Revised Standard Version here retains the order of the Hebrew clauses. There are four subordinate clauses building up to the final main clause, in which as a climax the accusation is made that “you were like one of them.” That is, Edom was like the foreigners who were capturing Jerusalem. This order is effective in Hebrew but may be rather difficult to follow in other languages. Good News Translation has split the verse into two sentences, with the main accusation at the beginning of the second one: You were as bad as those strangers. Good News Translation has also reordered the other clauses so as to present the events described in the sequence in which they occurred. Thus the clause when enemies broke down their gates comes before the clause carried off Jerusalem’s wealth, since the enemies had to enter the city before they could plunder it.

This reordering certainly makes the description easier to follow, but probably loses something of the poetic force of the passage, and something of the intense emotional involvement of the prophet. Translators do, of course, need to make their translation clear, but they should also try to retain as much of the emotional impact of the original as possible. The devices by which this may be achieved vary widely from one language to another. Translators should try to ensure that the main emphasis of the verse falls on the main accusation, You were as bad as those strangers. Since emphasis is often related to the order of presentation, this clause should be placed in a position that shows its importance as the climax of the verse. Good News Translation is not a helpful model here, but Jerusalem Bible catches the mood of the Hebrew quite well, concluding the verse with the words “you behaved like the rest of them.”

Another aspect of the poetic and emotional force of this passage is the constant repetition of the phrase “on the day” or “in the day” in verses 11-14. Revised Standard Version includes this phrase every time it occurs in the Hebrew. Good News Translation has used a similar phrase only once in each verse, in the interests of English style. Translators will need to consider the effect that repetition will have on the reader in their own language before deciding how often to use the same or similar phrases.

You stood aside implies that the Edomites refused to help the people of Judah.

The expression that day (or “the day,” as it appears in the following verses) does not necessarily mean a single day, but rather a period of time during which something happens. In this case it refers to the enemies’ victory over Jerusalem and to all of the things they did at that time. This use of the word is of course similar to the use of “the day” when referring to the time when God will judge the nations and punish those who have done wrong (see verse 15). It was used in a similar way in verse 8.

Good News Translation says that enemies broke down their gates. This is literally “foreigners entered his gates” (Revised Standard Version). These foreigners are the ones who had come to attack Jerusalem, so Good News Translation is right to call them enemies. However, it may not be so clear why Good News Translation says that they broke down the gates. The Babylonians took Jerusalem only after a long siege, when they finally broke through the walls (Jer 39.2; 52.7; 2 Kgs 25.4). If we say simply that they entered the gates, it may imply that the enemies walked through without a struggle, so Good News Translation has tried to give a more precise picture of what happened.

The main accusation this verse makes against the Edomites has already been discussed, that they “were like one of” the enemies (Revised Standard Version). Good News Translation makes clear that the way in which they were like the enemies is a bad thing, and says You were as bad as the enemies. In some languages this type of comparison is quite difficult to make, and it may be much easier to use a form more like Revised Standard Version. Other languages will have different ways of expressing the same idea.

Wealth here includes all kinds of moveable possessions, not just money. The way the enemy divided it among themselves was by casting lots, a procedure that was basically religious, since the result was supposed to be controlled by the gods. Revised Standard Version says that they “cast lots for Jerusalem,” but this refers to the wealth that they found there, as Good News Translation makes clear. It may be more likely that the wealth was divided in Jerusalem and carried off afterward, so that Good News Translation‘s ordering of the clauses may still not correspond exactly to the order in which the events took place.

The method of casting lots in these cases is not definitely known, but it may have involved small stones that stood for different possible answers. A method was used for choosing one of the stones by chance, and this showed what the answer was. One method of choosing was to shake the stones in a cup until one of them fell out.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Obadiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The book is rounded off by this final statement of victory over Edom, not merely as a nationalistic revival by Israel, but also as a symbol of the ultimate triumph of Israel’s God.

The victorious men of Jerusalem: the word translated “Saviors” (Revised Standard Version) was understood by ancient translators as a passive form, equivalent to “those saved.” This understanding has been accepted by some modern translators, and is expressed for instance by New English Bible as “Those who find safety on Mount Zion.” If the verse is taken this way, it is probably a reference back to “those that escape” (Revised Standard Version, New English Bible) on Mount Zion in verse 17.

