Original Meaning
OBADIAH 1 GIVES the title of the book, its author, and an indication of its nature. It is a summons, not to peace and tranquility, as in some prophetic messages, but to the violence and destruction of war. The summons is also not to God’s people, a call for them to respond and return, but rather to outsiders, unusual recipients of God’s message. It includes a word to those who will be attacked, showing why they will be brought low.
In the sparsest title in the prophets the writer indicates the literary genre of the work and its originator. He identifies his work as a “vision” (ḥazôn), which is used as a title for only two other Old Testament prophets (Isaiah, Isa. 1:1; cf. 2 Chron. 32:32; and Nahum, in the slightly longer form “the book of the vision,” Nah. 1:1). Verbs from the same root (ḥzh) have as their subject other prophets (e.g., Moses, Ex. 18:21; Balaam, Num. 24:4, 16; Isaiah, Isa. 1:1; 2:1; 13:1; Amos, Amos 1:1; Habakkuk, Hab. 1:1).
Where the noun ḥazôn relates to a named person, it is as a subjective genitive, with the person named performing the visionary action. Though the verb can be used of physical sight (e.g., Ps. 58:8), the noun only refers to prophetic perception, indicating the content of what is seen rather than the act of perceiving (cf. Ps. 89:19). For example, in Balaam’s fourth oracle, it parallels the words and knowledge that derive from God (Num. 24:16–17). It is a neutral term as regards content, needing modification to indicate whether it is good (e.g., Ps. 17:2; Isa. 30:10) or ill (e.g., Isa. 30:10; Lam. 2:14; Ezek 13:6, 8, 9).
The original hearers of the prophecies would expect “vision” in such a title to mean a message from God through his named prophet. This expectation is confirmed here when Yahweh affirms four times that he is the One speaking (vv. 1, 4, 8, 18). The expectation of a divine source is of first importance, so the lack of some of the material commonly found in other prophetic books regarding specific dates (cf. Amos 1:1) or family background of the prophet (cf. Isa. 1:1) is not a concern.
The next sentence is a “messenger formula” (v. 1b), since the speaker is acting on behalf of another—a common practice in Israel (e.g., Gen. 32:5; Ex. 5:10). It derives from its Near Eastern context where literacy was rare, and messages, even if transmitted in writing, needed to be read aloud by the messenger.1 Readers/hearers were aware that this formula indicates that the messenger did not speak on his own authority but on the authority of the one whose name follows.
The framer of the message is identified by the modified proper noun “Sovereign LORD,” or more literally “my lord [ʾ adōnay; title], Yahweh [proper name].” This combination has become fossilized, so that the personal designation has become lost. Note the various instances of God using the title of himself (e.g., 2 Kings 19:23; Ezek. 29:16), so it comes to be read as “the Lord Yahweh.” Most English translations hide the personal name of God, “Yahweh,” behind a substitute “LORD,” thus resulting in a translational difficulty in this case, where consistency demands a rendering “my Lord LORD.” This complication is avoided among the major English translations only by JB, where “Yahweh” more accurately reflects the Hebrew.
The divine title indicates the subservient position of the speaker in relation to the addressee, acknowledging the authority of the latter. This could be metaphorical, since it is used in polite address as we do with the English “sir” (e.g., Ruth 2:13), but at times the social distance is literal. The usage is therefore appropriate when speaking of the Creator of the universe.
The message regards Edom, Israel’s eastern neighbor. In every other case where the present construction is used in the exact order of “messenger formula + preposition le + indirect object” (e.g., Gen. 32:4 [Esau]; 2 Chron. 20:15 [king of Jerusalem and its inhabitants]; Isa. 45:1 [messiah Cyrus]), the preposition indicates the one “to whom” the vision is to be delivered, and NIV uniformly translates accordingly. Obadiah 1 is the only instance where NIV translates this construction as “about,” though it does translate le elsewhere as “concerning, about” (e.g., Num. 9:8; Jer. 46:2; 48:1; 49:1, 7, 23, 28), though never where the other two elements of the construction used in Obadiah 1 are present.2 In general, “concerning, about” is translates the preposition ʿal (e.g., Gen. 24:9; 47:26; Amos 1–2; Micah 3:5).3 In other words, based on customary usage, the message in Obadiah is directed to Edom rather than just being about Edom.
Most regard the prophetic messages found in Scripture to address the Israelites, even if other nations are named in their headings (e.g., Jer. 1:4–10, which designates Jeremiah as a prophet to the nations; cf. 46:1). While only one prophet, Jonah, actually addresses a foreign nation directly (3:3–5), it is possible that prophets were, at least indirectly, addressing those outside the land. Prophecies were not given in secret, and word likely reaches the intended hearers without undue difficulty. Evidence for domestic and international delivery of news comes from several sources. In Amos 7:10 a message is relayed from a priest to the king. In Number 23–24 Balaam delivers his oracles, which are couched in terms of the promises to Abra(ha)m from Genesis 12:1–3; 17. Balaam would have had no firsthand knowledge of these promises since he is not an Israelite. He had, therefore, become aware of these promises by some other means of news delivery, whether by human or divine messenger.
Verse 1c introduces Yahweh as the originator of another message, this time a report (cf. Isa. 28:19; 53:1; Ezek. 21:7) concerning a call to battle (see Jer. 6:22–24 for another reported battle). Obadiah and others “have heard” the report, with “we” identifying Obadiah either with his contemporaries in Judah or with the tradition of prophets of which he is a part (cf. Jer. 49:14, where the [earlier?] prophecy had a singular, “I heard”).4 The extent of the report is most likely the rest of this verse.5
A messenger, an official representative from Yahweh (cf. Isa. 57:9; Prov. 25:13), is sent to call the nations to war against the land of Edom (“her”; cf. Jer. 49:17). They were not simple witnesses of Yahweh’s case against wrongdoers (e.g., Isa. 43:9; Ezek. 16:37) or recipients of his punishment (e.g., Joel 3:1; Zeph. 3:8), but participators in it. It is not just the nations who fight, however, but Yahweh himself joins in with them (“let us”).
National pride is a characteristic of nations, in the biblical period and even today. What starts as justifiable pride in national achievements can become chauvinistic when others are either ignored in their need or put down as below one’s self-inflated position of superiority. The Edomites had this attitude, and their neighbors in Judah were feeling the brunt of it. They are now, and for the remainder of the book, addressed through the use of masculine (“you”) forms, referring to the people in contrast to the grammatically feminine land.6
“See, look, something of immediate importance is coming next” (hinnēh) all are possible renderings of the Hebrew particle that opens God’s message to Edom in verse 2. This particle and the Hebrew word order emphasize that the Hebrew word “small, insignificant” does not regard number but rather size or significance. Size was usually not an issue, since most of the other regional states in the area, such as Moab, Ammon, Israel, Judah, and the Philistines, were not geographically large (cf. Eccl. 9:14). Significance, honor, or status was a different matter, however, especially for those like Edom who had a vaunted self-image. To be small in significance was to be “despised,” as the second half of verse 2 indicates. In an area vying for national prominence, diminution of esteem was degrading as well as dangerous, because it was viewed as a sign of weakness and an opportunity to attack.
According to verse 3, Edom vaunts herself because of the strategic advantage she enjoys over her neighbors as a result of her geographical setting. A topographical map indicates that the land of Canaan steadily rises going eastward from the Mediterranean Sea. Jerusalem is situated in the central highlands in Judah, but after the steep descent toward the Dead Sea and the Arabah to its south, the land rises precipitously to the even higher plateau (up to 5,500 feet), on which Edom is situated. Land passage through this territory is often through narrow passages between towering rocks, a way that is easily blocked by a few well-placed soldiers.
Geographically, therefore, Edom is impregnable to outside military forces. This is in contrast to neighboring Judah to the west. She has the disadvantage of lying athwart a coastal plain along major trade routes. This opened her up not only to the wealth of passing merchant caravans, but also to the pillaging of army movements, which happened all too frequently in her history.
Edom’s military advantage puffs up her national pride to a point of arrogance. She is convinced of her inviolability enough to brag of it. This is not a justified self-esteem deriving from some actual preeminence, but rather a deceptive self-vaunting. As the first woman was deceived by the serpent in the Garden into rising above her level of adequacy (Gen. 3:13), so Edom leads herself astray. Her pride raises her even above her earthbound heights. She likens herself to an eagle who can soar and nest above the high terrain (Obad. 4; cf. Job 39:27; Prov. 23:5), or even above the earth itself, to the very stars, the outer reaches of their existence (Job 22:12).
Unfortunately for Edom, her survey to every horizon of the military might to which she considers herself superior does not include a glance heavenward, where the greatest threat to arrogance lies. It is not a human army who brings Edom down, but the warrior God (Amos 9:2). He leaves the nation a diminished and “despised” people. She does not consider Israel’s God, who created those same stars (Gen. 1:16) and who is also referred to as an eagle (Deut. 32:11; Jer. 49:22). It is this God, Yahweh, who speaks these words of judgment, as indicated by the phrase “declares the LORD,” which occurs numerous times in the prophets.
Bridging Contexts
MESSENGERS AND MESSAGES. Literacy was rare in the ancient Near Eastern world because of the complex writing systems of the major societies such as Egypt and Mesopotamia. Messages, if written, were recorded by scribes and delivered orally to the recipient, who also likely was illiterate. It is, therefore, of vital importance to indicate clearly both the source and the recipient. The former is necessary since it is under the sender’s authority, rather than that of the messenger, that the message is to be understood. The words were not those of the messenger but of his sponsor. This is clear also in the context of Old Testament prophecy, where the authority of the message does not lie in the prophetic messenger but in the divine sender, Yahweh himself.
This position of the messenger as intermediary is how God pictures the roles of Moses and Aaron when confronting Pharaoh (Ex. 7:1–2) and is indicated frequently in the prophetic books when they state that the words are those of Yahweh (e.g., “This is what the LORD says,” over 300 times in the prophets; “declares the LORD,” over 350 times). In the same way that neither Moses nor any kings claimed authorship of the law, so the prophets do not claim to be originators of their messages to the people. In fact, prophecies of human origination were specifically declared as false (Jer. 23:30–31, 36). It is due to Obadiah’s position as a messenger of God that his warning to Edom needs to be heeded.
God as warrior. Israel as a nation entered into the Promised Land through battle (Joshua), and through battle lost it again (2 Kings 17:3–6; 18:9–11; 25:1–7; Jer. 39:1–7; 52:4–11). Throughout its history Israel faced armed conflict, so the metaphor of the Lord as a warrior God is most appropriate (Ex. 15:3; Ps. 24:8).7 Starting life as a slave race with no army, Israel needed instruction in warfare from God, even in as elementary matters as determining potential able-bodied fighters (Num. 1:2–3). Yahweh himself takes their side numerous times in battle, leading them with “an outstretched arm” (e.g. Deut. 4:34; 7:19; cf. Ex. 17:16; 1 Sam. 17:47; 1 Chron. 5:22; 2 Chron. 20:15, 17). Deities depicted as warriors were common among Israel’s Near Eastern neighbors.8 Yahweh defends his people through warfare, but his end goal is peace, not only for Israel but for all humanity. This is a role carried on by Jesus in his defeat of natural calamities, the demonic, disease, and even death (e.g., Mark 4:35–5:43).
Nationalism. Nationalistic pride is not the domain of Edom alone but characterizes the human race, both in terms of ethnic as well as ecclesiological associations. Humanity is pictured as reaching toward heaven from their habitation in Babylon early in human history (Gen. 11:1–11, esp. v. 4; cf. Job 20:6; Prov. 21:24) just as Babylon did much later (Isa. 14:12–14; Jer. 51:55; cf. Isa. 13:19; Hab. 2:2–5). While one might expect such self-confidence on the part of the world powers (cf. Assyria, 2 Kings 19:22; Isa. 10:12; Zech. 10:11; Egypt, Ezek. 32:12), it is also evident among smaller states (Moab, Isa. 16:6; 25:10–11; Jer. 48:29; Tyre, Isa. 23:9; Ezek. 28:2; Philistines, Zech. 9:6). Even Israel and Judah are not immune (Israel, Isa. 9:9; 28:1–3; Hos. 5:5; Amos 9:2; Judah, Jer. 13:9, 17; Zeph. 3:11). Pride in might, whether through armed forces, chariotry, or horses, is misplaced, however, since it is Yahweh who brings these into being (Isa. 43:16–17), and he brings them down (Jer. 51:20–21; Zech. 9:10). The battle is ultimately in God’s hands (Prov. 21:31), not in that of any nation.
