tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-605720789950223521.post994977284723443499..comments2024-03-11T18:37:29.803-07:00Comments on That Happy Expectation: An Analysis of Paul’s Olive Tree ParableAaron Welchhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11169688326514727094noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-605720789950223521.post-43874013321937009932019-04-29T15:56:39.526-07:002019-04-29T15:56:39.526-07:00Hi Unknown,
Thanks for commenting. When I mention...Hi Unknown,<br /><br />Thanks for commenting. When I mentioned the “leaves” and “fruit” of the wild olive bough, I wasn’t trying to explain what the “fruit” or “leaves” represent (for I don’t think it represents anything, or stands in need of an explanation). My only point in mentioning the leaves and fruit was simply to emphasize that the nations don’t cease to be non-Israelites/non-covenant people by virtue of their privileged and advantageous position during this current era of Paul’s administration (which, again, is what I believe is being allegorically represented in Paul’s olive tree parable). The position of the nations, collectively (the “wild olive”), is such that they are able to receive salvation or “riches” apart from Israel (rather than through God’s covenant people), without undergoing a change in their status as those who don’t have the covenant relationship with God that Israel does. Again, the point I was trying to make is simply that the “wild olive” continues being a “wild olive” even after being “grafted in” (with its “wild” nature representing the ethnic and non-covenantal status of the nations in contrast with God’s covenant people, Israel). <br /><br />In contrast with the above, it seems to be your view that Paul’s parable was intended to tell us something about the nature of the “fruit” of the wild olive. But Paul doesn’t specifically mention the fruit. If Paul HAD specifically mentioned the fruit (and/or the leaves) of the wild olive - or made some sort of distinction between the bough and that which grows from it - I think your criticism might have some merit. However, Paul didn’t do this. And insofar as this is the case, I see no reason to think that the fruit (or leaves) growing from the wild olive has any figurative or “spiritual” meaning distinct from the bough itself. To speculate on what the fruit of the wild or natural boughs in Paul’s parable represents is, to me, like speculating on what the unmentioned soil in which the tree is growing represents. Thus, your perplexity with what I wrote seems to be based on your own assumption concerning the significance of something that is neither mentioned in, nor relevant to, Paul’s parable. <br /><br />As far as the jealousy to which Paul hoped Israel would be provoked through the glorifying of his dispensation, Paul seems to have believed that it was simply the fact that people from among the nations were being saved that would provoke Israel to jealousy (Rom. 11:11). So if – as you seem to believe – the “fruit” of the wild olive represents that which provokes unbelieving Israel to jealousy, it would have to represent the salvation of those from among the nations who believed Paul’s evangel. However, even if that were the case, the gentiles to whom Paul wrote didn’t cease to be gentiles after they were saved. Their being saved didn’t cause them to become members of God’s covenant people (as were those represented by the “natural boughs”). But again, I see no reason to speculate on what the fruit of the wild olive may or may not represent (since Paul doesn’t specifically mention it). I just don’t see it as being any way relevant to the meaning of the parable.<br /><br />I hope the above helps you better understand my position. Thanks again for your comment, and for taking the time to read my article.<br /><br />AaronAaron Welchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11169688326514727094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-605720789950223521.post-12663501449378551582019-04-28T21:37:00.730-07:002019-04-28T21:37:00.730-07:00Quoted from top 1/3 "begin receiving sap (and...Quoted from top 1/3 "begin receiving sap (and thus life) from the tree into which it was grafted, its inherent “wild” nature would remain unchanged. It would continue to have the same nature as the wild olive tree from which it was cut (just as the “natural boughs” would remain such even after being hewn out of “their own olive tree”), and it would continue producing the same kind of leaves and fruit that it would’ve produced had it never been hewn out of its parent wild olive tree."<br /><br />This doesn't make sense to me. If there is no change to the wild branch fruit, why graft them on to the promises for Israel? How do gentile believers receiving the fat from the root provoke the natural branches to jealousy if they dont produce good fruit different than before? If wild branches produce good natural fruit, then there could be a cause for jealousy. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03103535650284514601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-605720789950223521.post-52068329065336490582017-05-02T04:45:55.906-07:002017-05-02T04:45:55.906-07:00Thank you so much for your encouraging comments, L...Thank you so much for your encouraging comments, Lu. By the way, my wife and I are planning on meeting some believing friends in Camden sometime this month for dinner/fellowship (they're from Columbia). I remember you saying that you live there, so I was wondering if you might be able to meet us? Just send me an email if you're interested (Areynoldsw@aol.com).Aaron Welchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11169688326514727094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-605720789950223521.post-53810534527362242752017-05-01T17:25:13.672-07:002017-05-01T17:25:13.672-07:00Thanks Aaron!GoD blessed continually brother.Thank...Thanks Aaron!GoD blessed continually brother.Thanks for your consistency.I understand many may see thus differently but the facts are the facts and they are in! <br />I also thought that you were going to add a few cents on the adherents of what seems to be Paul's evangel aka the majority of church folks and where they stand in regards to this well expounded truth.But then again you don't really cover much of this hoopla if at all in your expositions.Anyways I'm thankful for your contribution.Grace and Peace to you and your fam. brother.Luhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09087413326718758853noreply@blogger.com