Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Why did Jesus curse the fig tree?


Recommended Posts

Posted

I do not find it hilarious. I don't think that Jesus uttered any idle words or did anything which we have recorded which was not on purpose and purposeful.I think there is a significant lesson that can be learned from that little incident. I think it is a metaphor to those in the Church who have great potential but who do not produce works (spiritual food) to nourish those with lesser learning, etc.

 

Just my two cents worth, if it is worth that.

 

Glenn

Posted
47 minutes ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

I found this one of the more humorous scripture events. Jesus is hungry and he looks for food on the tree and sees none, so he curses the tree. Why did he do it and does anyone else find it hilarious?

I find it more troubling than hilarious. It's the sort of thing I would expect to find in one of the spurious "infancy gospels" rather than in canonical scripture.

Posted

Picking up the story from the Gospel of Mark, Chapter 11, it's useful to consider how the material is organized in the verses (fig tree/cleansing of the temple/fig tree).  It suggests a connection between cleansing of the temple and the cursing of the fig tree.  In the Old Testament, the fig tree often serves as a metaphor for Israel and its standing before God.  So in this light, the withered fig tree represents the judgment of God.

Sobering stuff...

--Erik

Posted

There being lots of leaves on the tree gave the impression that there would be lots of fruit. The fact that it had no fruits but lots of leaves is a representation of those who profess to recognize Christ's authority but bring forth no good fruits in their actions. It was also a good opportunity to demonstrate of his power over nature.  At least he did it to a tree and not to an actual person.

 

Posted

It was the one destructive miracle, fitting that he should demonstrate that power at least once in mortality. He needed the practice for what was about to happen to the Nephites.

Posted

The fig was also one of the botanical representations of the Tree of Life. One aspect of the Tree of Life was its connection to the king. Symbolically, the rightful king removed a symbolic representation of a competing king that did not qualify. The positive aspect of the destructive miracle was to underline Christ as the rightful triumphant Messiah, or the kingly Messiah.

Posted
1 hour ago, Brant Gardner said:

The fig was also one of the botanical representations of the Tree of Life. One aspect of the Tree of Life was its connection to the king. Symbolically, the rightful king removed a symbolic representation of a competing king that did not qualify. The positive aspect of the destructive miracle was to underline Christ as the rightful triumphant Messiah, or the kingly Messiah.

Surely.

It was a demonstration of His powers over creation, plants and elements, since He had created all things.

19 And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away.

 20 And when the disciples saw it, they marvelled, saying, How soon is the fig tree withered away!

 21 Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done.

Posted (edited)

He was cranky because He hadn't had anything to eat all day, since, "You're not you when your hungry," but there were no Snickers bars back then, so ... ;)

Edited by Kenngo1969
Posted
19 hours ago, Brant Gardner said:

The fig was also one of the botanical representations of the Tree of Life. One aspect of the Tree of Life was its connection to the king.

What about all the other trees in the Garden of Eden?  What were they representations of?

Thanks,
Jim

Posted
30 minutes ago, Vance said:

For hypocrisy.

It wasn't the tree's fault that it didn't have any fruit. As Mark notes, "it was not the time for figs" (Mark 11:13). The season for bearing fruit was between May and October, not early April.

This episode reminds me of an anecdote related by Helen Mar Kimball Whitney:

"I will mention a little incident that happened the summer previous to my father’s return [from England]. The Prophet and two or three brethren had called at our house to hear a letter read from father, and when they rose to leave, Joseph, who stood by the bureau, where a couple of china dolls were standing upon two large salt cellars, which had also been sent from England to my mother, while he was talking took one up to look at, but in replacing it sat it upon one side, when it fell, breaking the head off; he merely remarked: 'As that has fallen, so shall the heathen gods fall.' I stood there a silent observer, unable to understand or appreciate the prophetic words, but thought them a rather weak apology for breaking my doll’s head off."

(https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/womans-view-helen-mar-whitneys-reminiscences-early-church-history/4-scenes-nauvoo)

Posted
22 hours ago, Nevo said:

It wasn't the tree's fault that it didn't have any fruit. As Mark notes, "it was not the time for figs" (Mark 11:13). The season for bearing fruit was between May and October, not early April.

Then why did Jesus expect to find something on it?

" he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon"

Posted
On 2/15/2016 at 4:34 PM, theplains said:

What about all the other trees in the Garden of Eden?  What were they representations of?

Thanks,
Jim

The only other one that mattered was the Tree of Life. That was pretty simply associated with life, though that association was represented by the water that flowed by it, its fruit, or in some cases the juice of its fruit (typically fermented).

 

The rest represented trees.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...