2Old Testament Interpretive Commentary of Jonah --Overview.docx

2
Old Testament Interpretive Commentary of Jonah --Overview
The following research assignment is an independent study
meant to reflect your research, study, and work. The purpose of
this assignment is for you to interpret the text from the original
author to the original recipients within the historical and
cultural context. Exegesis (interpretive analysis) engages the
historical, grammatical, and literary meaning of the text.
This assignment is teaching you a basic method on how to
prepare to teach Scripture from an exegetical hermeneutic. After
the completion of this assignment, you will be able to prepare
expository messages based on an exegetical method which is
consistent with the meaning of the text from the original author
to the original recipients.
Your commentary paper will evidence a combination of original
thought and insightful comments from resources. The
commentary paper will not be an extensive string of quotes from
sources. You should avoid long quotes that exceed 5 lines and
are required to be block quotes.
Week 2: Title Page and Bibliography (26 pts.)
Create your title page and bibliography. The title page and
bibliography must conform to Turabian format. The
bibliography should represent exegetical commentaries. The
better your resources, the better your paper. You need a
minimum of 5 good resources (more are certainly welcome).
Good resources are less than 50 years old and provide
exegetical comments based on paragraph or verse units. These
resources should not be primarily devotional in nature. Websites
and internet blogs that are not peer-reviewed are unacceptable.
Journal articles are good, but understand that journal articles

are often narrow in focus or propose unique views that are not
universally accepted. It is best to use commentaries that focus
on detailed exegesis of Jonah. These resources will make it
easier for you to write a substantive commentary.
Commentaries such as the Pulpit, Jamieson-Faussett-Brown,
Weirsbe, McGhee, and Matthew Henry are too old or too
devotional. Commentaries such as NICOT, Expositors Bible,
MacArthur, New American Commentary, NIV Application and
Word Biblical are good examples. You should consult with your
pastor or others in your community to gather these sources.
There are Bible software programs that provide many of these
sources as e-books. Journal articles can be accessed through the
Liberty University Library via the ATLA Religion databases.
The LU library staff is available to help you. There are LU
videos to teach you how to access the library.
Week 7: Jonah Commentary (200 pts.)
Submit your completed Interpretive Commentary by the close of
Module Seven. Keep in mind that you are not writing a sermon;
you are writing a commentary. You can produce sermons from
the commentary, but the commentary is not sermonic. The
application portion of this paper is at the end of the assignment;
the commentary itself is interpretive. Read through your sources
and highlight insightful comments that you want to include in
your commentary. You will need to be selective so that the
commentary is not primarily a string of quotes. If you are using
digital media, you can cut and paste these comments into your
outline. You should have 3-4 citations for each chapter of
Jonah. Seek to have balanced research by having your citations
evenly distributed throughout your commentary. Make sure that
you provide proper citations and footnotes for all sources.
As you write your interpretive commentary, include the
following 4 components: 1) an introduction to the historical

setting (approximately 200 - 300 words); 2) an exegetical
outline of the book (that provides structure for the commentary
with content oriented subheadings); 3) an interpretive
commentary on Jonah for chapters 1-4 (approximately 500
words per chapter); as well as 4) a conclusion that supports at
least 3 applications to the Christian life drawn from the
interpretive analysis performed in the commentary
(approximately 300 – 500 words). It is recommended that you
use subheadings or subtitles to organize your commentary.
Regarding the outline, this provides structure and a framework
for your commentary that is more detailed than the four chapter
breaks alone. Look for breaks and transition in subject matter
(setting, characters, etc.) and literary markers (genre, repetition,
etc.) as you organize your outline. Paragraph breaks in the
translation that you are using may provide the structural breaks
for your outline.
See the Obadiah sample commentary for ideas on how your
Jonah commentary might develop in structure, form, and
content. This is only a sample—allow yourself some flexibility
in how your Jonah commentary best reflects your own work,
analysis, and creativity.
Work Environment Assessment Template
Use this document to complete the Module 4 Workplace
Environment Assessment.
Summary of Results - Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory
Identify two things that surprised you about the results. Also
identify one idea that you believed prior to conducting the

Assessment that was confirmed.
What do the results of the Assessment suggest about the health
and civility of your workplace?
Briefly describe the theory or concept presented in the article(s)
you selected.
Explain how the theory or concept presented in the article(s)
relates to the results of your Work Environment Assessment.
Explain how your organization could apply the theory
highlighted in your selected article(s) to improve organizational
health and/or create stronger work teams. Be specific and
provide examples.
General Notes/Comments
Work Environment Assessment
Template
© 2018 Laureate Education Inc.
1
18 American Nurse Today Volume 10, Number 11
www.AmericanNurseToday.com

“I believe we can
change the world if we
start listening to one
another again. Simple,
honest, human con-
versation…a chance to
speak, feel heard, and
[where] we each listen
well…may ultimately
save the world.”
Margaret J. Wheatley,
EdD
GIVEN the stressful healthcare
workplace, it’s no wonder nurses
and other healthcare professionals
sometimes fall short of communi-
cating in respectful, considerate
ways. Nonetheless, safe patient care
hinges on our ability to cope with
stress effectively, manage our emo-
tions, and communicate respectful-
ly. Interactions among employees
can affect their ability to do their
jobs, their loyalty to the organiza-
tion, and most important, the deliv-
ery of safe, high-quality patient
care.
The American Nurses Associa-
tion (ANA) Code of Ethics for
Nurses with Interpretive Statements
clearly articulates the nurse’s obli-
gation to foster safe, ethical, civil
workplaces. It requires nurses “to

create an ethical environment and
culture of civility and kindness,
treating colleagues, coworkers, em-
ployees, students, and others with
dignity and respect” and states that
“any form of bullying, harassment,
intimidation, manipulation, threats,
or violence will not be tolerated.”
However, while nurses need to
learn and practice skills to address
uncivil encounters, or-
ganization leaders and
managers must create
an environment where
nurses feel free and
empowered to speak
up, especially regard-
ing patient safety
issues.
All of us must strive
to create and sustain
civil, healthy work en-
vironments where we
communicate clearly and effectively
and manage conflict in a respectful,
responsible way. The alternative—
incivility—can have serious and
lasting repercussions. An organiza-
tion’s culture is linked closely with
employee recruitment, retention,
and job satisfaction. Engaging in
clear, courteous communication fos-

ters a civil work environment, im-
proves teamwork, and ultimately
enhances patient care.
In many cases, addressing inci-
vility by speaking up when it hap-
pens can be the most effective
way to stop it. Of course, mean-
ingful dialogue and effective com-
munication require practice. Like
bowel sound auscultation and na-
sogastric tube insertion, communi-
cation skills can’t be mastered
overnight. Gaining competence in
civil communication takes time,
training, experience, practice, and
feedback.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
1. Identify components of a healthy
workplace.
2. Discuss how to prepare for a chal-
lenging conversation.
3. Describe models for conducting a
challenging conversation.
The planners of this CNE activity have disclosed no
relevant financial relationships with any commercial
companies pertaining to this activity. See the last page
of the article to learn how to earn CNE credit. The
author has disclosed that she receives royalties and
consulting fees pertaining to this topic. The article
was peer reviewed and determined to be free of bias.

Expiration: 11/1/18
CNE
1.0 contact
hours
Conversations
to inspire and promote a
more civil workplace
Let’s end the silence that surrounds incivility.
By Cynthia M. Clark,
PhD, RN, ANEF, FAAN
November 2015 American Nurse Today 19
What makes for a healthy
workplace?
The American Association of Criti-
cal-Care Nurses has identified six
standards for establishing and sus-
taining healthy work environ-
ments—skilled communication, true
collaboration, effective decision-
making, appropriate staffing, mean-
ingful recognition, and authentic
leadership.
In my own research, I’ve found
that healthy work environments al-
so require:

• a shared organizational vision,
values, and team norms
• creation and sustenance of a
high level of individual, team,
and organizational civility
• emphasis on leadership, both
formal and informal
• civility conversations at all orga-
nizational levels.
I have developed a workplace
inventory that individuals and
groups within organizations can use
as an evidence-based tool to raise
awareness, assess the perceived
health of an organization, and de-
termine strengths and areas for im-
provement. The inventory may be
completed either individually or by
all team members, who can then
compare notes to determine areas
for improvement and celebrate and
reinforce areas of strength. (See
Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory.)
How to engage in challenging
conversations
One could argue that to attain a
high score on nearly every invento-
ry item, healthy communication
must exist in the organization. So
leaders need to encourage open

discussion and ongoing dialogue
about the elements of a healthy
workplace. Sharing similarities as
well as differences and spending
time in conversation to identify
strategies to enhance the workplace
environment can prove valuable.
But in many cases, having such
conversations is easier said than
done. For some people, engaging
directly in difficult conversations
causes stress. Many nurses report
they lack the essential skills for hav-
ing candid conversations where
emotions run high and conflict-
negotiation skills are limited. Many
refrain from speaking with uncivil
individuals even when a candid
conversation clearly is needed, be-
cause they don’t know how to or
because it feels emotionally unsafe.
Some nurses lack the experience
and preparation to directly address
incivility from someone in a higher
position because of the clear power
differential or a belief that it won’t
change anything. The guidelines be-
low can help you prepare for and
engage in challenging conversations.
Reflecting, probing, and
committing
Reflecting on the workplace culture
and our relationships and interac-

tions with others is an important
step toward improving individual,
team, and organizational success.
When faced with the prospect of
having a challenging conversation,
we need to ask ourselves key ques-
tions, such as:
• What will happen if I engage in
this conversation, and what will
happen if I don’t?
• What will happen to the patient
if I stay silent?
In the 2005 report “Silence Kills:
The Seven Crucial Conversations
for Healthcare,” the authors identi-
fied failing to speak up in disre-
spectful situations as a serious com-
munication breakdown among
healthcare professionals, and they
asserted that such a failure can
have serious patient-care conse-
quences. In a subsequent report,
“The Silent Treatment: Why Safety
Tools and Checklists Aren’t Enough
to Save Lives,” the authors suggest-
ed a multifaceted organizational ap-
proach to creating a culture where
people speak up effectively when
they have concerns. This approach
includes several recommendations
and sources of influence, including
improving each person’s ability to

be sure all healthcare team mem-
bers have the skills to be “200% ac-
countable for safe practices.” Ways
to acquire safe practice skills in-
clude education and training, script
development, role-playing, and
practicing effective communication
skills for high-stakes situations.
Creating a safe zone
If you’ve decided to engage in a
challenging conversation with a
coworker who has been uncivil,
choose the time and place careful-
ly. Planning wisely can help you
create a safe zone. For example,
avoid having this conversation in
the presence of patients, family,
and other observers. Choose a set-
ting where both parties will have as
much emotional and physical safety
as possible.
Both should agree on a mutual-
ly beneficial time and place to
meet. Ideally, the place should be
quiet, private, away from others
(especially patients), and con-
ducive to conversation and prob-
lem-solving. Select a time when
both parties will be free of inter-
ruptions, off shift, and well-rested.
If a real or perceived power differ-
ential exists between you and the
other person, try to have a third
party present.

