Introduction: Read Exodus4v18to31.

This short passage contains many difficulties and has given rise to speculation and many differences of opinion. In examining some of these difficulties it is important not to forget the main purpose of Scripture. It is given for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. See 2Tim3v16.

(1) Reluctant accord.

It is a great pity we do not know more about where the places mentioned in Exodus were. We cannot be sure if Jethro lived in a permanent settlement or where his main abode was. The land of Midian is thought to be a strip of land to the east of the Gulf of Aqaba. However in some respects it is meaningless to tie the Midianites down to any particular territory as they were nomadic herders. No one is sure where Mount Horeb, also called Sinai, was located. Some place it in the south of the Sinai peninsula, some in the north and others to the east of the Gulf of Aqaba. If Mount Horeb was in the northeast of Sinai it might well have been grazed by Midianite shepherds for part of the year. Moses may have left Jethro's flock in the care of other Midianite shepherds when he returned east to his father-in-law's main camp. This may have been by a well in the northern part of what was traditionally Midianite territory. After receiving Jethro's blessing Moses had to retrace his steps because he was reunited with Aaron at Horeb. Aaron had been prompted by God to find his brother Moses in the wilderness. There was a lot of wilderness! It is likely that Aaron was aware Moses had settled with the Midianites. If so, he would make for their traditional spring or summer grazing land. (In the time of Gideon the nomadic Midianites entered the land about the time of harvest - when Gideon was threshing his wheat.) If we accept that Horeb was in the far north of the Sinai peninsula it lies midway between Egypt and Midian. It is not hard to imagine Moses and Aaron arriving in the region about the same time.

The narrative suggests Moses was in reluctant accord with God. I don't think he was fully committed in his own mind to taking on Pharaoh. Rather, he was prepared to meet with his brother Aaron. This would explain his words to Jethro: "Let me go back to my own people in Egypt to see if any are still alive." v18. Moses was not dissembling. This was the extent of his commitment.

Moses was prepared to take his wife and sons with him because God had assured him that all those who wanted to kill him were dead. It is understandable that Moses wanted to introduce his wife and two boys to his brother Aaron. However, it appears unlikely that Zipporah and her sons went all the way back to Egypt with Moses. It was AFTER the Exodus that Jethro re-united Zipporah and her sons with Moses. Perhaps after meeting Aaron at Horeb Moses sent his family back to Jethro in the care of other Midianite shepherds.

The only hopeful signs that Moses would finally deliver the Israelites from slavery were that he started back to Egypt and more significantly, he took the staff of God in his hand.

LESSON:

(a) There is a huge difference between doing nothing and making a start. The inhabitants of Jerusalem could have been forgiven for being in despair about the ruined state of he walls of their city. But once Nehemiah arrived the people said: "Let us start rebuilding." So they began this good work. Neh2v18 As soon as they began, the work took on a momentum of its own.

Many times I have been confronted with a mountain of work. It is easy in such circumsances to be overwhelmed to the point of giving up in despair. However there is nothing like making a start to dispel the blues. I once had all the tombstones of our chapel graveyard to survey and make safe. It was not a job I wanted to do. The thought of it depressed me. However, once I got started I felt better about the task.

(b) When Moses set out for Egypt his staff became God's staff. Eventually what happened to his staff happened to Moses as well. He became God's instrument for the salvation of his people.

If we start by giving what we have to God we will end up giving what we are to him in his service.

(2) Speaking for the record.

Once Moses sets off for Egypt God gives him a brief preview of what will take place. He will perform wonders before Pharaoh but they will not be enough to persuade the tyrant to let the Hebrews go. God condemns Pharaoh for not letting his people go, dear as a first born son to him as they are. As a result of his intransigence Pharaoh will lose his own first born son.

Now it is absolutely ridiculous to argue as some do that God manipulated Pharaoh - making him unwilling to release the Israelites. This is NOT how God operates. He is totally committed to mankind's freedom. God leaves us free to suffer the consequences of our own actions. That is why there is so much misery and mayhem in the world. God pays a heavy price for leaving us free. Our Maker could easily manipulate our minds and wills so that we had to be good. (Even we are able to do this to a limited extent through conditioning or hypnosis.) God could have manipulated Moses so he accepted his role with alacrity. That would have saved God the humiliation of having to argue with Moses. Indeed, Moses would have been quite surplus to requirements if God gave Pharaoh an uncontrollable urge to set his slaves free. So we could go on - with a bit of mental tweaking there would be no enslavement of the Hebrews in the first place.

It should be obvious to anyone but the most died in the wool Calvinist that God achieves his purposes under the very real constraint of leaving men and women free and responsible for their actions. I deal with with these issues in my exposition on Acts23v11to31.

Pharaoh obviously didn't want to lose his slave labour force. If they were allowed to go for a three day jaunt into the wilderness there was no way Pharaoh would be able to round them all up again. Each time a plague occurred God gave Pharaoh the opportunity to free the Hebrew slaves. Each time Pharaoh reneged on his promise to release the slaves after a plague ended his heart hardened just that little bit more. Only insofar as God was responsible for plague after plague following refusal after refusal did he harden Pharaoh's heart. The Egyptian ruler's heart was hardened by the very opportunities he was given - opportunities he would not accept.

I think in Pharaoh's case his obdurance may have been in the will and purpose of God - just as the crucifixion of Jesus was. Perhaps, that is what the sacred writer means when God is said to harden Pharaoh's heart. The succession of plagues ended in the Passover with all that has meant to Jews and later to Christians.

