Commentary on the book of the prophet Zephaniah

The book of the prophet Zephaniah ranks ninth among the books of the minor prophets both in the Hebrew Masoretic Bible and in the Greek LXX, Latin Vulgate and other translations. The Hebrew name of the prophet is Zephaniah, transmitted by the LXX Σοφανίας, from Hebrew means, according to the words included in its composition: tsafan, to cover, to protect, and ia (r) - Jehovah, the one who is protected, whom Jehovah protects. In the Old Testament, this name, in addition to the prophet, was borne by three more persons mentioned in different biblical places (by the way, the second priest of the church contemporary to the prophet, Jer. 21:1, 29:25, 52:24; Compare Zech 6.10, 14 and 1 Chr. 6.21), and, according to the indicated etymology of this name, it generally expressed the theocratic confidence of the pious people of the Old Testament in the grace-filled protection of the constant thought of Jehovah (cf. Ps. 27:5, 30:21, 82:4). The transmission and explanation of the word Zephat by Blessed Jerome does not closely correspond to the direct literal meaning of the first part of the Hebrew name of the prophet. “The name of Zephaniah,” he says 1, “some translated: “a high place for observation” (speculä from Ch. “tsafa”, observed), others: “the secret of the Lord”, (from the chapter “tzafan” - to be hidden). However, whether this name is interpreted as “tower of the day of observation,” or as “the secret of the Lord,” both are equally suitable for the prophet. In fact, it is also said to Ezekiel: “Son of man, I have made you a watchman (tzofe) for the house of Israel” (Ezekiel 3.17), and in another place: “For the Lord God does nothing without revealing His secret to His servants the prophets” (Am 3.7). According to this explanation, blessed. Jerome conveys the meaning of the Hebrew name of the prophet Zephaniah with the expression: “Speculator et arcanorum Dei cognitor.” But with all the fidelity and depth of the thought contained here, the exact correspondence to the Jewish etymology of the name of the prophet in the explanation of Blessed Jerome is not noticed: the verbs “tsafa” and “tzafan”, with all their mutual proximity in origin and meaning, however, each has an independent meaning, and the second verb more often has a concrete meaning (to cover, protect) than an abstract one (secret). In view of this, it is better to remain with the first etymology of the name Zephaniah-Zephaniah that we indicated. No information about the personality, life and activity of the prophet Zephaniah has been preserved in the historical and modern prophetic writing of the Old Testament, and the only direct biblical evidence about the person of the prophet, as the writer of the prophetic book known with his name, his origin and the time of prophetic activity, is the inscription of the book, Zeph. 1: 1: “The word of the Lord, which came to Zephaniah the son of Hushai, the son of Gedaliah, the son Amoriah the son of Hezekiah, in the days of Josiah the son of Amon, king of Judah." What is the meaning of the indication of the ancestors of the prophet named here? “The Jews,” says Blessed Jerome (named interpretation 237), “tell that if the name of the father or grandfather of a prophet is indicated in the table of contents of a book, then the latter were also prophets. Therefore Amos, one of the twelve prophets, who says: I am not a prophet, nor the son of a prophet; I was a shepherd and collected sycamore trees (Am 7.14), the table of contents of the book does not have my father’s name. If this tradition is true, then the prophet Zephaniah was born, so to speak, on behalf of the prophetic and from the glorious generation of his ancestors. their ministry, as well as other persons named as the fathers of the prophets (Amotsa - the father of the prophet Isaiah, Isaiah 1.1, Beeri and the father of Hosea, Hosea 1.1, Bethuel - the father of Joel, Joel 1.1; Amathiah - the father of Jonah, Jonah 1:1; Barachiah - the father of the prophet. Zechariah, Zech 1.1), nothing is known for certain, and this is unlikely, since the prophetic ministry among the people of God did not have a hereditary character at all. Other ancient and modern commentators believe that such an unusually long pedigree of the prophet, even up to the fourth generation in an ascending degree, indicates that the prophet came from a noble family and had several ancestors famous for their merits. Bypassing the unknown stories - the prophet's father - Hushai, grandfather - Gedaliah and great-grandfather - Amoriah, researchers usually stop at the fourth and last member of the genealogical table - the ancestor of Hezekiah, whose name should determine the nobility of the prophet's origin, and some (in modern times Black, Strauss, Gitzig, Stade, etc.) identify this ancestor of the prophet with the king of the same name Jewish Hezeki (2 Kings 18.1), thus recognizing the prophet’s belonging to the royal