_THE PROPHET AND THE REFORMERS_
ZEPHANIAH i.—ii. 3
Towards the year 625, when King Josiah had passed out of his
minority,[100] and was making his first efforts at religious reform,
prophecy, long slumbering, awoke again in Israel.
Like the king himself, its first heralds were men in their early
youth. In 627 Jeremiah calls himself but a boy, and Zephaniah can
hardly have been out of his teens.[101] For the sudden outbreak of
these young lives there must have been a large reservoir of patience
and hope gathered in the generation behind them. So Scripture itself
testifies. To Jeremiah it was said: _Before I formed thee in the belly
I knew thee, and before thou camest forth out of the womb I consecrated
thee._[102] In an age when names were bestowed only because of their
significance,[103] both prophets bore that of Jehovah in their own. So
did Jeremiah’s father, who was of the priests of Anathoth. Zephaniah’s
“forbears” are given for four generations, and with one exception
they also are called after Jehovah: _The Word of Jehovah which came
to Ṣephanyah, son of Kushi, son of Gedhalyah, son of Amaryah, son of
Hizḳiyah, in the days of Joshiyahu,[104] Amon’s son, king of Judah._
Zephaniah’s great-great-grandfather Hezekiah was in all probability the
king.[105] His father’s name Kushi, or _Ethiop_, is curious. If we are
right, that Zephaniah was a young man towards 625, then Kushi must have
been born towards 663, about the time of the conflicts between Assyria
and Egypt, and it is possible that, as Manasseh and the predominant
party in Judah so closely hung upon and imitated Assyria, the adherents
of Jehovah put their hope in Egypt, whereof, it may be, this name
Kushi is a token.[106] The name Zephaniah itself, meaning _Jehovah
hath hidden_, suggests the prophet’s birth in the “killing-time” of
Manasseh. There was at least one other contemporary of the same name—a
priest executed by Nebuchadrezzar.[107]
Of the adherents of Jehovah, then, and probably of royal descent,
Zephaniah lived in Jerusalem. We descry him against her, almost
as clearly as we descry Isaiah. In the glare and smoke of the
conflagration which his vision sweeps across the world, only her
features stand out definite and particular: the flat roofs with men
and women bowing in the twilight to the host of heaven, the crowds of
priests, the nobles and their foreign fashions; the _Fishgate_, the New
or _Second_ Town, where the rich lived, the _Heights_ to which building
had at last spread, and between them the hollow _Mortar_, with its
markets, Phœnician merchants and money-dealers. In the first few verses
of Zephaniah we see almost as much of Jerusalem as in the whole book
either of Isaiah or Jeremiah.
For so young a man the vision of Zephaniah may seem strangely dark
and final. Yet not otherwise was Isaiah’s inaugural vision, and as a
rule it is the young and not the old whose indignation is ardent and
unsparing. Zephaniah carries this temper to the extreme. There is no
great hope in his book, hardly any tenderness and never a glimpse of
beauty. A townsman, Zephaniah has no eye for nature; not only is no
fair prospect described by him, he has not even a single metaphor
drawn from nature’s loveliness or peace. He is pitilessly true to his
great keynotes: _I will sweep, sweep from the face of the ground; He
will burn_, burn up everything. No hotter book lies in all the Old
Testament. Neither dew nor grass nor tree nor any blossom lives in it,
but it is everywhere fire, smoke and darkness, drifting chaff, ruins,
nettles, saltpits, and owls and ravens looking from the windows of
desolate palaces. Nor does Zephaniah foretell the restoration of nature
in the end of the days. There is no prospect of a redeemed and fruitful
land, but only of a group of battered and hardly saved characters: a
few meek and righteous are hidden from the fire and creep forth when it
is over. Israel is left _a poor and humble folk_. No prophet is more
true to the doctrine of the remnant, or more resolutely refuses to
modify it. Perhaps he died young.
The full truth, however, is that Zephaniah, though he found his
material in the events of his own day, tears himself loose from
history altogether. To the earlier prophets the Day of the Lord, the
crisis of the world, is a definite point in history: full of terrible,
divine events, yet “natural” ones—battle, siege, famine, massacre and
captivity. After it history is still to flow on, common days come back
and Israel pursue their way as a nation. But to Zephaniah the Day of
the Lord begins to assume what we call the “supernatural.” The grim
colours are still woven of war and siege, but mixed with vague and
solemn terrors from another sphere, by which history appears to be
swallowed up, and it is only with an effort that the prophet thinks of
a rally of Israel beyond. In short, with Zephaniah the Day of the Lord
tends to become the Last Day. His book is the first tinging of prophecy
with apocalypse: that is the moment which it supplies in the history of
Israel’s religion. And, therefore, it was with a true instinct that the
great Christian singer of the Last Day took from Zephaniah his keynote.