However, many modern translations do not feel it necessary to follow this understanding, since the Hebrew makes acceptable sense as it stands. The “saviors” (Revised Standard Version) are understood to be military leaders in the same manner as the judges had been in the days before the establishment of the monarchy. Their distinguishing mark was that they led the Lord’s people to victory over their enemies. Thus Jerusalem Bible translates “Victorious, they will climb Mount Zion.” Here as elsewhere, Mount Zion stands for Jerusalem and for its Temple site in particular, and Good News Translation renders this plainly as The victorious men of Jerusalem. When understood in this way, the people referred to in this verse are the same people mentioned in the last part of verse 20, who have just captured the towns in southern Judah. It is because of these victories that they are called victorious. In some languages it may be easier to begin this sentence, “After the men of Jerusalem have won all these victories….”

In the Hebrew the reference to Jerusalem as “Mount Zion” is paralleled by the reference to Edom as “Mount Esau” (Revised Standard Version), an echo of verses 8 and 19. Good News Translation translates plainly as Edom. The word translated “to rule” in Revised Standard Version is the same Hebrew verb that is frequently used to describe the activities of the Judges in the Book of Judges (Judges 10.2, 3; 12.7-14; 15.20; 16.31). Jerusalem Bible emphasizes this link by saying here “to judge the Mount of Esau.” Good News Translation gives more emphasis to the meaning in the particular context of Obadiah and translates will attack Edom and rule over it.

Neither Revised Standard Version nor Jerusalem Bible seem to suggest that these victorious people will go to Edom itself. Rather they “go up to Mount Zion to rule Mount Esau” (Revised Standard Version). However, since Mount Esau is not on Mount Zion, commentators assume that this means that Mount Zion becomes the base for an attack on Edom. Another possible understanding of these words is “Victorious leaders will make their headquarters in Jerusalem and will rule over the land of Edom.” Verse 18 has of course already described the final attack on Edom, so verse 21 must be understood as a summary or as a restatement of the main point.

The final clause is expressed impersonally in Hebrew, and this structure is retained in many modern translations, as for instance Revised Standard Version, with its “the kingdom shall be the Lord’s.” Good News Translation and some other modern versions such as Moffatt keep the emphasis of the Hebrew more accurately by using a personal construction and saying the LORD himself will be king. If a translator feels that he should make clear what the Lord is king of, he may add “king of his people,” or even “the real (or, true) king of his people.” This statement gives the theological justification for the prophet’s whole message. The sovereignty of the Lord is the basis for both the restoration of his people and the punishment of their enemies. When the boundaries of the Promised Land are restored to be as they were when David was king (verses 19-20), then the Lord himself will again be the true king of his people, as he was in David’s day.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Obadiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse continues the theme of expansion and reconquest and speaks of the activities of two main groups, The army of exiles from northern Israel and The exiles from Jerusalem. Revised Standard Version, as its footnote indicates, understands a place name “Halah” instead of the Hebrew word hahel, meaning “this army.” 2 Kgs 17.6 mentioned Halah as a place in Assyria where some of the exiles from the northern kingdom were resettled. New English Bible omits the phrase altogether, but as Jerusalem Bible and Good News Translation show, it can make acceptable sense as it stands. Revised Standard Version says that these exiles are from “Israel.” Israel can be used in two senses. Sometimes it means the old northern kingdom, and sometimes it means the whole country, including both northern and southern kingdoms. In this place it refers to the northern kingdom and contrasts with the group of exiles from Jerusalem in the former southern kingdom of Judah. The translator must decide which meaning of Israel his readers will be most likely to understand in this verse. Good News Translation assumes that English readers will most probably understand Israel to mean the whole country, so they have referred here to northern Israel, thus limiting the meaning to the former northern kingdom.

When Good News Translation speaks of exiles from these places, it means people whose ancestors used to live in these places before those ancestors were exiled. These people are still called exiles, even though they themselves had probably never lived in the land of Israel. These people will now return.

The group who originally came from the north will form an army when they have returned, and will naturally expand northward from their traditional territory. They will conquer Phoenicia as far north as Zarephath, a town on the coast between Tyre and Sidon. North here is made explicit by Good News Translation to help readers unfamiliar with these place names to appreciate at least the direction involved. Zarephath was a town where the prophet Elijah lived for a while (1 Kgs 17.9-10; Luke 4.26). This area around Tyre is described as part of the northern border of Israel in Josh 19.28-29. This region is called “Canaan” in the Hebrew and in some translations, but the word refers to the area known as Phoenicia and should be translated in this way.

The exiles from Jerusalem are said to be “in Sepharad” (Revised Standard Version). The identification of this place is uncertain, and a number or possible locations have been suggested, including Spain, Media, and Libya. Modern scholarly opinion tends to agree that Sepharad is another name for the town of Sardis, the capital city of Lydia in Asia Minor. Good News Translation accepts this view and translates Sepharad as Sardis. An inscription from the fifth century B.C. found in Sardis suggests the presence of a Jewish community there at that time.

Wherever The exiles from Jerusalem had been, they would return to their own area in southern Palestine and would expand southward from there to capture the towns of southern Judah (“the Negeb,” as at the beginning of verse 19 in Revised Standard Version). The geographical description thus ends in the place where it began, with the recovery of the territory occupied by the people of Edom. In this way it contributes to the main theme of the prophecy, the punishment of Edom.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Obadiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Verses 19-20 together give details of how the Lord’s people will reoccupy the full extent of the land that was promised to them. There are a number of difficulties in the Hebrew text. In places it is so disjointed that many scholars believe that some words in it were original notes and were only by accident taken into the text itself. However, Good News Translation makes good sense of the passages with only very little change in the Hebrew text as it stands.

After the people of Judah been taken into exile in 587 or 586 B.C., the Edomites had begun to move westward and occupy southern Judah, called in Hebrew “the Negeb” (Revised Standard Version; spelled “Negev” on Good News Translation maps and on maps in this Handbook). Obadiah here foresees the opposite thing happening—People from southern Judah will occupy Edom, which had been part of the wider kingdom under David and Solomon (2 Sam 8.13, 14). The people referred to here are obviously considered to be people of Judah, and were probably returned exiles. To occupy, in the context of verse 18, would doubtless involve some fighting, and the meaning is therefore the same as capture, used in the next line.

Those from the western foothills will capture Philistia: another nation that had given much trouble in earlier times was that of the Philistines, who lived mainly in the western coastal plain. They too had been conquered by David (2 Sam 5.17-25) but had remained troublesome to Israel from time to time, and after the fall of Jerusalem they were able to occupy “the Shephelah” (Revised Standard Version) unopposed. The Shephelah is the area of foothills in western Judah, next to the coastal plain. Here again the situation will be reversed, and the people from the western foothills will capture Philistia.

If a language does not have a word for foothills, this simply means the region where the hill country begins. It should be possible to find a way to express this idea, but it can also called the “western border region.”

In the second half of the verse, the prophet turns to the northern part of the country, the territory of Ephraim and Samaria. The text as we have it today does not say clearly who will regain this territory, as it simply has “they” (Revised Standard Version) as the subject of the verb. Clearly, some group of the Lord’s people is meant, and Good News Translation supplies the general term Israelites.

Ephraim had often been used in the past to stand for the northern kingdom, since it was the dominant tribe there, and Samaria had been the capital city of that kingdom. The wording of the Hebrew (see Revised Standard Version) would suggest that two separate areas are referred to, but the two names really refer to the same territory. It may be possible in some languages to follow Good News Translation and suggest that there is one territory called both Ephraim and Samaria. In other languages it may be clearer to say “the town of Samaria, and the rest of the territory of Ephraim.”

Finally, the people of Benjamin will take Gilead. The traditional territory of Benjamin was the area just north of Jerusalem. Gilead is a general term for the areas to the east of the River Jordan occupied in the past by the tribes of Reuben and Gad, and part of the tribe of Manasseh. It is not clear why Benjamin should be named to recapture this area.

It is not clear whether the prophet thought that the Israelites would have to fight to take Ephraim and Gilead, or whether they would be able to take over these areas peacefully, so the translator should use the word that seems most appropriate to him. In all cases, the translator should make it clear that it is the Israelites who are taking over the areas mentioned.