You may need to initiate the
conversation by asking the other
person for a meeting. Suppose
you and your colleague Sam dis-
agree over the best way to per-
form a patient care procedure.
You might say something like,
“Sam, I realize we have different
approaches to patient care. Since
we both agree patient safety is our
top concern, I’m confident that if
we sit down and discuss possible
solutions, we can work this out.
When would you like to get to-
gether to discuss this?”
Before the meeting, think about
how you might have contributed to
the situation or conflict; this can
help you understand the other per-
You can use the inventory below to help determine the health of
your workplace. To complete it, carefully read the 20 statements
below. Using a scale of 1 to 5, check the response that most
accurately represents your perception of your workplace. Check
5 if
the statement is completely true, 4 if it’s somewhat true, 3 if
it’s neutral, 2 if it’s somewhat untrue, and 1 if it’s completely
untrue.
Then total the number values of your responses to determine the

overall civility score. Scores range from 20 to 100. A score of
90
to 100 indicates a very healthy workplace; 80 to 89, moderately
healthy; 70 to 79, mildly healthy; 60 to 69, barely healthy; 50 to
59,
unhealthy; and less than 50, very unhealthy.
Completely Somewhat Neutral Somewhat
Completely
Statement
true (5) true (4) (3) untrue (2)
untrue (1)
Members of the organization “live” by a shared vision □
□ □ □ □
and mission based on trust, respect, and collegiality.
There is a clear and discernible level of trust
□ □ □ □ □
between and among formal leadership and
other members of the workplace.
Communication at all levels of the organization □
□ □ □ □
is transparent, direct, and respectful.
Employees are viewed as assets and valued □
□ □ □ □
partners within the organization.
Individual and collective achievements are celebrated □
□ □ □ □
and publicized in an equitable manner.

There is a high level of employee satisfaction,
□ □ □ □ □
engagement, and morale.
The organizational culture is assessed on an ongoing □
□ □ □ □
basis, and measures are taken to improve it based on
results of that assessment.
Members of the organization are actively engaged in □
□ □ □ □
shared governance, joint decision-making, and policy
development, review, and revision.
Teamwork and collaboration are promoted and evident. □
□ □ □ □
There is a comprehensive mentoring program for □
□ □ □ □
all employees.
There is an emphasis on employee wellness and self-care. □
□ □ □ □
There are sufficient resources for professional growth □
□ □ □ □
and development.
Employees are treated in a fair and respectful manner. □
□ □ □ □
The workload is reasonable, manageable, and fairly □
□ □ □ □
distributed.
Members of the organization use effective conflict- □
□ □ □ □
resolution skills and address disagreements in a
respectful and responsible manner.

The organization encourages free expression of diverse □
□ □ □ □
and/or opposing ideas and perspectives.
The organization provides competitive salaries, benefits, □
□ □ □ □
compensations, and other rewards.
There are sufficient opportunities for promotion and □
□ □ □ □
career advancement.
The organization attracts and retains the
□ □ □ □ □
“best and the brightest.”
The majority of employees would recommend the □
□ □ □ □
organization as a good or great place to work to
their family and friends.
© 2014 Cynthia M. Clark
Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory
son’s perspective. The clearer you
are about your possible role in the
situation, the better equipped you’ll
be to act in a positive way. Re-
hearsing what you intend to say al-

so can help.
Preparing for the conversation
Critical conversations can be stress-
ful. While taking a direct approach
to resolving a conflict usually is the
best strategy, it takes fortitude,
know-how—and practice, practice,
practice. Prepare as much as possi-
ble. Before the meeting, make sure
you’re adequately hydrated and
perform deep-breathing exercises
or yoga stretches.
On the scene
When the meeting starts, the two
of you should set ground rules,
such as:
• speaking one at a time
• using a calm, respectful tone
• avoiding personal attacks
• sticking to objective information.
Each person should take turns
describing his or her perspective in
objective language, speaking di-
rectly and respectfully. Listen ac-
tively and show genuine interest in
the other person. To listen actively,
focus on his or her message in-
stead of thinking about how you’ll
respond. If you have difficulty lis-
tening and concentrating, silently
repeat the other person’s words to
yourself to help you stay focused.

Stay centered, poised, and fo-
cused on patient safety. Avoid be-
ing defensive. You may not agree
with the other person’s message,
but seek to understand it. Don’t in-
terrupt or act as though you can’t
wait to respond so you can state
your own position or impression.
Be aware of your nonverbal
messages. Maintain eye contact and
an open posture. Avoid arm cross-
ing, turning away, and eye rolling.
The overall goal is to find an
interest-based solution to the situa-
tion. The intention to seek com-
mon ground and pursue a com -
promise is more likely to yield a
win-win solution and ultimately im-
prove your working relationship.
Once you and the other person
reach a resolution, make a plan for
a follow-up meeting to evaluate
your progress on efforts at resolv-
ing the issue.
Framework for engaging in
challenging conversations
Cognitive rehearsal is an evidence-
based framework you can use to
address incivility during a challeng-
ing conversation. This three-step
process includes:
• didactic and interactive learning

and instruction
• rehearsing specific phrases to
use during uncivil encounters
• practice sessions to reinforce in-
struction and rehearsal.
Using cognitive rehearsal can
lead to improved communication, a
more conflict-capable workforce,
greater nurse satisfaction, and im-
proved patient care.
DESC model
Various models can be used to
structure a civility conversation.
One of my favorites is the DESC
model, which is part of Team-
STEPPS—an evidence-based team-
work system to improve communi-
cation and teamwork skills and, in
turn, improve safety and quality
care. Using the DESC model in
conjunction with cognitive rehears-
al is an effective way to address
specific incivility incidents. (See
DESC in action: Three scenarios.)
Other acceptable models exist
for teaching and learning effective
communication skills and becom-
ing conflict-capable. In each mod-
el, the required skills are learned,
practiced, and reinforced until re-

sponses become second nature.
Another key feature is to have the
learner make it his or her own; al-
though a script can be provided, it
should be used only to guide de-
velopment of the learner’s personal
response.
Nurturing a civil and
collaborative culture
Addressing uncivil behavior can be
difficult, but staying silent can in-
crease stress, impair your job per-
formance and, ultimately, jeopard-
ize patient care. Of course, it’s
easier to be civil when we’re re-
laxed, well-nourished, well-hydrat-
ed, and not overworked. But over
the course of a busy workday,
stress can cause anyone to behave
disrespectfully.
When an uncivil encounter oc-
curs, we may need to address it by
having a critical conversation with
the uncivil colleague. We need to
be well-prepared for this conversa-
tion, speak with confidence, and
use respectful expressions. In this
way, we can end the silence that
surrounds incivility. These encoun-
ters will be more effective when
we’re well-equipped with such
tools as the DESC model—and
when we’ve practiced the required
skills over and over until we’ve

perfected them.
Effective communication, con-
flict negotiation, and problem-solv-
ing are more important than ever.
For the sake of patient safety,
healthcare professionals need to
focus on our higher purpose—pro-
viding safe, effective patient care—
and communicate respectfully with
each other. Differences in social-
ization and educational experi-
ences, as well as a perceived pow-
er differential, can put physicians
and nurses at odds with one an-
other. When we nurture a culture
of collaboration, we can synthesize
the unique strengths that health-
care workers of all disciplines
bring to the workplace. In this
way, we can make the workplace
a civil place. �
Cynthia M. Clark is a nurse consultant with ATI
Nursing Education and professor emeritus at Boise
State University in Boise, Idaho. Names in scenarios
are fictitious.
For a list of selected references, visit American
NurseToday.com/?p=21641.

DESC in action: Three scenarios
The DESC model for addressing incivility has four elements:
D: Describe the specific situation.
E: Express your concerns.
S: State other alternatives.
C: Consequences stated.
The scenarios below give examples of how to use the DESC
model to address uncivil workplace encounters.
Nurses Sandy and Claire
At the beginning of her shift, Sandy receives a handoff report
from Claire, who has just finished her shift.
“Geez, Sandy, where have you been? You’re late as usual. I
can’t
wait to get out of here. See if you can manage to get this
informa-
tion straight for once. You should know Mary Smith by now.
You
took care of her yesterday. She was on 4S forever; now she’s
our
problem. You need to check her vital signs. I’ve been way too
busy
to do them. So, that’s it—I’m out of here. If I forgot something,
it’s
not my problem. Just check the chart.”
Not only is Claire rude and disrespectful, but she also is put-
ting the patient at risk by providing an incomplete report.
Here’s how Sandy might address the situation.
Describe:“Claire, I can see you’re in a hurry, and I understand
you’re upset because I’m late. We can talk about that when we
have more time. For now, I don’t feel like I’m getting enough
information to do my job effectively.”

Explain: “Talking about Mrs. Smith in a disrespectful way and
rushing through report can have a serious impact on her care.”
State: “I know we’re both concerned about Mrs. Smith, so
please give me a more detailed report so I can provide the
best care possible.”
Consequence:“Without a full report, I may miss an important
piece of information, and this could compromise Mrs. Smith’s
care.”
Nurse manager Alice and staff nurse Kathy
The anxiety level may rise for a nurse who experiences incivili-
ty from a higher-up. The following scenario illustrates an unciv-
il encounter between Alice, a nurse manager, and Kathy, a staff
nurse.
“Hey Kathy, I just found out Nicole called in sick, so you’re
going to
have to cover her shift. We’re totally shorthanded, so you need
to
stay. You may not like the decision, but that’s just the way it
is.”
Kathy is unable—and frankly, unwilling—to work a double
shift. Exhausted, she’d planned to spend time with her family
this evening. Also, she has worked three extra shifts this
month. She decides she needs to deal with this situation now
instead of setting up a meeting with Alice later in the week.
Here’s how she might use the DESC model with her manager.
Describe:“Alice, I can appreciate the need to cover the unit
because of Nicole’s illness. We all agree that having adequate
staff is important for patient care.”
Explain:“I’m exhausted, and because I have recently covered
other shifts, I’m less prepared to administer safe, high-quality
care.”
State:“I realize that as manager, it’s your responsibility to

make sure we have adequate staff for the oncoming shift. But
I’d like to talk about alternatives because I’m unable to work an
additional shift today.”
Consequence:“Let’s work together to discuss alternatives for
covering Nicole’s shift. It’s important for me to have a voice in
decisions that affect me.”
For a staff nurse, addressing a manager can be daunting. To
have a critical conversation with an uncivil superior in an effort
to put an end to the problem, you need the courage to be as-
sertive. Engaging in stress-reducing and self-care activities and
practicing mindfulness can boost your courage so you’ll be
prepared. Most of all, you need to practice and rehearse effec-
tive communication skills until you feel comfortable using
them.
A 2014 study by Laschinger et al. found a compelling rela-
tionship between meaningful leadership and nurse empower-
ment and their impact on creating civility and decreasing
nurse burnout. This study underscores the need for leadership
development to enable nurse managers to foster civil work en-
vironments. To create and sustain a healthy environment, all
members of the organization need to receive intentional and
ongoing education focused on raising awareness about incivil-
ity; its impact on individuals, teams, and organizations; and
most important, its consequences on patient care and safety.
Nurse Tom and Dr. Jones
This scenario depicts an uncivil encounter between a nurse
and a physician.
Tom is concerned about Mr. Brown, a patient who’s 2 days
postop
after abdominal surgery for a colon resection. On the second
evening after surgery, Mr. Brown's blood pressure increases.

