Family Problems

In the texts we have looked at, we have observed Moses present excuses, or problems, that he feels are obstacles to his fulfilling God’s calling. The first three are the problem of personal inferiority (Exodus 3:11-12), the problem of the message (Exodus 3:13-22) and the problem of the reception (Exodus 4:1-9). For each of these God had provide for Moses assurances.

But Moses still is not through making excuses. We have a fourth round of excuses between Moses and the Lord. This is …

1. The Problem of Delivery, 4:10-12

A. The excuse, 4:10.

The Hebrew is “I am not a man of words.” Evidently Moses had never been a great speaker. He was not an orator even though he could express himself quite well in writing. This seems to be the meaning of Acts 7: 22, where we see . . .

Moses was a writer, but not a speaker. He had not been one before, and Moses realized that since the Lord had begun speaking to him, he had not had no change in this regard.

Moses is seeking to be truthful and realistic. He is not making up excuses but is presenting that which is in his heart before the Lord. He is out in out with the Lord and seeking to have everything cleared up.

There is a lesson here that we should not miss. God is bypassing those who are great in speech or oratory and using one who is deficient. This is not only true in the case of Moses but seen in reference to many others in the Word.

Concerning Moses, we read in Exodus 6:30 … “Behold, I am unskilled in speech…”

Isaiah exclaims, “Woe is me, for I am ruined! Because I am a man of unclean lips … (Isaiah 6:5).

Jeremiah retorts, “Alas, Lord GOD! Behold, I do not know how to speak, Because I am a youth.” (Jeremiah 1:6)

It is well to remind ourselves that Paul himself was no speaker even though he was a great writer.

“Now I, Paul, myself urge you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ—I who am meek when face to face with you, but bold toward you when absent!” (2 Cor. 10:1)

“For they say, “His letters are weighty and strong, but his personal presence is unimpressive and his speech contemptible.” (2 Cor. 10:10)

God takes that which is weak and nothing to glorify Himself; and with few exceptions, He bypasses the man with the dynamic personality and great oratorical ability. The reason is that most men with great ability use that ability to call attention to themselves rather than to the Lord. God has a few like Apollos, Chrysostom and Spurgeon that are great speakers, but this is the exception rather than the rule.

B. The answer, 4:11.

Notice the Lord’s reply carefully. The Lord is saying that he is responsible for every man’s condition. If a man has ability, it is of the Lord. If a man has some impediment, it is also of the Lord. He is ultimately responsible for all that occurs in our lives whether it be “gifts” or “thorns in the flesh,” whether it be perfections or imperfections.

C. The sign, 4:12.

Once again in reply to Moses the Lord gives him a sign. His command to him is “Go.” Upon going, “I will be with your mouth and teach you what you shall say.” If you will be obedient, then I will do the rest and all your needs will be met. What a promise God has made! God will take care of both his mouth and his understanding or mentality. This will be the sign to Moses of the Lord’s call to him.

That God ultimately did all he said he would do is seen in the book of Deuteronomy which is a book of three speeches of Moses to the people. Moses learned that what God promises, he is abundantly able to perform.

Nothing more is needed. Every problem of Moses has been answered. God has been patient and gracious with His child, but there is no more place for refusing. The Lord has commanded “Go” and any disobedience now will result in discipline, for this is His command for His child.

How we need to learn the lesson well that the Lord is very patient and longsuffering, but this does not mean that there is not an end to His patience and His talking. He is just like a father in the flesh who after making his will completely known, will discipline for continued disobedience.

Moses now engages in a fifth round with the Lord and it was this final round that was uncalled for and completely detrimental to Moses and to the work of the Lord. Whenever we take less than the best, it is not only we who suffer, but also the work of the Lord suffers.

2. The Problem of Moses’s Obedience, 4:13-17.

A. The excuse, 4:13.

This is a polite way of phrasing a Hebrew idiom: “Couldn’t you send someone else, Lord?” This request is without justification and made in spite of the light given in the previous four replies. Because of this, the Lord will operate in righteous anger. Moses request is without cause. Therefore, the Lord’s reply will be in discipline and less than the perfect will of God which Moses has refused.

B. The answer, 4:14a.

It is one thing to question the Lord in sincerity; Moses has done this four times. It is another thing to reject what He is requesting of us; Moses is doing this now. God has given been giving Moses the absolute best; Moses has rejected it and so will receive something less than the best.

Moses has asked for someone else, and the Lord will provide Aaron. Aaron is Moses’s older brother and Moses would have done much better without him. He will live to regret this decision. There is nothing worse than to have a message in your heart to give to a people and depending upon someone else to deliver it for you. It is not until after Aaron’s death that Moses is delivered from this arrangement, and it is then that Moses delivers his three addresses to the nation recorded in the book of Deuteronomy showing that the Lord was abundantly able to provide for Moses every need in the way of speaking. There seems to be something else, however, that Moses forfeited in this arrangement. Moses, who was also of the tribe of Levi, now hears the term the “Levite” used of his brother. Aaron becomes the head of the house of Levi (1 Chronicles 23:13). Being the head of this tribe gives him the right of the priesthood. By his continued refusal, Moses lost much that God would have given him. A.B. Simpson wrote this poem:

God has his best things for the few

That dare to stand the tests;

God has his second choice for those

Who will not have his best.

It is not always open ill

That risks the promised rest;

The better, often is the foe

That keeps us from the best.

Some seek the highest choice,

But, when by trials pressed,

They shrink, they yield, they shun the cross

And so they lose the best.

Give me, O Lord, thy highest choice –

Let others take the rest,

Their good things have no charm for me;

I want Thy very best.

I want, in this short life of mine,

As much as can be pressed

Of service true for God and man;

Make me to be Thy best.

I want within the conquering throng

to hear my name confessed;

‘Tis not Thy second best I seek

I want Thy very best.

He knows, He loves, He cares,

Nothing this truth can dim.

He gives the very best to those

Who leave the choice with Him.

Aaron can “speak well” but notice that God’s perfect plan was to use the man who could not speak well over the man who could speak well. What a revelation of the person in program of God.

Before we sharply criticize Moses, let us also remember that he himself is writing this about himself. Moses is completely open and seeks to give no pretense or put on a mask. How we can both admire and imitate this that is seen in his life.

C. The sign, 4:14b-17.

You will notice that in each answer God has given a sign to prove what He is doing. The sign to Moses in this case is Aaron already coming to meet Moses. In verse 27 we learned that God Himself had spoken to Aaron, commanding him to “go to meet Moses in the wilderness,” and Aaron did not question or refuse the Lord at all. Aaron, without any excuses, went. Therefore, he shares the honor with Moses.

Aaron will try to meet Moses at the mount of God (Ex. 4:27) as Moses is traveling toward Egypt. What a marvelous illustration this is that when God works, he works on both ends at the same time. The Lord deals with both Cornelius and Peter at the same time to bring them together. Just so the Lord works with both Saul and with Ananias, with Phillip and with the Ethiopian eunuch. We can know that when God calls, He has also prepared everything at the other end of the line.

Verses 15 and 16 describe the arrangement. It would be the same as God works through a prophet. Moses is in the place of God in this arrangement, and Aaron is the prophet or spokesman. A prophet is one who tells forth the word from God to man and this is Aaron’s position. He will tell forth the word from Moses to the people.

Then in verse 17, once again the reference is made to the staff by which Moses will do the signs. It seems that there is just one staff, and that staff is Moses’s staff, but Aaron also handles the same staff “in the place of Moses.”

Moses’s call and commission at the burning bush is over. It has been recorded in detail because of its significance to Moses, to the children of Israel, to Egypt and the Egyptians, to typology, to prophecy and to us. Let us profit by it greatly. And let us always remembered that the backwardness of the flesh is just as wrong as the forwardness of the flesh. The flesh is wrong – always – regardless of what form it takes.

Moses’s Problems, 4:18-6:13.

Moses has several problems as he answers the Lord’s call. The very fact that we have been called by the Lord Himself does not signify that there will not be difficulties. In fact, we can anticipate that there will. Whenever there is a great door opened with opportunity, there will be many adversaries. Whenever the Lord works, Satan opposes.

Moses problems are in four areas. They are in the domestic realm, civil realm, social realm and spiritual realm. The problems are with his home, with the state of Egypt, with the nation of Israel, and with himself.

3. Domestic problem, 4:18-26.

A. The situation with Jethro, 18

Moses had no problem with Jethro, his father-in-law. Jethro was the head of the family unit, and Moses, even at age 80, reports to him that which he desires to do and receives permission from him. The oldest man in the clan was the head, and all worked in conjunction to him. This same respect for age is commanded in the New Testament where Timothy himself is enjoined: “Do not sharply rebuke an older man but rather appeal to him as a father” (1 Tim. 5:1).

Spiritual service demands and never circumvents the common courtesies of life. Responsibilities to God never alleviate responsibilities to man and society. The believer should be the best and most considerate person of society.

Moses does not reveal the whole affair to Jethro, his father-in-law, probably out of humility. To state now what Moses was called to do would appear to be bragging.

B. The situation with Zipporah, 4:19-26.

In verse 19-20, we observe a second call, as Moses is now in Midian. It is to confirm to Moses without any question that the Lord is in this so that by the mouth of two, every word would be established. The added revelation is given here that both the Pharaoh and those with him who sought to kill Moses are no longer alive. Moses can return in perfect confidence and not in fear.

It will not be an easy journey, but it is begun. Moses has the staff of God in his hand. This will be referred to also as Moses’s staff, and Aaron’s staff as Aaron also will use it.

