BIG IDEA:
THE TABLES WILL BE TURNED ON THEIR MALICE AND ALOOFNESS AND GLOATING AND EXPLOITATION
INTRODUCTION:
David Baker: The external reasons for the fall of Edom are now identified. The surprising reversal of verse 7 (friends turning to enemies) is not that surprising after all! Instead, Edom will receive back on her own head what she had done to her own “family.” What goes around comes around!
The first two verses of this section break the normal Hebrew word order by beginning with prepositional phrases. They emphasize causes of judgment: violence and noninvolvement. Verses 12–14 continue with a litany of eight sentences, each beginning with the adverb “(and) not.” By emphatic ordering and the emphasis of repetition, the prophet is hammering away at the heinous nature of that in which Edom is involved. The inseparable preposition “(deriving) from violence,” which opens this section in verse 10, is the same preposition that closed the previous section (“[deriving] from slaughter” in v. 9). This provides a noticeable syntactic tie between cause and effect.
Trent Butler: The main charge against Edom revolved around the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon in 586 B.C. Edom stood on the other side from Judah at that time, aloof while strangers carried off his wealth. As Babylon burned the city and carried away temple treasures (2 Kgs. 25), Edom made no effort to respond as a treaty partner or ally of Jerusalem. Instead they were like one of them. They acted like foreigners who had no relationship to Israel. They helped destroy their kinsmen in hopes of financial gain.
Richard Coggins: With v. 10 we reach a new section of the book in two senses. First, at the literary level, the detailed links with Jer. 49 are now at an end (the thematic link between v. 16 and Jer. 49:12 is only a very partial exception to this claim). Second, there is a change of theme. From the announcement of doom upon Edom the emphasis now turns to a spelling out of the wrongs which have made such a doom inevitable.
Philip Peter Jenson: The distinctive emphasis of the section is that Yhwh’s judgment is coming because of Edom’s behaviour to his “brother,” Israel. The accusations echo the punishments of earlier verses and, together with the specific statement of principle in v. 15b, assert that Edom’s terrible fate is not arbitrary but reflects its actions against Judah. Following an introductory summary (v. 10; cf. v. 2), Edom is accused of inaction (v. 11a; cf. v. 7), plundering Jerusalem (v. 11b; cf. vv. 5–6), gloating over Judah’s misfortune (v. 12; cf. v. 2) and helping to mop up survivors (v. 14; cf. v. 7). The crime is so serious because the identities of the two nations are bound up with their ancestors, the two brothers Jacob and Esau (vv. 10, 12).
James Nogalski: Verses 10–14 continue the thought of Obad 1–9 but shift from pronouncements of judgment to explicit accusations of the crimes of Edom against Judah (Jacob). The crimes include: violence against Jacob (v. 10); taking captives from Jerusalem when others attacked it (v. 11); rejoicing over Judah’s misfortune (v. 12); entering Jerusalem (v. 13); and capturing Jerusalem’s fugitives (v. 14). Literarily, this unit contains two parts: reference to Edom’s past mistreatment of Judah and its future consequences in verses 10–11 and the negative commands (vetitives) in verses 12–14 that function both as admonitions and accusations.
I. (:10) THEIR MALICE
A. The Offense
“Because of violence to your brother Jacob,“
David Guzik: Some sins become worse depending on whom we sin against. It is sin to treat someone else badly; it is worse to treat a brother or sister in Jesus badly. It is sin to speak harshly to anyone; it is worse to speak harshly to your husband or wife.
David Baker: “violence” — This word can indicate both personal physical abuse (e.g., Gen. 49:5–6; Jer. 13:22) and practices destructive of institutions and society (e.g., Ex. 23:1; Zeph. 3:4). In this case, both physical and psychological destruction are introduced by this term. Specific instances are explored in the following verses.
