Walzer, In God’s Shadow, p. 100.

 Walzer, In God’s Shadow, p. 100.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 H. Irsigler, Zefanja (Frieburg: Herder, 2002), p. 374.

 H. Irsigler, Zefanja (Frieburg: Herder, 2002), p. 374.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Sweeney, Zephaniah, p. 185, explores additional links between Zeph. 3:8b-10 and Isaiah 18–19.

 Sweeney, Zephaniah, p. 185, explores additional links between Zeph. 3:8b-10 and Isaiah 18–19.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Ben Zvi, Zephaniah, p. 228, although Ben Zvi concludes that 3:10 parallels 3:9 in terms of its subject and referent, as does Berlin, Zephaniah, p. 135.

 Ben Zvi, Zephaniah, p. 228, although Ben Zvi concludes that 3:10 parallels 3:9 in terms of its subject and referent, as does Berlin, Zephaniah, p. 135.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 See Perlitt, Die Propheten, p. 142.

 See Perlitt, Die Propheten, p. 142.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 See, on Assyria, M. Zehnder, Umgang mit Fremden in Israel und Assyrien: Ein Beitrag zur Anthropologie des ‘Fremden’ im Licht antiker Quellen (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2005), pp. 63–74; and M. Fales, “The Enemy in Assyrian Royal Inscriptions: The Moral Judgment,” in H. Nissen and J. Renger (eds.), Mesopotamien und seine Nachbarn (Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, 1982), pp. 425–35 (esp. p. 427). On the Neo-Babylonian Empire, see Vanderhooft, The Neo-Babylonian Empire and Babylon in the Latter Prophets; and, on the Persian Empire, A. Kuhrt, “The Achaemenid Persian Empire (c. 550-c. 330 BCE): Continuities, Adaptations, Transformations,” in S. Alcock, T. D’Altroy, K. Morrison and C. Sinopoli (eds.), Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 93–123.

 See, on Assyria, M. Zehnder, Umgang mit Fremden in Israel und Assyrien: Ein Beitrag zur Anthropologie des ‘Fremden’ im Licht antiker Quellen (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2005), pp. 63–74; and M. Fales, “The Enemy in Assyrian Royal Inscriptions: The Moral Judgment,” in H. Nissen and J. Renger (eds.), Mesopotamien und seine Nachbarn (Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, 1982), pp. 425–35 (esp. p. 427). On the Neo-Babylonian Empire, see Vanderhooft, The Neo-Babylonian Empire and Babylon in the Latter Prophets; and, on the Persian Empire, A. Kuhrt, “The Achaemenid Persian Empire (c. 550-c. 330 BCE): Continuities, Adaptations, Transformations,” in S. Alcock, T. D’Altroy, K. Morrison and C. Sinopoli (eds.), Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 93–123.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 J.B. Rives, “The Decree of Decius and the Religion of Empire,” The Journal of Roman Studies 89 (1999), pp. 135–54.

 J.B. Rives, “The Decree of Decius and the Religion of Empire,” The Journal of Roman Studies 89 (1999), pp. 135–54.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 See M. Doyle, Empires (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1986), pp. 30, 45.

 See M. Doyle, Empires (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1986), pp. 30, 45.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 See Y. Shain and A. Berth, “Diaspora and International Relations Theory,” International Organization 57 (2003), pp. 449–79. The remaining tension between worshipping Yhwh outside Judah and the prominence of Jerusalem (3:11, “my holy mountain”) and of Israelites (3:20) cannot be brushed aside, but is not significant enough to undo the interpretation proposed here.

 See Y. Shain and A. Berth, “Diaspora and International Relations Theory,” International Organization 57 (2003), pp. 449–79. The remaining tension between worshipping Yhwh outside Judah and the prominence of Jerusalem (3:11, “my holy mountain”) and of Israelites (3:20) cannot be brushed aside, but is not significant enough to undo the interpretation proposed here.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 See A. Gibson, Biblical Semantic Logic: A Preliminary Analysis (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2nd edn, 2001), pp. 140–50, for an explanation of this concept.

 See A. Gibson, Biblical Semantic Logic: A Preliminary Analysis (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2nd edn, 2001), pp. 140–50, for an explanation of this concept.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Gibson, Biblical Semantic Logic, p. 140.

 Gibson, Biblical Semantic Logic, p. 140.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Heywood, Political Theory, p. 365.

 Heywood, Political Theory, p. 365.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Grosby, Biblical Ideas, p. 248.

 Grosby, Biblical Ideas, p. 248.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Walzer, In God’s Shadow, pp. 95–96, also argues that religion is the fundamental phenomenon in such passages, while politics are an exponent, context, and/or expression of the resultant human behavior in society.

 Walzer, In God’s Shadow, pp. 95–96, also argues that religion is the fundamental phenomenon in such passages, while politics are an exponent, context, and/or expression of the resultant human behavior in society.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 T. Donaldson, Judaism and the Gentiles: Jewish Patterns of Universalism (to 135 CE) (Waco: Baylor University Press, 2007), p. 499.

 T. Donaldson, Judaism and the Gentiles: Jewish Patterns of Universalism (to 135 CE) (Waco: Baylor University Press, 2007), p. 499.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Donaldson, Judaism and the Gentiles, p. 499.

 Donaldson, Judaism and the Gentiles, p. 499.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Donaldson, Judaism and the Gentiles, p. 513. Although Donaldson bases his argument on other prophets of the Hebrew Bible, his description fits Zephaniah well. See also J. Levenson, “The Universal Horizon of Biblical Particularism,” in M. Brett (ed.), Ethnicity and the Bible (Leiden: Brill, 1996), pp. 165–69. Donaldson’s formulation is a welcome alternative to the false dichotomy between law and prophets that A. Kuenen adopted in his discussion of particularism and universalism over a century ago, and which lingers on in some formulations of ancient Israel’s history; see W. Brueggemann and D. Hankins, “The Invention and Persistence of Wellhausen’s World,” CBQ 75 (2013), pp. 15–31.

 Donaldson, Judaism and the Gentiles, p. 513. Although Donaldson bases his argument on other prophets of the Hebrew Bible, his description fits Zephaniah well. See also J. Levenson, “The Universal Horizon of Biblical Particularism,” in M. Brett (ed.), Ethnicity and the Bible (Leiden: Brill, 1996), pp. 165–69. Donaldson’s formulation is a welcome alternative to the false dichotomy between law and prophets that A. Kuenen adopted in his discussion of particularism and universalism over a century ago, and which lingers on in some formulations of ancient Israel’s history; see W. Brueggemann and D. Hankins, “The Invention and Persistence of Wellhausen’s World,” CBQ 75 (2013), pp. 15–31.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation