The question format captures the complacent attitude as an internal conviction rather than mere intellectual doubt. By phrasing their belief as a question, the text exposes the vacuous theology undergirding their apathy—a practical deism that assumes God’s irrelevance to daily life. The interrogative form reveals this isn’t ignorance but settled unbelief.

The text records no verbal response from the complacent. Their answer is implied in their continued behavior—remaining settled in apathy. Zephaniah immediately pronounces God’s response: He will actively search Jerusalem with lamps and punish these men, contradicting their assumption of divine inaction.

The question captures a theology of divine indifference—the practical deism of Jerusalem’s complacent class. The Hebrew phrase translated ‘settled on their lees’ (qaphe’u al shimreyhem) uses winemaking imagery: wine left undisturbed on its sediment becomes thick and worthless. These men had become spiritually stagnant, their theology matching their lifestyle. They didn’t deny God’s existence but His relevance, asking in effect whether He actually intervenes in human affairs. Asking this as a question rather than stating a doctrine exposes the hollowness of their position—it’s more assumption than conviction, more excuse than theology. The theological weight is enormous: such practical atheism provokes God’s active searching judgment, proving by His response that the question’s premise is catastrophically wrong.