posted
I am rereading Stone Tables. At the end of Chapter 8, Moses goes up the mountain and hears the voice of God, telling him to go to Pharao and lead his people out of Egypt. I checked the Bible Story and it's all according to Exodus 3 and 4. But, why did OSC leave out Exodus 4 : 24-27 ? These verses say that when Moses was on his way to Egypt, God came to him and sought to kill him. Then Sippora (Zeforah) circumcised her son and God left.
First question: Does anyone understands Exodus 4 : 24-27 at all? And second, to me it seems important so I just can't understand why OSC left it out, do you have an idea?
Posts: 1247 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmmm. I sort of skimmed through the replies and I've noticed (although I could be mistaken) that nobody brought up the fact that although Wolfgang Peterson was signed on as director, he's got at least a few different directions he's considering to pursue as far as movies go.
I heard he might be taking on Batman Vs. Superman (or something of the sort) or a couple others that I can't seem to remember right now. So I guess how successful EG the movie would be will determine whether or not he'll take on the EG project. That is, if my facts are correct, of course; let's hope if this is really the case, then he'll find EG the movie promising enough to not leave us in such anticipation.
Actually, I've got some split feelings on the subject; on one hand, I'm eager to see how EG the movie would turn out, while on the other, I think movies tend to ruin what our minds have fabricated for us. =/
quote: May 7, 2004: In Focus magazine talked to "Troy" director Wolfgang Petersen who says both the Batman vs. Superman and Superman movies are shelved at the moment. He compares Achilles and Hector in "Troy" to Batman and Superman... "The two main characters in our movie, Achilles [Brad Pitt] and Hector [Eric Bana], are enemies and have the big, big, major fight in the movie – and you feel for both of them, because you connect to both of them," Petersen explains. "Both of them are part of yourself – with Achilles being the darker, more aggressive, edgy character and Hector the more positive, noble man." He says that closely parallels what he had in mind for "Batman vs. Superman": "I mean, we have Batman and Superman in ourselves," he says. "We like Batman – we understand him, we suffer with him. On the other hand, we want to be Superman. But they're conflicting philosophies. Let's bring them together in one movie and see how we, as an audience, wrestle with our inner demons."
So is there any chance we'll ever see Batman vs. Superman or a new Superman film?
I ask the question myself quite often. I was just talking to Alan Horn about it and he said, "I always liked that concept so much." I think it's on the back-burner because Warner Brothers decided to go with single "Batman" and "Superman" movies. "Superman" is, at the moment, shelved; I think if they successfully launch it again, then at some point it will be "Batman vs. Superman" again. I'll definitely be attached to that project whenever…" Thanks to Superherohype.com
Doesn't look like Batman vs. Superman is gonna go into production any time soon So let's just hope he goes with EG next.
EDIT: Why did you post that here in this thread? It has nothing to do with Stone Tables.
[ May 09, 2004, 01:48 AM: Message edited by: St. Yogi ]
Posts: 739 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thats a common question of biblical scholars, with very well known answers. Let me give you the answer that Rashi, the most basic commentary on the OT gives: The angel sought to kill moses because he had not circumcised his son, Eliezer. Because he was remiss, he was to be punished by the death penalty. (Rashi quotes a dissenting opinion: Heaven forbid! he was not remiss. Rather he said: Shall I perform the circumcision and then depart on the journey? Traveling poses a danger to the infant until three days have elapsed after the circumcision. OR shall i perform the circumcision and wait three days? The Holy One, Blessed is He has commanded me, "Go! Return to Egypt." So why was Moses to be punished with death? Because he busied himself with making arangements at he inn first before performing the circumcision (The inn was near egypt and the remainder of the journey would have posed no danger to the infant).
posted
Haha, I was a bit confused; not quite sure how it ended up on this thread exactly either. Must be forum challenged? Posts: 10 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the preceding verses may be relevant. Also, the "him" that God sought to kill is ambiguous. If it meant Eliezar, then this could be a type of the destruction of the Egyptian firstborn (which is foretold in verses 22 and 23).
Zipporah's reaction to the circumcision also indicates she may have stood in the way initially. For some reason this suggests how Sarah resisted the will of the Lord in giving Abraham Haggar as a surrogate and then sent away the firstborn that resulted.
Also, we know this journey was undertaken with Moses' "sons" (v.20) so Eliezar was not an infant.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The commentaries say that the reason tzippora had to do it is because Moses was being swallowed by a snake... He was kinda occupied at the moment. *shrug* Oh and by the way, you arent far off with the interpretation of "him". In the Talmud, the minority opinion is that "him" refers to eliezer, however most people hold that "him" is moses. Nice job!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
So let's just hope he goes with EG next.![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