Daniel Timmer: Violence refers to ‘cold-blooded and unscrupulous violation of the personal rights of others, motivated by hatred and greed and often accompanied by brutal, physical violence’, and puts the ‘Edom’ in view here in a very unfavourable light.
B. The Punishment
- Shame
“You will be covered with shame,”
David Baker: Violent Edom, instead of being cloaked by its pride (v. 3), is now “covered with shame,” just as the flood covered Noah’s violent neighbors (Gen. 7:19–20) or as one might be wrapped in a garment (e.g., Ex. 28:42; Deut. 22:12). The ironic twist is that garments are used most commonly to cover one’s shame (e.g., Gen. 9:23; Hos. 2:9; cf. Gen. 3:7, 21), but here it is shame that covers the nation. Shame is in contrast with honor, an external consideration of worth—an important concept in the Near East, including contemporary Arabic culture. Honor is unlike pride, which is an internal, subjective consideration of worth. Edom is deprived of the former as she already had been deprived of the latter (Obad. 2–3).
Daniel Epp-Tiessen: One consequence of Edom’s violence against his brother is that he will be covered with shame, meaning that Edom will be overwhelmed by humiliation and disgrace before a watching world (v. 10). This is another example of Edom’s punishment fitting its crime. Because it has participated in the humiliation of Judah (vv. 12-13), it will be similarly humiliated. A second consequence is that Edom will be cut off forever (vv. 9-10), which means the end of Edom as a national entity. This punishment also fits the crime: Edom will later be accused of cutting off Judah’s refugees (v. 14).
2. Elimination
“And you will be cut off forever.”
Leslie Allen: Edom’s violence, a basic disregard for human rights, will prove the prelude to its inevitable humiliation, and indeed to its permanent dissolution. So certain is the prophet of God’s justice and its outworking in the world of men. In fact the mills of God’s judgment ground slowly but inexorably to this very destiny. Taking advantage of Judah’s downfall and pressing into the west, the Edomites eventually proved natural victims to a resurgent Judah in the second century B.C., when John Hyrcanus conquered them, and, compelling them to be circumcised, deprived them of their nationhood.
David Baker: Shame is not the only result, however, since shame, while psychologically damaging, is not of itself fatal. Edom will be “destroyed” (the same verb as “cut down” in v. 9, providing yet another verbal tie between this section and the last). The nature of this total destruction (cf. Gen. 9:11; Jer. 11:19) is accentuated here, since it is eternal (“forever”). There is no hope for future restoration since there will be nothing to restore.
Biblehub.com: and cut off forever
The phrase “cut off forever” indicates a complete and permanent destruction. This prophecy was fulfilled historically when Edom ceased to exist as a nation. The Edomites were eventually absorbed by surrounding peoples, and their identity was lost. This judgment reflects the biblical principle that those who oppose God’s chosen people will face divine retribution (Jeremiah 49:17-18). The finality of being “cut off” underscores the seriousness of Edom’s sin and serves as a warning to other nations. This also foreshadows the ultimate judgment against all who oppose God’s kingdom, as seen in eschatological passages like Revelation 19:11-21.
II. (:11) THEIR ALOOFNESS
“On the day that you stood aloof,
On the day that strangers carried off his wealth,
And foreigners entered his gate And cast lots for Jerusalem—
You too were as one of them.”
Richard Coggins: The governing theme of the next few verses is that of the “day.” Hebrew yom (“day”) occurs at least once in each verse and eleven times in all in vv. 11–15, and in the present form of the text (there is dispute, as we shall see, whether v. 15a has been displaced) the climax is reached with the announcement in v. 15 that this day is “the day of the LORD.”
