Charles Ellicott Commentary Obadiah 1:5-9

"If thieves came to thee, if robbers by night (how art thou cut off!), would they not steal [only] till they had enough? if grape-gatherers came to thee, would they not leave some gleaning grapes? How are [the things of] Esau searched! how are his hidden treasures sought out! All the men of thy confederacy have brought thee on thy way, even to the border: the men that were at peace with thee have deceived thee, and prevailed against thee; [they that eat] thy bread lay a snare under thee: there is no understanding in him. Shall I not in that day, saith Jehovah, destroy the wise men out of Edom, and understanding out of the mount of Esau? And thy mighty men, O Teman, shall be dismayed, to the end that every one may be cut off from the mount of Esau by slaughter." — Obadiah 1:5-9 (ASV)

The completeness of the overthrow awaiting Edom. It is no mere inroad of a marauding tribe. Something would escape the robber, though he might go away quite satisfied with his plunder; and even a raid in vintage time, for the purpose of doing all the mischief possible to the country, would leave here and there a scattered bunch, gleanings for the inhabitants when the spoilers had retired. But now everything is doomed to destruction. Edom is completely robbed and ransacked. Notice how the sad, almost pathetic, conviction of this breaks out—as if rather from a friend (see Introduction) than an enemy—in the parenthetical "how art thou cut off!" in the very middle of the sentence. Everyone must perceive, the prophet seems to say, a higher hand at work here.

Some grapes.— Gleanings, as in margin. (Isaiah 24:13.)

How are the things of Esau searched out! —Literally, How are they searched out Esau! Where Esau is either taken collectively as Edom as a nation, or we must supply, as in the Authorized Version, “the things of,” or, as Ewald, “they of.” For search, compare to Zephaniah 1:12.

His hidden things.— Hebrew, matspunîm, from tsapan = to hide, but whether hidden treasures or hiding places cannot be determined, as the word only occurs here.

Overtaken by this terrible calamity, and deserted by her allies, Edom will turn in vain for counsel to her senators and wise men, and for support to her heroes and mighty men, for these will not only share in the general ruin, but are marked out for an overthrow as signal as their renown.

(7) All the men of your confederacy... .— This desertion by allies is doubtless put prominently forward as the due retribution on Edom for his treachery and cruelty to his natural ally, his brother Jacob. The members of the confederacy are not specified. In Jeremiah 27:3 we find Edom associated with Moab, Ammon, Tyre, and Sidon, in the warning to submit to Nebuchadnezzar. The two former would be the natural allies of Edom, and in Ezekiel 25:8 Seir is joined with Moab as reproaching Israel. From Psalms 60:8, we may add to these Philistia (Compare also to Obadiah 1:19).

The expression "have brought you to the border" is variously understood. The most natural explanation is that the fugitives from the ruin of Edom, flying into the territory of neighboring and allied tribes for help, are basely driven back to their own frontier, and left to their fate.

The men that were at peace with you.—As in margin, the men of your peace, an expressive Hebrew idiom occurring in Jeremiah 20:10; Jeremiah 38:22, and in Psalms 41:9, where it is translated "mine own familiar friend."

Great difference of opinion exists as to the connection of this and the following clause, and as it stands the text presents considerable difficulty. By dropping the italicized words in our version, and omitting the semicolon, we get, "The men of your peace have deceived you, prevailed against you and your bread, have laid a wound under you." There are two verbal difficulties: (1) “wound,” Hebrew mazôr, which occurs in Hosea 5:13 in the sense of a festering wound or abscess, but which the older translators here render ambush, or snare (Septuagint: ἔνεδρα; Vulgate: insidiæ).

Ewald and Hitzig, among moderns, prefer net, and defend it etymologically. This certainly gives good sense, and if zûr, of which it is a derivative, can have the sense of binding, it may be correct. Our translators in Jeremiah 30:13, and Aquila and Symmachus in this passage, evidently give it that force (see also Lee’s Hebrew Lexicon, under the word). To squeeze or crush, however, seems the true meaning of zûr, as in Judges 6:38, of Gideon’s fleece, and Job 39:15, of the eggs of the ostrich.

The preposition tachath = under, also offers a difficulty; "Laid a wound under you" suggests no intelligible meaning. But on the authority (though possibly somewhat doubtful) of 2 Samuel 3:12, where the word is translated “on behalf of,” but where the context requires “without his knowledge,” and on the analogy of all other languages, we may (with Vatablus, Drusius, Luther, and L. de Dieu; see Keil) translate the word deceitfully, or without your knowledge, a rendering in accordance with the parallelism. But the syntax of the passage still remains unexplained.

What is the construction of lachmeka = of your bread? From Psalms 41:9, "The man of my peace which did eat of my bread," we are led to the conjecture that it forms part of a familiar, perhaps proverbial, expression for one bound by the closest ties of fellowship and hospitality. We must, therefore, either supply a participle, these eating, as in the Psalm, or understand a second anshêy = men of. It is true there is no other instance of the phrase "men of your bread," but it is a conceivable Hebrew idiom. Keeping the parallelism we now get an intelligible rendering of the passage.

"Unto the border they sent you, all the men of your confederacy.
Deceived you, ruined you,
Men of your peace, men of your bread;
(They) gave you a wound in secret.
No understanding (is) in him."

For the arrangement of the second clause, which is put for deceived you the men of your peace, ruined you the men of your bread, see Song of Solomon 1:5, and Note there. In the last clause the margin reads of it: i.e., of the injury just mentioned, instead of in him. But it is better to take it as an abrupt declaration in the prophet’s manner (Compare to "how art thou cut off!" in Obadiah 1:5) of the utter bewilderment that had come or was coming on Edom, unable either by counsel or force to withstand his foes.

Shall I not... —Literally, Surely in that day —it is Jehovah’s saying— I will make sages disappear from Edom, and understanding from Esau’s mountain.

The tradition of a peculiar sagacity in Edom, and especially in Teman , lingered long. Job’s sage friend Eliphaz was a Temanite.

In Baruch 3:22-23 we read: "It (wisdom) has not been heard of in Canaan, neither has it been seen in Teman. The Hagarenes that seek wisdom upon earth, the merchants of Meran and of Teman, the authors (margin, expounders) of fables and searchers out of understanding, none of these have known the way of wisdom, or remember her paths."

Jeremiah’s words show even more strikingly how high the reputation had been: "Is wisdom no more in Teman? is counsel perished from the prudent? is their wisdom vanished?"

“The men of the world think that they hold their wisdom and all God’s natural gifts independently of the Giver. God, by the events of His natural providence, as here by His word, shows, through some withdrawal of their wisdom, that it is His, not theirs. Men wonder at the sudden failure, the flaw in the well-arranged plan, the one over-confident act which ruins the whole scheme, the over-shrewdness which betrays itself, or the unaccountable oversight.”

So the utter lack of perception and foresight in Edom seems unaccountable, until we think of the Divine purpose and end in it all. The wise were destroyed, and the mighty men dismayed, "to the end that every one of the mount of Esau may be cut off by slaughter." It is the prophetic statement of the truth of the old heathen proverb: “Whom God wishes to destroy He first dements.”

For Teman, see Job 2:11.