Date. The date of the book of Joel is determined alone by internal evidence. A terminus a quo is fixed by the dispersion and wrongs mentioned in Joel 3:1. Many have seen in these a reference to the sacking of Jerusalem during the reign of Jehoram (about 850 b.c.) by the Philistines and Arabians, recorded in 2 Chronicles 21:16.; In that case the book would probably be one of the earliest of the prophetic writings, a formerly prevalent view, suggested by its position in the Canon after Hosea. Agreeable to this early date have been pointed out, (1) that the condemnation of Egypt and Edom for having shed innocent blood (Joel 3:19) may refer to the invasion of Shishak during the reign of Rehoboam (1 Kings 14:25), and to the revolt of Edom under Jehoram (2 Kings 8:20); (2) that the mention of the valley of Jehoshaphat preserves a lively recollection of that king's victory at the valley of Berachah (2 Chronicles 20:26); (3) that the simplicity of the teaching of Joel indicates an early period of written prophecy; (4) especially as fixing the date of his book in the early part of the reign of Joash (837-801 b.c.), that it is silent concerning the king—then in his minority; (5) that idolatry and Baal worship are not mentioned, since they did not flourish when the king was under the influence of Jehoiada the priest (2 Kings 12:2; 2 Chronicles 24:17.); (6) that the priests and the worship of Jehovah are made prominent (Joel 1:18; Joel 2:17), something also to be expected at the same time through the influence of Jehoiada; and, finally, (7) that the failure to mention the Syrians, Assyrians, or Chaldeans as enemies of Judah, is also agreeable to this date, since only late in the reign of Joash did the Syrians, through Hazael, threaten Judah (2 Kings 12:17.).
But, in spite of this apparent accumulation of evidence, it is doubtful whether the dispersion and wrongs of Joel 3:1, where the partition of the land is definitely stated (Joel 3:2), can refer to any other event than the Chaldean conquest of Judah, and the following considerations also are in favour of a post-exilic date. (1) The words of Joel stand in strong contrast to those of the early prophets, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, and Jeremiah, who emphasised the defection of Israel from Jehovah through deeds of violence and oppression, political alliances and idolatry, and based almost wholly upon these their calls for repentance or forebodings of divine judgment. But these features are entirely wanting in the book of Joel. Human agencies, also, are not found as instruments of divine judgments, as in the earlier prophets, except in the slightest degree, but supernatural manifestations take their place, and thus the book is of the nature of an apocalypse, a kind of writing prevalent from the captivity and onward. One feature of the apocalyptic literature is the use made of parallels from earlier writings, and these are frequent in the book of Joel. (2) The stress laid upon sacrifices and the prominence given to the priests (Joel 1:9; Joel 1:13; Joel 2:17) reflect a highly developed ecclesiastical community, which the Jews became after the exile. (3) The mention of the Grecians in connexion with the slave trade (Joel 3:6) points strongly to the post-exilic period when Syrian slaves were in request in Greece. (4) The silence concerning the northern kingdom and the Syrians, Assyrians and Chaldeans, and a king in Judah, already mentioned, favour a post-exilic date. (5) The references to Edom and Egypt can also readily be explained from the post-exilic point of view, since bitter feeling then continued toward Edom, and Egypt might be mentioned typically: see Joel 3:19. And, finally, (6) the language favours a post-exilic writer. Hence the more prevailing view among scholars now is that the book of Joel belongs to the post-exilic period, and was written cirJoel 500 b.c., though possibly considerably later.