Here, as elsewhere in Obadiah and more generally in the OT, there is a complex relationship between historical and theological assertions. The theme of the day of the LORD is characteristically that of judgment; it is a day when God brings judgment upon all who have fallen short of the demands made upon them. Characteristically, those victims of judgment will be the enemies of Israel; but on a number of occasions the prophets warn that Israel itself will not be immune from the threat of judgment. The frequency with which similar phrases and motifs are found suggests that the background of this language was cultic. But such a background should not lead us to suppose that historical events had no part to play in the building up of this picture of the day. Judgment was given, to some extent at least, on the basis of specific wrong acts, and it is most likely that one occasion for the gathering together of the book of Obadiah was the conviction that Edom had, by such specific wrong acts, transgressed the will of Yahweh and would be the victim of judgment at his day. Some such understanding seems essential to make good sense of the verses which here follow, gradually building up to their climax in v. 15.
David Baker: The verb “carried off” indicates that military action is involved, with the conqueror removing either people (whether soldiers or citizenry; e.g., 1 Kings 8:46–48) or property (“wealth”; cf. 2 Chron. 21:17). In a society where gates and walls protect cities, open access for nonnative “foreigners” (Deut. 17:15) is not only a disgrace, but it is also dangerous. Jacob’s/Judah’s gates are open, those of Jerusalem as well as those of her other towns.
These strangers, rather than respecting the authority of Judah’s capital or the sanctity of the site of the temple, treat it as a commodity won by the lucky gambler. The instrument determining the winner is the “lot,” most likely a pebble with inscriptions on its surfaces. These indicate various possible outcomes that are determined randomly by throwing, much like dice. While used to determine who might receive clothing or property (e.g., Num. 26:55; Ps. 22:18), it is also used in a grammatical form similar to that found here to indicate the division of prisoners of war for exploitation as slaves (Joel 4:3; Nah. 3:10). While no such practice is associated with any specific date in Judean history, the reference of this whole section is probably to the Babylonian exile of Jerusalem and Judah in either 597 or 586 B.C.
Thomas Constable: God cited one specific instance of Edom’s violence against her brother, but as I explained in the introduction, which instance is unclear. Edom’s treachery against Judah had taken place on a particular “day” in the past. Likewise God’s judgment would come on a particular “day” yet future (v. 8). The Edomites’ sin was that they failed to help the Israelites in their hour of need (cf. Luke 10:31-32). Instead they stood aloof and watched joyfully as Israel’s invader plundered Jerusalem. Enemies passing though a city’s gate signified the loss of its self-rule.32 God considered the Edomites as guilty as Jerusalem’s invaders because the Edomites failed to help their brethren.
David Guzik: Sometimes doing nothing is a great sin. Numbers 32:23 speaks of the sin that will find you out, and the sin it speaks of is the sin of doing nothing.
Progression of sin of Edom:
- First they did nothing
- Then they rejoiced in Judah’s distress and calamity
- Then they took advantage of their vulnerable state
- Then they joined in the violence against God’s people
“The one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it is sinning” (James 4:17).
Daniel Epp-Tiessen: Obadiah uses three different images to portray Jerusalem’s devastation (v. 11).
- First, foreigners have entered the city’s gates, meaning that invaders have overcome Jerusalem’s defenses.
- Second, strangers have looted the city and carried off its wealth.
- Third, the invaders have cast lots for the city, which could mean that troops used a game of chance to determine who got to loot which part of the city, or perhaps who got which part of the plunder already collected (cf. Joel 3:3; Nah 3:10; Ps 22:18).
Daniel Timmer: Edom’s lack of fraternal love and concern for Judah is inseparable from its disregard for yhwh as the deity in covenant with Judah (note my people in v. 13). It is perhaps for this reason that this is the second and last time that Obadiah refers to Judah as Edom’s brother.
Biblehub.com: you were just like one of them
Edom’s behavior is equated with that of the invaders, despite their kinship with Israel. This condemnation highlights the betrayal and moral failure of Edom, aligning them with the enemies of God’s people. The Bible frequently warns against aligning with the wicked (Psalm 1:1), and Edom’s actions serve as a cautionary tale of the consequences of such alliances.
III. (:12) THEIR GLOATING
“Do not gloat over your brother’s day, The day of his misfortune.
