Olive Oil vs. Petroleum Oil

Olive Oil vs. Petroleum Oil
By: Steve Spillman
April 9, 2006

As I share the message of the promise of a great oil reserve, to be discovered in Israel in
the last days as explained in our book “Breaking the Treasure Code; the Hunt for Israel’s Oil”
a question sometimes arises about just what kind of oil the Bible means when it speaks of
Jacob’s Blessing. Critics argue that the passages referring to “oil” should be interpreted as
“olive oil.” To read “petroleum” into the words of Jacob’s Blessing, in their estimation, is
ridiculous; taking the words out of context. According to them there is only one way to interpret
these passages – literally, in the context of the day in which it was written.  When the word “oil”
is used “olive oil” is meant.

On the surface their interpretation seems pretty sound. Olive oil was used almost
universally in the days of the Old Testament and usually, when the word “oil” was used, “olive
oil” was meant.  People in the days of Jacob, when the blessing was first given; and then in
Moses’ time when the blessing was repeated, were familiar with olive oil as part of the every day
economy. There was no word in the Hebrew language for petroleum oil. The concept of
petroleum oil didn’t exist for Jacob’s sons (around 1800 BC) or their descendents in the time of
Moses (around 1400 BC). So how in the world could anyone interpret “oil” in the Old
Testament to mean petroleum oil?

When Moses mentioned oil in his repeat of Jacob’s Blessing in Deuteronomy, he used the
Hebrew word “shemen.”  In English translations of the Genesis account of Jacob’s Blessing, the
word oil is never used. “Shemen,” according to Strong’s Concordance, in its noun form means
literally “grease, especially liquid”; in its verb or adjective form it means, “fatness” as in to
make fat or to become fat (prosperous). “Shemen” is a general term; it can, in its noun form be
used to describe olive oil, but it can also describe any substance that is oily or greasy or fatty.
The use of the word “shemen” in ancient Hebrew is analogous to the American usage of
the word “oil” circa 1800 AD.  Just like olive oil in the ancient Middle East, whale oil in the
early 1800’s was a major and ever-present part of the American economy. Whale oil was used
almost universally for lighting, soaps, cosmetics, and cooking. Two hundred years ago, when a
Bostonian mentioned oil, people could assume he was speaking of whale oil.  Likewise, today, if
the Wall Street Journal states that oil is selling for $60.00 a barrel we can assume it’s referring to
petroleum; not olive oil or whale oil.  If we read the passages in Genesis and Deuteronomy
strictly within the limits of the understanding of the time in which it was written it is easy to
assume the word “shemen” refers to olive oil.

Ancient Hebrew however, was not without the ability to describe specific meaning. When
Moses addressed the people of Israel as God’s spokesman, there were times when he wanted
them to understand exactly what he meant. If Moses wanted God’s people to understand that he
meant “olive oil” specifically he would use the words “shemen” (oil) and “zayith” (olive) in
conjunction. Moses used this conjunction at least four times recorded in the Exodus, Leviticus
and Deuteronomy. Leviticus 24:2 gives us a good example of “shemen” and “zayith” being used
in conjunction to mean specifically olive oil. “Command the children of Israel, that they bring
unto thee pure oil (shemen) olive (zayith) beaten for the light, to cause the lamps to burn

continually.” When speaking to the children of Israel, Moses was to express God’s instructions
precisely and specifically.  If Moses wanted the children of Israel to understand that the “oil” in
Jacob’s Blessing was literally “olive oil” and nothing else, he used the “shemen/zayith”
conjunction. Modern day critics who contend that every time the word “oil” was used in the
Bible it must be interpreted literally as “olive oil” might have had some trouble convincing
Moses.

Perspective
How we understand the Bible is limited to what kind of book we think it to be.  We
probably could agree that the Bible can be described as a collection of ancient wisdom and
history written by men who lived a long time ago.  But if that’s as far as we go we miss the
whole point and power of the book.  Limiting our understanding of what the Bible is by that
statement is like saying the Mona Lisa is an assortment of colored grease smeared on a piece of
canvas by a man who lived a long time ago.  The statement itself is true but it misses the point,
purpose and power of the object.

If our understanding of the Bible is limited to the context and comprehension of the men who
penned its words we’ve missed the point, the purpose and the power of the Bible.  If, however, we open our spiritual eyes and ears enough to imagine that the Bible is God’s Word to His people, whether they lived in the first days or live in the last days, and that His message is as personal and relevant to us today as it was to Jacob 3,600 years ago, we begin to understand that the Bible is more than a collection of ancient wisdom and history…a lot more.  The Bible is literally “God’s Word.”  That means God inspired the men who wrote the words of the Bible to write what they wrote.  The Bible is a message to man of God’s intent and purpose.  The men penned the words but it was God who directed the pen.  If we limit God’s ability to communicate with man through the ages via His written word to Jacob’s and Moses’ ability to fully comprehend the meaning of the message in their limited personal context, then yes, God probably meant olive oil.

