THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
SN a Pe
mair, Zeno von Verona, Minster, 1904; H. Brewer, in Zeitschrift fiir katholische Theologie, xxviii. 1 (1904), 92— 115; idem, in Revue bénédictine, xxii (1905), 470; H. Januel, Commentationes philologice in Zenonem Veronensem, program of the gymnasium at Regensburg, 1905-06; DCB, iv. 1213.
ZENOS, ANDREAS CONSTANTINIDES: Presbyterian; b. at Constantinople Aug. 13, 1855. He was educated at Robert College, Constantinople (A.B., 1872); was pastor of the Presbyterian church at Brandt, Pa. (1881-83), and in 1883 was appointed professor of Greek at Lake Forest University, where he remained five years. He was then professor of New-Testament exegesis in Hartford Theological Seminary (1888-91), and since 1891 has been connected with McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago, as professor of church history (1891— 1894) and of Biblical theology (since 1894). He collaborated with F. W. Kelsey in an edition of Xenophon’s Anabasis (Boston, 1889); translated the “‘ Keclesiastical History” of Socrates for the N7cene and Post-Nicene Fathers (New York, 1890); edited, with M. W. Jacobus and E. E. Nourse, The Standard Bible Dictionary (New York, 1909); and has written Elements of Higher Criticism (New York, 1895); Compendium of Church History (Philadelphia, 1896); and The Teaching of Jesus concerning Christian Conduct (New York, 1905).
ZEPHANIAH, zef/’a-nai’ad: Ninth of the Minor Prophets in the arrangement of the English version. His genealogy is traced (in i. 1) back to the fourth generation to ‘‘ Hizkiah,” probably Hezekiah, king of Judah, although this is not stated in the
title. That this was Hezekiah is not
Author and disproved by the fact that no son of Contents. Hezekiah named Amariah is elsewhere spoken of; while the long reign of
Manasseh suffices to cover the apparent discrepancy of the known three steps between Hezekiah and Josiah and the four generations named in this passage. Nothing inherently improbable attaches to the supposed Davidic descent of Zephaniah. In chap. 1. appear first a threat of judgment against the earth in general, and then against Judah and Jerusalem because of heathenism in worship, the use of foreign customs by princes and nobles, and distrust of or disbelief in Yahweh. In chap. ii. is an exhortation to turn to righteousness, before judgment falls upon the Philistines, Moabites, Ammonites, Cushites (see CusH),' and Assyrians. Chap. iii. 1-7 is a lament over Jerusalem, arraigning all classes, 7-13 promises return to purity, 14-20 is a triumphal: song in view of deliverance, since Jerusalem’s foes are cast out and Yahweh is her king. The prophecy falls, therefore, into two parts: chaps. i—ii., the menace; chap. iii., the announcement of salvation, verses 1-7 being merely introductory. The unity of the prophecy rests upon the idea of the day of Yahweh (see Day or THe Lorp); the aspects of this for the heathen and for Israel are discriminated. It is a day of destruction for man and beast, for Israel and the heathen; for special classes of Israelites—the idolaters, the fashionable, merchants, atheists, and sinners; for the foes of Israel. Then the isles are to worship Yahweh, the peoples will serve him, the Cushites will bring gifts, the
diaspora of Israel shall be celebrated in all lands. Thus the picture of the Day of Yahweh is not altogether one, in which it agrees with the twofold aspect of the day in Isaiah. If the prophecy is a unit, the author has used various aspects in a fashion all his own. The pattern, however, was Ezekiel. Thus the prophecies against the heathen are in the middle (cf. Ezek. xxv.-xxxii.; Zeph. ii. 4-15). Ezekiel’s order is menace, exhortation, the oracles concerning the heathen, which Zephaniah seems to copy. It seems likely, also, that the text has not remained in its original form, but has received additions.
The activity of Zephaniah is placed in the time of Josiah (i. 1), and shortly before 625 B.c. This is corroborated by the religious and ethical situation in Judah and Jerusalem reflected in the book. The inhabitants are compared with wine settled on the
dregs; the city has long remained free
The Date. from war and other calamities; the
star-worship is there, which dates after the time of Assyrian influence (i. 5); religious syncretism was coincident with foreign influence, in which the princes lead and the king does not object. This fits the period of the minority of Josiah, when he had no influence upon the practises of the people. On attaining his majority, he broke with the party friendly to Assyrian control, developed a national policy in religion and politics, and then came his reform (i. 4). Definiteness of time is indicated also by the idea of the Day of Yahweh, which in Zephaniah is motived by the Scythians from the north (i. 10, 13), who are to plunder the inhabitants. The enemy could be none of the neighbors of Judah, did not menace Egypt or Assyria, could hardly be Babylonia, and appeared suddenly—characteristics which depict the Scythians, who come as bringing a sacrifice (i. 7). The moderated expression in ii. 1-3 may be due the passing of the Scythians, which happened c. 625, while Zephaniah’s activity shortly preceded this time. But this period is not the situation reflected in ii. 14-20, the atmosphere of which is that of the exile and the spirit that of Isa. xl— Ixvi., the restoration of Israel and return of the exiles; similar in tone is iii. 9-10, a basis for which is found only after Israel had dwelt among the heathen (cf. II Kings v. 1 sqq.); with the foregoing should be placed also ii. 11. Further, the attitude of Moab and Ammon toward Israel reflects the events of 586, while ii. 7a seems a reference to the brilliant Maccabean period (cf. I Macc. xi. 61). The passage iii. 1-7 is general in tone as compared with the concreteness of chap. i., while the expression ‘‘ meek of the earth” (ii. 3) recalls the epithets applied to the pious of the exile. As secondary elements then may be reckoned ii. 1-3, 7, 8-10, 15, and iii.; the rest may be ascribed to Zephaniah.
From the primary portions as thus distinguished may be seen the conditions in Judah shortly before Josiah’s reform, the indications of strife between popular and prophetic piety. There is religious syncretism, influenced by the East, and Yahweh is made to say that he will not share his rulership with Baal and other deities; the judgment is coming, the Scythians are the instruments. Dependence is seen upon Isaiah and Amos in the shaking of the earth and the anger of Yahweh, which involve other