This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Jewish Women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish WomenWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish WomenTemplate:WikiProject Jewish WomenJewish Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Ancient Near East related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing
the article, and help us
assess and improve articles to
good and
1.0 standards, or visit the
WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Folklore, a
WikiProject dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the topics of
folklore and
folklore studies. If you would like to participate, you may edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
project's page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to
discussion.FolkloreWikipedia:WikiProject FolkloreTemplate:WikiProject FolkloreFolklore articles
This article is within the scope of the Women in Religion WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in religion. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Women in ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject Women in ReligionTemplate:WikiProject Women in ReligionWomen in Religion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us
assess and improve articles to
good and
1.0 standards, or visit the
wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
It isn't debated because of any percieved anti-black bias. It is debated simply because it clearly says that Zipporah is a Midianite. Midianites are not Cushites (for one thing they are substantially whiter). So either the Cushite is a different person, or Cushite is metaphorical.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
FDuffy (
talk •
contribs)
18:46, 30 October 2005 (UTC)reply
It's pretty clear that Zipporah and the Cushite Wife aren't identical. So it seems Moses did at least took one other wife. Miriam/Aaron did not object to Zipporah it seems. God turns against Miriam/Aaron not because they had no point, but because they tried to undermine Moses. Num 12:8 makes that quite clear. In newer times people have started to make a 'racism'-debate from this. As if God 'Condemned Miriam's Racism'. He does not in fact there are several instructions in the Bible that admonishes the Israelites not to mingle with people whose genealogies were a little suspect. Previous to World War Two this was also be understood by most Christians: Races and Nations are part of the Creation Order... And the Gospel needed to be preached to 'all Nations' (ethnos) and to the 'whole of creation'. This view changed drastically after World War Two. Especially after the 1960s when Christianity was interpreted as some kind of universalist, tolerant, multicultural, diverse religion... Which it clearly isn't.
105.8.4.163 (
talk)
10:53, 6 September 2022 (UTC)reply
Midieval Jewish scholarship debated whether she was the cushite woman. Rashi (R. Shlomo ben Yitzhaki) claimed she was - but his style of reading the Bible was of recycling characters - if they only appear once then they are the same as other characters. This is based on the midrash. However, it can be debated that this is supposed to be understood metaphorically. Many other Jewish scholars - particularily Ibn Ezra and the Ramban (Nachmanides) both say they are different women. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.197.238.62 (
talk)
03:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)reply
Why is your uncited statement any better than his? Which modern scholars are we talking about? —
Chris CapocciaT⁄C 20:00, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
It is also unclear how deep is the scepticism of the scholars you are referring to. Are they merely doubting Zipporah's nationality/race? Are they doubting her existence? Are they doubting Jethro's existence? Are they doubting the entire record of the book of Exodus? —
Chris CapocciaT⁄C 14:38, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
Interesting arguments - I had assumed that Moses took more than one wife (in the manner of many of the OT patriarchs) and that his siblings' objections were essentially what we would now call "racist". Could it be that he married Zipporah shortly after joining Jethro's household and then when he returned to Egypt some 40 years later he then found this second, unnamed, woman amongst the dark-skinned people who live there?
Douglasson (
talk)
16:12, 15 February 2018 (UTC)reply
You should not be using Shahak as a reference. You have plenty of more reliable choices and using him simply shows that you stopped when you found somebody who agreed with you.
4.249.63.231 (
talk)
15:33, 14 August 2011 (UTC)reply
Does anyone have a credible source for Zipporah's conversion to Judaism? I can only find sources saying it is assumed she did. No apparent reference in the Old Testament. Might consider removing the list tag.
