The story of the fig tree can be found in Mark 11:12-26 and in Matthew 21:17-22 . Most Christians I have encountered say it is a metaphor. But is it? If you read the following passages, it is not a metaphor, but a continuous narrative on that day before Jesus and his gang went to Jerusalem. Jesus was hungry and went up to a fig tree to get something to eat — and subsequently cursed the tree to death because it had no fruit.
Now, is this the way this “Jesus loves me” thing is supposed to act? Aside from the obvious question as to why Jesus, being so big on forgiveness here, did not forgive the fig tree (or even heal it). He even cursed it! In my interpretation, Jesus just woke up on the wrong side of the bed, that’s why he’s too crabby on that day. Anyway, the Fig-tree enigma just tells me that Jesus is not “all-good” as what Christian fundies are saying. It’s a myth. If the New Testament is as accurate as these fundies would have me believe, its main character, Jesus, is a dolt.
We can summarize the story so far as:
1. Jesus was hungry.
2. He looked for figs on a tree.
3. But it was not fig season.
4. So, because the moron didn’t get his way, Jesus killed the poor tree in retaliation.
Why did Jesus (if he’s a god) cannot even tell if it’s fig season? Can”t this nut even tell if its fig season? Remember that it is Passover season. Passover (Pesach in Hebrew) begins on the eve of the fifteenth day of the month of Nisan according to the Jewish lunar calendar. The date varies from year to year according to the English calendar, falling in March or April (that falls in springtime.) So, it’s not even a season where fig trees are supposed to have fruits! I thought Jesus is god and a god is supposed to be all-knowing?
If it wasn’t fig season, why would this moron look for figs? Is killing a tree for not bearing fruit out of season a reasonable response by any standard?
Now, what is the moral of that story? As a good Christian, if you asked for something and the guy failed to give it to you, kill him! Is that what your Jesus likes to teach? Sounds more like the MAFIA to me.
Furthermore, the Fig-tree story is another proof of biblical inconsistency. Compare Matthew 21:17-22 to Mark 11:12-14 and 20-26. Look closely, in the Matthew version, when Jesus cursed the poor fig-tree, it died immediately and his apostles saw it happened. On Mark’s version, the poor tree died sometime and was already dead when Jesus and his gang passed by it from Jerusalem. (Talk about accurate reporting huh.)
Now the Christians want me to believe that an All-Good God named Jesus exists, but the Bible says otherwise. Then, the Jesus is God concept doesn’t exist.
innerminds
Cola
f241vc15
frank
GabbyD
taxx
sinisterspark
element_115x
romainechester
Ryan Tani
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
I was planning not to responce to most of the comments here…but…
Issue 1: Is the fig tree story a metaphor or a parable?
Most Christians rely to the excuse that the story found in Mark 11:12-26 and in Matthew 21:17-22 arer just metaphor or a parable. Why? Simple…a benevolent God-Man will not act as barbaric, ill tempered SOB as how the gospel writers pictured him. But…is the excuse valid?
Let us first define what a parable and a metaphor is: A metaphor is an analogy between two objects or ideas, conveyed by the use of a word instead of another, while a parable is a brief, succinct story, in prose or verse, that illustrates a moral or religious lesson. So far, so good…
Now what is a continues narrative? It has something to do with ordering events and thoughts in a coherent sequence.
If I will accept the Jesus story as a work of fiction, it still won’t justify Mark 11:12-26 and Matthew 21:17-22 as a parable or a methapor. The said story is a part of Jesus’ biography.
Notice how the paragraph was structured…
“The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.” And his disciples heard him say it.” – Mark 11:12-14
In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!” Mark 11:20-21
Jesus wasn’t telling a story here. He’s a part or a character of the said situation. An account of the series of events in someone’s life is not a methapor nor a parable.
The fig tree here is not a symbol. Will Jesus eat a symbol? When Mark said that “after leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry”, was the author making a metaphorical statement?
According to some Christian commentators, the symbols were “acted-out”. That means in the narrative, Jesus killed the fig-tree to give a methapor or a representation of Israel…yet that still doesn’t give Jesus to kill an innocent life to demostrate his cockiness and explain his point…or just because he was hungry and wanted to get something to stuff is belly!
The cursing of the fig tree is just a (spitefully) demostration of Jesus power…but its moral implication is quite devastating. Why will this benevolent Man-God curse a fig tree who doesn’t bare fruit…while knowing quite well that it’s not even fig tree season? Will you expect a mango to bare fruit if it’s not mango season?
i’m just wondering, setting aside the question of metaphor and theology…
“yet that still doesn’t give Jesus to kill an innocent life”
by life, we mean the tree…
what would give a person the right to kill a tree?
what are good reasons to kill a tree?
Why don’t you try to answer that, @GabbyD? What are the good reasons for killing a tree, or an innocent life for that matter?
i think there are lots of good reasons to cut trees. humans can cut trees for many reasons. example: if u plant a tree, and the tree is not useful, then a tree ought to be cut.
am i missing someting?
i’m wondering about pinoyatheists’ reasons. what are the valid reasons for killing trees?
@GabbyD:
I agree that there are good reasons for cutting trees like using them for lumber to build houses. However, Jesus did not cut the tree; he simply cursed it and caused it to die. Can you think of a good reason for that? Jesus did not get any lumber from the tree, or even firewood. He did not even uproot the tree in order to make space for planting a new tree. He simply made it wither.
Now I’m wondering why you’re wondering about Pinoyatheist’s ‘reasons’ to justify the killing of the fig tree, because as far as I understood from the article, Pinoyatheist is condemning the killing of the tree. (Please correct me, @Pinoyatheist if I misrepresented your stand.)
first: killing the true doesnt preclude it from being used for other purposes. after its been killed, theres no reason for it not being used for whatever else purpose. he didnt talk about this other purpose – coz the alternative purpose, whatever that is, is not the point of the passage.
second: he killed it for a reason — as a metaphor/teaching example of nob being fruitful.
so color me confused — whats the problem?
you may disagree with the teaching, but you cant disagree that he had reason to do it.
GabbyD wrote: “you may disagree with the teaching, but you cant disagree that he had reason to do it.”
- Agreed. I agree that he had a ‘reason’ to kill the tree. But I disagree that his reason was ‘good’. I noticed in your previous comments you used the adjective ‘good’ to describe ‘reason’, but in your latest post it’s only ‘reason’.
Innerminds: Now I’m wondering why you’re wondering about Pinoyatheist’s ‘reasons’ to justify the killing of the fig tree, because as far as I understood from the article, Pinoyatheist is condemning the killing of the tree. (Please correct me, @Pinoyatheist if I misrepresented your stand.)
John the ATHEIST: That is correct.
To GabbyD:
The issue here is not “cutting trees” but, “Will you kill or take away “life” just to prove your damn point?”
Yes…it’s OK to kill something to prove your point…if you’re a mafioso or a member of the Chinese triad. But to say or insist that God or Jesus is good…and then kill a defenses life form. Now…uh…it seems there some kind of a problem with that…eh…hello?
i thought jesus was born a man rather than a divine being which means he is still man in some aspects. I mean have you read the story how jesus was angry on how the people made a temple into a market, i mean if he was the incarnation of god in earth he shouldn’t be angry and understand people are making a living.
There are principles of Biblical Interpretation. And even if one may claim that there can be a variety of interpretations there is no denying the fact that there is a universally accepted method of interpreting texts– whether literary, Biblical or historical.
My only point perhaps is that we try to study first this method so that we can all have a common ground in our arguments on interpretations. We will end up nowhere if, in the first place, we fail to adhere to the standards of scholarly interpretation.
By the way, in case we worry about whether or not such standard is bias, I encourage everyone to search for books from the social sciences and literature dealing with the issue of interpretation. At least these are from the scholarly perspective, not religious.
A good place to start is with the science of interpretation called hermeneutics.