Obadiah is not quoted, or even alluded to, in the New Testament. Nonetheless there are still a few points of contact worth noting. Herod the Great was an Idumean, that is, an Edomite. His attempt to have Jesus killed (Mt. 2:16) is of a piece with Edom’s historic hostility to God’s people.[1]

Positively, Mark 3:7-8 includes people from Idumea among those who followed Jesus’s ministry. If these people came to faith in Christ, they would be among those resurrected believing Edomites who would be ruled by Yhwh from Jerusalem during the millennium and new creation.

Finally, the concept of the Day of the Lord, introduced primarily by Obadiah, is prominent in the Thessalonian epistles and in Revelation. Obadiah warned of the nations drinking the cup of Yhwh’s judgment and Revelation 14:10 speaks of those who will “drink the wine of God’s wrath” during that final day of the Lord.

---

[1] Rooker, “The Book of Obadiah,” in The Word and the World, 444.

The prophet Joel quotes Obadiah 17, which affirms that a remnant of Israel will escape the judgment of the eschatological day of the Lord. Joel quotes this as something “the Lord has said” (Joel 2:32) and as an explanation of his statement, “everyone who calls on the name of Yhwh shall be saved” (Joel 2:32).

Jeremiah also quotes from Obadiah extensively in Jeremiah 49 in an oracle against Edom (which is part of a larger section of oracles against the nations). Jeremiah does not include Obadiah’s warnings against Edom’s future actions against Jerusalem, likely because Edom violated those warnings in the 586 BC conquest of Jerusalem. In Jeremiah there are no further warnings, only the reiteration of judgment.

Jeremiah’s oracle against Edom is only one of a number found in the prophets, though the others are not directly dependent on Obadiah: “For other oracles about Edom, see Numbers 24:18; Isaiah 63:1–6; Jeremiah 9:24–25 (Eng., 9:25–26); 25:21; 27; 49:7–22; Ezekiel 25:12–14; 32:29; 35–36; Amos 1; 9:12; Joel 4:19 (Eng., 3:19); Malachi 1:2–5 (see also 2 Sam. 8:14; 2 Kgs. 8:20–22; 2 Chr. 21:8–10).”[1]

Finally, while one could argue that the Day of the Yhwh has clear background in the Pentateuch, the warnings of judgment in Deuteronomy 27-28, and (symbolically) in the Day of Atonement,[2] Obadiah is likely the first to use the “day” terminology that the rest of the prophets develop.

---

[1] Shepherd, KEL, 208.

[2] Matthew Aernie and Donald Hartley, The Righteous & Merciful Judge: The Day of the Lord in the Life and Theology of Paul, Studies in Scripture & Biblical Theology (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2018), 36. See especially the reference to “the day of their calamity” (Deut. 32:35). Block, ZECOT, 84.

Obadiah does not have a superscription that dates the book, and there are numerous proposed dates ranging from the early ninth century BC to the mid-fourth century BC. There are two dates that are most common among conservative scholars: a date during the reign of King Jehoram of Judah (mid-ninth century BC) or a date between the conquest of Jerusalem by Babylon (586 BC) and Nabonidus’s conquest of Edom (553 BC) (mid-sixth century BC).[1]

Arguments for a Mid-Sixth Century Dating

This dating goes back at least to the time of the Reformation. Calvin dated Obadiah subsequent to Isaiah (740-700 BC) and noted the prophet was a possible contemporary of Jeremiah. Calvin suggested that Jeremiah may have made use of Obadiah.[2] Luther more confidently dated Obadiah to the time of the fall of Jerusalem to Babylon and stated his conviction that Obadiah and Jeremiah were contemporaries. Luther held that Obadiah drew on Jeremiah’s text in writing his own prophecy.[3] This is currently the most popular viewpoint among evangelical scholars.

1. Some argue that Obadiah made use of Jeremiah, which would require Obadiah to have been written after Jeremiah.[4] However, others grant that Jeremiah often made use of other, earlier prophets and that he may have made use of Obadiah even if the two were contemporaries.[5] If Obadiah made use of Jeremiah, a date from the mid-sixth century of later would be necessary. If Jeremiah made use of Obadiah, Obadiah would have needed to precede or be a contemporary of Jeremaih.

