Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

gmark - Re: Temple negation and fig trees

gmark AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Kata Markon

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Jeffrey Krantz <jkrantz AT optonline.net>
  • To: gmark AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: Temple negation and fig trees
  • Date: 19 Sep 99 18:53:29 -0500


I have always read this passage from Mark as an indication that it should be
dated later than
the destruction of the temple in 70. (Even when I was much more sure of
Markan priority
than I am these days!)

But it results less from Mark's apparent intention to equate the fate of the
temple with the fate
of the tree. (Though this is strong, especially as Jesus is said to have
quoted Jeremiah when
_he_ stood in the gate of the first temple and predicted its destruction.
(It makes Jesus
upsetting of the tables into an enacted prophecy. "Cleansing" is such a
mis-naming of the
event.))

Instead, I have grounded my thinking about this "sandwich" and Markan dating
on the very
strange exchange between Peter and Jesus when they come upon the wilted tree.
(11:20-25)
It has often been taken to be an excursus by Jesus on the power of prayer.
"Pray for the tree
to wilt, and it will!" But rather, I believe that Mark intended it to be a
response to the dismay
of the Markan hearer/reader to the destruction of the temple.

Peter makes a hidden comment about the destruction of the temple, (the tree
and the temple
have become so thoroughly identified with each other by this time.) and Jesus
replies, "Have
faith in God!" Only then does he go on to suggest that prayer has the power
to move
mountains. And this prayer is grounded in the forgiveness of one another.
(As close as
Mark comes to the Lord's Prayer, or "how do we pray in community?")

This makes the whole event into (for Mark) an opportunity to allow Jesus to
comment from
the past on the meaning of the Temple's destruction for Mark's community. (An
apt prelude
to the apocalypse of chapter 13.)


> I would never have thought of it before, but is it not possible that
> the structure of this indicates a more direct paralleling between fig tree
> and temple?

Perhaps you New Testament
> folk can decide how this bears on how this affects the dating of Mark
> (i.e., if the positioning indicates that the temple was gone at the time
> of the writing, like the withered fig tree in the next passage ). Just a
> thought.

Jeffrey Krantz
Church of the Advent, Westbury LI
Mercer School of Theology
http://www.agapenetwork.org


Jeffrey H. Krantz
Church of the Advent
Mercer School of Theology
http://www.agapenetwork.org





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page