Jesus Curses the Fig Tree
Jesus, seeing the tree full of leaves, may have assumed there would be at least a few figs on it. But there were none.
Well, he could have done the decent thing and walked away rather than compounding his stupidity and providing a stumbling block for future prospective members for his cult.
What Journey-On said.
Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
"I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful. You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you. Remain in me, and I will remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.
"I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you. This is to my Father's glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples.
What sort of parable could Jesus have been trying to illustrate using the metaphor of this strange tree?
I've seen what strangler figs do to trees, they natively grow in my area. However strangler figs do not grow in the area of Jerusalem. That fig would have been of a different kind.
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
How can he know that it was a poor fruiter if it was not the season of figs?
He didn't have any special insight into this tree because, if he did, he wouldn't have wasted his time checking it out to see if it had any fruit.
This is indeed an interesting account. But it is not allegorical or symbolic. It is very literal, as much as the spectacular accound of Lazarus' resurrection or Jesus walking on water. Even Jesus talking about transferring "this mountain", the Mount of Olives, was literal. Think about it, is walking on water or resurrecting someone from the dead "easier" than transferring a mountain. No, they are equally difficult. Just as Yoda said to Luke Skywalker ...."size matters not" with the force.
The force Jesus was talking about was the holy spirit. The holy spirit has the power to enable a human to walk on water, raise someone from the dead, shrivel up trees, and transfer mountains.
The context shows that Jesus was teaching his disciples the power of faith and prayer. What's interesting is that power of faith and prayer have never been demonstrated since. But there was one man that did demonstrate an amazing example of faith besides Jesus. It was Peter.
Peter, a human, walked on water, and for some distance according to the account. It wasn't symbolic. It literally happened. And for two thousand years no one since has even come close to such a demonstration. Why? Why spend the time recording the account and several pages of the Bible dedicated to an account that ultimately no one would be able to apply?
We dont know. Is it possible that it was recorded for some purpose to be revealed in the future?
The bottom line is that Jesus was demonstrating the power of the Holy Spirit that humans can tap into through faith and prayer. But how?
No one has shown the ability since Peter.
To clarify my thoughts on this account, I'm not saying this did not literally happen. But the literal event was used as an opportunity to impart a secondary meaning as well as a mystery teaching to his disciples.
But the literal event was used as an opportunity to impart a secondary meaning as well as a mystery teaching to his disciples.
I don't see that as an excuse for the juvenile behaviour of the saviour, or anyone else for that matter.
Whatever message he wanted to give, it could have been done without a tree in sight.
If he had waved his magic wand and made the tree bear fruit, that would have been a miracle worthy of commendation. Killing a perfectly good tree that was just doing what fig trees do at that time of year was just silly.
Again. What Journey-On said. It is the same lesson in the Parable of the Talents.
“Therefore stay alert, because you do not know the day or the hour. For it is like a man going on a journey, who summoned his slaves and entrusted his property to them. To one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one, each according to his ability. Then he went on his journey. The one who had received five talents went off right away and put his money to work and gained five more. In the same way, the one who had two gained two more. But the one who had received one talent went out and dug a hole in the ground and hid his master’s money in it. After a long time, the master of those slaves came and settled his accounts with them. The one who had received the five talents came and brought five more, saying, ‘Sir, you entrusted me with five talents. See, I have gained five more.’ His master answered, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave! You have been faithful in a few things. I will put you in charge of many things. Enter into the joy of your master.’ The one with the two talents also came and said, ‘Sir, you entrusted two talents to me. See, I have gained two more.’ His master answered, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave! You have been faithful with a few things. I will put you in charge of many things. Enter into the joy of your master.’ Then the one who had received the one talent came and said, ‘Sir, I knew that you were a hard man, harvesting where you did not sow, and gathering where you did not scatter seed, so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. See, you have what is yours.’ But his master answered, ‘Evil and lazy slave! So you knew that I harvest where I didn’t sow and gather where I didn’t scatter? Then you should have deposited my money with the bankers, and on my return I would have received my money back with interest! Therefore take the talent from him and give it to the one who has ten. For the one who has will be given more, and he will have more than enough. But the one who does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. And throw that worthless slave into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth’”
journey..................could you clarify your clarification?
It is the same lesson in the Parable of the Talents.
That proves my point, that he should be able to give his message without vandalising fruit trees.