2. The words used to describe Judah’s situation—“misfortune,” “ruin,” “distress” (2x), “calamity” (3x), and “disaster” (Obad 12-14)—point to an event more like that destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon rather than to earlier attacks upon Jerusalem.[6] Raabe notes, “The phrase in v 12 is especially strong, ‘on the day of their [the Judahites’] ruin,’ literally, ‘on the day of their perishing.’”[7]

3. Raabe argues that Obadiah 12-14 should be understood to refer to past actions of Edom. “Unlike other parts of the book that employ figurative language and imagery, these verses use realistic language and make specific accusations. Only if the Edomites actually engaged in such activities does the prophet’s expression of shock and disbelief make sense.”[8]

4. The Hebrew term translated “carried off” in Obadiah 11 is elsewhere used of Babylon taking Israel captive (Jer 13:17; 50:33; Ezek 6:9; Ps 137:3).[9]

5. Numerous Scripture passages indicate that Edom encouraged Babylon’s destruction of Jerusalem (Ps. 137) and participated in it (Lam 4:21-22; Ezek 25:12-14; 35:1-15). Other texts indicate that Edom was active in the politics surrounding Judah and Babylon in the time surrounding the invasion (Jer 27:1-11; 40:11-12).[10]

6. Several commentators think that the reference to Edom having “drunk on my holy mountain” “implies” or “alludes” to the destruction of the temple (Obadiah 16).[11]

7. Some commentators interpret Obadiah 16 as teaching that Judah drank the cup of God’s wrath on the temple mount, which they think best aligns with Babylon’s destruction of the temple.[12]

8. Raabe argues that Obadiah 19 “presupposes the loss of the territories of Ephraim, Samaria, and Gilead, which happened during the Assyrian campaigns of 732 and 722.” This would preclude a mid-ninth century date, since the book must have been written after the Fall of the Northern Kingdom.[13]

9. The reference to exiles from Israel and Jerusalem best fits with the Babylonian exile, though these interpreters grant that there were Israelites exiled previous to that event.[14]

Arguments for Mid-Ninth Century Dating

Though the mid-sixth century date is currently the most common among evangelical commentators in the late nineteenth century evangelical scholars favored the mid-ninth century date, and this date retains advocates up through the present time.

1. Though the minor prophets are not organized according to a strict chronology, those dated to the pre-exilic period are found at the beginning of the collection, and those dated to the post-exilic period are found at the end of the collection. Obadiah is found with the pre-exilic prophets (as is Joel, the other undated book).[15] More specifically, Hosea, Amos, Jonah, and Micah are eighth century prophets. Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah are seventh century prophets. Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi are post-exilic prophets.[16] While this observation is not definitive, it favors a pre-exilic date.

2. More significantly, the grammatical construction used in Obadiah 12-14 indicates that these verses are prohibitions of future actions. Raabe gives a helpful explanation:

To express a past subjunctive—”you should not have”—Hebrew uses lmh+ perfect, “Why did you gloat?” (I owe this observation to C. R. Krahmalkov.) But the construction used in vv 12-14, ’al + second person jussive, is the standard way to make a vetitive or negative command, as Hebrew does not negate the imperative form. Therefore it should be translated “Do not do so-and-so” (so LXX, Vulgate, Peshitta, NEB, NASB). The construction expresses the speaker’s will and desire that the addressee not engage in the activity, often with the sense of urgency (Joüon 1991 § 114). By definition vetitives concern present or future time. One does not say “Do not gloat yesterday.” They can be rendered “Do not begin an action” (e.g., Gen 22:12; 37:22) or “Stop doing an action” (e.g., Amos 5:5; Pss 35:19; 75:5-6 [4-5]). The context dictates.[17]

Raabe, who adopts the mid-sixth century date says that “the prophet imaginatively locates himself back to the time of Judah’s fall, or he projects the past catastrophe into the present.”[18] But Keil and Niehaus both argue that “Obadiah is warning Edom not to do again what she had already done.”[19]

3. Those who argue for the mid-ninth century date see evidence that Jeremiah made use of Obadiah, rather than the other way around.

