The fig tree Jesus cursed withered imeediately or overnight

[Guest]

In the book of Matthew 21:18
When he was going back to the city in the morning, he was hungry.
19
Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went over to it, but found nothing on it except leaves. And he said to it, "May no fruit ever come from you again." And immediately the fig tree withered.
20
When the disciples saw this, they were amazed and said, "How was it that the fig tree withered immediately?"
In the book of Mark 11: 12
11 And he entered Jerusalem, and went into the temple; and when he had looked round at everything, as it was already late, he went out to Bethany with the twelve. 12 On the following day, when they came from Bethany, he was hungry. 13 And seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to see if he could find anything on it. When he came to it, he found nothing but leaves, for it was not the season for figs. 14 And he said to it, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard it. 15 And they came to Jerusalem. And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold and those who bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons; 16 and he would not allow any one to carry anything through the temple. 17 And he taught, and said to them, "Is it not written, `My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations'? But you have made it a den of robbers." 18 And the chief priests and the scribes heard it and sought a way to destroy him; for they feared him, because all the multitude was astonished at his teaching. 19 And when evening came they went out of the city. 20 As they passed by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered away to its roots. 21 And Peter remembered and said to him, "Master, look! The fig tree which you cursed has withered."

A clear problem here, if you continue to read both gospels jesus said you can move a mountian if you have faith. Both episodes they were coming to the city.

 

[Quath]

The way I have seen people get around this is to assume that there is no chronological order of one of the passages. I find it to be a cop-out, but everything can be reconciled if you really want it to be.

Quath

 

[JM]

A paradox isn't a contradiction.

Could you supply a source alone with your posts please, I'd like to see what else is coming down the road.

Peace

 

[BradtheImpaler]

A paradox isn't a contradiction.

"Paradox" can be a euphomism for "contradiction" though. What if the example of the "paradoxical" accounts of the fig tree incident had been recorded in the Koran, instead of the NT, and attributed to Mohammed instead of Jesus? Would you be saying it was a paradox or a contradiction?

 

[Gary]

DavidDavid, you copy-and-paste from an atheist site.

You said you had "researched" these issues. If you had, you would have known that these so-called contradictions have been answered before. It seems your "research" was very shallow.

http://www.geocities.com/gary_bee_za/bi ... iction.htm

http://www.carm.org/diff/Mark11_14.htm

http://www.tektonics.org/uz/zapfigtree.html

 

[BradtheImpaler]

DavidDavid, you copy-and-paste from an atheist site.

You said you had "researched" these issues. If you had, you would have known that these so-called contradictions have been answered before. It seems your "research" was very shallow.

http://www.geocities.com/gary_bee_za/bi ... iction.htm

http://www.carm.org/diff/Mark11_14.htm

http://www.tektonics.org/uz/zapfigtree.html

The contradiction has been answered - but what is the answer? The CARM reference concludes -

"The account does pose a challenge for the doctrine of inerrancy"

And Tektonics actually goes as far as to suggest that maybe the fig tree withered immediately but verse 21 - "When the disciples saw this" was the next day. Just because Christian Apologists address something doesn't mean they solved it. Most apologetics to challenges of these contradictions are very tortured. Finding any way one can seemingly wriggle out of an apparent contradiction does not help the case. Did you ever wonder why there are SO MANY apparent contradictions in the first place? The answer is simple - many of them ARE. Especially in the case of the gospels it is easy to understand why this is so. The Jesus story was transmitted orally for many years before it was written down. When it was finally written down, it was written down by different authors who had different details of many of the events. This is always what happens when a story is told and retold - nobody is going to relate the details exactly the same. But when people are indoctrinated to believe in the doctrine of inerrancy they cannot honestly evaluate the possibility of contradiction.

 

[Imagican]

First, we are dealing with two distinct gospels. We must realize that everyone following Jesus was not privileged to hear and see ALL that He spoke and performed.

With this in mind, let us make a simple assumption. I know I know, and I won't I promise. he he he

So, let us say that on the day that Christ spoke the words to the fig tree, that it withered immediately. Only the people at the front of the line actually saw this though.

But, by the next day, the others had heard the witnesses describe the event that they witnessed and as those that had heard the story passed by the same place the next day, they too saw the evidence of what had happened the day before.

Remember, these are two separate stories written by two separate men perhaps many, many years apart.

What do you think?

 

[BradtheImpaler]

First, we are dealing with two distinct gospels. We must realize that everyone following Jesus was not privileged to hear and see ALL that He spoke and performed.

With this in mind, let us make a simple assumption. I know I know, and I won't I promise. he he he

So, let us say that on the day that Christ spoke the words to the fig tree, that it withered immediately. Only the people at the front of the line actually saw this though

The front of the line? : This wasn't the Crusades (yet) Imagican. Mark says (verse 11) that he was with the "TWELVE".

But, by the next day, the others had heard the witnesses describe the event that they witnessed and as those that had heard the story passed by the same place the next day, they too saw the evidence of what had happened the day before

So we first have to imagine that only some of the 12 disciples witnessed this (even though they were travelling together) and that they told Peter, but apparently neglected to tell him that they saw the tree wither after Jesus cursed it, they just told him that Jesus cursed it, because the next day, according to Mark...

"Peter remembered and said, Rabbi! Look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!" (Mark.11:21 NASB)

Remember, these are two separate stories written by two separate men perhaps many, many years apart.

What do you think?

I think you're right with that last comment - two seperate stories written by two seperate men years apart - that explains it.

 

[Imagican]

I beg to differ my friend. If you will read the whole chapter you will see that this is the chapter that speaks of Christs' entrance into Jerusalem.

Mark 11:8 And many spread their garments in the way; and others cut down branches off the trees, and strewed them in the way. 9. And they that went before, and they that followed, cried saying, Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord:

11 And Jesus entered into Jerusalem, and into the temple: and when he had looked round about upon all things, and now the eventide was come, he went out unto Bethany with the twelve......

Nothing here speaks of 'only' twelve, it simply states that the twelve were with Him. But from my perspective, it certainly stands to reason that if there were many people that welcomed Jesus into Jerusalem, that there would be many that followed Him when He left.

And it doesn't take crusades to form a group too large to see 'everything' that transpires among the members of said group. And you are certainly aware of what happens to a story as it spreads from one person to another. It changes a little bit with each retelling.

My interpretation wasn't meant to be 'fact', I was simply offering one possible explanation that would attribute the discrepancy noted above.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

I beg to differ my friend. If you will read the whole chapter you will see that this is the chapter that speaks of Christs' entrance into Jerusalem.

Mark 11:8 And many spread their garments in the way; and others cut down branches off the trees, and strewed them in the way. 9. And they that went before, and they that followed, cried saying, Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord:

11 And Jesus entered into Jerusalem, and into the temple: and when he had looked round about upon all things, and now the eventide was come, he went out unto Bethany with the twelve......

Nothing here speaks of 'only' twelve, it simply states that the twelve were with Him. But from my perspective, it certainly stands to reason that if there were many people that welcomed Jesus into Jerusalem, that there would be many that followed Him when He left.

Why does it SPECIFY he went with the twelve if he went with many more? If he had been with a large group that day (including, of course, the twelve) and then as the day was ending it says he went to Bethany WITH THE TWELVE that means, if anything, ONLY the twelve.

And it doesn't take crusades to form a group too large to see 'everything' that transpires among the members of said group

It says that when Jesus cursed the fig tree, "his disciples heard him say it". They heard him, but only some saw the tree wither immediately, and those that saw it didn't bother to tell the others standing nearby that the tree withered immediately? When you have to go this far "out on a limb" :wink: to try and make a case it ought to tell you something.

And you are certainly aware of what happens to a story as it spreads from one person to another. It changes a little bit with each retelling

Absolutely - my point all along. That's what happened with the gospels and why there are discrepancies regarding many of the same events. The story was related orally for many years before it began to be written down by different people in different locations who had heard different details.

My interpretation wasn't meant to be 'fact', I was simply offering one possible explanation that would attribute the discrepancy noted above.

It is only the type of contrived explanation that one who felt there HAD to be an explanation (other than it's a contradiction) would come up with. If you believe the bible is inerrant even on the level of details such as this then your mind is already made up and no amount of reason will convince you otherwise.

 

[Ruben]

Why did Jesus curse the tree? I've heard that the event was symbolic of God's rejection of the Israel because Israel had rejected God. Any comments?

 

[Bubba]

This may help. Beza

45. When Jesus entered Jerusalem he cleansed (Matthew 21:12) or did not cleanse (Mark 11:1-17) the temple that same day, but the next day?

(Category: misunderstood the author's intent)

The key to understanding may be found in Matthew's use of narrative. At times he can be seen to arrange his material in topical order rather than strict chronological sequence. See the next question (#46) for more details.

With this in mind, it is probable that Matthew relates the cleansing of the temple along with the triumphal entry, even though the cleansing occurred the next day. Verse 12 states that 'Jesus entered the temple' but does not say clearly that it was immediately following the entry into Jerusalem.. Verse 17 informs us that he left Jerusalem and went to Bethany, where he spent the night. Mark 11:11 also has him going out to Bethany for the night, but this is something that he did each night of that week in Jerusalem.

Matthew 21:23 states: "Jesus entered the temple courts" in a similar fashion to verse 12, yet Luke 20:1 says that the following incident occurred "one day", indicating that it may not have been immediately after the fig tree incident.

According to this possible interpretation, Jesus entered the temple on the day of his triumphal entry, looked around and retired to Bethany. The next morning he cursed the fig tree on the way to Jerusalem (at which time it started to wither) and cleansed the temple when he got there. Returning to Bethany that evening, probably as it was getting dark, the withered fig tree may not have been noticed by the disciples. It was only the following morning in the full light of day that they saw what had happened to it.

(Archer 1994:334.335)

46. Matthew 21:19 says that the tree which Jesus cursed withered at once, whereas Mark 11:20 maintains that it withered overnight.

(Category: misunderstood the author's intent)

The differences found between the accounts of Matthew and Mark concerning the fig tree have much to do with the order both Matthew and Mark used in arranging their material. When we study the narrative technique of Matthew in general, we find (as was noted in #45 above) that he sometimes arranges his material in a topical order rather than in the strictly chronological order that is more often characteristic of Mark and Luke.

For instance, if we look at chapters 5-7 of Matthew which deal with the sermon on the Mount, it is quite conceivable that portions of the sermon on the Mount teachings are found some times in other settings, such as in the sermon on the plain in Luke (6:20-49). Matthew's tendency was to group his material in themes according to a logical sequence. We find another example of this exhibited in a series of parables of the kingdom of heaven that make up chapter 13. Once a theme has been broached, Matthew prefers to carry it through to its completion, as a general rule.

When we see it from this perspective it is to Mark that we look to when trying to ascertain the chronology of an event. In Mark's account we find that Jesus went to the temple on both Palm Sunday and the following Monday. But in Mark 11:11-19 it is clearly stated that Jesus did not expel the tradesmen from the temple until Monday, after he had cursed the barren fig tree (verses 12 to 14).

To conclude then, Matthew felt it suited his topical approach more effectively to include the Monday afternoon action with the Sunday afternoon initial observation, whereas Mark preferred to follow a strict chronological sequence. These differences are not contradictory, but show merely a different style in arrangement by each author.

(Archer 1982:334-335 and Light of Life III 1992:96-97)