St. Matthew defends Jesus in fig tree slaying; questions of motive linger

By Raul Casso

 

Amid spirited public debate and holy speculation, the question all want answered remains: Why did Jesus kill a fig tree? Mark and Matthew each bore witness on how Jesus cursed a fig tree to death (Mk 11:12-26; Mt 21:18-22). According to their testimony, Jesus was hungry and went to a fig tree looking for figs. Finding the tree to be figless, he killed it for its not bearing fruit.

Mark and Matthew also testify, however, that figs were out of season -- no fig tree would have had figs to offer at that time -- so why would Jesus blame the fig tree for its obeying the seasons? Surely Jesus knew, whether he was God or not, that fig trees were not in season at that time. After all, St. Mark knew and even said so (Mk 11:13). Why, then, would Jesus go looking for figs out of season, knowing there would be no fruit, acting like he expected to find some, and then when he found none, haul off and kill the poor tree?

Many believe that the fig tree story is symbolic, that God knew that figs were out of season and that the tree wouldn't have any, but he was making a point. Sunday school teachers tell us that this passage demonstrates Jesus' humanity: he was human because he got hungry. Others think the fig tree story is symbolic of the destruction of Jerusalem . Still others believe the passage to mean that the “Son of God,” our savior and redeemer, is telling Christians that they must “bear fruit.” The problem with all of this is that Jesus did not curse the fig tree for show or to make a point: the Bible simply states that he was hungry and was looking for something to eat (Mt. 21:18, Mk 11:12).

Ostensibly, if Jesus was making a point of killing the tree, the point seems to be expressed in Jesus' “faith moves mountains” speech that both Mark and Matthew quote immediately after the fig tree withered away -- the point being that with faith, one can do anything. Indeed, Matthew has Jesus saying, “If ye have faith . . . ye shall . . . [do] . . . this which is done to the fig tree” (21:21). The point of killing a fig tree, however, is completely lost on Mark, who says nothing about killing trees as an example of faith at work.

If Jesus cursed the fig tree in order to demonstrate what faith can do, then it is quite odd that Mark fails to say so. The speech that Mark quotes says nothing of the fig tree (11:23-26). Mark's omission is stranger still when one considers that the Gospel of Mark is the oldest of the four, and is incorporated almost completely by Matthew in his respective Gospel.

In fact, the “faith can kill trees” comment in Matthew 21:21 is, perhaps, one of the clearest examples of an editorial addition to the biblical text made long after the alleged facts and by unknown editors eager to shape the story so as to make it more palatable. After all, the image of Jesus killing a fig tree in a fit of anger is not the most endearing.

Indeed, the image of Jesus killing a tree for its not satisfying his hunger is disturbing. By becoming upset over a barren fig tree to the point of shouting curses at it and killing it, the character of Jesus appears somewhat manic, or otherwise unstable. At minimum, Jesus is portrayed as being on a power trip. In order to deal with these implications, the writer(s) of “Matthew” added a bit of text to the faith/mountain speech so as to cover up an otherwise impertinent act.

Consider, for example, what the effect would have been had Jesus walked up to a tree, announced to his followers, “Hey everybody, watch this . . .”, and then proceeded to curse the tree to death. Then, upon the withering of the tree, Jesus could have proclaimed, “You see . . . with faith, one can do anything -- one can kill a tree, move mountains, etc.” What a clearly understood demonstration of faith that would have been. Or, if the point was to demonstrate the power of faith such as to move mountains, then Jesus might have caused the barren tree to produce figs on the spot. Making a tree produce fruit out of season would be an extraordinary feat -- almost like moving a mountain.

The purpose of the “faith moves mountains” speech is obscured, however, by the hunger-looking-for-food episode. Jesus' act in killing the tree is hardly connected to it. So, what's going on here? Why would Matthew refer to it in the faith/mountains speech and not Mark?

The answer lies in the fact that the Gospels of Matthew and Mark were composed at different times, historically, and were aimed at different audiences. The Gospel of Mark was written decades after the alleged facts it relates. In all likelihood, Mark included the story of the fig tree into his gospel because that story was, by then, popular legend and could not be ignored. The faith/mountains speech was added to serve as justification for the otherwise strange act. Matthew, in turn, relying on Mark for much of his gospel (but writing several decades later), included the story and speech, but was uncomfortable with the problematic portrait of Our Savior that it presented. In an effort to obviate the problem, Matthew resorted to a bit of creative writing and added the “faith can kill trees” sentence to the speech.

One wonders why the writers of Matthew were sensitive to Jesus' image in a way that the writers of Mark were not. Regardless, what the fig tree story provides is an example of how the image of Christ was shaped over time, and how the writers of the gospels were not above making changes to the story as they deemed appropriate to the beliefs they sought to instill.