Joel's Prophecies and the Day of the LORD

[not an echo]

On 3/8/2022 at 3:55 AM, Diaste said:

On 3/8/2022 at 12:13 AM, not an echo said:

17 Israel is a scattered sheep; the lions have driven him away: first the king of Assyria hath devoured him; and last this Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon hath broken his bones.

I don't see 'Day of the Lord' in Jeremiah 50.

For clarity, your comment stems from what I said (in part) prior to the above verse from Jeremiah 50...

====================

"...In any case, for me, whether what happened in the 8th century B.C. and then the 6th century B.C. is seen as one storm with a lull, or two completely different storms doesn't really matter that much, as I can see it either way.  Both were DOTL judgments and as Jeremiah said of the day in chapter 50...

17 Israel is a scattered sheep; the lions have driven him away: first the king of Assyria hath devoured him; and last this Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon hath broken his bones."

====================

I only said what I did the way I did ("as Jeremiah said of the day in chapter 50") from the perspective of realizing that God's using of the Assyrians to destroy the northern kingdom and the Babylonians to destroy the southern kingdom were indeed DOTL judgments.  Because your statement that I made this particular reply to---"I can't abide by that even if I can abide by the OBVIOUS FACT other times when the Lord intervened in the affairs of mankind were INDEED called the Day of the Lord; or AT LEAST CLOSE ENOUGH."---indicated that you were now seeing this too, I took it for granted that you would understand what I was getting at, not that you would be looking for the actual phrase "'Day of the Lord'" in the particular reference I was using.  Since then, you have made comments on your statement that indicate you are unsettled on what you said, which to me is okay.  I commend your honesty.

A note concerning part of what I quoted of you above and emphasized "or AT LEAST CLOSE ENOUGH.":  If you come away from your study believing again what you here said, look again at Jeremiah 50.  I believe you will then see the "'Day of the Lord'" more than once, more than twice, even more than that.

[not an echo]

On 3/8/2022 at 4:18 AM, Diaste said:

On 3/8/2022 at 12:13 AM, not an echo said:

Moreover, if you acknowledge that what came upon the Israelites in the 8th and 6th centuries B.C. were DOTL judgments, it's a pretty steep order to get around the "at hand" of Joel 1:15 and the "nigh at hand" of Joel 2:1.

Since Joel lived in the 8 century you would describe 'near' as 'in the same century'? But then what about 6th century fulfillment? Is that 'near'? So to you 'near' is time? Is that the only relationship of the idea of 'near' to prophetic fulfillment?

In Joel 1:15 and 2:1 the word used is qarob. This term is a near cousin to qarab. Both have nearly the same idea and it's one of relationship and not time. The idea here is close, and it's close in terms of the ancillary events preceding the DOTL.

This fulfills the requirement of unforced interpretation. We don't have to find points in time where we can press the prophecy into a place it doesn't fit. 

I don't find a time requirement nearly as accurate as a relationship requirement. In fact you use near to find a 6th century fulfillment some 170 to 200 years in the future. Is that near to the utterance? Is that near to the audience? 

In Joel 2:1-11 the DOTL as Joel describes it is only near when the army as described is on the loose. So just from normal reading we see the day is 'near' in relationship to the army, not time. 

First of all, concerning the Hebrew, this is from the Worthy Strong's...

Strong's Concordance H7138

Original Word: קָרוֹב

Transliteration: qârôwb

Phonetic Spelling: kaw-robe'

or קָרֹב; from H7126; near (in place, kindred or time); allied, approach, at hand, any of kin, kinsfold(-sman), (that is) near (of kin), neighbour, (that is) next, (them that come) nigh (at hand), more ready, short(-ly).

You make the statement in your second paragraph, "and it's one of relationship and not time."  As I'm seeing it, your statement is in conflict with Strong's.

I guess I could stop with that, but either way or both, I'm not seeing where what you put forth affects my position---at all.  If Joel's prophecy came at any time in the 8th century B.C., even 799, his message would have been very relevant, both for the northern and southern kingdoms.  The northern kingdom had already been long out of God's will, diving headlong into idolatry some 200 years prior.  And, the southern kingdom should have perked right up and took serious notice---which it didn't---not as a whole.  If Joel's prophecy came in 799, Assyria was already strong and building power and started heating things up for the northern kingdom in the mid of the century.

I earlier used a hurricane to illustrate some of how I see all of this, but I never said anything about the build up of such a storm.  We all know that our modern day weathermen are good about letting us know when something is building out there.  They show us the beginnings, the projections---how everything is shaping up.  Before our modern era, it was harder to know what was shaping up.  I was in Florida one year when there was a hurricane building.  It was by no means visible, but there were already some 2-3 foot waves crashing in.  I was gathering a bucket of sea shells that were being exposed on the beach, and once, when I wasn't paying close enough attention, a big wave caught me from behind and scooted me about 20 foot on the sand.  You've heard of "road rash" but have you ever heard of "sand rash"?   I got a bad case of that---and lost every single shell I had collected.  I mean, it's like they all suddenly disappeared!  Annnyway, I didn't have to watch the weather to know that something was brewing.  But, all the weathermen were talking about it.

Now, the Israelites didn't have the tube, much less The Weather Channel.  But, they had the prophets.  AND JOEL IS COMMONLY REGARDED AS THE FIRST THAT STARTED BREAKING THE NEWS TO THEM.  Let me just say that the Israelites were needing somebody to tell them what was brewing, and what Joel started telling them had a bunch of relevance for them.  A BUNCH.  Further, what he said in 1:1-2:27 had as much relevance for them then as what he said in 2:28-3:21 has for us now.

You make the statement that "Joel describes it is only near when the army as described is on the loose. So just from normal reading we see the day is 'near' in relationship to the army, not time."  Well, the Assyrian army was on the loose my friend, and the Babylonian army wasn't far behind them.

The time???  It just adds more weight to the balance scale on the side of my position, IMHO.

[Diaste]

15 hours ago, not an echo said:

First of all, concerning the Hebrew, this is from the Worthy Strong's...

Strong's Concordance H7138

Original Word: קָרוֹב

Transliteration: qârôwb

Phonetic Spelling: kaw-robe'

or קָרֹב; from H7126; near (in place, kindred or time); allied, approach, at hand, any of kin, kinsfold(-sman), (that is) near (of kin), neighbour, (that is) next, (them that come) nigh (at hand), more ready, short(-ly).

You make the statement in your second paragraph, "and it's one of relationship and not time."  As I'm seeing it, your statement is in conflict with Strong's.

But as I have asked, is it at hand[Joel 1:15] then? 200 years later? If a time stamp is the factor then why didn't it occur in Joel's time? Why in the 6th century? How is that 'near' or 'at hand'? 

So as long as the time factor fits a doctrine then 'near' or 'at hand' can mean immediate or 200 years later? 

That seems forced into the text, don't you think? However if 'near' or 'at hand' is in relation to other events and conditions then there is no forcing of meaning. 

Joel lists many events and conditions in existence when the DOTL is 'near' or 'at hand'. I don't see a time factor or a time stamp anywhere in the prophecy.

God is unambiguous when it come to this. In Dan 9, "...70 weeks are determined..." And a clear time stamp is given; "...from the going forth of the decree to rebuild the city and the sanctuary...". 

In Joel there is no length of time. This is the same God speaking to both Daniel and Joel and a missing time stamp is conspicuous in absence. So I'm not in conflict at all but rather define the term based on the text and it's context. 

15 hours ago, not an echo said:

I guess I could stop with that, but either way or both, I'm not seeing where what you put forth affects my position---at all.  If Joel's prophecy came at any time in the 8th century B.C., even 799, his message would have been very relevant, both for the northern and southern kingdoms.  The northern kingdom had already been long out of God's will, diving headlong into idolatry some 200 years prior.  And, the southern kingdom should have perked right up and took serious notice---which it didn't---not as a whole.  If Joel's prophecy came in 799, Assyria was already strong and building power and started heating things up for the northern kingdom in the mid of the century.

Lots of 'ifs'. We have a sure word of prophecy. Joel doesn't have 'ifs'. Joel relates events, conditions and speaks to proximity and collective existence. If that is not extant as a whole then nothing in Joel 1-2:27 has occurred.

[Diaste]

15 hours ago, not an echo said:

You make the statement that "Joel describes it is only near when the army as described is on the loose. So just from normal reading we see the day is 'near' in relationship to the army, not time."  Well, the Assyrian army was on the loose my friend, and the Babylonian army wasn't far behind them.

Except for the this particular army is one that has never been nor ever will be. I can list dozens of armies that were greater than any army the Assyrian empire had to offer that came after the Assyrian empire was long gone. The Muslim conquests of 700-1200 AD come to mind. 

And that's just one, there are many others. They all outstrip the Assyrians and the Babylonians combined.  

[Diaste]

15 hours ago, not an echo said:

The time???  It just adds more weight to the balance scale on the side of my position, IMHO.

In the prophecy of Joel time is not a factor, conditions are. Not once does Joel mentions time. There is a literal gauntlet of conditions preceding the DOTL that all must be present as the clarion of prophecy fulfilled manifesting on earth prior to the DOTL.

And it's not time or minor armies.

[Diaste]

17 hours ago, not an echo said:

For clarity, your comment stems from what I said (in part) prior to the above verse from Jeremiah 50...

====================

"...In any case, for me, whether what happened in the 8th century B.C. and then the 6th century B.C. is seen as one storm with a lull, or two completely different storms doesn't really matter that much, as I can see it either way.  Both were DOTL judgments and as Jeremiah said of the day in chapter 50...

17 Israel is a scattered sheep; the lions have driven him away: first the king of Assyria hath devoured him; and last this Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon hath broken his bones."

====================

Except for the fact Jeremiah 50 doesn't say 'day of the Lord'. Ezekiel 30 does, not Jeremiah 50 though.

17 hours ago, not an echo said:

I only said what I did the way I did ("as Jeremiah said of the day in chapter 50") from the perspective of realizing that God's using of the Assyrians to destroy the northern kingdom and the Babylonians to destroy the southern kingdom were indeed DOTL judgments. 

Except for Jeremiah never says, 'day of the Lord'.

17 hours ago, not an echo said:

 

Because your statement that I made this particular reply to---"I can't abide by that even if I can abide by the OBVIOUS FACT other times when the Lord intervened in the affairs of mankind were INDEED called the Day of the Lord; or AT LEAST CLOSE ENOUGH."---indicated that you were now seeing this too, I took it for granted that you would understand what I was getting at, not that you would be looking for the actual phrase "'Day of the Lord'" in the particular reference I was using.  Since then, you have made comments on your statement that indicate you are unsettled on what you said, which to me is okay.  I commend your honesty.

A misrepresentation of my thought process. I only see it where it said, 'day of the Lord'. Where I am on this is deciding if 'day of the Lord' mentioned in the OT is one and the same with the 'day of the Lord' at the end of the age or, if it is a unique occurrence due to necessary action by the Most High God as a response to a nations behavior. 

I think there is one concerning Egypt but I'm failing to find it. @WilliamL brought this up in the past. Maybe he will help jog my memory.

So far, all I see is prophecy concerning an end of the age DOTL. 

17 hours ago, not an echo said:

A note concerning part of what I quoted of you above and emphasized "or AT LEAST CLOSE ENOUGH.":  If you come away from your study believing again what you here said, look again at Jeremiah 50.  I believe you will then see the "'Day of the Lord'" more than once, more than twice, even more than that.

I don't in Jeremiah 50. In Ezekiel 30 I do. But that prophecy has very similar language to Joel so both look like prophecies of the same time and events.

[not an echo]

On 3/8/2022 at 4:25 AM, Diaste said:

On 3/8/2022 at 12:13 AM, not an echo said:

Also, I don't believe we should forget the time.  I mean, in our day, there has come to be some pretty big differences between a war fought today and a war fought 135 years ago.  This wasn't the case in that day.  What happened in the 8th and 6th centuries B.C. was such that the news concerning the former could have essentially served as the news concerning the latter---with only the names being changed.

This doesn't prove anything. It's a red herring. I'm still waiting for the proof Joel 1-2:27 was fulfilled in every word, as written, full, final and complete, with every event manifest and every condition met in close proximity to the DOTL.

This is required of the prophet by the Most High or the prophet is false and we can disregard his every word. 

All I hear is; "I believe." That only means you have convinced yourself and is no proof of anything else.

I believe this is the first reply I have made in this thread that has earned the uncoveted "red herring" rating!   I've made 164 posts on this thread.  That means that so far, 99.3902439% of my posts have not contained a paragraph that has been so rated, and this was one of the smaller paragraphs of the post that contained it.  As still a relative newbie to all the opinions one encounters on forums, I'm thinking that my defense of my position on this 36 page thread has not been so bad, especially on a subject like Day of the LORD judgments, of which it seems that the only concept anyone in this forum family has of it is the Day of the LORD judgment of the last days.  This is one of the reasons I have busied myself so long with this thread, at the neglect of my other threads and others I am ready to start---when I get the time.  I just hope that what you consider to be a red herring doesn't distract you from all the other truths---supported by much Scripture---that I have shown in this thread.

Concerning the last sentence of your first paragraph, I'm thinking that it would be fair of me to say that I'm still waiting for an acknowledgement from you that there were Day of the LORD judgments that happened in the 8th and 6th centuries B.C.  I'm thinking more and more that we probably will not be able to have a very fruitful discussion till we are at least in agreement on that---whatever it may mean related to Joel's prophecy.

Concerning your second paragraph, are you saying this to me about Joel and his prophecy, or, are you saying this of me concerning what I have shown?

Concerning your last paragraph, why would you say this in relation to my statement, "Also, I don't believe we should forget the time"?  I mean, have I got to be so careful about saying the word "believe"?  I never said it was proof of anything.  Really, it reflected the difficulty that there sometimes is trying to come to a conclusion concerning, for example, whether the DOTL judgment being spoken of in this or that passage is the one of the Assyrians coming against the northern kingdom or the Babylonians coming against the southern kingdom.  With Joel's prophecy, I have spoke a little to this.  And, for the purposes of this thread and what I have discovered about the forum members' understanding of the subject, my desire has been to show the truth of there indeed being 8th and 6th century B.C. Day of the LORD judgments that need to be differentiated from the Day of the LORD judgment of the last days.

[Diaste]

3 hours ago, not an echo said:

Concerning the last sentence of your first paragraph, I'm thinking that it would be fair of me to say that I'm still waiting for an acknowledgement from you that there were Day of the LORD judgments that happened in the 8th and 6th centuries B.C.  I'm thinking more and more that we probably will not be able to have a very fruitful discussion till we are at least in agreement on that---whatever it may mean related to Joel's prophecy

I did say in another post that Ezekiel 30 contains the term, 'day of the Lord', and Jeremiah 50 does not. Jeremiah 46 does.

I'm not saying the term doesn't exist in scripture, I'm not yet convinced it's a term unrelated to the end of the age day of the Lord as a stand alone day of the Lord in no way related to eschatology, and the fulfillment of Joel 1-2:27, and not the fulfillment of another prophecy, like Ezekiel 29 for example.

There are 29 times 'day of the Lord' appears in scripture, 24 in the OT. Jeremiah 46 is the one I see that may not have a connection to the end of the age prophecies. There is no similar language in Jeremiah 46:10 like in Isaiah, Amos, Obadiah, Joel, etc., that matches with the end of the age as Jesus foretold. 

Even then there are some clues in Jeremiah 46 that prompt questions:

1. they shall stumble, and fall toward the north by the river Euphrates.?

2. Egypt riseth up like a flood, and his waters are moved like the rivers; and he saith, I will go up, and will cover the earth;?

3. and let the mighty men come forth; the Ethiopians and the Libyans?

4. for the Lord God of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country by the river Euphrates.?

5.  Egypt is like a very fair heifer, but destruction cometh; it cometh out of the north.?

6.  because they are more than the grasshoppers, and are innumerable.?

7.  she shall be delivered into the hand of the people of the north.?

8.  for I will make a full end of all the nations whither I have driven thee:?

 

On a map Babylon is east of Egypt. Why all this talk of the north? Ethiopia and Libya are not Egypt. Innumerable? Was Babylon innumerable? And make a full end of the nations where they were driven? They were driven to all nations, yes?

Is Egypt representative of the world in this passage and Babylon the punisher of the idea of the world here? 

Did Babylon destroy Egypt in the north by the Euphrates? 

Are we looking at the battle of Carchemish? That appears to be Egypt and Assyria but so far I see no Ethiopians or Libyans were taking part, as required by the prophecy. 

Cover the earth? Egypt could not have crossed the Euphrates to besiege Haran without the Assyrians, even then both were defeated by Babylon. That doesn't sound like an army that 'covers the earth'.

Maybe this has been misunderstood?

Concerning the Day of the Lord in Jeremiah 46 I do not doubt it is a day of the Lord, even a specific 'the day of the Lord', but the missing element of the darkness, gloom, sun and moon going dark, stars falling, etc., tells me this isn't related. Those conditions are ubiquitous in the Minor prophets, the Gospels, and Revelation.

It's not necessarily true those conditions were not present at what I assume is Carchemish to which you refer, but it's not recorded in scripture so I can't say either way, only that it's just not there.

I would add it's a prominent feature of the other prophecies of that day in the Major and Minor prophets sooo....why is it missing from Jeremiah 46?

[Diaste]

4 hours ago, not an echo said:

Concerning your last paragraph, why would you say this in relation to my statement, "Also, I don't believe we should forget the time"?  I mean, have I got to be so careful about saying the word "believe"?  I never said it was proof of anything. 

Sometimes, yes. I hear it a lot. It's the backstop for a lot unusual thinking. It can remove any information or ideas in conflict with dogma. And it wasn't just that one statement that prompted the admonition. 

I'm just not interested in a basket of personal belief, I want to hear the Lord Jesus in the context of this topic. 

I'm great with you being a Ford or Chevy guy, light roast over dark, steak, vegan, mowing your lawn diagonally[weird ], or whatever else. 

Personal belief is not allowed in assaying prophecy, in my book, as though it carries the same weight as prophecy. That's the reason for the mess we see in here.

Everyone has some personal interpretation of how they want it to be and it's very likely we will all be completely wrong, or at least partially. 

[WilliamL]

On 3/12/2022 at 5:06 AM, Diaste said:

A misrepresentation of my thought process. I only see it where it said, 'day of the Lord'. Where I am on this is deciding if 'day of the Lord' mentioned in the OT is one and the same with the 'day of the Lord' at the end of the age or, if it is a unique occurrence due to necessary action by the Most High God as a response to a nations behavior. 

I think there is one concerning Egypt but I'm failing to find it. @WilliamL brought this up in the past. Maybe he will help jog my memory.

Happy to. (And to shamelessly plug my blog while doing so. )

These three verses, [Daniel] 8:17, 19, 23, are where translators and commentators often go astray, imposing words and understanding not expressed in the Hebrew. In these and similar Hebrew prophetic texts, a common default presumption of translators has been that every “time of an end,” “Day of the LORD,” and “latter day/time” must refer to the end of OUR age. This is not true at all: there have been many “ends” of kingdoms and eras prophesied that have already come to pass. For example:

Jeremiah 46:2 Against Egypt. Concerning the army of Pharaoh Necho, King of Egypt, which was by the River Euphrates in Carchemish, which Nebuchadrezzar King of Babylon smote in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah. … 10 For this is the Day of the Lord GOD of hosts, a day of vengeance…

This historically-famous “Day of the LORD” battle took place in 610 B.C. Other fulfilled Day of the LORD prophecies include Joel 1:15 (but not Joel 2-3), and Ezekiel 7:19 and 13:5. The final “end”/Day of the LORD/last of the last days does not come until the end of the 7th Millennium, “when He [Christ] delivers the kingdom to God the Father…[having] put an end to all rule and all authority and power.” 1 Cor. 15:24

https://www.worthychristianforums.com/blogs/entry/1576-part-2-conclusion/