3.a. Notably, these warnings against future conduct are absent from Jermiah 49:7-21. As Niehaus observes, “because these verses are injunctions against future conduct, they are appropriate in the Book of Obadiah, which predates the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem. Jeremiah, who wrote his oracle against Edom after the fall of Jerusalem (Jer. 39), had no reason to employ such injunctions, since Edom had already committed the acts that Obadiah 12-14 had warned them not to commit.”[20]

3.b. Second, Jeremiah’s oracles against the nations often made use of earlier prophecies against those nations.[21] It is more likely, therefore that Jeremiah continued this practice here than that Obadiah made use of Jeremiah.

3.c. Finally, “Obadiah seems to be a more unified speech, whereas the wording in Jeremiah is more scattered.”[22]

4. Leaving aside Obadiah and Joel, the earliest mention of the Day of Lord in the Minor Prophets occurs in Amos (dated to the eighth century). It would be somewhat puzzling for Amos to contain the first revelation on this topic because Amos 5:18 reveals that the Israelites have already twisted the Day of the Lord to apply only to Israel’s enemies and not to themselves. On the other hand, Robert Bell observes, “If Obadiah and Joel preached their messages on the day of the Lord in the ninth century, then it is completely understandable that the eighth-century Amos found the term on the lips of carnal Israelites.”[23] Bell finds confirmation for this thesis by charting the characteristics of the Day of the Lord and noting that “Obadiah mentions the fewest common characteristics,” which “is what one would expect of the passage that first mentions a concept.”[24]

5. Numerous passages indicate that Edom was hostile toward Israel in pre-exilic times. Amos 1:11 says that Edom “pursued his brother with the sword and cast off all pity,”[25] and Amos 1:6 says that the Philistines carried of exiles to Edom.[26] Psalm 83 presents Edom in league with the Ishmaelites, Moabites, Amalekites, Philistines, Assyria, and others against God’s people. The inclusion of Assyria in this list of nations favors a pre-exilic date.[27] Referring to events during the reign Ahaz, subsequent the sixth-century, 2 Chronicles 28:17 says Edom “again invaded and defeated Judah and carried away captives” (emphasis added).[28] If Joel is pre-exilic, then Joel 3:19 would be pre-exilic mention of Edom acting violently toward Judah.[29]

6. Edom had been subordinate to Judah until the reign of Jehoram, at which time Edom successfully “revolted from the rule of Judah” (2 Kings 8:20-22; 2 Chron. 21:8-10). Later the Philistines and Arabians invaded Judah and “carried away all the possession they found that belonged to the king’s house, and also his sons and his wives, so that no son was left to hum except Jehoahaz, his youngest son” (2 Chron. 21:16-17). This is a significant invasion that clearly penetrated into the city of Jerusalem. If Amos 1:6 refers to this event when it says that Gaza (a Philistine city) “carried into exile a whole people to deliver them up to Edom,” then Edom is certainly implicated in the charge that he “stood aloof on the days that strangers carried off [Judah’s] wealth” (Obadiah 11). Amos’s direct charge against Edom, “he pursued his brother with the sword and cast off all pity” (Amos 1:11) could indicate that Edom also took a more active role in this invasion (cf. Obadiah 16)—if Amos refers to the same event.[30]

7. Obadiah does not mention Babylon anywhere in his prophecy. Instead, when Obadiah foresees Judah possessing its enemies, he mentions possession of Edom, Philistia, the Northern Kingdom of Israel, and Phoenicia. This collection of conquered enemies fits best with an earlier date.[31]

Evaluation

The strongest objection to the ninth century date is that the Bible does not reveal much about Edom’s actions toward Judah during the reign of Jehoram except that Edom revolted during his reign.[32] The correlation between 2 Chronicles 21:16-17, Amos 1:6, 11, and Obadiah 11 is plausible but not entirely certain. The strongest objection to the sixth century date is the grammar of Obadiah 12-14, which is best read as prohibitions of future actions. While it is possible that this can be explained as rhetorical, this seems to be explaining the grammar away rather than explaining the text in light of the grammar.

Numerous arguments favor the ninth century date even if they are not definitive. The placement of Obadiah with the pre-exilic prophets and Jeremiah’s likely quotation of Obadiah both favor the earlier date. It is also true that Amos presupposes preceding revelation about the Day of the Lord that Obadiah (and Joel) would provide if dated to the ninth century.