The “Dies Iræ, Dies Illa” of Thomas of Celano is but the Vulgate
translation of Zephaniah’s _A day of wrath is that day_.[108]
Nevertheless, though the first of apocalyptic writers, Zephaniah does
not allow himself the license of apocalypse. As he refuses to imagine
great glory for the righteous, so he does not dwell on the terrors
of the wicked. He is sober and restrained, a matter-of-fact man, yet
with power of imagination, who, amidst the vague horrors he summons,
delights in giving a sharp realistic impression. The Day of the Lord,
he says, what is it? _A strong man—there!—crying bitterly._[109]
It is to the fierce ardour, and to the elemental interests of the
book, that we owe the absence of two features of prophecy which are
so constant in the prophets of the eighth century. Firstly, Zephaniah
betrays no interest in the practical reforms which (if we are right
about the date) the young king, his contemporary, had already
started.[110] There was a party of reform, the party had a programme,
the programme was drawn from the main principles of prophecy and was
designed to put these into practice. And Zephaniah was a prophet—and
ignored them. This forms the dramatic interest of his book. Here was a
man of the same faith which kings, priests and statesmen were striving
to realise in public life, in the assured hope—as is plain from the
temper of Deuteronomy—that the nation as a whole would be reformed
and become a very great nation, righteous and victorious. All this
he ignored, and gave his own vision of the future: Israel is a brand
plucked from the burning; a very few meek and righteous are saved from
the conflagration of a whole world. Why? Because for Zephaniah the
elements were loose, and when the elements were loose what was the
use of talking about reforms? The Scythians were sweeping down upon
Palestine, with enough of God’s wrath in them to destroy a people still
so full of idolatry as Israel was; and if not the Scythians, then some
other power in that dark, rumbling North which had ever been so full
of doom. Let Josiah try to reform Israel, but it was neither Josiah’s
nor Israel’s day that was falling. It was the Day of the Lord, and when
He came it was neither to reform nor to build up Israel, but to make
visitation and to punish in His wrath for the unbelief and wickedness
of which the nation was still full.
An analogy to this dramatic opposition between prophet and reformer may
be found in our own century. At its crisis, in 1848, there were many
righteous men rich in hope and energy. The political institutions of
Europe were being rebuilt. In our own land there were great measures
for the relief of labouring children and women, the organisation of
labour and the just distribution of wealth. But Carlyle that year held
apart from them all, and, though a personal friend of many of the
reformers, counted their work hopeless: society was too corrupt, the
rudest forces were loose, “Niagara” was near. Carlyle was proved wrong
and the reformers right, but in the analogous situation of Israel the
reformers were wrong and the prophet right. Josiah’s hope and daring
were overthrown at Megiddo, and, though the Scythians passed away,
Zephaniah’s conviction of the sin and doom of Israel was fulfilled, not
forty years later, in the fall of Jerusalem and the great Exile.
Again, to the same elemental interests, as we may call them, is due the
absence from Zephaniah’s pages of all the social and individual studies
which form the charm of other prophets. With one exception, there is
no analysis of character, no portrait, no satire. But the exception is
worth dwelling upon: it describes the temper equally abhorred by both
prophet and reformer—that of the indifferent and stagnant man. Here we
have a subtle and memorable picture of character, which is not without
its warnings for our own time.
Zephaniah heard God say: _And it shall be at that time that I will
search out Jerusalem with lights, and I will make visitation upon the
men who are become stagnant upon their lees, who say in their hearts,
Jehovah doeth no good and doeth no evil._[111] The metaphor is clear.
