Talk:Book of Obadiah

Bible Top‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Judaism High‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religious texts (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts articles

Religion High‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ancient Near East Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

[Untitled]

Obadiah is not the shortest book in the Bible 3 John is the shortest with only 15 verses — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.1.219.145 (talk) 11:08, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Hello all. I have just updated the Obadiah page from what previously was. I have conserved much of the original information presented and have also added extensively to it. I will be watching this page and I welcome your comments. Nathan Hill

Theology

Hi, Nathan! Great article! One thing that really jumped out at me, however, was your claim that "It is the Christian perspective that the spirit will ultimately prevail when the flesh becomes obsolete." This sounds more like dualism than orthodox Christianity. It is my understanding that God desires to redeem the whole person and that is why Christians speak of bodily resurrection and the creation of a new heaven and a new earth. I would consider revising this statement. --Jdstrgh 23:07, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Editing Book of Obadiah

I heavily modified the intro to be more neutral and included those groups who have an interest in the book of Obadiah. I also broke out the Contents section to be less convoluted than its original analysis. I felt that there were too many quotes and borderline coercions of personal perspectives. I applied scripture links for quick viewing.

Themes

The section: “Themes” is written for a Christian audience, as ascertained by the following indications:

“A Christian with a knowledge of the New Testament of the Bible…”
“relevant for Christians as a faith group”
“Christians may understand…”
“It is the Christian perspective that…”

Hence this section should most appropriately be re-titled: “Christian Views”.

Historical Context

The topic in this section is better suited to be under Scholarly Issues due to the debate about dating the composition of Obadiah. All debates are issues. Also, the name should be changed to be more specific about that subject of when Obadiah was dated since that is the section's focus.

Scholarly Issues

There has to be a better title for this section. I really think there could be a better word than “Issues” to encompass debates, discussions and theory for its subsection topics.

Historical Background

I propose that a good topic for Obadiah’s Historical Background should be insights on how it was canonized in various bibles, such as the Tanakh, Old Testament and Septuagint. Insights on where the text came from and an analysis of the original text used for translation would be great info.

Jasonasosa (talk) 19:43, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

was the defeat, by the Arabs, Philistines, and other trade allies of Tyre & Sidon, during the days of Jehoram, king of Israel & Judah, husband of Athaliah, daughter of Jezebel (which slaughter co-occurred at the same (place &) time, as Athaliah's slaughter of the princes of Israel & Judah), what led to Jehu's rebellion, since he perceived incompetence, on the part of his king ? 66.235.37.80 (talk) 19:30, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Book of Obadiah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:23, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Frederick A. Tatford

The following sentence appears in "Contrast with Amos": "Moreover, Frederick A. Tatford in Prophet of Edom’s Doom says that Obadiah’s prophecy is fulfilled today as there is currently no trace of anyone who may be identified as a fleshly Edomite.." My understanding is that Frederick Tatford's book does not constitute a reliable source by Wikipedia's standards and that the whole sentence should be removed. But since I'm new here and don't want to step on toes, I thought I'd check and see what other editors thought. Alephb (talk) 08:26, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Book of Obadiah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070923011058/http://www.chabad.org/default.asp to http://www.chabad.org/default.asp
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.anova.org/sev/htm/hb/31_obadiah.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070923011058/http://www.chabad.org/default.asp to http://www.chabad.org/default.asp
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ucg.org/brp/brp.asp?get=daily&day=2&month=February&year=2003&Layout=

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:00, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Protestant" View?

How is quoting from one book published in 1981, and lacking any explanation as to how their perspective is uniquely "Protestant," sufficient to claim to represent the perspective of an incredibly diverse 40% of global Christians? This is ridiculous.

I don't even know how you would go about fixing this, except to delete that small section which seems to really add nothing to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.217.159 (talk) 10:39, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]