Verse 19 as a whole states that the Lord’s people will expand their territory southward (into Edom), westward (into Philistia), northward (into Ephraim and Samaria), and eastward (into Gilead). That is to say, from the small area around Jerusalem that they held in the prophet’s day, they will expand in all directions in the effort to regain their traditional land. Some translators may feel that it will be helpful to bring this out more clearly in the translation, by making sure that all of these directions are clear in the text. One may say, for example, that “the people of Benjamin will cross to the eastern side of the Jordan and take the region of Gilead.” Directions are sometimes a problem for translators, especially if their languages do not use terms that match with Hebrew and English terms like north, south, east, and west. In some languages, for example, directions are given in terms of the way the main rivers flow. Translators should of course use the forms that are natural in their languages. But if they have problems knowing just how to use these forms to refer to the geography of Palestine, they should ask their translation consultant about their special problems.

It may be useful to mention that Jerusalem is in hilly country. These hills run from north to south and include the areas of Ephraim and the Negeb, so there is no significant change of altitude between any of these places. Philistia to the west was in the plain near the Mediterranean Sea and was lower than Jerusalem. Anyone traveling to Gilead in the east or Edom in the south would have to cross the low valley of the Jordan and the Dead Sea. But both Gilead and Edom are mostly in high county, so the person going to them would have to climb up again to altitudes about the same as Jerusalem.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Obadiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse continues the theme of the Lord’s people regaining the land that had been taken from them after the fall of Jerusalem, especially the land taken by the Edomites. Verse 17 states the basic fact that the people of Israel will regain their lost territory, and verses 18-20 give the details of how this will happen. Appropriately, the details begin with the Edomites, the people this book has been mostly concerned with.

In Hebrew the verse opens with two lines that are parallel in form and overlapping in meaning, as shown by the literal translation of Revised Standard Version. Good News Translation has combined these two lines into one, as it often does elsewhere, and stated the full meaning in a single clause, The people of Jacob and of Joseph will be like fire. Here Jacob stands for the people of Judah, and Joseph for the people of Israel. The two names together mean the survivors of both kingdoms, that is, the entire Jewish nation.

Since Joseph was historically Jacob’s son, it may sound strange in some languages to refer to his descendants as though they are a different group of people from his father’s descendants. Even in languages that do not have this problem, it is unlikely that many readers will know what these names are meant to refer to. Therefore some translators may prefer to translate as “the people of Judah and Israel” or even as “the people of the northern and southern parts of Israel.”

Fire is used as a picture of the Lord’s anger, and the Lord’s people are seen as the agents through whom the divine punishment is carried out. This picture is ancient and widespread (compare Exo 15.7; Isa 10.17; 29.5, 6; Nahum 1.6, 10; Mal 4.1; Matt 3.12; Luke 3.17) and should not be difficult to retain in translation, since the destructive power of fire is known to all societies.

The fuel for this fire will be the people of Esau, that is, the Edomites (see comments on verse 6), who will be destroyed as fire burns stubble. Stubble is the dry and useless stalks left in the fields after the wheat has been harvested. It burns very readily and thus offers an easily understood picture of quick and complete destruction. If stubble itself is not known in any area, the translator can compare Edom to dry grass, or anything of this sort which readers will recognize as something that burns easily.

No descendant of Esau will survive: the completeness of the destruction is emphasized by the word survive, which echoes “survivors” (Revised Standard Version) in verse 14. The Edomites had handed over the survivors of Judah to the Babylonians. When the time came for the descendants of those survivors to carry out the Lord’s punishment on Edom, “there shall be no survivor” (Revised Standard Version). Esau will be left with No descendant.

The verse is rounded off with a reminder that this is not just a man’s nationalistic dream, but the purpose of the Lord. In the Hebrew here as in verse 15, the reference to the Lord is in the third person, and again Good News Translation translates this in the first person, I, the LORD, have spoken, since the whole of verses 2-21 are understood as the direct words of the Lord.

It may be unnatural in some languages to put a statement like this in the middle of a person’s speech. Thus, since the Lord is still speaking in the following verses, it may not sound right for him to say I … have spoken in verse 18. The meaning is that these things will happen because they are the will of the Lord, and it can therefore be translated as something like “I declare that this must happen,” or “All of this will happen according to my will.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Obadiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The opening words to this verse are quoted in Joel 2.32, and the theme of the sacredness of Zion is expanded in Joel 3.17 to include the promise that “foreigners will never conquer it again.”

But at the beginning of the verse contrasts sharply the fate of the nations at the end of verse 16 with the survival of the Lord’s people. The theme of the remnant of Israel surviving to begin afresh is a common one in the prophets (for example, Isa 4.2-4; Amos 3.12; Micah 2.12; Zeph 2.7-9).

The reason why Israel’s position would change for the better was that the Lord’s punishment of her, though severe, was not final. There were some who survived the fall of Jerusalem and became the nucleus of a new nation. It is suggested in the introduction, “Translating the Book of Obadiah,” that the prophecy of Obadiah was written about 500 B.C. If that is true, then those who had returned from the exile were already in possession of Jerusalem, where they had first returned in 538 B.C. Already the Temple had been rebuilt (516 B.C.) and was in use for the worship of the Lord. Thus the words on Mount Zion (which included the Temple area) some will escape, and it will be a sacred place had already been partially fulfilled in the prophet’s own day. This would encourage the people to believe in the more extensive restoration of territory promised in the second half of the verse. Some will escape is an echo of those trying to escape in verse 14.

Many languages may find that the usual word for escape will not sound right in this context, since the people of Jerusalem will not go anywhere else but will remain in Jerusalem. The meaning is that they will not be harmed in the troubles that accompany the punishment of the nations (verses 15-16), but will be able to go on living in their city.

Mount Zion will be “holy” (Revised Standard Version) at this time, or a sacred place. As explained in the discussion of verse 16, this means a place that is connected with God in a special way. It may be necessary for some translators to say “truly holy” in this verse. The idea may well be that only the true people of God will be able to live there, and no others will be able to come in.

In the second half of the verse, the words “house of Jacob” (Revised Standard Version) mean the people of Jacob and refer to the inhabitants of Judah, the remnant who had returned from exile. There are two possibilities for the interpretation of the Hebrew word translated as “their possessions” in Revised Standard Version. It may indeed mean “their possessions” and, if so, refers to the land that is theirs by right, as Good News Translation puts it. However, the same Hebrew consonants were given different vowels by ancient translators and understood as “those who dispossessed them.” This second understanding is preferred by some modern translators and is neatly expressed in New English Bible as “Jacob shall dispossess those that dispossessed them.” This relates in a more detailed way with the description in verses 19-20. However, the difference between the two interpretations is more one of emphasis than of basic meaning, and both fit easily into the context. Either interpretation is fully acceptable.

“Possessions,” if we take the meaning of Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, refers to the land that traditionally belongs to a person’s family, or in this case, to the people of Israel. Many languages may have a word or expression that has this meaning. Most of this land had been taken by various other peoples and did not belong to the people of Israel when the book of Obadiah was written. However, they still considered that in God’s eyes it really belonged to them, so if possible the translation should say something more than “the land that they used to own.” Possibilities for good translations might be “the land that is truly theirs,” or the land that is theirs by right. Since the area being referred to was all part of Israel before, it may be good in many languages to say that “they shall take back the land that is truly theirs,” or “reoccupy it,” or “once again live on it.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Obadiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

There are a number of problems in this verse. The first is to decide to whom it is addressed. The Hebrew simply has “you” (Revised Standard Version), but here the “you” is plural. In the preceding verses Edom has been consistently addressed in the singular, and it would be odd to change suddenly to the plural if Edom were still in mind. The majority of modern scholars therefore agree that the “you” refers to the people of Judah. This is the understanding of Jerusalem Bible, as shown in its footnote. It is also the understanding of Good News Translation, which makes it explicit by including My people in the text.

If a translator decides that the Lord is addressing the people of Judah in this verse, he may want to make this clear in the translation, and perhaps let the Lord address the people of Judah for the rest of the book. The Lord has been speaking to the people of Edom early in the book (Good News Translation begins this speech in verse 2), and the Lord remains the speaker for the rest of the book, even if we assume that he now begins to speaks directly to the people of Israel. Translators need to consider how this change will best be handled in their own languages. It may be possible to treat verses 2-21 as one long speech in which the Lord first talks to the people of Edom, then turns to the people of Israel and begins to talk to them. If a long speech like this is natural in a language, there may be various ways of showing when the speaker stops talking to one audience and starts talking to another. Many languages will need to begin verse 16 with words like “My people, I have made you drink a bitter cup.”

