Albert Mohler - "Did God Try to Kill Moses?"

R. Albert Mohler Jr. continues the series on hard questions, turning to Exodus 4:18-26 and the question, "Did God try to kill Moses?"

[@jennacalicchio4312]

I just learned so much in this 48-minute video. Probably more than I've learned than watching any other video.

[@edithm8998]

Same. Had never learnt so much. Lord God you have your soldier teachers all over.

[@jwadewole]

I am preparing to teach on Exodus and was stymied by this passage. Thank you for bringing some clarity.

[@SLVBULL]

To me, wrestling with God means that, no matter what adversities we face, we cling tightly to God, refusing to let Him go, until He gives us His blessing. This could be in prayer, in service, in work, in school, in anything we face in life; we never let go of God even to the point where we may become injured.

[@rhondatoothaker5494]

What a beautiful sermon. I just ran across this scripture and shook my head. This sermon cleared many things up for me. Thank you!

[@jeeengtham3775]

This is a wonderful sermon. It answers many questions that I have about this passage and helps me to see the significance of this event in the whole context of Moses' call to deliver God's people. Thank you ;)

[@milagroscastillo6647]

I was horrified in the biginning before I googled this question I was previously studying this but now I understand it I love to study the word of God

[@robinmarie8213]

Thankfully Jesus made a NEW covenant when He said "A new commandment I give you. Love one another as I have Loved you."... Some might say that doesn't mean to the exclusion of the old covenant, but I'm choosing to be optimistic. Why? Because LOVE NEVER FAILS 🙂

[@ElpisLivePodcastMusic]

This is great...

[@johnkhnana4731]

Circumcision is introduced in Gen 17 because Abraham and Sarah tried to shortcut the promise of offspring with Hagar in Gen 16. It’s not arbitrary but makes sense that the purposes of God will be furthered his ways and not by human striving.

[@jonathanbouriaque9828]

Zipporah's actions saved Moses' life by doing what he had failed to do. Moses failed in his obligation as a Jewish father to circumcise his sons on the 8th day as God had commanded Abraham. When Zipporah called him a "bloody husband", perhaps she was blaming him for making her do his (bloody) job: circumcise his son.

[@helenwilson9732]

Many translations say : She said " you surely are a bridegroom of blood. "

[@isaiascontrerastorra6097]

Este sermón fue transmitido en capilla en vivo del seminario. Me podrían enviar un link donde este doblado al español este mensaje del Dr. Al. Mohler. Quedó atento

[@isaiascontrerastorra6097]

Buenas tardes. Este mensaje fue transmitido con doblaje al español en vivo. Alguien me puede ayudar a encontrarlo en español, todavez que ya revise el canal en español y no aparece el sermon predicado en Capilla.

[@kadarahmn533]

Im not clear about Was Moses was circumcized or not doing? I did not find in the bible of Moses circmsized.

[@christophercocagne2373]

Ruel and Jethro any Ideas ? Just a curiosity of mine , no doctrinal issues .

[@eversosleight]

Dr. Michael Heiser just put out a new podcast on this very text. Hee concedes that it was Moses first born son as well

[@thesithempire1348]

I'm surprised to hear that. The book of Jubilees says it was Satan (Mastema) who tried to kill Moses.

[@thesithempire1348]

@Rodrick Evans You're better off saying "the Bible in its *current* canon." Canon of 1611 when the KJV was first completed contained 14 more books than it does now, while the canon of the Greek Orthodox was 78; of the Ethiopian churches 81; of the Coptic churches 75. While some books were compiled differently than they are now, there were still considerably more books (and portions of books) included, which is why Catholic Bibles conceded to restoring some of the ones that had been removed. 66 books is a late date invention, and had it been up to Luther, it would have been less. Both Jubilees and 1 Enoch were considered canonical in the time of Jesus and the Apostles, and they reference them throughout, along with other books that were later removed.

[@jefflinahan5853]

@@thesithempire1348 where does the book of Jubilees say that?

[@anthonylanger2566]

I have often wondered if Timothy’s circumcision set a precedent for Jews to continue following ceremonial laws, even though Gentiles are excepted from it. Thoughts, anyone? Or a recommended resource?

[@anselman3156]

To continue in the ceremonial laws which have been abolished is to reject Christ. The Church has no division, with some keeping the old laws , which were only a schoolmaster pointing forward to Christ and His Church. That is the whole import of the New Testament teaching.

[@emanuel5640]

Galatians 2:1-5

[@anthonylanger2566]

anselman So what do you make of Paul’s circumcision of Timothy? By the standard you’ve described, wouldn’t they have been rejecting Christ by this action?

[@anthonylanger2566]

E manuel - What about this passage? How would you apply it to the question?

[@emanuel5640]

Is written in text : because of the hebrews that were there. He was afraid of them. Not because it had some value (Galatians 5:1-6- salvation is only trough faith in Jesus, and if you believe that circumsition has some value, you are falling from faith under Law). And i strongly believe that the more Paul advanced in the knowledge of Christ, the more he understood that the circumsion, along with the keeping of others laws (Acts15:24-29) will harm the faith. I believe that the main objective of Paul was to preach the Gospel, but he was caught in a war between salvation by the Law and Faith. Many christians are seeing Paul as a perfect apostle. I am seeing him as a christian who is fighting to understand Jesus more and more (Philippians 3:12-15) Do not forget, that Paul had a dispute with Peter who was in the same situation (Galatians 2:11-21 - the fear of man can make us do stupid things). Now, why he have done that? It seems that the letter to Galatians was wrote about the year 49 and the Phillippians around 62/63.Between those letters he grew in faith and knowledge of Christ. Tested and perfected. After all, we all have done some ridicoulous things when we were childrens and definetly stupid things as mature. But long story short: Paul was against of all things that are required for salvation, except Christ (Colossians 2)

[@Andulusia]

God does not try, God, wills. He says be and it is

[@emanuel5640]

Moses spend first 3 months in his parents house. Also, when the daughter of phraon raised him she said: a child of the hebrews. That raise this questions:was any remarcable skin differences between egyptians and the israelites for her to say that or Moses was circumside and they weren't? Genesis 17:11-14 If Moses was 40 years old when fled in Midian and 80 when he was send back to the Egypt...how old was Gershom?...

[@charliewines3775]

Moses would have been circumcised on his eighth day. No other culture circumcised males, that's how Pharoah's daughter knew he was a Hebrew.

[@hereigns1113]

Note: it was the male born of the Israelites that were being thrown to the Nile river to die, not the children of the Egyptians...

[@emanuel5640]

@@hereigns1113 childrens trown to death weren't put in caskets.. just plain water...

[@hereigns1113]

E manuel that's because Moses' mom had a plan

[@NA-sl1bg]

Moses would have been circumcised by his father on the eight day. Moses’ son, Gershom must have been born to him from the age of 40 years old because he fled Egypt at age 40.

[@anselman3156]

I suppose that it is wrong to speak of God "trying" to do something.That suggests a potential inability to do something, making an effort to do something which one might not succeed in. There is probably a better way of referring to what is meant by "sought to kill him". Does it not suggest a threat of death unless one does what God requires?

[@emanuel5640]

1 Kings 22:19-23

[@YeshuaHamashiak]

Yes indeed. When God wants us dead we are as good as dead. There is no escaping from out of His hand.

[@anselman3156]

@@YeshuaHamashiak We are in His good hands. Though He slay me, yet will I trust Him. Everyone is kept in existence by God, and He decides when it's time for our spirit to return to Him. One may, like Hezekiah, obtain an extension of earthly life by prayer, but, thank God, there is life beyond this one, and closer fellowship with God.

[@isaacali8695]

Moses had to deal with the sins of his own family before he could deal with the sins of Egypt The same rules apply If they dont listen they would die Moses would have preferred to skip this hurdle because it might involve death on his family. Eventually he builds the courage to do it . No one knows the outcome but he did it and went to Egypt

[@heavenswayministrybyevange8462]

I think Moses son was considered to be a first born of Egypt seining that he was a prince of Egypt! I think when he heard about the death of the first born his wife taught that her son would also die! I think Moses not supposed to take his family on his mission! Because Moses would not have a problem circumcising his son if god ask him! The bigger point is not circumcising but Moses running from his calling because of fear! Moses did not want to go to pharaoh especially to tell him god is going to kill his first born and I think the anger of god was against him! We read about Moses marking excuse telling god he could not speak properly.

[@ayyheloo2292]

No he didnt. It's bad translation honestly. Read kjv

[@ayyheloo2292]

It is not that hard...GOD WASNT TRYING TO KILL MOSES WHY? BCS 1) WHY WOULD HE? THE CIRCUMCISION DIDNT ACT AS SACRIFICE FOR SIN, IT MERELY MEANT THAT THOSE WHO WERENT CIRCUMCISED WOULD BE LEFT OUT THE COVENANT...SO WHY WOULD GOD KILLL MOSES FOR NOT CIRCUMCISING HIS SON? ESP WHEN GOD SAID HE WAS GOING TO USE MOSES TO FREE THE PPL, THAT MAKES NO SENSE. THEN ALSO WHEN THIS VERSE GOES BY, AND AFTER THE CIRCUMSION GOES BY, WE DONT SEE THAT GOD ACKNOWLEDGES IT OR SAYS " THIS IS GOOD" NO HE DOESNT. THIS JUST MOVES ONTO AARON. THIS IS VERY CLEAR THAT GOD IS TALKING ABT PHARAOHS KID, BCS PREVIOUS TO THIS, HE SAID HE WOULD KILL PHAROAH'S KID. THEN IT SWITCHES TO MOSES CIRCUMCISING HIS SON PROB TO INCLUDE HIS SON INTO THE COVENANT . ( BUT THIS HAS NOTHING TO WITH PREVIOUS VERSES ) COS THINK ABT IT GUYS, WHY WOULD GOD RANDOMLY KILL MOSES ? GOD COULD HAVE JUST ASKED? IT WOULD HAVE MADE MORE SENSE. THIS VERSE IS CONFUSING BCS OF THE BREAK IN BTW PASSAGES AND IT SEEMS LIKE ITS STARTING OFF A NEW STORY BUT ITS NOT. REM THRRES NK BREAKS AND VERSE NUMBERS IN THE ACTUAL MANUSCRIPTS. THE NIV INFACR MAKES THIS ISSUE VERSE BCS THEY ADD THE NAMES OF MOSES BUT THIS WASNT THERE ORIGINALLY, IT JUST HAD "HE" AND "HIM" PRNOUNDS ORIGINALLY SO YEAH...

[@sonotheman]

God sought to kill the son of Moses NOT Moses! First and foremost IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT GOD WOULD TRY TO KILL MOSES! WHY? We have Isaiah 55:11, "so is my word that goes out from my mouth -it will not return to me unfulfilled;but it will accomplish what I intend,and cause to succeed what I sent it to do.” GOD HAD TOLD MOSES THAT HE WAS CHOSEN TO FREE THE HEBREWS IN EGYPT FROM SLAVERY AND TO FULFILL THE COVENANT GOD HAD MADE WITH ABRAHAM! Ezekiel 12:25 repeats the message! So the WORD was sent and it could not come back void! GOD was obligated to protect Moses and give him all the resources necessary to complete that which Moses was chosen to do! The same with Jonah! Running and hiding could not stop the word of GOD and eventually Jonah fulfilled what he was chosen to do! This is also repeated in the case of David and of course Yeshua (Jesus)! Furthermore the original Hebrew texts NOT THE TRANSLATIONS is very important! The pronoun "him" is the key! The original Hebrew text gives us the answer! The pronoun "him" used in the original Hebrew is 3rd person masculine singular! So this verse is referring to the son of Moses, NOT Moses! Here are the original texts of both times it is used; First at "God met him" original Hebrew is (וַיִּפְגְּשֵׁ֣הוּ), Second at "to kill him" original Hebrew is (הֲמִיתֽוֹ׃) The original Hebrew is 3rd person masculine singular in both case! So with the pronoun "him" referring to the son of Moses, the verse makes sense! So God came across the son of Moses and Zipporah and was about to kill their son then Zipporah acted by circumcising her son to save his life! NO CONTRADICTION, NO CONFUSION! GOD IS NOT A LIAR! AND NOT A MAN THAT HE SHOULD CHANGE! MOSES WAS CHOSEN AND HAD TO COMPLETE WHAT HE WAS CHOSEN TO DO! Moses could not be killed or harmed or blocked in anyway from doing what God chose him to do so that the WORD of God would not come back void, but complete the purpose for which it was sent! Interesting point here is that even if Zipporah had not circumcised her son and God had killed his son, Moses would still have done everything the WORD of God had been sent to accomplish through him!

[@hanscusheshtate-ati4659]

Accurate my brother, plus God wanted to cement the plaque of the firstborn sons outside his covenant by starting with the very same person he is using. God's seriousness.

[@capn_shawn]

Just another preacher talking about "old covenant" and "new covenant" and how lucky we are that we just have to believe in Jesus to be "saved". In the meantime, he tells a bunch of non-biblical stories and totally misses the point of the story of Moses, Ziporah and their child.... heck, missing the whole point of why Abram was circumcised too. There is no "old way" and "new way"... just THE WAY The stories of old are object lessons in how to live. Hebrew people always missed the point and thought they were special in some way and "Gentiles" were not-special. Jesus came and showed how to live and preachers of today miss the point just like the pharisees of old. Quit listening to preachers define "faith" as trust.... it is ACTION. If you act like Christ, you have the Faith of Christ. Preachers love Romans 4, but they rarely scroll down to help you see that it was Abraham's actions that gave him righteousness... not just believing in something. Rom 4:19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb: Rom 4:20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; Rom 4:21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. Rom 4:22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. Abram left Mesopotamia, went to a new land and changed everything. Later the Hebrews came out of Egypt to show the same thing. Being circumcised never had anything to do with anything other than showing that: - You cannot inherit the fleshly promised land unless you are circumcised in the flesh. - You cannot inherit the spiritual promised land unless you are circumcised in the spirit. An object lesson that is repeated in the New Testament: Col 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. The "faith" he speaks of here is the circumcision of the heart... BY PUTTING AWAY THE SINS OF THE FLESH as Christ did. If you didn't put away your sins, then you are not a "little Christ" or "Christ follower".... you are a fraud.