Exodus 3:18

3:18 “The elders ¹  will listen ²  to you, and then you and the elders of Israel must go to the king of Egypt and tell him, ‘The Lord, the God of the Hebrews, has met ³  with us. So now, let us go ⁴  three days’ journey into the wilderness, so that we may sacrifice ⁵  to the Lord our God.’

Exodus 5:3

5:3 And they said, “The God of the Hebrews has met with us. Let us go a three-day journey ⁶  into the desert so that we may sacrifice ⁷  to the Lord our God, so that he does not strike us with plague or the sword.” ⁸ 

Exodus 8:26

8:26 But Moses said, “That would not be the right thing to do, ⁹  for the sacrifices we make ¹⁰  to the Lord our God would be an abomination ¹¹  to the Egyptians. ¹²  If we make sacrifices that are an abomination to the Egyptians right before their eyes, ¹³  will they not stone us? ¹⁴ 

Exodus 10:26

10:26 Our livestock must ¹⁵  also go with us! Not a hoof is to be left behind! For we must take ¹⁶  these animals ¹⁷  to serve the Lord our God. Until we arrive there, we do not know what we must use to serve the Lord.” ¹⁸ 

[3:18]  ¹ tn Heb “And they will listen”; the referent (the elders) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:18]  ² tn This is the combination of the verb שָׁמַע (shama’) followed by לְקֹלֶךָ (lÿqolekha), an idiomatic formation that means “listen to your voice,” which in turn implies a favorable response.

[3:18]  ³ tn The verb נִקְרָה (niqra) has the idea of encountering in a sudden or unexpected way (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 25).

[3:18]  ⁴ tn The form used here is the cohortative of הָלַךְ (halakh). It could be a resolve, but more likely before Pharaoh it is a request.

[3:18]  ⁵ tn Here a cohortative with a vav (ו) follows a cohortative; the second one expresses purpose or result: “let us go…in order that we may.”

[5:3]  ⁶ tn The word “journey” is an adverbial accusative telling the distance that Moses wanted the people to go. It is qualified by “three days.” It is not saying that they will be gone three days, but that they will go a distance that will take three days to cover (see Gen 31:22-23; Num 10:33; 33:8).

[5:3]  ⁷ tn The purpose clause here is formed with a second cohortative joined with a vav (ו): “let us go…and let us sacrifice.” The purpose of the going was to sacrifice.

[5:3]  ⁸ sn The last clause of this verse is rather unexpected here: “lest he meet [afflict] us with pestilence or sword.” To fail to comply with the summons of one’s God was to invite such calamities. The Law would later incorporate many such things as the curses for disobedience. Moses is indicating to Pharaoh that there is more reason to fear Yahweh than Pharaoh.

[8:26]  ¹¹ tn The clause is a little unusual in its formation. The form נָכוֹן (nakhon) is the Niphal participle from כּוּן (kun), which usually means “firm, fixed, steadfast,” but here it has a rare meaning of “right, fitting, appropriate.” It functions in the sentence as the predicate adjective, because the infinitive לַעֲשּׂוֹת (la’asot) is the subject – “to do so is not right.”

[8:26]  ¹² tn This translation has been smoothed out to capture the sense. The text literally says, “for the abomination of Egypt we will sacrifice to Yahweh our God.” In other words, the animals that Israel would sacrifice were sacred to Egypt, and sacrificing them would have been abhorrent to the Egyptians.

[8:26]  ¹³ tn An “abomination” is something that is off-limits, something that is tabu. It could be translated “detestable” or “loathsome.”

[8:26]  ¹⁴ sn U. Cassuto (Exodus, 109) says there are two ways to understand “the abomination of the Egyptians.” One is that the sacrifice of the sacred animals would appear an abominable thing in the eyes of the Egyptians, and the other is that the word “abomination” could be a derogatory term for idols – we sacrifice what is an Egyptian idol. So that is why he says if they did this the Egyptians would stone them.

[8:26]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “if we sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians [or “of Egypt”] before their eyes.”

[8:26]  ¹⁶ tn The interrogative clause has no particle to indicate it is a question, but it is connected with the conjunction to the preceding clause, and the meaning of these clauses indicate it is a question (GKC 473 §150.a).

[10:26]  ¹⁶ tn This is the obligatory imperfect nuance. They were obliged to take the animals if they were going to sacrifice, but more than that, since they were not coming back, they had to take everything.

[10:26]  ¹⁷ tn The same modal nuance applies to this verb.

[10:26]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “from it,” referring collectively to the livestock.

[10:26]  ¹⁹ sn Moses gives an angry but firm reply to Pharaoh’s attempt to control Israel; he makes it clear that he has no intention of leaving any pledge with Pharaoh. When they leave, they will take everything that belongs to them.