On the other hand, it may sound strange in other languages to address different groups of people within the same speech. In that case it may be necessary to begin a new speech at verse 16, using words something like “The Lord says to you people of Judah, ‘Just as you have drunk….’ ”

A bitter cup of punishment: this is a picture of the Lord being angry with this people and punishing them, especially when he allowed Jerusalem and its Temple (my sacred hill) to be captured by the Babylonians.

The use of a cup of wine as a picture of the anger of the Lord is one that is quite frequent in the Bible. It is developed most extensively in Jer 25.15-29 and occurs also, for example, in Psa 75.8; Jer 49.12; and Hab 2.16. In the New Testament the figure is used both of Christ’s suffering (Mark 14.36; John 18.11) and of God’s anger (Rev 14.10; 16.19). It is, then, a common picture in the Scriptures and is related to one of the central features of Palestinian culture, namely, wine. It is therefore desirable to retain the picture in translation if at all possible, even in situations where wine is not known and where a cup has not previously been used with this figurative meaning. Translators must decide to what extent new figures of speech will be acceptable and meaningful in any language.

In many languages it is possible to speak only about drinking what a cup contains, and not about drinking the cup itself. Therefore, even if the figurative language is to the kept, it will have to be expressed as something like “drinking wine from a cup.” Many translators may also want to make the point of the comparison clearer and say “I will punish them so severely that they will not be able to stand up, just as men who are drunk cannot stand up.” In some cultures, of course, this will not be regarded as a terrible thing, and in these cultures it might not be possible to use this picture effectively. Good News Translation has tried to show that the drink is not pleasant by using the word bitter in the expression a bitter cup, and other translators may be able to do something similar. However, the main point of the Hebrew picture is the effect of the drink, not the taste. Drunken men sometimes stagger like men who have been hit very hard, while people who are completely drunk may lie down as though they were dead. The picture seems to be based on these facts.

Scholars who believe that this part of the verse refers to Edom, in spite of the change from singular to plural, have to interpret the cup of wine literally. They see it as referring to the drunken celebrations in which the Edomites took part at the time of the fall of Jerusalem. Such drinking was not only an insult to the Lord’s people but also to the Lord himself, since it took place on my sacred hill, that is, on the site of the Temple. This seems to be the view underlying New English Bible.

As the Good News Translation footnote shows, my sacred hill is a reference to Mount Zion, which is mentioned by name in the next verse. Mount Zion technically refers to the part of Jerusalem that included the Temple area. It is often used to refer to the whole city of Jerusalem, especially when its importance as a religious center is in focus, and that is the case here. Sacred or “holy” (Revised Standard Version) in this verse means “connected with God in a special way.” Many languages will have a good word for “holy” that can be used here. If there is none, then my sacred hill can be translated as “the hill (or, mountain) where my own house is” or “Jerusalem, the hill where my Temple is.”

But all the surrounding nations will drink a still more bitter cup of punishment: as discussed above, the first part of this verse probably referred to something that had happened to the people of Judah. This second part then says that the same sort of thing will happen to all the surrounding nations. There are a number of ways in which languages can show the relationship between the two parts. One way would be to start the first line with “Just as” and the second line with “so,” showing that two similar ideas are being compared. This is the meaning intended by the Revised Standard Version “as.”

Good News Translation, however, has made the first part of the verse into a full sentence and then begins a second sentence with But. This suggests a strong contrast: a bad thing had happened to God’s people, But all the surrounding nations will suffer even worse. This is conveyed by the words will drink a still more bitter cup. This statement further explains the words addressed to the Edomites in the last part of verse 15.

The Hebrew word translated surrounding (Revised Standard Version “round about”) is found in only a minority of the Hebrew manuscripts. Most have a different word that is translated “continually” (King James Version, New English Bible) or “unsparingly” (Jerusalem Bible). Both ideas (surrounding and “continually”) can be roughly paralleled elsewhere in the Old Testament. Zech 12.2 speaks of “all the peoples round about” (Revised Standard Version) in a context that includes a reference to drunkenness. Isa 51.22-23, in a passage with an extended picture of the cup of God’s anger, speaks of the cup passing from his people, never to return. It is “put … into the hand of your tormentors” (Revised Standard Version), with the implication that it will remain there. If the translation “continually” is preferred, then in some languages it may appear to clash with the vanish away at the end of the verse. This can be overcome by saying “the nations shall drink continually … until they vanish away.”

They will drink it all and vanish away: there is some uncertainty about the Hebrew word translated drink it all in Good News Translation and “stagger” in Revised Standard Version. Staggering is of course a natural result of drinking too much wine, and is associated with it, for example, in Psa 60.3; Isa 51.22; Jer 25.16; and Zech 12.2. But here “stagger” is based on a change in the Hebrew text, which actually has the word for “swallow,” as noted in the Revised Standard Version footnote. Moffatt also accepts the change to “stagger,” but other modern English versions do not, since “swallow” makes perfectly good sense in the context. Thus Good News Translation has drink it all, Jerusalem Bible “drink deep,” and New English Bible “gulp down,” all of which help to convey something of the emotional intensity of the passage.

The final clause “they … shall be as though they had not been” (Revised Standard Version) is generally taken to mean that the nations that undergo the extremes of divine punishment will disappear entirely, and Good News Translation translates this plainly by they will … vanish away. The literal meaning of this picture is “when I have finished punishing them, not one of them will be left” or “the whole nation will be destroyed.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Obadiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

In Revised Standard Version this verse begins with “For,” which shows its relationship to the preceding verses. The book up to now has told us that the Edomites will be punished by God for what they have done to Judah. This will happen “for” or “because” God judges and punishes all nations. The translator should understand the connection between the verses, and this may influence the way in which this verse is worded. But it may not be necessary actually to use any connecting word like “for.” There may not be any corresponding word in the receptor language, or the translator may feel that the relationship is quite clear without including any connecting word.

Some translators may need to understand more clearly the relationship between The day that God punishes Edom (verse 8), which is the time referred to in the second part of verse 15, and The day when the Lord will judge all nations. In some way the punishment of Edom is a part of the final punishment that the Lord will give to all nations, but it is not necessary to think that they happen at exactly the same time from our human point of view. Edom’s punishment may take place long before the other nations are punished. This is a good example of why we should not understand the day of the Lord as a literal day. (Psa 90.4 may be of some help in understanding this.)

The Lord is here referred to in the third person in the Hebrew. Good News Translation understands the whole of verses 2b-21 as the direct words of the Lord, and reminds the reader of this at this point by making a first person reference to I, the LORD.

The expression “the day of the LORD” (Revised Standard Version) is a common one in the prophetic books. Its meaning is made more explicit in Good News Translation by saying The day is near when I, the LORD, will judge all nations. The prophets firmly believed that the Lord was ruler of all the nations and was able to use them and to punish them as easily as he did his own people. The reference to the day here is an echo of the future day of Edom’s punishment in verse 8, in contrast to the frequent mention of the past day when Jerusalem fell, in verses 11-14.

Translators will probably want to choose an expression for “the day of the Lord” that they can use in most places where it occurs. But they will need to be able to vary it slightly when necessary, as for example in this verse, where the Lord himself is referring to it. In choosing this term, it is not necessary to use the word “day” if it does not seem appropriate. The word for “time” can be used here.

The thought is that God himself will be the judge at this time, so the verb used for judge should be the one used when referring to a judge holding court and deciding who is right and who is wrong. If the word chosen also includes the idea of deciding the punishments for the guilty, such a word will also be quite correct.

All nations may need to be translated as “the people of all countries (or, tribes).”

As one of the nations, Edom is particularly in the prophet’s mind, and Good News Translation addresses Edom by name here to make it clear that the second part of this verse refers to Edom.

Edom will be treated according to the principle “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” (Deut 19.21): what you have done will be done to you. The Edomites had behaved treacherously toward their relatives the Israelites when Jerusalem fell, and they in turn will fall victim to treachery, as already described in verse 7. Thus they will get back what they have given. This last clause states in less figurative language what is expressed idiomatically in Hebrew as “your deeds shall return on your head” (Revised Standard Version). Many languages will have some suitable idiom that can be used at this point, provided it does not introduce any item historically or culturally impossible in ancient Israel. If there is no figurative way to say this, it may be necessary to omit this line, because its literal meaning is almost exactly the same as the line before it, and it may not be possible to say the same thing in two different ways.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Obadiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .