With this in mind, let us review the story again. When Jesus approaches the fig tree on his way to Jerusalem (v. 12-14), he finds on it only leaves but no fruit, and so he curses it, saying, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." This immediately generates tension in the reader's mind: Why does Jesus do this?

Again, the question is not, or at least it should not be, "What is Jesus' moral justification for doing this?" since no moral justification is needed. A tension requiring moral justification for Jesus' action would only be a tension between the reader's unbiblical assumptions against the perfect righteousness that Jesus always exhibits as he performs his Father's will. Rather, the intended and legitimate tension is generated by the distance between question and answer – that is, it seems that Jesus does not have to curse the fig tree, so why does he do it? He must have a reason. The incident must have some meaning to it. But what is it?

Without relieving this tension that he has created, Mark rushes us forward to the temple at Jerusalem. There Jesus finds a center of religion that is buzzing with activities, but even a causal inspection reveals that they do not constitute or contribute to true worship. More than that, these activities in fact make true worship impossible, and would prevent any sincere seeker from using the temple for its intended purpose. In other words, like the fig tree with leaves but no fruit, there is much noise and movement at the temple, but no spiritual substance. There is an appearance of religious dedication, but there is no reality and no power to it.

At this point, the tension generated by the cursing of the fig tree remains fresh in the reader's mind, since he still does not know what has happened to it. But if he has been paying attention, by now he ought to understand why Jesus curses the tree earlier. Just as he responds with a curse – a pronouncement of final destruction – to the tree with only leaves but no fruit, so he will destroy a religious system that appears active on the outside, but that is lifeless and faithless on the inside.

The juxtaposition of the fig tree and the temple, while the tension created by the cursing of the fig tree is still fresh in mind, leads the reader to perceive the two incidents as one unit. Then, when he comes to verses 20 and 21, he finds out what has happened to the fig tree. The tension is resolved, and as he has identified the fig tree with the temple in his thinking, now he cannot shake the impression that what has happened to the fig tree is also what will happen to the temple. In addition, the fact that the fig tree is actually destroyed (withered from the roots) suggests that Jesus' action at the temple represents something that is greater than it appears, something more destructive and more final – that is, the destruction of the temple itself.

(to be continued)

Posted in Expositions | Permanent Link