Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Malachi151 · 03-12-2007, 02:40 AM

The scenes of the cursing of the fig tree and the cleansing of the temple I think offer solid evidence that the author of Matthew really did not understand the story that was written by the author or Mark.

There are really multiple things that lead to this conclusion, for example the fact that the author of Matthew praises the Pharasies in his writings while still quoting Mark's condemnations of them.

But, the issue of the fig tree offers a special look at how "Matthew" reworded Mark in such a way that shows he didn't get Mark.

From Mark:

Quote:

Mark 11:
12 The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. 13 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. 14 Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it.

15 On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, 16 and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts. 17 And as he taught them, he said, "Is it not written:
" 'My house will be called
a house of prayer for all nations'? But you have made it 'a den of robbers.'"

18 The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching.

19 When evening came, they went out of the city.

20 In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. 21 Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!"

This is based on Hosea 9:

Quote:

1 Do not rejoice, O Israel; do not be jubilant like the other nations. For you have been unfaithful to your God; ... 7 The days of punishment are coming, the days of reckoning are at hand. Let Israel know this. Because your sins are so many and your hostility so great, the prophet is considered a fool, the inspired man a maniac. 8 The prophet, along with my God, is the watchman over Ephraim, yet snares await him on all his paths, and hostility in the house of his God. 9 They have sunk deep into corruption, as in the days of Gibeah. God will remember their wickedness and punish them for their sins. 10 'When I found Israel, it was like finding grapes in the desert; when I saw your fathers, it was like seeing the early fruit on the fig tree. But when they came to Baal Peor, they consecrated themselves to that shameful idol and became as vile as the thing they loved. 15'... Because of their sinful deeds, I will drive them out of my house. I will no longer love them; all their leaders are rebellious. 16 Ephraim is blighted, their root is withered, they yield no fruit. Even if they bear children, I will slay their cherished offspring.' 17 My God will reject them because they have not obeyed him; they will be wanderers among the nations.

You can see that the author of Mark uses the motif from Hosea 9, to draw a clear reference to this passage. In Mark we have Jesus approaching the fig tree when it is out of season, looking for "early fruit", then he "drives them out of his house", and then he returns to see the tree "withered from the root".

This is a clear and distinctive pattern.

Now we go to Matthew:

Quote:

Matthew 21:
12 Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. 13 "It is written," he said to them, " 'My house will be called a house of prayer,' but you are making it a 'den of robbers.'"

14 The blind and the lame came to him at the temple, and he healed them. 15 But when the chief priests and the teachers of the law saw the wonderful things he did and the children shouting in the temple area, "Hosanna to the Son of David," they were indignant.

16 "Do you hear what these children are saying?" they asked him.
"Yes," replied Jesus, "have you never read,
" 'From the lips of children and infants
you have ordained praise'?"

17 And he left them and went out of the city to Bethany, where he spent the night.

18 Early in the morning, as he was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. 19 Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" Immediately the tree withered.

20 When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. "How did the fig tree wither so quickly?" they asked.

21 Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. 22 If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."

Here "Matthew" has totally destroyed the pattern and the references back to Hosea. Matthew gives the "meaning of the parable" later in the story, towards the end, taking the three parts totally out of sync. It's obvious that the author of Matthew didn't know that this linked back to Hosea, and had no idea of the subtleties of the messages in Mark.

This is now one of my favorite passages for demonstrating this type of relationships, both between Mark and the OT, and between Mark and the other Gospels. This provides support for Mark being an allegorical fiction based on the scriptures, which was later hisoricized by people who themselves didn't understanding the meaning of Mark and took it as fact.

wordy · 03-12-2007, 05:21 AM

Isn't there another such reference where Jesus remind them of the story of the fig tree. He refer to it as an allegory or what the proper word for it is. Fig tree as a metaphor. Look up every reference to fig tree and wither and you find it.

So that could indicate that those writing those parts knew it was all made up as commentary on things in OT and not something happening to Jesus and his gang of followers. The story is a functional one and not description of a historical fact. It is a prescriptive text telling about consequences of lack of faith in the interpretation the writers try to teach. Jesus as Christ in flesh a kind of enactment of a heavenly figure put in human body.

Malachi151 · 03-12-2007, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wordy

Isn't there another such reference where Jesus remind them of the story of the fig tree. He refer to it as an allegory or what the proper word for it is. Fig tree as a metaphor. Look up every reference to fig tree and wither and you find it.

That's in Matthew 24.

The author of Matthew, for some reason, split the whole story up and moved the pieces around, which totally lost the original meaning.

Quote:

So that could indicate that those writing those parts knew it was all made up as commentary on things in OT and not something happening to Jesus and his gang of followers. The story is a functional one and not description of a historical fact. It is a prescriptive text telling about consequences of lack of faith in the interpretation the writers try to teach. Jesus as Christ in flesh a kind of enactment of a heavenly figure put in human body.

Perhaps, but in Matthew the "deeper" meaning is totally lost.

Quote:

32 "Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. 34 I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

When you look at all of the "hidden" meanings in the Mark, they almost all refer to the destruction of Israel and God hating the Jews.

Here the author of Matthew has changed it into something else, being the coming of the kingdom of heaven.

Solo · 03-12-2007, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Here "Matthew" has totally destroyed the pattern and the references back to Hosea. Matthew gives the "meaning of the parable" later in the story, towards the end, taking the three parts totally out of sync. It's obvious that the author of Matthew didn't know that this linked back to Hosea, and had no idea of the subtleties of the messages in Mark.

First, if you compare passages, it would be fair to have the full pericope side by side. If you did that in this case you would have found that the structure of the passage and the concluding, teaching portion of the passage is preserved by Matthew. So I do not agree with the "totally destroyed" conclusion.

Next, the perceptible difference between the two passages lie the absence of the "Markan sandwich" in Matthew's rendition and his ommission of the tantalizing "out of season" info by Mark. Neither can be traced back to Hosea 9. and therefore I do not see where you can say that Matthew broke the link the Hosea passage.

It is quite probable that Mark actually took Hosea 9. as a witness to the iniquity that Jesus suffered by Israel (and the fig tree), and the "sandwiching" of the temple melee into fig tree lesson certainly helps that view. To my mind, there is also the intriguing part, of Hsa 9:7, which is consistent with the prevalent perception in Mark's Galilee of Jesus as mad.

I do not think that one can fairly say that the theme of "fig tree" as an example of punishment to Israel can fully account for the origin of the story as allegory. Most importantly, the "out-of-season" bit has no parallel in Hosea and should be then either meaningful theologically or as (I believe) a reference to something else. The tradition about Jesus attempting to feed off a fruit which was out of season, is stranger than fiction, and therefore was excised from Matthew. Nonetheless, Matthew 21:18 informs us that Jesus approached the tree in the morning - at a time when insomniacs commonly experience "miracles" of hypnagogia, i.e. dreaming while awake.

Jiri

Malachi151 · 03-12-2007, 08:36 AM

In Mark he says that the tree was "in leaf", but that it was not season. The only thing that this can refer to is spring, with the tree in leaf but it being before the fruit is on the trees. This refers to the "early fruit" of Hosea 9:10, so indeed this was important to preserve.

Solo · 03-12-2007, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

In Mark he says that the tree was "in leaf", but that it was not season. The only thing that this can refer to is spring, with the tree in leaf but it being before the fruit is on the trees. This refers to the "early fruit" of Hosea 9:10, so indeed this was important to preserve.

The season Mark places the event into is spring, before Passover. Figs are harvested in August-October. Simply put, there was no fruit on the tress, early (first) or otherwise.

Jiri

Malachi151 · 03-12-2007, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

The season Mark places the event into is spring, before Passover. Figs are harvested in August-October. Simply put, there was no fruit on the tress, early (first) or otherwise.

Jiri

But that's the points of the whole reference.

Quote:

13 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.

Quote:

when I saw your fathers, it was like seeing the early fruit on the fig tree.

The author of Mark was clearly constructing an "early fruit" scenario in order to draw the parallel to Hosea 9.

aa5874 · 03-12-2007, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

The tradition about Jesus attempting to feed off a fruit which was out of season, is stranger than fiction, and therefore was excised from Matthew. Nonetheless, Matthew 21:18 informs us that Jesus approached the tree in the morning - at a time when insomniacs commonly experience "miracles" of hypnagogia, i.e. dreaming while awake.

