Fig Tree Morality

[bigmrpig]

Matthew 21:17-20 state that Jesus was hungry, and after finding a fig tree to be bare, he killed it. I question the morality of this decision.

How can the Bible be a moral guide for other areas of life when it blatantly it shows Jesus killing a living thing after it did nothing wrong? In other times in the Bible when people are killed, sometimes there are obscure or questionable reasons, but for the fig tree, he had no reason to kill the fig tree, and accomplished nothing to do so.

Is Jesus showing us we should succumb to unfounded rage?

I would like to stick to this specific incident. Morality of the whole Bible can be discussed elsewhere, but if in this one instance Jesus' decision cannot be found to be moral, I don't see why any other controversial part should be.

So, to reiterate... how is killing a fig tree for having no figs moral?

[kens91765]

I have never felt more spiritually centred in my life.

So then you are a spiritual Atheist???

I come to fora like this is for the sport

All games must end sometime. This one ends now.

[palmera]

palmera wrote:
A much longer explanation should be provided, and for those interested I will.


I am sure that your esoteric wiccan views of scripture would be fascinating to many. As for me, I would prefer not to go too far beyond what the text actually says. You may view this as being simplistic. I view it as being honest.

My views on scripture have nothing to do with Wicca and they are in no way esoteric. Rather, my views on scripture come from years of intensive study on the cultures from which they came and the possible implications time, place, and the socio-economic realities of their situation might have had, and in fact almost certainly did have on the writing of the gospels.

The problem with a surface reading of scripture is that you may drastically misunderstand what is "actually being said" by the text. What the text actually says goes beyond the words on the page as any reader of any literature understands and can appreciate. To be honest about reading scripture (to me) is to carefully attend to the biases and assumptions which one brings to the text when reading.

[Bugmaster]

1.) A fig tree is not a person. It is not a sin to kill plants.

Some people (such as modern pagans) might disagree with you on that. I personally try to avoid killing things if at all possible, but that's just me.

From the strictly moral point of view, that fig tree did belong to someone (a local farmer, or a magistrate, I forget the details). By killing it, Jesus destroyed someone else's private property. That's not very moral of him.

[Bugmaster]

See, the entire Bible is written in this way; there are things in the Bible that make sense only in the context of the author's time and cultural background, as with any work from the Code of Hammurabi up through Shakespeare, Milton and Coleridge.

Did anyone ever attempt to re-cast the Bible in modern terms, by converting all the parables from their old cultural conexts to the current ones ? So, we'd have the IRC Chat Log instead of the Sermon on the Mount, the Parable of the Underachieving Corporate Division instead of this fig tree thing, etc. I think that would be a fun book to read.

[bernee51]

I have never felt more spiritually centred in my life.

So then you are a spiritual Atheist???

That is indeed what I am.

Do you think religion has a lien over spritiuality?

I come to fora like this is for the sport

All games must end sometime. This one ends now.

The 'game' never ends - only the players come and go.

Perhaps I did sound a little glib in my answer. I am here for more than the sport. I should have added 'spiritual' gymnastics.

I have, in the course of many discussions, learnt much, about myself and others.

For the most part I have found that all can be learnt from, even those who describe themselves as 'foolish'.

BTW - can you 'prove' the existence of Jesus - on the balance of probabilities?

[AlAyeti]

Bernee,

You're such a bully. It's 2005 for only one reason. Pouting about the "prove" -abilty of Jesus existing is beneath you. You spend too much time on infidels.org. Spend more effort spreading your views on justice. That kind of secularism will truly benefit Christ and His followers, if indeed there is a "free exchange" of ideas.

What cannot be proved is that 0 x anything (nongodianism) can come up with your keyboard, let alone anything else a trillion times more complicated. Even human instinct knows there is "a" God. Look at how many versions of religion and deities there are and always have been.

I'm relying on you when the chips are down for the Christians around you. A spritual atheist can't be all bad.

///

The Fig Tree was used as a parable and the text is accurate in portraying that. The reason the Jewish Sanhedrin and indeed Jerusalem's citizens thenselves weren't all that happy with Jesus is that they finally understood what he was saying on some things. No one wants to be told they're fruitless. That is to say . . . worthless. I'm sure that is why atheists go around attacking Christians and Christianity to this day.

It is not surprising that God spoke to people in parables, they won't even believe observable facts.

[bernee51]

Bernee,

You're such a bully.

Me? A bully?

Pouting about the "prove" -abilty of Jesus existing is beneath you.

The poster made a claim and through out a challenge. I uphels my end of the bargain I was merely expecting the same courtesy from him. It was not forthcoming.

That kind of secularism will truly benefit Christ and His followers, if indeed there is a "free exchange" of ideas.

The sound of a familiar drum you beat Al.

Even human instinct knows there is "a" God. Look at how many versions of religion and deities there are and always have been.

This begs the question - which is the right 'god' - why your's.

Just because man has always attributed his sense of the 'divine' to an external source is not proof of the existence of 'a' god.

That is to say . . . worthless.

This is where I part comapny with your Christ. No one is worthless.

I'm sure that is why atheists go around attacking Christians and Christianity to this day.

It is the narcissism, intolerance and ethno/sociocentric views promulagetd by religion that I believe should be challenged.

[AlAyeti]

I'm telling you. We're kindred spirits. Religion has got to go. And giving a person what they deserve is OK by me. The ignorant deserve a smack on the back of the noggin from time to time.

Christ is a relationship more than anything else. God as Abba, "daddy,"
is how he was portrayed by Jesus. His follwers do not retreat into the excuse of myth and legend to find solace. They keep studying, listening and learning.

I came to Christ because He was willing to come into time and space and let the rocks be thrown. Or, the nails be driven. And there is no compulsion. No puppet master controlling my choice behavior.

Allah has Mohammad and how do we know that because Mohammad is the Prophet of Allah. Jesus gave us no circular reasoning. Just Him and Him alone. Why is evolution a fact? Becuase only scientific evidence can be defined in evolutionary terms. Forget about the divine spark in instinctive thought processes in even an ant. No, no, randomness and chaos causes order to "develope." This cannot be challenged or questioned. This cannot be challenged or questioned. This cannot be challenged or questioned. This cannot be challenged or questioned. But body orifices can. How dumb are the educated really? Didn't we all make it through school being taught by a lot of people who were really idiots?

Really, it boiled down to just reading selected books, being tested on selections from those books and getting on with our lives in reality. Didn't we realize that the teachers were more like salesmen than sages?

No one is worthless (not even an evolutionist). You are right to chastise me if that is what I convey. This is why I view skeptics as health for the Church. Like anti-bodies making us better and stromger. Please don't fault Jesus when His follwers are wrong. You cannot find wrongdoing in His words.

There isn't any denial of skeptics and there questions in the New Testament. And no city was surrounded and razed to the ground by Jesus if no one followed His teachings.

[bernee51]

God as Abba,

Brings a whole new vision of "Dancing Queen'

His follwers do not retreat into the excuse of myth and legend to find solace. They keep studying, listening and learning.

Jesus IS myth and legend. And their minds closed when the NT was written.

I came to Christ because He was willing to come into time and space and let the rocks be thrown. Or, the nails be driven. And there is no compulsion.

And I came to the Self for the same reason - but with compulsion - the compussion for the truth.

No puppet master controlling my choice behavior.

Your god pulls your strings.

This cannot be challenged or questioned. This cannot be challenged or questioned. This cannot be challenged or questioned. This cannot be challenged or questioned.

Do you have a problem with your keyboard - or are you starting to sound like a stuck record?

. You cannot find wrongdoing in His words.

Wanna bet?

And no city was surrounded and razed to the ground by Jesus if no one followed His teachings.

Really? Are you sure of that. They did do a bit of damage.

[mishmash]

Well first of all prove that Jesus existed.

After you prove he didn't.

Actually it is you who is making the positive claim, so it is you with whom the burden of proof rests.

This discussion is on the morality of cursing a fig tree, not on the existence of Jesus. As such, any "positive claim" is off-topic and you shouldn't be responding to it.

I don't think killing the tree was such a bad thing, It was not sentient, after all. If it was someone else's property, they deserved compensation. Perhaps they did recieve compensation, or perhaps it was wild.

It was evidently intended to serve as a warning to the disciples and all of us, to bear fruit with our lives. We all need to be valuable contributing members of society. If not, we will become outcasts.