TEXT [Commentary]

  B.   The Restoration of Israel (1:17-21)

17 “But Jerusalem[*] will become a refuge for those who escape;

it will be a holy place.

And the people of Israel[*] will come back

to reclaim their inheritance.

18 The people of Israel will be a raging fire,

and Edom a field of dry stubble.

The descendants of Joseph will be a flame

roaring across the field, devouring everything.

There will be no survivors in Edom.

I, the LORD, have spoken!

19 “Then my people living in the Negev

will occupy the mountains of Edom.

Those living in the foothills of Judah[*]

will possess the Philistine plains

and take over the fields of Ephraim and Samaria.

And the people of Benjamin

will occupy the land of Gilead.

20 The exiles of Israel will return to their land

and occupy the Phoenician coast as far north as Zarephath.

The captives from Jerusalem exiled in the north[*]

will return home and resettle the towns of the Negev.

21 Those who have been rescued[*] will go up to[*] Mount Zion in Jerusalem

to rule over the mountains of Edom.

And the LORD himself will be king!”

NOTES

1:17 Jerusalem. Lit., “Mount Zion.” The term refers particularly to the Temple Mount, the abode of Israel’s God (Pss 2:6; 74:2; 132:13). The term “Zion” became identified with Jerusalem, the city where it was located (Isa 40:9; Lam 1:6, KJV; Mic 3:12) and still later was used to indicate the whole land (Ps 126:1, KJV) and its populace (Zech 9:13, KJV).

holy place. The Hebrew root carries with it the implication of separation from all that is defiling or impure, hence, that which is sacred. This noun (qodesh [TH6944, ZH7731]), usually translated “holiness,” may have been chosen to signify that the Holy God who dwells on Mount Zion and who has brought back a redeemed and purified remnant has rendered the city, people, and environs a total sacred continuum (cf. Isa 4:5-6; Joel 3:17; Zech 14:20-21). It may also imply the rebuilding of the Temple (Raabe 1996:243).

inheritance. Lit., “possessions”; the noun morashehem [TH4180, ZH4625]. The ancient versions translate “their possessors,” reading the participle morishehem [TH3423, ZH3769] and giving the sense that the people of Israel will lay claim to those who once possessed them. This alternate reading may envision the Edomites or all of Israel’s enemies (Amos 9:12). The MT may point to Israel’s despoiling its enemies’ possessions (Zech 14:14) or, as the NLT indicates, the claiming of the age-old promise of a land in perpetuity (Gen 12:7; 15:18-21; Exod 3:16-17; 6:8; Deut 6:3, 23; Ezek 11:15). The theme of possessing provides a common thread stitching the whole fabric of vv. 17-21.

1:18 Israel . . . Edom. The NLT’s “Israel” comprises two terms in the Hebrew text: the house of Jacob and the house of Joseph. By the former, Obadiah may intend Judah or all Israel in contrast to Edom (= the house of Esau); by the latter, the northern ten tribes, either in distinction from Judah (Keil) or as added emphasis that the prophet does not restrict his prophecy to the southern kingdom (Finley, Raabe). The latter suggestion has the advantage of preserving the Jacob/Esau motif more clearly while the former serves to preserve the north/south distinction mentioned elsewhere (e.g., Zech 10:6).

fire . . . stubble. The image of fire consuming stubble represents defeat in battle (Isa 47:14; cf. Joel 2:5), at times comprising judgment at the hands of the Divine Warrior (Exod 15:7; Nah 1:6, 10; Mal 4:1).

no survivors. See the note on v. 14. The repetition of the term here provides further stitching with the previous section (1:10-14; cf. Num 24:18-19).

1:19 my people living in the Negev. The NLT renders properly the metonymy resident in the Hebrew “the Negev.” This southern section of Judah was part of the original commission given to Moses and Israel (Deut 1:7) but had become inhabited by Edomites (Ezek 35:10, 12; 36:2-5) and in intertestamental times would become an Edomite territory known as Idumea. Repossession of the Promised Land was also part of the Deuteronomic covenant code (Deut 30:3-5). Here the returnees are portrayed as moving eastward into Edomite territory (lit., “Mount Esau”).

the foothills of Judah. Heb. the Shephelah. This area, which is amid the western lowlands and the Judean hill country, was the locale of much border conflict with the Philistines. It had fallen into Assyrian hands in the late-kingdom period. The verb “possess” does not occur in the Hebrew text but is properly supplied from the previous line.

