Exodus 4:24-26 — And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him, and sought to kill him. 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. So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.

Yesterday, I mentioned that there are Bible passages that my eye usually passes over — until they pounce on me! There’s another sort of passage that I tend not to look at too closely, because I know they’re mysterious, and I don’t want to get into deep water! As we move on through Exodus I come to this one … which is one of those, one I usually skirt around.
What’s going on? God has a task for Moses, He’s given him some direction and it seems like he’s set off to do the job — and now God is seeking to kill him! (There’s a mystery in itself, surely if God wants to kill him, He can just kill Him?). Then Zipporah circumcises their son, God lets him go and — apart from Zipporah being mad, it seems everything is well. Isn’t that strange? Zipporah was so mad, in fact, that it seems she left Moses, taking the boy with her, because in Exodus 18 we can read that Jethro (her father) brings her back.
I’m comforted by knowing that I’m not the only one who finds this passage difficult. One Jewish commentator says of it that it is “arguably the single most bizarre and baffling passage in all of the Hebrew Bible.” One of the biggest problems is about the word “him” in the phrases “and sought to kill him” and “So he let him go”. It’s been suggested that they refer to Moses, or to his son … In the end it seems simplest to let it refer to Moses and understand the passage in that light. The best suggestion seems to be to take the incident at the inn in the context of the two previous verses:

And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: and I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn. (Exodus 4:22-23)

Considered in this light it might seem that Moses had been told what the punishment for Pharaoh’s prevention of religious observance would be, and the mock attempt in his own life was a rebuke for his own failure — failing to circumcise his son prevented his religious observance.
Then why does Zipporah call Moses “a bloody husband”? Perhaps because if he had done his job she wouldn’t have had to get involved in the bloody business of circumcision.
Matthew Henry draws the lessons from the passage. He points out that God’s people must be quick to meet their obligations, or fear His displeasure. When God reveals sin to us, we must correct it quickly. When we return to our duty, God will remove His judgment. If others misunderstand us in the performance of our duty, we must bear it patiently and, finally, when we have God’s work to do we must put away distractions — as Moses sent away his family.
So there we are. It’s a knotty passage but, like every other scripture, “given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” (2 Timothy 3:16)