New wine was left upon its lees only long enough to fix its colour
and body.[112] If not then drawn off it grew thick and syrupy—sweeter
indeed than the strained wine, and to the taste of some more pleasant,
but feeble and ready to decay. “To settle upon one’s lees” became a
proverb for sloth, indifference and the muddy mind. _Moab hath been at
ease from his youth and hath settled upon his lees, and hath not been
emptied from vessel to vessel; therefore his taste stands in him and
his scent is not changed._[113] The characters stigmatised by Zephaniah
are also obvious. They were a precipitate from the ferment of fifteen
years back. Through the cruel days of Manasseh and Amon hope had been
stirred and strained, emptied from vessel to vessel, and so had sprung
sparkling and keen into the new days of Josiah. But no miracle came,
only ten years of waiting for the king’s majority and five more of
small, tentative reforms. Nothing divine happened. There were but
the ambiguous successes of a small party who had secured the king
for their principles. The court was still full of foreign fashions,
and idolatry was rank upon the housetops. Of course disappointment
ensued—disappointment and listlessness. The new security of life became
a temptation; persecution ceased, and religious men lived again at
ease. So numbers of eager and sparkling souls, who had been in the
front of the movement, fell away into a selfish and idle obscurity. The
prophet hears God say, _I must search Jerusalem with lights_ in order
to find them. They had “fallen from the van and the freemen”; they had
“sunk to the rear and the slaves,” where they wallowed in the excuse
that _Jehovah_ Himself _would do nothing—neither good_, therefore it
is useless to attempt reform like Josiah and his party, _nor evil_,
therefore Zephaniah’s prophecy of destruction is also vain. Exactly
the same temper was encountered by Mazzini in the second stage of
his career. Many of those, who with him had eagerly dreamt of a free
Italy, fell away when the first revolt failed—fell away not merely into
weariness and fear, but, as he emphasises, into the very two tempers
which are described by Zephaniah, scepticism and self-indulgence.
All this starts questions for ourselves. Here is evidently the same
public temper, which at all periods provokes alike the despair of the
reformer and the indignation of the prophet: the criminal apathy of the
well-to-do classes sunk in ease and religious indifference. We have
to-day the same mass of obscure, nameless persons, who oppose their
almost unconquerable inertia to every movement of reform, and are the
drag upon all vital and progressive religion. The great causes of God
and Humanity are not defeated by the hot assaults of the Devil, but
by the slow, crushing, glacier-like mass of thousands and thousands
of indifferent nobodies. God’s causes are never destroyed by being
blown up, but by being sat upon. It is not the violent and anarchical
whom we have to fear in the war for human progress, but the slow,
the staid, the respectable. And the danger of these does not lie in
their stupidity. Notwithstanding all their religious profession, it
lies in their real scepticism. Respectability may be the precipitate
of unbelief. Nay, it is that, however religious its mask, wherever
it is mere comfort, decorousness and conventionality; where, though
it would abhor articulately confessing that God does nothing, it
virtually means so—_says_ so (as Zephaniah puts it) _in its heart_, by
refusing to share manifest opportunities of serving Him, and covers
its sloth and its fear by sneering that God is not with the great
crusades for freedom and purity to which it is summoned. In these ways,
Respectability is the precipitate which unbelief naturally forms in
the selfish ease and stillness of so much of our middle-class life.
And that is what makes mere respectability so dangerous. Like the
unshaken, unstrained wine to which the prophet compares its obscure
and muddy comfort, it tends to decay. To some extent our respectable
classes are just the dregs and lees of our national life; like all
dregs, they are subject to corruption. A great sermon could be
preached on the putrescence of respectability—how the ignoble comfort
of our respectable classes and their indifference to holy causes
lead to sensuality, and poison the very institutions of the Home and
the Family, on which they pride themselves. A large amount of the
licentiousness of the present day is not that of outlaw and disordered
lives, but is bred from the settled ease and indifference of many of
our middle-class families.
It is perhaps the chief part of the sin of the obscure units, which
form these great masses of indifference, that they think they escape
notice and cover their individual responsibility. At all times many
have sought obscurity, not because they are humble, but because they
are slothful, cowardly or indifferent. Obviously it is this temper
which is met by the words, _I will search out Jerusalem with lights_.
None of us shall escape because we have said, “I will go with the
crowd,” or “I am a common man and have no right to thrust myself
forward.” We shall be followed and judged, each of us for his and her
personal attitude to the great movements of our time. These things are
not too high for us: they are _our_ duty; and we cannot escape our duty
by slinking into the shadow.