family. This opinion in itself does not contain anything impossible. Although King Josiah of Judah, contemporary to the prophet Zephaniah, was not a great-great-grandson, but only a great-grandson of King Hezekiah, he was separated from him not by three intermediate members, as in the prophet’s genealogy, but only by two (Manasseh - Amon), and although the biblical evidence does not mention Amoriah - the son of King Hezekiah and the brother of King Manasseh, both are quite acceptable and understandable in view the long period of time separating Josiah and the prophet Zephaniah from King Hezekiah. However, two circumstances speak against this assumption: 1) the absence in the inscription under consideration of the name of Hezekiah of the designation “king of the Jews” (Heb. “melech - Yehuda”), by which the prophet would directly and positively establish the nobility of his family; 2) evidence of Jewish tradition, preserved in the work “de vita prophetarum” Pseudoepiphania, according to which the prophet Zephaniah came from the tribe of Simeon from the district of Saravaf. This legend is included in our Chetya Menaion, see. on December 3, on the day of the church remembrance of the memory of the prophet, and although the reliability of this tradition is not beyond doubt, the very existence of such a tradition about the origin of the prophet Zephaniah from the tribe of Simeon speaks quite strongly against the assumption that the prophet belonged to the royal family, therefore to the tribe of Judah, since otherwise it would remain unclear how the tradition could attribute him to another tribe, while indicating precisely the place of his birth. Thus, the opinion that the prophet Zephaniah belongs to the royal family of David cannot be recognized as undoubted. It is better to accept the opinion of St. Cyril of Alexandria, that (as can be concluded from the long list of the prophet’s ancestors) the prophet Zephaniah “was according to the flesh not without a certain family” (οὐκ ἄσημος ὤν κατὰ σὰρκα γένος) 2. Tradition has not preserved any other information about the life and activities of the prophet, just like Holy Scripture. The Christian Orthodox Church, celebrating the church glorification of the prophet Zephaniah on December 3, in the church service to the prophet especially notes the solemn messianic prophecy of his glorification of Zion with the appearance of Christ, Zeph 3.14–15. “You appeared, illuminated by the Divine Spirit, the prophet Zephaniah, proclaiming God’s appearance: rejoice greatly, daughters of Zion, Jerusalem, preaching: behold, your king comes to save” (kontakion of the prophet. See canon 6th hymn, troparion 2nd). The time of the prophetic service, as well as the delivery of the speeches of the prophet Zephaniah, is determined in the very inscription of his book “the days of Yam and Josiah, the son of Ammon, king of Judah,” who reigned, as is known from 2 Kings 22.1 and 2 Chronicles 34.1, for thirty-one years, according to the accepted chronology from 641 to 610 BC. But to what period of this reign does the beginning belong? prophetic activity of Zephaniah - researchers differ on the solution to this issue. It is known that the reign of the pious Josiah was a time of religious reform aimed at eradicating idolatry among the people of God - the sad legacy of Josiah's father Amun and grandfather Manasseh. Comparing the news of this reform 2 Kings 22–23 and 2 Chronicles 34–35, in modern times they usually divide the reign of Josiah into three periods, different in nature: the first eleven years of his reign form the first, pre-reform period, then from the 12th year to the 18th year (when the book of the law was found in the church by the high priest Hilkiah, 2 Kings 22.8 ; 2 Chronicles 34.15 etc.) follows the period of reform activity of King Josiah in the direction of the destruction of all types of idolatry and the restoration in all purity of the worship and worship of Jehovah, finally, from the 19th year to the 31st year of the post-reform. To which of these periods should Zephaniah's prophetic speeches be attributed? In the absence of any direct external evidence of the activity of the prophet Zephaniah, when solving this question, one must be guided by the internal data of the book itself, as well as some comparisons and analogies from the book of the prophet Jeremiah, who set out on his prophetic ministry, as is known (Jer. 1:2, 25:3) in the 13th year of the reign of Josiah, therefore, undoubtedly, he was - more or less a long time - a contemporary of the prophet Zephaniah. But the book’s instructions about the internal state of the Jewish people, as well as about their external relations with other peoples, are so general that they do not allow us to establish exact dates and do not exclude the possibility of different opinions about the time of Zephaniah’s prophetic speeches. Thus, some researchers and interpreters of the book of the prophet Zephaniah attribute