take over . . . Ephraim and Samaria. The Hebrew text does not specify which of the returnees will occupy Ephraim and Samaria. The NLT ties the retaking of these territories to the inhabitants of the Shephelah. However, the verb yarash [TH3423, ZH3769] (possess, take away, occupy) occurs twice in the verse, the first with the taking of the Negev and Shephelah, and the second here. Thus, it is perhaps better to discern two groups of movements: (1) Some Judeans move into the Negev and eastward while those of the Shephelah move westward into former Philistine territory, and (2) other Judeans go northward into Ephraim and Samaria while those of Benjamin move eastward into Gilead. Others (e.g., Allen, Finley) suggest that the more northerly tribes would take over these latter territories and then move eastward across the Jordan. Ephraim doubtless is metonymy for the whole of the northern kingdom, with its capital in Samaria spelled out here. Thus Laetsch (1956:210) remarks, “Obadiah regarded it necessary to name both ‘the fields of Ephraim’ and ‘the fields of Samaria,’ in order to make it clear that he was speaking of the entire kingdom, not only of either the tribe of Ephraim or the city of Samaria.”

Gilead. Gilead lay generally east of the Jordan River and south of the Sea of Galilee and Yarmuk River. It fell into Assyrian hands during the era of the divided kingdoms. Several scholars have had difficulty with the prediction that Benjaminites would move into this territory. Some have viewed the text as corrupt (Stuart) or have suggested that perhaps Gilead is the name of an Israelite city (cf. Judg 10:17; Hos 6:8). Obadiah, however, may once again be employing metonymy—“Gilead” standing for all of Israel that formerly lived east of the Jordan (cf. Judg 20:1; 2 Kgs 10:33; Jer 50:19; Zech 10:10). In this case the citizens of Judah are pictured as moving southward, westward, northward, and eastward to reclaim the Promised Land.

1:20 exiles. The collective noun translated “exiles” refers to those deported in the various captivities of God’s people. As an abstract noun, it can also refer to the exile itself (Amos 1:15).

exiles of Israel. The underlying Hebrew phrase is difficult to understand. Lit., “exiles of this fortress for the sons of Israel.” The noun khel [TH2426, ZH2658] (rampart, fortress) is normally used of fortresses, a meaning that clearly does not fit here. Therefore, most scholars prefer the reading khayil [TH2428, ZH2657] (company, host, army), which supplies a better contextual meaning. Some scholars, however, have suggested reading khalakh [TH2477, ZH2712] (Halah), an area of Israel’s exile in northern Mesopotamia (NRSV; cf. 2 Kgs 17:6). The NLT is compatible with the former alternative. Obadiah’s defective spelling of the noun khel may have been to distinguish it from the homograph he used in vv. 11 and 13, which means “wealth” or “substance,” a meaning not impossible here.

The sentence is complicated still further by the following libene yisra’el ’asher kena‘anim [TH3669, ZH4050] (to me/my[?] sons of Israel who are Canaanites). Many suggestions have been made as to the reading of these words. Most consider the preposition li [TH3807.1, ZH4200] to be a corruption and omit it from consideration. It is also strange to call the Israelites “Canaanites.” But Isa 19:18 calls Hebrew the language of Canaan, and Zeph 1:11 appears to describe selfish Hebrew merchants as moneygrubbing “Canaanites.” (For the term “Canaan,” see TDOT 7.211-228.) Nevertheless, the phrase “who are Canaanites” has been emended to yield such readings as “who are in Canaan” (NIV), “who are among the Canaanites” (NASB), “[shall possess] that of the Canaanites” (KJV), and “[will have] the Canaanite land” (JB; cf. LXX, “to the sons of Israel shall belong the land of the Canaanites”; Latin Vulgate, “all the places of the Canaanites”). Many, like the NLT, translate the sense of the passage. For example, REB has “Exiles from Israel will possess Canaan”; GW has “Exiles from Israel will take possession of Canaan.” Problems such as this validate the observation of Finley (1990:376) that “from the standpoint of the Hebrew text, 1:20 is the most difficult in the entire book of Obadiah to interpret.”

