Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 21:19
And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward forever. And presently the fig tree withered away.
Verse 19. He saw a fig tree in the way] , By the road side. As this fig tree was by the way side, it was no private property; and on this account our Lord, or any other traveller, had a right to take of its fruit. For a full explanation of this difficult passage, relative to this emblematic fig tree, see on Mr 11:13, &c.
Let no fruit grow on thee] Can a professor, who affords Christ nothing but barren words and wishes, expect any thing but his malediction? When the soul continues in unfruitfulness, the influences of grace are removed, and then the tree speedily withers from the very root.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
And when he saw a fig tree,…. In the Greek text it is “one fig tree”, one remarkable fig tree: he must see a great many, as he went along; for a large tract of the Mount Of Olives was full of fig trees, and therefore called “Bethphage”: and notice has been taken already of the figs of Bethany: but he saw none that had such large and spreading leaves as this; for it was the time when the fig tree was just budding, and putting forth its leaves: wherefore he took notice of it; and though it was “afar off”, as Mark says, yet being hungry, he made up to it, expecting, from its promising appearance, to find fruit on it. This fig tree was “in the way”; by the road side, and probably had no owner; was common to anybody, and so no injury was done to any person by losing it: he came to it,
and found nothing thereon but leaves only: Mark says, “he came, if haply he might find anything thereon”; which must be understood of him as man; for as he hungered as man, so he judged and expected as man, from the appearance of this fig tree, that he might find fruit upon it; and which is no contradiction to his deity, and his having the Spirit of God, as the Jew t objects; and especially since, as Bishop Kidder u observes, such an expectation is attributed to God himself, in Isa 5:2 and it may be added, and with regard to that people, of which this fig tree was an emblem, and designed by Christ to be considered as such in what he did to it. The same evangelist further observes, “and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves, for the time of figs was not yet”. The word “yet” is not in the original text; which last clause is a reason, either why he found no fruit, or nothing but leaves upon it, because it was not a time, or season of figs: it was not a good fig year, so Dr. Hammond interprets it; and yet though it was not, since this tree was so very flourishing, fruit might have been expected on it: and also, it furnishes out a reason why Christ took so much pains to go to it, seeing there were very few figs to be had elsewhere, and this bid very fair to supply him with some in this time of scarcity: or else, as a reason why, besides its promising appearance, he expected fruit upon it, because the time of figs, that is, of the gathering of the figs, was not come: in which sense the phrase is used in Mt 21:34; and is Bishop Kidder’s interpretation of the passage: and since therefore the time was not come for the ingathering of the figs, none had been taken off of it, the more might be expected on it. This sense would be very probable, did it appear that figs were usually ripe about this time; but the contrary seems manifest, both from Scripture, which represents the fig tree putting forth its leaves, as a sign the summer is nigh, Mt 24:32 and from the Talmudists, who say w, that the beginning of leaves, or putting forth of the leaves of trees, is in the month Nisan, the month in which the passover was kept, and so the then present time of the year; and who, from this time, reckon three times fifty days, or five full months before the figs are ripe x: so that these words are rather a reason why Christ did not expect to find figs on other trees, which he saw in great abundance as he passed along, because the time of common, ordinary figs being ripe, was not come; and why he particularly expected to find some on this tree, because it being full of leaves, appeared to be of a different kind from other fig trees: and was either of that sort which they call
, “Benoth Shuach”, as Dr. Lightfoot conjectures which were a kind of white figs that were not ripe till the third year y. This tree put forth its fruit the first year, which hung on it the second, and were brought to perfection on the third: so that when it was three years old, it had fruit of the first, second, and third year on it: this being such a tree, by its being full of leaves, when others had none, or were just putting out, fruit, of one year, or more might have been expected on it, when it had none at all, and therefore was cursed: or it might be one of that sort which brought forth fruit twice a year; for of such sort of fig trees we read in the Jewish writings z: and therefore though it was not the time of the common figs being ripe, yet this being one of the seasons, in which this tree bore ripe fruit, and being so very flourishing, might reasonably be expected from it: but there being none,
he said unto it, let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever; or, as it is expressed in Mark, “no man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever”: for if none grew on it henceforward, no man could hereafter eat of it. Both expressions design the same thing, the perpetual barrenness of the fig tree:
and presently the fig tree withered away: immediately, upon Christ’s saying these words, its sap was dried up, it lost its verdure; its leaves were shrivelled and shrunk up, and dropped off, and the whole was blasted. This tree was an emblem of the Jews: Christ being hungry, and very desirous of the salvation of men, came first to them, from whom, on account of their large profession of religion, and great pretensions to holiness, and the many advantages they enjoyed, humanly speaking, much fruit of righteousness might have been expected; but, alas! he found nothing but mere words, empty boasts, an outward show of religion, an external profession, and a bare performance of trifling ceremonies, and oral traditions; wherefore Christ rejected them, and in a little time after, the kingdom of God, the Gospel, was taken away from them, and their temple, city, and nation, entirely destroyed.
