Exodus 4:25

Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son,.... Perceiving that it was the neglect of circumcising her son was the cause of the divine displeasure against her husband; and

Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me. No JFB commentary on this verse.

Perceiving the danger of her husband, and the cause of it, and her husband being disenabled from performing that work, whether by some stroke or sickness, or by the terror of so dismal and unexpected an apparition to him, and delays being highly dangerous, she thought it better to do it herself as well as she could, rather than put it off a moment longer; whether because the administration of that sacrament was not confined to any kind or order of persons, or because, if it was so, she did not apprehend it to be so, or because she thought this was the least of two evils, and that it was safer to commit a circumstantial error, than to continue in a substantial fault. A sharp stone, which she took as next at hand in that stony country. Let none think this strange, for not only this work, but the cutting off of that part, which some used to do, was commonly performed with a flint, or a sharp stone, as is expressly affirmed by Herodotus, 1. 2; Plin. 35. 12. See also Juvenal, Sat. 6. and Martial. Epigram. 3. 18. But the word may be rendered, a sharp knife. See ,3. Cast it at his feet: the words are very short, and therefore ambiguous, and may be rendered, either thus, she cast herself at his feet; either, 1. At the feet of the angel, as a supplicant for her husband’ s life. But it is most probable that she directs this action and her following speech to the same person. Or, 2. The feet of her husband, to make request to him, that she and her Children might depart from him, and return to her father, which also he granted. But neither was she of so humble a temper, nor at this time in so mild a frame, as to put herself into such a lowly posture to her husband; nor was she likely to present her humble supplication to him, to whom at the same time she showed such scorn and indignation. Or rather thus, she cast it at his, i.e. her husband’ s, feet: it, either the child; but that being tender, and now in great pain, she would not use it so roughly: or rather the foreskin cut off, or at least the blood which came from it; which she did in spite and anger against her husband, as the cause of so much pain to the child, and grief to herself. A bloody husband art thou to me: this some think she spake to the child, whom she calls her spouse, as some late rabbins affirm the infant used to be called, when it was circumcised, though they bring no competent proof for this usage; or her son, as the Hebrew word chathan signifies. But indeed that signifies only a son-in-law, as , which is not true nor proper here.

Exodus 4:25 Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast [it] at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband [art] thou to me.Ver. 25. Surely a bloody husband.] A peevish wife, whose frowardness is either tollenda or toleranda, cured or carried patiently, ne coniugium fiat coniurgium. She was not so hot, but Moses was as meek.

(25) A sharp stone.—On the use of stone knives by the Egyptian paraschistœ see Herod. ii. 86. They were regarded as more pure than metal knives. From Joshua 5:2 it would seem that stone knives were in the early ages commonly employed for circumcision by the Israelites. At his feet.—Moses’ feet, undoubtedly. The action was petulant and reproachful. Zipporah regarded the bloody rites of her husband’s religion as cruel and barbarous, and cast the foreskin of her son at his feet, as though he were a Moloch requiring a bloody offering. A bloody husband.—Heb., a husband of bloods A husband, i.e., who causes the blood of his children to be shed unnecessarily for some unintelligible reason.

25. a flint] in accordance with the oldest custom (cf. Joshua 5:2-3; Joshua 24:30 LXX.); because the practice of circumcision originate among peoples, or in an age, in which metal knives were either not yet in use, or used but rarely (Di.). and made it touch his feet] to connect him with what she had done, and make her son’s circumcision count as her husband’s. For the Heb., cf. Isaiah 6:7, Jeremiah 1:9. a blood-bridegroom] Originally the expression may have denote the bridegroom, as one who (see below) was himself circumcised. Here however it is used in the sense of a bridegroom secured to his wife by the circumcision of his son.

Sharp stone - Not “knife,” as in the margin. Zipporah used a piece of flint, in accordance with the usage of the patriarchs.

24-26. It came to pass… in the inn — An incident which transpired at some well-known halting-place on the road (the lodging-place) is so briefly related as to have occasioned much doubt and perplexity to all interpreters.