On the whole, it seems best to retain the difficult MT and, in the same way that yarash [TH3423, ZH3769] did double duty in each line of v. 19, understand the preposition be [TH871.2, ZH928] (in/among) and the verb “possess” (from the second line of 1:20) to be syntactically operative in the first line of 1:20. Thus, the verse should read “The exiles of this company, of the sons of Israel who are [among] the Canaanites, [shall take possession] as far as Zarephath and the exiles of Jerusalem who are in Sepharad shall possess the cities of the Negev.” So construed, v. 20 adds to v. 19 the understanding that in addition to the expansion in all directions of those left behind during the captivity, those who were exiled will return and be resettled to the full limits of the Promised Land, from north to south.

Zarephath. Zarephath was a Phoenician town south of Sidon famed for Elijah’s miracle in the preservation of the widow’s oil (1 Kgs 17:9-10; cf. Luke 4:26). The city fell to King Sennacherib of Assyria in 701 BC (ANET 287) and was later put under the control of Phoenician Tyre by Esarhaddon (681–668 BC).

the north. Lit., “in Sepharad.” The identification of Sepharad is uncertain. At least six sites have been suggested: (1) Sparta (Keil), (2) the district of Shaparda in Media (Niehaus, Stuart), (3) Spain (Peshitta, Targum), (4) the Hesperides, islands off the coast of Libya (Gray 1953:53-59), (5) the Bosphorus (Latin Vulgate), and (6) Sardis in Asia Minor. (Allen [1976:171] documents two fifth-century BC Aramaic inscriptions pointing to the presence of Jews in the general area, one of which refers to the Lydian capital as sprd.) On the whole, the last suggestion appears to be most favorable and is compatible with the NLT.

1:21 Those who have been rescued. In agreement with the ancient versions, the NLT has translated this active participle (“those who deliver”) as a passive participle (“those who have been delivered”). Verse 17 indicates that there will be deliverance on Mount Zion (NLT, “refuge for those who escape”). Taken as active, these deliverers have regained Jerusalem by conquest (Armerding, Keil). Laetsch (1956:212-213) relates the participle to its verbal root in a spiritual sense of “save”; thus they are saviors.

to rule. The Hebrew verb is used of judging but carries with it an administrative sense. Niehaus (1993:540) points out that Othniel and Ehud were called deliverers (Judg 2:16; 3:9, 15; cf. 2 Kgs 13:5).

Edom. The Hebrew term is Mount Esau. The mountain motif once again comes forward forcefully. The Jacob/Esau motif that is threaded throughout the prophecy reaches its climax here: Quite properly, Jacob (Israel) and Mount Zion win out over Esau (Edom) and Mount Seir (or Mount Esau).

the LORD himself will be king! The Hebrew reads, “The kingdom will be the LORD’s.” The noun “kingdom,” as Niehaus (1993:541) notes, often connotes the sense of royal authority or dominion. Whatever judges may be given to the kingdom, royal authority belongs to the Lord himself (cf. Ps 22:28).

COMMENTARY [Text]

Obadiah’s prophecy of the Day of the Lord reaches its climax in verses 19-21. The account of the victory over Edom (and the nations) that regains Jerusalem as a refuge for the godly remnant (1:17-18) is filled out to give details concerning the renewed kingdom of that day. The revivification of Judah is considered first (1:19): As Judeans living in the Negev and Shephelah (see note) spread out to the east and west to occupy the lands of two protracted enemies (Edom and Philistia), others join them from neighboring Benjamin to repopulate the old contours of the northern kingdom and the Transjordanian territories. Those carried away into captivity and exiled to various northern districts will return and join in the resettlement of the Promised Land to its full limits and even beyond (1:20). Obadiah’s final glimpse of the day shows a newly appointed leadership ruling in Jerusalem under the authority of the true king on Mount Zion. Jerusalem will be blessed with the presence of a holy God dwelling in the midst of a purified people. Indeed, the whole city will be rendered a holy habitation.[50] In that day the long-standing hostility between Jacob and Esau will be resolved, with Israel safely in the land and occupying former Edomite territory.

Obadiah’s closing words thus contain important theological information for the future. Here again, the contrast between Israel and her persecutors is underscored. The oppressors will be judged and God’s people delivered. Thus, Obadiah’s teaching (drawn from God’s own declaration, 1:18b) concerning the Day of the Lord provides a note of hope for God’s people. The holy city, trampled down and looted by its captors, will once again be a refuge for the restored remnant of Jerusalem.