t R. Isaac, Chizzuk Emuna, par. 2. c. 30. p. 421. u Demonstration of the Messiah, par. 2. p. 38. w Jarchi & Bartenora in Misn. Sheviith, c. 4. sect. 10. x T. Hieros. Sheviith, fol. 35. 4. y Misn. Sheviith, c. 5. sect. 1. & Demai, c. 1. sect. 1. & Maimon. & Bartenora in ib. z Misn. Demai, c. 1. sect. 1. & Maimon. in ib. T. Bab. Erubin, fol. 18. 1.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
A fig tree ( ). “A single fig tree” (Margin of Rev. Version). But was often used = or like our indefinite article. See Matt 8:10; Matt 26:69. The Greek has strictly no indefinite article as the Latin has no definite article.
Let there be no fruit from thee henceforward for ever ( ). Strictly speaking this is a prediction, not a prohibition or wish as in Mr 11:14 (optative ). “On you no fruit shall ever grow again” (Weymouth). The double negative with the aorist subjunctive (or future indicative) is the strongest kind of negative prediction. It sometimes amounts to a prohibition like and the future indicative (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 926f.). The early figs start in spring before the leaves and develop after the leaves. The main fig crop was early autumn (Mr 11:14). There should have been figs on the tree with the crop of leaves. It was a vivid object lesson. Matthew does not distinguish between the two mornings as Mark does (Mark 11:13; Mark 11:20), but says “immediately” () twice (Matt 21:19; Matt 21:20). This word is really like our “on the spot” (Thayer). It occurs in the papyri in monetary transactions for immediate cash payment.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
A fig – tree [ ] . Lit., one single fig – tree. Rev., in margin.
Presently [] . Presently, in popular speech, has acquired something of a future force. I will do such a thing presently means, I will do it, not immediately, but soon. The rendering here was correct in the older English sense of instantly. So constantly in Shakspeare :
” PROSPERO. Go, bring the rabble,
O’er whom I gave thee pow’r, here, to this place.
ARIEL. Presently?
PROS. Ay, with a twink.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
19 Let no fruit grow on thee henceforth. Let us learn from this what is the meaning of the word curse, namely, that the tree should be condemned to barrenness; as, on the other hand, God blesses, when by his voice he bestows fertility. It appears more clearly from Mark , that the fig-tree did not instantly wither, or, at least, that it was not observed by his disciples, until they saw it next day stripped of leaves. Mark , too, attributes to Peter what Matthew attributes equally to all the disciples; but as Christ replies in the plural number, it may naturally be inferred that one put the question in the name of all.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(19) In the way.Better, on the road. Fig-trees were often planted by the road-side under the notion that dust suited them.
He came to it.St. Mark adds, what St. Matthew indeed implies, that He came, if haply He might find anything thereon. The fig-tree in Palestine bears two or three crops a year. Josephus, indeed, says that fruit might be found on the trees in Juda for ten months out of the twelve. Commonly at the beginning of April the trees that still grow out of the rocks between Bethany and Jerusalem are bare both of leaves and fruit, and so probably it was now with all but the single tree which attracted our Lords notice. It was in full foliage, and being so far in advance of its fellows it might not unnaturally have been expected to have had, in the first week of April, the first ripe fruit (Hos. 9:10), which usually was gathered in May. So, in Song Son. 2:13, the appearance of the green figs coincides with that of the flowers of spring, and the time of the singing of birds. The illustrations from the branches and leaves of the fig-tree in Luk. 21:29-30, suggest that the season was a somewhat forward one. On the special difficulty connected with St. Marks statement, the time of figs was not yet, see Note on Mar. 11:13.
Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever.From the lips of one of like passions with ourselves, the words might seem the utterance of impatient disappointment. Here they assume the character of a solemn judgment passed not so much on the tree as on that of which it became the representative. The Jews, in their show of the leaves of outward devotion, in the absence of the fruits of righteousness, were as that barren tree. But a few weeks before (Luk. 13:6) He had taken the fig-tree to which a man came seeking fruit and finding none, as a parable of the state of Israel. Then the sentence, Cut it down, had been delayed, as in the hope of a possible amendment. Now, what He saw flashed upon Him in a moment (if we may so speak) as the parable embodied. The disappointment of the expectations which He had formed in His human craving for food was like the disappointment of the owner of the fig-tree in the parable. The sentence which He now passed on the tree, and its immediate fulfilment, were symbols of the sentence and the doom which were about to fall on the unrepentant and unbelieving people.
Presently.The word is used in its older sense of immediately. As with nearly all such wordsanon, by and by, and the likemans tendency to delay has lowered its meaning, and it now suggests the thought.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
19. Leaves only Like a hypocrite with a fair show of profession. No fruit. Mark says that “it was not yet the time of figs.” But the fig tree usually puts forth fruit before its leaves, and if this tree was able to put forth leaves, what defence had it for being fruitless? Or what business had it to be putting forth leaves, and so pretending fruit, if it were barren just like the rest? The Jewish nation had the leaves of a fair profession above all the nations; or, we may say, alone of the nations. But it was, like them, barren of fruit. No fruit henceforward He that is wilfully barren may find himself given over to impotence. And after that he shall, like the fig tree, wither away.
Some have cavilled at this act of our Lord as being destructive and malignant in its character. But it was one of a series of symbolical acts, from which no one suffered. The fig tree was by the road side; and so, probably, the property of no one but the Creator; and doubtless He consented to be at that much expense to supply material for the symbol. Matthew now omits all notice of the farther events of Monday, in order to pursue the sequel of the fig tree. Mark and Luke inform us that the Lord spent the day in quiet teaching in the temple, while the hierarchy were plotting to destroy him.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And seeing a fig tree by the way side, he came to it, and found nothing on it, but leaves only. And he says to it, “Let there be no fruit from you from now on for ever.” ’
In an abbreviated account Matthew now describes how on seeing a fig tree by the side of the road He came up to it and found that it had nothing but leaves, and at this He says, “Let there be no fruit from you from now on for ever.”
We should first of all note that the idea is not said to be that He did not find figs, (indeed Mark says that it was not the season for figs), but that He found ‘nothing but leaves’. The tree gave an indication of fruitfulness but was totally barren. Thus the point is that He found no indication of fruitfulness at all. But as it was ‘not the season for figs’ why did He expect to find some?
One suggestion is that He did hope to find on the fig tree some remnant of old figs, (He was used to eating rough and would be a hardy eater). But that would not explain the reference to leafiness.
More likely is the suggestion that it was His hope that because of its leafiness He would find something edible on the tree, such as the barely edible green knops that come before the actual figs arrive. Seeing leaves on a fig tree is usually an indication of some kind of fig growth.
But equally likely is the suggestion that this was a special type of fig tree, the early fig tree that produces green figs, and would normally be expected to produce fruit of a kind early on. Thus once the leaves began to grow, figs would be expected. Such trees have been known to produce figs in April, as is evidenced from a number of sources.
Isa 28:4 mentions ‘the firstripe fig before the summer, which when he who looks on it sees, he eats it up while it is in his hand’. That may have referred to something similar to what we have described. Whichever way it is the point is that the tree evidenced a total lack of fruitfulness. This would not in fact be surprising. Unless a fig tree is carefully tended it is quite common for it to grow to be an unfruitful tree, and this tree seemingly just grew by the wayside.
Thus Jesus used the fact that it was a fruitless tree to make it into a living example, and simply speeded up its expected demise. It is not suggested that He is angry, (we read that into it because we get like that), and His words should be noted. No fruit from it from now on ‘for ever’. This would appear to confirm that it is old unbelieving Israel as such that He has in mind. For no fruit acceptable to Jesus can result from such an Israel. The indication was that the final opportunity for those in old Israel who will not become fruitful by responding to Him and become part of the true vine (Joh 15:1-6) has gone for ever.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
‘And immediately the fig tree withered away.’
The word rendered ‘immediately’ need not indicate that it was instantaneous. The point is rather that the fig tree withered away within a period discernible to the disciples. It indicates ‘within a short time’ (compare its regular use in this way in Mark where it cannot possibly always mean ‘at once’). We should note that Jesus is not said to have ‘cursed’ the fig tree. In Mark that is Peter’s language. But He has certainly hastened its end in such a way that Peter saw it as being like that (another example of Peter’s impetuosity). The probable reason for this was in order to illustrate that because it was all show and really unfruitful, old Israel’s end was near in the same way.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 21:19 . Comp. Mar 11:19 ff. ] “unam illo loco,” Bengel.
] The tree, which was by the side of the public road (not on private property), stood above the road , either projecting over it merely, or occupying an eminence close to it, or the road itself may have been in a ravine. It was a favourite practice to plant fig-trees by the roadside, because it was thought that the dust, by absorbing the exuding sap, was conducive to the better growth of the fruit, Plin. N. H . xv. 19.
] not: conscendit arborem (Fritzsche), but: He went up to it. From seeing the tree in foliage , Jesus expected, of course (for it was well known that the fig-tree put forth its fruit before coming into leaf), to find fruit upon it as well, namely, the early boccre , which, as a rule, did not ripen till June, and not the harvest-figs, Kermuse , that had been on the tree all winter, and the existence of which He could not infer from seeing leaves . Comp. Tobler, Denkbl. aus Jerus . p. 101 ff. On the disappointed expectation of Jesus, Bengel observes: “maxima humanitatis et deitatis indicia uno tempore edere solitus est.” It is a perversion of the text to say, with Chrysostom, Euthymius Zigabenus, that He did not expect to find fruit upon the tree, but went up to it merely for the purpose of working the miracle. Moreover, the hunger is alleged to have been only a (Euthymius Zigabenus), or an esuries sponte excitata (Cornelius a Lapide). The account of the withering of the tree, contained in Mar 11:12 ff., Mar 11:19 f., is more precise and more original (in answer to Kstlin, Hilgenfeld, Keim). Matthew abridges.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
19 And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away.
Ver. 19. He came to it and found nothing ] He thought then to have found something; there was some kind of ignorance, we see, in Christ as man (but not that that was sinful). His soul desired the first ripe fruits, Mic 7:1 ; yea, though they had not been ripe and ready, hard hunger would have made them sweet and savoury, as the shepherd’s bread and onions were to Hunniades, when he was put to flight by the Turks; so well can hunger season homely cares, saith the historian. Of this promising fig tree our Saviour might say, as Alciat of the cypress,
” Pulchra coma est, pulchro digestaeque ordine frondes,
Sed fructus nullos haec coma pulchra gerit.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
19. ] , ‘unam illo loco:’ a solitary fig-tree.
. . ] “ by the road-side: so Herod. vii. 6, : Demosth. p. 300. 16, . It was the practice to plant fig-trees by the road-side, because it was thought that the dust, by absorbing the exuding sap, was conducive to the production of the fruit. Plin. [158] . [159] . xv. 19.” Meyer. [But “M [160] now translates ‘ over the road ,’ adding that we may either suppose that the tree simply projected over the road, or that it was planted on an elevation by the road-side, or that the road here passed through a ravine.” Moulton’s Winer, p. 468, note 4.]
[158] CODEX PURPUREUS. “These fragments (of the sixth century ) are found in three places: four leaves are in the British Museum (Cotton. C. xv.), denoted J or I by Wetstein and others; two are at Vienna (Imperial Library, Cod. Theol. Gr. Num 2:1-34 Lambec.), to which the notation N was formerly restricted; and six in the Vatican (No. 3785), called by Scholz . Edited by Tischendorf in his Monumenta Sacra, 1846.” (Tregelles.) To these must now be added some further fragments collated by Tischendorf for his eighth edition.
[159] The Codex Wolfii B, now in the Public Library at Hamburg. Its history is the same as that of the last MS. Its contents, the Gospels, with many lacun: its assigned date, about the end of the ninth century . It was collated by Wolf, Tregelles, and Tischendorf.
[160]. Marcion, 130; fragments in Epiph. (Mcion-e) and Tert. (Mcion-t)
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 21:19 . : in late Greek was often used for , but the meaning here probably is that Jesus looking around saw a solitary fig tree. , by the wayside, not necessarily above (Meyer). , came close to it, not climbed it (Fritzsche). : leaves only, no fruit. Jesus expected to find fruit. Perhaps judging from Galilean experience, where by the lake-shore the fig time was ten months long (Joseph., Bell. J., iii. 108. Vide Holtz., H. C.), but vide on Mar 11:13 . , etc.: according to some writers this was a prediction based on the observation that the tree was diseased, put in the form of a doom. So Bleek, and Furrer who remarks: “Then said He, who knew nature and the human heart, ‘This tree will soon wither’; for a fig tree with full leaf in early spring without fruit is a diseased tree” ( Wanderungen. p. 172). . , cf. Mk.’s account.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
a = one (single).
in = on. Greek. epi. App-104.
to = up to. Greek. epi.
found nothing. See notes on Mar 11:13.
for ever = for the age (see App-151. a.), i.e. to the end of that Dispensation. The fig tree represents the national privilege of Israel (see notes on Jdg 9:10), and that is to be restored (Rom 11:2, Rom 11:26).
presently = at once, on the spot; Greek. parachrema, rendered “soon” in Mat 21:20. See note on “immediately”, Luk 1:64.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
19.] , unam illo loco: a solitary fig-tree.
. .] by the road-side: so Herod. vii. 6, : Demosth. p. 300. 16, . It was the practice to plant fig-trees by the road-side, because it was thought that the dust, by absorbing the exuding sap, was conducive to the production of the fruit. Plin. [158]. [159]. xv. 19. Meyer. [But M[160] now translates over the road, adding that we may either suppose that the tree simply projected over the road, or that it was planted on an elevation by the road-side, or that the road here passed through a ravine. Moultons Winer, p. 468, note 4.]
[158] CODEX PURPUREUS. These fragments (of the sixth century) are found in three places: four leaves are in the British Museum (Cotton. C. xv.), denoted J or I by Wetstein and others; two are at Vienna (Imperial Library, Cod. Theol. Gr. Num 2:1-34 Lambec.), to which the notation N was formerly restricted; and six in the Vatican (No. 3785), called by Scholz . Edited by Tischendorf in his Monumenta Sacra, 1846. (Tregelles.) To these must now be added some further fragments collated by Tischendorf for his eighth edition.
[159] The Codex Wolfii B, now in the Public Library at Hamburg. Its history is the same as that of the last MS. Its contents, the Gospels,-with many lacun: its assigned date, about the end of the ninth century. It was collated by Wolf, Tregelles, and Tischendorf.
[160]. Marcion, 130; fragments in Epiph. (Mcion-e) and Tert. (Mcion-t)
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 21:19. , a certain fig-tree) the only one in that place.-, He came) sc. as the road led by it. The fig-tree appears to have stood in a place of public resort. Our Lords partaking of refreshment in public is illustrated also by Joh 4:6-7. [i.e. at Jacobs Well. See Gnomon in loc.]- , near to it[922])-, …, says, etc.) By that very act He meets the difficulty which some might have otherwise experienced from astonishment at the Lords being hungry, and coming to a tree without fruit.[923] He was wont to display at the same time the greatest proofs of both His manhood and His Godhead; see Joh 11:35; Joh 11:40.[924]- , let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever) The Old Testament contains many miracles of vengeance: the evangelical history, at its close, this almost alone; cf. Gnomon on ch. Mat 8:32.-, fruit) And therefore it was not to receive any more sap in vain. Such was the punishment of the Jews; see Luk 13:6. This is an example of what malediction is.-, was dried up) Its outward appearance was changed; its leaves shrivelled, or even fell off.
[922] ) It is better to exhibit and produce nothing at all, than merely leaves. Reflect, O man, what kind of a tree thou art.-V. g.
[923] Viz. That as God He should be hungry at all, or if hungry, that He should not create fruit.-ED.
[924] Such instances, for example, were:-The humble condition of His nativity, on the one hand; the testimony of the angels, on the other:
His circumcision, and yet His receiving the name Jesus (expressive of God-head and salvation):
His purification, and yet at the same time the Hymns of Simeon and Anna:
His dwelling at despised Nazareth, and yet His thereby fulfilling the prophecy:
His obedience to His parents, and yet the specimen of noble gravity exhibited in a boy twelve years old:
His baptism; and, on the other hand, the protest of John, the very becoming reply of Jesus, the Voice from heaven, the Spirit of GOD descending on Him:
The Hunger and Temptation; and, on the other hand, the ministry of angels:
His informing them of His approaching Passion, followed however by His
Transfiguration on the Mount:
His paying the tribute-money at Capernaum, and yet His declaration as to the Sons being free, His miracle in the case of the fish and the coin:
His washing the feet, yet declaring Himself Master and Lord:
His being taken prisoner, yet declaring I am He!
His Cross, yet the royal inscription over it:
His death and burial, yet the miracles, accompanied with the testimony of the centurion.-Harm. Gosp., p. 455.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
fig tree
Lit. a solitary fig tree. Luk 13:6-9. The withered fig tree is a parabolic miracle concerning Israel. Luk 13:6-9. Cf., Mat 24:32; Mat 24:33 a prophecy that Israel shall again bud.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
fig tree: Gr. one fig-tree
and found: Isa 5:4, Isa 5:5, Luk 3:9, Luk 13:6-9, Joh 15:2, Joh 15:6, 2Ti 3:5, Tit 1:16
Let: Mar 11:14, Luk 19:42-44, Heb 6:7, Heb 6:8, 2Pe 2:20-22, Rev 22:11
the fig tree: Jud 1:12
Reciprocal: Deu 20:19 – thou shalt not Psa 1:3 – shall not Psa 69:27 – Add Son 6:6 – General Isa 1:30 – ye shall be Isa 29:17 – the fruitful Jer 8:13 – there Eze 17:10 – shall it Zec 11:9 – that that dieth Mat 3:10 – is hewn Mat 7:19 – bringeth Mar 11:13 – seeing Mar 11:20 – General 1Co 6:10 – thieves 1Co 13:2 – I am Tit 3:14 – that
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1:19
In the account given at Mar 11:13 the statement is added: “For the time of figs was not yet.” Our verse says that Jesus found only leaves on the tree when he expected to find fruit also. If it was not the time for figs why would Jesus curse the tree for not having the fruit as well as the leaves? This matter is explained by the editor’s note on Jo-sephus, Wars, Book 3, Chapter 10, Section 8, as follows: “It may be worth our while to observe here, that near this lake of Gennesareth grapes and figs hang on the trees ten months of the year. We may observe also, that in Cyril of Jerusalem, Cateches, 18, section 3, which was delivered not long before Easter, there were no fresh leaves of fig trees, nor bunches of fresh grapes in Judea, so that when Mark says (11:13), that our Saviour, soon after the same time of the year, came and ‘found leaves’ on a fig tree near Jerusalem, but ‘no figs,’ because the time of ‘new figs’ ripening ‘was not yet,’ he says very true; nor were they therefore other than old leaves which our Saviour saw, and old figs which he expected, and which tven with us commonly hang on the trees all winter long.”
Jesus cursed the fig tree for having leaves but no fruit, since its opportunity for bearing the one was as good as the other, regardless of whether it was the old or new crop that was expected. Many people have moralized on this circumstance and compared the leaves to the empty Profession of righteousness that men make and the absence of fruit to the failure of doing one’s duty to the Lord. We may make our own comparison to it for the purpose of an illustration, but nothing in the text indicates that to have been in the mind of Christ. Rather, it was just another opportunity to perform a miracle for the instruction of the disciples, for that was the only subject they discussed about it afterward. Presently is from PARACHREMA which Thayer defines, “Immediately, forthwith, instantly,” and Robinson says, “On the spot, forthwith, straightway.”
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away.
[Found nothing thereon but leaves only.] This place is not a little obscure, being compared with Mar 11:13; who seems to say, that therefore figs were not found on this tree, because it was not yet the time of figs. Why then did our Saviour expect figs, when he might certainly know that it was not yet the time of figs? And why, not finding them, did he curse the tree, being innocent and agreeable to its own nature?
I. We will first consider the situation of this tree. Our evangelist saith, that it was in the way. This minds me of a distinction used very often by the Talmudists, between the fruits of trees of common right, which did not belong to any peculiar master, but grew in woody places, or in common fields; and the fruits of trees which grew in gardens, orchards, or fields, that had a proper owner. How much difference was made between these fruits by the canonists, as to tithing, and as to eating, is in many places to be met with through the whole classes, entitled Seeds. This fig-tree seems to have been of the former kind: a wild fig-tree; growing in a place or field, not belonging to any one in particular, but common to all. So that our Saviour did not injure any particular person, when he caused this tree to wither; but it was such a tree, that it could not be said of it, that it was mine or thine.
II. He found nothing thereon but leaves; because the time of figs was not yet a great while, Mar 11:13.
1. “At what time in the seventh year do they forbear to lop their trees? The school of Shammai saith All trees from that time, they bring forth [leaves].” The Gloss, “The beginning of leaves is in the days of Nisan.”
2. “Rabban Simeon Ben Gamaliel saith, From the putting forth of leaves, till there be green figs, is fifty days; from the green figs, till the buds fall off, fifty days; and from that time till the figs be ripe are fifty days.” If, therefore, the first putting out of the leaves was in the month Nisan, and that was five months’ time before the figs came to be ripe, it is plain enough that the figs of that year coming on were not expected by our Saviour, nor could be expected.
That we may pursue the matter somewhat home, and make it appear that the text of Mark, as it is commonly read, for the time of figs was not yet; is uncorrupted,
I. We must first observe what is said about the intercalation of the year: “They intercalate the year upon three accounts; for the green year, for the fruit of the tree, and for Tekupha.” Maimonides is more large; whom see. Now if you ask what means the intercalation for the fruit of the tree, the Gloss answers, “If the fruit be not ripened till Pentecost is past, they intercalate the year; because Pentecost is the time of bringing the firstfruits: and if at that time one should not bring them along with him when he comes to the feast, he would be obliged to make another journey.” But now this is not to be understood of all trees, but of some only, which put forth their fruit about the time of the Passover, and have them ripe at the feast of Pentecost. For thus Maimonides in the place cited: “If the council sees that there is not yet any green ear, and that the fruit of the trees which used to bud at the feast of the Passover is not yet budded [mark that, ‘used to bud’], moved by these two causes, they intercalate the year.” Among these the fig-tree can by no means be reckoned: for since, our Saviour being witness, the putting forth of its leaves is a sign that summer is at hand, you could not expect any ripe figs, nay (according to the Talmudists), not so much as the putting out of leaves, before the Passover. When it is before said that Pentecost was the time of bringing the firstfruits, it must not be so understood as if the firstfruits of all trees were then to be brought, but that before Pentecost it was not lawful to bring any; for thus it is provided for by a plain canon, “The firstfruits are not to be brought before Pentecost. The inhabitants of mount Zeboim brought theirs before Pentecost, but they did not receive them of them, because it is said in the law, ‘And the feast of harvest, the firstfruit of thy labours which thou hast sown in thy field.’ ”
II. There are several kinds of figs mentioned in the Talmudists besides these common ones; namely, figs of a better sort, which grew in gardens and paradises: 1. Shithin. Concerning which the tract Demai; among those things which were accounted to deserve lesser care; and among those things which were doubtful as to tithing were shithin; which the Glosser tells us were wild figs. 2. There is mention also in the same place of…a fig mixed with a plane-tree. 3. But among all those kinds of figs, they were memorable which were called a kind of fig; and they yet more, which were called white figs; which, unless I mistake, make to our purpose: not that they were more noble than the rest, but their manner of bearing fruit was more unusual. There is mention of these in Sheviith; in these words, we will render the words in the paraphrase of the Glossers: “…white figs; and a kind of fig; the seventh year” (that is, the year of release) “is to those the second” (viz of the seven years following); “to these, the gong out of the seventh. White figs put forth fruit every year, but it is ripe only every third year: so that on that tree every year one might see three sorts of fruit, namely, of the present year, of the past, and of the year before that. Thus the kind of fig bring forth ripe fruit in two years,” etc.
Concerning white figs thus the Jerusalem Gemara: “Do they bear fruit every year, or once in three years? They bear fruit every year; but the fruit is not ripe till the third year. But how may one know which is the fruit of each year? R. Jona saith, ‘By the threads that hang to them.’ The tradition of Samuel, ‘He makes little strings hang to it,’ ” etc.
III. The fruit of very many trees hung upon them all the winter, by the mildness of the weather, if they were not gathered or shaken off by the wind: nay, they ripened in winter. Hence came those cautions about tithing: “The tree which puts forth its fruit before the beginning of the year of the world” [that is, before the beginning of the month Tisri, in which month the world was created], “must be tithed for the year past: but if after the beginning of the world, then it must be tithed for the year coming on. R. Judan Bar Philia answered before R. Jonah, ‘Behold the tree Charob puts forth its fruits before the beginning of the world, and yet it is tithed for the year following.’ R. Jissa saith, ‘If it puts forth a third part before the year of the world, it must be tithed for the year past; but if after, then for the year following.’ R. Zeira answers before R. Jissa ‘Sometimes palm-trees do not bring forth part of their fruit till after the beginning of the year of the world; and yet they must be tithed for the year before.’ Samuel Bar Abba saith, ‘If it puts forth the third part of its fruit before the fifteenth day of the month Shebat, it is to be tithed for the year past; if after the fifteenth day of the month Shebat, for the year to come.’ ” Hence that axiom in Rosh Hashanah, “The first day of the month Shebat is the beginning of the year for trees, according to the school of Shammai; but, according to that of Hillel, the fifteenth day.”
However, fig-trees were not among those trees that put forth their fruit after the beginning of Tisri; for you have seen before, out of the Talmudists, that they used to put forth their leaves in the month Nisan: and that their fruit used to be ripe in thrice fifty days after this. Yet, perhaps, it may be objected about them, what we meet with in the Jerusalem Gemara, at the place before cited: “One gathers figs (say they), and knows not at what time they were put forth” (and thereby is at a loss for what year to tithe them). “R. Jonah saith, ‘Let him reckon a hundred days backwards; and if the fifteenth day of the month Shebat falls within that number, then he may know when they were put forth.’ ” But this must be understood of figs of a particular sort, which do not grow after the usual manner, which is plain also from that which follows; for, “they say to him, ‘With you at Tiberias there are fig-trees that bear fruit in one year’: to which he answers, ‘Behold, with you at Zippor there are trees that bear fruit in two years.’ ” Concerning common fig-trees, their ordinary time of putting out green figs was sufficiently known; as also the year of tithing them: but concerning those trees of another sort, which had ripe fruit only in two or three years, it is no wonder if they were at a loss in both.
IV. Christ, therefore, came to the tree seeking fruit on it, although the ordinary time of figs was not yet; because it was very probable that some fruit might be found there. Of the present year, indeed, he neither expected nor could expect any fruit, when it was so far from being the time of figs; that it was almost five months off: and it may be doubted whether it had yet so much as any leaves of the present year. It was now the month Nisan, and that month was the time of the first putting out of leaves; so that if the buds of the leaves had just peeped forth, they were so tender, small, and scarce worth the name of leaves (for it was but the eleventh day of the month), that to expect figs of the same year with those leaves had not been only in vain, but ridiculous. Those words seem to denote something peculiar, having leaves; as if the other trees thereabout had been without leaves, or, at least, had not such leaves as promised figs. Mark seems to give the reason why he came rather to that tree than to any other; namely, because he saw leaves on it, and thereby hoped to find figs. “For when he saw (saith he) a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon.” From the leaves he had hopes of figs: these, therefore, certainly were not the leaves of the present spring, for those were hardly so much as in being yet: but they were either the leaves of the year past, that had hung upon the tree all winter; or else this tree was of that kind which had figs and leaves together hanging on it for two or three years before the fruit grew ripe. And I rather approve of this latter sense, which both renders the matter itself more clear, and better solves the difficulties that arise from the words of Mark. This tree, it seems, had leaves which promised fruit, and others had not so; whereas, had they all been of the same kind, it is likely they would all have had leaves after the same manner. But when others had lost all their leaves of the former year by winds and the winter, and those of the present year were not as yet come out, this kept its leaves, according to its nature and kind, both summer and winter. St. Mark, therefore, in that clause, which chiefly perplexes interpreters, for the time of figs was not yet; doth not strictly and only give the reason why he found no figs, but gives the reason of the whole action; namely, why on that mountain which abounded with fig trees he saw but one that had such leaves; and being at a great distance when he saw it, he went to it, expecting figs only from it. The reason, saith he, was this, “Because it was not the usual time of figs”: for had it been so, he might have gathered figs from the trees about him; but since it was not, all his expectation was from this, which seemed to be the kind of fig or white fig, which never wanted leaves or figs. For to take an instance in the tree: That tree (suppose) bore figs such a summer, which hung upon the boughs all the following winter; it bore others also next summer; and those, together with the former, hung on the boughs all this winter too: the third summer it bore a third degree, and this summer brought those of the first bearing to ripeness, and so onwards continually; so that it was no time to be found without fruit of several years. It is less, therefore, to be wondered at, if that which promised so much fruitfulness by its looks, that one might have expected from it at least the fruit of two years, did so far deceive the hopes it had raised, as not to afford one fig; if that, I say, should suffer a just punishment from our Lord, whom it had so much, in appearance, disappointed: an emblem of the punishment that was to be inflicted upon the Jews for their spiritual barrenness and hypocrisy.
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
Mat 21:19. A single (lit., one) fig tree. A solitary one.
By the way side, where it was customary to plant such trees, as the dust was thought to help the productiveness.
But leaves only. Mark adds: for the time of figs was not yet. The usual explanation is that the fruit of the fig tree precedes the leaf, hence it promised fruit. A recent traveller in Palestine (T. W. Chambers) says this is not the case, and gives the following explanation: The tree bears two crops, an early ripe fig which is crude and without flavor and valueless, and a later fig which is full of sweetness and flavor, and highly esteemed. All trees bear the first, only good ones have the second. Now the tree our Lord saw had not the second, for the time of that had not yet come, but it had not even the first, for it had nothing but leaves, and the lack of the first was sure evidence that the second would also be wanting. The solitary tree was a figure of Israel set by itself; the leaves represented the hypocritical pretensions to sanctity, the barrenness the lack of real holiness. Applicable to false professors in every age.
No more shall there be fruit from thee, etc. Peter (Mar 11:21) calls this a cursing of the tree, i.e., a condemning to destruction. A miracle of punishment, both a parable and prophecy in action: a parable, teaching that false professors will be judged; a prophecy in its particular application to the Jews. There is no evidence that this affected private property. The miracle is a proof of goodness and severity. (In the Old Testament the fig tree appears as a symbol of evil.)
And immediately the fig tree withered away. On Tuesday morning it was found to be dried up from the roots (Mar 11:20). The application to the Jewish people is unmistakable. Both the actual desolation of the land and the judgment on the people are prefigured. The curse was for falsehood as well as barrenness. The true fruit of any people before the Incarnation would have been to own that they had no fruit, that without Christ they could do nothing. The Gentiles owned this; but the Jews boasted of their law, temple, worship, ceremonies, prerogatives, and good works, thus resembling the fig tree with pretensions, deceitful leaves without fruit. Their condemnation was, not that they were sick, but that, being sick, they counted themselves whole (condensed from Trench and Witsius).
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 19
This curse upon the barren fig-tree was perhaps intended as emblematic of the doom of the Jewish nation, or of all those who are unfruitful in the service of God.