I want to start of by saying that I posted this thread so that I could grow my hypothesis (the circumcision points to the Passover and the name on the Messiah's thigh) and test its validity. It has certainly grown thanks to the input of various people (namely Bolts...). This is why I may seem to have contradicted myself from previous statements.
StoveBolts: While I understand your reasoning on this, and I also see how you would use this to further your view, I do not see it as a valid reason why Moses son Eliezer was not the one circumcised while Moses is the one the Lord sought to kill.
I originally asserted that Eliezer was not the one circumcised, but I understand now that we simply don't know if this were true or not. We also don't know if Eliezer was born prior to 4:24. There is no mention of Eliezer by name prior to this. The only clue that Eleizer was born prior to 'the Lord sought to kill him' is in Exodus 4:20
And Moses took his wife and his sons, and set them upon an ass, and he returned to the land of Egypt: and Moses took the rod of God in his hand.
But as I have mentioned before, the word for sons is also the word for a single son or both male and female children collectively. So I don't know if Eliezer was not the one circumcised. I hold that he may or may not have been. For the thesis statement of this thread, who was circumcised is not important. I believe that God sought to kill the first born of Moses, but Gershom may or may not have been the one being circumcised.
Moses was brought up understanding his Jewish background.
Yes, he did. But as you remember, Moses was separate from the Israelites. As far as I am aware, there is no mention of him being assimilated as part of the culture. He was Hebrew that wore Egyptian clothing. The Israelites rejected him prior to him leaving Egypt when he tried to break up a fight. He was Hebrew by blood, but it doesn't seem that he was accepted as a 'fellow' Hebrew. I don't doubt that Moses knew his stuff, but there is no mention of his reverence to Yahweh prior to the burning bush.
I would like to argue how he knew about his Hebrew background. I still doubt that he stayed with his mother much longer beyond infancy. There are plenty of commentaries that agree to that end. He was the son of the princess of Egypt. He received the best education. I am certain he was curious of his people as he had their mark. I am certain there was a plethora of knowledge on Hebrews as they had been there for 400 years. They were an integral part of Eqyptian society. You would think that if a slave were to become prince that he would be popular among the slaves, but that doesn't seem to be the case. It doesn't seem like Moses was a 'true scottsman' to the Hebrew slaves.
Also, the Midrash regards Jethro as an idolator. Would a true god fearing Hebrew marry an idolator?
And this seems to beg the question. Why did Zipporah perform the circumcision and not Moses? Why was Moses not able to? I would argue that "He" had Moses
That is why I originally suggested that Moses wasn't present, but I don't think that God sought to kill Moses because the law regarding circumcision requires the uncircumcised to receive the punishment (to be removed from their family), not the persons father. Also, as I said before, God and Moses' conversation prior to the circumcision regarded killing first borns for not allowing His people to worship Him. The circumcision was an agreement for many nations in exchange for worshipping God and a son was not circumcised. That is why she spoke to God so bitterly afterwards. God came to kill her son and the circumcision was what bound her son to God, like a marriage. She calling Moses a bridegroom of blood because they had been married for 40 years. She was talking to God because He forced her hand to complete the union.
We also know that Gershom was not a child at this point and I believe it is safe to say that Gershom was already circumcised in accordance to the Covenant with Abraham. This could even lend to the reason why Zipporah was able to circumcise their second son, Eliezer as she would have watched her husband Moses perform that duty many years prior with Gershom.
I agree, Gershom must have been a grown man, but the context is that God would kill the first born. Gershom may have been circumcised or may not have been. Eleizer may have been born or may not have been born yet. We dont know. What we do know is that someone was not circumcised.
Will you give me your take on these verses? They have been presented before.
Exd 18:3 - And her two sons; of which the name of the one [was] Gershom; for he said, I have been an alien in a strange land:
Exd 18:4 - And the name of the other [was] Eliezer; for the God of my father, [said he, was] mine help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh:
Gershom must have provided familial comfort in a way that Zipporah or Jethro could not have. Gershom would have been the only blood relative around.
Eliezer, I believe, was that same mental/emotional driving force. Being gone from his Midianite family for such a long period of time must have been a troubling experience even if the rest of his blood family is in Egypt with him. It had been 40 years since he had seen any of his Egyptian Hebrews that a chasm surly would have grown. Even God had to reassure Moses that his brother, Aaron, would be excited to see him. So in the same way that Gershom was a comfort to Moses during his exile, Eliezer was the driving force to finish his mission and return to his family. Eliezer may have been a baby or just a bun in the oven when Zipporah returned to her father.
;) (not you, but the other poster!)
:fightflow!! --Elijah