Moreover, Israel—all Israel, north and south alike, will enjoy living in the land promised to their forefathers (Gen 13:15-17; Deut 30:1-5). Israel’s enemies will have the tables turned on them as they suffer irreversible defeat at the hands of God’s people. Like stubble ignited by flaming fire, Israel will rage through former Edomite territory in a victory so complete that Edom will never rise again as a political power.

Whatever future application these verses may have, such literally came to pass in historical times. The Edomites were driven from their ancestral home beginning in the sixth century BC, and by the fourth century BC, the former Edomite territory was controlled by the Arabian Nabateans. The surviving Edomites gradually settled in the Negev with the result that by the fourth century BC this territory was known as “Edom’s land” or “Idumea.” During the period of Judah’s resurgence under the Maccabees, the Idumeans were defeated and several of their cities were taken (1 Macc 4:61; 5:3, 65; 2 Macc 10:15-23). Final subjugation of the area was accomplished by John Hyrcanus I (135–104 BC), Edomite national identity thus coming to an end (Josephus Antiquities 13.9.1; 13.15.4).[51]

These last verses also rehearse several key Old Testament theological truths. Here, as throughout the book, Obadiah is concerned with emphasizing that the Lord God is sovereign and therefore the rulership of all nations belongs to him (Ps 113:4). Israel’s sovereign God is also active in the affairs of nations, whether internally or in their relations with one another.

Central to God’s dealings in history is the fact that his role as history’s regulator is mediated through his chosen people, Israel (Deut 32:8-9). Further, in preserving and delivering a remnant of his people, God demonstrated that the promises contained in the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants will find their complete fulfillment. Crucial to their accomplishment was the promise that Israel would possess its land. Indeed, Israel’s land was always viewed as a gift from the Lord (Deut 1:8; 5:16). They would find rest there (Deut 12:9-11; Josh 1:13; 21:44; cf. Ps 95:11), and God himself would dwell there (Ezek 48:35) and establish his name there (Deut 12:5, NASB).

Obadiah has given news of an expanded kingdom that will be given to God’s people. Yet, in an ultimate sense, the kingdom is the Lord’s (Ps 47:7). It is a universal kingdom (Mic 4:1-5; Hab 2:14) in which the benefits of godly rule will be enjoyed by those who are his (Isa 65:17-25; Joel 3:17-21).

The notice that deliverance would come upon Mount Zion provides a link with the Davidic covenant and Old Testament Zion theology. Together with its emphasis on the successes of the Divine Warrior and the expectation of the coming kingdom in an era of everlasting peace and felicity, it also demands of its citizens a concern for righteousness, justice, love, humility, and adoration of the King. Concomitant with all of this is the messianic hope of the coming of a greater David who will establish righteousness and justice and will bring to full fruition all the provisions contained in the Abrahamic and new covenants (cf. Gen 17:1-8; 2 Sam 7:12-16; Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 37:21-28; Gal 3:26-29). Thus, the Old Testament promises find their culmination in the work of Christ himself (Acts 3:19-26; Rom 4:18-25).[52]

The choice of the term “rescuers” (1:21; cf. NLT mg) may contain a veiled spiritual hint. If so, Obadiah anticipates the day when every knee shall bow and every tongue confess the lordship of Christ (Phil 2:10-11), the deliverer who came to Zion and “will reign forever and ever” (cf. Gen 49:10; Pss 2:7-9; 22:28; Isa 11:1–12:6; Dan 7:13-14; Rev 11:15; 12:10; 19:15).

Obadiah’s condemnation of Edom leaves a sobering challenge. Remembering that Edom stands prophetically as a type of the nations (cf. Isa 34:1-17; 63:1-6; Ezek 35:1-15; 36:1-38), these verses remind the believer that there is a day coming in which the nations of this world will feel the weight of God’s judgment (Joel 3:12; 2 Pet 3:7-15). Ultimately, the Son of Man will come to defeat the nations (Rev 19:11-21), bring them before him to judgment (Matt 25:31-46; Acts 17:31), and rule over the earth in great power and everlasting peace (Isa 11–12; Dan 7:13-14; Rev 11:15). Knowing the destiny of all nations, the believer may not only take encouragement from the assurance that right will ultimately triumph but should also be challenged both to purity of living and to greater missionary endeavor (Acts 1:6-8; 1 Thess 5:1-11).