the time of pronouncing the speeches contained in it to the first period of the reign of Josiah, preceding the reform of the cult (Ewald, Gefernik, Stade, etc., from the Russians - Tyurnin, Narcissov). The basis for this is the following data about the internal state of the Kingdom of Judah, borrowed from the book itself: 1) the country is dominated by the cult of Baal with special priests, kemarim, worship and service of the heavenly bodies and the cult of Moloch (Zeph 1.4–9), 2) the main importance in the life of the people belongs to the secular and spiritual aristocracy, which, however, abuses its importance and only corrupts the people ( Soph 3.2–4); 3) from the outside, the state enjoys peace, significant wealth has accumulated in the hands of ruling officials and merchants (Zeph. 1:13, 18), but material contentment has created in them complete indifference to the teachings and threats of the prophets, complete moral indifference, and the only way to destroy wickedness is the complete destruction of the lawless (Zeph. 1:3, 12, 3:11). All these features, they say, point to a time when the state authorities, due to Josiah’s youth, had not yet taken measures to eradicate idolatry in the country, and the religious life of the people remained in a state inherited from two previous wicked reigns. These features, taken from the contents of the book itself, were indeed inherent in the life of the people to whom the prophetic speeches of Zephaniah were addressed, but they did not constitute an exclusive property only of the first period of the reign; on the contrary, all of them in their entirety took place both during the reform of Josiah and after it, as this is especially clearly revealed from the combination of the prophetic speeches of Zephaniah with the formidable speeches of the prophet Jeremiah, Jer. 11–17, pronounced after the reform Josiah, moreover, during his own lifetime. The opinion about the early origin of the prophecy of Zephaniah could have received greater strength and stability only if the assumption of many ancient historians and scientific researchers of the book of the prophet Zephaniah (Dunker, Niebuhr, Schrader, Maspero, Stade, etc.) was probable, as if in the latter, precisely in the prophecy about the approach of the terrible day of the Lord, the day of wrath and sorrow, the day of the trumpet and the cry of abuse, Zeph.1:14–16, one can see a foreshadowing of the Scythian invasion that shook the whole of Western Asia in the second half of the 7th century BC. The main and perhaps even the only source of historical information about this event is the news of Herodotus, according to which the Scythians invaded Media at the time when Cyaxares of Media began to besiege Nineveh, forced him to lift this siege, defeated him and ruled in Asia for 28 years; tried to penetrate into Egypt, but Pharaoh Psammetichus managed to buy them off by paying an indemnity, and on the way back they robbed the church of Aphrodite-Astarte in the Philistine city of Ascalon; finally, they were expelled by the same Cyaxares (Herod., Histor. I, 103–106; I, 73; IV, 1). But first of all, you need to know that historians do not agree on determining the exact chronology of the Scythian invasion, and it can only be more or less likely to be attributed to the time of the Jewish king Josiah (i.e. generally after 640 BC). The main thing is that the invasion of the Scythians, so memorable to other peoples of Western Asia, apparently barely affected Judea and the Jewish people (the Scythians, perhaps, only passed through part of Judea, capturing only booty, just as they did in the land of the Philistines), and therefore did not find any strong or even direct response in the speeches of the contemporary prophets of the people of God - Zephaniah and Jeremiah. In the prophet Jeremiah’s depiction of the enemies who should appear as executors of God’s judgment over the Jews (Jer. 4:6–7, 5:15–17, 6:1–3, 21–23), there is not a single feature that could not be completely attributed to the Babylonians (Jer. 25.9–11); We do not find any clear indications of the Scythians from him. The same must be said about the prophet Zephaniah and his book. There is no need to see in the depiction of Zeph 1.14–16 the terrible day of Jehovah the disaster of the Scythian invasion (this invasion for Judea, as already said, probably did not have significant significance). Rather, the invasion of the Scythians and their dominance over the various peoples of Asia could only give rise to the prophet. Zephaniah to depict the judgment of God over the people of Judah, who had become ossified in their depravity and had become blind and deaf to the great signs of the times ( Zeph. 2:1–2, 3:1–2, 5–7); Meanwhile, the prophet saw in the intense hostility and struggle of different peoples with each other only the beginning of a bloody struggle for dominance in the world, which had to shake almost all the states of that time (Zeph. 