Gowser (
talk)
18:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)reply
Why would Zipporah "convert" to Judaism? She introduced Moses and the Hebrews to the Name of the One True God. If anything, the question should be, did the Hebrews diligently worship her God? Zipporah, and her son Gershon(m), were the "diligent observers", the "ha-noẓerim" that has been misread as "ha-yoẓerim" ("the potters"; I Chron. iv. 23), causing people to think there were "Kenites" or "Cinites" traveling with the Hebrews. The Gershonites were Levites, priests, which bothered Mariam and Aaron, which led to the episode in Num:12 (so, yes, Zipporah, the same woman he met when he originally sojourned to the Sinai was traveling with Moses during the Exodus out of the Sinai). When the Hebrews departed from the Sinai the clans of Gershon and Merari carried the Dwelling (Num. 10: 17-18). Of course, the "Aaronist" (today, and back then) wanted to assert that only Aaron and his clan could be priests. But that assertion was shut down. The Gershonites were spread among the other tribes (as were all Levite priests), but they always, including Eliasaph and Caleb remained "diligent observers" of the True God. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Kzlion (
talk •
contribs)
17:55, 31 December 2017 (UTC)reply
The article connects Cush to Arabians. This is totally unsupported and misleading as Arabs were considered descendants of Sem. Moreover, there is no Scriptural support that Midianites were traced to Cush.
Kzlion (
talk)
22:17, 29 December 2017 (UTC)reply
Wiki article says Midians worshipped Baal, not YHWH, no Scriptural evidence otherwise.
Midians were "cousins" of Hebrews, no evidence of YHWH in either before introduction to Cush woman.
Midians sold Joseph into slavery, no evidence of fondness for Hebrews.
Hebrews killed the Midian kings. If the Midians kings worshipped YHWH, probably would not have killed. On the Levant, the conqueror would destroy the old god and kill the king.
Hypothesis is:References to Midian are a misreading after the return from captivity in Babylon. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Kzlion (
talk •
contribs)
22:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC)reply
I don't know what you are talking about when you say "The article connects Cush to Arabians". As for your second comment, Wikipedia is based on what reliable sources say. Please review
WP:TPG and use this page only to discuss making specific changes to the article.
Jytdog (
talk)
22:43, 29 December 2017 (UTC)reply
That was my reflection too, this is like a comicstrip. My other reflection was "Hm, should we use the far-right Zipporah instead, that could be fun? And it relates to the inn-story." And thanks for adding the ref.
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk)
21:25, 10 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Leadimage, again
Previous leadimageNew/current leadimage
@
Howardcorn33, hi. I like that painting and won't revert, actually I started the WP-article on it. However, it can be argued that Zipporah is more commonly depicted in art as white, and therefore such a depiction is a better
WP:LEADIMAGE. We'll see what happens.
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk)
07:41, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
First of all, I hope we can agree the
previous image in the infobox was not a good depiction. It was not close up and it isn’t clear who Zipporah is without a caption. Ideally we should have a clear view of the face without ambiguity of who the subject is. Now, the reason I chose the Jordaens portrait is because it is the only portrait of Zipporah which has its own Wikipedia article. For this reason, I considered it notable enough to be the lead image. As for the claim that she is commonly depicted as white, I believe we would need to provide citations for such a claim. Taking a quick glance at Google images, it appears that depictions of Zipporah with darker skin are more common than depictions of her with white skin. Perhaps it is true that Zipporah was once commonly depicted as white in art, but we must choose the depiction which is more recognizable to readers. ―Howard •
🌽3310:24, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
In this context, roughly "biblical characters", I think the previous is good enough, and it has some nice context, event and kids. It's true that Moses Leaving for Egypt isn't a portrait. And, having an article is not necessarily "better". It's not like what the face looks like actually matters in these cases. And for all we know, Jordaens could have been thinking of
Tharbis, not that it matters here. But like I said, I'm not going to revert, consensus will be what it will be.
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk)
10:45, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I was initially going to defend my position further, but after reading this[1] article, I don't feel particularly certain that the Jordaens portrait even depicts Zipporah. The portrait is certainly clear and straightforward but I don't know if it is correct to place a questionable portrait into the infobox itself. The reason I initially chose the Jordaens portait is because I believed it was a portrait which would be recognizable to the reader, so a reader could go "Oh, I recognize that face!" and quickly grasp who the article was covering. But in this case, we must make a decision on whether the uncertainty of the portrait's subject warrants its removal from the infobox. Perhaps we could use
this painting by Botticelli instead.
Looking again, one aspect is also that Jordaens is sending a very Christian signal, but that is probably the case with the other one too, if not quite as in-your-face.
Gråbergs Gråa Sång (
talk)
11:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply