⁴ tn Heb “executed judgments on Joash.”

¹ tn “Joash”; Jehoash and Joash are alternate forms of the same name.

¹ sn Jehoash and Joash are alternate forms of the same name.

² sn The referent here is Joash of Judah (see 12:21), not Joash of Israel, mentioned earlier in the verse.

¹ tn Heb “his”; the referent (Joash) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

¹ tn Heb “him”; the referent (Joash) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

³ tn Heb “him”; the referent (Joash) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

¹ tn Heb “and Joash did what was proper in the eyes of the Lord.”

² tn Heb “according to all which Joash his father had done, he did.”

² tn Heb “Jehoash”; Jehoash is an alternate version of the name Joash (see 11:2) used through 12:18 in the Hebrew text. The name Joash reappears in 12:19.

¹ tn Heb “and it was, later, there was with the heart of Joash to repair the house of the Lord.”

³ sn Joash is a variation of the name Jehoash. Some English versions use “Jehoash” here (e.g., NIV, NCV, TEV, NLT).

³ tn Heb “Joash,” an alternate form of the name “Jehoash.” For clarity, the translation consistently uses “Jehoash” for the son of Jehoahaz King of Israel in 13:9, 12, 13, 14, 25.

¹ tn Heb “As for the rest of the events of Joash, and all which he did, are they not written on the scroll of the events of the days of the kings of Judah?”

² tn Heb “As for the rest of the events of Joash, and all which he did and his strength, [and] how he fought with Amaziah king of Judah, are they not written on the scroll of the events of the days of the kings of Israel?”

⁴ sn Whoever takes up his cause will die by morning. This may be a warning to the crowd that Joash intends to defend his son and to kill anyone who tries to execute Gideon. Then again, it may be a sarcastic statement about Baal’s apparent inability to defend his own honor. Anyone who takes up Baal’s cause may end up dead, perhaps by the same hand that pulled down the pagan god’s altar.

¹ sn The dating of the book of Joel is a matter of dispute. Some scholars date the book as early as the ninth century b.c., during the reign of the boy-king Joash. This view is largely based on the following factors: an argument from silence (e.g., the book of Joel does not mention a king, perhaps because other officials de facto carried out his responsibilities, and there is no direct mention in the book of such later Israelite enemies as the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians); inconclusive literary assumptions (e.g., the eighth-century prophet Amos in Amos 9:13 alludes to Joel 3:18); the canonical position of the book (i.e., it is the second book of the Minor Prophets); and literary style (i.e., the book is thought to differ in style from the postexilic prophetic writings). While such an early date for the book is not impossible, none of the arguments used to support it is compelling. Later dates for the book that have been defended by various scholars are, for example, the late seventh century or early sixth century or sometime in the postexilic period (anytime from late sixth century to late fourth century). Most modern scholars seem to date the book of Joel sometime between 400 and 350 b.c. For a helpful discussion of date see J. A. Thompson, “The Date of the Book of Joel,” A Light unto My Path, 453-64. Related to the question of date is a major exegetical issue: Is the army of chapter two to be understood figuratively as describing the locust invasion of chapter one, or is the topic of chapter two an invasion of human armies, either the Babylonians or an eschatological foe? If the enemy could be conclusively identified as the Babylonians, for example, this would support a sixth-century date for the book.

⁶ sn This refers to a well-known earthquake that occurred during the first half of the 8th century b.c. According to a generally accepted dating system, Uzziah was a co-regent with his father Amaziah from 792-767 b.c. and ruled independently from 767-740 b.c. Jeroboam II was a co-regent with his father Joash from 793-782 b.c. and ruled independently from 782-753 b.c. Since only Uzziah and Jeroboam are mentioned in the introduction it is likely that Amos’ mission to Israel and the earthquake which followed occurred between 767-753 b.c. The introduction validates the genuine character of Amos’ prophetic ministry in at least two ways. First, Amos was not a native Israelite or a prophet by trade. Rather he was a herdsman in Tekoa, located in Judah. His mere presence in the northern kingdom as a prophet was evidence that he had been called by God (see 7:14-15). Second, the mighty earthquake shortly after Amos’ ministry would have been interpreted as an omen or signal of approaching judgment. The clearest references to an earthquake are 1:1 and 9:1, 5. It is possible that the verb הָפַךְ (hafakh, “overturn”) at 3:13-15; 4:11; 6:11, and 8:8 also refers to an earthquake, as might the descriptions at 2:13 and 6:9-10. Evidence of a powerful earthquake has been correlated with a destruction layer at Hazor and other sites. Its lasting impact is evident by its mention in Zech 14:5 and 2 Chr 26:16-21. Earthquake imagery appears in later prophets as well (cf. D. N. Freedman and A. Welch, “Amos’s Earthquake and Israelite Prophecy,” Scripture and Other Artifacts, 188-98). On the other hand, some of these verses in Amos could allude to the devastation that would be caused by the imminent military invasion.