Olive Culture

[Strindberg]

IOW, what seems to be an error at first, is actually a strong support.

I don't think this is necessarily the 'strong support' you are proclaiming. Since the author of the article sometimes participates in these threads, perhaps he can clarify, but here is how I read it: he says that "some prophetic figures of the ancient Mediterranean, specifically Greek thinkers and so on..." There are too many vagaries in this statement for me or you to call it a 'strong support.' Specifically, which Greek thinkers said this? When did they say it? An Athenian Greek writing in 250 AD could well be characterized as "an ancient Greek thinker", but his world was so far removed from that of a devout Jew from Jerusalem living in 600 BC that they may as well have existed on different planets. Given the divsity of times and places that could fall under the title "ancient Mediterannean', an ancient Greek espousing a certain idea does not prove (or even lend very strong evidence suggesting) that the same counterfactual idea had any traction for Hebrews of Jacob's era.

Again, as the author of the article is here, I would be interested in his input on the exact nature of this evidence; it very well may be quite persuasive. I am merely saying the the paragraph, as written, does not seem like "strong proof" at all but more like a "partial deflection of criticism."

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? -- This thread can't just fade away. Did I miss something or did no one answer Dan Vogel's criticism (re-copied below)?

Essentially, it elaborates Lehiâ??s allegory of the olive tree (cf. 1 Ne. 10:12-14;15:12-16), which in turn was inspired by Romans 11:11-14. Smith follows Paulâ??s error of grafting branches from a wild olive tree into a cultivated tree. Nevertheless, Smith. â?¦

The first thing one notices about Zenosâ?? allegory is the apparent anomalous setting of olive trees in â??vineyards,â? which was forbidden by Jewish law (Deut. 22:9) even though the rule was not enforced by New Testament times (Luke 13:6). The allegory describes the husbandry of the olive treesâ??pruning, grafting, fertilizationâ??in terms that would have been familiar to those working apple orchards (60) such as the Smiths had in Norwich, Vermont, and on their farm in Manchester, New York. â?¦

The act of cutting off and burning dead branches is reflected in John 15:5-6 and was undoubtedly employed on the Smith farm. â?¦

Finally, in order to revive the roots, the master tells his servants to take branches from wild olive trees and graft them onto the old tree (v. 9). This probably comes from Romans 11 and 1 Nephi 10 and represents the grafting in of gentiles, although one does not normally graft wild branches into cultivated trees. â?¦

Upon inspecting the tree, they discover that the grafted branches have begun to bear fruit, that the fruit was â??good â?¦ like unto the natural fruitâ? (5:17). Genetically, this is impossibility, for the grafted branches of a wild olive tree will not bear the same quality fruit as the cultivated tree. â?¦

In another part of the vineyard, the master has planted in a â??good spot of groundâ? but the branches produce â??wild fruitâ? along with â??tame fruitâ? (5:25), representing the Lamanites and Nephites in the choice land of America. This mixture of wild and tame olives on a single cultivated branch is impossible. â?¦

The master says to the servant, â??The time draweth near, and the end soon cometh; wherefore, I must lay up fruit against the season, unto mine own selfâ? (5:29). They inspect the tree that had wild and tame branches and see that it has born â??all sorts of fruitâ? (5:30). After tasting the fruit, the master finds that none of it is good (5:32). Evidently, Smith was unaware of how bitter olives are on the tree and that they cannot be casually sampled before being cured, which can take from several days to even months, without which one would not think of tasting them. â?¦

In an anachronistic allusion to Matthew 19:30 and 20:16, the lord of the vineyard then directs his servants to â??begin at the last that they may be first, and that the first may be last, and dig about the trees â?¦â?

[T]here are other influences at play in the allegory such as the parable of the vineyard in Isaiah 5:1-7 (cf. 2 Ne. 15:1-7) and the parable of the fig tree in Luke 13:6-9, the latter of which contains concepts and words similar to Zenosâ?? allegory. In Lukeâ??s parable, a â??certain manâ? had planted a fig tree in his â??vineyard.â? When the man visits the vineyard after three years and finds the tree is barren, he asks the caretaker why he has allowed the tree to remain in the vineyard (â??why cumbereth it the ground?â? [cf. Jacob 5:9]) and orders him to cut it down. The servant asks the man to spare the tree for another years, â??till I shall dig about it, and dung itâ? (cf. Jacob 5:45). Then â??if it bear fruit, well; and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.â? â?¦

In light of its obvious singularity, it is remarkable that Zenosâ?? allegory is not subsequently mentioned by any Nephite prophet. As with polygamy, the allegoryâ??s absence from Nephite literature is the result of the order of Smithâ??s dictation.

--Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, 454-57.

I've always thought the allegory of the olive tree was one of the strongest evidences, perhaps the strongest evidence for the legitimacy of the BoM. Maybe it is. I've just never seen the above criticisms. Any responses?