In verse 21, the Lord once again reminds Moses what he is to do, and that still there will not be immediate success. Concerning the problem of God hardening Pharaoh's heart, we will deal with those issues at another time. Here there is only a prediction that such will be done in the future. God knows what will happen.

From verses 22-23, God has elected Israel as His firstborn. The whole nation was to be born as a unit, as a nation, even as it will be born in a day at the second coming of Christ. Carefully observe, however, that never is any one person referred to as God's Son, or as the Son of God. This is especially important for even the term, “sons of God” all through the Old Testament is reserved to refer to angels alone who were the direct and immediate creation of God.

The Lord never has a messenger without a message. Moses was to state clearly to Pharaoh that it was either one or the other. Either he allowed Israel to leave, or it would be judgment for him. It was either the Lord's firstborn, Israel, that would leave, or it was Pharaoh's firstborn that would die.

Reading verse 24, we may ask, ‘What is this?’ Moses and his family have just commenced on their way. They have gone only one day and stop at a “lodging place.” Aaron has not met Moses yet, but does so at the second night out when they came to the mount of God.

This meeting of the Lord and Moses is just as significant and as important as the meeting at the burning bush, although it is not as pleasant. Moses finds himself under discipline. In what way the Lord met Moses is not stated. That he did, and that Moses knew it and the reason for it is clear.

So, what is going on here? Many evangelical scholars have grappled with this, which is one of the most difficult texts in Exodus. The common interpretation goes something like this: Moses is struck by a sickness because of his failure to circumcise one of his sons (usually the youngest), because the assumption is that circumcision was performed on his first-born and that his mother objected to the rite and would not let her son (the youngest) follow the rite of circumcision as Moses and the Hebrews practiced it. So, for his failure to keep the Abrahamic covenant, God would “cut off” Moses from His people, i.e. he would die. Because Moses was incapacitated, Zipporah had to perform the circumcision on her son—and she was not happy about it! But she did, and God relented and spared Moses, end of story.

I think that there is another way to see this text, as pointed out by Duane Garrett in his commentary, and I think it is more helpful. The key points are as follows:

1. Our text does not say the LORD met and tried to kill Moses. Moses is not mentioned in verses 24-26.

2. The antecedent pronoun “him” in verse 24 is not specified.

3. There are only three explicit persons mentioned: LORD, Zipporah, and her son.

4. The narrative makes us ask the question: “What’s going on? Who is the LORD trying to kill?” Verse 25 gives us the answer, Zipporah’s son.

5. Genesis 17:14 indicates that an uncircumcised male should be “cut off” from his people. There is no indication that the father of an uncircumcised male should be punished, and thus no basis for thinking that God attacked Moses because his son was uncircumcised.

6. Text: Zipporah circumcised “her son” rather than “his son.” Point: if God were attacking Moses because he had not circumcised his son, wouldn’t the text say that she circumcised “his son?”

7. There are no grounds for thinking Moses told her to perform the circumcision. From what we see in the text, she did it on her own. Then there is no reason to think Zipporah was angry that Moses made her do the circumcision.

8. The interpretation that Zipporah touched Moses’s “feet” with the circumcised foreskin is improbable. The Hebrew text says, “And she cut off her son’s foreskin, and she touched his feet.” It is quite a leap to claim that this refers to Moses’s feet.

9. The use of the same word “touch” in Exodus 12:22 (“apply some” lit. = “cause to touch some”) is part of the Passover ritual; this suggests that Zipporah’s touching of the “feet” is a ritual act, not an outburst of anger, and the object of the ritual is her son, not Moses. This would complete the consecration of the boy.

10.If this is correct, we have no reason to think that when she spoke, she addressed Moses nor that it was an angry outburst.

11.The statement in verse 26 were spoken in reference to the circumcision, not in reference to Moses. The “Bridegroom” reference can also mean “son-in-law;” the term as used here may refer to making someone become a relative by a covenant bond. Therefore, the term translated “bridegroom” may describe bringing someone into the community by the ritual of circumcision.

12.The reference to “bloody” is almost certainly used here in this text as a ritual reference to blood and has nothing to do with murder, its more common meaning. Several ancient texts understood it as a part of a formulaic ritual, possible an ancient Midianite ritual. The special annotation at the end of verse 26 seems to tell the readers the significance of the phrase.

With Moses being God’s chosen leader to lead the children of Israel out of bondage into freedom, it was extremely important that all the males in his household were in alignment with the Abrahamic Covenant. It was an expression of faith in the promises of the Lord to Abraham’s descendants.

We can’t overstate this: the role of a father is significant. Fathers, we cannot do just a good job—we must do our best. Moses’ failure in doing what he knew was required for this one son almost cost him his son…and, though not stated in our text, placed a barrier between himself and Zipporah, the daughter of a Midianite priest. If God would judge Pharaoh and Egypt for their mistreatment of the children of Israel by killing the firstborn, could he do any less for one who knew what was required and failed to do it? We must trust the Lord and then put our trust into action when He calls us to serve Him.