On the other hand, numerous arguments made for the sixth century date are also consistent with the ninth century date. The argument that the strong language in Obadiah 12-14 describing Judah’s ruin best fits the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem is compatible with the view that these verses are warnings against future actions by Edom—warnings which Edom did not heed. Similarly, the passages that indicate that Edom encouraged and participated in Babylon’s destruction in Jerusalem could indicate that Edom did not heed the warning given in Obadiah in the ninth century. The argument that the term translated “carried” off is used of Babylon taking Israel captive is weakened by the fact that Obadiah refers to wealth being carried off while Babylon carried off people. Likewise, the claim that the references to exiles from Israel and Judah best fits with the Babylonian exile is neutralized by the reference in Amos 1:6 to exiles who were carried off in earlier invasions by other countries.  

Other arguments in favor of the sixth century date simply fail. It is simply not the case that Obadiah 16 indicates that the temple was destroyed. Nor does Obadiah 19 indicate that Ephraim, Samaria, or Gilead had been lost already to Assyria. These verses are eschatological and indicate only that the Northern kingdom was at times hostile to Judah and that in the end it would be possessed by Judah (the Davidic kingdom).[33]

In sum, a mid-ninth century date, in the reign of Jehoram is to be preferred.

---

[1] Raabe, Obadiah, AB, 51; Block, Obadiah, ZECOT, 23.

[2] Calvin, Commentaries on the Twelve Minor Prophets, 418-19.

[3] Luther, Works, 18:193-94.

[4] Luther, Works, 18:193; Shepherd, A Commentary on the Book of the Twelve, KEL, 27-28.

[5] Finley, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, WEC, 344-45.

[6] Finley, WEC, 341; Raabe, AB, 51; Block, ZECOT, 24.

[7] Raabe, AB, 51, brackets in original.

[8] Raabe, AB, 52.

[9] Raabe, AB, 51.

[10] Luther, Works, 18:193; Stuart, Hosea-Jonah, WBC, 404; Finley, WEC, 341; Raabe, AB, 52; Rooker, “The Book of Obadiah,” in The World and the Word, 440; Block, ZCOT, 25-26; Rogland, “Obadiah,” ESVEC, 373-74.

[11] Raabe, AB, 51-52; Block, ZECOT, 25.

[12] Raabe, AB, 51; Block, ZECOT, 24-25.

[13] Raabe, AB, 52; also Block, ZECOT, 24.

[14] Raabe, AB, 52; Bloack, ZECOT, 24-25.

[15] Paul Kleinert, A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Obadiah, ed., John Peter Lange (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), 4; Niehaus, “Obadiah,” Minor Prophets, 500; Irvin A. Busenitz, Commentary on Joel and Obadiah, Mentor Commentaries (Geanies House, Fearn, Ross-shire, Great Britain: Mentor, 2003), 229.

[16] O. Palmer Robertson, Prophet of the Coming Day of the Lord, 10.

[17] Raabe, AB, 177.

[18] Raabe, AB, 177.

[19] Niehuas, 498; cf. Keil and Delitzech, in loc.; Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 335.

[20] Niehaus, 501.

[21] Keil and Delitzsch, 10:228-29; Kleinert, 4; Archer, 335; Niehaus, 500; Tully, Reading the Prophets as Christian Scripture, 291 (Tully holds to the mid-sixth century date).

[22] Tully, Reading the Prophets as Christian Scripture, 291; cf. Keil and Delitzsch, 10:228-29; Archer, 335; Niehaus, 500; Busenitz, 234.

[23] Bell, The Theological Messages of the Old Testament Books, 377-78.

[24] Bell, Theological Messages, 377.

[25] Kleinert, 4; Niehaus, 498.

[26] E. J. Young, Introduction to the Old Testament, 253.

[27] Niehaus, 498.

[28] Niehaus, 499.

[29] Kleinert, 4.

[30] Keinert, 4-5; Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 333; Niehaus, 501.

[31] Kleinert, 4; Busenitz, 232-33.

[32] Stuart, WBC, 404.

[33] See Busenitz, 232.