"... The Septuagint identifies the attacker as an angel of the Lord instead of the Lord himself, since “It could not be accepted that the Lord in person would threaten the life of any man, and particularly not the life of his elect.” The Septuagint also has Zipporah fall at the feet of the angel and say, “The blood of the circumcision of my son has stood,” rather than making a statement about a bridegroom of blood; verse 26 specifies that it was because she said this that the angel left. The Armenian version reads, “Behold the blood of the circumcision of my son,” and the Ethiopic version has “May the blood of the circumcision of my son be in his place.” All three of these versions emphasize the sacrificial aspect of this circumcision: Moses is saved by his son’s blood. Targum Onkelos agrees with the Septuagint in verse 24. In verse 25, Zipporah says, “May my husband be given to us by the blood of this circumcision,” which is a similar interpretation to that of the Septuagint. Then, in verse 26, she says, “Were it not for the blood of this circumcision, my husband had merited execution.” Thus this Targum offers two interpretations of the phrase “bridegroom of blood,” the first being the sacrificial interpretation found in the Septuagint and the second being the possibility of the shedding of her husband’s blood. In Fragmentary Targum and Codex Neofiti, the attacker is identified as the “Destroyer,” the “Angel of Death,” and the reason for Zipporah’s son’s state of uncircumcision is that Jethro did not allow Moses to circumcise him ..."