Before us is a prophecy about Edom, a pagan people, yet closely related to the Israelites. Edom appears before us as an example of treachery and cunning, and for these evil deeds it will receive the punishment it deserves. We hear another prophecy about the inevitability of retribution for lawlessness.

But why does Obadiah address Edom? Why does he need to address his prophetic word to an audience very different from the one to which Israel's prophets usually spoke? After all, other prophets, when setting out what the Lord revealed to them about the ways of neighboring nations, still directed their main speech to their own countrymen. Here too there must be a lesson for his compatriots: in speaking about Edom, the prophet intended to warn them against repeating the sins of their neighbors. The sins of Edom can be repeated by inhabitants of other lands too, and in fact they have been repeated many times. This means that the universal character of prophetic preaching is shown here once again, for among all people, whatever nation they belong to, there exists a real interconnection, even if they do not always recognize it. Therefore what was said many centuries ago for a concrete reason that seemed important to only a few can also matter for those who happen to live in other lands and in other times.

Obadiah's words, addressed to Judah's age-old enemy - Edom - raise the question of what is sometimes called historical justice. At first glance it appears that the prophet has precisely this in mind when he says that on the day of Yahweh (the day of the Lord), the same thing will happen to Edom that happened to Judah, which was devastated to the delight of its longtime opponent, who took advantage of the situation. What, then, is Obadiah speaking of when he mentions the day of Yahweh? The Day of Judgment? It is possible: apocalyptic moods were characteristic of his era. But sometimes the day of Yahweh (especially in the pre-exilic period) also meant times of any disaster that fell upon a country and people, and that disaster itself was considered God's judgment.

It is quite possible that the prophet has exactly this in mind, foreseeing that soon after Judah's defeat, over which Edom rejoices so much, its own turn will come. It would seem that here is the triumph of that very historical justice: the one who rejoiced over another's misfortune receives, in the literal sense, what he deserves, experiencing exactly what he had just rejoiced over while looking at his neighbor's troubles. But justice presupposes strict adherence to the Torah by the one who wants to restore it. And vengeance has never been a means of fulfilling the commandment: the Torah reluctantly permits it in certain cases as a concession to the bad tradition of fallen humanity, setting clear limits for it, but by no means encourages it. "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" is not a prescription but a limitation, necessary so that for one knocked-out eye the offender would not have both eyes knocked out, and for one knocked-out tooth, all thirty-two. Meanwhile, in the situation of which the prophet speaks, the principle "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" is precisely what we see - from the standpoint of the Torah, the worst of all possible principles.

But in the fallen world it is usually exactly this principle that operates. And it presupposes not so much God's action as His nonintervention in the situation, what in theological language is usually called permission. Of course, this nonintervention is relative: God still does not give the warring sides complete freedom, otherwise in the end no one would remain alive on earth. Yet such mutual extermination of people is certainly not part of God's plan, and He does not want the sort of "compensations" Obadiah speaks of at all. But if God's people turn away from the Creator, they become like everyone else, one among the many peoples living on earth, subject to the laws common to all in the fallen world, which regard the principle "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" as "higher justice."

Obadiah’s words addressed by him to the eternal enemy of the Jews - Edom, raise the question of what we sometimes call the historical justice. It seems at first sight that the prophet refers in particular to it, saying that in the day of the LORD, will arrive to Edom the same thing that occurred to the Jews that underwent destruction, to the delight of its old enemy, taking advantage of the situation. About what speaks Obadiah, mentioning the day of the LORD? It is the Judgment day? Maybe: the apocalyptic humors were peculiar to its era. But sometimes the day of the LORD (particularly at the pre-captivity period) was also called the time of any disaster, which is dumped on the country and the people, and the disaster was more considered as God's judgment. It is quite likely that the prophet has in mind in particular that, foreseeing that a little time after the destruction of the Judea, which delights so much Edom, will come its own turn.

It would seem there is the triumph of this historical justice: the one, who was delighted for the misfortune of another, receives in the literary sense according to the merit, experiencing in particular what he had just enjoyed, looking at the disasters of the neighbor. But indeed, the justice supposes the imperative observance of the Torah by the one who wants to restore justice. So vengeance was never a means of the execution of the commandments; the Torah reluctantly admits it in particular cases, as a concession to the bad tradition of the fallen humanity, establishing in this tradition known bounds, but does not encourage it. "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" is not a prescription, but a restriction, necessary so that for one knocked eye, both are not knocked to the knocker, and for a broken tooth - all the thirty-two.

However, in the situation, about which speaks the prophet, there is just in particular the principle "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth", the worst principle of all, from the point of view of the Torah. But in the fallen world, it is in particular exactly it that acts the most. It [the principle] does not suppose so much God's action, as His non-intervention in the situation.

Of course, this non-intervention is relative, God does not all the same give to the parties in conflict a complete freedom, otherwise there would finally be on the earth nobody alive. However do not of course enter into God's plan such a mutual destruction of people, and He wants not at all "the compensation" of this type, about which speaks Obadiah. But if the people of God turn away from God, it becomes the same as all, one of the multitudes of peoples living on earth. And submits itself to these laws of the fallen world common to all, that suppose as form of "higher justice", the principle "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth".