BSI196 
 .5.D3S6 
 
 John M. P. Smith 
 
 The Day of Yahvieh 
 
 ^«i' 
 
/^' 
 
 
 5.P35G 
 
Zbe Tanlvereltg o( Cbicago 
 
 FOUNDED BV JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER 
 
 THE DAY OF YAHWEH 
 
 PART OF A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE 
 
 GRADUATE DIVINITY SCHOOL, IN CANDIDACY FOR THE 
 
 DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 (department of old testament LITERATURE AND INTERPRETATION) 
 
 BY 
 
 JOHN M. P. SMITH 
 
 PRINTED BY 
 
 ttbc TUnlversltfi of Cblcago press 
 1901 
 
'©5 M <^ 6 
 
Zbe innlversfti^ of Cbfcago 
 
 FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER 
 
 THE DAY OF YAHWEH 
 
 PART OF A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE 
 
 GRADUATE DIVINITY SCHOOL, IN CANDIDACY FOR THE 
 
 DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 (department of old testament LITERATURE AND INTERPRETATION) 
 
 JOHN M. P. SMITH 
 
 PRINTED BY 
 
 Zbc "GlniversitB ot Cbicago press 
 1901 
 
 \ 
 \ 
 
/ 
 
 THIS DISSERTATION 
 
 WAS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY AND ACCEPTED 
 
 IN JUNE, 1899 
 
 [Reprinted from the American Journal of T/ico!ogy,Vo\.\, pp. 505-331 
 
 ^ 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH. 
 The origin of the idea of the Day of Yahweh must be sought in 
 the pre-prophetic stage of Israel's history. The first appearance of the 
 conception in the Old Testament is in the prophecy of Amos, where it 
 is clearly defined and formulated. The idea which Amos found already 
 existing and occupying a large place in the thought of the people was 
 apparently a conception of the day as a time when a period of great 
 glory and prosperity was to be inaugurated for Israel. Naturally such 
 a day was greatly desired. Whence came this idea ? It seems to be 
 a development of several ideas in combination. One of these is the 
 conception of a divine mission which early took possession of the con- 
 sciousness of Israel.' Tradition exhibits many traces of such a con- 
 ception. The founders of the nation and all her great leaders are said 
 to have had in mind a unique position for Israel among the nations. 
 Utterances to this effect are common in the J and E documents,* and, 
 belonging as they do to some of the earliest of Israel's historical records, 
 it is not probable that they are wholly without basis in facts. They 
 may, therefore, be properly taken as evidence for the existence in very 
 early times of a hope for a glorious future of the nation as Yahweh's 
 representative in the world. 
 
 In further support of the existence of some such ambition as this 
 may be urged the presence of similar hopes among Semitic peoples in 
 general. 3 The national character of Semitic gods seems best explained 
 on the supposition that small and weak families, clans, and tribes sub- 
 mitted to the dominion of larger and more powerful communities 
 because of some necessity, such as conquest, lack of food, or need 
 of protection and assistance against powerful enemies. In such a 
 union the superiority of the god of the more powerful body of people 
 was acknowledged, and the god of the weaker people was reduced to 
 subordinate rank. As this pirocess continued, a nation gradually came 
 into existence, and the original tribal god developed into a national 
 god.* But the fact of his having reached this dignity did not rob him 
 
 ' Cf. Frants Buhl, American Journal of Theology, Vol. II, p. 767. 
 
 '-£. ^., Gen. 12 :2ff.; 18: i8ff.; 27:29; 28:14; Exod. 19 : 5 f.; 34 : 10 ; Numb. 
 23:9; 24:9, 17. 
 
 3W. R. Smith, The Religion of the Semites, 2d ed., pp. 75-81. 
 
 *SoMKtiZlKS,ffisioryofReligion,pp. 79 £f.; D'AhVlEi.hA,/deaofGod,pp.20it.; eial. 
 .3 
 
4 THE DA Y OF YAHWEH 
 
 of his original expansive force; his nature remained essentially the 
 same, and his ambition for power would carry him on to universal 
 dominion, were his adherents sturdy and aggressive enough to attain 
 that goal. It was therefore the natural and proper desire of every 
 Semitic nation to extend the influence of its own particular god to the 
 farthest possible limit. This could best be accomplished through the 
 conquest of new territory over which the sway of the god might be 
 established. Hence wars of conquest, which were at the same time 
 religious wars, were of unceasing occurrence. ,., ,, ., 
 
 Assyrian records furnish the best illustrations of this spirit of 
 expansion in political and religious affairs. The wars of Assyria were 
 preeminently religious wars. Every king in every campaign declares 
 himself to have been incited, emboldened, and prospered by his nation's 
 gods. Kings felt and declared themselves to be the agents of the 
 gods, and regarded it as one of their chief duties to widen the dominion 
 of the gods and to manifest their power.^ Esarhaddon, for example, well 
 expresses the animating spirit of Assyrian warfare thus : "The names 
 of the great gods they invoked together and trusted to their power. 
 I, however, trusted in Ashur, my lord, and like a bird out of the moun- 
 tains I captured him and cut off his head. In order to exhibit the might of 
 Ashur, my lord, before the eyes of the peoples, I hung the heads of Sanduarri 
 and Abdimilkuti upon the necks of their great men."* The inscrip- 
 tions of Tiglath-pileser I., Shalmaneser II., Tiglath-pileser III., Sar- 
 gon, Sennacherib, Esarhaddon, Ashurbanipal, and others are full of 
 illustrations showing the place and influence of religious ideas in con- 
 nection with the national territorial development.'' The evident desire 
 was that Ashur should be acknowledged as the supreme deity through- 
 out the known world. The kings certainly regarded him as such and 
 commonly spoke of themselves as kings of the four quarters of the 
 world over which Ashur had given them dominion.^ 
 
 The amazingly rapid spread of the religion of Mohammed is 
 another illustration of the efificient service rendered by religious ideals 
 
 s Cf. McCURDY, History, Prophecy and the Monuments, Vol. I, pp. 63 f.; Sayce, 
 Early Israel and the Surrounding Nations, pp. 248 f. 
 
 «The Six-Sided Prism, Cylinder A, col. i, 11. 43 ff. 
 
 T Cf. Sennacherib, Taylor- Prism, co\. i, 11. 10 ff., 63; i, 42 f,; iii, 42; iv, 43; 
 Esarhaddon, Cylinder A, col. ii, 1. 45 ; iii, 7-12, 40-48, 53 ; iv, 19-25, 38-47 ; Ashur- 
 banipal, Annals, col. iv, 1. 34; viii, 8 ff.; ix, Ii2ff.; etc. 
 
 ^For the same idea see the closing tablet of the Dibbara Legend, translated by 
 Jastrow in Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, p. 535, and by W, Muss-Arnolt in 
 R. F. Harper's Assyrian and Babylonian Literature ("The World's Great Books," 
 Aldine edition; New York: D. Appleton, 1901), p. 314. 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH 5 
 
 in the furtherance of political development. The religious and ethical 
 principles upheld by Mohammed were certainly purer and more vigor- 
 ous than those of the earlier Arabic religions opposed by him, and 
 his success was, no doubt, largely due to this fact; but it seems prob- 
 able that the old Semitic idea of a national god upon whose people 
 there rested an obligation to extend his dominion had much to do 
 in arousing the extraordinary zeal and energy with which the new 
 religion was propagated, and that chiefly by force of arms. For 
 such a religion and such a god success was the best recommendation ; 
 a recital of the triumphs already achieved was one of the best argu- 
 ments for inducing still other peoples to acknowledge the supremacy of 
 the new religion and the new god. Moreover, confidence engendered 
 by successes already won carried the victors on to fresh contests and 
 victories for their god. 
 
 In view of such corroborating testimony from without, it is not 
 strange to find evidence within Israel of a similar laudable ambition 
 for Yahweh and of a hope for the time when he would bring great 
 glory to his people. That this hope originated at a very early date is 
 evident, since it appears strongly in the earliest literature. Moreover, 
 as suggested by Professor McCurdy,' the possession of such a hope is a 
 necessary presupposition to any satisfactory explanation of the fact that 
 Israel was able to obtain and hold for herself a home among the tribes 
 of Canaan, poorly disciplined as she was and beset by foes on every 
 side. Her strong faith in Yahweh's power and in his purpose to bring 
 glory to himself through Israel gave her courage in the face of all 
 sorts of dangers and difficulties. Hence it is that every forward step 
 during the period of the conquest and the years immediately following 
 seems to have been preceded and accompanied by a great revival of 
 zeal for Yahweh. Furthermore, the course of Israel's early national 
 history was not unfavorable to the growth of this idea of a glorious 
 destiny. Beginning with Saul and continuing through the days of 
 Solomon, victory and prosperity had come to Israel in no small meas- 
 ure. Even in later centuries the reign of David was looked back upon 
 longingly as a sort of golden age, and ideals of the future were shaped 
 in accordance with the glorified and magnified traditions of the Davidic 
 days. Solomon extended his influence so far, established his kingdom 
 so securely, and equipped himself so splendidly as to be the source 
 of envy and wonder to all surrounding peoples. He was in a fair way to 
 make Israel aworld-empire such as Assyria and Babylon later came to be. 
 
 9 0/. «V., Vol. II, pp. no f. 
 
6 THE DA Y OF YAHWEH 
 
 After the check consequent upon the division of the kingdom, north- 
 ern Israel, under the able leadership of the house of Omri, gradually 
 reasserted herself. This new development was retarded by the long war 
 with Syria, but by the time of Jeroboam II. Damascus was subdued, and 
 Israel had attained prosperity and power second only to those enjoyed 
 during the age of David and Solomon. History thus seemed to jus- 
 tify the popular hope of a gloriously bright future." 
 
 In addition to this, the work of the earliest prophets tended in the 
 same direction. All the prophets up to the time of Amos, with the 
 possible exception of Elijah, seem to have foretold success and glory 
 for their people." They constantly emphasized the fact that Israel 
 was Yahweh's people, and that, if Israel remained faithful to him, he 
 would and must lead her on to victory. 
 
 Thus far we have found the hope of a great future for the nation 
 through Yahweh's help to have been (i) fostered by tradition ; (2) an 
 outgrowth of the general Semitic conception of a God-given commis- 
 sion to enlarge the sphere of the divine authority; (3) a prerequisite as 
 a source of inspiration and courage in the great work of the conquest 
 of Canaan ; (4) developed and strengthened by its apparent partial 
 realization in the progress of the nation's history; and (5) enforced 
 impressively upon the national consciousness by the nation's prophets, 
 the spokesmen of Yahweh, the nation's God. In view of these facts 
 the existence of such a conception of Israel's national destiny in the 
 eighth century B. C. seems certain. It was not a conception of an 
 exalted ethical and religious content, for ethical and religious stand- 
 ards were as yet comparatively low. It was rather the conception of a 
 mission, one of the chief ends of which was to bring glory to those 
 who fulfilled it. 
 
 A second and important element in the formation of the early idea 
 of the Day of Yahweh was the conception of Yahweh which then pre- 
 vailed." The people were not far removed from polytheism, as is shown, 
 among other things, by the frequency and ease with which in after 
 years they took up with idolatrous rites ; by the survival of the plural 
 form D'^nbU^ ; by the use of teraphim; by the incident of the calf- 
 worship at Sinai ; and by traces lingering in many words and customs.'-'' 
 
 "> Cf. G. A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve Prophets, Vol. I, pp. 49 f. 
 " Cf. 1 Kings 20: 13, 28; 22 :6, 11, 12; 2 Kings 2 : 13-19; 13 : 14-19; 14 = 25. 
 '" Cf. R. H. Charles, A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life in Israel 
 in fudaism and in Christianity, pp. 85 f. 
 
 "^ Cf. Baudissin, Studien zur semitischen Religionsgeschichte, Heft I, pp. 55-65. 
 
THE DA Y OF YAHWEH 7 
 
 The intermediate stage, monolatry, was essential as a stepping-stone to 
 monotheism, and the religion of Israel in the eighth century was of 
 this kind. Israel's God was only one among many gods ; the name 
 Yahweh as a proper name distinguished him from Chemosh, god of 
 Moab, Milcom of Ammon, Baal of Phoenicia, and the gods of other 
 surrounding peoples. This monolatrous worship persisted far into 
 the prophetic period, monotheism not being fully accepted and estab- 
 lished in the thought of the nation until the days of the exile.'^ The 
 difference between Yahweh and other gods was but dimly realized in 
 the early days of Yahwism. The points of resemblance between the 
 worship of Israel and that of Canaan were more noticeable than the 
 points of difference, and the constant endeavor of Israel's religious 
 leaders was to keep the people from taking over so much of Baal- 
 worship into the Yahweh-worship as to destroy the distinctive character 
 of the latter. The preservation of true Yahweh-worship was essential to 
 the development and continuance of national life and individuality. The 
 Yahweh-religion was almost the only unifying influence which held 
 together the heterogeneous and widely scattered elements of Israel. 
 Yahweh's especial function was to be the deliverer of Israel in time of 
 danger. He was emphatically a war-god, and it was as such that he 
 was honored by Israel. He had proven his superiority to the gods of 
 Egypt at the time of the exodus ; and again, in the attack upon 
 Canaan, he had demonstrated his superiority to the Canaanitish Baalim 
 by conquering them and their people. This was, indeed, the only 
 kind of superiority that Israel was as yet prepared to appreciate. Her 
 existence during the greater part of the pre-prophetic period was one 
 constant struggle to maintain her place against the peoples of Canaan, 
 and a god who could not, or would not, render efficient service in this 
 contest was not likely to command her respect and adherence. The 
 victories of Israel over her enemies were necessary, not only to her 
 national existence, but also to her retention of the Yahweh-religion. 
 The work of Elijah in his fearless opposition to Baal-worship, and the 
 work of Elisha as the source of the inspiration, wisdom, and patriot- 
 ism in the conduct of the war with Damascus which enabled Israel to 
 achieve final victory, sealed Israel to Yahweh in closest allegiance. 
 
 '3 See Judg. 6 : 31 ; 9 : 13; 11 : 24; Gen. 28 : 20 f.; Exod. 15 : 11 ; 18 : 11 ; I Sam. 
 26 : 19 ; 28 : 13 ; Amos 9:7; Ezek. 8 : 12 ; 9:9; etc. For a fuller treatment of the 
 matter consult Smend, Lehrbuch der alttestamentlichen Religionsgeschichte (2d 
 ed.), pp. 193-200; MONTEFIORE, y?<f/z^w« of the Ancient Hebrews {=^" The Hibbert 
 Lectures," 1892), pp. 228, 268 f.; McCurdy, op. cit., Vol. Ill, pp. 370 f.; W. R. 
 Smith, The Prophets of Israel {ntvf edition), pp. 59 ff.; SCHULTZ, Old Testatnetit The- 
 ology, Vol. I, pp. 175 f.; BUDDE, Religion of Israel to the Exile, pp. 210 f. 
 
8 THE DA Y OF YAHWEH 
 
 Though the recognition and acceptance of Yahweh as Israel's God 
 did not involve the denial of reality to the gods of neighboring 
 peoples, but permitted them to be regarded as real deities holding rela- 
 tions with their worshipers similar to those existing between Yahweh 
 and Israel, yet Yahweh was supreme in Israel and in everything 
 relating to Israel, and thus, when the interests of Israel clashed with 
 ! those of her neighbors, it was to be expected that he would bring 
 j about the triumph of his own nation. However, the recognition of the 
 reality of the gods of the nations was a great hindrance to Israel's full 
 realization of the true nature of her mission to the world. It shut off 
 almost entirely the outflow of the altruistic spirit and left the concep- 
 tion of Israel's destiny to find embodiment in hopes for Israel's 
 supremacy among the nations and Yahweh's dominion over the gods. 
 It was a self-centered mission, a destiny founded on ambition for 
 Israel, and jealousy for the honor of Yahweh. 
 I Another source of light upon the origin of the idea of the Day of 
 i Yahweh is found in the political relations of early Israel with outside 
 1 nations. After the fierce struggles connected with the early days of 
 ' the settlement in Canaan, Israel seems to have adopted a policy of 
 conciliation toward the Canaanites in whose land she was an unwel- 
 come intruder. The battle led by Deborah and Barak was the last 
 great conflict with the people of the land. Deadly enmity gave way 
 little by little to peaceful intercourse. Conciliation was Israel's wisest 
 course; dwelling in the midst of a numerous people far more advanced 
 in civilization than herself, and ready to take advantage of any and 
 every opportunity to drive her out of their territory, it was necessary 
 for her to strengthen herself in every possible way. She therefore 
 gladly admitted "strangers" into her ranks and threw open to them 
 all the privileges of Israelites.'" She gained much by accretions 
 resulting from such a policy and by the friendly feeling thus cultivated 
 toward neighboring tribes. 
 
 But, though Israel succeeded thus in bringing her immediate 
 neighbors into harmony with herself, she was not suffered to develop 
 her resources in peace. Her whole life up to the eighth century was 
 one almost continual struggle for existence. Occupying, as she did, 
 the most fertile oasis in northern Arabia, she was subjected to the 
 onslaughts of less fortunate tribes who coveted the rich possession for 
 themselves. Prior to David's time contests were waged with the 
 
 '<For a discussion of the whole question of the place of "strangers" in Israel see 
 Bertholet, Die Stellung der hraeliten und der Juden zu den Fre7>idett, pp. 1-67. 
 
f: 
 
 THE DAY OF YAHWEH 9 
 
 Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Philistines, Midianites, Edomites, 
 and Syrians, deliverance being wrought for Israel under the leadership 
 of Ehud, Shamgar, Gideon, Jephthah, Samson, and Saul. David's 
 reign was a period of war and conquest resulting in great renown for 
 Israel. The territory acquired by David began to revolt and slip 
 away under Solomon's administration. The long struggle with Syria 
 began in the reign of Baasha of Israel, and continued with bitter hos- 
 tility down through the reigns of Jehoahaz and Jehoash. In addition 
 to this there were skirmishes with the Philistines in the days of Nadab 
 of Israel ; war with Mesha, king of Moab, in the time of Jehoram ; 
 revolt and reconquest of Edom under Joash and Amaziah respectively. 
 Moreover, Assyria appears upon the scene as collector of tribute from 
 Jehu. The last great war, that with Damascus, was a long drawn-out 
 agony for Israel ; but at last Yahweh sent Israel a savior in the person 
 of Assyria, and she enjoyed a brief respite from fighting. The feel- 
 ings of an Israelite, as he looked back upon his nation's long struggle, 
 can scarcely have been amicable toward those with whom he had 
 waged so many conflicts. He rejoiced in the downfall of Damascus, 
 and would have taken equal pleasure in the discomfiture of other 
 hereditary foes. Revenge was a far sweeter thought to him than for- 
 giveness, and one more likely to stir his enthusiasm and arouse his 
 zeal. 
 
 The bearing of the preceding discussion upon the question of the 
 origin of the idea of the Day of Yahweh may now be briefly summa- 
 rized. The people of Israel in the eighth and ninth centuries had 
 inherited and developed the idea that they were destined by Yahweh 
 for great things. They thought themselves certain of attaining 
 political preeminence. They were to be instrumental in demonstrating 
 to the nations the superiority of Yahweh, Israel's God, over all the 
 gods of the nations. With a conception of Yahweh as but one — 
 howbeit the greatest one — among many gods, it was necessary for 
 them to prove his greatness to the surrounding peoples who were in 
 like manner proud of their own respective gods. Yahweh had repeat- 
 edly shown himself to be efficient and worthy of all confidence as a 
 war-god. It was along this line that his superiority was to be proved 
 to the nations. Yahweh had shown his pleasure in Israel and had mani- 
 fested his power in recent days by overthrowing Damascus, her bitterest 
 foe. How natural that the great majority in Israel should feel encour- 
 aged and should hope for the speedy coming of the day when Yahweh 
 should manifest himself in behalf of his people and bring disaster and 
 
THE DA V OF YAHWEH 
 
 
 destruction to all their foes, thereby proving his own supremacy over 
 all other gods and the superiority of his chosen people over all the 
 , peoples of other gods ! T\it. popular conception of the Day of Yahweh 
 was, in short, that of a great day of battle on which Yahweh would 
 place himself at the head of the armies of Israel and lead them on to 
 
 J overwhelming victory over all their enemies. '^ 
 
 ^ In the hands of Amos this conception underwent a transformation. 
 As heretofore it had been instrumental in stimulating the national 
 spirit and life, so now, purified from its grosser elements, it is made to 
 contribute to the development of the religious and moral life of the 
 people. Instead of being the day of Israel's glorification at the 
 expense of her enemies, it now became the day of her humiliation 
 and chastisement at the hands of Yahweh. It was a complete 
 reversal of all the hopes which Israel had so long centered in this 
 day. The first announcement of the new doctrine (Amos 5 : i8 ff.) 
 must have fallen upon the people with startling suddenness ; it was a 
 rude awakening from a pleasant dream. 
 
 '5 The view of Hoffmann, Zeitschrift fiir die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 
 {=ZATIV.), 1883, p. 112, that in the popular conception the Day of Yahweh was looked 
 upon as z. feast day has no support aside from the fact that the context of Amos 5 : 18 ff. 
 takes up the question of feasts, and this is not sufficient to establish the usage in view of 
 the indications favorable to the view adopted here. For other instances of DT' in the 
 sense "day of battle" see Isa. 9:3 = ']'''1TQ DTD, and Hos. 2:2 = bii^nr DT' ; 
 
 cf. Obad., vs. 11 = TnS5 DT', and Ps. 137:7 = ObTDTT' DT . The Arabic jly. 
 is frequently used in the same sense; see the Quran, Sura 45, vs. 13, where the 
 expression "days of God" is interpreted by Arabic commentators as meaning days 
 when God overthrows the infidels in battle. Schultens, Liber Jobi cum nova ver- 
 sione . . . . et commentario perpetuo, etc., Vol. I, pp. 54 f., quotes in support of this 
 usage the following passage from Hamasa: 
 
 iuijo xJuao oIaJI lt>l 
 
 "Who saw our day and the day of the sons of Teim, 
 When the dust was made coherent with its blood ?" 
 
 2ind irom Omar ibfi Keltsoum : LjJoLft jLjLo *\S^S oJul Uj "Nor have the 
 days \i. e., days of battle] left any resources in our possession." W. R. Smith also 
 {Prophets of Israel, Lecture III, note 15) refers to a section on the "Days of the 
 Arabs" in the Ikd oi Ibn 'Abd Rabbih, Egyptian ed., Vol. Ill, pp. 60 f., from which 
 he cites the phrase "the days of Tamim against Bekr" {Ikd, p. 80) in illustration of 
 the fact that among the Arabs the day of battle was often named after the combatants. 
 See also the Arabic illustrations of the same usage cited by Gesenius in his com- 
 mentary on Isa. 9 : 3, and by Steingass, Arabic Dictionary, sub voce. 
 
THE DA V OF YAHWEH 1 1 
 
 The new conception of the day introduced by Amos was the out- 
 growth of the new idea of Yahweh which had taken possession of him. 
 It was the practical application of his thought of God to the conditions 
 of his age. (For him Yahweh's predominant characteristic was rjght- / 
 eousness (Amos 5 :4-6, 24) ; and this called for a corresponding right- 
 eousness on the part of Israel. The peculiar relation she sustained 
 to Yahweh only increased the obligation upon her to be righteous 
 (Amos 3 : 2). In the presence of this demand for moral integrity Amos 
 saw Israel's fearful depravity. ' Northern Israel had probably never_ 
 before enjoyed such outward prosperity and political prestige as at this 
 time.'* Hints are not wanting in Amos of the great wealth and luxury 
 of the times (Amos 3 : 10, 12, 15; 5:11; 6:4-8). But it was alto- 
 gether too manifest that this was secured largely at the expense of the 
 poor, and that cruelty and vice of every description abounded (Amos 
 2:6-8; 3:9,10; 5:10-13). Even the women had sunk to^the l owes t 
 depths of degradation (Amos 4 : 1-3), and the political leaders, as well 
 as the religious leaders, were foremost in wickedness./* Yet amid all 
 this moral desolation, having no conception of Yahweh's demand for 
 righteousness, the people prided themselves on the fact that Yahweh 
 was with them, and that evil therefore could not overtake them.'^ 
 Realizing the righteousness of Yahweh and the wickedness of Israel 
 as fully as he did, Amos was forced to the conclusion that nothing 
 short of Israel's destruction would satisfy the demands of Yahweh's V 
 justice. As the instrument for the execution of Yahweh's judgment 
 upon Israel, his attention was naturally turned to the invincible Assyr- 
 ian army, whose victorious progress was ever drawing nearer and 
 nearer to the borders of Israel. The nation was ripe for destruction ; 
 the destroying agent was close at hand ; therefore the Day of Yahweh 
 must be coming full soon — perhaps even in his own generation. It was 
 to be the close of the existing degenerate age rather than the opening 
 of a new and glorious one, as the people had fondly hoped. 
 
 With such a message Amos addressed northern Israel. Wellhausen 
 has called attention to the artistic and dramatic way in which he intro- 
 duced his startling announcement.'^ By denouncing the neighboring 
 peoples and foretelling their destruction he raised the hopes of his lis- 
 teners that the Day of Yahweh was about to come upon their foes, as 
 
 ^^C/. 2 Kings 14 : 25-28, and McCurdy, op. cit. Vol. I, pp. 308 f. 
 
 '7 Amos 5 : 14 is suspected as a later insertion by Valeton, G. A.. Smith, Volz, 
 Nowack, Lohr, ei al.; but in any case the blind confidence in the protecting presence 
 of Yahweh which is there attributed to Israel was characteristic of her in the eighth 
 century B. C. ; cf. Mic. 3:11 and Judg. 6:13. 
 
 ^^ Die kleinen Propheten, on Amos 2 : 14 ff. 
 
12 THE DAY OF YAHIVEH 
 
 they had long desired, only to dash those hopes to the ground with 
 startling suddenness when he announced to them that judgment was 
 about to fall upon them themselves. "Woe unto you that desire the 
 Day of Yahweh," says Amos; "wherefore would ye have the Day of 
 
 Yahweh ? It is darkness and not light Shall not the Day of 
 
 Yahweh be darkness and not light, even very dark and no brightness 
 in it ? " This statement was followed up and reinforced by the 
 declaration of Yahweh's hatred of their luxurious and superstitious 
 worship, and his intention to drive Israel into exile because of her sins. 
 In the face of incredulity, jeers,"' and threats, Amos persisted in his mes- 
 sage. fXhat day is to be ushered in by terrible portents in earth and 
 heavenk Mourning and lamentation will take the place of the songs 
 and feasts of the present. No one will be able to deliver himself from 
 the universal calamity; all the workers of iniquity will perish. Not a 
 ray of light illumines the darkness of the Day of Yahweh as described 
 by Amos.*° He saw that the popular idea of it as a time for Israel's 
 glorification was deeply wrought into the life of the nation and was 
 fraught with great danger to the higher interests of Israel, so that 
 nothing less would do than to transform it completely and present it 
 from an entirely new point of view. He must draw the thoughts o 
 the people away from illusive hopes and fix them upon stern realities 
 In the formulation of his doctrine of the Day of Yahweh Amos did 
 not break away completely from the past. He utilized some elements 
 
 f^ Jr "Amos 6:3. QnY.Xii'e., The Book of the Prophet haiah. A New English Trans- 
 
 Jf Solution, Y>- 135 [:= Polychrome Bible, or 6'^C7'.], seems to regard this passage as testi- 
 
 Xf^ti' fying to the existence of two opposite views concerning the Day of Yahweh among 
 the people in the time of Amos — the one looking forward to it eagerly as a time of 
 joy for Israel, the other regarding it as an evil day, but supposing it to be still distant. 
 If this was the case, all that Amos did was to adopt the darker view already existing 
 and endeavor to convince Israel of its near approach. It seems more natural, how- 
 ever, to take this utterance of Amos as addressed to those who received his doctrine 
 of the Day of Yahweh skeptically and ironically, blindly trusting in their present ease 
 and security, and refusing to credit gloomy forebodings concerning a coming disaster 
 of which they can see no signs. Cf. the interpretations of this passage given by Well- 
 hausen. Gunning, Mitchell, Driver, and G. A. Smith. 
 
 "°The promise of Amos 9 :8<5-i5 is from a later hand. The argument against 
 these verses is set forth in detail by VoLZ, Die vorexilische Jahweprophetie und der 
 Messias, pp. 22-4 ; cf. G. A. Smith, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 190-95. Among many others 
 who assign them to a later time may be cited Wellhausen, Stade, Smend, Cheyne, 
 Cornill, Marti, Nowack, Lohr, Schwally, ZATW., 1890, pp. 226 f.; Preuschen, 
 ZATIV., 1895, pp. 24-7; TOKK-EY, Journal of Biblical Literature,Yo\.XY,Y>^.iS2,i-\ 
 J, Taylor, article "Amos" in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible. For a defense of 
 the authenticity of the passage see Driver, Joel and Amos, pp. 219-23. 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH 13 
 
 of the popular conception already existing, viz., j^the though_t_Jhat 
 Yahweh was to manifest himself personally in judgment; that this 
 would^pccur on a specific d^IJ. that tjns_day would^ be_ a^ day of 
 battle; that ^wonderful phenomena on earth^nd in the_heavens 
 would accompany the dayj^ that in connection with the^ judgment 
 punishment would falljipon- the_enemies_of jsrael and of Yahweh; 
 and_^above all, that it woujd be the tjme^when Yahweh would vindicate 
 him^lf in the sight of the whole world. But a radical departure from 
 the popular idea is seen in the essential content of the[new doctrinp in 
 accordance with which Yahweh's vindication involves Israel's discomfi- 
 ture rather than her triumph. This was the necessary outcome of the 
 new conception of Yahweh arrived at by Amos, for whom Y ahweh's love «— 
 of righteousness was greater and^ stronger than his love for his people. 
 The eBe"ct of the application of this new idea of God to the doctrine of 
 the Day of Yahweh was to lift the doctrine to a far higher plane and to 
 make it subserve ethical and religious ends no less efficiently than it 
 had thus far subserved the purpose of national and political develop- 
 ment. The doctrine henceforth becomes one of the most powerful 
 arguments of the prophets in their appeals to the people of Yahweh to 
 forsake evil and cleave to that which is good. 
 
 Following the lead of Amos, the prophets continued to use the idea 
 of the Day of Yahweh as a factor in the work of developing a purer 
 national life and a keener moral sense. The pre-exilic prophets, how- 
 ever, with the exception of Zephaniah, did not give the idea a promi- 
 nent place in their teaching. The term "Day of Yahweh" appears 
 neither in Hosea, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, nor Jeremiah, and but a 
 few times in the genuine utterances of Isaiah,^'' while Amos himself 
 mentioned it only for the purpose of combating the erroneous popular 
 conception in regard to it and of putting an entirely different meaning' 
 into it. This avoidance of the use of the term was due, perhaps, to a 
 desire to refrain from calling to the remembrance of the people the 
 perverted idea which it represented, an idea so strongly intrenched 
 in the minds of the people that expulsion by direct attack seemed 
 inadvisable ; hence the earlier prophets chose the more indirect and 
 effectual method of teaching correct fundamental ideas about Yahweh, 
 the acceptance of which would drive out false conceptions of the Day^ 
 of Yahweh. 
 
 "Isa. 2: 12 ff.; cf. 5: 18 f.; 7: l8ff.; 9:8 — 10:4; I7:4ff.; 22: 5 ff.; chap. 13 and 
 34 : 8 are of later origin ; see the commentaries of Duhm, Marti, and Cheyne on 
 Isaiah. 
 
14 THE DAY OF YAHWEH 
 
 Though the immediate successors of Amos avoided the use of the 
 term for the most part, yet its content as formulated by Amos was 
 taken up by them and strenuously enforced upon the nation. No 
 important contribution was made to the_idea. by^ _Hosea, Micah, 
 or _ Isaiah; they adopted^ thejyiew of Amos without essential change. 
 T he day of Yahweh's visitation con_tinjIe^To be thought of as a time 
 for the punishment of Israel's sins." Isaiah's doctrine of the Remnant, 
 / however^opened the way for the announcements of a blessed future 
 ' from later prophets. Nahum's vision is confined to a picture of the 
 overthrow of Assyria; it is a rehabilitation of the popular conception 
 of the Day of Yahweh, with a change in the reason assigned for the 
 destruction of Israel's foes ; it is no longer merely because they are 
 foes to Israel and Israel's God, but because they are wicked.''^ This 
 view was stated still more fully and forcibly by Habakkuk at a some- 
 what later date.""* In the words of Professor Charles : "According to 
 the primitive view, Yahweh was bound to intervene on behalf of his 
 people on the ground of the supposed natural affinities existing 
 between them, whereas, according to the view of Nahum and Habak- 
 kuk, his intervention must follow on the ground of ethical affinities; 
 for Israel and the gentiles are related to each other as the righteous, 
 p^i:2, and the wicked, 5>ir^ (Hab. i : 4, 13)."'^ 
 
 The prophecy of Zephaniah was concerned with the Day of Yahweh 
 as no previous one had been ; it is the dominant thought everywhere 
 present in his utterances. His conception agrees with that of Amos 
 in that it supposes the day to be close at hand (i : 7, 14), and to be a 
 
 ** The passages in the books named after these prophets which present pictures 
 of a bright future in connection with the coming of the Day of Yahweh are regarded 
 by an increasing number of scholars as of late origin. See, e. g., VOLZ, Die vorexilische 
 Jahiveprophetie und der Messias; NowACK, Die kleinen Propheten ; Wellhausen, Die 
 kleinen Propheten; W. R. Harper, American Journal of Semitic Languages and 
 Literatures, Vol. XVII, pp. 1-15; Stade, ZATW., Vol. I, pp. 161-72; Cornill, 
 Einleitung in das Alte Testament; Cheyne, Introduction to the Book of Isaiah, zxid, 
 SPOT., Part 10; DuHM, Das Buch Jesaia ("Handkommentar z. Alt. Test."); Marti, 
 Das Buch Jesaia ("Kurzer Hand-Commentar z. Alt. Test."), and article "Hosea" in 
 Encyclopccdia Biblica; Hackmann, Die Zukunftserwartung des Jesaia. 
 
 ^3 Chap. 1:1 — 2:3 is assigned to a later date by Bickell, Gunkel, Cornill, 
 Nowack, et al., chiefly on the basis of its form and structure. However, all agree that 
 this opening section gives a description of the Day of Yahweh fully in keeping with 
 the spirit and contents of the rest of the book. 
 
 **Chap. 3 is quite generally regarded as a later addition; so, e.g., Kuenen, 
 Cheyne, Cornill, Wellhausen, Nowack, Driver, A. B. Davidson, G. A. Smith. 
 
 *^ A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 94. 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH 15 
 
 day of gloom and terror bringing judgment (i : 2-6, 15 ff.), which is to 
 fall primarily upon Yahweh's people, but also upon their enemies 
 (i : 7-18 ; 2 : 4-15). But Zephaniah goes farther than any of his prede- 
 cessors, if we may suppose 3 : 8 to have come from him, in that he 
 makes the judgment well-nigh world-wide. It is not, however, strictly 
 speaking, a universal judgment, since certain "guests" are evidently 
 excepted (i : 7), and, furthermore, all are clearly not on the same level 
 before Yahweh, for Judah is still regarded as Yahweh's people, and 
 given blessings and privileges at the expense of her enemies.^* Out 
 of this wide-reaching judgment a remnant of poor and afflicted people 
 who trust in Yahweh's name, do no evil, and refrain from deceit is to 
 remain and continue the relation between Judah and Yahweh.^' 
 
 Jeremiah's work furnishes a good illustration of the prophets' 
 dependence upon history. After his first utterances, which seem, like 
 the words of Zephaniah, to have been called forth in connection with 
 the Scythian invasion, little or nothing was heard from him until about 
 the time of the battle of Carchemish, where Nebuchadrezzar appeared 
 as the coming conqueror of western Asia. Jeremiah at once grasped 
 the significance of this event and sounded the alarm for his people, 
 continuing to preach repentance as the only way of escape from com- 
 plete overthrow until the day his words were fulfilled. He did not call 
 this coming calamity the Day of Yahweh, as Amos had done on a sim- 
 ilar occasion in northern Israel, and as Zephaniah had already done 
 in Judah. In the present state of the criticism of the book of Jeremiah it 
 is difficult to determine just what the exact teaching of Jeremiah on 
 this subject was.""^ But it seems to have included a simple, yet scath- 
 ing arraignment of Israel's wickedness and a call to immediate repent- 
 ance. He lays greater emphasis than any of his predecessors upon the 
 
 »* Professor Charles' treatment {op. cit., p. 98) of Zephaniah's teaching con- 
 cerning the Day of Yahweh is based largely on the doubtful passages 2:8-10 and 
 3:8-10. Moreover, the treatment is inconsistent in that part of its conclusions is 
 based upon the authenticity of these verses, while part is based upon the supposition 
 of their being interpolated. 
 
 *7 Zeph. 3 : 14-20 is considered late by most interpreters, e. g., Oort, Stade, 
 Kuenen, Schwally, Wellhausen, Budde, Cornill, Nowack, G.A.Smith. 2:8-11 is 
 regarded as late by Oort, Wellhausen, Schwally, Budde, Nowack, G. A. Smith. Well- 
 hausen and Schwally reject 3:8-10, and Budde, Nowack, G. A. Smith, 3 : 9, 10. 
 
 =** All messianic passages are referred to a later time by VoLZ, Die vorexilische 
 Jahwepropheiie und der Messias, pp. 68-80. SCHWALLY, ZATPV., Vol. VIII, pp. 177- 
 217, denies chaps. 46-51, and much of chap. 25, to Jeremiah. Cornill, SBOT., Part 
 II, assigns to later times : 10:2-16; 17:19-27; 19 : 1—20 :6; chaps. 26-28,34, 36-44, 
 and 50-52, and many glosses besides. To these sections he adds, in his recently pub- 
 lished pamphlet, Die vielriscken Stiicke des Bitches Jeremia rcco7istrnirt (Leipzig, 1901, 
 
1 6 THE DAY OF YAHWEH 
 
 religious life as distinguished from the ethical. The sins he rebukes 
 are idolatry, sun-worship, human sacrifice, a superstitious multiplica- 
 tion of sacrifices and offerings to Yahweh in the hope of thereby secur- 
 ing his favor, a blind trust in the inviolability of Jerusalem with its 
 temple, and failure to keep the covenant and ordinances of Yahweh ; 
 see, e.g., 7 : 4-10 ; 11:13; 15:4. He soon saw that Judah had gone 
 too far in her downward path to be able to return, and that destruction 
 was therefore inevitable. He looked upon Nebuchadrezzar as Yah- 
 weh's servant (27:6 ff.), through whom he was about to bring Judah and 
 all the nations to judgment (25 : 15-26). He makes a great advance 
 in that he admits the enemies of Judah to a share in Yahweh's mercy; 
 those who repent and learn Yahweh's ways will be restored to their own 
 lands after their punishment ; only the nations that refuse to obey 
 Yahweh will be completely destroyed (12 : 14-17). However, the judg- 
 ment is still national rather than individual in character ; Jeremiah 
 seems to have only introduced the thought of individualism into the 
 religion of Yahweh and to have left the full working out of the idea to 
 his successors. 
 
 Theeschatological, apocalyptic tone of Zephaniah's threats of woe is 
 almost entirely lacking in Jeremiah's preaching. He knows of no per- 
 sonal appearance of Yahweh upon earth, no extraordinary departure 
 from the laws of nature, no threats of sudden visitation. His thought of 
 Yahweh's activity and personality seems more spiritual than that of earlier 
 prophets, and his presentation of the future is more sane and rational, 
 pp. xiii-[- 43), the following passages: chap. 30; 31 : i,6-9«, 10-14, 21^,38-40. Giese- 
 BRECHT {Handkomme7itar zuvi Alien Testament) allows to Jeremiah only I : I — '17 : 18 ; 
 chap. 18; 20:7-18; chaps. 22-24; 25:3 ff., 15-26; chap. 27; 32:6-17^,24-44; chap. 35; 
 much of the remainder he attributes to Baruch. Nath. Schmidt, article "Jeremiah " in 
 Encyclopcedia Biblica, regards as genuine only chap, i ; 2 : 2-13, 20-37; 3:1-5; 4 : 19 ff''. 
 7 :3 — 9:21 ; 10: 19-21,23-25; chap. I3(?); 15 : 5-9 ; 16 :2-l3; l8:I-I7; 19: I f., 10 f.; 
 20 : 1-6 ; 21 : i-io ; 22 : 2-5, IO-19, 24-27 ; 23 : 9 ff.; chaps. 24 ; 28 ; 32 : 14 f.; chap. 
 34 ; 37 : i-io, 1 1 ff. DUHM, whose commentary on Jeremiah {Kurzer Handcommentar 
 zum Alten Testament, 1901) has just come to hand, assigns the following portions, 
 with the exception of minor glosses, to Jeremiah, viz.: chaps. 2-6; 8; 9:1-21; 
 10:19-22; 11:15-20; 12:7-12; 13:15-17; 14:2-10, 17 f.; chap. 15; 16:5-7; 
 
 17 :.l-4, 9 f., 14-17 ; 18 : 13-20 ; 20 : 7-18 ; chap. 22 ; 23 : 9-15 ; 30 : 12-15 ; 31 : 2-6, 
 15-22; 38:22. To Baruch he assigns: 7: 18; chap. 26 ; 27:2f.; chap. 28 ; 29:1, 
 3-7, II-15, 21-29; 32:6-15; 34 : l-li ; 35: i-il ; 36:1-26, 32; 37:5, 12-18, 20 f.; 
 38:1,3-22,24-28; 39:3,14a,- 40:6—42:9; 42:13a, 14, 19-21 ; 43:1-7-. 44:15-19, 
 24f., 28^,- chap. 45. The remainder of the book was added by various hands at 
 various times, the messianic utterances and the oracles against foreign nations being 
 among the latest additions. These latter come from as late a time as the end of the 
 second century B. C. 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH 17 
 
 The pre-exilic conception of the Day of Yahweh was preeminently 
 that of a day of judgment — a gloomy, forbidding event, fraught with 
 punishment for Israel. The character of the times and the spirit of 
 the people made it necessary for the prophets to take this view of the 
 day whenever they touched upon the subject of Israel's future. They 
 felt themselves to be reformers sent to a " wicked and adulterous gen- 
 eration," and they devoted all their energies to the work of arousing 
 the people from their moral stupor and convincing them of their awful 
 condition and of the near approach of punishment. To this end 
 they uttered the threats of chastisement and painted the scenes of dis- 
 aster so often associated with the thought of the Day of Yahweh. In 
 a low stage of religious development messages of doom are often the 
 most effective means of reaching men's minds and hearts. Moham- 
 med's preaching was largely made up of this sort of material, and 
 even Christian preachers have found it useful. Not that the early 
 prophets deliberately employed this method of arousing the national 
 conscience, though the form of expression is no doubt often embel- 
 lished by rhetorical device intensified by oratorical fervor. They 
 were giving expression rather to heartfelt convictions forced upon them 
 by observation of social and political conditions and illuminated by 
 the spirit of Yahweh. They strove earnestly to convince the nation of 
 the truth of their message. Sometimes, as in the case of Zephaniah, 
 they turned their attention to Israel's neighbors and proclaimed their 
 destruction, perhaps with a not unnatural feeling of satisfaction ; but 
 primarily their preaching against the nations seems to have been for 
 the purpose of warning Israel and calling her attention to the need of 
 reformation, if she would avoid a similar fate. Nahum alone of the 
 pre-exilic prophets reverts to the original pre-prophetic conception of 
 the Day of Yahweh, and even though he does base his exultation over 
 Assyria's approaching downfall upon ethical rather than natural 
 grounds,^' we cannot but feel that he stands on a lower moral plane 
 than his predecessors and contemporaries in the prophetic office. 
 
 It was not till Israel was already feeling the bonds of captivity that 
 Jeremiah changed his tone and began preaching words of encourage- 
 ment and hope to Israel. Then he cheered her with promises of return 
 from captivity and of restoration to her former glory. In this return 
 and blessing northern Israel was also to have a share. A new cove- 
 nant of love was to be established between Yahweh and his people, a 
 covenant engraved upon their hearts ; and the nation was to become a 
 source of wonder to surrounding peoples because of her prosperity (33:9). 
 
 ^ Cf. Charles, op. cit., p. 94. 
 
1 8 THE DAY OF YAHWEH 
 
 In thus painting the future of Israel bright, Jeremiah was followed 
 by practically all succeeding prophets. The fall of Jerusalem and the 
 exile of the people marked an epoch in religious as well as political 
 history. As long as Jerusalem remained standing, the old superstitious 
 belief in its charmed life continued, and prevented the people from 
 coming to a true understanding of the relation existing between 
 Yahweh and themselves. Hence both Jeremiah and Ezekiel had con- 
 stantly reiterated the announcement of the coming destruction, and 
 had thus prepared the people to understand, in some measure at least, 
 the significance of the shock when it came upon them. The great 
 disaster completely dissipated all false confidence, and opened the way 
 for the propagation of new and grander conceptions of Yahweh and 
 his will. 
 
 In connection with many other new teachings, the thought of 
 Israel's restoration to Yahweh's favor was emphasized by both Jeremiah 
 and Ezekiel, and this thought served to keep the disheartened people 
 from deserting Yahweh and allying themselves with the successful 
 gods of Babylon or lapsing into indifference, skepticism, and practical 
 atheism. The Day of Yahweh is given a larger place in Ezekiel's 
 thought than in that of Jeremiah, and this is natural in view of the 
 fact that Jeremiah sought to reform the nation, and so to avert the 
 impending disaster, while Ezekiel, especially after 586 B. C, concerned 
 himself chiefly with the future of his people. Ezekiel conceives of the 
 Day of Yahweh throughout as a day of battle quite in harmony with 
 the pre-prophetic representation ; but prior to 586 B. C. it is a day of 
 battle on which Yahweh inflicts terrible punishment on Israel because 
 of her sins (7:9 ff.; 13:5); after that date it becomes a day of battle on 
 which Yahweh triumphs gloriously over the heathen world (30: 2 ff.; 
 34 : 12 ; 39 : 8 ff.). The visitation of Yahweh upon Israel for the pur- 
 pose of her purification is historically mediated, the Babylonians being 
 the agents of Yahweh, just as the Assyrians had been thought of by 
 Amos and Isaiah, and the Scythians by Zephaniah. The judgment 
 upon Israel is also a national one as heretofore, but there is at least a 
 suggestion (11 : 17-21 ; 21 125) of the idea of a judgment day for the 
 individual, an outcome of Ezekiel's belief in the individual responsibility 
 of each soul before Yahweh. The result of the chastisement of Israel 
 will be her purification from sin and her loving allegiance to Yahweh, 
 who will restore both branches of the nation to their homes and 
 unite them under the rule of the messianic king. In connection 
 with and preparatory to the deliverance of Israel, judgment is to fall 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH 19 
 
 upon the nations hostile to Yahweh, and especially upon Egypt (chaps. 
 30-32), the latter being singled out, no doubt, because of the promi- 
 nent part she had played in bringing about Israel's calamity. 
 
 After restored Israel is established in the favor of Yahweh, the great 
 final Day of Yahweh is to come upon the heathen world (chaps. 38, 
 39). The description of this day has in it apocalyptic elements, and 
 is also conceived in a spirit of particularism, two things developed to 
 their full extent in later Judaism. The forces of the heathen world 
 are represented as gathering upon the mountains of Israel for the 
 great battle against her. Under the leadership of Gog, prince of the 
 land of Magog, the hosts assemble from all quarters till they seem like 
 a storm, like a cloud covering the land. But they are permitted to 
 assemble by Yahweh only that he may destroy them. Without any 
 effort on the part of Israel they are to be annihilated. Violent earth- 
 quakes will overwhelm them with terror; in their confusion they will 
 set upon and slay one another; pestilence will smite them, and 
 Yahweh will rain fire, hail, and brimstone upon them. By this will 
 all peoples be made to know Yahweh, Israel's Holy One. All that 
 Israel has to do is to go forth and clean up the land after the conflict ; 
 seven months will it take them to bury the slain and seven years to 
 burn their weapons, so great will be the slaughter. 
 
 In so far as Ezekiel's Day of Yahweh has to do with the nations, 
 there is .little advance beyond the original pre-prophetic idea. It is 
 altogether a time of destruction for them, and that because they have 
 presumed to regard lightly Israel and Israel's God. There is not a 
 promise made to them, nor a hope of any description held out to 
 them. Everything is done for the sake of Israel and Yahweh. This 
 is a natural result of the harsh treatment that Israel received in her 
 exilic experience, and is the point of view occupied by all the prophets 
 of this period. Ezekiel evidently gives up the old idea of one day, 
 and seems to have in mind rather an extended period of time. 
 There are at least three definite and distinct stages in his "day," 
 viz.: (i) a day upon Israel when Jerusalem falls; (2) a day upon Egypt 
 and the nations when Israel is restored ; and (3) a final day upon the 
 representatives of the whole heathen world. The beginning of the 
 formation of the dogma of the Day of Yahweh is manifested here in 
 the absence of historical agents as mediators of the judgment upon 
 Gog and his host, and in the universal character of the judgment 
 inflicted upon Gog. In all previous judgment scenes the nations 
 made to suffer the wrath of Yahweh have been those who have in 
 
I-- 
 
 20 THE DAY OF YAHWEH 
 
 various ways brought upon themselves the wrath of Israel, and they 
 have been distinctly cited by name. But hexe the statement is broad 
 and indefinite; it is a judgment upon the representatives of the non- 
 Israelitish world as such. 
 
 Not a prophet from the time of Ezekiel on through to the close of 
 the activity of the prophets failed to show marked interest in things 
 pertaining to the Day of Yahweh and the future which it was to usher 
 in. Sometimes they used the terrors of the day as a scourge with 
 which to whip the nation into line with their own lofty ideals of 
 morality and religion ; but more frequently they used it as a source of 
 consolation and hope for the people in the midst of their discourage- 
 ment and misery, presenting it in vivid colors as a time when Israel 
 was to enter gladly upon the enjoyment of a glorious future. 
 
 In Ezekiel the day is noteworthy chiefly for the fact that the prophet 
 conceives of it as the time when Yahweh will take vengeance upon his 
 foes. The thought of vengeance was sweet to Israel during and after 
 her bitter experience as a captive in a strange land. The true prophets 
 were through every experience unswerving in their loyalty to Yahweh, 
 and they believed, in later times at least, that his dominion was to be 
 extended over the whole earth. But they had not yet succeeded in 
 emancipating Yahweh from bondage to the people of his choice. 
 Yahweh's supremacy over the world was only to be brought about in 
 connection with the political exaltation of Israel, his own peculiar 
 people, in triumph and power over all her enemies. They must be 
 overthrown before Israel could attain the place necessary for her as 
 Yahweh's representative in the earth. 
 
 A similar spirit to that prevalent in Ezekiel is exhibited in Isa. 
 13:2 — 14:23.^" The Day of Yahweh here is preeminently, if not 
 exclusively, a time when Yahweh's fury is to be poured out upon 
 Babylon. The nations will gather against her, and the Medes espe- 
 cially will be stirred up against her — a pitiless and terrible people 
 that cannot be turned from its purpose by the most lavish bribery. 
 Babylon will be utterly destroyed, with all the horrors and barbarities 
 of oriental warfare. The approach of this awful day, which is near at 
 hand, will be signalized by an eclipse of the sun, moon, and stars, and 
 
 ^'This passage is assigned to the close of the exile by Duhm ; Q,we.\'iiV., Introduc- 
 tion, pp. 67-78 ; G. A. Smith, Skinner, Marti, et al. The ode in 14 : \b-22 is claimed 
 for Isaiah by Winckler, Altorientalische Forschungen,\o\.\, pp. 193 f-; so also 
 Wi.H.Co^B, Journal of Biblical Literature, 1896, pp. 18-35; for a criticism of this 
 position see Chv-YHV., Journal 0/ Biblical Literature, 1897, pp. 131-5. 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH 21 
 
 by a great earthquake, shaking both earth and sky, and spreading terror 
 everywhere. As a result of it, Judah will be restored to her own land, 
 and the very peoples who have hitherto scorned and oppressed her will 
 escort her home with honors and henceforth yield themselves as her 
 servants. The old relation of taunter and taunted will be reversed ; 
 Israel will now make sport of fallen Babylon. 
 
 Isa. 42:13-17 is another picture of the Day of Yahweh which 
 comes from this period. The manifestation of Yahweh will be in 
 wrath against the nations, but will result for Israel in deliverance from 
 captivity and return home under the guidance of Yahweh. 
 
 The same tone predominates in the prophecy of Obadiah, which 
 belongs to the period of the exile.-" The Day of Yahweh is " near upon 
 all the nations," and Edom in particular is to receive just punishment 
 for her unfeeling conduct toward Israel in her day of trouble. The 
 destruction of Edom is to be accomplished, as in Isa. 11 : 14, by the 
 united people of Israel. As Edom formerly oppressed Israel, so will 
 Israel now oppress her, even to the point of annihilation. While Edom 
 is thus blotted out of existence, the holy people left in Zion will take 
 possession of Edom, Philistia, Ephraim, Samaria, Gilead, as far north 
 as Zarephath, and of the cities of the south. Over all this Yahweh will 
 reign as king. 
 
 Amos 9 : 8^-1 5, which exhibits a similar sentiment toward Edom, 
 may belong to this period.^" It gives great prominence to a descrip- 
 tion of the abundant material prosperity which Israel is to enjoy as the 
 favored one of Yahweh in the era inaugurated upon his great Day. 
 
 The future of Edom and that of Israel are presented in striking 
 contrast in Isa., chaps. 34 and 35, prophecies which seem to reflect the 
 experiences of the latter part of the exile. ^^ The Day of Yahweh is 
 described as about to come upon all the nations, and especially upon 
 Edom, bringing fearful slaughter. As usual, it is to be accompanied 
 by wonderful and terrible signs in earth and sky. The very soil of 
 Edom is to suffer, and by its barrenness and desolation serve as a 
 
 3» For a defense of the exilic origin of Obadiah see G. A. Smith, The Book of the 
 Twelve Prophets, Vol. II, pp. 167-72. 
 
 J' See footnote 20. 
 
 33 These chapters are assigned to the later days of the exile by Dillmann, Driver, 
 Introduction, 6th ed., p. 226, and Giesebrecht. G. A. Smith and Skinner place them 
 after the beginning of the exile, but do not venture upon an exact date. Cheyne 
 assigns them to the years 450-430 B. C, while Duhm and Marti put them at some 
 time in the second century, but before the subjugation of the Edomites by John 
 Hjrrcanus in 128 B. C. 
 
2 2 THE DAY OF YAHWEH 
 
 memorial of the great day ; given over to thorns, thistles, wild beasts, 
 satyrs, and the Lilith, it will be deserted of men and consumed by 
 unending fire. But ransomed Israel will return to Zion ; all her 
 afflicted will be made whole ; flowers and streams will unite to make 
 the homeward journey pleasant ; and every difficulty and danger will 
 be removed from the way. 
 
 The hard experiences of the exile, and especially the attitude of the 
 Edomites, seem to have given rise in this period to a spirit of bitter 
 hatred of the nations, such as had never before existed. There is a 
 feeling that Yahweh must vindicate his honor and his righteousness in 
 the sight of the nations, but it seems at times as though this were over- 
 shadowed in the mind of the prophet by a desire for revenge and 
 retaliation upon the foes of Israel. Yahweh had so long been thought 
 of as inseparably connected with Israel and her interests that even now 
 in spite of the adoption of a monotheistic conception of God, it seems 
 that the vindication of Yahweh can be only through a terrible judg- 
 ment upon Israel's foes and an exaltation of Israel to a position of 
 power and superiority over the nations. 
 
 The idea of the universality of the character of Yahweh, who was 
 acknowledged in Israel, in consequence of her exilic experiences, as 
 the only God of all mankind, bore fruit but slowly in the thought of 
 the people. One result of the adoption of this larger conception of 
 God was a gradual change in the thought of the Day of Yahweh. The 
 necessity of Israel's vindication in the eyes of the world was by no 
 means lost sight of, but alongside of and instead of the feeling of bit- 
 terness which had reveled in a contemplation of the destruction of 
 outside nations there grew up a feeling of satisfaction in the thought 
 of a possible conversion of the nations to Yahweh through the agency 
 of Israel, his messenger to the world. 
 
 In Haggai and Zech., chaps. i-8, no very definite statements are 
 made concerning judgment upon the nations. Express mention of 
 the Day of Yahweh is made by neither prophet. Echoes of it are 
 heard in Hag. 2 : 6 f., 20-22, and Zech. 2 : 9, which passages are appar- 
 ently reflections of the disturbed state of the Persian empire caused by 
 the revolts against Darius. There is but scanty reference, moreover, 
 to a work of preliminary purification in Israel to be performed by 
 Yahweh before the full tide of prosperity can turn toward her (Zech. 3 : 9 
 and chap. 5). In the main, Israel's future is one to be desired rather 
 than feared ; she has already received her judgment and expiated her 
 sins through the sufferings of the captivity. The only further judgment 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH 23 
 
 that may be expected is that upon the nations, and little atten- 
 tion is given to this ; for the prophets are chiefly interested in the 
 effort to restore the temple and thereby to arouse hope in Israel for 
 the future. The effect of the judgment upon the nations will be, as 
 usual, the exaltation of Israel in the eyes of the world. Instead of the 
 little company of inhabitants now in Jerusalem, an overflowing popu- 
 lation will be found therein. Yahweh himself will dwell there, and 
 " City of Truth " will it be named. Yahweh's people will be gathered 
 home from all lands to enjoy the rich fruitage of their own land as 
 blessed by Yahweh. Best of all, so glorious will Israel become that 
 many nations will seek Yahweh and join themselves to him in that 
 day (Zech. 8 : 20-23). 
 
 The view of the future given in Isa. 2 : 2-4, cf. Mic. 4 :i-4, is quite 
 in keeping with that seen in Haggai and Zechariah. It contemplates 
 a submission of the nations to the dominion of Yahweh, an exaltation 
 of Jerusalem and its people in the sight of the world, Jerusalem as 
 the center of the world's worship and the source of all instruction, and 
 the inauguration of an era of peace. These ideas fit this period well 
 and make it probable that this prophecy belongs here.^'^ 
 
 The high hopes kindled by Haggai and Zechariah were not at once 
 realized. After the completion of the temple, things went on prac- 
 tically as they had before ; there was no wonderful manifestation of 
 Yahweh's power on behalf of Israel ; crops were no better ; outsiders 
 were no less scornful and malicious; Israel was apparently no nearer 
 the attainment of her ideal. As a result of the reaction caused by this 
 state of affairs, Israel sank deeper and deeper into despair. Even 
 those hitherto most faithful now began to doubt Yahweh and to ques- 
 tion whether after all it was worth while to worship him. To this 
 disappointed and discouraged people the words of Malachi were 
 addressed. They were aimed especially at three classes : (i) those who 
 had become skeptical, doubting Yahweh's love for Israel and his right- 
 eousness; (2) the corrupt priesthood; (3) those who had contracted 
 
 3^ So Hackmann and Marti. A post-exilic origin is favored also by Stade, ZA TW., 
 Vol. I, pp. 165 ff.;IV, p. 292 ; Wellhausen, Mitchell, Corniill, Eutl., pp. 137 f., 182; 
 Volz, Cheyne, Nowack, et al. Duhm maintains Isaiah's authorship ; so also Bertho- 
 LET, Die Stellung der Israeliten undderjuden zu den Fremden, pp. 97 £f. Ryssel, Unter- 
 suchungen iiber die Textgestalt und die Echtheit des Buches Micha, pp. 2 1 8-24, makes it 
 originate with Micah. G. A. Smith maintains the possibility of its origin in the eighth 
 century or in the beginning of the seventh. The view held by Hitzig, Ewald, Kuenen, 
 De Goeje, et al., that it is an older prophecy incorporated into both Isaiah and Micah, 
 is now generally abandoned. 
 
24 THE DAY OF YAHWEH 
 
 foreign marriages, A worldly spirit possessed all classes, and the fear 
 of Yahweh was not in their hearts. 
 
 These facts determine the nature of the conception of the Day of 
 Yahweh in Malachi. It is a day of judgment upon the wicked in 
 Israel. No word of condemnation is spoken against the heathen. In 
 fact, the book boldly asserts that the nations are truer worshipers of 
 Yahweh than is Israel herself. The Day of Yahweh is upon Israel 
 only, and its preliminary work now, as always, is one of purification. 
 But such is Yahweh's love for Israel that he will send his messenger, 
 even the great Elijah, before the great and terrible day, to warn the 
 wicked of approaching destruction and save them from the wrath to 
 come. No historical agent appears here as executor of the divine pur- 
 pose, but, as in Ezekiel's representation of the overthrow of Gog, 
 Yahweh himself does the work of destruction. The idea of a day of 
 battle upon which Yahweh overthrows the enemies of himself and of 
 his people for the sake of his own honor is here lost sight of; the 
 judge and the culprit are the only parties considered ; there are no 
 spectators. The prophet does not go so far as to put gentiles on an 
 equal footing with Israelites and to make righteousness, irrespective of 
 nationality, the only requisite for divine favor, but leaves the gentiles 
 completely out of consideration. Yahweh's Day is not only a time 
 for the destruction of the wicked, but also the opening of a glorious 
 age for the righteous. But the prophecy of Malachi does not dwell 
 upon this phase of the day; the apparent aim of the book is to bring 
 about a reform in worship and in other practical affairs, and the dark 
 and terrible side of the Day of Yahweh is presented with the purpose 
 of causing a halt in the wicked career of Israel. 
 
 From the time of Ezra on, a new environment was created for 
 prophecy — an environment in which prophecy, in its real sense, 
 could not live. The adoption of the written law as the rule and stand- 
 ard of life left little scope for prophetic activity. Everything was 
 controlled by the legal and priestly spirit; the prophets themselves 
 were priests at heart. The whole tendency of the priestly system was 
 toward exclusiveness, and consequently the Jews withdrew themselves 
 more and more from association and fellowship with outsiders, espe- 
 cially in religious matters. The Samaritan schism, with its accompa- 
 nying rivalry and animosity, also tended to embitter the Jews against 
 their neighbors. 
 
 To this period, perhaps, belong such utterances as those in Isa. 
 61:2; 63:1-6; 65:1 — 66:24.^5 Here the spirit of revenge appears at 
 
 35 So Duhm, Cheyne, Skinner, and Marti. 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH 25 
 
 its worst. The remnant of Israel is promised all the blessings within 
 the gift of Yahweh, while his enemies are to suffer every affliction and 
 to perish by fire and sword. Those of them who escape will go to 
 distant nations that have not heard of Yahweh and tell them of his 
 deeds. Then will all the nations join in escorting Israel's exiles back 
 and in rendering worship to Yahweh at the stated times in Jerusalem. 
 
 Some time after Ezra, Joel prophesied amid a scene of desolation 
 and sorrow.3* Swarms of locusts had devoured the fruits of the land ; 
 all food and drink were cut off; drought had combined with the 
 locusts to render destruction complete. Even the regular offerings of 
 the temple could no longer be kept up, and this was the climax of 
 calamity in Joel's thought. He looked upon all this as an announce- 
 ment of the approaching Day of Yahweh (i: 15). In view of this he 
 issued a call for a general day of fasting in Israel, and exhorted all to 
 humble themselves in penitence before Yahweh and appeal to his 
 mercy, in order that the destructive scourge might be removed and the 
 terrible Day of Yahweh withdrawn. The expectation of pardon is 
 grounded in the thought that Yahweh's honor in the sight of the 
 world forbids him to destroy his own people utterly (2 : 17). 
 
 The day of fasting seems to have been observed and to have had 
 the desired effect, for there follows immediately a description of 
 returning prosperity, with promises of abundance in the coming days 
 (2:18-27). After the realization of material blessings of every kind, 
 the spirit of prophecy is to be imparted by Yahweh to the whole 
 nation, regardless of age, rank, or sex. The Day of Yahweh, which 
 was an occasion of dread when near at hand, can be looked forward to 
 at a distance as a joyful day — a dreadful day still, but for Israel's 
 enemies, not for Israel. All who depend upon Yahweh will escape in 
 that day. The scattered exiles of Judah will be gathered from all 
 places whither they have been driven, and will be restored to Mount 
 Zion. All the nations — among which Tyre, Sidon, Philistia, and 
 Edom are especially mentioned — are to be summoned together for 
 war in the "valley of Jehoshaphat," in the "valley of decision." There, 
 in truly apocalyptic fashion, will they be annihilated by Yahweh 
 because of their "violence done to the children of Judah." But Judah 
 
 3* The post-exilic origin of Joel is granted by most recent interpreters; e. g., Wil- 
 deboer, Nowack, G. A. Smith, et al. place it in the second Persian century. Driver, 
 Joel and Amos {cf. article "Joel" in Encyclopcedia Biblica), puts it about 500 B. C, or 
 possibly in the century after Malachi. VVellhausen makes it a late post-exilic work ; 
 cf. HOLZINGER, ZATW., Vol. IX, pp. 89-131. For a recent defense of the early date 
 see G. G. Cameron, article "Joel" in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible. 
 
26 THE DAY OF YAHWEH 
 
 is to abide forever, and Jerusalem from generation to generation ; she 
 shall be holy, and strangers shall no more walk her streets. This 
 world -judgment is apparently aimed by Joel at the peoples that 
 have roused the enmity of the Jews in their mutual intercourse. The 
 words "all nations" evidently cannot be taken literally, for the men of 
 Sheba are still to survive (3 : 8). 
 
 Joel's Day of Yahweh was no longer a danger actually threatening 
 the nation ; as a result of the beginning made by Ezekiel and the 
 further development, especially in Malachi, it was now a well-estab- 
 lished dog?na. No specific sins of the people of Israel are cited as 
 occasioning the approaching calamity, and the offense of the gentile 
 world is merely that of being hostile to Judah. No historical agent is 
 used in carrying out the will of Yahweh upon the nations; he himself 
 accomplishes their end by awful catastrophes in the natural world. Judah 
 alone is to escape the terrors of that day, and her deliverance is due, 
 not to her moral character, but to the fact that she acknowledges the 
 sovereignty of Yahweh. The whole conception is eschatological and 
 apocalyptic rather than prophetic, and it is dominated by the most 
 intense particularism. 
 
 The same general apocalyptic style and spirit are characteristic of 
 Zech., chaps. 9-14, which section probably comes from the troublous 
 times of the Greek period, when the successors of Alexander were 
 struggling among themselves for the possession of Syria, and the Jews 
 were suffering the consequences of the strife. ^^ The feeling which 
 exists toward outside peoples is the same as that in Joel ; the same 
 
 37 In support of this date see especially Stade's epoch-making articles in ZATW., 
 Vols. I, pp. 1-96; II, pp. 151-72, 275-309; and R. Eckardt in ZATW., Vol. XIII, pp. 
 76-109. Cf. also KuiPER, Zacharia IX-XIV, Rene exegetisch-critische Studie (1894); 
 Driver, Introduction, 6th ed., pp. 346 ff.; Wildeboer, Die Litteratur des Alten 
 Testaments, pp. 354 ff.; CORNILL, Einleitung in das Alte Testament, pp. 193-200 ; 
 NowACK, Die kleinen Propheten, pp. 346-54 ; G. A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve 
 Prophets, Vol. II, pp. 449-62, Staerk, Untersuchungen ilber die Komposition und 
 Ahfassungszeit von Zech. g-14, agrees with Stade in the main, but dates 11 14-17 and 
 i3-'7-9 from the year 170 B.C. Kvenkn, Einleitung in das Alte Testament, Yo\. 
 II, pp. 386 ff., takes the position that chaps, 9-1 1 and 13:7-9 are made up of old 
 fragments from the eighth century which have been worked over, supplemented, and 
 arranged in their present form by a post-exilic editor, while 12 : i — 13 : 6 and chap. 
 14 originated about 400 B. C. Wellhausen, Kleine Propheten, 2ind.Z-e.\-Dti-E.K, Theolo- 
 gische Studien, Vol. XII, pp. 73 ff., assign chaps. 9-14 all to the Maccabrean period ; 
 so also RUBINKAM, The Second Part of the Book of Zechariah, with the exception of 
 9 : i-io, which he assigns to the time of Alexander. For a recent defense of the unity 
 of the entire book see G. L. Robinson, " The Prophecies of Zechariah," in the Ameri- 
 can fournal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, Vol. XII, pp. 1-92. 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH 27 
 
 enemies are threatened with woes, viz., Syria, Phoenicia, Philistia, and 
 Egypt, with the addition of Greece, in a prominent way, natural in the 
 later times. There is the same need of an initial work of purification 
 in Israel as was demanded by Joel at first. But the punishment of 
 Jerusalem that the Day of Yahweh will bring is, indeed, drastic ; all 
 nations will gather against her and capture her, subjecting her to the 
 horrors of pillage and destroying half her population. But their tri- 
 umph will be short-lived, for Yahweh himself will interpose with a ter- 
 rible plague and will set them to slaying one another. As in Joel, 
 Yahweh personally destroys the opponents of Israel, and adds to the 
 awfulness of the occasion by working wonders in earth and sky. 
 
 After this inaugural work of destruction, a time of blessing opens 
 up for Israel. However, a period of mourning is predicted for her, 
 during which her people will weep for their former rebellion against 
 Yahweh. This is a new thought in connection with the Day of Yah- 
 weh, and is not at all fully or clearly set forth ; it is too general and 
 indefinite to admit of accurate exposition. All idolatry is to be abol- 
 lished and — what sounds strange, indeed — prophecy will cease to 
 exist. Whereas Joel's ideal was that all of Yahweh's people might be 
 prophets, this anonymous dreamer regards them as quite out of har- 
 mony with the blessedness and holiness of the days to come. He holds ' 
 prophecy and deception to be practically synomymous terms — a sad 
 commentary on the prophecy of his day. The dispersed Jews will be 
 reassembled from all corners of the earth and brought back to Judah 
 and Jerusalem. The earth will yield abundantly, and there will be no 
 more curse upon it. Yahweh will be universally acknowledged as 
 Lord and King, and Jerusalem, his dwelling-place, will be the gather- 
 ing point of all nations ; for everyone surviving from the slaughter of 
 the nations will go up thither annually to keep the Feast of Booths. 
 This is the most striking feature of the priestly character of this apoca- 
 lypse, which is even more marked than that of Joel. Over all in 
 Jerusalem will reign the messianic king who shall speak peace to the 
 nations and have dominion over all the earth. 
 
 Zech., chaps. 9-14, does not present a coherent picture of the Day 'Z & e-Vs 
 of Yahweh. It consists of a series of abrupt and fragmentary sketches 
 of special features of that day, which are not easily brought together 
 into a harmonious view. The same general ideals prevail as in Joel, 
 but the particularism is not quite so intense, for, after being severely 
 punished to bring them to their senses, the nations are given a part in 
 the worship of Yahweh, though evidently not on an equal footing with 
 
28 ' THE DAY OF YAHWEH 
 
 the inhabitants of Jerusalem, while Joel has no place for them after 
 their great overthrow on the Day of Yahweh. Zech., chaps. 9-14, does 
 not make use of the term "Day of Yahweh ;" all its views of the future 
 are introduced by "in that da}';" but that he has in mind the well- 
 known Day of Yahweh is evident from 14:1, "A day is coming for 
 Yahweh, etc." The idea seems, however, not to be limited to a single 
 day, but to embrace a period of indefinite duration. 
 
 Two sections from the book of Isaiah seem to belong somewhere 
 in the latter part of the post-exilic age, viz., chaps. 24-27 and 
 19 : 16-25.3^ The former is thoroughly in sympathy with Zech., chaps. 
 9-14, in almost every respect. The writer lives in a time of trial and 
 suffering, but "in that day" all this will be done away. The nations 
 will then receive their deserts ; Judah will be saved, her exiles restored 
 to her, and her reproach taken away in the eyes of all the world. 
 Jerusalem will be the center of worship. In this apocalypse the uni- 
 versalistic element is less emphasized than in Zech., chaps. 9-14, there 
 being only one reference to the nations as destined to enjoy the bless- 
 ings of Yahweh (25:6 ff.). 
 
 In Isa. 19 : 16-25, while there is the usual prediction of woe upon 
 the nations as they are represented in Egypt, it is, nevetheless, dis- 
 tinctly stated that this is only of a disciplinary nature, and that in con- 
 sequence Egypt will repent and turn to Yahweh. Then follows the 
 most generous and universal teaching in all prophecy. Egypt and 
 Assyria — the apocalyptic name for Syria — representing the whole 
 heathen world, are to share equally with Israel in the worship and ser- 
 vice of Yahweh and in the enjoyment of his favor. " Blessed be Egypt, 
 my people, and Assyria, the work of my hands, and Israel, mine 
 inheritance." Not one advantage is assigned to Judah or Jerusalem. 
 It is not even necessary to come up to Jerusalem to worship, for there 
 will be an altar in the midst of Egypt. There will be constant inter- 
 course between Egypt and Syria, and the two peoples will worship 
 Yahweh together oblivious of all'past enmity. 
 
 The book of Daniel, while it does not make reference to the Day 
 of Yahweh by name, is nevertheless a gathering up of the fruitage of 
 that idea. It is rather a record and an embodiment of the influence of 
 
 3^ Isa., chaps. 24-27, can scarcely be definitely assigned with certainty. Ewald, 
 Delitzsch, Dillmann, Kirkpatrick, Driver, et al. put it in the early post-exilic period. 
 Kuenen, Cornill, Smend {ZATW.,No\. IV, pp. 161 ff.), Wildeboer, Cheyne, et al. 
 assign it to the second Persian century. Duhm, Marti, et al. date it about 128 
 B.C. Chap. 19: 16-25 is dated about 160 B. C. by Duhm and Marti, while Cheyne 
 and Kittel assign it to the years 323-285 B. C. 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH 29 
 
 the idea than the representative of any further change or development 
 in the idea itself. It conceives of the Jews as occupying the position 
 of supremacy in the world of the future, and of God's kingdom as 
 finally overthrowing all others. The sinfulness of the nation and her 
 unceasing opposition to God are alone responsible for her present 
 trials and misfortunes. When chastisement has done its work of puri- 
 fication, God will deliver his people by his own power and exalt them 
 above all peoples. Not only those living at the time of this consum- 
 mation will be partakers of its glory, but the righteous Jews of former 
 ages will arise from their graves and share in the happiness of these 
 days. This thought of the resurrection, found also in Isa. 26 : 19, is 
 rather an individual than a national conception such as the Day of 
 Yahweh was, and its origin and development are to be connected with 
 the growth of the idea of individualism as taught by Jeremiah and 
 Ezekiel, rather than with that of the Day of Yahweh. But it is a 
 national conception and supplements the thought of the Day of Yah- 
 weh in so far as it is due to a desire to add to the numbers and 
 influence of the people of Israel in the time of glory upon which they 
 are about to enter. 
 
 Through all the development of the idea of the Day of Yahweh 
 in the Old Testament there clung to it certain characteristic features, 
 some of which passed on into the later form of the idea found in 
 
 I, the New Testament. They were never all equally prominent at one 
 !time, but received different degrees of emphasis according as the cir- 
 .•^'cumstances of the times and the thought of the nation changed. 
 |;The very existence of the idea itself was a constant testimony to the 
 : 'fact that the nation felt its inability to work out its own destiny and 
 -trusted to Yahweh to complete the task. The ideal of its destiny 
 changed much as the centuries passed, but the consciousness of the 
 need of divine aid in attaining to this ideal grew ever more vivid and 
 the activity of Yahweh in connection with it ever more prominent. 
 There was also a recognition of the fact that the present age was only 
 temporary, and must give way to a better and more glorious one which 
 should abide forever. To inaugurate and establish this new era it was 
 necessary that Yahweh himself should come to earth in person and 
 institute the new order of things. This idea of the coming of Yahweh 
 was very crude and anthropomorphic in the first stages of the idea of the 
 Day of Yahweh, but as the thought concerning God became truer and 
 more exalted, the coming of Yahweh was gradually thought of in a more 
 and more spiritual sense. Connected with this coming of Yahweh was 
 
30 THE DAY OF YAHVVEH 
 
 constantly pictured a series of great catastrophes in the natural world ; 
 marvelous portents on land and sea, in air and sky. These convulsions 
 and shocks were just as numerous and conspicuous at the end of the 
 development of the idea as at its beginning — indeed, rather more so 
 after the Day of Yahweh began to take on apocalyptic coloring. This 
 idea of wonders and horrors in the natural world accompanying a revo- 
 lution in the moral and spiritual world was a natural outcome of the 
 Hebrew conception of the physical universe, which took no account of 
 universal and inviolable natural laws, but thought of Yahweh as direct- 
 ing the movements of the physical world in the most direct and per- 
 sonal way; it was his ordinary custom to punish religious backslidings 
 by withholding the products of the soil. Nature, religion, and morals 
 were directly and closely related to each other through Yahweh, and 
 nothing was more natural than that a great change in the latter sphere 
 should be introduced and accompanied by momentous actions in the 
 former sphere.^' 
 
 The coming of Yahweh was always thought of as being for puni- 
 tive purposes. Sometimes emphasis was laid upon the guilt of the 
 nations as being the occasion of the punishment, sometimes on that of 
 Israel. Usually both came in for a share of the chastisement, though 
 
 / more severe upon one than the other ; but at times, carried away by 
 indignation with his own people, the prophet lets the nations go 
 unpunished, as in the case of Malachi ; at other times the prophet's 
 bitterness of feeling against the nations is so great that he exhausts 
 
 \ himself in uttering denunciations and threats against them, letting 
 Israel go free ; such is the case with Nahum and several of the exilic 
 prophets. But in any case the chief end of the day was accomplished 
 in the revelation it made to the whole world of the holiness, majesty, 
 and might of Yahweh, Israel's God. The time of the coming of the 
 day was always left indefinite, though for the most part it was conceived 
 of as near at hand, at most distant only a few years. But definite and 
 specific predictions were not common with the prophets in any of their 
 work, and they followed the prophetic custom with reference to this 
 subject, leaving it in a state of indefiniteness that could not but add to 
 the terrors which they so generously and vividly described — there was 
 no telling when this awful visitation might fall upon the earth ! Until 
 the very latest days this coming was always conceived of as connected 
 with some great historical movement of the times. Assyrians, Scythians, 
 Babylonians, Persians, and Greeks were each in succession, as they 
 39 C/. Stade, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, Vol. II, pp. 225 f. 
 
THE DAY OF YAHWEH 31 
 
 appeared on the stage of world-history, heralded by the prophets as 
 Yahweh's agents and instruments in administering the punishments of 
 his great day. It is not till the incoming of apocalyptic prophecy with 
 Malachi and Joel that these historical agents are ever dispensed with, but 
 thereafter Yahweh is represented as personally executing his own decrees. 
 
 The last common characteristic of importance is the fact that the 
 Day of Yahweh was always represented as introducing a new political 
 state. The prophets were also patriots ; they were no less loyal to 
 Judah than to Yahweh ; patriotism and religion were inseparably 
 blended in them. Thus, even after the most universal type of monothe- 
 ism had taken hold of the prophetic consciousness, they were wholly 
 ; unable to think of Israel in the new kingdom of God otherwise than 
 as the acknowledged head of the nations of the world. Jerusalem is to 
 become the religious capital of the world, the abode of Yahweh, Israel's 
 God, whither all the peoples shall come to do him homage. From a 
 position of the slightest political significance in the world, Jerusalem 
 and Judah are to be exalted to the place of greatest renown. The 
 Day of Yahweh was always preeminently a vindication, in one way or 
 another, of Israel, Yahweh's own people. 
 
 It appears as a result of this study that the development of the idea 
 of the Day of Yahweh in Israelitish history was marked, not so much by 
 the addition from time to time of new features, as by the expan- 
 sion and deepening of elements already present, at least in germ, at the 
 time of the origin of the prophetic conception. The great growth of 
 the idea of God out of which the Day of Yahweh grew and with which it 
 was ever vitally connected, necessarily affected the teaching of the Day 
 tremendously. So likewise did the great change that manifested itself 
 in reference to Israel's conception of her destiny as the people of 
 Yahweh, as that conception changed gradually from one of political 
 supremacy to one of religious and moral preeminence. 
 
 But the instrument of all this change both in constituent elements 
 and in the idea as a whole — that which under divine guidance forced 
 Israel's prophets and people to enlarge and enrich their conception of 
 the Day of Yahweh — was the historical experience through which the 
 nation was compelled to pass. No single prophetic conception better 
 illustrates the prophet's relation to the history of his times than does 
 this idea. It reflects clearly from generation to generation the polit- 
 ical and social environment of the nation, adapting its form and con- 
 tent at all times to the demands of the historical situation, of which the 
 prophets were always the best interpreters. 
 
 / 
 
VITA. 
 
 I, John M. P. Smith, was born on the twenty-eighth day of Decem- 
 ber, 1866, in London, England. I prepared for college in the Light 
 House Academy at Leominster, Herefordshire, and The Plantation 
 House Academy at Dawlish, Devonshire. Removing, in 1882, to the 
 United States, I later entered Des Moines College, whence I received 
 the degree of A.B. in 1893. The next two years were occupied in 
 teaching Greek and Latin in The Cedar Valley Seminary, Osage, Iowa. 
 In the summer quarter of 1894 I entered the University of Chicago 
 and began the study of theology ; after a year's absence, spent in 
 teaching, I returned to the University in the summer quarter of 
 1895, and remained in residence altogether fifteen quarters, giving 
 especial attention to Old Testament language and literature, and to 
 Assyrian. I received an appointment as Fellow in the Department of 
 Semitic Languages and Literatures for the years 1897-98, 1898-99. 
 
 In pursuance of my Semitic studies I attended lectures under 
 President William R. Harper, Professors Robert Francis Harper, Ira 
 M. Price, George S. Goodspeed, Karl Budde, and James H. Breasted, 
 and Drs. C. E. Crandall and G. R. Berry. To all my teachers I grate- 
 fully acknowledge my indebtedness, and especially to President William 
 R. Harper and Professor Robert Francis Harper, under whose direc- 
 tion most of my work was done. 
 
m 
 
DATE DUE 
 
 >U 
 
 p^^=3?p» 
 
 im'Sk'm 
 
 rfsU&r^^k*" 
 
 •-^mm^^m^'. 
 
 DEf^fefy^ 
 
 
 
 ■3i»»««*i!s««i^ 
 
 S^ob4 
 
s^V'^ 
 
 BS11%.5 .D3S6 
 Theday of Yahwen. 
 
 Princeton Theological Semmary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 00060 49; J 
 
 ii 
 llii 
 
 ills 
 
 % 
 
 >>* 
 
 ffi;:i"*> 
 
 a 
 
 4:'\%J