2.4-11) and lead Judea to complete destruction (Zeph. 1: 2-3, 3: 8). The Scythian invasion, thus, could only give rise to the terrible prospect depicted by the prophet that awaited the Jews. An indirect allusion to this devastating invasion of the Scythians for many Asian peoples is not without reason seen in the words of the prophet. Zephaniah Zeph.3:6–8, as well as in the first half of the verse Zeph.1:18. In the last place one can presumably see a tense indication of the selfishness of these predators that especially distinguished the aggressive campaigns of the Scythians. According to other researchers (Kepln, Hitzig, Strauss), the origin of Zephaniah’s prophecy is contemporary with the very reform activity of King Josiah. But no matter how probable the actual participation of the prophet Zephaniah, together with other contemporary prophets (see 2 Kings 23.2) in the renewal of the covenant and the subsequent cleansing of the temple, Jerusalem and the country from the paraphernalia of idolatry, there is a direct indication of the religious and liturgical reforms of King Josiah in the book of the prophet. is not available, and therefore the idea of ​​putting the contents of the book in a temporary and causal connection with the event and details of the reform of King Josiah should be abandoned. It remains, therefore, to attribute the speeches of the prophet Zephaniah to the third and last period of the life and reign of Josiah, that is, after the 18th year of his reign, which is what some researchers do (Delitzsch, Kleinert, Philippson, etc.). The whole situation of the book - a depiction of the people's sins against faith and morality, as well as the punishments awaiting them - is similar to the prophetic speeches of Jeremiah, undoubtedly spoken after the reform of Josiah. It was possible to talk about the upcoming extermination of “the remnants of Baal” (Zeph 1.4) only after Josiah, upon reaching adulthood, initiated religious reform, especially after receiving the book of the law (in the 18th year), with new zeal he began to exterminate the remnants of idolatry in his country. Likewise, there could be no question of the official use of the law in the country, although violated by the priests (Zeph 3.4), until the opening of the “book of the law.” And the prophet Jeremiah speaks of idolatry (Jer. 7.17, 18) next to the official dominance of true worship and legalism (Jer. 6.19–30), of a false oath in the name of Jehovah next to the oath of idols (Jer. 5:2, 7:9, 12:6; cf. Zeph 1.5), of malicious transgression of the law (Jer. 8.8–9), about the corruption of all classes of the people - the royal family, princes, prophets and priests (Jer 2.8, 26 fn. Zeph 1.4, 8–9, 3.4). Therefore, both prophets recognize the only possible outcome for the people of their time - general destruction, the terrible punishment of God, the ignition of the all-consuming flame of God's wrath (Zeph 1.18 see Jer 7.20), which has to destroy people and all living things from the face of Palestine (Zeph 1.2-3 see Jer 4.25, 9.9, 12.4), and thus, as it were, repeat and develop the essence of the formidable prophecy of Oldana regarding the acquisition of the book of the law and its oaths (2 Kings 22.16 ff. 2 Chronicles 24.24). Finally, the fact that the prophet Zephaniah, adjoining the well-known prophecy of Nahum (see especially Nahum 1.14, 2.2, 3.15), foreshadows the imminent destruction of Nineveh and all of Assyria (Zeph 2.13–15), which, according to the now accepted scientific reckoning, happened in 606 BC. favors comparatively later rather than earlier writing of a book. According to the inscription of the book, the authenticity of which there is no reason to doubt, previous researchers recognized it as the work of one sacred writer who lived 25 years before the Babylonian captivity. But from the middle of the 19th century, when the so-called higher criticism of the biblical writings raised the question of the origin and composition of each of them, objections began to be heard against the recognition of the unity and integrity of the book of the prophet Zephaniah. Currently, some biblical critics (Stade, Schwalli, Buddha) argue that only the first chapter indisputably belongs to the prophet. Zephaniah, whose name appears in the inscription, in the second and third chapters critics indicate individual verses and entire sections, supposedly of post-captivity origin. Here critics include all those passages that in tone and direction do not agree - in their opinion, with the content of the first chapter, they do not have a menacingly accusatory character towards the Jews, but, on the contrary, have the goal of protecting the Jewish people from other nations - this is the section of Zeph. 2: 4-10, which contains a foreshadowing of punishment for the nations neighboring the Jews; or in their content they contain an indication of the circumstances of the time of the Babylonian captivity or even the post-exilic