LESSONS:

Men and women become hard-hearted by responding repeatedly in the same way to a given situation. As a school teacher I heard all kinds of excuses for homework not being done. In the end I paid no attention to what pupils said but consigned them to detention automatically. I hardened my heart against them. I just would not listen to them. Sometimes this led to injustices!

In the last World War atrocities were perpetrated by Germans against Jews and by the Japanese against prisoners of war. It must have been hard in the first place to herd Jews into the gas chambers - but the more a person did it - the more used he got to it - so his heart hardened.

Another evil consequence of this process is found where a regular church goer repeateldy hardens his or her heart to the gospel and becomes what is called gospel hardened. Jesus refereed to such hearers in his Parable of the Sower. Some seed fell on the wayside - it never penetrated the soil - it never bore fruit.

(3) Marital discord.

Moses set out for Egypt with his family. Maybe mother and younger son were on a donkey and Moses and his oldest son walked. Eventually they come to a caravanserai - a camping place by a well or oasis. What follows is difficult to work out because the account is terse and lacking in detail. It seems Moses rather than one of his sons was suddenly taken so seriously ill his very life was threatened. In response Zipporah circumcised one son - in all likelihood the youngest. She didn't need to circumcise Moses. Pharaoh's daughter knew that the baby she found in the ark was a Hebrew child for the obvious reason.

The question that arises is: Why did Zipporah associate Moses illness with the need to circumcise her youngest son? She only circumcised one - not both sons. I don't think she was pleased about having to perform the operation. She placed the foreskin at Moses' feet to identify him with the deed and said, "You are a bridegroom of blood to me." This is akin to saying, "A bloody husband you have turned out to be."

The sequence of events suggests Moses and Zipporah were in dispute about circumcising their second son. Zipporah was possibly appalled at the procedure on her first son. She may have been disgusted at the distress it caused and considered it unnecessary and barbaric. She wasn't going to let her second son suffer in the same way. As long as Moses was resigned to spending his life as a Midianite shepherd he was prepared to give way to his wife.

The situation changed when Moses was charged by God with the task of negotiating the Israelites freedom from slavery. Moses doubtless brought the matter up as they journeyed toward Horeb. He knew how important circumcision was to his people. It was the sign of the covenant God made with Abraham to give his descendents a land flowing with milk and honey. See Gen17v8. Moses was to play a key role in fulfilling this part of God's covenant. This being the case it was hardly appropriate that one of his sons remained uncircumcised.

In all probability Zipporah refused to co-operate and opposed Moses in this matter. I can imagine Moses saying: "Look Zipporah it is my right as husband (bridegroom) to have my way in this matter." But still she resisted.

In such circumstances it is possible Moses suffered a stress related neurological episode such as an epileptic type fit or paralysis. In such circumstances Zipporah would know the cause of her husband's illness. Faced with the choice of losing her husband or circumcising her son she chose the latter. Zipporah obviously knew how to perform a circumcision and had the nerve to carry it out with a sharp flint knife in spite of it being a man's job. Perhaps that is another reason she threw the foreskin at Moses! Certainly Zipporah circumcised her son with bad grace.

It is possible Moses realised the antagonism of his wife was a sign of things to come in the highly fraught time that was coming. Once he had met up with Aaron and made up his mind to accompany him back to Egypt Moses might well have thought the best place for Zipporah and his sons was back with Jethro his father-in-law. He could have sent them back from Horeb under the protection of other Midianite shepherds grazing in the area.

LESSONS:

The strange incident we have been looking at illustrates the unfortunate consequences of marriage between people of different religious traditions. Zipporah was not in sympathy with the God of the covenant. It was made with Isaac's descendents not Abraham's by Keturah. She didn't understand how important the sign of the covenant was. To her it was a nasty, painful, bloody operation performed on a baby boy causing distress to both baby and mother.

Paul taught: Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? .... What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 2Cor6v14to16.

All sorts of problems ensue when a Christian marries a non-Christian. The non-Christian does not share the priorities of a Christian. It invariably results in a reduced commitment to Christ on the part of the Christian who needs to compromise with an unbelieving partner. I know a woman, for example, who only worships once on a Sunday because her husband objects to the whole day being given up to Jesus. There is no doubt either that the children of a mixed marriage are much less likely to profess Christ than the children of a Christian couple. There is always a price to pay for disobeying God's word.

(4) Brotherly accord.

It is a relief to move from marital discord to brotherly concord. Moses and Aaron met on the flanks of Mt Horeb which would be roughly midway between northern Egypt and Midian if the mountain had, as I suspect, a northerly location. It is good to note that when the two brothers met for the first time in at least 40 years they kissed.

In the process of telling Aaron all about his call to deliver the Israelites from slavery it seems likely Moses decided to do as God asked. So the outcome of the meeting was that Moses returned to Egypt with Aaron, met with the Israelite elders and convinced them that God was going to deliver his people from captivity.

LESSON:

It is amazing the difference moral support makes. Moses was undoubtedly confirmed in his mission as he and Aaron discussed the situation in Egypt and his encounter with God at the burning bush.

There are times when I have been anxious, apprehensive and disturbed. After a poor night's sleep I have discussed the troubling issue with a friend or Christian brother and my fears subside and the way ahead becomes clear.

I like the account in Acts of Paul travelling along the Appian way from Puteoli to Rome. When he gets to Three Taverns he meets a group of Christians who have come from Rome to meet him. Luke records: At the sight of these men Paul thanked God and was encouraged. Acts28v15.

It is good to talk things over with God - but there are times when the support and sympathy of a friend or Christian brother makes all the difference.