Another Crazy fig-tree problem
Dean Galbraith deanwest@iconz.co.nz
Mon, 26 Jan 1998 22:07:47 +1300 (00885827267, 01BD2AA6.E7583FA0@gqhdtyij)
Brian Dean wrote:
I have noticed that the leaves -> figs theory has been shot. However I noticed that the two storys in Matthew and Mark about the cursed fig tree contradict each other in when the disciples first noticed that the fig tree died. One account says that they noticed it the same day, and the other account says that they didn't notice it until the following day. Does anyone have an explanation for this?
Dean:
At first I thought that the contradictory chronologies in the two "fig tree" accounts in Matthew and Mark would be easily reconciled by apologists.
The formulation employed would be along the lines that - Matthew presents a "topical" and non-chronological account, while Mark presents a chronological account - eg Matthew simply tags on the disciples' reaction to end the account of the fig tree, even though the disciples didn't notice the fig tree until the next day (per Mark).
And this is precisely how Gleason Archer reconciles the two accounts in his "Encyclopedia of Biblical Difficulties". Similarly, Geisler / Howe in "When Critics Ask" state that Matthew has made the two trips to the temple (per Mark) into one composite topical account, in order to reconcile the order of the 'temple cleansing' and the 'fig-tree cursing'.
However, when I read the two accounts, I found that the topical/chronological reconciliation was extremely weak. Matthew's account purports to be as chronological as Mark's, given the various chronological words Matthew employs there.
If the disciples only noticed that the fig-tree was dead on the second day (per Mark), why the emphasis on "immediately" (parachrema) in Matt 21:19 - in relation to the fig tree immediately withering. The disciples therefore commented on the fig-tree "immediately" withering in Matt 21:20.
It is quite possible to work out what happens on what day, according to the chronology of each of the gospel-writers. The chronology and accounts leave us with other problems, in addition to the problem of when the disciples notice the fig-tree, inter alia:
1 On the day Jesus enters Jerusalem (Matthew) / on the second day after entering Jerusalem (Mark), Jesus drives out the buyers and sellers in the temple, and overturns money-changers' tables.
2 On the day Jesus enters Jerusalem, he does not do anything in the temple as it was late afternoon (Mark) / after driving out buyers/seller, he heals the blind and lame (Matthew).
A chronology would be as follows:
FIRST DAY
Matt 21:1 At the Mount of Olives, a donkey and a colt is bought.
Mark 11:1 At the Mount of Olives, a donkey is taken, without being bought.
Matt 21:8 Riding them, Jesus is received by a very large crowd.
Mark 11:7 Riding the colt, Jesus is received by many.
Matt 21:10 Jesus enters Jerusalem and drives out the buyers/sellers in the temple, and overturns money-changers' tables.
Mark 11:11 Jesus enters Jerusalem and temple [Jesus does not drive out buyers/sellers or express his indignation].
Matt 21:14 Jesus cures blind and lame in the temple.
Mark 11:11 As it was late, Jesus merely has a look around.
Matt 21:17 Jesus spends the night in Bethany.
Mark 11:11 Jesus spends the night in Bethany.
SECOND DAY
Matt 21:18 In the morning of Jesus' return, Jesus curses the fig tree, which withers at once, to the disciples' amazement.
Mark 11:12 Coming from Bethany, Jesus curses the fig tree [the fig tree is not recorded as withering, and the disciples are not recorded as reacting until the third day].
Mark 11:15 Jesus drives out buyers/sellers in temple, and overturns money-changers' tables.
Mark 11:19 Jesus went out of the city for the night.
THIRD DAY
Mark 11:20 The disciples saw that the fig-tree was withered in the morning.
Luke and John do not refer to the fig-tree incident. I note that John's account of Jesus driving out the buyers and sellers in the temple at a very early stage of Jesus's public ministry is completely at odds with Mark's account (if this happened no more than once), and is at odds with Mark's Jesus being careful to conceal his Messianic identity until the end of his life.
Dean