Matthew 21

Jesus Curses the Fig Tree

18 In the morning, as [Jesus] was returning to the city, he was hungry.  19 And seeing a fig tree by the wayside he went to it, and found nothing on it but leaves only. And he said to it, “May no fruit ever come from you again!” And the fig tree withered at once.



Such petty, childish, vindictive, irrational behavior. The logical course of action would've been to cause the tree to suddenly bear fruit. That way he would not only have demonstrated his power, he would also have been able to sate his hunger.

Well, when you meet him one day you can tell him what you think of him.

Oh wait, let me guess, you don't believe he even exists right?  So why even post things about things you don't believe exists?

Or are you just trying to push people's buttons?

What if youre wrong and you meet him one day and have to give an account of your words?  

Hey everybody!  In case you were wondering, an atheist troll has a negative opinion of something in the Bible!

I know that's going to come as news, but it's out there now.  

You should have specified that's what your "logical" course of action would be.

Beyond that, you completely missed the point of that passage.

I'm posting about an act described in the Bible, which clearly does exist.

If he is so irrational as to have actually engaged in an act of vengeance against a fig tree as told in Matthew 21, then I doubt that anything I could say would matter.

So tell me, if you saw someone destroy a tree because it had no fruit when he was hungry, wouldn't you think he was at least a wee bit emotionally disturbed?

Willful ignorance?  Trolling?

Which is it?

Please enlighten me -- just what is the point of him killing the tree because it had no figs???

OP is from CA. Move along.

You didn't answer my question.

First, let me ask you ...

Have you done anything - at all - to try to understand what's being spoken about there, or did you just stumble upon a couple of isolated verses and then start complaining about them because they don't seem to fit into "your logic"?

Tragedy of the commons.

He wasn't punishing the tree, but the looters that had stripped it of fruit.

That's rather inconsiderate. I posed my question first...

The way you edited my post in your quote, and your avoidance of my question, has pretty well answered my question.

No answer would satisfy you.  would it?

Yeah? Obviously you misunderstood my post. I avoided your question solely because you did not answer my question. You still refuse to answer. If you want your questions answered, you'll have to display the good manners to answer mine.

Sure, an honest answer could. But, evading the issue, and dancing around the question, definitely does not.

More avoidance.  More trolling.

Feel free to carry on with your intentional/uninformed gripe-fest, though.

Fig trees have a specific symbolism.

Also, if you like, you can see it in the context of what Jesus says elsewhere about trees, the bearing fruit, and consequences.

Or you can put 'em both together.

The answer I give here is not for OP, because it is clear in OP's words that he has already decided what is signified in this verse by use of the terms "petty, childish, vindictive, irrational".  The rest is likely trolling for him, but perhaps stating my view on this might be useful to others.
First, review the context:







Observations: This tree seems to represent Israel at the time of rejecting it's messiah, this occurs just as Jesus has had a negative reaction from the religious leaders.  It has bared no fruit for messiah and he condemns it to wither, as foretold and as occurs for Israel.  Elsewhere we read that the unprofitable servant has taken from him even that he has to be given to the profitable.  This is the same theme.





The literal translation here is: "Never, no more from you fruit let there be, for the age (aion)."  It almost reads like a curse upon Israel, to be barren to the end of the age (e.g. till the end time comes).  





The discussion is one that follows, which is one of faithfulness, which Israel at the time was not.  Had Israel been faithful to God and looking for messiah rather than their own geopolitical agenda, would the tree have been withered?  Would Jerusalem and Israel have been overthrown?





I argue it is prophecy, exhortation to faithfulness, and warning to those who can read his word and understand.
And suppose there are those read the acts of God and can not see his wisdom, justice, or love, but only see pettiness or vindictiveness, etc., remember...  He is supreme, he isn't unmade by the negative opinions of humanity, and for those who don't want to be in his presence he has lined up alternate accommodations where they can complain all they like.  Think carefully before insisting on those alternate accommodations.




 
 

The funny thing is, if you went to Jesus with a sincere heart, he would forgive everything you have ever said about him. Let's take Paul's life for example.

How petty, childish, vindictive, and irrational is that?

Don't talk about the awesome acts of forgivness and mercy and love, just take some passages out of context to try to backup your opinion of him being mean and vindictive.

You're trolling because your question was answered and you've so far chosen to ignore it.

Thank you sir.

 

+1

In order to really understand it, one would have to look at it as a parable.  Fig trees exist for a purpose (bearing fruit).  This fig tree wasn't carrying out its purpose, fitting into the natural order per its design, thus it merited destruction.

Odd to see someone who (presumably) believes in the theory of evolution get so put out by this parable because it communicates a very similar meaning.

But sincere understanding isn't really what this thread is about, is it?

Cut to the chase, and let him who has ears hear.

OP is the fig tree.

This coming from one who has repeatedly avoided giving an answer to my question. I think that's called hypocrisy.

Trolling.