PRELIMINARY REMARKS.

The position which has been assigned to Joel in the collection of the

Minor Prophets, furnishes an external argument for the determination of

the time at which Joel wrote. There cannot be any doubt that the

Collectors were guided by a consideration of the chronology. The

circumstance, that they placed the prophecies of Joel just between the

two prophets who, according to the inscriptions and contents of their

prophecies, belonged to the time of Jeroboam and Uzziah, is thus

equivalent to an express testimony that he also lived, and exercised

his ministry, during that time.

By this testimony we have, in the meanwhile, obtained a firm

standing-point; and it must remain firm, as long as it is not

overthrown by other unquestionable facts, and the Collectors are not

convicted of an historical error. But, as regards the latter point,

there is the greater room for caution, because all the other statements

which they have made are, upon a careful examination, found to stand

the test; for none of the other Minor Prophets is found to occupy a

place to which he is not entitled. But no such facts are to be found;

on the contrary, everything serves to confirm their testimony.

It will not be possible to assign the prophecies of Joel to a later

period; for Amos places at the head of one of his prophecies one of the

utterances of Joel (compare Amos i. 2 with Joel iv. 16 [iii. 16]), as

the text, as it were, on which he is to comment. That we are not

thereby precluded from considering the two prophets as contemporaneous,

is shown by the altogether similar case of Isaiah, in his relation to

Micah. Isaiah, too, borrows, in chap. xiii. 6, a sentence from Joel i.

15, the peculiarity of which proves that the coincidence is not

accidental. Such verbal repetitions must not be, by any means,

considered as unintentional reminiscences. They served to exhibit that

the prophets acknowledged one another as the organs of the Holy

Spirit,--to testify the ἀκριβῆ διαδοχήν, the want of which in the times

after Ezra and Nehemiah is mentioned by Josephus as one of the reasons

why none of the writings of [Pg 292]that period could be acknowledged

as sacred. (See the Author's _Dissertations on the Genuineness of

Daniel_, p. 199.) _Further_,--The description of the threatening

judgment in chap. i. and ii. is, in Joel, kept just in that very same

generality in which we find it in the oldest prophecies that have been

preserved to us, viz., in Amos, in the first chapters of Isaiah and of

Hosea; whilst in later times, the threatening is, throughout,

particularized by the express mention of the instruments who were, in

the first instance, to serve for its fulfilment, viz., the Assyrians

and Babylonians. That which Judah had to suffer from the former was so

severe, that Joel, in chap. iv. 4 ff.--where he mentions, although, as

it were, only in the way of example, nations with which Judah had

hitherto already come into hostile contact--would scarcely have passed

them over in silence, in order to mention only the far lesser calamity

inflicted by other nations.

But just as little can we think of an earlier period. It is certainly

not accidental, that among all the prophets whose writings have been

preserved to us, no one appeared at an earlier period; any more than it

is accidental, that no prophecies are extant of the distinguished men

of God in earlier times, of whom the historical books make mention,

especially Elijah and Elisha. It was only when the great divine

judgments were being prepared, and were approaching, that it was time,

through their announcement, to waken from the slumber of security those

who had forgotten God, and to open the treasures of hope and

consolation to the faithful. Formerly, the living, oral word of the

prophets was the principal thing; but now that God opened up to them a

wider view,--that their calling had regard not only to the present, but

also to the future time, the written word was raised to an equal

dignity. Nothing, then, but the most cogent reasons could induce us to

make, in the case of Joel only, an exception to so established a rule.

But we cannot acknowledge as such, what _Credner_ (in his _Comment. on

Joel_, p. 41 sqq.) has brought forward to prove that Joel committed to

writing his prophecies as early as under the reign of Joash, _i.e._,

about 870-65 B.C., or from seventy to eighty years earlier than

any of the other prophecies which have come down to us. If we do not

allow ourselves to be carried away by the multitude of his words,

we shall find that the only remaining plausible argument is--that the

Syrians of Damascus [Pg 293]are not mentioned among the enemies of the

Covenant-people, as they are in Amos. From this, _Credner_ infers that

Joel must have prophesied before the first inroad of the Syrians on

Judea, which, according to 2 Kings xii. 18 ff.; 2 Chron. xxiv. 23 ff.,

took place under Jehoash. But we need only look at that passage, in

order to be convinced that the mention of that event could not be

expected in Joel. The expedition of the Syrians was not directed

against Judea, but against the Philistines. It was only a single

detached corps which, according to Chronicles, incidentally, and on

their return, made an inroad on Judah; but Jerusalem itself was not

taken. This single act of hostility could not but be soon forgotten in

the course of time. It was of quite a different character from that of

the Phœnicians and Philistines mentioned by Joel, which were only

particular outbreaks of the hatred and envy which they continually

cherished against the Covenant-people, and which, as such, were

preeminently the object of punitive divine justice. But on what ground

does the supposition rest, that Joel must necessarily mention all those

nations, with which the Covenant-people came, at any time, into hostile

contact? The context certainly does not favour such an idea. The

mention of former hostile attacks in chap. iv. (iii.) 4-8 is altogether

incidental, as _Vitringa_, in his _Typ. Doctr. Proph._ p. 189 sqq., has

admitted: "The prophet," says he, "was describing the heavy judgments

with which God would, after the effusion of the Spirit, successively,

and especially in the latter days, visit the enemies of the Church, and

overthrow them, on account of the injuries which they had inflicted

upon it. And while he was doing so, those injuries presented themselves

to his mind, which in his own time, and in the immediate past, were

inflicted upon the Jewish people--a portion of the universal Church--by

the neighbouring nations, the Tyrians, Sidonians, and Philistines. To

them he addresses his discourse _in passing_ (_in transitu_), and

announces to them, in the name of God, that they themselves also would

not remain unpunished." The correctness of _Vitringa_, with his "_in

transitu_," is proved by the וגם, as well as by the circumstance, that

vers. 9 ff. are closely connected with ver. 3; so that vers. 4 ff. form

a real parenthesis. How entirely out of place would here have been any

mention of the Syrians! There was necessarily something required which

was very striking, and [Pg 294]which, having but recently occurred, was

still vividly remembered. But the matter was altogether different in

the case of Amos. Joel has to do with the enemies of Judah only; Amos,

with those of the kingdom of Israel also, among whom the Syrians were

the most dangerous. Hence, he begins with them at once. The crime with

which he charges them in chap. i. 3, that they had threshed the

inhabitants of Gilead with threshing instruments of iron, concerns the

kingdom of Israel only. The same applies to the Ammonites and Moabites

also, who, in like manner, are mentioned by Amos, and not by Joel. The

Ammonites are charged in Amos i. 13 with ripping up the women with

child of Gilead, that they might enlarge their border; and the crime of

the Moabites, rebuked in chap. ii. 1, occurred, very probably, during

the time of, or after, the expedition against them, mentioned in 2

Kings iii.--the real instigator of which was the king of Israel.

We must indeed be astonished that _Hitzig_, _Ewald_, _Meier_, _Baur_,

and others, after the example of _Credner_, have likewise declared in

favour of the view that the prophecies of Joel were composed under

Joash. None of the arguments, however, by which they attempt to support

their view, can stand examination.

"There is nowhere, as yet, the slightest allusion to the Assyrians,"

says _Ewald_. But neither is any such found in Amos, nor in the first

part of Hosea. An irruption, however, such as former times had not

known,--an overflowing, as it were, by the heathen, such as could by no

means proceed from the small neighbouring nations, but from extensive

kingdoms only, is here also brought into view. Joel is, in this

respect, in strict agreement with Amos, who embodies his prophecy

concerning this event, in chap. vi. 14, in these words: "For, behold, I

raise up against you, O house of Israel, Gentile people, saith the

Lord, the God of hosts, and they shall afflict you from Hamath unto the

river of the wilderness."

"There breathes here still the unbroken warlike spirit of the times of

Deborah and David," _Ewald_ further remarks. But is there in the fourth

(third) chapter any trace of self-help on the part of the people?

Judgment upon the Gentiles is executed without any human

instrumentality, by God,--not by His earthly, but by His heavenly

"heroes," who are sent down [Pg 295]from heaven to earth, and who make

short work with these fancied earthly heroes. Compare chap. iv. (iii.)

11-13, where the address is directed to the heavenly ministers of God,

at the head of whom the Angel of the Covenant must be supposed to be:

Ps. ciii. 20; Rev. xix. 14. _Such_ a victory of the kingdom of God, all

the prophets announce,--not only Isaiah and Micah, but also Ezekiel,

_e.g._, in chap. xxxviii. and xxxix.

"We perceive here the prophetic order in Jerusalem, still in the same

ancient greatness as when Nathan and Gad may have exercised their

office at the time of David. A whole people, without contradicting or

murmuring, still depend upon the prophet. He desires the observance of

a grievous ordinance, and willingly it is performed; his word is still

like a higher command which all cheerfully obey. Nor is any discord to

be seen in the nation, nor any wicked idolatry or superstition; the

ancient simple faith still lives in them, unbroken and undivided." So

_Ewald_ still further remarks. But this argument rests upon a false

supposition; a conversion of the people at the time of the prophet is

not at all spoken of. The pretended repentance is to take place _in

future_,--which, according to chap. i. 4, we must conceive of as being

still afar off, namely, in the time after the divine judgments have

broken in. And as to a progress in the apostasy of the people, it can

scarcely be proved that such took place in the time betwixt Joash and

Uzziah. Between these two, we do not find any new stage of corruption.

The idolatry of Solomon, and the abominations of Athaliah, had

exercised their influence, even as early as under Joash. How deep the

rent was which, even then, went through the nation, is shown by the

fact, that, according to 2 Chron. xxiv. 17, 18, after the death of

Jehoiada, Joash gave way to the _urgent demands of the prince's of

Judah_, and allowed free scope to idolatry. Moreover, the threatening

announcement of a judgment, which is to extend even to the destruction

of the temple, proves how deep the apostasy was at the time of Joel.

Where a judgment is thus threatened, which, in its terrors, far

surpasses all former judgments, the "ancient faith" certainly cannot

have been very vigorous.

"The Messianic idea appears here in its generality and indefiniteness,

without being as yet concentrated in the person of an ideal king,"

_Hitzig_ remarks. But if this argument were at all [Pg 296] valid, we

should have to go back even beyond the time of Joash. Solomon, David,

and Jacob already knew the personal Messiah. The prophets, however, do

not everywhere proclaim everything which they know. Even in Isaiah,

there occur long Messianic descriptions, in which the Messiah Himself

is not to be found. In Joel, moreover, everything is collected around

the person of the "Teacher of righteousness."

"Joel," it is further remarked, "must have prophesied at a time when

the Philistine and other nations, who had become so haughty under

Jehoram, had but lately ventured upon destructive plundering

expeditions as far as Jerusalem, 2 Chron. xxi. 10 ff." This argument

would be plausible, if the injuries inflicted by the Philistines and

the inhabitants of Tyrus had not appeared in equally lively colours

before the mind of Amos (chap. i. 6-10), who, at all events, prophesied

between seventy and eighty years after these events. It is just this

fact which should teach caution in the application of such arguments.

The recollection of such facts could not be lost, as long as the

disposition continued from which they originated. It was as if they had

happened in the present; for, under similar circumstances, similar

events would have again immediately taken place. The passage chap. iv.

19, "Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate

wilderness, for the violence against the children of Judah, because

they have shed innocent blood in the land," shows also how lively was

the recollection of injuries sustained long ago. Egypt and Edom in that

passage are mentioned individually, in order to designate the enemies

of the people of God in general, and yet with an allusion to deeds

perpetrated by the Egyptians and Edomites properly so called. As the

suffix in ארצם must be referred to the sons of Judah--for we have no

historical account of a bloody deed perpetrated against Judah by the

Edomites in their own land, and it was the land of Judah which was

invaded and devastated by the host of locusts--we can think, in the

case of the Egyptians, only of the invasion under Rehoboam (1 Kings

xiv.), and in the case of the Edomites, only of the great carnage which

they made in Judah, during the time at which David carried on war with

Aram in Arabia and on the Euphrates,--probably at a time when he had

sustained heavy losses in that warfare; compare my Comment. on Ps.

xliv. and lx. Of any [Pg 297] similar later occurrence there is no

account extant. It is only by a fanciful exposition that "the innocent

blood" can be found in 2 Kings viii. 20-22. The Edomites at that time

kept only a defensive position, and did not come into the land of

Judah. "The innocent blood" implies a war of conquest, and a hostile

inroad.

"In chap. iv. (iii.) 4-7, Joel promises a return to the citizens of

Judah, who had been carried away by the Philistines under Jehoram; and,

hence, an age cannot have elapsed since that event." Thus _Meier_

argues. But the words, "Behold, I raise them out of the place whither

ye have sold them," contain no special prediction, but only the

application of the general truth, that God gathers together the

dispersed of Judah, and brings back again the exiled of Israel; and it

is only requisite to compare concerning them. Gen. xv. 16, "In the

fourth generation they shall come hither again," and l. 24, "God will

visit you, and bring you out of this land."

We thus arrive at the conclusion that Joel occupies the right place in

the Canon.

The assertion that Joel belonged to the priestly order, is as baseless

as the similar one regarding Habakkuk, and as the supposition that the

author of the Chronicles was a musician.

The book contains a connected description. It begins with a graphic

account of the ruin which God will bring upon His apostate

Congregation, by means of foreign enemies. These latter represent

themselves to the prophet in his spiritual vision as an all-destroying

swarm of locusts. The fundamental thought is this:--"Wheresoever the

carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together,"--wherever

corruption manifests itself in the Congregation of the Lord, punishment

will be inflicted. Because God has sanctified Himself _in_ the

Congregation, and has graciously imparted to her His holiness. He must

therefore sanctify Himself upon her,--must manifest His holiness in her

punishment, if she has become like the profane world. He cannot allow

that, after the Spirit has departed, the dead body should still

continue to appear as His kingdom, but strips off the mask of hypocrisy

from His degenerate Church, by representing her outwardly as that

which, by her guilt, she has become inwardly. This thought commonly

appears in a special [Pg 298] application, by the mention of the name

of the particular people whom the Lord is, in the immediate future, to

employ for the realization of it. In the case before us, however, He is

satisfied with pointing to the dignity and power inherent in Him. The

enemies are designated only as _people from the North_. But it was from

the North--from Syria--that all the principal invasions of Palestine

proceeded. Hence there is no reason either to think of one of them

exclusively, or to exclude one. On the contrary, the comprehensive

character of the description distinctly appears in i. 4. It is there,

at the very threshold, intimated, that the heathenish invasion will be

a fourfold one,--that Israel shall become the prey of four successive

extensive empires. Joel's mission fell at the commencement of the

written prophecy; and in harmony with this, he gives only an outline of

that which it was reserved for the later prophets to fill up, and to

carry out in its details, by the mention of the name of each single

empire, as the times moved on. It was enough that Joel prophesied the

destruction by these great empires, even before any one of them had

appeared on the stage of history, and that he was enabled to point even

to the fourfold number of them.

The threat of punishment, joined with exhortations to repentance, to

which the people willingly listened, and humbled themselves before the

Lord, continues down to chap. ii. 17. With this is connected the

proclamation of salvation--which extends down to chap. iii. 2 (ii. 29).

The showing of mercy begins with the fact, that God sends the _Teacher

of righteousness_. He directs the attention of the people to the design

of their sufferings, and invites the weary and heavy laden to come to

the Lord, that He may refresh them. His voice is heard by those who are

of a broken heart; and there then follows rich divine blessing, with

its consummation--the outpouring of the Spirit. Both--the sending of

the Teacher of righteousness, and the outpouring of the Spirit--had

their preliminary fulfilments; the first of which took place soon after

the commencement of the devastation by the locusts, in the time of the

Assyrians,--a second, after the destruction by the Babylonians had come

upon the people,--a third, after the visitation by the Greek tyranny

under the Maccabees. But the chief reference of the prophecy is,

throughout, to Christ, and to the vouchsafement [Pg 299] of the

blessing, and to the outpouring of the Spirit, originating in His

mediation.

The announcement of salvation for the Covenant-people is, in the third

and last part, followed by the opposite of it, viz., the announcement

of judgments upon the enemies of the Congregation of God. Their hatred

of it, proceeding from hatred to God, is employed by Him, indeed, as a

means of chastising and purifying His Church; but it does not, for that

reason, cease to be an object of His punitive justice. The fundamental

idea of this part of the book is expressed in 1 Pet. iv. 17 by the

words: "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of

God. And if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that

obey not the Gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved,

where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?" The description bears

here also, as in the second and first parts, a comprehensive character.

That which, in the course of history, is realized in a long series of

single acts of divine interposition against the enemies of the Church,

is here brought together in a single scene. The overthrow of Assyria,

Babylon, the Persian and Grecian monarchies, is comprehended in this

prophecy. But its final fulfilment must be sought for only in the

Messianic time. This is sufficiently evident from the relation of this

part, to the second. Having given ear to the Teacher of righteousness,

and the Spirit having been poured out upon her, the Congregation has

become an object of the loving providence of God. From this flows the

judgment upon her enemies. If, then, the promise of the Teacher of

righteousness and of the outpouring of the Spirit be, in substance,

Messianic, so, the judgment too must, in substance, bear a Messianic

character. The same appears from iv. (iii.) 18, according to which

passage, simultaneously with the judgments, there cometh forth, from

the house of the Lord, a fountain which watereth the valley of

Shittim--the waters of salvation which water the dry land of human

need. (Compare the remarks on Ezek. xlvii,; Zech. xiv. 8; and my

_Comment. on Revel._ xxii. 1.) This feature, however, clearly points to

the Messianic time.

We must here, however, avoid confounding the substance with the

form,--the idea with the temporary clothing which the prophet puts upon

it, in accordance with the nature of prophetic [Pg 300] vision, in

which, necessarily, all that is spiritual must be represented in

outward sketches and forms. This form is as follows:--In the place

nearest to the temple, and which was able to contain a great multitude

of people, in the valley of Jehoshaphat, all nations are gathered. (The

valley very probably received its name from the appellation which, in

the passage under consideration, the prophet gives to it, in order to

mark its destination; for Jehoshaphat means, "the Lord judges," or

"Valley of Judgment."[1]) The Lord, enthroned in the temple, exercises

judgment upon them. In this manner--in outward forms of perception--the

idea is brought out, that the judgment upon the Gentiles is an effect

of the kingdom of God; that they are not punished on account of

their violation of the natural law, but because of the hostile

position which they had occupied against the teachers of God's revealed

truth,--against the Lord Himself who is in His Church. Every violation

of the natural law may be pardoned to those who have not stood in any

other relation to God, even although they should have [Pg 301]

proceeded to the most fearful extent in depravity. They who were once

disobedient, when the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah,

were not as yet given over to complete condemnation, but were kept in

prison until Christ came and preached to them. "This was the iniquity

of Sodom: fulness of bread, and abundance of peace, were in her and her

daughters; yet the hand of the poor and needy they did not assist; but

they were haughty and committed abomination before the Lord: therefore

He took them away as He saw good." But, nevertheless, the Lord will, at

some future time, turn the captivity (the misery) of this Sodom and her

daughters, and they shall be restored as they were before,--not

corporeally, for their seed is utterly rooted out from the earth, and

even their place is destroyed, but spiritually; compare Ezek. xvi. 49

ff. But, on the other hand, far more severe punishments are inflicted

upon those who have rejected, not the abstract, but the concrete

God,--not the God who is shut up in the heavens, but the God who

powerfully manifests Himself on earth, in His Church. It is true, that

as long as this revelation is still an imperfect one--as it was under

the Old Testament dispensation--and hence the guilt of rejecting Him

less, mercy may still be shown. External destruction does not involve

spiritual ruin. Moab, indeed, is destroyed, so that it is no longer a

people, because it has exalted itself against the Lord; yet, "in the

latter days I will turn the captivity of Moab, saith the Lord," Jer.

xlviii. 47. But when the revelation of the grace of God has become

perfect, His justice also will be perfectly revealed against all who

reject it, and rise in hostility against those who are the bearers of

it: "Their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched,

and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh," Is. lxvi. 24. These

remarks contain the key to all which the Lord declares as to the future

judgment which, in its completion, belongs only to the future world. It

is not the world as such, but that world to which the Gospel has been

declared, and in the midst of which the Church has been founded, which

forms the object of it; compare Matt. xxiv. 14.

Footnote 1: _Hofmann_ (_Weissag. u. Erfül._ i. S. 203) has revived the

explanation, according to which the valley of Jehoshaphat is to be

understood as the valley in which, under Jehoshaphat, judgment was

executed upon several Gentile nations. But this locality, the desert of

Thekoa, which was about three hours distance from Jerusalem (compare my

_Comment. on the Psalms_, in the _Introduction to Ps._ xlvi. xlviii.

lxxxiii.), is at too great a distance from the temple, where, according

to vers. 16 and 17, the Lord holds His judgment upon the nations.

Tradition has rightly perceived that the valley of Jehoshaphat can be

sought for only in the immediate vicinity of the temple. In favour of

the valley of Jehoshaphat now so called, "at the high east brink of

Moriah, the temple-hill" (_Ritter_, _Erdk._ xv. 1, S. 559; xvi. 1, S.

329), is also Zech. vi. 1-8 (compare the remarks on that passage). From

the circumstance that there is, first, the mention of the name, and,

then, the statement of its signification, "And I gather all nations,

and bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and _plead_ with

them there," _Hofmann_ infers that the name must have already existed

as a proper name. There is, however, an analogy in Num. xx. 1: "And the

people encamped at Kadesh;"--but the place received the name Kadesh

only because of the event to be subsequently related: previous to that,

its name was Barnea. (Compare _Dissert. on Gen. of the Pent._ vol. ii.

p. 310 ff.) The two theological names of the place, which arose only

from the event recorded in Num. xx., occur even as early as Gen. xiv.

7. The natural name of the valley of Jehoshaphat is, moreover, in all

likelihood, _King's Dale_; compare Gen. xiv. 17; 2 Sam. xviii. 18; and

_Thenius_ on this passage.

[Pg 302]

Christology of the Old Testament: And a Commentary on the Messianic Predictions, Vol. 1 · 第 35 / 74 题