Exodus 4:24-26 English Standard Version 24 At a lodging place on the way the Lord met him and sought to put him to death. 25 Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son's foreskin and touched Moses' feet with it and said, “Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me!” 26 So he let him alone. It was then that she said, “A bridegroom of blood,” because of the circumcision.

Exodus 4:24-26 Brenton Septuagint Translation 24And it came to pass that the angel of the Lord met him by the way in the inn, and sought to slay him. 25and Sepphora having taken a stone cut off the foreskin of her son, and fell at his feet and said, The blood of the circumcision of my son is staunched: 26and he departed from him, because she said, The blood of the circumcision of my son is staunched.

**Below are verses pertaining to the topic of Circumcision and how it relates to Exodus 4 and Joshua 5.

Genesis 34:14 English Standard Version 14 They said to them, “We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one who is uncircumcised, for that would be a disgrace to us.

NOTE: A person with no circumcision was viewed as socially unacceptable.

1 Samuel 18:24-27 English Standard Version 24 And the servants of Saul told him, “Thus and so did David speak.” 25 Then Saul said, “Thus shall you say to David, ‘The king desires no bride-price except a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, that he may be avenged of the king's enemies.’” Now Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines. 26 And when his servants told David these words, it pleased David well to be the king's son-in-law. Before the time had expired, 27 David arose and went, along with his men, and killed two hundred of the Philistines. And David brought their foreskins, which were given in full number to the king, that he might become the king's son-in-law. And Saul gave him his daughter Michal for a wife.

NOTE: Foreskins were seen as an important and valuable thing.

Zephaniah 2:8 King James Bible I have heard the reproach of Moab, and the revilings of the children of Ammon, whereby they have reproached my people, and magnified themselves against their border.

NOTE: This verse shares similar language of a Gentile nation taunting God's people.

Joshua 5:9 English Standard Version 9 And the Lord said to Joshua, “Today I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from you.” And so the name of that place is called Gilgal to this day.

NOTE: Like Zephaniah 2:8, it is possible the Egyptians are mocking the Israelites as having the Egyptian circumcision (suggesting ownership over them) or having no circumcision at all. Now, that they were circumcised they were viewed vessels of honor for God.

Jeremiah 9:26 English Standard Version Egypt, Judah, Edom, the sons of Ammon, Moab, and all who dwell in the desert who cut the corners of their hair, for all these nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in heart.”

NOTE: Egypt did participated in circumcision, but not in the same method as Israel.