Contemporary Significance
“IN THE NAME of the LORD.” Like the false prophets of old who spoke their own words for their own gain, society and the church today hear siren calls to follow.
• “Invest in technology, because its growth is assured!”
• “Commit suicide so we might be able to become one with the God of the comet!”
• “Send money to my ministry and God will increase it a hundred times!”
Israel listens for a word from Yahweh, which they will recognize if it comes to pass (Deut. 18:22, ruling out the first statement above), if it points toward God and not another (Deut. 13:2; 18:20, ruling out the second statement), and if it is not self-appointed and self-serving (Jer. 14:14; Ezek. 13:19; cf. 2 Cor. 2:16, ruling out the third statement). God spoke to his people through his messengers the prophets, and he continues to do so, through his Word of Scripture and through his servants today. What is needed is careful discernment, openness to God’s revelation, and also continuing acknowledgment that the evaluative criteria for that Word have not changed. If attention is directed to the messenger instead of the One who sent her, those who hear must be very cautious.
Personal pride. There is a fine line between self-confidence, self-reliance, and pride. God calls and equips people to various tasks from the garden (Gen. 1:28) through the Exodus (Ex. 3:7–12a; 6:30–7:2), from the time of the settlement of the land (Judg. 2:16) to its resettlement after the Exile (Neh. 1), from the commissioning of the church (Matt. 28:16–20) to its culmination (Rev. 22:9). In each instance the primary focus is to be on the task and the preparation for it, not on the obstacles challenging it or on the person to whom it is delegated.
A diversion in either direction can easily derail the mission. When Israel was directed to take the land, she sent in spies to survey it. When they concentrated on the obstacles, they were overwhelmed and refused to fulfill their calling (Num. 13:26–29, 31–33). Only those who understood the capability that accompanied the commissioning were confident in themselves because they were confident in God (v. 30). He was the warrior on their behalf; they did not need to take the land themselves. The church today needs to take this to heart as well: God does not leave us to defeat sin and the enemy on our own.
At other times attention to one’s self and one’s own capabilities or calling get in the way. Saul was commissioned to defeat and annihilate the Amalekites (1 Sam. 15:1–3). Formerly unable to believe that he had anything to offer God or his people (9:21; 10:22), now he felt that he did not even need God’s instruction; he was able to make his own decisions even if they ran counter to God’s specific instructions (15:9, 15, 20–21). He had become so self-confident he did not even understand what he had done wrong.
Pride, defined in the dictionary as “a high or inordinate opinion of one’s own dignity, importance, merit, or superiority,” characterizes our age, at least in Western culture. “I did it my way,” says a popular song of not too long ago, and unfortunately the same attitude invades the church. One of the problems of self-reliance and pride is that one is not open to correction; after all, if I am right, why should I listen to what anyone else thinks? One of the advantages of the community of faith is not only to find support when one is hurting, but also to find guidance when one is lost. Edom is sure of its safety and impregnability. Some individuals and churches think they too have it all together; they know what God is saying since they believe that he is speaking directly to them. The church is still hurting from leaders with these ideas—Jim Jones and David Koresh, Jimmy Swaggart and Jimmy Bakker.
Americans pride themselves in freedom, autonomy, and self-reliance, but where is there also accountability? Denominations and structures are not God’s ultimate answer to the unity of his body, because they too often degenerate into ecclesiological nationalism. However, if we are out of fellowship with a wider body of believers, whether within a church or as a church in a wider circle of influence, where is our accountability? What will temper our pride and keep us from doing what is right in our own eyes?