Exodus -14 - Exod. 4:24-31 The Bridegroom of Blood

I began this lesson with a review of the purposes of the Bible podcast study series entitled, "The Gospel According to Moses."  There are two such series.  The one in Genesis and this one, on the book of Exodus.  I promised you a link to read the four purposes of this study.  Here's the link - https://www.dropbox.com/s/aczx1wpcwk730up/FOUR%20GOALS%20MAY%2016%202021.pdf?dl=0

We will deal with three verses in the Torah that are very perplexing and problematic, Exod. 4:24-26.  Real Hebrew scholars agree that in the Hebrew and not in the English these verses are puzzling.  There are many who offer their views and ideas on what these verses mean but, it is absolutely clear, they are ignoring the original text of the Bible and the Hebrew.  We will not.

This lesson is a prime example of how translators put in words in the Bible that are not in the original so that their view, their opinion is validated.  This happens in Exod. 4:24-26.  Just consider the verses ...

Now it came about at the lodging place on the way that the LORD met him and sought to put him to death. Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son's foreskin and threw it at Moses' feet, and she said, "You are indeed a bridegroom of blood to me." So He let him alone. At that time she said, "You are a bridegroom of blood"--because of the circumcision. (Exo 4:24-26)

This is the translation from the NASB and it is also in other versions like the ESV, the Message, NET, Scriptures 1998, and , of course, the NIV.  The problem is that Moses' name NEVER OCCURS in the original Hebrew text nor is the Hebrew חתן דמים Chatan Dahmeem translated as the "bridegroom of blood" accurate.  These are examples of men, translators, with a preconceived view of the meaning of the verses.  Not only do they show their lack of Hebrew knowledge but they actually insert a word into the Bible text so the Bible text says what they want it to mean!  It is as if I was writing the New Ferret Version, NFV, and did the following in a verse you know well.  I added the word highlighted in black ...

Now in those cold days of December days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that a census be taken of all the inhabited earth. This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. And everyone was on his way to register for the census, each to his own city. Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, in order to register along with Mary, who was engaged to him, and was with child. While they were there, the days were completed for her to give birth. And she gave birth on Christmas December 25th the year 0 to her firstborn son; and she wrapped Him in cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn. (Luk 2:1-7)

I can't do this!  I can not add to God's word.  Doing this is a simple stupid example of me trying to provide Biblical backup for my preconceived views about the birth of Jesus.  (FYI - I don't hold to the belief that Jesus was born in December) This is almost, to me, a major sin.  By adding to God's word to prove my view - as the translators did by adding Moses' name in Exod. 4:24-26 - we distort God's word and perhaps even change the intended meaning that the Lord wanted us to understand.  But, that is exactly what happened in these verses.

Dr. John Currid, and amazing devout Christian Bible scholar, theologian, and archaeologist, has written a commentary on the Torah.  He proposes a solution to the questions that arise in these verses that really deals with the exact Hebrew and he does not offer hypotheticals.  Other scholars like Nahum Sarna in the JPS Torah Commentary offer their ideas and solutions but none compare to Currid's.  Of course the orthodox rabbis have their ideas.  They claim Moses was to be killed by God since when Moses arrived at the inn and (are you ready for this??) Moses was too concerned with making arrangements for their stay and delayed the circumcision.  This comes directly from the orthodox Torah commentary called the "Chumash" from Artscroll.  Huh? The Bible does not say that!  The Bible in Hebrew does not use Moses' name nor does it say Moses had to make hotel arrangements.  The orthodox rabbis are making up stuff to try and solve the dilemma posed by these verses.  This is an example of MIDRASH, Jewish rabbinic study, that is not sound midrash.  The orthodox rabbis offer a hypothetical as truth.  How come they can not suggest solutions from what the Bible actually says rather than suggesting solutions that are not credible?  And yet many gentile Messianic Christians buy into this since it's from the rabbis.  Well, they say.  It it's from the rabbis it has to be true, right?  Wrong.  One needs to also be very careful with Jewish rabbitical midrash and sort out the true and credible from the hypotheticals and contrived translations.  We have to do the same thing with supposed Christian Bible scholars as well since most completely avoid the study of the Bible in its historical context.  They also have no training in the Greek or the Hebrew.  They have very little in fact of the critical tools to help us grasp the meaning of God's word.  

In these three verses one question is who is God trying to kill?  Is God trying to kill Moses?  Gershom, his first born son?  One can not determine the answer in the Hebrew and the original Masoretic text of the Torah.  On top of that why did the translators translate the Hebrew חתן דמים Chatan Dahmeem as "the bridegroom of blood?" In these verses Moses' name it not brought up.  Even if was Moses he is not a bridegroom - he's been married for a number of years and has two sons!  He is not a bridegroom.  So, what alternative meanings are there for the Hebrew חתן דמים Chatan Dahmeem? 

Dr. Currid offers a possible real solution that takes us to the Cross.  I was truly amazed and it only makes sense in that God, Yeshua the Messiah, our Lord, stated that all scripture testifies of Him.  The primary books of the Bible then were the five books of Torah.  These verses seem to relate to the first born, blood, covenant, and being saved from God's wrath.  It's as if these are pictures that are like mirrors of future events.  Curious?  Wondering how the circumcision of Moses' son is connected to the crucifixion of the Lamb of God?  Come join us in the important podcast on three perplexing verses.

Rev. Ferret - who is this guy?  What's his background? 

(John and his wife Robin on a teaching mission to Mexico)

Why should I listen to him?  Check his background at this link - https://www.dropbox.com/s/ortnret3oxcicu4/BackgrndTeacher%20mar%2025%202020.pdf?dl=0