Of course if we’re going to stick with the theory that Jacob and Moses had to comprehend the full meaning of the message they were given, in their cultural and literal context, then we’re in real trouble.  Jacob opens his blessing by saying, “Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days.”  Chances are Jacob didn’t know what was going to happen the next day, let alone what was going to befall his children’s children in the “last days.”  So we know that he knows he wasn’t speaking in the context of his present day and time.  Jacob goes on to call Judah a “lion’s whelp”; he calls Issachar an “ass”; Dan is a “serpent”; Naphtali is a “hind” (deer); Joseph is a “fruitful bough”; and Benjamin is a “wolf.” Unless Jacob held a poor
opinion of his son Issachar we can assume he wasn’t speaking literally.

So we’ve pretty much concluded that Jacob wasn’t speaking in the context of his present day and he wasn’t speaking literally. Of course Jacob never mentioned oil, olive or otherwise, in his blessing of Genesis 49.  He did, however use the word “shemen” in its adjective form. Jacob told Asher that “his bread shall be fat.”  The adjective form of “shemen” is used here, translated in English to “fat.”  According to Vine’s Dictionary, this use, in its adjective form means “rich” or “fattening.”  It seems that critics, who argue that the use of “shemen” or its derivatives in the Bible could only mean olive oil, disagree with Jacob who, the single time he used the word in his blessing refers to “fat bread.” Moses used “shemen” or its derivatives three times in Deuteronomy 32 and only once in Deuteronomy 33. Deuteronomy 32 is known as the “Song of Moses.” It was a hymn for Israel in remembrance of their deliverance, salvation and future as God’s people.  Its words are figurative, prophetic and mystical. It would be very difficult for anyone to argue that the Song of Moses was literal in its meaning and limited to the cultural context and comprehension of Moses or his contemporaries. As long as our critics want to be sure of the word’s meaning in the “context” of the passage, let’s look at the context in which these words are used:

1. Verse 9 states: “For the Lord’s portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.”
God set aside the children of Israel (Jacob) as His “portion” when He divided the nations.
What does the word “lot” mean when the passage states; “Jacob is the lot of his
inheritance”?  According to Strong’s Concordance “lot” is the Hebrew word “chebel”
meaning “measuring line, district, region, or country.”  Moses was using a term that was
geographic in context to describe Jacob’s Blessing; it had to do with the land in which
Jacob’s descendents were about to enter. We haven’t seen any oil or “shemen” yet, but be
patient; remember we’re looking at the context of the passage.

2. Verse 13 states: “…and he made him suck honey out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty
rock…”  This verse has oil in it and it’s the Hebrew word “shemen.” Now we’re getting
somewhere!  Our critics, however, are sticking to their story; in this passage oil means
literally “olive oil” and honey means literally “bee’s honey.”  Bees have been known to
make hives in rocky crags, and olive trees grow on rocky hillsides all over the Holy Land.
They even conjecture that the ancients could have used hollow reeds to “suck” honey from
the hives in the rocky crags (how the ancients “sucked” olive oil from the rocky hillsides, I’m
not sure).

Let’s dissect this passage a little further. Not only is Jacob (remember verse 9, Jacob is the
lot of his inheritance, the blessing is in the land) sucking oil (shemen) out of the rock; and
he’s also sucking honey out of the rock.  The English word “suck” in this verse is the
Hebrew word “yanaq.” This is the word used for a baby nursing; literally sucking milk from
its mother’s breast.  The English word “suck” translates two other Hebrew words in the Old
Testament. The meanings for both of these other Hebrew words are closer to “drink” or
“sip,” not suckle as a baby to its mother.  It seems strange that if Moses were speaking of
Jacob ingesting olive oil and bee’s honey he would use the word meaning suckle rather than
either of the two words meaning to “drink” or “sip.”  It seems a bit of a stretch to believe he was trying to say that Jacob’s descendents should use hollow reeds to “suck” bee’s honey and olive oil out of the ground.  But perhaps Moses was trying to convey an idea other than sucking up olive oil and bee’s honey? Remember, the Hebrews had no word for petroleum oil in the days of Moses and the mechanical pump hadn’t been conceptualized.  If Moses wanted to express the notion of “pumping petroleum” (two concepts of which he hadn’t the faintest idea), it’s conceivable that the only words available to describe the picture he had been given by God to convey was “suck honey out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty rock.” Let’s say you’re willing to consider for a second that “shemen” might be used to mean petroleum oil and “yanaq” might be used to express the concept of “sucking” something to the surface like a pump. This verse says Jacob will “suck honey out of the rock”; surely there’s not some hidden or double meaning to the word “honey”? Every time honey is mentioned in the Old Testament it’s the same Hebrew word, “debash.”  “Debash” is the only Hebrew word in the Old Testament for honey; and we know this can’t mean petroleum oil…can it? According to Strong’s the literal meaning of “debash” is “to be gummy.”  The word, “debash,” described the gummy, sticky characteristic of honey.  The ancient Hebrews literally described bee’s honey as “that gummy, sticky stuff.” If Moses meant only that Jacob’s descendents would enjoy olive oil and honey in the Promised Land why would he say (all in the same phrase) that Jacob would “suck (yanaq) honey (debash) out of the rock, and oil (shemen) out of the flinty rock…”? Mentioned individually, you might be able to make a case that Moses was just being poetic; but together in the same phrase, you’ve got to wonder if perhaps he may have meant something else. Moses, in fact, did mean something else; and he meant exactly the same thing when he put “sucking honey out of the rock” and “oil out of the flinty rock” together. This literary structure, common in the Bible, is known as a Hebrew parallelism. The first object (honey) of the parallelism is symbolic; the second object (oil) is literal. Both objects are tied together by
the verb (suck) to form the parallelism. Whatever Moses was trying to convey will be “sucked” from the rock is of the same essence. In this case “honey” and “oil” hold the same meaning.
If Moses was trying to accurately describe an understanding given to him by God that, in the
last days, an oily, gummy, sticky substance, maybe amber in color, was to be sucked from
the rocks and there were no words for or concept of petroleum oil being pumped from deep
underground, could he use the word “yanaq” (to suck) instead of pump and the words
“debash” (gummy sticky stuff) or “shemen” (oil) instead of petroleum? Why not? These were
probably the most accurate Hebrew words at the time to describe the image he had been
given.

3. Still speaking of Jacob eating “the increase of the fields,” verse 14 states, “with the fat of
kidneys of wheat.”  The English word “fat” in this verse is the root form of “shemen.” This
passage is referring to the good (fat) part of the wheat kernel. As far as we know, it’s not
implying petroleum and surely not meaning olive oil.

4. Verse 15 again uses the root form of “shemen” referring to Jacob getting “fat” and being
“covered with fatness.”  This passage speaks of the rebellion and wickedness of the people
of Israel. We can assume this usage has nothing directly to do with olive oil or petroleum oil.

5. In Deuteronomy chapter 33, the only mention of the word “oil” in Jacob’s Blessing is in
verse 24.  The verse states, “And of Asher he said, Let Asher be blessed with children; let him be acceptable to his brethren, and let him dip his foot in oil.”  The Hebrew word in this passage is “shemen” (oil), not “shemen/zayith” (olive oil). This is probably the most used verse in the Bible to justify (or refute) the existence and location of petroleum in Israel; by both those who believe that God has ordained vast oil deposits in the land of Israel, and those who don’t believe and think the whole idea is nonsense.  The “believe” group says, “Asher is dipping his foot in oil!  Let’s find the foot of Asher and start drilling!”  The “don’t believe” group contends, “This verse means olive oil.  You can’t extract a petroleum oil prophecy out of one vague reference to (olive) oil in the
Old Testament.” If either side is basing their argument on this one passage, then both groups are wrong.  The “believes” can’t cover the Holy Land with oil derricks based on a single passage in scripture.  The “don’t believes” can’t single out this verse as proof that God always means “olive oil” in the Old Testament.  This verse is just one of many “clues” pointing to God’s meaning.
The biblical evidence for the belief that Israel has been endowed by God with a treasure buried deep beneath the surface of its land extends far beyond whether or not we can interpret “oil” mentioned in the Old Testament as anything but olive oil.

It’s obvious by now that when the Bible uses the word “oil” in English translations or
“shemen” in the original Hebrew that the term is generic and, though usually used in reference
to olive oil, is in no way exclusive. We’ve also begun to build the case that in the few specific
instances regarding Jacob’s Blessing in Genesis and Deuteronomy that the Bible could
conceivably be speaking of a future petroleum discovery. What we haven’t discussed in this
article is the overwhelming contextual evidence that the Bible does indeed allude to subterranean
liquid “treasures” as a part of Israel’s “inheritance.” To present all the evidence that Jacob’s
Blessing does indeed refer to a latter day petroleum discovery would require a book length essay.
That, of course, was the purpose for writing “Breaking the Treasure Code; the Hunt for
Israel’s Oil.” For a more in depth study on the subject this would be an obvious first choice. The
book, however, is not the only resource on the subject.

The more Jacob’s Blessing is researched, by serious Christian and Jewish scholars the
more evident it becomes that the Bible points to something beyond olive oil. Theologian and
former trustee of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. Roger Luther has written an
excellent study on the 47th through 49th chapters of Genesis and the 33rd chapter of Deuteronomy.
Israeli petroleum attorney Philip Mandelker has written a study on the roots of the word
“shemen” and references to petroleum both in scripture and antiquity. Mandelker’s “The Search
for Oil in the Land of Israel: A Biblical Treasure Hunt” presents a scholarly historical,
geological and Jewish perspective on the subject. As an Old Testament prophecy alluding to a
last days discovery of petroleum in the land of Israel is, both biblically and historically, a Jewish
subject, Philip’s paper allows a depth and perspective Gentile Bible scholars would most likely
miss. The book, “Breaking the Treasure Code; the Hunt for Israel’s Oil,” Dr. Luther’s study
and Mr. Mandelker’s paper are available at www.oilinisrael.net.

Does the Bible allude to petroleum oil being discovered in the land of Israel in the “last
days” or is this just the pipe dream of a few latter-day would-be prophets and some well
meaning evangelical Christian oil men? Can the word “oil” in the English Bible or “shemen” in
the Hebrew Bible possibly mean something besides olive oil? Could certain uses of the term
actually apply to petroleum? The answer to these questions is found within the pages of the Bible. The clues can and have been mined by Bible scholars. How these clues are interpreted depends largely on the perspective the seeker brings to the book. If the seeker is predisposed to flights of fancy and shallow research, the Bible could probably reveal anything the seeker wanted bad enough to see. Likewise, if the seeker is predisposed to see the Bible as an historical document, written and inspired solely by men who penned its words, it would be difficult to find any interpretation outside of the context of the time in which it was written.

We believe that the Bible is the Word of God; that God directed the minds and pens of
the men who wrote it, and that its message communicates God’s plan and purpose to us today
with as much or more relevance as it communicated in the day the original text was written. If
the seeker brings this perspective to the book, the meaning and power of its message is not
confined to the era and cultural framework of its earthly scribes. Limiting the potential of God’s
Word to the context and understanding of the men who penned its pages doesn’t do justice to the
living power of the Bible or to our faith in an omnipotent God Who knows the beginning and the
ending of all things and Whose perfect purpose is at work in these days just as it was in the days
of Jacob and Moses.

Taking the position that when the Bible speaks of “oil” it means “olive oil” has a surface
logic that seems reasonable to those who are comfortable to treat the text as just an historical
book. The patriarchs were familiar with olive oil and the concept of petroleum oil, as far as we
can tell from biblical texts, was foreign to them. They didn’t understand “oil” as “petroleum
oil”; so we assume they couldn’t have possibly meant “petroleum oil” when they penned the
text. When the word “oil” is used in the Bible, in the vast majority of cases, it does mean olive
oil. So the argument for the olive oil interpretation, then, is this:

1. since the patriarchs apparently didn’t have a concept of petroleum oil they
couldn’t have meant petroleum oil any time oil was mentioned in the Bible in any
context.

2. Since when “oil” is mentioned in the Bible, it almost always means “olive oil,”
we are safe to take “olive oil” as our default understanding, regardless of the
contextual clues.

If our desire is to read the words of the Bible casually, or if we choose to treat it as
strictly an historical document, then the arguments above make sense and we can move on to
other casual and conceptually safe Bible study topics. Although I would suggest staying away
from the prophet Ezekiel, where men with four faces live in whirlwinds of fire and ride wheels
within wheels covered with eyes. The prophet Daniel would be good to ignore as well. The book
is filled with disturbing images of lions with wings and other troubling apparitions that would be
difficult to rationalize in light of Daniel’s cultural and historical limitations.

It’s a good thing that Daniel himself didn’t rely on his limited cultural and historical
understanding to scribe the message he was given. In the last passages of the book that bears his
name, after a detailed and disturbing vision about happenings which Daniel could, in no way
interpret or understand in light of his cultural and historical context, he addresses the pre-
incarnate Christ:

And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end
of these things? And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end…and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. (Daniel 12: 8-9, 10b)

American Bible expositor and teacher, the late Donald Grey Barnhouse offers a sound
approach to understanding the Word of God.

If we are going to understand the Word of God, we must have a spiritual attitude
toward it. The Lord said that “the natural man receiveth not the things of the
Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them,
because they are spiritually discerned” (I Corinthians 2:14). God refuses to
reveal Himself to just any casual passer-by.1

Barnhouse continues with his recommended methodology for studying any subject in the
Bible to extract its full meaning.

Putting The Puzzle Together
The proper method of Bible study, then, is analogous to the putting together of a puzzle. For any given doctrinal subject, read the entire volume, selecting every verse that bears the truth under study. Put all of these passages together, and the synthesis of the result is the true Bible doctrine on the question with which you are concerned. A verse from Moses, and one from Ezekiel, and one from Paul, put side by side, each illuminating the others, fit into the perfect pattern of the whole
design and give the whole light which God has been pleased to reveal on that particular theme. Taken one by one the verses may be no more than mere shapes, meaningless as far as the overall purpose of the inspired revelation is concerned… The Lord says that the anointing by the Spirit renders us capable of understanding, so that we do not need to have anyone teach us… The
responsibility of reading and knowing the Word and will of God is upon every individual, who must find out for himself, conclude what he believes and be ready to give an answer for the hope that is within him, knowing that he will be answerable to the Lord for the content of his faith, and that he will not be permitted to present the excuse that he believed what some church or group of
clergy interpreted for him…2

If the idea that certain passages in Jacob’s Blessing point to a vast liquid treasure to be found in the land of Israel in the last days was limited to a verse or two where the Hebrew word “shemen” is translated “oil” then it would be a pretty weak idea indeed. If this was the extent of evidence for the argument, I would have to side with the “don’t believes,” and let biblical oil be olive. If, however, the idea that passages in Jacob’s Blessing point to a vast oil treasure reserved for Israel in the last days, is based on substantial contextual evidence, not only in the passages in question, but throughout the Bible, and if geographic, historical, and now geologic evidence confirms the scriptural evidence we would be hard pressed not to consider the message lying there for us.

1
Donald Grey Barnhouse, The Invisible War (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1965)11.
2
Barnhouse 11-12.

*****
So then; how should we answer the question of “olive oil” versus “petroleum oil” in the
Bible? Let’s break it down into three questions:

Question: When the Bible mentions oil, is it referring to olive oil?
Answer: In many case, most cases, yes. Olive oil was almost universally known and used
in Bible times.

Question: When the Bible mentions oil, should we assume that it is always referring to
olive oil.
Answer: No, of course not; even a casual study of the Bible and Hebrew terms reveals
that “oil” (shemen) is a generic term referring to any oily, greasy, liquid and that when
the Hebrew wished to express olive oil specifically, the conjunction “shemen”
(oil)/“zayith” (olive) was used.

Question: Could the Bible, in some cases, be referring to petroleum oil?
Answer: Yes, we believe it does. Our interpretation is based on the approach that the
words of the Bible are inspired by God, Who knows the end from the beginning and
Whose message is for man in these times every bit as much as it was for men in earlier
times. The contextual clues in Genesis and Deuteronomy pointing to Israel in the last
days, a treasure that lies deep underground, and earth honey and rock oil, confirmed by
passages from other parts of scripture are so overwhelming that the reader, if presented
with all the evidence would have to be predisposed to believe that the Bible is nothing but
an historical book to deny the idea’s validity. Further research – historical, cultural,
geographic, and geologic, has added to the biblical evidence.

An old proverb says that “the proof of the pudding is in the eating.” Will skeptics and
critics still exist when petroleum oil is discovered in Israel, in the exact spot Jacob’s Blessing
pronounced it to be more than 3,600 years ago and brought to the surface before the eyes of the
world? Probably. Their post-discovery argument has already been developed. “After all,” they
reason, “the middle-east is awash in oil; it was only a matter of time before Israel discovered
reserves in their land.”

Is all this talk of prophecy and clues and hidden meanings a little difficult to swallow?
Does God really communicate His purpose through cryptic allusions planted in the Bible, to be
figured out at a later time? Jesus had to address his disciples as to why he spoke to the people in
parables (cryptic allusions to be figured out at a later time).

He answered and said unto them, “Because it is given to you to know the
mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever
hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever
hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to
them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither
do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah, which saith,
‘By hearing ye shall hear and not understand; and seeing ye shall see and not
perceive: for this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of
hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with
their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and
should be converted, and I should heal them.’
But blessed are your eyes, for they shall see: and your ears for they shall hear.
For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to
see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things
which ye hear, and have not heard them.” (Matthew 13: 11-17)

By: Steve Spillman

Related posts:

1. Asher’s Shoes of Iron and Brass?
2. Naphtali and Bubblin’ Crude?