And do not rejoice over the sons of Judah In the day of their destruction;
Yes, do not boast In the day of their distress.”
Richard Coggins: One of the most clearly defined subunits of the whole book embraces vv. 12–14. It is a series of prohibitions, each beginning in the same Hebrew form (weʾal + verb) and ending with the phrase “in the day of.…”
John Barton: The main exegetical question in this section is how to understand the verbs in vv. 12–14. The obvious way to take them is as imperative imperfects: “do not gloat, rejoice, boast,” and so forth. But this produces an odd effect, since until now the prophecy has clearly referred to what the Edomites have already done. It is possible that the present oracle is to be seen as older than the first three and that it represents what Obadiah had said to Edom (i.e., to a Judaean audience but intending to be “overheard” by the Edomites) before the fall of Jerusalem. Apart from the general implausibility of the prophet’s uttering such instructions to an absent audience, they are curiously detailed for such a scenario—forbidding, for example, standing at a crossing point to cut off fugitives’ escape. The prophet would hardly have had in mind such a detailed blueprint for the Edomites’ actions.
The usual solution has been to read these imperfects as referring to what Edom should not have done. There are few examples of such a use of the imperfect in the Old Testament, but it was recognized by GK §107. . . But you should not have gloated over your brother… etc.
Daniel Epp-Tiessen: Verses 12-14 continue to describe Edom’s offenses through eight parallel statements naming the abuses that Edom should not have committed against Judah. The NRSV renders the verbs in past tense so that they condemn Edom for its past misdeeds, whereas the NIV renders them in the imperative so that they warn Edom to refrain from the offenses. Technically, the Hebrew verbs are a form of imperative, but they function somewhat like a parent’s admonition to a misbehaving child, “You should not hit your brother” (Bridger: 60). This sentence issues a command by responding to a misdeed that has already happened. Given that Edom’s crimes have already been committed (vv. 10-11), it seems best to think of the imperative verbs of verses 12-14 functioning as both admonitions and denunciations, with significantly more weight on the latter.
Leslie Allen: The narration of bare facts given in the heart of v. 11 now yields to an excited elaboration of the heartless behavior of the Edomites. The prophet shouts as if in the grip of a nightmare. He feels afresh the emotions of resentment and loathing as in his mind’s eye he sees again the leering, loutish folk of Edom. In his anguish he screams out “No, no, no!” protesting with all his being against their revelling in the situation that spelled the end of Judah. Again the keynote your brother sounds out in condemnation of their lack of concern. . .
The treachery of Edom in its treatment of Judah is to be echoed in the betrayal of Edom by its own allies and confederates. The traitor will be betrayed in turn, and the unfaithful will discover how bitter is the taste of infidelity.
Daniel Timmer: The list of eight actions or attitudes exceeds by one the Old Testament’s classically complete list of seven (gloat, rejoice, boast, enter, gloat, loot, stand, hand over). These activities touch nearly every dimension of human existence: ‘eyes (seeing), mouth, foot (entering), hand (reaching out), heart (to rejoice)’ (Dick 2005: 16). The prohibitions are definitive of these Edomites, as much in grammar as in their number and variety, and simultaneously condemn them on those grounds (Renkema 2003: 171).
Biblehub.com: But you should not gloat in that day
The admonition against gloating highlights the moral and ethical expectations God has for nations and individuals. Gloating over another’s misfortune is condemned throughout Scripture, as seen in Proverbs 24:17-18, which warns against rejoicing when an enemy falls. This phrase underscores the principle of empathy and compassion, even towards adversaries. The “day” refers to a specific time of judgment or calamity, often seen as a divine act of justice.nor boast proudly in the day of their distress
Boasting in another’s distress is portrayed as arrogance and pride, which are consistently condemned in Scripture. This attitude reflects a lack of understanding of God’s justice and mercy. The “day of their distress” refers to the severe trials faced by Judah, including the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. This phrase serves as a warning against pride and self-exaltation, reminding readers of the need for humility before God. The prophetic literature often contrasts human pride with divine sovereignty, as seen in Isaiah 2:11-12.
