Zephaniah 2:4-7

4-7. The doom of Philistia.

Gaza… Ashkelon… Ashdod… Ekron See on Amos 1:6-8. Gath is again absent.

Shall be forsaken Depopulated. The original contains a word play which it is difficult to reproduce in English; some attempt it by reading, “Gaza shall be forgotten.”

Drive out Ashdod That is, the inhabitants of Ashdod.

At the noonday Of uncertain meaning. Perhaps the thought is that it will be taken after a brief assault, lasting only from morning till noon, that is, with ease (compare Jeremiah 15:8). A similar expression is found in an inscription of Esarhaddon, “Memphis, his capital, I took in the half of the day” at noonday; here also the emphasis seems to be on the brevity of time in which the city was taken.

Shall be rooted up Another word play in the original. The expression implies complete destruction.

Zephaniah 2:5 continues the threat upon the Philistines in the form of a woe.

Inhabitants of the seacoast Literally, the line of the sea; that is, the narrow strip stretching along the sea. The territory of the Philistines was located along the Mediterranean coast.

Nation of the Cherethites In apposition to the preceding (see on Amos 1:6-8; Amos 9:7; compare 1 Samuel 30:14).

O Canaan Since the prophet is concerned only with the Philistines, Canaan must denote Philistia, as is made clear also by the phrase which immediately follows, “the land of the Philistines.” According to Joshua 13:1-3, the territory of the Philistines was thought a part of Canaan, but it is doubtful whether Canaan could be used as a synonym of Philistia. The text is improved if the word is omitted “The word of Jehovah is against you (or, better, against thee), O land of the Philistines.” The destruction is to be so complete that not a single inhabitant will be left. If these threats were written originally in the Kinah meter (see on Amos 5:1-3), the rhythm becomes greatly improved by an additional alteration of the text, so that Zephaniah 2:5 will read, “Woe, inhabitants of the seacoast, nation of the Cherethites! I will destroy thee, that there shall be no inhabitant, land of the Philistines.”

The general thought of Zephaniah 2:6 is clear, but in details there is much uncertainty. The text may have suffered in transmission; LXX., which differs considerably from the Hebrew, reads, “And Crete shall become dwelling places for shepherds, and folds for flocks.” This involves the omission of one expression from the Hebrew, “the seacoast,” which might have been repeated accidentally from Zephaniah 2:5, the transposition of two words, and a change in the vocalization of another.

Crete Not the island of Crete, but Philistia; the former is supposed to have been the original home of the Philistines (see on Amos 9:7). The term “Cherethites” (Zephaniah 2:5) is derived from the same word. To improve the rhythm some omit even the word translated “Crete,” which might be “a mere transcriptional duplicate of the preceding word, as the letters forming the two words are frequently confused.” With this omission Zephaniah 2:6 would read, “And it (the land of the Philistines) shall become dwellings (or, pastures, Amos 1:2) for shepherds, and folds for flocks.” Marti goes still further and, continuing 5b, reads, “And thou shalt become.…” Whether any of these emendations are accepted or not, the meaning remains the same; the land of the Philistines is to be so completely deserted that shepherds will be able to pasture and fold their flocks wherever they like.

Zephaniah 2:7 adds to the threat of the destruction of the Philistines the promise that the “remnant of Judah” shall possess the territory deserted by its present inhabitants. A similar promise is found in Amos 9:12. The English translation of the first clause, “And the coast shall be for the remnant of the house of Judah,” disregards the grammatical construction of the original, which can be rendered only, “And it (the land of the Philistines, Zephaniah 2:5) shall be a portion for the remnant of the house of Judah.” The ordinary English translation follows substantially LXX., which reads, however, “the seacoast.”

Remnant of the house of Judah Must be identical with the “meek” of Zephaniah 2:3, who escape the judgment by heeding the prophet’s exhortation.

Shall feed R.V. adds rightly, “their flocks.”

They The remnant. The grammatical construction is according to sense.

Thereupon Upon what? If the text is correct the reference must be to the “pastures” of Zephaniah 2:6 (for the grammatical inaccuracy involved in the use of a masculine pronoun referring to a feminine noun compare G.-K., 135o). Wellhausen divides the word and transposes one letter, so that it reads “by the sea” instead of “upon them.” This would remove the grammatical peculiarity.

In the houses of Ashkelon shall they lie down in the evening During the day they will feed their flocks in the fields of the Philistines; when darkness sets in they seek shelter in their towns. Ashkelon represents the Philistine towns in general; it seems to be selected rather than any other for rhythmical reasons. The closing sentence gives the cause of the transformation in the fortunes of Judah, or at least of the remnant.

God shall visit them In mercy. The same word is used frequently in the sense of “punish,” that is, visit in judgment (compare Zephaniah 1:8-9).

Turn away their captivity R.V., “bring back their captivity,” or, restore their fortune. The expression does not presuppose the exile as accomplished, nor even the expectation of an exile (see on Hosea 6:11; Amos 9:15; and p. 133).

Marti and others reject Zephaniah 2:7 in its present form as a later addition (see p. 518), but the former thinks that the verse contains some original elements. These he finds, in a corrupt form, in the second and third clauses of the verse; as restored by him they read, continuing Zephaniah 2:6, “In thy ruins they lie down, they shall feed by the sea.” The subject of the verbs he takes to be Arab nomads.