Zephaniah 1:8-9

8, 9. In agreement with the other pre-exilic prophets Zephaniah names the nobles and princes as special objects of the divine wrath, because they have sinned most persistently against the divine will.

Princes See on Hosea 3:4.

The king’s children LXX., “the king’s house.” The latter is accepted as original by some because the other is thought to create a chronological difficulty. The condemnation presupposes that the children had reached the age of responsibility, but if the prophecy is dated before 621 B.C. the children of King Josiah must have been very young at the time of its delivery (compare 2 Kings 23:31; 2 Kings 23:36). “Children” and “house” are sometimes interchanged in the Old Testament, but such interchange need not be assumed here, for why restrict the term to the sons of Josiah? It may be intended to include the sons of the deceased kings, Amon and Manasseh, and may be equivalent to “royal princes.” What the prophet means to say is that not even the royal family will escape the judgment. It is worthy of notice that there is no condemnation of the king. At the time of Zephaniah’s preaching, Josiah was too young to commit very serious offenses; besides, it is not improbable that even during the early years of his reign he was under prophetic influence, which would prevent him from committing the crimes of his predecessors.

Such as are clothed with strange apparel R.V., “foreign apparel.” An evidence of indulgence and of disregard of the simplicity characteristic of the ancient Hebrews. Only the court and the nobles could afford these costly garments (compare Matthew 11:8), and they secured the means with which to purchase them by oppression and violence (compare Isaiah 2:6-7; Deuteronomy 22:11; Leviticus 19:19). It has been suggested to place 9b after 8a and 8b after 9a, but this rearrangement is no improvement over the present text. Zephaniah 1:9 condemns other forms of wrongdoing.

Those that leap on the threshold Better, R.V., “over the threshold.” Since this expression occurs only here, commentators differ widely in their interpretations. Some think that it refers to a superstitious rite of the idol worshipers (compare 1 Samuel 5:5), but the second part of the verse does not favor this view. There is no conjunction between the two parts, which indicates that no new transgression is condemned; the filling of the house with violence and deceit is closely connected with the leaping over the threshold. Hence Ewald is probably right when he says that even 9a refers to “dishonest servants of the royal court who seek to serve their lord well by exacting treasures from his subjects by force and fraud.” It may be a sort of proverbial phrase for breaking into other people’s houses for purposes of robbery.

Their masters’ houses R.V., “their master’s house.” Not the house of Jehovah, but the house of the chief to whom they render unscrupulous service.

With violence and deceit With treasures and possessions secured through violence and fraud. Similar condemnations may be read in all the pre-exilic prophets (compare Amos 3:10; Micah 3:1-3; Ezekiel 22:25-29). Jehovah must punish these outrages.