IV. (:13-14) THEIR EXPLOITATION
“Do not enter the gate of My people In the day of their disaster.
Yes, you, do not gloat over their calamity In the day of their disaster.
And do not loot their wealth In the day of their disaster.
14 And do not stand at the fork of the road To cut down their fugitives;
And do not imprison their survivors In the day of their distress.”
David Baker: Obadiah uses a synonym for “misfortune” three times in verse 13. “Their disaster” (ʾêdām) refers to that of Judah, but the term also supplies a clear wordplay on the name Edom. Edom looks around from close quarters (cf. v. 12) at Judah’s calamity after they enter her gate. But Edom does not stop with observing. She joins in the looting and pillage of their wealth. The verb “stretch out [the hand]” (NIV “seize”) has a peculiar grammatical form, but is often used of taking things (with the implied direct object “your hand”; see also 2 Sam. 6:6; cf. Gen. 3:22; Ex. 22:7, 10). The identification of Edom with the enemy of previous verses again accentuates the surprising statement closing Obadiah 11.
Hampton Keathley: This is like people who loot a city after a hurricane or something. If you can have degrees of evil, this is one of the lowest forms of theft. It is taking advantage of another’s calamity.
Trent Butler: Edom took three steps against Judah: (1) They entered the gate; (2) they examined the evil done to Jerusalem; and (3) they found and sent away anything of value for their personal use. They forgot one thing. God declared that these were his people. Babylon defeated Jerusalem. Babylon did not defeat Yahweh, the God of Jerusalem. He remained to fight another day. Edom, beware!
God had one last set of No! No! for Edom. “Do not stand over the crossroads to cut off his refugees. Do not deliver over his survivors in the day of trouble.” Edom went one step further down the road to God’s wrath. Edom was not content with getting valuables and running home. Edom stood at the highway intersections and captured the few surviving escapees from Judah. Edom participated as a full ally of Babylon, not as a friend, relative, and ally of Jerusalem.
Biblehub.com: Nor should you stand at the crossroads
This phrase highlights the strategic position of Edom, located at a crossroads of major trade routes. Historically, Edomites were known for their strategic control over these routes, which they used to their advantage. The crossroads symbolize a place of decision and opportunity, where Edom chose to act against their kin, the Israelites. This action is condemned as it reflects betrayal and opportunism. The crossroads also serve as a metaphor for moral and spiritual decisions, emphasizing the importance of choosing righteousness over exploitation.to cut off their fugitives
The act of cutting off fugitives indicates a deliberate attempt to prevent escape and ensure capture or death. In the context of the Babylonian invasion of Jerusalem, Edom’s actions are seen as a betrayal of their kinship with Israel. This phrase underscores the severity of Edom’s sin, as they not only refrained from offering refuge but actively participated in the oppression. Biblically, this act is reminiscent of other instances where God condemns those who harm the vulnerable, such as in Proverbs 24:11-12, which calls for the rescue of those being led away to death.nor deliver up their survivors
Delivering up survivors implies handing over those who managed to escape the initial destruction. This action is particularly egregious as it involves betrayal and a lack of compassion. Historically, this reflects Edom’s alliance with Babylon, prioritizing political gain over familial loyalty. Theologically, it contrasts with the biblical call to protect and aid the oppressed, as seen in passages like Isaiah 1:17, which urges the defense of the fatherless and the widow.
Lloyd Ogilvie: But the catalogue of the sins of the Edomites reaches a climax with the description of how they stood at the crossroads outside Jerusalem and captured the fleeing citizens of the city and turned them over to the invaders. Added to this, the Edomites apparently acted as quislings to the Chaldeans in rounding up the Israelites who were still hiding in the city. No mercy was shown by the Edomites.