Have you isolated all the passages that are under the effects of 'hypnagogia',i.e. dreaming while awake? The conception of Jesus, with those visions, should qualify.

Solo · 03-12-2007, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Quote:

13 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.

Quote:

when I saw your fathers, it was like seeing the early fruit on the fig tree.

The author of Mark was clearly constructing an "early fruit" scenario in order to draw the parallel to Hosea 9. Like with Matthew you are leaving the meaty part of Hosea 10.

Again (like with the passage of Matthew) you are "half-quoting" and misapprehending the point:

Quote:

Hosea 9:10 (RSV) "Like grapes in the wilderness, I found Israel. Like the first fruit on the fig tree, in its first season, I saw your fathers. But they came to Ba'al-pe'or, and consecrated themselves to Ba'al, and became detestable like the thing they loved."

Hosea sees Israel like grapes in the desert and its fathers like an early fruit of a young fig tree (which I take means "tastier" than later figs from later seasons), but then Israel and its dads pervert themselves to Baal and become abominable.

By contrast, Mark's Jesus thinks he sees figs in the tree but does not, because it's not August, but curses the tree anyhow (to make a point on it later) and then he goes to the Temple and finds it became "a den of thieves". I would not call that exactly a functional analogy. If Mark wanted to parallel Hosea and create a meaningful allegory out of scratch, he would have let Jesus find "early fruit" on a young tree and eat thereof predicting the tree's demise (to the disciples' utter incomprehension), and note on return from the Temple that the tree indeed withered (to the disciples' amazement). But he did not, and my wild guess it was because he was constrained by some tradition that said that shortly before his arrest Jesus went out to look for figs out of season. The best Mark could do with that was create a self contradictory teaching on the power of faith, which can move mountains but can't get a hungry Son of Man a few figs early.

Jiri

Malachi151 · 03-12-2007, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Again (like with the passage of Matthew) you are "half-quoting" and misapprehending the point:

I'm not half quoting or misapprehending anything, I quoted from a different translation. Nor did a misquote or misapprehend anything from Matthew. Nothing in Matthew relates to the destruction of Israel.

Given the reordering of all the texts, nor does the passage relate back to Hosea anymore, either in structure or specific phrases, such as the withering of the root, etc.

Clearly, "Matthew" screwed it up, and perhaps never recognized the parallels. His he did he totally eliminated them and failed also to summarize them in his text.

Quote:

By contrast, Mark's Jesus thinks he sees figs in the tree but does not, because it's not August, but curses the tree anyhow (to make a point on it later) and then he goes to the Temple and finds it became "a den of thieves". I would not call that exactly a functional analogy. If Mark wanted to parallel Hosea and create a meaningful allegory out of scratch, he would have let Jesus find "early fruit" on a young tree and eat thereof predicting the tree's demise (to the disciples' utter incomprehension), and note on return from the Temple that the tree indeed withered (to the disciples' amazement). But he did not, and my wild guess it was because he was constrained by some tradition that said that shortly before his arrest Jesus went out to look for figs out of season. The best Mark could do with that was create a self contradictory teaching on the power of faith, which can move mountains but can't get a hungry Son of Man a few figs early.

This is just a bunch of wishful malarkey.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-12-2007, 05:21 AM	#2
wordy Contributor Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Sweden, Europe Posts: 12,091	Isn't there another such reference where Jesus remind them of the story of the fig tree. He refer to it as an allegory or what the proper word for it is. Fig tree as a metaphor. Look up every reference to fig tree and wither and you find it. So that could indicate that those writing those parts knew it was all made up as commentary on things in OT and not something happening to Jesus and his gang of followers. The story is a functional one and not description of a historical fact. It is a prescriptive text telling about consequences of lack of faith in the interpretation the writers try to teach. Jesus as Christ in flesh a kind of enactment of a heavenly figure put in human body.

03-12-2007, 08:36 AM	#5
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	In Mark he says that the tree was "in leaf", but that it was not season. The only thing that this can refer to is spring, with the tree in leaf but it being before the fruit is on the trees. This refers to the "early fruit" of Hosea 9:10, so indeed this was important to preserve.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.