For all this wickedness and indifference Zephaniah sees prepared the
Day of the Lord—near, hastening and very terrible. It sweeps at first
in vague desolation and ruin of all things, but then takes the outlines
of a solemn slaughter-feast for which Jehovah has consecrated the
guests, the dim unnamed armies from the north. Judah shall be invaded,
and they that are at ease, who say _Jehovah does nothing_, shall be
unsettled and routed. One vivid trait comes in like a screech upon the
hearts of a people unaccustomed for years to war. _Hark, Jehovah’s
Day!_ cries the prophet. _A strong man—there!—crying bitterly._ From
this flash upon the concrete, he returns to a great vague terror,
in which earthly armies merge in heavenly; battle, siege, storm and
darkness are mingled, and destruction is spread abroad upon the whole
earth. The first shades of Apocalypse are upon us.
We may now take the full text of this strong and significant prophecy.
We have already given the title. Textual emendations and other points
are explained in footnotes.
* * * * *
_I will sweep, sweep away everything from the face of the ground—oracle
of Jehovah—sweep man and beast, sweep the fowl of the heaven and the
fish of the sea, and I will bring to ruin[114] the wicked and cut off
the men of wickedness from the ground—oracle of Jehovah. And I will
stretch forth My hand upon Judah, and upon all the inhabitants of
Jerusalem; and I will cut off from this place the remnant[115] of the
Baal,[116] the names[117] of the priestlings with the priests, and
them who upon the housetops bow themselves to the host of heaven, and
them who...[118] swear by their Melech,[119] and them who have turned
from following Jehovah, and who do not seek Jehovah nor have inquired
of Him._
_Silence for the Lord Jehovah! For near is Jehovah’s Day. Jehovah has
prepared a[120] slaughter, He has consecrated His guests._
_And it shall be in Jehovah’s day of slaughter that I will make
visitation upon the princes and the house[121] of the king, and upon
all who array themselves in foreign raiment; and I will make visitation
upon all who leap over the threshold[122] on that day, who fill their
lord’s house full of violence and fraud._
_And on that day—oracle of Jehovah—there shall be a noise of crying
from the Fishgate, and wailing from the Mishneh,[123] and great havoc
on the Heights. Howl,_ _O dwellers in the Mortar,[124] for undone are
all the merchant folk,[125] cut off are all the money-dealers.[126]_
_And in that time it shall be, that I will search Jerusalem with
lanterns, and make visitation upon the men who are become stagnant
upon their lees, who in their hearts say, Jehovah doeth no good and
doeth no evil.[127] Their substance shall be for spoil, and their
houses for wasting...._[128]
_Near is the great Day of Jehovah, near and very speedy.[129] Hark, the
Day of Jehovah! A strong man—there!—crying bitterly!_
_A day of wrath is that Day![130] Day of siege and blockade, day of
stress and distress,[131] day of darkness and murk, day of cloud and
heavy mist, day of the war-horn and battle-roar, up against the fenced
cities and against the highest turrets! And I will beleaguer men, and
they shall walk like the blind, for they have sinned against Jehovah;
and poured out shall their blood be like dust, and the flesh of them
like dung. Even their silver, even their gold shall not avail to save
them in the day of Jehovah’s wrath,[132] and in the fire of His zeal
shall all the earth be devoured, for destruction, yea,[133] sudden
collapse shall He make of all the inhabitants of the earth._
Upon this vision of absolute doom there follows[134] a qualification
for the few meek and righteous. They may be hidden on the day of the
Lord’s anger; but even for them escape is only a possibility. Note the
absence of all mention of the Divine mercy as the cause of deliverance.
Zephaniah has no gospel of that kind. The conditions of escape are
sternly ethical—meekness, the doing of justice and righteousness. So
austere is our prophet.
...,[135] _O people unabashed![136] before that ye become as the
drifting chaff, before the anger of Jehovah come upon you,[137] before
there come upon you the day of Jehovah’s wrath;[138] seek Jehovah, all
ye meek of the land who do His ordinance,[139] seek righteousness, seek
meekness, peradventure ye may hide yourselves in the day of Jehovah’s
wrath._
FOOTNOTES:
[100] Josiah, born _c._ 648, succeeded _c._ 639, was about eighteen in
630, and then appears to have begun his reforms.
[101] See above, pp. 40 f., n. 85.
[102] Jer. i. 5.
[103] See G. B. Gray, _Hebrew Proper Names_.
[104] Josiah.
