>"Is that a fig tree that I, the god of the universe, designed to only bear fruit in specific seasons, and it isn't one of those seasons right now?">"Stupid fucking tree! I hope you shrivel up and die!"
>>25499723Jesus is cursing your semen less scrotum ("your fig") and with you the 2nd temple.
>>25499723Just more proof that the trinity is bullshit.
>>25499731Are you saying trinitarianism is a figless tree? Or are you saying that Satanic gnostic dualism is the dead wasp in the fig?
The fig tree is the Jews, duh.
>>25499723The story of the fig tree is inset with the story of Jesus flipping tables at the temple. Theyre part of the same chapter. Its obviously a retelling of the 'by their fruit you will recognize them' passage made literal. Here is that passage i Mark:>By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.The point its trying to make is that a tree bearing bad fruit (the temple being turned into an opportunistic market place) will wither or be cut down (destruction of the temple, rending of the curtain, etc.) Both Christians and vulgar atheists both tend to read the bible way too much as an actual historical account and not as the piece of literary fiction it actually is.
>>25499723Bot-posted agitpropFunded by the Jew, programmed by the Jeet
>>25499754Where does it say in the Bible that Jesus didn't literally curse a fig tree?
>>25499759In the little red D- your high school English teacher scribbled under your reading comprehension assignment.
>>25499770>"And his disciples heard him say it"It seems the writter of that gospel really wants readers to believe that Jesus really did curse that fig tree. So did Jesus curse the fig tree, confusing his disciples, only to expand on the themes of his later metaphors in the money-lending temple?
>>25499723
>>25499759Mark 4:11-12 (YLT), "and he said to them, To you it hath been given to know the secret of the reign of God, but to those who are without, in similes are all the things done; that seeing they may see and not perceive, and hearing they may hear and not understand, lest they may turn, and the sins may be forgiven them."Mark is having fun writing his Jesus character. Perhaps he was inspired by Seneca's De Ira (45 AD) where it says, "No sane man becomes angry with nature. That would be as pointless as choosing to wonder why fruit doesn’t hang on woodland briars, or why brambles and thorn bushes aren’t filled with some useful fruit."
>>25499797The similes in the plot get pretty tiresome to be honest. The parables are much nicer. Why Thomas is best gospel: all cream, no water.
>>25499798The word the YLT translates as similes is usually translated as parables. It's the same word.
>>25499797>that seeing they may see and not perceive, and hearing they may hear and not understand, lest they may turn, and the sins may be forgiven themThat sounds like Jesus being an asshole
>>25499801Best explanation of it I've come across (though I don't have a link to the paper offhand) is that it's intended as a sort of sarcasm or ironic statement both when Jesus says it and where it's originally found in Isaiah 6, which Jesus is quoting.The interpretation as I remember it in Jesus' case is that many people don't want to repent or hear what Jesus has to say, so Jesus will graciously spare them the condemnation of rejecting his message by not giving it to them as straightforwardly as he could, reserving the full explanation for those who are sufficiently interested and prepared.
>>25499812>Jesus will graciously spare them the condemnation of rejecting his messageOr maybe just the trouble of listening to it
>>25499723>be me>reading a book>something strange pops up>immediately assume the worst>don't try to find a deeper meaning>run to /lit/ to cream in my pants about how smart i am
>>25499797>why brambles and thorn bushes aren’t filled with some useful fruit."?
>>25499820I'm starting to think ye olde people were just fucking stupid.
>>25499812>many people don't want to repent or hear what Jesus has to say, so Jesus will graciously spare them the condemnation of rejecting his messageSo that's enough for Jesus not to preach to them? If I see a thief breaking into a car, should I not tell them that they're doing wrong because they wouldn't want to listen to me criticise their actions?
>>25499820Brambles is a bit of an unfortunate localization of ἀκάνθινος which means "thorny bush" more generically. In Coptic it refers specifically to thorny mimosa and i do think that is a very good candidate for the actual plant the gospel writers had in mind since this is a very common and very hardy desert shrub in Palestine. Its mostly agriculturally useless because it has no fruit and its avoided by goats and sheep due to its nasty spikes.
If being left alone in peace is a curse I wish jesus would curse me to
>>25499828I don't think it's moral teachings that Jesus (or, rather, Mark) is disguising. Love your neighbour as yourself is right there for anyone to see, for example, along with the recommendation to pay taxes, the criticism of scribes prioritizing appearances over ethics, the poor widows' offering being more significant than the rich peoples' offering, Jesus telling the rich man to sell what he has and give to the poor, Jesus apparently declaring all foods clean, undermining the Jewish law, and so on. What I think Mark is disguising for the most part is the more metaphysical stuff, along with perhaps a belief that Paul was the best apostle, though it's so well disguised that you won't find many scholars agreeing about it.
>>25499854If Jesus' important teachings aren't disguised in parables, then why would there be a need to disguise his unimportant teachings in parable to prevent the condemnation of rejecting them?
>>25499875Both teachings are supposed to be important and valuable and true, but rejecting the truth is worse than not knowing the truth, and, as long as you persist in doing good, not knowing the truth won't by itself prevent you from being saved. So there is an asymmetry. I believe the distinction made is similar to picrel from Hebrews (Paul's letters seem to have the same distinction, but it's plainer in Hebrews).
>>25499902Just imagine Jesus as morpheus, okay
