Exodus 18:12 (UASV): “And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, took a burnt offering and sacrifices for God: and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses’ father-in-law before God.”

The Hebrew clause under examination is: וַיִּקַּ֞ח יִתְרוֹ חֹתֵן מֹשֶׁה עֹלָה וּזְבָחִים לֵאלֹהִים (“And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, took a burnt offering and sacrifices for God”). The verb וַיִּקַּ֞ח (wayyiqqaḥ) is a waw-consecutive form of the Qal imperfect 3ms of לקח (“to take”). The natural and most straightforward rendering is “and he took.” However, the context and the parallel traditions in ancient versions raise an important textual question regarding whether Jethro merely “took” sacrificial animals or “offered” them.

The Masoretic Textual Reading

The Masoretic Text (MT) reads unequivocally “took” (וַיִּקַּ֞ח). The Masoretes faithfully transmitted the Hebrew consonantal text, and there is no indication of a variant in their tradition at this location. Thus, in the Hebrew textual tradition, Jethro is said to have “taken” a burnt offering and sacrifices.

The word “took” in sacrificial contexts does not necessarily preclude the idea of offering. It may indicate the taking of animals or items intended for sacrifice. In the broader Pentateuchal sacrificial language, verbs such as לקח (“take”), הקריב (“bring near”), and עלה (“ascend, offer up”) can all play roles in describing various aspects of sacrifice. Thus, the Masoretic reading could reflect an idiomatic way of speaking, emphasizing Jethro’s role in preparing or presenting the offering, even if the act of slaughtering and burning was carried out by others.

Witness of the Ancient Versions

The Syriac (Peshitta), the Targums, and the Latin Vulgate all attest to the reading “offered” instead of “took.” Jerome’s Vulgate reads obtulit (“offered”), the Syriac has ܩܪܒ (“offered, brought near”), and the Targums likewise smooth the sense by expressing the sacrificial action directly. These versions appear to represent an interpretive translation rather than direct evidence of a different Hebrew Vorlage.

It is not uncommon for translators to substitute a more natural and explicit verb in places where the Hebrew employs broader or less specific verbs. The translators of these versions likely considered that “took a burnt offering” might sound incomplete or awkward without the explicit statement that the offering was made to God. Thus, they rendered the sense in a way that clarified Jethro’s action.

Textual Considerations and Contextual Meaning

The presence of Aaron and the elders, who “ate bread with Moses’ father-in-law before God,” strongly indicates a covenantal and sacrificial meal setting. In such a setting, the act of “taking” an offering naturally implies its subsequent offering before Jehovah. The versions’ rendering “offered” clarifies what the Hebrew “took” assumes. Therefore, the variant is best understood not as an alternate Hebrew reading but as an interpretive translation designed to remove ambiguity.

Theologically and textually, the Masoretic “took” is to be retained as original. The versions demonstrate how early translators interpreted the verb functionally, aligning it with the sacrificial act they knew the narrative required. This makes sense, since in the broader Pentateuch, “taking” an offering is often the first step toward its presentation on the altar.

Textual-Critical Evaluation

The evidence aligns as follows:

• MT: “took” (וַיִּקַּ֞ח)

• Versions (Syr., Tg., Vg.): “offered” (interpretive rendering)

The MT should be given primacy. The reading “took” is the more difficult reading (lectio difficilior), as it is less expected in a sacrificial context. Scribes and translators are far more likely to replace “took” with “offered” than the reverse. Thus, the MT’s “took” represents the authentic Hebrew tradition. The versions serve as interpretive expansions, attempting to clarify that Jethro’s “taking” naturally included the act of offering.

Therefore, the most accurate rendering should retain “took” while recognizing, in context, that it leads to the act of sacrifice. This is faithfully reflected in the UASV’s translation.

Conclusion

Exodus 18:12 demonstrates the precision of the Masoretic tradition and the interpretive tendencies of the ancient versions. Jethro “took” a burnt offering and sacrifices—meaning he prepared or presented them for God—while the Syriac, Targums, and Vulgate clarified the implicit action by translating “offered.” The MT reading is original, and the versions provide a valuable window into how ancient translators sought to make explicit what the Hebrew text conveyed implicitly.

You May Also Enjoy

The Transmission of the Old Testament Text: Masoretic Precision, Dead Sea Scrolls, Ancient Versions, and the Reliability of the Hebrew Bible

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS