Seriously... Why did Jesus smite the fig tree?

Matthew 21:18-22 and Mark 11:12-25 both relate a similar story. Jesus is hungry and sees a fig tree. He approaches the tree and finds it bare of figs. He is apparently annoyed at this fact, so he curses the tree to never bear fruit again, at which point it withers up and dies.





Although I am not a believer, I have a pretty good grasp of the intent of most biblical stories. This one I just don't get. If Jesus had the power to kill the tree with words, he surely could have just talked it into giving him some figs. What kind of lesson is being taught here?





I'm sincerely not trying to cause trouble or poke fun at anyone. I would just like to hear some explanations for this story.





Thanks in advance for your answers.

Seriously... Why did Jesus smite the fig tree?
I think a lot of people make the mistake of taking things literally that were obviously meant to be symbolic or allegorical--like the creation story in Genesis.





In this case, the fig tree is a symbol of the Jewish people, the nation of Israel. Jesus was Jewish and never thought of himself as anything else. He meant only to reform Judaism in his time. But by the time the stories were written, 70-100 years after Jesus' death, he was seen as the founder of a new religion and Judaism was seen as 'evil'.





So Jesus's cursing of the fig tree for not bearing fruit is symbolic of him cursing Judaism for not producing salvation. Even though he knew (the story says) that it wasn't time for the tree to bear fruit yet. The concept of 'salvation' doesn't even exist in Judaism!
Reply:It's rather problematic if it is to be taken literally. Supposedly the story took place in the week or two before Passover, which is early Spring.





Figs don't bear in early spring. Depending on the variety and the pollination circumstances they may bear in late spring, summer or early to mid autumn.





Mark actually makes this clear "...and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet." Matthew leaves out this detail, despite depending on Mark for the story.
Reply:It's an example to us that we are to bear fruit or "good" fruit. As Christians, we are to bear the fruit of our professions. The fig tree "appeared" to have good fruit, but was void of any; that's why it was cursed. As Christians we are expected to produce fruit as is the fig tree, bvut when we do not... the validity of our profession is in question and perhaps we truly are cursed.





This strory also demonstrates that the world is cursed by the sin of man; rocks, trees, soil, everything.
Reply:Reading the account(s) of the fig tree, you find that one author has it occurring prior to Jesus entering the temple, while another author has it after Jesus leaves the temple. In each case, the fig tree represents the temple, or more specifically, as the centerpiece of Jewish worship of the time, the fig tree represents the nation of Israel. Jesus approached Israel in search of the "fruits" of righteousness, and found none. The fig tree was cursed to wither and die, and ancient Jerusalem shortly thereafter withered and died as well.





I believe Luke points out that figs were out of season during the time. He does this to communicate that the fig tree itself is an analogy.
Reply:Parlor trick? Most everything he did or said was an analogy. This was one of them.





Matthew: 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.





22And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive."
Reply:Apparently, Jesus was punishing the tree for being uncooperative. He must not have realized that the tree did not do this on purpose, just to spite him.





So okay sam, *God* was punishing the tree for being uncooperative. I would have understood if Jesus did that. He probably didn't know trees can't think. But wouldn't God have known better? Oh well, it wasn't the first time he killed something for being just as he had created it.
Reply:I think its metaphorical for the eventual fate of those who deliberately oppose jesus. I mean, the tree obviously isnt deliberately being mean to jesus, since it cant think, but its the only logical conclusion I can take out of it. By deliberate opposition, I emna something along the lines of killing jesus in a music video, talking about how you hate jesus, killing Christians, Burning churches, etc.
Reply:Seriously, Jesus said he did nothing of his own, but what the Father told/showed him. So, he did it because he obeyed God the Father. That is what we are supposed to do, obey God, even if we don't know why he wants us to do something.
Reply:you grow a fruit tree that does not bare fruit when it is supposed to %26amp; see if you o not smite it your self!
Reply:I can not answer for god it could be for a butterfly flapped his wings in asia it was for what he saw and cannot be concieved by a basic human mind
Reply:Because God hates Figs.





http://www.godhatesfigs.com
Reply:He got a bit of his Dad's temper.
Reply:Jesus was trying to teach a parable. Understanding what the symbols in the story represent helps it make sense.





As is indicated in the story (and confirmed to me by the fig tree at the house we lived at until a short time ago), by the time a fig tree is covered in leaves, it has lots of figs on it. The figs start to grow about the time the leaves are just starting to bud out, and fig leaves are big, so there is plenty of time for the figs to get close to ripe by the time the leaves are full.





Therefore, when Jesus saw a fig tree full of leaves, it was natural to expect fruit on it. But he didn't find it.





Let me give the symbolism now. The fruit obviously refers to the evidence in the life, like we talk about a person who has good fruits like kindness, love, unselfishness, etc. The tree referred to the Jewish nation. The Jews at the time were plotting to kill Jesus (and succeeded before the week was out). They had all the appearance of piety, but they were fruitless trees. Looking on the outside, one would expect to see the fruit of the spirit in their lives, but they were barren hypocrites.





When Jesus cursed the fig tree, it had nothing to do with the tree itself. He was showing that the Jews, who had been the depositories of His sacred truth which they were supposed to deliver to the world, would no longer do this. The job was passed from the Jews to any believer who would bear fruit.





Jesus could have talked the fig tree into giving him some fruit, as you mentioned, but talking to the Jews had not been successful, so talking to the tree would have spoiled the parable.





I hope this explanation makes sense.
Reply:People are the fig tree. The good fruits of the fig tree, the figs, are what the fig tree produces or is supposed to produce if it is a productive, fruitful tree. It means what kind of works do people produce. If a fig tree produces fruit, it alleviates hunger, provides nourishment and sustains life. If people do good works they can also help others. In this case, the tree, which showed promise of producing fruit by putting out leaves, did not produce anything. The non-fruitful tree was cursed because it failed to produce fruit.





Luke 6


43 For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.


44 For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.


45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.





See also Matthew 25: 31-46
Reply:Because he has a tendency for melodramatics?





Seriously though, it's a sin to curse or otherwise destroy a fruit tree according to Jewish law. And we never give up hope that things in the world change for the good. It is our responsibility to not destroy, but to transform them for the good. So he was a sinner x2 in this instance. One can't be claiming a good mitzvah by a transgression.





What this story mostly shows me is that the Romans took everything out of context because of their hatred for who holds the light in Jerusalem, and their greed for Jerusalem. It was the Romans, after all, who decided what goes into the New Testament and how it was interpreted.