period, such as: Zeph.3:9-10 (fn. Zeph 2.11), expressing the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe conversion of the pagans to Jehovah, and Zeph.3:14-20, concluding a solemn prophecy about the future renewal and glorification of Zion after the times of humiliation. But the additional prophecies contain not only denunciations and threats to the unfaithful and criminal people of Judah, but also comforting prophecies about the salvation and glorification of the pious remnant (Am 5.15; Joel 2.32; Isa 37.32; Micah 5.6). Likewise, conditions favorable to the spread of true knowledge of God among the pagans existed long before the Babylonian captivity, and biblical history knows not only many individual cases of pagans turning to the faith of Jehovah: Rahab (Joshua 2.10–22), Ruth, Naaman the Syrian (2 Kings 5.1) but also entire masses of pagans, like the Gibeonites (Joshua IX). Particularly favorable conditions for this conversion of the pagans to the faith of Jehovah opened up from the time of the fall of the northern ten-tribe Kingdom of Israel, when the Assyrians resettled in the place of the Israelites began to assimilate the principles of the religion of Jehovah, although at first this worship of them could only be very imperfect (2 Kings 17.24). Even less incomprehensible and strange, of course, is the prophet’s expression that Jehovah will “return the captivity” of the Jews (Zeph 2.7, 3.20), which, according to critics, indicates that the Jews were already in captivity at the time of writing these sections. In fact, the idea of ​​the necessity, the inevitability of the captivity of the chosen people in the event of their failure to fulfill the commandments of God, as well as their release in case of repentance for correction, is a very ancient thought, expressed by Moses (Deut. 30.3) and repeated more than once by the prophets who undoubtedly lived before the captivity (for example, Hos. 6.11). Moreover, of course, the speech about this in the mouth of a prophet who lived and prophesied some 30 years before the captivity of Babylon is understandable. The content and form of the prophetic sermon and the prophetic speeches of Zephaniah are in accordance with or in relation to the circumstances of the life of the chosen people, and partly of their neighboring peoples. It is precisely in view of the sad and hopeless religious and moral state of the people of God at this time, which showed no hope of correction at all, and on the other hand, in view of the grave and formidable events of modern external history, the predominant tone of the speeches of the prophet Zephaniah is eschatological, and their main and central subject is the punitive and purifying judgment over Israel, and then over other nations and over the whole world in general. But this terrible judgment of God has no goal in itself; on the contrary, it is only a means and path of God’s actions towards the goal of common, universal salvation. The beginnings of this salvation will be the “humble lands, fulfilling the laws” of Jehovah (Zeph 2.3), the “remnant of Israel” who do no injustice (Zeph 3.13), which will make up the new theocratic community. The religious and moral foundations of the life of this future community will be directly opposite to the life of the contemporary Jewish community of the prophet (Zeph 3.11–13), and, as a result, Jehovah’s relationship with the people will completely change: instead of a formidable Judge, as now, He will be a King, Patron, Protector for His chosen ones, and His relationship to the new community will be as loving as the relationship of the groom to the bride (Soph 3.14–17), and the end result will be honor, peace and glory of the renewed theocratic community (Zeph 3.18–20). And then the prophet is presented with even more lofty and broad prospects: other nations will also take part in salvation, whose false gods will be destroyed (Zeph 2.11), and they themselves will turn to the pure, sincere and unanimous calling of Jehovah (Zeph 3.9–10). In view of the fact that all the noted main points of the content of the prophecy of Zephaniah have parallels or analogies for themselves in more ancient prophets, the question arises about the relationship of the book of the prophet Zephaniah to the prophecies of his earlier prophets and, in general, about the position and significance of the first among other prophetic writings. On this issue, two fairly widespread views have been expressed in Western biblical scholarship. Firstly, at the initiative of one of the ancient researchers of the book, Martin Bucer (Comment, in Tzephanjam. Argentor. 