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?

[McCulloch]

The killing of the tree provided an object lesson for the disciples.

Enlighten me. What object lesson was provided? God's demands can be unreasonable and arbitrary but you better obey or else?

The fig tree example is not meant as a lesson of morality but of expediency. Were the fig tree to produce fruit it's survival would be protected as it is beneficial to it's environment (or those sharing the environment). If the tree bears no fruit then what is to stop someone chopping it down without a second thought.

Even when the fruit is out-of-season. So the lesson is you must be beneficial to your environment even when it is biologically or practically not expected of you. Don't sleep

[Curious]

The fig tree example is not meant as a lesson of morality but of expediency. Were the fig tree to produce fruit it's survival would be protected as it is beneficial to it's environment (or those sharing the environment). If the tree bears no fruit then what is to stop someone chopping it down without a second thought.

Even when the fruit is out-of-season. So the lesson is you must be beneficial to your environment even when it is biologically or practically not expected of you. Don't sleep

I didn't write it, I just interpret it. I am sure that someone else might interpret it as "kill thy neighbour if they don't tow the line". I think this shows more about the person interpreting it then the actual meaning of the message though. It would be unreasonable to expect a fig tree to produce apples or figs out of season. A good idea is to possibly get the gist and then use it in connection with other things you may learn.
"The worker is worth his keep" is a good example that could be used in connection with this one.

[steen]

A good idea is to possibly get the gist and then use it in connection with other things you may learn.
"The worker is worth his keep" is a good example that could be used in connection with this one.

So it means that even very literal, specific and detailed descriptions in the Bible needs "interpreting" to make sense with current knowledge!

[Curious]

A good idea is to possibly get the gist and then use it in connection with other things you may learn.
"The worker is worth his keep" is a good example that could be used in connection with this one.

So it means that even very literal, specific and detailed descriptions in the Bible needs "interpreting" to make sense with current knowledge!

Well I suppose it depends on whether or not you believe the Bible is the direct word of God, some vague interpretation of fact requiring real study to understand, or just outright deception.

[steen]

A good idea is to possibly get the gist and then use it in connection with other things you may learn.
"The worker is worth his keep" is a good example that could be used in connection with this one.

So it means that even very literal, specific and detailed descriptions in the Bible needs "interpreting" to make sense with current knowledge!

Well I suppose it depends on whether or not you believe the Bible is the direct word of God, some vague interpretation of fact requiring real study to understand, or just outright deception.

Neither, actually. I see it as an inspoiration from God as to how to interact with each other as we became societies. An instruction sorely mangled and abused by the literalists, though. They have done just about everything BUT loving their neighbors.

[Pujitos]

I think jerickson had it right when he said it was about his authority over nature, and I think it was also about "you can do this too if you have faith".
I wouldn't say this is particularly unprofound - it's a hard lesson to get, and there are a number of passages in the Bible that deal with it - like Jesus walking on the water, for example.
Even if it is unprofound, what's to stop Jesus saying unprofound things?

It is a weird verse, but I don't think it was Jesus suddenly and irrationally smiting a fig tree because it wouldn't bear figs out of season. Why would he do that? That makes even less sense. The simplest explanation is probably just that he wanted to teach his disciples something.

[steen]

It is a weird verse, but I don't think it was Jesus suddenly and irrationally smiting a fig tree because it wouldn't bear figs out of season. Why would he do that? That makes even less sense. The simplest explanation is probably just that he wanted to teach his disciples something.

At the expense of what looks like a temper tantrum, though.

[McCulloch]

I think jerickson had it right when he said it was about his authority over nature, and I think it was also about "you can do this too if you have faith".
I wouldn't say this is particularly unprofound - it's a hard lesson to get, and there are a number of passages in the Bible that deal with it - like Jesus walking on the water, for example.
Even if it is unprofound, what's to stop Jesus saying unprofound things?
It is a weird verse, but I don't think it was Jesus suddenly and irrationally smiting a fig tree because it wouldn't bear figs out of season. Why would he do that? That makes even less sense. The simplest explanation is probably just that he wanted to teach his disciples something.

So, what was he trying to teach? I'm not convinced that the lesson makes a lot of sense.

[MagusYanam]

It's actually one of the prime examples of why the Bible should not be taken literally. The tale of the fig tree only really makes sense in its proper cultural context, since during the time of Christ, the fig tree was symbolic of Israel and especially Israel's clerical elites (the Saducees, for example). The incident of Jesus killing the fig tree would have been seen in its time as indicative of his being disgruntled with the current status quo among Israel's priesthood. It may even have been a parable for the barrenness of Israel's priesthood.

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. Unfortunately for Christianity as a whole, the awareness of the cultural disconnect between the Biblical times and our own is fading thanks to fundamentalism, biblical literalism, inerrancy doctrine and sola scriptura. I'm of the opinion that the mainline churches should again take the helm of Biblical scholarship and reclaim the language of the Gospel for the good of the religion as a whole.

[jerickson314]

J.P. Holding has an entire article on this here.

Quotes:

"How can Jesus be sinless when he got irritated and angry at the fig tree?" This is a non-objection. There is no hint of irritation or annoyance in Jesus' attitude; how can this be read into the text? Even if there was, though, I have yet to see the commandment, "Thou shalt not be irritated!"...

These points serve to answer the question of why Jesus expected figs -- at a time of year (April; the normal season was much later) when there wouldn't be any normally. As he approached Jerusalem, his acceptance as Messiah would have ushered in the Messianic age. Checking the fig tree for fruit out of season was a signal: Had he found fruit (which normally came in after the leaves), it would have been a sign of the coming Messianic Kingdom. Since he did not find fruit, the tree became a symbol for fruitless Israel, and of his rejection, and was withered -- in line with the OT judgments prescribed above. The withering of the fig tree is an enacted parable (that recorded in Luke) and a prophetic demonstration. To ask why Jesus was "irritated" or "peevish" is to miss the significance of this episode....and Mark is actually offering a double meaning when he says it was "not the season for figs." The "season" in question is not the normal fig season, but the "season" or time of the Messiah!