[105] It is not usual in the O.T. to carry a man’s genealogy beyond his
grandfather, except for some special purpose, or in order to include
some ancestor of note. Also the name Hezekiah is very rare apart from
the king. The number of names compounded with Jah or Jehovah is another
proof that the line is a royal one. The omission of the phrase _king
of Judah_ after Hezekiah’s name proves nothing; it may have been of
purpose because the phrase has to occur immediately again.
[106] It was not till 652 that a league was made between the Palestine
princes and Psamtik I. against Assyria. This certainly would have been
the most natural year for a child to be named Kushi. But that would set
the birth of Zephaniah as late as 632, and his prophecy towards the end
of Josiah’s reign, which we have seen to be improbable on other grounds.
[107] Jer. xxi. 1, xxix. 25, 29, xxxvii. 3, lii. 24 ff.; 2 Kings xxv.
18. The analogous Phœnician name צפנבעל, Saphan-ba’al = “Baal protects
or hides,” is found in No. 207 of the Phœnician inscriptions in the
_Corpus Inscr. Semiticarum_.
[108] Chap. i. 15. With the above paragraph cf. Robertson Smith,
_Encyc. Brit._, art. “Zephaniah.”
[109] Chap. i. 14_b_.
[110] In fact this forms one difficulty about the conclusion which we
have reached as to the date. We saw that one reason against putting
the Book of Zephaniah after the great Reforms of 621 was that it
betrayed no sign of their effects. But it might justly be answered
that, if Zephaniah prophesied before 621, his book ought to betray some
sign of the approach of reform. Still the explanation given above is
satisfactory.
[111] Chap. i. 12.
[112] So _wine upon the lees_ is a generous wine according to
Isa. xxv. 6.
[113] Jer. xlviii. 11.
[114] The text reads _the ruins_ (מַכְשֵׁלוֹת, unless we prefer with
Wellhausen מִכְשֹׁלים, _the stumbling-blocks_, i.e. _idols_) _with the
wicked, and I will cut off man_ (LXX. _the lawless_) _from off the face
of the ground._ Some think the clause partly too redundant, partly too
specific, to be original. But suppose we read וְהִכְשַׁלְתִּי (cf. Mal. ii. 8,
Lam. i. 14 and _passim_: this is more probable than Schwally’s כִּשַׁלְתִּי,
_op. cit._, p. 169), and for אדם the reading which probably the LXX.
had before them, אדם רשע (Job xx. 29, xxvii. 13, Prov. xi. 7: cf. אדם
בליעל Prov. vi. 12) or אדם עַוָּל (cf. iii. 5), we get the rendering
adopted in the translation above. Some think the whole passage an
intrusion, yet it is surely probable that the earnest moral spirit of
Zephaniah would aim at the wicked from the very outset of his prophecy.
[115] LXX. _names_, held by some to be the original reading (Schwally,
etc.). In that case the phrase might have some allusion to the
well-known promise in Deut., _the place where I shall set My name_.
This is more natural than a reference to Hosea ii. 19, which is quoted
by some.
[116] Some Greek codd. take Baal as fem., others as plur..
[117] So LXX.
[118] Heb. reads _and them who bow themselves, who swear, by Jehovah_.
So LXX. B with _and_ before _who swear_. But LXX. A omits _and_. LXX. Q
omits _them who bow themselves_. Wellhausen keeps the clause with the
exception of _who swear_, and so reads (to the end of verse) _them who
bow themselves to Jehovah and swear by Milcom_.
[119] Or Molech = king. LXX. _by their king_. Other Greek versions:
Moloch and Melchom. Vulg. Melchom.
[120] LXX. _His._
[121] So LXX. Heb. _sons_.
[122] Is this some superstitious rite of the idol-worshippers as
described in the case of Dagon, 1 Sam. v. 5? Or is it a phrase for
breaking into a house, and so parallel to the second clause of the
verse? Most interpreters prefer the latter. The idolatrous rites have
been left behind. Schwally suggests the original order may have been:
_princes and sons of the king, who fill their lord’s house full of
violence and deceit; and I will visit upon every one that leapeth over
the threshold on that day, and upon all that wear foreign raiment_.
[123] The _Second_ or New Town: cf. 2 Kings xxii. 14, 2 Chron. xxxiv.
22, which state that the prophetess Huldah lived there. Cf. Neh. iii.
9, 12, xi. 9.
[124] The hollow probably between the western and eastern hills, or the
upper part of the Tyropœan (Orelli).
[125] Heb. _people of Canaan_.
[126] נטיל, found only here, from נטל, to lift up, and in Isa. xl.
15 to weigh. Still it may have a wider meaning, _all they that carry
money_ (Davidson).
[127] See above, p. 52.
[128] The Hebrew text and versions here add: _And they shall build
houses and not inhabit_ (Greek _in them_), _and plant vineyards and not
drink the wine thereof._ But the phrase is a common one (Deut. xxviii.
30; Amos v. 11: cf. Micah vi. 15), and while likely to have been
inserted by a later hand, is here superfluous, and mars the firmness
and edge of Zephaniah’s threat.
[129] For מהר Wellhausen reads ממהר, pt. Pi; but מהר may be a verbal
adj.; compare the phrase מהר שלל, Isa. viii. 1.
[130] Dies Iræ, Dies Illa!
[131] Heb. sho’ah u-mesho’ah. Lit. ruin (or devastation) and
destruction.
[132] Some take this first clause of ver. 18 as a gloss. See Schwally
_in loco_.
[133] Read אף for אך. So LXX., Syr., Wellhausen, Schwally.
[134] In vv. 1-3 of chap. ii., wrongly separated from chap. i.: see
Davidson.
[135] Heb. הִתְקוֹשְׁשׁוּ וָקשּׁוּ. A.V. _Gather yourselves together, yea,
gather together_ (קוֹשֵׁשׁ is _to gather straw or sticks_—cf. Arab.
_ḳash_, to sweep up—and Nithp. of the Aram. is to assemble). Orelli:
_Crowd and crouch down_. Ewald compares Aram. _ḳash_, late Heb. קְשַׁשׁ,
_to grow old_, which he believes originally meant _to be
withered, grey_. Budde suggests בשו התבששו, but, as Davidson remarks,
it is not easy to see how this, if once extant, was altered to the
present reading.
[136] נִכְסָף is usually thought to have as its root meaning _to be
pale_ or _colourless_, _i.e._ either white or black (_Journal of
Phil._, 14, 125), whence כֶּסֶף, _silver_ or _the pale metal_: hence in
the Qal to long for, Job xiv. 15, Ps. xvii. 12; so Ni, Gen. xxxi. 30,
Ps. lxxxiv. 3; and here _to be ashamed_. But the derivation of the name
for silver is quite imaginary, and the colour of shame is red rather
than white: cf. the mod. Arab. saying, “They are a people that cannot
blush; they have no blood in their faces,” _i.e._ shameless. Indeed
Schwally says (_in loco_), “Die Bedeutung fahl, blass ist
unerweislich.” Hence (in spite of the meanings of the Aram. כסף both to
lose colour and to be ashamed) a derivation for the Hebrew is more
probably to be found in the root _kasaf_, to cut off. The Arab. کﺴف,
which in the classic tongue means to cut a thread or eclipse the sun,
is in colloquial Arabic to give a rebuff, refuse a favour, disappoint,
shame. In the forms _inkasaf_ and _itkasaf_ it means to receive a
rebuff, be disappointed, then shy or timid, and _kasûf_ means shame,
shyness (as well as eclipse of the sun). See Spiro’s _Arabic-English
Vocabulary_. In Ps. lxxxiv. נכסף is evidently used of unsatisfied
longing (but see Cheyne), which is also the proper meaning of the
parallel כלה (cf. other passages where כלה is used of still unfulfilled
or rebuffed hopes: Job xix. 27, Ps. lxix. 4, cxix. 81, cxliii. 7). So
in Ps. xvii. 4 כסף is used of a lion who is longing for, _i.e._ still
disappointed in, his prey, and so in Job xiv. 15.
[137] LXX. πρὸ γένεσθαι ὑμᾶς ὡς ἄνθος (here in error reading נץ for מץ)
παραπορευόμενον, πρὸ τοῦ ἐπελθεῖν ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς ὀργὴν κυρίου (last clause
omitted by א^{c.b}). According to this the Hebrew text, which is
obviously disarranged, may be restored to בְּטֶרֶם לאֹ־תִהיוּ כַמֹּץ עֹבֵר בְּטֶרֶם
לאֹ־יָבֹא עֲלֵיכֶם חֲרוֹן יהו.
[138] This clause Wellhausen deletes. Cf. Hexaplar Syriac translation.
[139] LXX. take this also as imperative, _do judgment_, and so
co-ordinate to the other clauses.