Jesus Curses the Fig Tree? Mark 11: 12-14

[Vanessa]

After reading the posts, I got a new idea.

If it was not the time for figs, why was Jesus mad? It was a natural conclusion for the tree not to have fruits at that time. And why, when asked about the tree, does he explain about the power of faith. It doesn’t seem to follow.

What if he’s saying that God has given the Christian so much power thru prayer that God expects fruit from us even when it is not the season. We don’t have any excuses not to be fruitful. People of other faiths can only cooperate with nature, but more is given and more is expected of us.

 

[Grace_Angel]

Yes, you are. Israel is not “cursed”, never was and never will be. Yes all Israel right now is not saved, but even you believe one day all Israel will be saved. And you are right, it will be. Israel is the only nation in the world that has the amazing power to invite the Messiah Jesus back. I dont see how that makes them cursed. Read what God says about Israel in Jeremiah 31 when he talks about the coming of the New Covenant, it will always be a nation before him.

Still, you said earlier-

All is given to the gentiles? What do you mean by this? So of Israel is not saved, so some say they are cursed. So, I ask you, if all is given to the gentiles, is all of America, Russia, Ireland, Mexico, Australia, Japan, Saudi Arabia, etc., etc.100% saved?

So scriptually, we can read that when Jesus comes back, all Israel will be saved. But we both know that promise is made to no other country in the bible, but individual peoples from the nations will come to Christ. So then why is Israel cursed now if no other country is totally come to Christ?

And correct me if Im wrong, but I assume you are referring to Matthew 27:25 “May his blood be upon us…” when you talk about the High Priest bringing a curse over the whole nation.

I didnt say that Israel wont be saved, however, I did say that the high priest brought forth a curse for the whole people. Yes you are right Mt: 27:25. It was not God or Jesus who uttered the cursed but their own high priest. I believe that when the “High Priest” of Israel (Cheif Rabbi perhaps?) publically acknowledges Jesus as Lord and Saviour of his people and of all mankind then the curse is lifted. Again I believe it is like Zechariah who was struck dumb because of his unbelieff but when he pronounced “His name is John” the curse was lifted.
Again Iknow that all of Israel will be saved (Romasn).
GraceAngel.

 

[Benay]

Fig trees are unusual because they are supposed to bear their fruit before they develop leaves. This tree had leaves but no fruit, meaning that it was of no use to anyone.HTH!!

This is only a partial explanation and I thank you for this information. The point, for me, was that it was NOT THE SEASON for figs. Yet Jesus cursed a tree that was doing what it was supposed to do.

Yes, I understand that Jesus told the parable about an owner that commanded a fig tree be cut down because it had borne no fruit for 3 years. This makes sense. But Jesus and his disciples were walking past the tree and we are not told whether or not he had been that way before and knew the tree had been barren in previous years.

Yes, I see the analogy, but this does not explain a seemingly pointless curse made by Jesus who is never portrayed in the Gospels as someone who curses without reason. For a tree to bear fruit out of season is an unreasonable reason to curse a tree. Jesus was not an unreasonable man.

This passage continues to bother me.

So far, all the explanations I have read on this thread are not satisfying. They do not answer the essential question about Jesus character.

 

[Grace_Angel]

This is only a partial explanation and I thank you for this information. The point, for me, was that it was NOT THE SEASON for figs. Yet Jesus cursed a tree that was doing what it was supposed to do.

Yes, I understand that Jesus told the parable about an owner that commanded a fig tree be cut down because it had borne no fruit for 3 years. This makes sense. But Jesus and his disciples were walking past the tree and we are not told whether or not he had been that way before and knew the tree had been barren in previous years.

Yes, I see the analogy, but this does not explain a seemingly pointless curse made by Jesus who is never portrayed in the Gospels as someone who curses without reason. For a tree to bear fruit out of season is an unreasonable reason to curse a tree. Jesus was not an unreasonable man.

This passage continues to bother me.

Benay the responses can never be satisfying unless you want them to be. The fig tree often represents Israel and Jesus came to His own Israelites and His own received him not. Remember He wept for his people. He wanted to gather them like a mother hen but they would not. The curse I believe is that Israel will not see Him again until those He went to and who accepted him are fully in his care “until the time of the gentiles is complete” and until the High Priest reverses the curse “may his blood be upon us and upon our children” and acknowledges Jesus as Messiah. Jesus on confirms the curse which the High Priest later utters. We await the day the Chief Rabbi of Israel declares Jesus as Lord, then things will absolutely begin to change for all, the Jewish people and the gentiles who have been gathered into the fold.
Indeed God has used the curse to gather all, that is the chosen race and the gentiles into the fold.
GA
So far, all the explanations I have read on this thread are not satisfying. They do not answer the essential question about Jesus character.

 

[Not_Sure_1]

the curse on the fig tree is the end of the old covenant. The Jews and their covenant will bear no more fruit unless they come to Jesus.

Same as the tear in the tabernacle and the destruction of the temple. Jesus is the only way. The Messiah has come, reject him at your own peril because there is no other way to God. The old covenant is fulfilled with Jesus and so, the religion of the Jews is now false and no fruit will come more from it.

 

[Grace_Angel]

the curse on the fig tree is the end of the old covenant. The Jews and their covenant will bear no more fruit unless they come to Jesus.

Same as the tear in the tabernacle and the destruction of the temple. Jesus is the only way. The Messiah has come, reject him at your own peril because there is no other way to God. The old covenant is fulfilled with Jesus and so, the religion of the Jews is now false and no fruit will come more from it.

“Note sure” I would not have answered the way you did. If I undersand Romans 11:25-32
well “Part of Israel had its mind hardened but only until the gentiles have wholly come in: and this is how all Israel will be saved…etc” It says that Israel will be intentionally blinded to the reality of the Massiach until all the others have been given an opportunity to know Him and when this is done then all of Israel will be saved. that is, the Jews and the Gentiles. Be thankful that God uses all our mistakes to make something wonderful for his heaven. If the Jews are not responding then God uses this response and time to bring others into the fold. Understand Scripture well God never gives up on anyone.

 

[chosen_people]

In Judaism, the violation of Jewish law is a sin. Jesus cursed a fig tree because it did not have fruit which caused it to wither and die (Mathew 21:18-19) even though it wasn’t the season for figs ((Mark 11:13). Jesus sinned because he directly violated the Torah’s prohibition against destroying fruit trees even those of an enemy in time of war (Deuteronomy 20:19). This story is especially problematic because if Jesus was the “son god” and could perform miracles he also had the power to cause the tree to bear fruit instead of killing it. This behaviour can be compared to the story of Rabbi Yossi’s son who wanted to feed his workers. Rabbi Yossi cried out “Fig tree, fig tree send forth your fruit” and a barren fig tree produced figs and they ate" (Talmud Tannis 24a) - (source: Twenty-six reasons why Jews don’t believe in Jesus by Asher Norman)

An example of The fig tree story in anti-Jewish Catholic writing:

“But Israel despised and would not render, for their will was not right, nay moreover they killed those that were sent, and not even before the Lord of the vineyard were they ashamed, but even He was slain by them. Verily, when he came and found no fruit in them, He cursed them through the fig tree, saying, ‘Let there be henceforth no fruit from thee;’ and the fig tree was dead and fruitless, so that even the disciples wondered when it withered away. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophet; ‘I will take away from them the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the scent of myrrh, and the light of a lamp, and the whole land shall be destroyed.’ [Jer 25:10] For the whole service of the law has been abolished from them, and henceforth and forever they remain without a feast. And they observe not the Passover; for how can they? They have no abiding place, but they wander everywhere … But in every place they transgress the law, and as the judgements of God require; they keep days of grief instead of gladness. Now the cause of this to them was the slaying of the Lord, and that they did not reverence the Only Begotten … Therefore the Lord cursed them under the figure of the fig tree.” [St Athanasius: Letter 6, Easter 334] _

---

 

[Grace_Angel]

In Judaism, the violation of Jewish law is a sin. Jesus cursed a fig tree because it did not have fruit which caused it to wither and die (Mathew 21:18-19) even though it wasn’t the season for figs ((Mark 11:13). Jesus sinned because he directly violated the Torah’s prohibition against destroying fruit trees even those of an enemy in time of war (Deuteronomy 20:19). This story is especially problematic because if Jesus was the “son god” and could perform miracles he also had the power to cause the tree to bear fruit instead of killing it. This behaviour can be compared to the story of Rabbi Yossi’s son who wanted to feed his workers. Rabbi Yossi cried out “Fig tree, fig tree send forth your fruit” and a barren fig tree produced figs and they ate" (Talmud Tannis 24a) - (source: Twenty-six reasons why Jews don’t believe in Jesus by Asher Norman)

An example of The fig tree story in anti-Jewish Catholic writing:

“But Israel despised and would not render, for their will was not right, nay moreover they killed those that were sent, and not even before the Lord of the vineyard were they ashamed, but even He was slain by them. Verily, when he came and found no fruit in them, He cursed them through the fig tree, saying, ‘Let there be henceforth no fruit from thee;’ and the fig tree was dead and fruitless, so that even the disciples wondered when it withered away. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophet; ‘I will take away from them the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the scent of myrrh, and the light of a lamp, and the whole land shall be destroyed.’ [Jer 25:10] For the whole service of the law has been abolished from them, and henceforth and forever they remain without a feast. And they observe not the Passover; for how can they? They have no abiding place, but they wander everywhere … But in every place they transgress the law, and as the judgements of God require; they keep days of grief instead of gladness. Now the cause of this to them was the slaying of the Lord, and that they did not reverence the Only Begotten … Therefore the Lord cursed them under the figure of the fig tree.” [St Athanasius: Letter 6, Easter 334] _

---

So tell me which of this is technically wrong? Is it that the words sound harsh? yes they do. Tell me when was the last sacrifice offered by the Jewish people in a Temple? What happened to the temple where sacrifice was offered? Have the Hebrew people been in diaspora for several thousand years and only very recently returned to Israel? The main celebration is Passover and day of atonement with other minor celebrations (similar to Christian ones) Christmas and Easter with other minor non global ones.
These days of celebration, Passover and Day of Atonement are days of grief and not joy or galdness. “figure” or typology of fig tree is always understood to be Israel and not a tree in the backyard. Why this? Because I suspect that the High Priest uttered the words on Jesus (the curse if you will) “Let his blood be upon us and upon our children” The High Priest "for that year was Caiphas. It was Caiphas who counselled the Jews that “it is better for one man to die for the people” Jhn 18:14… And further ,in the words of the High Priest for that year, Caiphas, “Let his blood be upon us and upon our children” (Matt:27:25) Remember Matthew’s community were all Hebrew converts to believers in the Peson of Jesus as the Messiah.
That people have persecuted Jews Yes I understand that and feel the pain for them, but thats because people will always sin. Did G-d mean in “your yearning will be for your husband and he will dominate you” (Gn3:16) that the woman’s desire will alwys be for her husband and he will use that longing to bully and beat and humiliate you? I suspect thats not G-d meant but thats how its been interpreted for millenia. And as a result we have much sufferings both for the Jews in their situation and women in theirs.

 

[TimothyH]

In Judaism, the violation of Jewish law is a sin. Jesus cursed a fig tree because it did not have fruit which caused it to wither and die (Mathew 21:18-19) even though it wasn’t the season for figs. Jesus sinned because he directly violated the Torah’s prohibition against destroying fruit trees even those of an enemy in time of war (Deuteronomy 20:19). This story is especially problematic because if Jesus was the “son god” and could perform miracles he also had the power to cause the tree to bear fruit instead of killing it. This behaviour can be compared to the story of Rabbi Yossi’s son who wanted to feed his workers. Rabbi Yossi cried out “Fig tree, fig tree send forth your fruit” and a barren fig tree produced figs and they ate" (Talmud Tannis 24a) - (source: Twenty-six reasons why Jews don’t believe in Jesus by Asher Norman)

An example of The fig tree story in anti-Jewish Catholic writing:

“But Israel despised and would not render, for their will was not right, nay moreover they killed those that were sent, and not even before the Lord of the vineyard were they ashamed, but even He was slain by them. Verily, when he came and found no fruit in them, He cursed them through the fig tree, saying, ‘Let there be henceforth no fruit from thee;’ and the fig tree was dead and fruitless, so that even the disciples wondered when it withered away. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophet; ‘I will take away from them the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the scent of myrrh, and the light of a lamp, and the whole land shall be destroyed.’ [Jer 25:10] For the whole service of the law has been abolished from them, and henceforth and forever they remain without a feast. And they observe not the Passover; for how can they? They have no abiding place, but they wander everywhere … But in every place they transgress the law, and as the judgements of God require; they keep days of grief instead of gladness. Now the cause of this to them was the slaying of the Lord, and that they did not reverence the Only Begotten … Therefore the Lord cursed them under the figure of the fig tree.” [St Athanasius: Letter 6, Easter 334]

I’ll not debate this post but will instead address my comments to Catholics.

We have to keep in mind that St. Athanasius wrote those words about the Jews being cursed approximately 260 years after the destruction of Jerusalem. Much was going on then, including widespread persection of Christians and the rise of emperor Constantine who eventually legalized Christianity. St. Athanasius was exiled by Roman emperors several times - sent to Germany and to live in the desert for many years. He fought against many strong heretical groups who tried to gain political power in both the Church and in secular government. It’s easy to throw around terms like “Anti-Jewish Catholic writing” from a vantage point of almost two millenia, but this was the heyday of martyrdom and very violent times. We have to keep that in mind.

As a matter of history about the biblical passages cited, St. Athanasius cites the prophet Jerimiah who wrote those words immediately before the Babylonian exile. The prophet Daniel tells us however, that although the Israilites were to physically return to the land after 70 years, spiritually the exile was to continue for 490 years. Many didn’t even physically return from Babylon, but instead gave up their identity as God’s chosen people and assimilated into the culture and religion of their captors.

The 490 year exile prophesied by Daniel continued as many in chose to give up their identity as God’s chosen people. An example of this can be found in the first chapter of 1 Maccabees. Alexander the Great had hellenized the world, uniting it under one culture, one langage and one religion. Some of the Jews held onto their identity as God’s chosen people, but not all…

In those days there appeared in Israel men who were breakers of the law, and they seduced many people, saying: “Let us go and make an alliance with the Gentiles all around us; since we separated from them, many evils have come upon us.” The proposal was agreeable; some from among the people promptly went to the king, and he authorized them to introduce the way of living of the Gentiles. Thereupon they built a gymnasium in Jerusalem according to the Gentile custom. They covered over the mark of their circumcision and abandoned the holy covenant; they allied themselves with the Gentiles and sold themselves to wrongdoing. (1 Maccabees 1:11-15)

They actually had circumcision reversals! This is an example of thier spiritual exile. And one can conclude that this exile continues today. An abandonment of the mosaic law and loss of national identity in relation to God as his chosen people. But one could argue the same about the USA, or any other western nation - abortion is really no different than the practice of child sacrifice to the god Molech which was practiced in some places in ancient times and our pornographic, contraceptive lifestyle is really no different from the practices of cult prostitution, incest and multiple wives which also took place. One could argue that we are worse. Are we not also in spiritual exile? Are not our hearts far from God?

So we have to be careful about using terms like “Anti-Jewish Catholic writing” as we cite works written eighteen centuries ago, which reference books of the Old Testament that the average Starbucks sipping, SUV driving Christian or Jew of today is not intimately familiar with. Tthere are plenty of cultural Jews who do not identify with their role as God’s chosen people. And there are plenty of Church going Christians who are pornographing and contracepting themselves into hell. 25 Centuries later, both are still in Babylon.

The sword cuts both ways.

-Tim-

 

[Benay]

Tim, thanks for this very well reasoned post. It still does not answer the question I posed or questioned a little differently by Chosen People: Why did Jesus curse the tree rather than cause it to bear fruit?

Jesus behavior in this story is contrary to Jesus character as given in other stories. There have been a number of responses and replies but no direct answer to this question. Perhaps there is no answer that we can know in this life.Perhaps the question is too concrete? Perhaps it is a stupid question that has no bearing on our ultimate salvation, but it is puzzling nevertheless.

 

[Grace_Angel]

Tim, thanks for this very well reasoned post. It still does not answer the question I posed or questioned a little differently by Chosen People: Why did Jesus curse the tree rather than cause it to bear fruit?

Jesus behavior in this story is contrary to Jesus character as given in other stories. There have been a number of responses and replies but no direct answer to this question. Perhaps there is no answer that we can know in this life.Perhaps the question is too concrete? Perhaps it is a stupid question that has no bearing on our ultimate salvation, but it is puzzling nevertheless.

Benay perhaps you dont really want to see the answers given to you.
He came to His own and his own wanted Him not (not all of them because His first followers were from His own people) and further “a prophet is always dispised in his own country” this still is true to this day. the “Fig Tree” is a type of Israel and the leadership of Israel rejected Him so He went to others and prepared them and Shepherded and prepared other shepherds rather than the ones who were planned from “in the beginning”.
Perhaps you should read Scott Hahns books. He does a magnificent work of both New and Old Testaments.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I would actually say we probably don’t understand how fig trees work. On it’s face, yes, it doesn’t make sense to condemn something for not doing what it cannot do.

There are various parables and lessons where the full effect is often lost on us simply because we didn’t grow up in that time and culture, even if much of the parables still make sense.

For example, the parable of the Good Samaritan, when the priest and scribe both pass by the hurt man, we tend to think this was because they were wicked, when in reality they were very careful to follow the Mosaic Law which states a dead body makes one ceremonially ‘unclean’.

Based on this, I am strongly inclined to think that even though it “wasn’t the season for figs,” this does not mean no figs or seedlings or buds were not present or would have been present. Against the backdrop of the Jews being rejected by God for not “bearing fruit” repeatedly in their history, the condemnation “may you never have the chance to bear fruit again” seems to have some relevance.

 

[Benay]

I would actually say we probably don’t understand how fig trees work. On it’s face, yes, it doesn’t make sense to condemn something for not doing what it cannot do.

There are various parables and lessons where the full effect is often lost on us simply because we didn’t grow up in that time and culture, even if much of the parables still make sense.

.

Good point. I do not know what life was really like in Judah during Jesus day. I may have read about it, but “knowing” by living in that culture of that time is simply not possible. So, yes, I am probably missing some contextual reference, known to the Jews of that time, understood by the Jews of that time, but never explicitly stated anywhere. That is one of the problems in reading the Bible today. We cannot really understand what we are reading if we are not aware of the historical and cultural contexts. And in some cases, we may never know. I will just have to accept the fact that in this case, I will simply never know for sure.

To lighten things up a bit, I once asked a Priest after Mass, when this passage was read, to explain, since he had not mentioned it during his homily. He couldn’t answer the question, although he tried, and ended the discussion by saying, jokingly, “Maybe Jesus just had a bad hair day.” There are lots of us who will never know the answer – at least to our satisfaction.

 

[Carolus_Martell]

…after all these years and explanations I’m still left scratching my head over this fig tree in scripture passage. Oh well…

 

[Petergee]

I didnt say that Israel wont be saved, however, I did say that the high priest brought forth a curse for the whole people. Yes you are right Mt: 27:25. It was not God or Jesus who uttered the cursed but their own high priest. I believe that when the “High Priest” of Israel (Cheif Rabbi perhaps?) publically acknowledges Jesus as Lord and Saviour of his people and of all mankind then the curse is lifted. .

I don’t know where you’re getting the idea that it was the high priest who said “Let His blood be upon us and upon our children.” But it’s not from the Gospel, which says that it was the whole crowd, “to a man” (i.e. Gentiles as well as Jews) who said it. But they didn’t realise the irony of what they said. Jesus’ Precious Blood does NOT bring a curse on those who repent and accept it in faith, it brings salvation. Just like the blood of the Passover Lamb which was a fore-type of the Lamb of God, Jesus.

 

[Petergee]

Tim, thanks for this very well reasoned post. It still does not answer the question I posed or questioned a little differently by Chosen People: Why did Jesus curse the tree rather than cause it to bear fruit?

Because that would be contrary to the lesson He was teaching His disciples. He doesn’t FORCE us to be good and produce “good fruit”. He asks us to follow His commandments, if we choose not to, He will condemn us to eternal death. Jesus chose this illustration to graphically drive the point home.

Jesus behavior in this story is contrary to Jesus character as given in other stories.

What about when Jesus drove the demons into the Gadarene swine and they rushed over a cliff and were killed? In that case Jesus was (as some have claimed) “cruel” to sentient dumb animals who hadn’t done anything to deserve punishment. Being “cruel” to a tree is mild by comparison.
I think the story is quite in line with what we know about Jesus’ character from other sources. He came to teach us the most important lesson any of us ever has to learn. If it took the deaths of a few “innocent” plants and animals to drive the lesson home, no big deal.

 

[Grace_Angel]

I don’t know where you’re getting the idea that it was the high priest who said “Let His blood be upon us and upon our children.” But it’s not from the Gospel, which says that it was the whole crowd, “to a man” (i.e. Gentiles as well as Jews) who said it. But they didn’t realise the irony of what they said. Jesus’ Precious Blood does NOT bring a curse on those who repent and accept it in faith, it brings salvation. Just like the blood of the Passover Lamb which was a fore-type of the Lamb of God, Jesus.

You are right Petergee, I was thinking of Caiphas who made the statement “it is better fo one mana to die for the people” But its interesting that the qupte the I made from Matthew has a cross reference with Jeremiah. Listen to this " But be sure of this, that if you put me to death, you will be bringing innocent blodd on yourselves, on this city, and on its its inhabitants, since Yahweh has truly sent me to you to say all of this for you to hear." How really interesting I had not noticed it before.
Ga

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Good point. I do not know what life was really like in Judah during Jesus day. I may have read about it, but “knowing” by living in that culture of that time is simply not possible. So, yes, I am probably missing some contextual reference, known to the Jews of that time, understood by the Jews of that time, but never explicitly stated anywhere. That is one of the problems in reading the Bible today. We cannot really understand what we are reading if we are not aware of the historical and cultural contexts. And in some cases, we may never know. I will just have to accept the fact that in this case, I will simply never know for sure.

To lighten things up a bit, I once asked a Priest after Mass, when this passage was read, to explain, since he had not mentioned it during his homily. He couldn’t answer the question, although he tried, and ended the discussion by saying, jokingly, “Maybe Jesus just had a bad hair day.” There are lots of us who will never know the answer – at least to our satisfaction.

Interestingly, I googled around and found this quote by a noteworthy Protestant scholar:
“The other miracle is the cursing of the barren fig tree (Mk. xi 12 ff.), a stumbling block to many. They feel that it is unlike Jesus, and so someone must have misunderstood what actually happened, or turned a spoken parable into an acted miracle, or something like that. Some, on the other hand, welcome the story because it shows that Jesus was human enough to get unreasonably annoyed on occasion. It appears, however, that a closer acquaintance with fig trees would have prevented such misunderstandings. ‘The time of the fig is not yet,’ says Mark, for it was just before Passover, about six weeks before the fully-formed fig appears. The fact that Mark adds these words shows that he knew what he was talking about. When the fig leaves appear about the end of March, they are accompanied by a crop of small knobs, called taqsh by the Arabs, a sort of fore-runner of the real figs. These taqsh are eaten by peasants and others when hungry. They drop off before the real fig is formed. But if the leaves appear unaccompanied by taqsh, there will be no figs that year.** So it was evident to our Lord, when He turned aside to see if there were any of these taqsh on the fig-tree to assuage His hunger for the time being, that the absence of the taqsh meant that there would be no figs when the time of figs came**. For all its fair foliage, it was a fruitless and a hopeless tree.” (Bruce, Are The New Testament Documents Reliable? [Intervarsity Press; Downers Grove, Ill, fifth revised edition 1992], pp. 73-74; bold emphasis ours)
This is interesting and makes sense.

• Jesus was hungry, so there had to be something to eat on it - it would be just as absurd to look for food on a barren tree as to curse it for not having food.
• To say “it was not the time for figs” doesn’t mean there was no food on it, but rather no RIPE figs. There could have been unripe figs or edible buds.
• Some have pointed out Song of Solomon 2:13 notes “The fig tree forms its early fruit,” indicating some kind of pre-ripened figs.

So thus when Jesus saw many leaves on it but no signs (edible buds) of fruit to come, He “cursed” the tree as a symbolic act of the Jews putting on show but having no intention or indication of good fruit to follow.

It’s all about the edible buds.

 

[Benay]

What about when Jesus drove the demons into the Gadarene swine and they rushed over a cliff and were killed? In that case Jesus was (as some have claimed) “cruel” to sentient dumb animals who hadn’t done anything to deserve punishment. Being “cruel” to a tree is mild by comparison.
I think the story.

Jesus did not say to the herd of swine – go drown yourselves! That would have been a direct order from Jesus. Instead, he drove the demons out of a human and they asked permission to reside in the swine who then, en masse, fled from Jesus into the sea. It was the Devil that drove the swine to their death, not Jesus.

These stories don’t have much in common, IMO, as Jesus takes direct action against the fig tree in one instance, and in the second he is taking direct action against the Devil who chose to flee into swine and drown. One example has intended consequences the other has unintended consequences. Jesus did not kill those pigs.

Thanks for trying to clarify this issue.

 

[Benay]

Thank you Catholic Dude!

This is the best explanation I have ever heard/read and is completely satisfying. This passage will not longer bother me. You have no idea how relieved I am.

Thanks again.