1528), it is often called a summary, a successful abbreviation of all prophetic speeches (breve compendium, elegans epitome). Secondly, Delitzsch and others divide the prophetic writings into two series - Isaiah and Jeremiah, and the prophecy of Zephaniah is placed at the head of those that stand under the determining influence of the prophet Jeremiah. But it should be noted that from the Orthodox Church point of view, the idea of ​​​​the literary dependence of the prophets and, in general, sacred writers from each other is not entirely acceptable. In addition, a deeper study of the prophetic writings in the light of the data of external history, and especially when highlighting the history of the sequential course of Revelation, shows that the sometimes observed similarity of thoughts and expressions among different prophets is explained not by direct borrowing, but by the proximity or similarity of the events of time, as well as the internal means of the ideas of the religious and moral world order proclaimed by them. Finally, in the presentation of his prophetic speeches, each prophet to a certain extent demonstrated the personal characteristics of his spirit and put the stamp of personality on his books. Taking into account all these indisputable features of prophetic speeches, we cannot fully and without reservations accept both of the above judgments of Western scientists about the book of the prophet Zephaniah. In fact, his prophetic speeches cannot be called a generalization of the content of the prophets who preceded him, if only because not all the features of the future Messianic kingdom were revealed or even mentioned by Zephaniah: for example, there is no teaching about the Personal Organizer of the future kingdom - the Divine Branch of the house of David, as the previous prophets speak about (Hosea 3.3; Micah 5.2; Isa 11.1) and subsequent ones (Jer. 23.5, 33.14–17; Ezekiel 34.23–25; Zechariah 3.3) - although in the sublime depiction of the prophet, Zeph 3.14–15, one cannot help but see a foreshadowing of the future triumphal entry of the Lord Jesus Christ into Jerusalem (see Matt. 21.5; John 12.15), why section Zeph 3.14–19, in the Orthodox Church it is designated for reading as parimia on the feast of the Entry of the Lord into Jerusalem. Likewise, the essential points of the content of the book of the prophet Zephaniah - judgment and salvation - are expressed in him with a special nuance, distinguishing him from other prophets (Nahum, Obadiah, Isaiah, Habakkuk, Joel): “the day of Jehovah” for him is not only the day of wrath and judgment (like Joel, Nahum), but at the same time the beginning of revival, and, moreover, not just one chosen people, like the prophet Joel (Chapter III), but also of all humanity. This universal idea of ​​judgment and salvation appears in the prophet Zephaniah in such a unique revelation that does not allow us to talk about any lack of independence or dependence on the prophet Jeremiah or on another prophet. But, of course, there are connections between the thoughts and expressions of the prophet and the teachings and language of other prophets, and they should not be overlooked when explaining the book. In terms of content, the book of the prophet Zephaniah, as can be seen from what has already been said, can be divided into three parts, generally coinciding with the current division of the book into three chapters. Chapter one depicts the judgment of God awaiting Judea for the idolatry and wickedness of its inhabitants. Chapter two foreshadows the destruction of other pagan kingdoms. Chapter three - after re-depicting the punishment of Judah and other nations (Zeph. 3:1-8), gives a majestic image of the coming new form of life - the salvation of Jews and Gentiles. For interpretation, as well as for study in general, the books of the prophet Zephaniah can serve: 1) interpretations translated into Russian - St. Cyril of Alexandria, Blessed Theodoret, Blessed Jerome; 2) isagogical-exegetical works of Western scientists: P. Kleinert in Bibelwerk Lange 1868, L Philippson in his D. Israelitische Bibel. II, 1858 H. Ewald, Die Propheten d. Alten Bundes. 1840, I, T. Strauss, Vaticinia Zephaniae 1843. Keil, Bibl. Commentary ub. d. 12 Klein. Propheten 1873. K. Marti, Dodekapropheton 1904, etc. 3) in Russian bibliological literature - Archbishop Irinea. Pskovsky, interpretation of the twelve prophets. St. Petersburg. 1807, part V, Palladium ep. Sarapulsky, interpretation on St. prophets 1876, c. V, Historical and exegetical study “The Book of the Prophet Zephaniah” by I. Tyurnin. Sergiev Posad. 1897 and regarding this book - prof. O. G. Eleonsky, on the question of the book of the prophet Zephaniah. Christ. Read 1898, II. We use a lot of the venerable work of Mr. Tyurnin in compiling the introduction and interpretation of the book of the prophet. Zephaniah. Wed. also from D. A. Nartsisov. A Guide to Studying the Prophetic Books of the Old Testament. Poltava. 1904, p. 208–214. Blessed Jerome, one book of commentaries on the prophet Zephaniah. The creation of Blessed Jerome, Russian. transl., part 14. Kyiv 1898, p. 237–238 Our Holy Father Cyril of Alexandria, interpretation of the prophet Zephaniah. Russian translation Theological Bulletin. 1895, I, p. 327. You might be interested in: