Daniella Ishai-Rosenboim, «Is yh MwOy (the Day of the Lord) a Term in Biblical Language?», Vol. 87 (2006) 395-401
The collocation yh MwOy in the Biblical language is not a term, as it does not answer
the criterion of being a term: one, specific and unchanged expression referring to
one, specific and unchanged concept: Rather, this collocation may be replaced by
other ones (e.g. yhl Mwy, yh P) Mwy, yhl Mq@n Mwy,
Kp)/wp) Mwy) and on the other hand the
concept is referred to also (mostly!) by another expression ( )whh Mwyh); nor does it
refer exclusively to the concept of ‘The Day of the Lord’. None of the cultures
continuing the Biblical one refer to the concept by this collocation or by a
translation of it.
Is ùh (the Day of the Lord) a Term in Biblical Language? 401
µ/y
light, and the prophet could think about a day of darkness, etc. etc. True, there
are not many days in the history of the world on which God interferes in the
routine course of nature or in human history, but every day on which He does
do that, in the past or in the future, is ùh µ/y (‘a day of the Lord’). It is that
simple meaning of the collocation that Maimonides sees (cited by Hoffmann,
note 10) saying: “… you must know that each day of great salvation or of
great distress is called the great and terrible day of the Lordâ€. As to that
attribute in Joel 2,11, he is uncertain as to the day, whether it refers to the day
of “the death of Sennacherib†or to “the death of Gog on Jerusalem in the days
of the King the Messiah†(Guide for the Perplexed, Part II, Ch. 29).
The conclusion drawn from the above discussion is that the collocation
ùh µ/y in the Bible is not a term (11), and is not the key to the study of the concept
called today ‘The Day of the Lord’, ‘YHWH’s Day’ or the like. Hoffmann’s
criticism of those scholars who did not base their researches on that point of
departure is not vindicated: The absence of this collocation does not eliminate
a prophecy from the list of prophecies dealing with the concept under
discussion, and on the other hand, its existence in other contexts does not
arouse the question of ‘Day of the Lord in the past’ or ‘Two Days of the Lord’
or the like.
The key to the study of the concept under discussion is neither “those
passages that specifically use this phrase†nor this phrase expanded; it is
found in Weinfeld’s words: “When we discuss the subject ‘The Day of the
Lord’, we don’t have to limit the discussion to prophecies in which we find
this specific collocation ùh µ/y … The criteria for defining a prophecy as one
of the Day of the Lord are definite motives characteristic of that time in which
God will appear†(12).
13, Ha-Shoshan St. Daniella ISHAI-ROSENBOIM
42815 Pardesiya
Israel
SUMMARY
The collocation ùh µ/y in the Biblical language is not a term, as it does not answer
the criterion of being a term: one, specific and unchanged expression referring to
one, specific and unchanged concept: Rather, this collocation may be replaced by
other ones (e.g. ùhl µwy, ùh πa µwy, ùhl µQn µwy, ˚pa/wpa µwy) and on the other hand the
concept is referred to also (mostly!) by another expression (awhh µwyh); nor does it
refer exclusively to the concept of ‘The Day of the Lord’. None of the cultures
continuing the Biblical one refer to the concept by this collocation or by a
translation of it.
(11) This is the solution of the difficulty Hoffmann is taking note of. Hoffmann
wonders “Why should a prophet prefer new variations to a well-defined term? It is doubtful
whether there is a simple answer to this question†(“The Day of the Lordâ€, 48). The answer
is simply that it was not “a well-defined termâ€, it was not even a term at all.
(12) M. WEINFELD, “The Expectation of God’s Government in the Bible and its
reflection in the Jewish Liturgy – about the essence of the concept ‘The Day of the Lord’â€,
Messianism and Eschatology (ed. Z. BARAS) (Jerusalem 1983) 76 (Hebrew).