The Book of Mormon Site

Jacob 5: Olive “Vineyard”

The text of Jacob chapter 5 mistakenly calls an olive grove a “vineyard” throughout—a fundamental error, starting in verse 3:

For behold, thus saith the Lord, I will liken thee, O house of Israel, like unto a tame olive-tree, which a man took and nourished in his vineyard; and it grew, and waxed old, and began to decay.

Vineyards (the word is used 90 times) are places where grape vines grow in rows, attached to special supports so they have somewhere for the branches to hang. Who plants an olive tree in a vineyard? Someone who is not from a Mediterranean climate—that’s who. If you did such a thing, the vines would climb up the olive tree and choke it to death. We will see shortly that this exact conflation metaphorically proved fatal to this so-called allegory.

To those who claim an olive tree or olive trees can grow in something that can be called a vineyard, who cares what the garden / farm / orchard / grove / field is called? This fails to explain how the horticulturist (the Lord God of Israel) in the story was inexplicably surprised or bothered to find bitter fruit growing on olive trees (v. 52, 57, 65). To those who claim vineyard doesn’t refer to grape vines, not so: the word vineyard has the word vine in it. (I know some apologists hate to admit the evidence of their own eyes.) The word “vine” is written literally 90 times into the text. You can’t take the word “vine” out of this chapter without heavily wresting the scriptures.

The Trees to Which Israel is Compared: Vine, Fig Tree, Olive Tree

For more background, see Clarence Larkin, The Trees to Which Israel is Compared in the Scriptires (The Bible). Here we will focus on the Song of the (Grape) Vineyard in Isaiah, and Paul’s allegory of the House of Israel as an Olive Tree, into which the Gentiles are grafted (graffed).

Isaiah chapter 4:2 and 5:1–7, Song of the Vineyard

4:2 In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel.

…

5:1 Now will I sing to my wellbeloved a song of my beloved touching his vineyard. My wellbeloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill: 5:2 And he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a winepress therein: and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes.

See, vineyards have grapes / vines, for making wine. (It’s in the name.) Maybe olives are just metaphorically a weird kind of “wild grape”? Like if they are really bad, or bitter?

5:3 And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard.

5:4 What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes? 5:5 And now go to; I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard: I will take away the hedge thereof, and it shall be eaten up; and break down the wall thereof, and it shall be trodden down: 5:6 And I will lay it waste: it shall not be pruned, nor digged; but there shall come up briers and thorns: I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it.

5:7 For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant plant: and he looked for judgment, but behold oppression; for righteousness, but behold a cry.

“Prune” is mentioned 10 times in Jacob 5, “dig” is mentioned 7 times.

Romans 11:13–27, the relationship of Israel to the Gentiles

Remember that this is to the saints in Rome, by definition Gentiles:

11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I [Paul] am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: 11:14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh [Jewish], and might save some of them.

11:15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? 11:16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.

11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; 11:18 Boast not against the branches [the Gentiles]. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root [bear] thee.

11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.

11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches [house of Israel], take heed lest he also spare not thee [the Gentiles].

11:22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.

11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.

11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature [Gentiles], and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree [Israel]: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches [house of Israel / Jewish], be graffed into their own olive tree [back into favor with God]? 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob [house of Israel]: 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins [i.e. through Jesus].

‘Editorial Fatigue’ in Zenos’ conflation of the two accounts

In 1998 or 1999, Curt van den Heuvel made the following connection regarding Jacob 5 (after giving the example of Luke copying Mark and making a telling mistake as one example of editorial fatigue):

The parable [of Zenos] appears to be drawn from two biblical sources: the Song of the Vineyard in Isaiah 5, and Paul’s discussion of the relation of the Gentiles to the Jews in Romans 11. The problem for the author of the Book of Mormon is that Isaiah and Paul used slightly different metaphors: Isaiah that of a vineyard, and Paul an Olive tree. It is thus quite significant that halfway through the parable, Zenos appears to forget that he is using an Olive tree as his metaphor, and begins to use the whole vineyard as his focus.

Jacob 5:41: And it came to pass that the Lord of the vineyard wept, and said unto the servant: What could I have done more for my vineyard?

Significantly, the break appears at the same point that the Book of Mormon quotes the Isaiah passage:

Isaiah 5:4: What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?

From this point on, the prophet Zenos refers exclusively to the “fruit of the vineyard,” apparently forgetting that vineyards yield grapes, not olives.

Curt van den Heuvel also mentions:

That these two passages provided the framework upon which Joseph Smith built his parable is evident from several sources. Firstly, both passages were quoted by Smith earlier in the Book of Mormon narrative. Isaiah’s song of the vineyard is found in 2 Nephi 15; Paul was alluded to in 1 Nephi 10:12-14 and other passages.

The 67 uses of the word “tree” or “trees” are demonstrative and solidly show where the conflated metaphors switch: “tree” is used 34 times in the singular, until verse forty, with “trees” being used zero times before verse 41 (the quote of Isaiah 5:4). After that, the plural is used 16 times, the singular 17 times (to refer back to the house of Israel as the original tree that the Lord of the vineyard wants to burn down). Notably, the chapter starts out “thus saith the Lord, I will liken thee, O house of Israel, like unto a tame olive tree”—not a vineyard, as in Isa. 5:7 “For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel.”