Tom
watches him closely and continues to monitor his vital signs. As
the night wears on, Mr. Brown’s blood pressure continues to
rise,
his breathing seems more labored, and his heart rate increases.
Tom calls Dr. Jones, the attending physician, to report his find-
ings. Dr. Jones chuckles and says, “He’s just anxious. Who
wouldn’t
be in his condition?” and hangs up. Undaunted, Tom calls back
and insists Dr. Jones return to the unit to assess Mr. Brown.
Reluc-
tantly, Dr. Jones comes to the unit, peeks into Mr. Brown’s
room
without assessing him, and chastises Tom in front of his col-
leagues and other patients about his “ridiculous overreaction.”
Tom politely asks Dr. Jones to meet with him in an empty
meeting
room. Here’s how Tom uses DESC to address the situation.
Describe: “Dr. Jones, I’d like to explain something. Please hear
me out before you comment. I am a diligent nurse with exten-
sive patient care experience.”
Explain:“I know that as Mr. Brown’s attending physician,
you’re committed to his safety. I assure you that everyone on
the healthcare team shares your concern, including me. I
called you immediately after determining persistent and no-
table changes in Mr. Brown’s vital signs.”
State:“Because we are all concerned about Mr. Brown’s care, it
would be best if you conducted an assessment and addressed
me in a respectful manner so we can provide the best care
possible. I will show you the same respect.”
Consequence:“Disregarding important information or allow-
ing your opinion of me to influence your response could com-
promise Mr. Brown’s care. We need to work together as a team
to provide the best care possible.”

Please mark the correct answer online.
1. The American Association of
Critical-Care Nurses does not identify
which of the following as a
characteristic of a healthy workplace?
a. Skilled communication
b. Informal leadership
c. True collaboration
d. Meaningful recognition
2. A healthy work environment
requires:
a. civility conversations at the highest
level of the organization.
b. emphasis on formal rather than
informal leadership.
c. shared organizational vision, values,
and norms.
d. individualized values and norms.
3. When considering whether to have
a challenging conversation, which key
question should you ask yourself?

a. Is the person I need to talk to a full-
time employee?
b. Do I have enough experience to
have the conversation?
c. How many years have I worked at
this facility?
d. What will happen to the patient if I
stay silent?
4. Which of the following helps to
create a safe zone for a challenging
conversation?
a. Agreeing on a mutually beneficial
time to meet
b. Having the conversation in the
presence of patients
c. Having the conversation in the
presence of family members
d. Choosing a time immediately after
the other person’s shift
5. If a power differential exists
between you and the other person, an
effective approach is to:
a. keep the matter between the two of
you.
b. have a third party present.

c. have a security officer attend the
meeting.
d. refrain from having the
conversation.
6. Which of the following is an
appropriate action during a challenging
conversation?
a. Interrupt as needed.
b. Talk quickly.
c. Cross your arms.
d. Maintain eye contact.
7. The first step of cognitive rehearsal
is:
a. describing your position in objective
terms.
b. rehearsing specific phrases to use
during uncivil encounters.
c. undergoing didactic and interactive
learning and instruction.
d. having a practice session to
reinforce instruction and rehearsal.
8. What is the first element of the
DESC model?
a. Describe the specific situation.
b. Discuss your concerns.
c. Define your solution.

d. Detail the alternatives.
9. What is the last element of the DESC
model?
a. Coordinate your response.
b. Consider the setting.
c. Consequences stated.
d. Concerns stated.
10. Which statement about challenging
conversations is correct?
a. Nurses have an innate ability to
have these conversations.
b. The person who called the meeting
should dominate the discussion.
c. Agreeing with the other person’s
message is important.
d. After the resolution, the participants
should schedule a follow-up
meeting.
POST-TEST • Conversations to inspire and promote a more
civil workplace
Earn contact hour credit online at
http://www.americannursetoday.com/continuing-education/
Provider accreditation
The American Nurses Association’s Center for Continuing Edu-
cation and Professional Development is accredited as a
provider of continuing nursing education by the American
Nurses Credentialing Center’s Commission on Accreditation.

ANCC Provider Number 0023.
Contact hours: 1.0
ANA’s Center for Continuing Education and Professional
Devel-
opment is approved by the California Board of Registered Nurs-
ing, Provider Number CEP6178 for 1.2 contact hours.
Post-test passing score is 80%. Expiration: 11/1/18
ANA Center for Continuing Education and Professional Devel-
opment’s accredited provider status refers only to CNE activi-
ties and does not imply that there is real or implied endorse-
ment of any product, service, or company referred to in this
activity nor of any company subsidizing costs related to the
activity. The author and planners of this CNE activity have dis-
closed no relevant financial relationships with any commercial
companies pertaining to this CNE. See the last page of the
article to learn how to earn CNE credit.
CNE: 1.0 contact hours
CNE
JONA
Volume 41, Number 7/8, pp 324-330
Copyright B 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams
& Wilkins
T H E J O U R N A L O F N U R S I N G A D M I N I S T R A
T I O N

Fostering Civility in Nursing
Education and Practice
Nurse Leader Perspectives
Cynthia M. Clark, PhD, RN, ANEF
Lynda Olender, MS, RN, ANP, NEA-BC
Cari Cardoni, BSN
Diane Kenski, BSN
Incivility in healthcare can lead to unsafe working
conditions, poor patient care, and increased medical
costs. The authors discuss a study that examined
factors that contribute to adverse working relation-
ships between nursing education and practice, effective
strategies to foster civility, essential skills to be taught
in nursing education, and how education and practice
can work together to foster civility in the profession.
The work of nursing is 4 times more dangerous than
most other occupations,1 and nurses experience work-
related crime at least 2 times more often than any
other healthcare provider.2 Root causes for workplace
violence are multifaceted and include work-related
stress due in part to an increasingly complex patient
population and workload and deteriorating interper-
sonal relationships at the bedside.1 When normalized
or left unaddressed, these uncivil and disruptive be-
haviors may emerge into an incivility spiral,3 depicted
along a continuum from an unintentional act leading
to intentional retaliation, escalating to workplace bul-
lying and even violence.4 Incivility and disruptive be-
haviors have been identified both in the academic5-7

and clinical settings8-10; however, no direct study of
incivility between the 2 environments has been made.
Review of the Literature
Incivility and disruptive behavior in nursing educa-
tion and practice are common,4,9 on the rise,11 and
frequently ignored.12 Two decades ago, Boyer13
noted several challenges facing institutions of higher
education, including academic incivility. Although
incivility in the academic setting is not a new phe-
nomenon, the types and frequency of misbehavior
are increasing and have become a significant prob-
lem in higher education, including nursing educa-
tion. Clark and Springer14,15 explored faculty and
student perceptions of incivility in nursing education
and found negative behaviors to be commonplace
and exhibited by students and faculty alike. The ma-
jority of respondents (71%) perceived incivility as a
moderate to serious problem and reported that stress,
high-stake testing, faculty arrogance, and student en-
titlement contributed to incivility.14 More than half
of the respondents reported experiencing or know-
ing about threatening student encounters between
students or faculty.14
A small but growing body of research suggests
that incivility and disruptive behaviors are particu-
larly commonplace to the new graduate nurse or
nursing student within the clinical setting.10 Paral-
leling incivility in the academic setting, staff nurses
are also vulnerable to bullying, defined as negative
behavior that is systematic in nature and purpose-
fully targeted at the victim over a prolonged time
frame with the intent to do harm.16 These findings

are also supported by a recent Joint Commission
(TJC) survey17 reporting that more than 50% of
nurses are victims of disruptive behaviors including
324 JONA � Vol. 41, No. 7/8 � July/August 2011
Author Affiliations: Professor (Dr Clark) and Research
Assistants (Mss Cardoni and Kenski), School of Nursing, Boise
State University, Idaho; Doctoral Candidate (Ms Olender),
Seton
Hall University, South Orange, New Jersey, and Executive Con-
sultant and Nurse Researcher (Ms Olender), James J. Peters VA
Medical Center, Bronx, New York.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Correspondence: Dr Clark, School of Nursing, Boise State Uni-
versity, 1910 University Dr, Boise, ID 83725
([email protected]).
DOI: 10.1097/NNA.0b013e31822509c4
Copyright @ 201 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized
reproduction of this article is prohibited.1
incivility and bullying, and more than 90% of nurses
stated witnessing abusive behaviors of others in the
workplace. Likened to the concept of nurses ‘‘eating
their young’’,18 the findings of several studies suggest
that these negative behaviors are a learned process,
transferred through staff nurses to new nurses and
student nurses via interaction within the hierarchi-
cal nature of the profession.10
Incivility and disruptive behaviors may also be

normalized or perpetuated by organizational cul-
ture,12,18 particularly during times of restructuring
or downsizing. This is suggested to be secondary to
unclear roles and expectations, professional and per-
sonal value differences, personal vulnerabilities, and
power struggles common within organizations dur-
ing periods of change.18 Other consequences of inci-
vility include heightened stress levels, physiological
and psychological distress,5 job dissatisfaction,10,19
decreased performance,20 and turnover intention.21
Bartholomew18 noted that uncivil behaviors may
contribute to the exodus of new graduates leaving
their first job within 6 months. If disruptive behav-
iors are tolerated, nurses may leave the profession
altogether.21 Disruptive and bullying behaviors have
been identified as a root cause of more than 3,500
sentinel events over a 10-year time frame22 and con-
tribute to an annual estimate of 98,000 to 100,000
patients dying secondary to medical errors in hos-
pitals.23,24 Collectively, these findings led TJC17 to
intervene and release a sentinel event alert calling
for zero tolerance of intimidating and bullying
behaviors.
Conceptual Framework
Clark5 developed a conceptual model to illustrate
how heightened levels of nursing faculty and student
stress, combined with attitudes of student entitle-
ment and faculty superiority, work overload, and a
lack of knowledge and skills, contribute to incivility
in nursing education. This conceptual model has
been adapted to reflect the stressors that contribute

to incivility in both nursing education and practice
(Figure 1). Factors that contribute to stress in nurs-
ing practice are similar to the stressors experienced
in nursing education including work overload, un-
clear roles and expectations, organizational condi-
tions, and a lack of knowledge and skills. Moreover,
in both practice and academia, stress is mitigated by
leaders who role model professionalism and utilize
effective communication skills.25 The importance of
modeling effective communication and related edu-
cation to address incivility cannot be underestimated,
can reduce its incidence and effects,26 and can assist
in fostering cultures of civility.6
Figure 1. Conceptual model for fostering civility in nursing
education (adapted for nursing practice).
JONA � Vol. 41, No. 7/8 � July/August 2011 325
Nurse Leaders’ Survey
Mindful of the need to enhance the culture of civility
both in the academic and clinical settings, a descrip-
tive qualitative study was conducted. The purpose of
the study was to gather practice-based nursing lead-
ers’ perceptions about factors that contribute to an
adverse working relationship between nursing ed-
ucation and practice, the most effective strategies
needed to foster civility, the skills needed to be taught
in nursing education, and how nursing education and
practice can work together to foster civility in the

nursing workplace.
Procedure and Analysis
The survey was developed by the author (C.M.C.)
and included 4 open-ended questions designed to
garner nurse leaders’ perceptions on ways to foster
civility in nursing education and practice. The ques-
tions were constructed based on a comprehensive
review of the literature on incivility and numerous
empirical studies. Two other researchers reviewed
the survey for content validity and logical construc-
tion. Institutional approval to conduct the study was
obtained. The surveys were administered to nurse
leaders attending a statewide nursing conference
using a paper method for gathering narrative, hand-
written responses. Once the study was clearly ex-
plained, the respondents provided consent and
voluntarily completed the survey. Aside from indi-
cating their employment position, no demographic
information was gathered about the participants.
The survey contained 4 questions:
1. What factors contribute to an adverse
working relationship between nursing edu-
cation and practice?
2. What are the most effective strategies for
fostering civility in the practice setting?
3. What essential skills need to be taught in nurs-
ing education to prepare students to foster ci-
vility in the practice setting?
4. How can nursing education and practice
work together to foster civility in the prac-

tice setting?
The sample consisted of 174 nurse leaders: 68
(39.1%) nurse executives and 106 (60.9%) nurse
managers who were attending a statewide conference
held in a large western state. The respondents were
recruited by the researcher (C.M.C.), who explained
the purpose of the study during the keynote address.
The surveys were collected and prepared for analysis.
Textual content analysis was used to manually
analyze the respondents’ narrative responses. Key
words or phrases were quantified by the researchers;
inferences were made about their meanings and cat-
egorized into themes. Two members of the research
team reviewed the nurse leaders’ comments indepen-
dently to quantify the recurring responses and orga-
nize them into themes. Then, 2 other research members
reviewed the comments. Areas of theme agreement
and disagreement were discussed, and verbatim com-
ments were reviewed until all researchers were con-
fident that the analysis was a valid representation of
the comments.
Findings
Analyses of the narrative responses from the partici-
pants were organized into themes, ranked in order
of the number of responses, and described according
to each research question. The first research ques-
tion asked nurse leaders to identify factors that con-
tribute to an adverse working relationship between
nursing education and practice. Both groups identi-
fied a noticeable gap between nurses in education
and practice (Table 1). Nurse executives reported

nurse educators failing to keep pace with practice
changes, lacking familiarity with practice regulations
and standards, being slow to respond with curricular
changes, and a lack of shared goals between nurses in
education and practice. Nurse managers reported
similar findings, but suggested that a limited number
of nursing faculty, a highly stressed work environ-
ment, and lack of adequate resources also contributed
to adverse working relationships. These reported defi-
cits resulted in the perception that students were not
being adequately prepared for practice.
The second research question asked the respon-
dents to identify the most effective strategies for fos-
tering civility in the practice setting. Nurse executives
identified 4 major themes, and nurse managers iden-
tified 7 themes, listed in Table 2. Strategies that ren-
dered less than 10 responses are not listed in the table.
For nurse executives, these themes included holding
self and others accountable for acceptable behaviors,
addressing incivility in nursing education programs,
implementing stress reduction strategies, making ci-
vility a requirement for hiring, and conducting in-
stitutional assessments to measure incivility. Nurse
managers’ responses to this question were similar to
those of nurse executives. Notable differences between
the 2 groups were nurse executives’ recommendations
for civility teaching starting at the education level,
civility as a requirement for hiring, and ongoing ci-
vility assessment. Nurse managers’ responses differing
from executives were establishing a healthy work en-
vironment, ongoing practice-preparedness education,
and reinforcing positive behavior.

The third research question asked the respon-
dents to identify essential skills that need to be taught
in nursing education programs to prepare students to
foster civility in the practice setting (Table 3).
Nurse executives identified 4 major themes, and
nurse managers identified 8 themes. Strategies that
rendered less than 10 responses are not listed in the
table. For nurse executives, these themes included re-
flective practice and critical thinking, respect for di-
versity, and stress reduction strategies. Nurse mangers
had similar responses for essential skills and also sug-
gested critical-thinking skill sets (time management,
decision-making, and problem-solving skills), organi-
zational culture of civility, and civility education.
The final research question asked nurse leaders
for strategies about how nursing education and prac-
tice can work together to foster civility in the prac-
tice setting (Table 4). Both groups identified 5 major
themes. Once again, strategies that rendered less than
10 responses are not listed in the table. For nurse
executives, these themes included making civility a
requirement for hiring, teaching conflict resolution
and managing difficult situations, implementing stress
reduction strategies, and conducting institutional as-
sessments to measure incivility. Teaching civility was
identified only by nurse executives, and themes iden-
tified only by nurse managers were mentorship, pro-
fessionalism, and reinforcing and rewarding civility.

Nurse managers also suggested focusing on patient
care and safety and implementing stress reduction
strategies (G10 responses).
At both the organizational level and unit levels,
nurse leaders in practice noted the importance of
having a shared vision of civility and underscored the
importance of adopting and implementing codes of
conduct and effective policies and procedures. Both
Table 2. Strategiesa for Fostering Civility in the Practice
Setting
Nurse Executives (n = 64 of 68 [94.11%])b Nurse Managers (n
= 95 of 106 [85.62%])b
1. Conducting joint meetings to develop a shared
vision and a culture of civility (49)
1. Conducting joint meetings to develop a shared vision and
a culture of civility (38)
2. Establish codes of conduct with and policies
with clearly expected behaviors (40)
2. Establish codes of conduct and policies with clearly
expected behaviors (32)
3. Provide ongoing education (conflict resolution,
problem solving, respectful communication) (23)
3. Establish a healthy practice environment, emphasizing
workplace civility (32)
4. Positive role modeling by all members of the
healthcare team (20)

4. Positive role modeling by all members of the
healthcare team (30)
5. Provide ongoing education (conflict resolution, problem
solving,
respectful communication) with a focus on practice
preparedness (20)
6. Hold self and others accountable for acceptable behaviors
(19)
7. Reinforce positive behavior (11)
aStrategies identified by less than 10 respondents are not
included; please see text.
bThe number in parentheses following the strategies indicates
the number of times the strategy was identified. The number
exceeds the number
of respondents because of suggestions of multiple strategies.
Table 1. Factors Contributing to an Adverse Working
Relationship Between Nursing
Education and Practicea
= 101 of 106 [95.28%])b
1. Educators not keeping current with practice
changes (standards and regulations) (39)
1. Limited number of faculty and disconnected
from practice (40)
2. Lack of communication, collaboration, and mutual
curriculum planning between nursing faculty
and staff (16)

2. Highly stressed work environments plagued by rude,
uncivil behaviors among members of the health
care team (32)
3. Lack of preceptor engagement due to stress
and workload (23)
3. Faculty and staff workload and being stretched
too thin (29)
4. Lack of shared vision, mission, and goals
between practice and education (11)
4. Lack of communication, collaboration, and mutual curriculum
planning between nursing faculty and staff (21)
5. Lack of adequate resources (human and financial) (18)
aFactors identified by less than 10 respondents are not included;
please see text.
bThe number in parentheses following the factors indicates the
number of times the factor was identified. The number exceeds
the number of
respondents because of suggestions of multiple factors.
nurse executives and managers expressed the need
for effective communication and collaboration, pos-
itive role modeling, and the importance of vigilant

and purposeful hiring with civility in mind.
Discussion
The applicability of Clark and Olender’s (Figure 1)
conceptual model for fostering civility in nursing
academic and clinical practice environments is
supported by the results of this study. Indeed, results
suggest an increased awareness of stressors likely
contributing to a culture of incivility by these nurs-
ing leaders. As depicted in the model, and as Table 2
denotes, the implementation of strategies to reduce
stressors (such as policy and procedure, education,
and self-care initiatives) is a key objective for the
establishment of a culture of civility. A high percent-
age of nursing leaders emphasized the importance of
a collaborative vision and partnership between educa-
tion and practice to meet this goal. This vision could
emerge via joint education and practice meetings
that focus on designing up-to-date and relevant cur-
ricula that reflect current practice standards with em-
phasis on civility education and teamwork. Ideally,
this would result in the development and implemen-
tation of comprehensive, well-defined, nonpunitive
policies and procedures that focus on civility, are
widely disseminated, and have measurable outcomes.
An emphasis on individual accountability at all or-
ganizational levels, as well as organizational adop-
tion of a culture of civility, would be required for
policies to be effective. In addition, leadership mind-
fulness and intentionality toward positive role mod-
eling, professionalism, collaboration, teamwork,
and ethical conduct would be required. Related com-
petencies would be reinforced and practiced through
simulation and role playing, in real time, and in-

clusion of these skills within competency assessment
systems.
Our findings lend support to studies indicating
that stress is a major contributor to incivility1,5,14,15,19;
thus, it is important to integrate self-care and stress
reduction into daily activities. The American Holistic
Table 4. How Nursing Education and Practice Can Work
Together to Foster Civility
in the Practice Settinga
= 84 of 106 [79.24%])b
1. Improve communication and partnerships between
education and practice (33)
1. Improve communication and partnerships between
education and practice (55)
2. Develop a shared vision for a culture of civility (14) 2.
Integrate civility into the nursing curriculum (30)
3. Integrate civility into the nursing curriculum (13) 3. Develop
codes of conduct with expected behaviors (23)
4. Foster leadership and positive role modeling (11) 4. Foster
leadership, professionalism, positive role
modeling, and mentoring (16)
5. Teach civility and behavioral expectations (11) 5. Reinforce
and reward civility (11)
aStrategies identified by less than 10 respondents are not
included; please see text.
bThe number in parentheses following the strategies indicates
the number of times the strategy was identified. The number

exceeds the number
of respondents because of suggestions of multiple strategies.
Table 3. Essential Skillsa Needed to Prepare Students to Foster
Civility in the Practice Setting
= 99 of 106 [93.39%])b
1. Conflict resolution, negotiation, assertiveness,
learning to address incivility (43)
1. Effective communication, teamwork,
and collaboration (57)
2. Effective communication, teamwork, and collaboration (31)
2. Conflict resolution, negotiation, assertiveness (38)
3. Professionalism and leadership skills (24) 3. Professionalism
and leadership skills (35)
4. Personal accountability and patient safety (22) 4. Time
management, organizational skills, and
decision-making and problem-solving skills (17)
5. Creating a healthy work environment and
organizational culture (17)
6. Civility education (13)
7. Patient-focused care and patient safety (11)
aSkills identified by less than 10 respondents are not included;
please see text.
bThe number in parentheses following the skills indicates the
number of times the skill was identified. The number exceeds
the number of
respondents because of suggestions of multiple skills.

Nurses Association27 recommends several stress
management techniques including enjoying the com-
pany of family, friends, and other supportive people;
getting regular exercise and adequate sleep; eating
healthy foods; and drinking plenty of water. We also
suggest lunchtime walking programs, change of shift
aerobic classes, meditation, and 5-minute massages.
This may also include implementing caring compe-
tencies such as empathy, collaboration, and conflict
resolution in the work site. Last, Olender-Russo28
suggests creating forums to share success stories and
to communicate evidence-based outcomes such as
staff and patient satisfaction, low turnover rates, and
patient-related adverse events or avoidances both at
the organizational and unit levels to sustain work-
place civility and staff motivation.
Conclusion
Recent reports of the increasing prevalence of in-
civility and related disruptive behaviors within our
nursing academic and clinical settings are alarming,
especially when considering the impact on patient
and staff safety. The old adage, ‘‘it takes a village,’’
rings true when one considers the complexity of the
task of fostering a culture of civility. A comparison
study with academic nurse leaders could illuminate
shared perceptions or alternative ways to foster ci-

vility in nursing education and practice.
The model proposed in this study is newly adapted
to practice and requires further empirical testing. For
example, evidence-based data obtained through in-
stitutional assessments, such as the Organizational
Civility Scale,29 are needed to measure the organiza-
tional culture so that targeted interventions may be
implemented and empirically tested. Case study meth-
ods may be beneficial to showcase best practices.
Researchers also suggest that negative behaviors
in the workplace may be a learned process and likely
exacerbated within stressful academic and clinical set-
tings.12 Conversely, fostering civility in nursing edu-
cation and practice may also be a learned process and,
as such, amenable to positive interventions. Nurse
leaders need to be extremely attentive and supportive
toward the success of the nursing practice and nurs-
ing education partnership for the cocreation and sus-
tainment of a healthy work environment. Indeed, the
promotion of a positive organizational culture has
been shown to be a successful strategy and is asso-
ciated with increased nurse manager engagement in
authentic leadership.25 As healthcare providers, we
all have an ethical responsibility to care for those
who care for others. Specifically, nurse leaders must
create and promote a work environment conducive
to caring. This includes fostering a culture of civility
both within the academy (where nursing learning
begins) and within practice environments (where
learning of nursing continues).
References
1. Gallant-Roman M. Strategies and tools to reduce workplace

violence. AAOHN J. 2008;56(11):449-455.
2. Dunhart DT. National Crime Victimization Survey: Violence
in the Workplace, 1993-1999. Washington, DC: US Depart-
ment of Justice; 2001:1-12. Available at http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.
gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=693. Accessed June 19, 2011.
3. Anderson LM, Pearson CM. Tit for tat? The spiraling effect
of incivility in the workplace. Acad Manage Rev. 1999;24(3):
452-471.
4. Hutton S, Gates D. Workplace incivility and productivity
losses
among direct care staff. AAOHN J. 2008;56(4):168-175.
5. Clark CM. The dance of incivility in nursing education as de-
scribed by nursing faculty and students. Adv Nurs Sci. 2008;
31(4):E37-E54.
6. Clark CM. Faculty and student assessment and experience
with incivility in nursing education: a national perspective.
J Nurs Educ. 2008;47(10):458-465.
7. Luparell S. The effects of student incivility on nursing
faculty.
J Nurs Educ. 2007;46(1):15-19.
8. Olender-Russo L. Reversing a bullying culture. RN. 2009;
72(8):26-29.
9. Randle J. Reducing bullying in healthcare organisations.

Nurs Stand. 2007;21(22):49-56.
10. Simons S. Workplace bullying experienced by
Massachusetts
registered nurses and the relationship to intention to leave the
organization. Adv Nurs Sci. 2008;31(2):48-59.
11. Lipley N. Bullying at work on increase, Royal College of
Nursing survey finds. Nurs Manage. 2006;12(10):5.
12. Lewis MA. Nurse bullying: organizational considerations in
the
maintenance and perpetration of health care bullying cultures.
Nurs Manage. 2006;14(1):52-58.
13. Boyer EL. Campus Life: In Search of Community. San
Francisco,
CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching;
1990.
14. Clark CM, Springer PJ. Incivility in nursing education:
descriptive
study on definitions and prevalence. J Nurs Educ. 2007;46(1):7-
14.
15. Clark CM, Springer PJ. Thoughts on incivility: student and
faculty perceptions of uncivil behavior in nursing education.
Nurs Educ Perspect. 2007;28(2):93-97.
16. Hutchinson M, Vickers M, Jackson D, Wilkes L. Workplace

bullying in nursing: towards a more critical organisational
perspective. Nurs Inq. 2006;13(2):118-126.
17. The Joint Commission. Behaviors that undermine a culture
of
safety. Sentinel Event Alert. July 9, 2008; issue 40. Available
at http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/18/SEA_40.pdf.
Accessed June 19, 2011.
18. Bartholomew K. Ending Nurse to Nurse Hostility: Why
Nurses Eat Their Young and Each Other. Marblehead, MA:
HCPro; 2006.
19. Vessey JA, DeMarco RF, Gaffney DA, Budin W. Bullying
of
staff registered nurses in the workplace: a preliminary study
for developing personal and organizational strategies for the
transformation of hostile to healthy workplace environments.
J Prof Nurs. 2009;25(5):299-306.
20. Cortina LM, Magley VJ, Williams JH, Langout RD.
Incivility
in the workplace: incidence and impact. J Occup Health
Psychol. 2001;6(1):64-80.

21. Duffield C, O’Brien-Pallas L, Aitken L. Nurses who work
outside of nursing. Nurs Health Care Manage Policy. 2004;
47:664-667.
22. Healthgrades, Inc. Healthgrades Seventh Annual Patient
Safety in American Hospitals Study. March 2010. Avail-
able at http://www.healthgrades.com/media/DMS/pdf/
PatientSafetyinAmericanHospitalsStudy2010.pdf. Accessed
June 19, 2011.
23. Institute of Medicine. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer
Health System. Washington, DC: National Academy Press;
2000.
24. Institute for Safe Medication Practices. Results from ISMP
survey on workplace intimidation. Available at http://ismp.org/
Survey/surveyresults/Survey0311.asp. Accessed June 19, 2011.
25. Shirey MR. Authentic leadership, organizational culture,
and
healthy work environments. Crit Care Nurs Q. 2009;32(3):
189-198.
26. Griffin M. Teaching cognitive rehearsal as a shield for
lateral
violence: an intervention for newly licensed nurses. J Contin
Educ Nurs. 2004;35(6):257-263.
27. American Holistic Nurses Association. Holistic stress

manage-
ment for nurses. Available at http://www.ahna.org/Resources/
StressManagement/tabid/1229/Default.aspx. Accessed
June 19, 2011.
28. Olender-Russo L. creating a culture of regard: an antidote
to workplace bullying. Creat Nurs. 2009;15(2):75-81.
29. Clark CM, Landrum RE. Organizational Civility Scale.
Avail-
able at http://nursing.boisestate.edu/civility/research-instr.htm.
Accessed June 19, 2011.
LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
Old Testament Exegetical Commentary of (Name of Book)
Submitted to (Professor’s Name) in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the completion of the course

OBST (Course and Section Number)
Old Testament Orientation (Number)
by
Student Name
Date (July 4, 1776??)
Introduction to Obadiah
1 Historical Background
The nation of Edom had its genealogical roots in Esau (Gen.
25:30; 36). Esau was an ungodly man who despised his
birthright (Gen. 25:19-34). His patriarchal blessing was stolen
by Jacob, his devious brother. Rebekah, their mother, led Jacob
in this plan of deception (Gen. 27). Rebekah lacked faith in God
as she had already been told at the birth of the twin brothers
that the older Esau would serve the younger Jacob (Gen. 25:23).
There was no need to steal the blessing as it had already been
bestowed by God at Jacob's birth.
2 Prevailing Conditions
The primary benchmark for determining the date of Obadiah is
the identification of the invasion of Jerusalem (11-14). There
are four major dates that must be considered. The earliest was
the invasion of Shishak, king of Egypt, in 926 B.C. This took
place during the reign of Rehoboam of Judah (1 Kings 14:25-26;
2 Chron. 12). This event falls short of validity because Edom

remained under subjection to Israel at this time. This invasion
did not result in the plundering of Jerusalem.
A second view suggests the civil war between Jehoash of Israel
and Amaziah of Judah. Jehoash invaded Israel about 790 B.C.
and devastated the land (2 Kings 14; 2 Chron. 25). The
difficulty with this view is that the invaders are called
"foreigners" which would not be a proper designation for Jews
living in the north.
A third viewpoint maintains the destruction of Jerusalem by
Nebuchadnezzar in 586 B.C. A problem for this view is that
Obadiah does not reflect a complete destruction of Jerusalem.
The fourth date involves the warfare of the Philistines and
Arabians against Jehoram of Judah (848-841 B.C.). In favor of
this date (845 B.C.) are the following considerations:
1) The nation of Edom had revolted against the vassalage of
Jehoram, and Edom was a bitter enemy of Judah during this
time (2 Kings 8:20; 2 Chron. 21:16-17).
2) Nebuchadnezzar took the captives back to Babylonia (Daniel
1), and those in Obadiah's day were taken to Phoenicia and
westward (20).
3) Other prophets like Jeremiah, Daniel, and Ezekiel are
mentioned in the deportation of Nebuchadnezzar so that the
absence of Obadiah's name in the deportation would argue for a
different time.
4) The lack of identification of a specific invader by Obadiah
would indicate that these enemies were different from the
Chaldeans or Babylonians who are clearly identified by the
prophets of the sixth century B.C.
5) A comparison of Obadiah to Amos (760 B.C.) and Jeremiah
(627 B.C.) evidences the acquaintance of these prophets to his
work (Ob. 14-Amos 1:6; Ob. 4-Amos 9:2; Ob. 19 - Amos 9:12;
Ob. 1-9 -Jer. 49:7-22. See also Joel 3:3-6.).
6) Although minor, some weight for an earlier date should be
given to the placement of Obadiah in the canon with the
prophets that date to the ninth and eighth centuries
B.C.[footnoteRef:1] [1: Hassler, Mark A. For additional

discussion, see “The Setting of Obadiah: When does the oracle
concerning Edom transpire?” Journal of the Evangelical
Society, 59.2 (June 2016) 241-54.]
3 Main Characters
3.1 Obadiah
The biblical record provides only nominal information about the
prophet Obadiah. Walter Baker states: “At least 12 Old
Testament men were named Obadiah including an officer in
David’s army (1 Chron. 12:9), Ahab’s servant (1 Kings 18:3), a
Levite in the days of Josiah (2 Chron. 34:12), and a leader who
returned from the Exile with Ezra (Ezra 8:9).”[footnoteRef:2]
Smith and Page note that: “The name ‘Obadiah’ is from a root
meaning ‘to serve,’ with a shortened form (yâ) of the covenant
name for Israel’s God, Yahweh. Thus, the name means servant
(or worshiper) of Yahweh.”[footnoteRef:3] There is the
suggestion that he may be identified with the chief officer of
Ahab (1 Kings 18). If this identification is true, there must have
been a meaningful change in his life after meeting with Elijah.
Ahab's Obadiah was a man who was quite unwilling to help
Elijah. Although he had protected a hundred prophets during the
murderous terror of Jezebel, he sought every avenue to avoid
association with Elijah. He feared the Lord greatly, but he also
feared Ahab. Obadiah must have known Elijah personally since
he easily recognized him. Even though these two Obadiahs may
be placed during the same period, it is difficult to conclude that
they are the same person. [2: Walter L. Baker, “Obadiah,” in
The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the
Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck, vol. 1 (Wheaton,
IL: Victor Books, 1985), 1453.] [3:
Billy K. Smith and Franklin S. Page, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah,
vol. 19B, The New American Commentary (Nashville:
Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 179.]

3.2 Edomites
It is apparent from the history of the Edomites that Esau passed
on to his descendants his immoral and idolatrous ways. The
Edomites settled in the Trans-jordan region that is southwest of
the Dead Sea. This region is traversed by rugged mountainous
terrain that provided a natural barrier of protection. Sela
(Petra), the capital, was accessed by a long and narrow
passageway that led through the mountainous cliffs. A few
soldiers were able to protect the city from a massive army due
to the restricted entrance to the city. This fact, combined with
the high fortification of their homes in the mountains, caused
them to have a false sense of security.
Ever since Esau sold his birthright and Jacob stole his blessing,
the Edomites and Israelites had been at enmity. The Edomites
refused Moses and the exodus generation the freedom of
passage along the Kings Highway that traverses Edom (Ex. 20).
In spite of this maltreatment by their cousin, the Israelites were
commanded by God not to take vengeance on their relatives
(Deut. 23:7-8). King Saul fought against them and later David
brought them under subjection (1 Sam. 14; 2 Sam. 8). The
Edomites revolted against Solomon but they were not able to
throw off his yoke (1 Kings 11). The Edomites gained a measure
of freedom during the reign of Jehoram (2 Kings 8:20-22).
Scrimmages and hostilities continued between these nations
until the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. The Edomites survived in
part until the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, and its
surrounding regions in A.D 70.
4 Argument
Yahweh (LORD) will bring retributive judgment on Edom
because Edom reveled and participated in the destruction of
Israel. Walter Baker argues that God’s “righteousness
demanded vengeance on Edom, Israel’s perennial enemy.
Judgment against Edom is mentioned in more Old Testament
books than it is against any other foreign nation (cf. Isa. 11:14;

34:5–17; 63:1–6; Jer. 9:25–26; 25:17–26; 49:7–22; Lam. 4:21–
22; Ezek. 25:12–14; 35; Joel 3:19; Amos 1:11–12; 9:11–12;
Obad.; Mal. 1:4).”[footnoteRef:4] [4: Walter Baker, 1453.
]
5 Purpose
Israel was to be encouraged and hope in Yahweh because He
would avenge Edom's sin and restore Israel as a nation in His
kingdom.
6 Key Verse
For the day of the Lord draws near on all the nations. As you
have done, it will be done to you. Your dealings will return on
your own head (15).
7 Major Themes
The judgment of the Edomites for attacking Israel.
The complete destruction of the Edomites.
The Edomites would be betrayed by their allies.
The arrogance of the Edomites.
The deliverance of Judah, Israel and Jerusalem by the
LORD God.
The Day of the Lord brings judgment and deliverance.
The principle of lex talionis, corresponding punishment.
The Kingdom of LORD will be established on earth.
Interpretation and Exposition
1 The Lord Yahweh pronounces judgment on Edom 1-2.
Obadiah received his prophetic message from God through a
vision. Walter Baker comments, “The word vision is also used
in Isaiah 1:1, Micah 1:1, and Nahum 1:1 to introduce those
prophetic books (cf. Dan. 1:17; 8:1; 9:24; Hosea 12:10). It
suggests that the prophet “saw” (mentally and spiritually) as

well as heard what God communicated to him.”[footnoteRef:5]
Apparently, this form of communication came on the prophets
as well as others during a state of sleep. God would reveal the
message to them within the consciousness of their minds (Gen.
46:2; Dan. 2:28; Joel 2:28). [5: Ibid., 1455.]
The vision is a message of judgment against Edom. The imagery
is that of the LORD (Yahweh) sending out an envoy or
ambassador to call out the nations to rise with military action
against Edom. Obadiah addressed God as “Adonai Yahweh”, a
designation that emphasized His sovereignty and covenant
relationship to Israel. Yahweh would make Edom small among
the nations. The Edomites would be despised by their neighbors.
Just as Esau despised his birthright, so Yahweh and the nations
would despise them (Gen. 25:34). Carl Armerding writes:
“Edom” represents an alternative name of ‘Esau,’ the brother of
Jacob (Gen 36:1, 8, 43; cf. Obad 6, 8–9, 18–19, 21). It also
denotes the descendants of Esau (Gen 36:9, 16–17; cf. 36:31,
43), whose blood relationship with Israel is invoked repeatedly
in the OT (Num 20:14; Deut 23:7; Amos 1:11; Mal 1:2; cf.
Obad 10, 12); and it describes the land inhabited by them (Num
20:23; 21:4; 34:3; cf. Obad 18–21).”[footnoteRef:6] [6: Carl E.
Armerding, “Obadiah,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary:
Daniel and the Minor Prophets, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 7
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 341.]
2 Edom will not be able to protect itself from Yahweh's
judgment 3-4.
The Edomites lived in a state of self deception Their pride or
presumptuous insolence gave them a false sense of security.
Living in the shadow of the mountains, protected by the rugged
terrain and narrow gateway to their city, they thought that no
one, not even God could bring them down. They carved their
houses into the mountainous rock and in the highest places of

the cliffs. The Edomites mocked the nations and God by stating:
"Who will bring me down to earth (3)?" They thought they were
both invincible and impregnable. Yahweh taunts them by His
affirmation that they will be brought down. Their reasoning had
blinded them because their hearts had been lifted up. Yahweh
would bring down this people whose hearts had been lifted up
by their insolence and false sense of security in their location at
high elevations.
Yahweh continued to mock them: "Though you rise high as an
eagle, and set your nest between the stars, I will bring you
down, declares Yahweh (4)." Smith and Page observe that:
“Obadiah compared Edom with the eagle, a bird known to soar
high in the air and to nest in the mountain heights. From such
lofty heights the eagle customarily launched deadly attacks on
its victims below. Edom had been accustomed to doing
that.”[footnoteRef:7] [7:
Smith and Page, 183.]
Armerding adds that: “Its main centers of civilization were
situated in a narrow ridge of mountainous land southeast of the
Dead Sea (cf. v.1). This ridge exceeded a height of 4,000 feet
throughout its northern sector, and it rose in places to 5,700 feet
in the south. Its height was rendered more inaccessible by the
gorges radiating from it toward the Arabah on the west and the
desert eastwards.”[footnoteRef:8] [8:
Armerding, 342–343.]
3 Yahweh's judgment will completely devastate Edom 5-9.
Obadiah details the devastating and horrific judgments that
God would execute on the Edomites. David Baker elaborates:
“The author highlights the heinous nature of the crime by
inserting an almost involuntary exclamation, whose introductory
interjection ‘Oh’ can indicate horror (Jer. 51:41) or lament (Isa.
1:21; Jer. 48:17)”.[footnoteRef:9] [9:

David W. Baker, Joel, Obadiah, Malachi, The NIV Application
Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House,
2006), 169–170.]
The geographical location of Edomite cities provided the
people a strategic opportunity for the accumulation of great
wealth. One city, Petra was a great commercial marketplace on
the Syrian and Arabian trade route. It was situated in the rocks
of a mountain plateau. “The term translated “rocks” (selaʿ) may
be a pun on the name of Edom’s capital city, Sela (cf. 2 Kgs
14:7; Isa 16:1; 42:11). Identification of Sela with Petra cannot
be established absolutely for lack of adequate
evidence.”[footnoteRef:10] [10: Smith and Page, 183.]
The Edomites had benefited greatly from this trade and had
accumulated much wealth. The LORD exemplifies His
devastating judgment on the region with two illustrations (5).
When thieves break into a house, they take what they want,
what they can carry, and are gone very quickly. They take as
much as they can carry, but usually leave behind some
possessions. The nations that judge Edom will ransack their
cities so thoroughly that there will be nothing left. The invaders
will search out all of the treasures, even the hidden treasures
and carry them off as plunder (5-6).
The second illustration relates to the harvesting of grapes.
When a person gleans from grapevines, there are usually some
grapes that are missed, fall to the ground, or are purposely left
for the poor to pick. The completeness of Yahweh's judgment is
such that when He is through with the Edomites, there will be
nothing left for them to find.[footnoteRef:11] [11:
See Moisés Silva and Merrill Chapin Tenney, The Zondervan
Encyclopedia of the Bible, Q-Z (Grand Rapids, MI: The
Zondervan Corporation, 2009), 1024 for further discussion on
the harvesting of grapes in the Ancient Near East. ]
The city of Petra, although somewhat impregnable from the

outside, would fall from the inside as allies betray Edom (7).
The nations about Edom betrayed them by breaking covenants
of peace and turning against them in war. Those nations who
had cut a covenant with Edom would now cut off Edom (9).
David Baker notes that: “Rather than criminals or ancient
enemies plaguing Edom, it is her former friends and allies who
turn against her. They are identified in Hebrew literally as
covenant partners (“allies”; lit., “those of your covenant”),
“friends” (lit., “those of your peace”; Jer. 38:22; cf. Ps. 41:9;
Jer. 20:10), and “your bread.”[footnoteRef:12] [12:
David Baker, 170–171.]
One form of a covenant was the meal or bread covenant. Any
group of people or kings could sit down for a meal together in
which they would share bread. This gathering showed their
mutual acceptance of each other and at times would also involve
the taking of an oath of allegiance and protection. The nations
lured Edom into a trap by deceitfully sharing a bread covenant
with them so that by gaining their trust, they could then turn
and surprise them with destruction. Edom had been treacherous
with their neighbors and cousins, the Israelites, and now this
treachery would return on their own heads. Armerding
comments: “It threatens Edom with deception by its “friends”;
the noun “friends” translates a phrase implying not merely
coexistence but communal commitment (lit., “the men of your
peace” [ʾanšê šelōmeḵā]; so Ps 41:9; Jer 20:10;
38:22).”[footnoteRef:13] [13:
Armerding, 344.]
The LORD’s judgment would not only be on Edom’s wealth but
also Edom’s wisdom. Smith and Page note that: “The rhetorical
question raised in v. 8 demands a yes answer. “In that day” is
prophetic language for a future intervention of God in human
affairs (cf. Amos 2:16; 8:3, 9, 13; 9:11). Here it refers to the
time of God’s judgment of Edom (cf. v. 15).”[footnoteRef:14]
The text is clear, “YES!” judgment would destroy all aspects of

Edomite society and culture. [14: Smith and Page, 188. ]
Leslie Allen remarks: “In the book of Job, Eliphaz, whose
traditional wisdom is attacked, is stated to have come from
Teman in Edom. To Edom’s bazaars thronged peoples of the
east, who brought with their wares travellers’ tales of learning
and lore. It was probably this byproduct of its being a center of
trade and travel that gave rise to Edom’s awesome reputation
for wisdom. Here its wisdom takes the form of skill in military
strategy.”[footnoteRef:15] The men of wisdom and
understanding would be destroyed. The counsel of the wise
would be destroyed as they sought to deliver Edom with their
military, religious and political strategies (8). [15:
Leslie C. Allen, The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah,
The New International Commentary on the Old Testament
(Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1976),
152–153.]
The prophetic woe pronounced on Teman focuses on the mighty
men that dwelled in this city (9). Patterson and Hill suggest
that Teman: “was one of Edom’s chief cities (Amos 1:12),
located in the northern part of the country. The term could thus
stand for a region in the northern sector or for the entire country
(Jer 49:7; Hab 3:3).”[footnoteRef:16] A major city was likely to
have a special military presence so as to protect the leaders and
their wealth. [16:
Richard D. Patterson and Andrew E. Hill, Cornerstone Biblical
Commentary, Vol 10: Minor Prophets, Hosea–Malachi (Carol
Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2008), 224.]
Donald Wiseman notes the complete devastation is indicated as:
“These three oracles build toward a climax with: (1) the plunder
of riches (5–6), (2) loss of wisdom and understanding (7–8),
and (3) a loss of military capability (9). The very structures of
society, in its constituent elements of economic well-being,
wise rule and military security through armed force and

international treaty, will topple.”[footnoteRef:17] [17:
Donald J. Wiseman, T. Desmond Alexander, and Bruce K.
Waltke, Obadiah, Jonah and Micah: An Introduction and
Commentary, vol. 26, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 39. ]
4 Yahweh's judgment on Edom is because of their violence,
arrogance, complacency and vengeance toward Israel 10-14.
The Edomites had violated the Abrahamic covenant through
violent acts against Israel. They had cursed their relatives,
God's covenant people, and now Yahweh curses them. The
Edomites had sought to cover their shame of violence against
their brother Jacob. Yahweh's vengeance returns that shame so
that it covered them. This shame probably referred to their own
captivity and humiliation by the conquering nations. It was not
uncommon for a person to be put to shame by being stripped
naked, face shaved and tied through the nose with a rope or fish
hooks after being defeated.
Harold Shanks summarizes the charges from verses 10-14:
“After announcing two more aspects of punishment this section
lists twelve acts of treachery: (1) violence against Jacob (v. 10),
(2) stood aloof (v. 11), (3) looted Jerusalem (v. 11), (4) looked
down on Jacob (v. 12), (5) rejoiced when they were destroyed
(v. 12), (6) boasted when they were in trouble (v. 12), (7)
marched into their gates (v. 13), (8) looked down on them (v.
13), (9) seized their wealth (v. 13), (10) waited on their
refugees (v. 14), (11) cut down their fugitives (v. 14), and (12)
handed over their survivors (v. 14).”[footnoteRef:18] [18:
Harold Shank, Minor Prophets, The College Press NIV
Commentary (Joplin, MO: College Press Pub. Co., 2001–), 316.]
The Edomites not only withheld their help to Judah, but also
participated in violence and aggression against them. They gave
hearty approval to those who invaded Jerusalem and were

accessories to the crimes. Their bitter hearts were void of
compassion, and they reveled in Judah's destruction with
boastful words. David Baker expresses the cruel irony in
writing: “Violent Edom, instead of being cloaked by its pride
(v. 3), is now “covered with shame,” just as the flood covered
Noah’s violent neighbors (Gen. 7:19–20) or as one might be
wrapped in a garment (e.g., Ex. 28:42; Deut. 22:12). The ironic
twist is that garments are used most commonly to cover one’s
shame (e.g., Gen. 9:23; Hos. 2:9; cf. Gen. 3:7, 21), but here it is
shame that covers the nation.”[footnoteRef:19] [19:
David Baker, 180.]
The road of escape from Jerusalem and Judea led through the
Judean wilderness to the Kings Highway in Trans-Jordan. A
person would flee through the wilderness and then cross the
Jordan River at Jericho or go farther south and cross below the
Dead Sea. Once on the Kings Highway, the flight would lead to
a crossroad that would go west to Egypt or east to Teman and
Petra. At this junction in the road, the Edomites stood and cut
down their helpless and exhausted cousins. Rather than offering
them the safety of a cool mountain haven, they murdered and
left them to rot in the desert sun. Those Judeans that were not
killed were forced into imprisonment and slavery. Wiseman
asserts: “Edom’s despicable actions towards her brother climax
with an attack on Judah’s refugees (cf. v. 12; 2 Kgs 25:4–5).
Not actively engaging in the conquest itself, Edom was doing
something even crueler, callously handing over (cf. Deut. 23:15;
32:30; 1 Sam. 23:11; Amos 1:9; 6:8) survivors (v. 8; Josh.
10:20) caught in their demoralized flight. Edom’s punishment
fits her crime: they who cut down others will themselves be cut
off (vv. 9–10).”[footnoteRef:20] [20:
Wiseman, Alexander, and Waltke, 41.]
Commenting on the cadence of the Hebrew text, Smith and
Page remark that: “This verse begins a series of eight
prohibitions in vv. 12–14 (lit., “do not …”). They employ the

form of an immediate prohibition (using the negative particle
ʿal) rather than that of a general prohibition (using the negative
particle lōʾ)… the impact Obadiah’s repeated language pattern
may have had on the listeners: The cadence is that of the
incessant beat of a drummer leading troops into
battle.”[footnoteRef:21] [21:
Smith and Page, 192–193.]
5 Yahweh will judge all nations according to their deeds 15-16.
The prophecy of Obadiah looked beyond the days of Edom to
include the day of the Lord at the end times. This is a day of
judgment that will fall on all the nations because they have
violated Yahweh's covenant with His people Israel (Gen. 12;
Joel 2-3). The law of recompense will be executed as the
dealings of the nations will fall back on their own heads.
David Baker summarizes the meaning of the Day of the LORD.
“The day of the Lord” is not a concept originating with
Obadiah, but rather one that started with the earliest of the
writing prophets (see Amos 5:18[2x], 20; cf. Isa. 13:6, 9; Ezek.
13:5; 45:35; Joel 1:15; 2:1, 11, 31; 3:14; Zeph. 1:7, 14[2x];
Mal. 4:5). The origins of the concept are debated, but its
contents are clear from what is probably the first of the biblical
uses of the phrase—Amos 5:18. It concerns a time of divine
intervention in history, bringing good and blessing on those
who please God and gloom and destruction on his foes. The day
is not only an eschatological concept at the end of the age, but a
time that is near (Joel 1:15; 3:14; Zeph. 1:7) and approaching
quickly (Zeph. 1:14).”[footnoteRef:22] [22: David Baker, 183.]
The Edomites and nations had drunk in celebration of their
devastation of Yahweh's Holy Mountain in Jerusalem and now
they will drink of His wrath. In the last days an angel will cry

out: "Righteous art Thou, who art and who wast, O Holy One,
because Thou didst judge these things; for they poured out the
blood of saints and prophets, and Thou hast given them blood to
drink. They deserve it" (Rev. 16:5-6, NASB).
Walter Baker identifies principles of Lex Talionis: “God’s
judgments on Edom corresponded to her crimes. What she (you
is sing[footnoteRef:23].) had done to Judah would then be done
to her: (1) She looted Jerusalem (v. 13), so she was looted (v. 6;
cf. Jer. 49:10). (2) Edom killed Judean fugitives (Obad. 14; cf.
Amos 1:11), so she was slaughtered (Obad. 8; cf. Isa. 34:5–8;
Ezek. 32:29; 35:8). (3) She handed over Judean survivors to the
enemy (Obad. 14; cf. Ezek. 35:5), so Edom’s allies expelled her
(Obad. 7). (4) Edom rejoiced over Judah’s losses (Obad. 12; cf.
Ezek. 35:15), so she was covered with shame and destroyed
(Obad. 10).”[footnoteRef:24] [23: ] [24: Walter Baker, 1457–
1458.]
6 Yahweh will avenge Israel by expanding her borders after He
has taken retribution on Edom 17-21.
Yahweh, true to His covenant with the patriarchs, will someday
restore Israel in the land. Jerusalem, the city from which the
people had to flee will be the place to which the victors will
march (17-21). Armerding states: “As the visible expression of
God’s sovereign holiness, Mount Zion becomes the source of
judgment on man’s sin…. However, the Lord’s kingly rule is
expressed equally by his salvation, which also emanates from
Mount Zion (e.g., Pss 20:2; 53:6), and which restores to it the
“holy” character consonant with his presence
there.”[footnoteRef:25] [25:
Armerding, 353–354.]
Those who escape the persecution of the Antichrist during the
tribulation will be established again in Jerusalem (Rev. 12). The
city and its people will prosper as Yahweh's blessings will pour

forth. Some expositors believe that Petra is the place that God
will prepare for the Jews to flee to during the Tribulation. If
Petra is that city, it is an interesting turnabout, as a city that
was destroyed for not protecting Israel will be used by God to
care for His people as originally intended.
The Abrahamic covenant promises that Israel will possess the
land for eternity. Israel will avenge its destruction by Edom.
Edom will be destroyed like the dry stubble of straw that is
ignited by a fire (18). The Jews will possess the promised land
and spread out to fulfill the covenant boundaries. The Negev to
the south, the mountains of Esau to the east, the Philistines' low
country to the west, the entire regions of Ephraim, Samaria,
Benjamin and Gilead will be possessed by the restored nation of
Israel.
“Fire is one means of divine punishment in the Old Testament
(cf. Exod 15:7; Isa 10:17; Joel 2:5; Amos 1:4, 7, 10, 12, 14; 2:2,
5). The house of Jacob will serve as God’s “fire,” and the house
of Joseph (Jacob’s prominent son) will serve as God’s torch
(“flame”). These parallel lines identify God’s reunited people
(Judah and Israel) as the instrument of judgment on Edom (cf.
Pss 77:15; 81:4–5; Jer 3:18; Ezek 37:16–28).”[footnoteRef:26]
[26:
Smith and Page, 199.]
The exiles will also return from other lands such as Sepharad
and possess the cities of the southern Negev. The identification
of some of these regions is difficult.[footnoteRef:27] Allen
suggests: “Judeans returning from exile to Jerusalem would
penetrate southward and wrest the Negeb towns from Edomite
interlopers. One might have expected a reference to Babylon as
the domicile of Jewish exiles, but instead a mysterious Sepharad
is named. The various identifications assigned to the place
underscore the uncertainty of present
knowledge.”[footnoteRef:28] [27:
See John D. Wineland, “Sepharad (Place),” ed. David Noel
Freedman, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (New York:

Doubleday, 1992), 1089 for further discussion on the
identification of Sepharad.] [28:
Allen, 171.]
This period of judgment and deliverance will bring a period of
the reversal of fortunes. Douglas Stuart observes: “Any
Edomites and any other foreign occupiers and interlopers, who
pushed Israelites out of the city, will themselves be driven off.
In effect all of Jerusalem, not just the temple area, will become
a holy place where only righteous people, by reason of God’s
regulations of purity, are entitled to dwell (cf. Lev 21:11–23;
Num 19:20).”[footnoteRef:29] Bradford Anderson summarizes
the concept in stating: “Obadiah uses a series of corresponding
designations for Edom and Judah that draw on their shared
history (Esau/Jacob) and their geography (Mount Esau and
Mount Zion). Moreover, these juxtapositions depict a reversal
of fortune for both these peoples; ‘brother’ Edom will be
dispossessed and purged, while Judah and Jerusalem will be
repossessed, and will be a place of refuge for YHWH’s people.”
[footnoteRef:30] [29:
Douglas Stuart, Hosea–Jonah, vol. 31, Word Biblical
Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2002), 420. ] [30:
Bradford Anderson, Poetic Justice in Obadiah, Journal for the
Study of the Old Testament Vol 35.2 (2010): 251.]
Bob Spender captures the essence of this eschatological victory.
“The message of Obadiah reminds us that the Lord is sovereign
over all the earth, but it also reminds us that his plan for the
future unfolds daily. For the believer this is centered in the
person of God’s own Son. John records the announcement of the
seventh angel in Revelation, who says, “The kingdom of the
world has become the kingdom of our Lord, and of his Christ;
and He will reign forever and ever” (Rev. 11:15). Yet we also
understand from the author of the book of Hebrews that God’s
plan for the future is still unfolding in that he writes, “for in

subjecting all things to him, He left nothing that in not subject
to him. But now we do not yet see all things subjected to him”
(Heb. 2:8). As believers we can affirm Obadiah’s message about
the kingdom of the Lord, but we also can rejoice in the firmness
of our present relationship in Christ.”[footnoteRef:31] [31:
Bob Spender, Obadiah: Accountability in Relationship,
Emmaus Journal, 14, no.1 (Summer, 2005): 95. ]
Application
1 The Edomites violated Yahweh's covenant with Abraham
and his descendants by murdering their cousins as they fled the
invasion of Judea and Jerusalem. The violation of the
Abrahamic Covenant is central to understanding God's dealing
with Israel and other nations. The Israelites knew that those
who bless Abraham are blessed, but the Edomites had cursed
their brothers and so they were judged by God (Gen 12). The
Israelites would have viewed the prophecy of Obadiah as
Yahweh’s righteous judgment. We must allow the LORD to
judge even today. We need to treat our neighbors, co-workers,
family, etc. in a loving way as God intends for us to do. We
must love others with the love of Christ; even our enemies so
that we might draw them to a saving knowledge of God (Mt.
5:43-44). We should also pray for the peace and evangelism of
those living in Israel, both Jew and Gentile.
2 Esau despised his birthright and was an ungodly man. He
passed down a godless, spiritual heritage to his children, and
the result was a godless nation. The Edomites had rejected the
wisdom of God for the wisdom of men. Israel was no better at

times when it came to obeying the LORD. We must make Christ
first in our lives, marriages, businesses, relationships, etc. so
that our children will not only hear about God, but be shaped
through seeing the model of Christ in us (Eph. 5-6).
3 The day of the Lord's judgment is drawing nearer on the
nations. Israel had many prophets warn them of judgment, and
in particular a final judgment of all of the nations. We must
prepare ourselves to live with an all holy God. If we believe
that Jesus died for our sins, and was buried, and that He was
raised on the third day according to the Scripture, then we are
saved (1 Cor.15). We must grow in Christ by reading God's
Word, praying without ceasing, and fellowshipping with other
believers in a local congregation. The endtimes will be a period
of cultural degradation (2 Tim. 3). As Christians, we must the
teachings of the Word of God knowing that all who desire to
live godly will suffer persecution.
4 Obadiah prophesied of the restoration of Jerusalem. This
would have been a source of great hope for the Israelites in his
day. The collective voices of the Old Testament prophets
promised of a day of revival and restoration. Jesus Christ will
lead his people in a triumphal victory at His Second Coming. He
will be accompanied by an angelic host and resurrected saints.
Tribulation saints, who will be victorious over the Antichrist,
will be resurrected; and then God's people will reign with Christ
in the millennial kingdom (Rev. 19-20). We can embrace this
same hope in the midst of the international crises that we face
today.
5 The Edomites were arrogant and prideful. They attached
those whom they should have helped. The evil that the Edomites
perpetuated came back on themselves. The Israelites
understood the concept of divine justice returning evil for evil.
We must be humble, gentle and compassionate people who
return love for hatred and good for evil (1 Thess. 5:15).

Bibliography
Allen, Leslie C. The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah.
The New International Commentary on the Old Testament.
Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1976.
Anderson, Bradford., Poetic Justice in Obadiah, Journal for the
Study of the Old Testament Vol 35.2 (2010).
Baker, David W. Joel, Obadiah, Malachi. The NIV Application
Commentary. Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2006.
Baker, Walter, Walvoord, John F., and Roy B. Zuck, Dallas
Theological Seminary. The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An
Exposition of the Scriptures. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985.
Burge, Gary M., and Andrew E. Hill, eds. The Baker Illustrated
Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2012.
Chisholm, Robert B., Jr. Handbook on the Prophets: Isaiah,
Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Minor Prophets.
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002.
Elwell, Walter A., and Barry J. Beitzel. Baker Encyclopedia of
the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988.
Ferreiro, Alberto. The Twelve Prophets. Ancient Christian
Commentary on Scripture OT 14. Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 2003.
Freedman, D. N., Herion, G. A., Graf, D. F., Pleins, J. D., &
Beck, A. B. (Eds.). (1992). In The Anchor Yale Bible
Dictionary. New York: Doubleday.
Gaebelein, Frank E., Gleason L. Archer Jr, Leon J. Wood,
Richard D. Patterson, Thomas E. McComiskey, Gleason L.
Archer Jr, Carl E. Armerding, et al. The Expositor’s Bible
Commentary: Daniel and the Minor Prophets. Vol. 7. Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986.
Hassler, Mark A. For additional discussion, see “The Setting of
Obadiah:
When does the oracle concerning Edom transpire?” Journal
of the
Evangelical Society, 59.2 (June, 2016) 241-54.

Matthews, Victor Harold, Mark W. Chavalas, and John H.
Walton. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old
Testament. Electronic ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 2000.
New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update. La Habra, CA:
The Lockman Foundation, 1995.
Patterson, Richard D., and Andrew E. Hill. Cornerstone Biblical
Commentary, Vol 10: Minor Prophets, Hosea–Malachi. Carol
Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2008.
Richards, Larry, and Lawrence O. Richards. The Teacher’s
Commentary. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1987.
Shank, Harold. Minor Prophets. The College Press NIV
Commentary. Joplin, MO: College Press Pub. Co., 2001–.
Moisés Silva and Merrill Chapin Tenney, The Zondervan
Encyclopedia of the Bible, Q-Z (Grand Rapids, MI: The
Zondervan Corporation, 2009)
Smith, Billy K., and Franklin S. Page. Amos, Obadiah, Jonah.
Vol. 19B. The New American Commentary. Nashville:
Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995.
Smith, J. M. Powis, William Hayes Ward, and Julius August
Bewer. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Micah,
Zephaniah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Obadiah and Joel. International
Critical Commentary. New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1911.
Stuart, Douglas. Hosea–Jonah. Vol. 31. Word Biblical
Commentary. Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2002.
Spender, Bob. Obadiah: Accountability in Relationship,
Emmaus Journal, 14, no.1 (Summer, 2005)
Walton, John H. Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds
Commentary (Old Testament): The Minor Prophets, Job,
Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs. Vol. 5. Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009.
Wiseman, Donald J., T. Desmond Alexander, and Bruce K.
Waltke. Obadiah, Jonah and Micah: An Introduction and
Commentary. Vol. 26. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries.
Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988.
2

2Old Testament Interpretive Commentary of Jonah --Overview.docx

2Old Testament Interpretive Commentary of Jonah --Overview.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from lorainedeserre

More from lorainedeserre (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

2Old Testament Interpretive Commentary of Jonah --Overview.docx