“God sought to kill Moses”
“And it came to pass on the way, at the encampment, that the LORD met him and sought to kill him. Then Zipporah took a sharp stone and cut off the foreskin of her son and cast it at Moses’ feet, and said, “Surely you are a husband of blood to me!” So, He let him go.”
How can we understand this profound scriptural passage? Was this event deeply symbolic rather than a literal event on the law of circumcision.
The early Church Fathers and biblical commentators have offered different interpretations, often linking it to covenantal faithfulness, divine discipline, and the spiritual significance of circumcision.
Circumcision as Covenant Obedience
Many early Church Fathers, including Origen and Saint Augustine, understood this as a moment of divine discipline. Moses, chosen to be the deliverer of Israel, had apparently neglected the covenant sign of circumcision for his son. Since circumcision was the mark of God’s covenant with Abraham (Genesis 17:10-14), failing to circumcise his son meant Moses was not fully aligned with God’s covenantal requirements. This was particularly serious because Moses was about to lead the people who were under that same covenant.
• Origen the scholar in (Homilies on Exodus) suggests that Moses’ failure to circumcise his son was a sign of spiritual negligence. God sought to remind him that before he could serve as a mediator for Israel, his own household had to be in order.
• Saint Augustine (Against Faustus, Book 22) points out that circumcision was a sign of spiritual purification and belonging to God’s people. Moses had to be obedient to this before he could fulfil his mission.
(Typological View) Another perspective
Did God use this instance to prepare Moses for spiritual warfare and the battle he was about to face against Pharaoh? Could this event have had profound depth in spiritual battles rather than just about the law of circumcision?
• Saint Gregory of Nyssa (Life of Moses) saw Moses as a type of Christ and Pharaoh as a type of Satan. Before Moses could lead Israel out of Egypt, he had to experience a kind of personal spiritual battle.
• Saint Cyril of Alexandria interpreted this passage in a Christological light, seeing Pharaoh as a symbol of the devil holding humanity in slavery to sin. The shedding of blood in circumcision pointed forward to Christ’s blood, which would be the true liberation from spiritual bondage.
Is This Like Jacob’s Wrestling?
We can compare Jacob’s wrestling with God (Genesis 32:24-30) and Moses encounter similar as both events involve a personal confrontation with God before a significant mission.
• Jacob’s wrestling with God, prepared him for his reconciliation with Esau, emphasising that his true struggle was not with Esau but with God’s plan for him.
• Moses’ encounter may have served a similar function: he was about to confront Pharaoh, but first, he needed to submit fully to God’s covenant. Thus, this passage could be seen as a test, ensuring that Moses was spiritually prepared before facing Pharaoh. The battle was not just political but spiritual—between God and the forces of darkness that Pharaoh represented.
Was It Just About Circumcision? Yes and no.
The literal issue was that Moses had not circumcised his son, which was a breach of the covenant. However, the deeper meaning seems to be that Moses needed to demonstrate full obedience to God before leading His people. The act of circumcision was not just a ritual but a sign of submission to God’s will.
The Church Fathers generally saw this passage as more than just about circumcision—it was about Moses’ spiritual preparation, covenant faithfulness, and the foreshadowing of Christ’s ultimate victory over sin and death. While circumcision was the immediate issue, the deeper lesson is that God’s battles are fought on a spiritual level, not just a human one.