Finally, verbiage from a few more New Testament passages is used by the author of the parable. Curt van den Hevel continues:

There are at least three shorter passages that provided structural material for Zenos’ parable. The concept of the Lord of the Vineyard and his servant, for example, is found in one of Jesus’ parables, recorded in Luke 13:6-9. From this passage, we find the source of Smith’s repeated reference to the useless branches ‘cumbering’ the ground and the trees (Jacob 5:9,30,44,49,66). It is from this passage, too, that Smith obtained the references to ‘digging and dunging’ (Jacob 5:47,64,76). We also here find the servant counselling his master against the wholesale destruction of the vineyard, a scene which is repeated in Zenos’ parable (Jacob 5:26,27 and Jacob 5:49,50).

The concept of unfruitful branches being hewn down and burnt (Jacob 5:42,46,47,49,66) is found in Matthew 3:10 and John 15:6. Matthew 3:10 was quoted verbatim in Alma 5:52 (which was dictated before the book of Jacob, according to some theories). Verse 8 of Matthew 3, (‘Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance’) is quoted several times in the Book of Mormon (Alma 12:15; 13:13; 34:30).

Luke 13:6-9:

13:6 He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. 13:7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? 13:8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.

Matthew 3:10:

3:10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

John 15:6:

15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

In defense of Zenos, getting Isaiah and Paul perfectly backwards

But since the vineyard is the world, it sort of makes sense that this is a double-layer allegory. What JS Jr. is trying (and failing) to accomplish actually makes sense, and is sort of clever, just sloppily exectuted. It’s actually really interesting that the metaphor changes around verse 41 from one tree (Israel, Paul / Romans) to the entire vineyard (many trees, something not found in a vineyard, FYI) which is when Paul’s single-tree metaphor should take over (taking the gospel to the Gentiles / rest of the world / rest of the vineyard), given the Book of Mormon’s emphasis that the gospel is more universal (other sheep meaning the New World, other tribes, etc.). The conflation is almost perfectly backwards, to switch to Isaiah’s vineyard metaphor after quoting Isaiah. It’s actually kind of ingeniously weird and twisted (like a grape vine) or uncanny, like expecting an olive tree to grow sweet (not bitter) fruit.

More observations on this confusing imagery

In verse 31, “the Lord of the vineyard did taste of the fruit.” This is not something an actual olive grower would do, because even good olive trees put out raw, unprocessed olives that are very bitter. (Verses 52, 57, and 65 even mention fruit that is bitter, which only makes sense for grapes in a vineyard, not olives.) However a grower of grapes would do such a thing, grab fruit from the vine and immediately eat it, expecting it not to be bitter.

While you technically can eat raw olives, they are typically very bitter due to a compound called oleuropein and are usually cured or processed before consumption to make them palatable.

(Cured means brined with salt (for eating directly) and processed means pressed (to make olive oil).)

Regarding verse 61, “most precious above all other fruit” is a callback to 1 Nephi 15, the vision of “… the tree of life, whose fruit is most precious and most desirable above all other fruits; yea, and it is the greatest of all the gifts of God.” Presumably this is also not an olive tree, if the fruit can be picked and eaten without processing with salt, or without the need for an olive press. I don’t think any olive grower, no matter how proud of his operation, would call his raw olives “most precious above all other fruit.” But a viticulturist might.

Again, in verse 65 “as they begin to grow ye shall clear away the branches which bring forth bitter fruit,” which if these are olive trees (not grape vines), would be all the fruits, even on good olive trees!

The fact that the word bitter is used three times after verse 41, shows that the author thought that the fruits should be edible and sweet (by contrast), and the only candidate for that would be grapes, not olives, as the parable explicitly begins.

5:48: And it came to pass that the servant said unto his master: Is it not the loftiness of thy vineyard …

Vineyards are not lofty, by definition, as vines have to climb up something else lofty, to get higher. In fact, most vineyards are probably around a yard or meter tall. And grape vines, with no supports, fan out and grow wild all over the ground. This was clearly written by someone who has never had grape vines growing out of control up trees, or trailing for yards across the ground, requiring pruning and staking to control where they grow. If the vines grow lofty, that is entirely on the laborers in the vineyard for not pruning or staking them properly, or for planting them next to an olive tree, not a problem with the vines themselves.

The Lord of the vineyard weirdly doesn’t know that he cannot “lay up” fruit “against the season” (mentioned eight times, v. 13, 18, 19, 29) using grapes—before the invention of refrigeration, grapes would have to be made into raisins, or pressed into wine. However, an olive grower can lay up olives (once cured or brined), which makes sense, which is why it is brought up at the end in verses 71 and 76.

So, we are back to olive trees, which would make more sense, but not the part about expecting the fruit thereof not to be bitter, and getting upset enough about it to burn down the whole vineyard grove of olive trees. The Lord of the olive grove vineyard sounds like a real confused piece of work.

Conclusion

Honestly, this conflation of a vineyard and an olive tree is headache-inducing. The clever metaphor with the house of Israel, the Lehites, the Gentiles, restoring the Jews, etc. all makes sense and has been written about ad nauseum (and is honestly very on the nose), but the underlying imagery (not the metaphorical meaning) is incoherent and incomprehensible and clearly not written by some ancient prophet from a warm, dry climate that actually grows grape vines and olive trees. It is much more easily explained as a conflation of the two Biblical passages mentioned earlier by someone from a non-Mediterranean climate.

< Back to Index