Stephen
Terry, Director
Jerusalem
Controversies
Commentary
for the August 31, 2024, Sabbath School Lesson
The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus
was hungry. 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. Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat
fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it. Mark 11:12-14, NIV
Figs are not grown where I grew
up and spent most of my life. Although I enjoy figs, since they are imported
from elsewhere, they are not competitively priced with locally produced fruits.
I live in Washington State which is best known for apples. I enjoy crisp, sweet
apple. Fuji apples are my preference, while my wife prefers Galas. They are next
to one another on the sweetness spectrum, far from the tart Granny Smith
apples. But as sweet as they are, I prefer the soft sweetness of apricots.
My great grandmother had a small
fruit orchard on her farm, and it included yellow plums and apricots. While
school was out during the summer I would help her with the irrigation and
harvesting of her raspberry fields. But as the weeks rolled by, I would keep an
eye on the orchard, yearning for the delicious soft fruits soon to ripen,
especially the apricots.
When I attended Walla Walla
College, I was happy to see that apricots grew well there. In fact, across the
street from our apartment was a large apricot tree. I enjoyed opening the fruit
on a scorching summer day, seeing the juice around the pit, and savoring its
sweetness. Although some who know me might argue the point, I prefer a juicy
apricot on a summer day to ice cream.
When we bought a home in Spokane
County, one of the first things I did was plant an apricot tree. The first year
we only had a few fruits, but the second year there were many more, and I made
apricot jam, so we could enjoy the fruity sweetness all winter long. However, Spokane
is a marginal area for growing soft fruits, and that winter killed our tree. It
tried valiantly to survive on the nourishment that remained in its trunk and
limbs, but the ground had frozen so deeply that the entire root system died. It
broke my heart to have to dig up the deceased fruit tree. I tried replacing it,
hoping that the harsh winter was just a fluke. It was not. The new tree died
also. Some might wonder why I would be so torn by it. The stores sell fresh
apricots. However, anyone who has plucked a tree ripened apricot and then
tasted those in the stores that were picked too green so they would not spoil
before being sold knows there is no comparison. Instead of the sweet juiciness
of the tree ripened fruit, the apricots in the stores tend to be dry and mealy.
My experience with the apricot
trees here in the Spokane area helps me to understand Jesus and the fig tree. Could
this be an enigma that challenges the character of God? Apologists have offered
explanations to defend such an out of character action by Jesus. This story is
only found in Mark and Matthew with scholars believing that much of Matthew was
derived from Mark's gospel. Since Mark portrays it in a manner that has Jesus
condemning the tree, Matthew has that perspective as well. The other synoptic
gospel, Luke, does not contain the story. After examining the Greek text, I am
not sure that is the only possible interpretation of what happened, especially considering
the vineyard metaphor found in the first part of the next chapter. Remember that
the writers of these gospels did not divide the text into chapters and verses,
so the parables may have closer connections originally than the separate chapter
headings might imply. Also remember the section headings are not in the
original text either. The word "curse" does not occur in the text.
Jesus is intrinsic to the
creation of our world. (John
1:1-3) As such, his knowledge of every created thing transcends that of the
most intelligent biologist or botanist. When he walked up to that fig tree and
declared that no one would ever eat fruit from it, he could understand the tree's
plight in ways the disciples could not, and a simple declaration may have been
interpreted as a curse. In the same way, when I looked at my apricot tree and knew
it would never bear fruit again, even though it also had leafed out from the
nourishment that remained in its trunk and limbs, those who could not read the
signs that were apparent to me would not understand. It is more likely that
Jesus already knew the state of the fig tree and saw it as an opportunity to
illustrate the condition of Israel. The disciples did not grasp the lesson.
Even when writing the gospel account, it comes forth as an enigma as opposed to
a lesson about the character of God.
Sadly, even those who professed
to be knowledgeable about their faith and God were even more obdurate, for when
Jesus said essentially the same thing in the parable of the vineyard, they knew
what it meant but refused to acknowledge its meaning because it condemned them
for not producing the fruit that emulating God's loving character should have
produced. Just as the fig tree had leaves identifying it as a fig tree, they
had the "leaves" that identified them as Jews, descendants of Abraham, but they
did not produce the fruits Abraham did, revealing that the roots of their
ancestors that should have nourished a pure faith had been left to rot and the
days of the tree they had become now were numbered. This was not God's doing.
He did not curse them to be fruitless. It was their own doing. When we read the
account of the vineyard in Isaiah
5:1-7, it becomes clear that these stories are parables about the state of
God's chosen people. It is not about God's desire to curse anyone. Jesus wept
over Jerusalem and its sorry state. (Matthew
23:37) In the end, Jerusalem could no more be saved than it was when the
Babylonians destroyed her. Rome also plundered Jerusalem, destroying the temple
and carrying the temple treasures off to Rome, as the Babylonians had
previously carried them to Babylon. One would think that history would have
shown them the truth about their corruption and how far they were from the
character God intended humanity should have. A counter point to the rest of
these two chapters in Mark that demonstrates what was taught Israel about
character and relationships is when the scribe agrees with Jesus about the two
greatest commandments. Jesus commends him for his insight.
Sadly, we tend to see ourselves
as that scribe and not like the Pharisees and certainly not the fig tree, or
the tenants of the vineyard. We want to identify with the heroes of the story
and not the villains. Because if we did, then like the Pharisees who were
bested in entrapment by Jesus, we would have to admit our error and would have
to change. Repentance is not a one-and-done event. It is a lifestyle change
where we are open to growth. At no point in this life do we arrive at a point
where we are fully grown into the loving character of God in whose image
mankind was created. If we look at someone else and say that person has no
right to approach God in that manner, it is proof that we are not yet in the
image of God. We become like the disciples who would not let children come to
Jesus. We feel we are the mature believers and therefore see ourselves as
preferred by God, just as the Jews felt they were chosen by being descendants
of Abraham. But it is our love for God and others that identifies us as citizens
of the Kingdom of God. Our family tree grants us nothing. It does not matter
how many generations we have been in a denomination. We cannot save our
children, even if our characters are right before God, just like our ancestors
could not save us.
It troubles me greatly that
those who claim to be leaders of God's remnant church of the End Times are at
times so unloving, so willing to attack those they do not approve of. They are
persuaded that what happened to the Jews via Babylon and Rome could never
happen to them. They do not see the peril of the course they are on. They feel
that the title "The Remnant Church" has been bestowed unconditionally on them
by God, just as the Jews claimed to be God's chosen people. But if those
originally called forth from Egypt could fall from grace, how much more for
those of us who have been adopted as foundlings? The prophets of old, like those
servants who came to the vineyard and were beaten or killed, called out the
flaws of God's chosen and warned of the conditional nature of their relationship
to God. Despite rulers who filled the streets of Jerusalem with blood (2
Kings 21:16), the Jews still felt they were God's chosen people and no harm
would come to them. Twice they showed that they were ready to murder the
innocent without letup and only the intervention of the Babylonians and the
Romans brought an end to the evil.
We might ask ourselves; do we delight
when those we feel are our enemies suffer? Are we willing to sacrifice the powerless
if they challenge what we want to see happen? How much blood would we spill
literally or figuratively and still feel we are doing God's will and have his
blessing on our blood-soaked hands? How much chutzpah does it take to believe that
God would always protect us and our country no matter what when even his chosen
people fell so far that they became easy prey for two ancient empires?
Nonetheless, should we fall, it will be our doing, not God's curse. God gave us
a better path to follow. But for so many, it just gets in the way of what they
lust for. Putting on the trappings of a denomination, even one calling itself
The Remnant, does not change who we are in our heart of hearts. Only God can do
that and only if we allow him, even if it interferes with our plans.