I will apologize ahead of time, as this will be the longest blog I have posted here. I assure you, however, that it is well worth your read.

The last aspect of these verses that I want to discuss is actually the cause of some controversy. It seems like these verses would be a strange place to find controversy, but leave it to man…

The concept I am referring to is the idea that the fig tree symbolizes the Temple, or even the Hebrew people themselves.

At first glance, this concept seems plausible as a stand-alone interpretation of these verses. It also seems harmless. However, a more critical analysis can begin to see its flaws and caustic nature fairly quickly.

If one were to look at the account of Christ rebuking the fig tree as a metaphor regarding the fate of Israel, the Jewish nation, or the Jewish Temple without taking into account the other factors going on in these passages, antisemitism is not far away. After all, why keep a good relationship or show love to a people who have been cursed by Jesus himself?

That is, of course, the most dangerous result of such an interpretation. A less dangerous, but equally controversial result is the unavoidable conflict between these passages and Paul’s writings on the subject. Paul goes into an exhaustive argument defending the Jewish people as the chosen people of God. This is not to say they are not the “builders who have rejected the capstone.” Paul addresses this in chapters 9 and 10 of Romans. It is in chapter 11 that we see the culmination of God’s love for his people.

Paul goes on to address the very attitude that the “fig tree passages” can produce in verses 16-27. He depicts Israel as a natural, groomed olive tree and gentile believers as wild branches crafted in by the hand of God. He puts the lofty christian in their place by reminding them of their position. He then warns us, “Do not be conceited, but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either.”

I bring all this up to ask, if the verses in Matthew and Mark are indeed preaching condemnation for the Jewish people or the Jewish nation, who are we to believe? Clearly Jesus and Paul are in conflict if this is the case. Do we side with the scholars who suggest Paul a heretic? Do we side with the other scholars who question the validity of the Gospels?

Or, perhaps, do we recognize that this interpretation of the fig tree account to be inaccurate?

Indeed, in order to cling to this interpretation we would have to disregard all historical and cultural context relating to these passages.

So, am I suggesting there is no relation whatsoever between the fig tree passages and the Jewish people?

Not at all.

As I stated at the end of my previous entry, there was another construct of the time that was built on sin’s foundations. The construct I was referring to was that of the Temple in Jerusalem.

Wait a minute. Didn’t I just spend a little too much time debunking that interpretation?

Not entirely.

That interpretation, with no regard to the historical and cultural context of these verses, is caustic. However, there are some very important facts that we must look at if we are going to get the full picture these passages are painting.

See, at this time the city of Jerusalem was under Roman occupation. This is a big deal. The Romans were smart conquerors. They knew that in order to avoid a revolution they needed to give the Jewish residents of Rome a Hebrew figurehead. They installed a puppet leader for the Jewish nation. At the time of Jesus, this figurehead was Herod.

As many of you may know, Herod was on the Roman Empire’s payroll. What you may not know is that the leaders of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem were as well. There was a Temple tax that all males of age were required to pay. This was the reason there were moneychangers in the Temple.

In order to explain this, I will have to address the passage that occurs in the middle of Mark’s fig tree account. It is what we often hear called the “cleansing of the temple“. The thing we must take into account when reading this passage is what Jesus attacks. He overturns the tables of the moneychangers and the tables of those selling doves.

The obvious question is why, and that answer is (of course) found in the historical context of the time. You see, the moneychangers were present for one purpose alone: to facilitate the payment of the Temple tax. A tax, by the way, that went directly to the funding of Rome and its Imperial cult. By overturning the tables and driving these men out, Jesus was making a bold statement about the presence of the Roman Empire in the Temple of God.

But what about the doves? Why overturn those tables?

That answer is a little more complicated, but very important nonetheless. While there is no restriction on doves in the Levitical law, many sources detail the implementation of such restrictions by the Temple leaders in this time. While doves were never require to be without blemish before, the Temple leaders took it upon themselves to add this requirement. This becomes significant when we understand that these men held a monopoly on the purchase of sacrificial doves. You see, the men who oversaw the sale of doves to the poor were, according to nearly all historical accounts, the same men who oversaw the sacrifice of the doves. It was up to them to approve or turn down doves for sacrifice. By the time of Christ, it got to the point that any dove not purchased at the Temple would be rejected. Prices of doves had gone through the roof. The priests who were supposed to be serving the poor were instead robbing them. Hence turning a house of prayer into a den of robbers.

Where this gets really fascinating for me is when we look at the motivation behind these acts. The Temple was essentially under control Rome. By the time Jesus came onto the scene, the Temple was just another gear in the machine of the Roman Empire. It no longer served God, for Rome had become its new master.

Through this, we can see Mark’s framing of the moneychangers account with the story of the fig tree symbolized that the Temple was now a part of the Roman Empire that Christ was rebuking.

This is also the reason for Mark’s clarification that is “wasn’t the time for figs.” That line was a statement of declaration that the time of the Roman Empire was at an end. Not only that, but also that the Roman Empire’s stranglehold on the Temple of God was seeing its last days.

Again, we can see that this passage was a declaration of freedom to its readers. “The time of Rome is coming to an end! The Kingdom of God is at hand!”

This also relates to the variation between Matthew and Mark about how the fig tree withered. It is directly related to the time the books were written. I want to clarify, before I go into this, that I am in no way suggesting that the writers fudged their accounts to coincide with what was happening in Rome at the time. I am actually suggesting that the events of the time affected the authors’ memories of the situation in a way that made the message even stronger for the reader. In other words, I suggest the following is a byproduct of the Holy Spirit. lol.

As previously mentioned, Mark was written at least ten years prior to Matthew - specifically, some time around 58 AD. The Ficus Ruminalis started to whither in 58 AD (a process that took a number of years to finish). I would like to suggest that Mark’s description of the fig tree withering “from the roots up” was a nod to this event taking place. It was a message that “these things take time, and some times when they start you can’t see it happening yet, but have faith. Our God is faithful.”

Matthew was written a number of years after the Ficus Ruminalis withered, so in my eyes Matthew’s account tells its reader that the work had already begun - Rome had already started to crumble. Its grip on the Temple had been loosed, and its days were numbered.

In summation, these passages are speaking to three elements. The Evil Empire (in this case, Rome), the presence of sin in the world, and the corruption of the Church by the World (in this case, the Temple and Rome). Most importantly, it is a message of hope. Christ has dominion over it all. Through him, we have the power to overcome the seemingly invincible. Praise be to God! If that doesn’t put a smile on your face, I don’t know what would.

So that’s it for my analysis of fig trees within the context of Roman Imperialism and the New Testament. Again, I apologize for the long-winded entry. I hope you got plenty out of it nonetheless. I’ll be back soon to start a new topic. I’d tell you what it is, but I don’t want to spoil the surprise. Until then, walk with confidence in Christ.

Iconoclast out.

I know it took me a while to get to this post. My apologies. I have been working diligently on a few screenplays.

I have spent a great deal of time on fig trees within New Testament writings. Something that, hopefully, you got a lot out of. In this post, I will be addressing other views on the verses mentioned. There are a number of theories - both plausible and not - especially in regards to the verses in Matthew and Mark.

The first thing I want to acknowledge is the fig three as a symbol of the fall of man. It is, in my opinion, another layer to these passages. It is absolutely founded, and something that I feel adds to the metaphors we have already discussed. To explain this, I will be acknowledging the concept of “first mention”.

For those of you who haven’t read Velvet Elvis (or did a while ago and don’t remember this section), Rob Bell explains that there are “methods to help decipher all the hidden meanings in a text. One is called the principle of first mention. Whenever you come across a significant word in a passage, find out where this word first appears in the Bible.” (Velvet Elvis, p. 156) In doing so, you can often get a clearer picture of what is being discussed.

What is the first mention of fig trees in Scripture?

If you were thinking the fall of man in Genesis 3, you win a grape. In verse 6, the sin happens. Adam and Eve then immediately (I would imagine, since it is their first act post-sin) “sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.”

So we see there is an association with the fig tree and the shame of man and his sin. Because of this, another layer in all the verses I have discussed is the idea that sin itself is being rebuked. When Christ rebukes the fig tree, it can be understood he in turn rebukes the power of sin in the world. He thus warns sin, its days are numbered.

Now let us be clear, this in no way negates the historical context we have discussed thus far. It builds on top of it. Allow me to explain. Rome came to power through murder, destruction and thievery. They were idolaters who reveled in debauchery. Greed was the driving force of their economy, jealousy its fuel. It was an empire built on sin.

An empire that, it has been illustrated a thousand times over, is not all that dissimilar to our own.

Through this we can see that Christ is not only rebuking the fig tree, nor only the empire of Rome, but the very foundations of sin in the world. The empire of Rome was built firmly upon those foundations. It was not the only construct of the time built upon said foundations, but that will have to wait until next time.

I hope to be back on a few days to finish this epilogue. Until then, stay safe… and don’t wear fig leaves. Please.