Judges 4:11 (NKJV)

11 Now Heber the Kenite, of the children of Hobab the father-in-law of Moses, had separated himself from the Kenites and pitched his tent near the terebinth tree at Zaanaim, which is beside Kedesh.

Numbers 10:29 (NKJV)

29 Now Moses said to Hobab the son of Reuel a the Midianite, Moses’ father-in-law, “We are setting out for the place of which the LORD said, ‘I will give it to you.’ Come with us, and we will treat you well; for the LORD has promised good things to Israel.”

How can we reconcile the two texts because in one instance it would seem Hobab is the father in-law of Moses but on the other hand he is the son of Reuel Moses father in-law

  • 2
    In English, it seems to simply be missing a comma: "Hobab, the son of Reuel a the Midianite, Moses’ father-in-law" In this case "the son of Reuel the Midianite" is an appositive modifying Hobab and "Moses' father-in-law" is referring back to Hobab. But we would need a Hebrew expert to confirm which phrase modifies which in the Hebrew (which is why this is a comment not an answer). I'm just saying in English it looks like they just missed a comma. – Joshua Dec 3 '16 at 14:07
  • The comma is there in KJV – Bob Jones Sep 4 '17 at 0:42
  • highly related: hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/20541/… – Bach Jan 2 '18 at 14:56

Some scholars believe that the term חׂׂתֵן used in all the aforementioned verses is non-specific and refers to all the woman's male relatives. Thus all Tziporrah's blood relatives would all be referred to, in the Bible, as חׂׂתֵן. See my answer somewhere else.

So in this case Reuel may have been Moses father-in-law and Hobab and Jethro his brothers-in-law. Alternatively, Reuel may have been the grandfather head of the clan, and Jethro may have been the father-in-law of Moses, and Hobab his brother-in-law, Jethro’s son.

| improve this answer | |

His name is Hobab ben-Reuel. If he were Irish he would be Hobab O'Reuel. And Swedish; Habab Reuelson. Take your pick. You don't separate his name to say he was the father-in-law.

Nu 10:29 His name is Hobab son of Reuel חבב בן-רעואל . Hobab is a Midianite as is his father (but it refers to Hobab), he is the father-in -law חתןto Moses.

Ju 4:11 Merely describes him as the father-in-law to Moses.

The additional information that Hobab was the son of Reuel does not make a contradiction requiring reconciliation.

Hobab ben-Reuel is his proper name designating his family line.

The question is based on a perceived contradiction in an English translation, there is no question in Hebrew.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    I've downvoted, as this answer does not show its work, and does not interact with either of the biblical texts in question. It looks like little more than an opinion. – user2910 Feb 3 '18 at 2:09

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.