Once again I found a problem.... it's not funny anymore

[Eliyahu]

When I said the Gospel was not written in the time sequence, I meant not all Gospel was written necessarily in time sequence.
The typical example of it is Luke.

Luke 3:20 King Herod imprisoned John the Baptist
Luke 3:21 Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist ( before he was imprisoned)
Luke 7:19 John the Baptist sent his 2 disciples to Jesus saying “ Art thou that should come? Or look we for another?

Now please recall my statement that as for the event of Fig Tree, Mark wrote it in time sequence.

The order appeared in Mar 11 is this:

1) Jesus and disciples came near Jerusalem
2) Jesus ordered His disciples arrange the place for Last Supper
3) People welcomed Jesus with Hosanna on the way to Jerusalem (v10)
4) Jesus entered the Temple but looked around – but didn’t clean it at this time ( v 11)
5) Jesus returned to Bethany – the first day ended ( v 11)
6) Next morning Jesus came out of Bethany and was going to Jerusalem, on the way He cursed the Fig Tree. ( v 12)
7) Jesus entered the temple and made the Temple Cleansing ( v 15)
8) Jesus returned to Bethany in the evening - the second day ended (v 19)
9) Next morning, on the third day, Jesus was coming out of Bethany and was heading to Jerusalem again, Disciples noticed the fig tree was withered. ( v20-23)

Now let’s look at Matthew 21:
1) Jesus and disciples came near Jerusalem ( v1)
2) Jesus ordered His disciples to arrange the Last Supper (2-7)
3) People welcomed Jesus with Hosanna! ( v 9)
4) Matthew combined here the first entrance into Temple and the second entrance for Temple Cleansing (v 12-16) Temple Cleansing is explained before the Curse of Fig Tree
5) Jesus returned to Bethany (v 17) – first day ended ( Temple Cleansing included for the second day)
6) Jesus cursed the Fig Tree on the second day morning (v 18-19) on His way from Bethany to Jerusalem
7) Matthew omit the story of Temple Cleansing here because he already combined the story with the first entrance into the Temple
8) Disciples saw it next day morning, and exclaimed about it ( Third Day) ( v 20)
9) Jesus explained how the miracle works ( v 21)

The difficulty in understanding this may have arisen from the combination of the first day and the second day of Temple Cleansing by Matthew.
As you could see in Luke 3:20-21, Bible sometimes combine the stories with the related ones first then move to another story which occurred earlier than the previous statement.
This happened exactly in Matthew. But Mark write it in time sequence in this case.

Cursing the Fig Tree was done before the Temple Cleansing, then it was noticed only after next morning. Disciples didn't notice it immediately. Temple Cleansing was combined with the first day Look Around in case of Matthew.

Hope you got it now!

 

[windcatcher]

xdisciplex, I understand that you feel some have rebuked you: Admonish is perhaps a more correct term as it denotes mild reproof, after serious consideration.

I perceive you are having a problem with doubt which exaggerates your perception and comprehension of the Scriptures. Have you considered changing your signature line? ""Behind the explosion of multiplied translations there is the sinister plot of the devil to undermine the belief that the bible is the word of God."(Dr. Alan Cairns) " As another posted, this is a self fulfilling prophecy which you are identifying in belief which makes you fearful more of the 'sinister plot' than hopeful that the truth be revealed.

As mentioned earlier, the matter you question is not regarding agreement: but the perception of timing and context. Clearly Matthew was concerned about the story of the fig tree, it's curse and withering: the lesson of faith to Jesus' disciples. Mark is involved more with the chronology of events, with a day passing between the cursing of the tree and the discussion of the withering and the application of faith. As another mentioned, the nature of a fig tree is to put on fruit buds with the leaves, but both passages make clear that the tree had leaves but no fruit: It was barren. Can one see analogy here between the Promise within Israel's 'fig tree' to the World which did not bear fruit in its season due to their rejection and disobediance: Can you not see how the coveting of power and jealousy of their religious leaders actually withheld from their people the preparation for Messiah, and moved within them to deceive the masses and brought about their own deception?

xdisciplex, if you really want to know God and what is true in His word, ask God to open your eyes, your ears, your mind, and your heart. If you lack the faith to believe and trust God at his word....confess it to him.... He already knows....but confess it to him: Then ask God for the faith to believe. Please read Mark 9, 17-29. Particularly notice verse 23 and 24 which reads "Jesus said unto him, "If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth." And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, 'Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief'. "

Was his prayer answered? Do you think God can answer your prayer if you are sincere. It is not his will that any should perish. If when we find ourselves struggling to overcome a weakness, these verses may help in leading us to honestly confront and confess our inpotency, and ask his help: And if not satisfied then pursue more earnestly with fasting and prayer.

Get to know the word before you trouble yourself with doubtings and disputations. Find a scripturally sound church and attend the teachings fellowships such as Sunday School. Seek God in the Word and he will reveal his glory to you. Don't look to the Scripture as magic formula for prospering....... It is faith ('forsaking all I trust Him') which is lived day by day in whatever circumstances you find your self in. Salvation in Jesus is joy unspeakable and full of glory. May his peace come to you and satisfy your soul!

 

[Not_hard_to_find]

"Behind the explosion of multiplied translations there is the sinister plot of the devil to undermine the belief that the bible is the word of God."(Dr. Alan Cairns).

'Tis not only the translations, but people that the devil uses to undermine belief that the Bible is the word of God. Once one accepts belief in Genesis 1:1, the remainder is beautiful.

 

[Eliyahu]

Hi everyone here,
I have been communicating with XDX for a long time, and found him very much enthusiastic about knowing the truth. He has brought very much interesting issues and subjects. His attitude may have been similar to Berean people ( Acts 17:11) though the range of his questioning has been quite broad covering the viewpoints of the unbelievers too. The Christianity is not so weak that we may have to worry about the confrontation with the Unbelievers and Anti-christians questions and arguments. The Bible is not that weak to be collapsed by any doubts and questions.

Therefore I would rather say that XDX's questioning is quite understandable and OK.
But XDX has got some complaints among the fellow members here as he has often disappeared after he had raised questions.

Therefore I would kindly advise XDX that he should seriously check the answers from others and search the scriptures daily whether those things are so ( Acts 17:11)

 

[EdSutton]

I suggest that xdisciplex cnsider the words of the late Bishop J. C. Ryle who said what I am posting and will post here:

by J.C. Ryle, B.A.
"On one point of vast importance in the present day, the reader will see that I hold very decided opinions. That point is inspiration. I feel no hesitation in avowing that I believe in the plenary inspiration of every word of the original text of Holy Scripture. I hold not only that the Bible contains the Word of God, but that every jot of it was written, or brought together, by Divine inspiration, and is the Word of God.
"I entirely disagree with those who maintain that the writers of the Bible were partially inspired, or inspired to such a limited extent that discrepancies, inaccuracies, and contradictions to the facts of science and history, must be expected and do exist in their writings. I utterly repudiate such a theory. I consider that it practically destroys the whole value of God's Word, puts a sword in the hand of infidels and sceptics, and raises far more serious difficulties than it pretends to solve.

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

continued -

Plenary inspiration
"I grant freely that the theory of "plenary verbal inspiration" involves some difficulties. I do not pretend to answer all the objections brought against it, or to defend all that has been written by its supporters ... but I do maintain that all parts of the Bible are equally "given by inspiration of God", and that are to be regarded as God's Word. If we do not see the Divine character of any particular part, it is because we have at present no eyes to saee it. The humblest moss is as much the handiwork of God's creative power as the cedar of Lebanon ... The least verse in the Bible is just as truly "given by inspiration" as the greatest ...
"I am content to remember that all inspiration is a miraculous operation of the Holy Ghost, and, like every operation of the Holy Ghost, must needs be mysterious. It is an operation of which not forty men in the world have been made the subjects, and the manner of which not one of the forty has described. It stands to reason that the whole question of inspiration, like everything else supernatural, must necessarily contain much that is mysterious, and much that we cannot explain. - But the difficulties of the "plenary verbal" theory appear to me mere trifles, compared with those which surround the counter theory of "partial inspiration".

 

[EdSutton]

continued -

The perilous alternative
"Once admit the principle that the writers of the Bible could make mistakes, and were not in all things guided by the Spirit, and I know not where I am. I see nothing certain, nothing solid, nothing trust- worthy in the foundations of my faith. A fog has descended on the Book of God, and enveloped every chapter in uncertainty! Who shall decide when the writers of the Scriptures made mistakes, and when they did not? How am I to know where inspiration ends, and where it begins? What I think inspired, another may think uninspired! The texts that I rest upon may possibly have been put in by a slip of the pen! The words and phrases that I love to feed upon, may possibly be weak earthly expressions, in writing which the author was left to his own private uninspired mind! - The glory is departed from my Bible at this rate. A cold feeling of suspicion and doubt creeps over me as I read it, and I am almost tempted to lay it down in despair. A partially inspired Bible is little better than no Bible at all. Give me the "plenary verbal" theory, with all its difficulties, rather than this. I accept the difficulties of that theory, and humbly wait for their solution. but while I wait, I feel that I am standing on a rock ...

All I can say is "Move over, J.C.!! Make room for me on that rock!!"

Ed

 

[tragic_pizza]

OK, so the fig tree was withered, but the great horror is that it might or might not have happened immediately?

xdx, I like you, but this is splitting hairs. Choking on minutae isn't the point of Scriptural study.

 

[EdSutton]

The entire 'sermon' by Bishop J. C. Ryle can be found here. One hunderd years later, it sounds as if it could have been preached today! And it could, for it is that applicable and up to date.

http://www.santabiblia.net/resources/Trinitarian/article_64.htm

Like the late Bishop, I'm standing on the rock, acknowledging that I do not have all the answers to every possible question. But not having the knowledge of Almighty God, I do humbly wait, as well.

7 Let the wicked forsake his way,
And the unrighteous man his thoughts;
Let him return to the LORD,
And He will have mercy on him;
And to our God,
For He will abundantly pardon.
8 “ For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways My ways,” says the LORD.
9 “ For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are My ways higher than your ways,
And My thoughts than your thoughts.
10 “ For as the rain comes down, and the snow from heaven,
And do not return there,
But water the earth,
And make it bring forth and bud,
That it may give seed to the sower
And bread to the eater,
11 So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth;
It shall not return to Me void,
But it shall accomplish what I please,
And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.
12 “ For you shall go out with joy,
And be led out with peace;
The mountains and the hills
Shall break forth into singing before you,
And all the trees of the field shall clap their hands. (Isa. 55: 7-12, NKJV)

11 Now also many nations have gathered against you,
Who say, “Let her be defiled,
And let our eye look upon Zion.”
12 But they do not know the thoughts of the LORD,
Nor do they understand His counsel;
For He will gather them like sheaves to the threshing floor. (Mic. 4:11-12, NKJV)

I don't wanna' be like these spoken of, in these Scriptures. I do want to understand, so I do study the Scriptures, and I find that most of the perceived difficulties will vanish in harmony with the Scriptures. It seems that you are choking on the word rendered "presently", and/or "immediately". Consider this, neither one necessarily means instantaneously, and the writers of Scripture, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, did not choose to use such a word.

As you said, as a farmer, I see many trees die or are in the process of dying, sometimes taking ten to up to twenty years or more, in some instances.

Overnight would certainly fit my own conception of "presently".

I think you have been given some good counsel by others. Consider it, prayerfully. raying:

Ed

 

[xdisciplex]

@ Eliyahu

Thanks for the explanation. But I think I alone would never have come to such an answer.

@ windcatcher

I have already prayed this prayer many times. The problem is simply that whenever I come across something in the bible which doesn't seem to fit then suddenly the whole foundation is shaking. This is the problem and the guy who EdSutton quoted sums it up very well. This is also exactly my point of view. But the problem is simply that there are many problems such as: What about our bibles today? It doesn't help us if the originals which are long gone were inspired and today we only have good copies.
And another problem is the question HOW inspired the writers were. Did God control their hands and make them write word for word exactly the way he wanted? Or did God only "guide" them leaving them a certain freedom?
I mean Luke says that he did some research. Why?
Why did he have to do research when God inspired all writers? Couldn't he simply have sat down and then asked God to tell him what to write?
Did the writers of the gospels even say that they are inspired or did they know that they are inspired? Can you be inspired without being aware of it?

The problem is simply that when you say that the bible is inspired and given by God then there must not be any discrepancy in it. But often when you ask about differences in the gospel accounts christians say something like: It's simply from the point of view of this person.
But points of views vary. Every person has a different point of view and every person has a different memory. But there is only 1 truth. For example when 2 people watched how Kennedy got shot then it isn't possible that one person heard 1 shot and is right and another person heard 2 shots and is also right. Both reports cannot be correct and it's the same with the bible. And this is where the problem lies. If one gospel says that there were 2 demoniacs and the other one only mentions one demoniac then I don't really understand this.
Some christians don't even care about such things and simply say: Well, even if it was 2 demoniacs this doesn't even touch the major doctrine of the bible.
But this isn't even the problem. The problem is inspiration! As soon as you start admitting that there are small mistakes in the bible then everything becomes insecure and the whole bible loses its power. It's the same with the debates about wether the end of Mark 16 is genuine or not. Even if those last verses are not important for questions such as how to get saved it's still very important when it comes to inspiration. How can you really rely on the bible when you have all those thoughts in your head at the same time? This doesn't work anymore.
I just wish God would speak to me and tell me that the bible today is exactly the way it should be and then the whole problem would be settled. But it's hard to simply have a childlike faith and not worry when you hear about all these things at the same time. I think the more you hear about these things the harder it becomes to have a childlike faith. Somebody who has never heard about all these controversies has it much easier than somebody who compares different manuscripts and who deals with all this stuff.

 

[tragic_pizza]

The problem is simply that when you say that the bible is inspired and given by God then there must not be any discrepancy in it.

Says who, xdx? Please, explain to me who it is that puts such an unreasonable standard of performance against a book?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

May I venture to answer your question, Disciplex, about the fig trees?

First, I always presuppose I may be the one wrong; not the Bible; and no sooner I discover, how right I was I am the one at fault!
Sometimes though, it is true, mistakes, glaring and unsolveable discrepancies, obviate themselves; I have learnt that then I must start looking at the translation. Usually no sooner I discover I was right the Bible was right again - as always!

But the fig tree.
The one Gospel tells how the tree was curse and dried up then and there. The other Gospels says that the disciples the next morning saw the fig tree, dried up.

Now what's wrong with that? I don't see any discrepancy? The morning the disciples found the tree in that state of being dried up. The process of drying up happened the day before, immediately when it was cursed to dry up.

Maybe too, a distinction might be drawn between the 'tree' as the branches and the leaves, and the 'tree' as the trunk to the roots. Paul used the figure of the trunk and the branches as being different things.

Or am I stupid?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Mark refers to the roots as well; Matthew doesn't.

 

[Don]

XDX,

If I may - you're trying to reconcile an argument that doesn't actually exist.

Your premise is that the word translated as "presently" means "immediately" (v. 19)

Here's where that falls down: the same word, parachrema, is used in the very next verse (v. 20) and translated as "soon."

Jesus expected this tree to have fruit; So we can safely assume it wasn't a brand new tree, as sometimes it takes fruit-producing trees years to start producing fruit (another biblical lesson?).

As someone else pointed out, studying the meanings of the word--for just about every word has more than one meaning--shows that parachrema can be translated as immediately, presently, soon, forthwith. So how do we know which one to use?

By studying the context.

Presently, the fig tree withered away, meaning it dried up and became lifeless--and recall, this wasn't a new, small tree. The disciples marveled about how soon this happened. In Mark, it was mentioned that it happened within a day.

How long does it normally take a tree, that's old enough to start bearing leaves to wither and die? Days? Weeks? Months? In normal circumstances, definitely more than just one day.

Which completely reconciles with "presently," "soon," and "the next morn."

Now, about the order of events: What is it you're expecting from the accounts from 2 different authors? The naysayers of the Bible are gonna get you both ways on that. On the one hand, "it can't be true because the accounts don't exactly match." On the other hand, "it can't be true because 2 different people say it happened exactly the same way, which only justifies the thought that the Bible was written by one person and attributed to different authors."

Think about it from a traffic cop's point of view, and I say this from personal experience: Whenever there's an incident, the traffic cop will interview everyone present, and will indubitably get at least 3 different accounts about what happened. However, the elements of the story all match: There's a fig tree, there's a visit to the temple, Jesus curses the tree, the disciples marvel at how quickly it withered away. In this regard, both accounts match exactly. The order in which they happen may be different, but the main elements are the same.

 

[steaver]

The OP states "Once again I found a problem".

Here is a fact that you must accept before you can ever understand what you perceive to be a "problem", and it is the fact that there is NO problems with the "Word of God" which is what we call the "Bible".

You do not see a "problem" but rather you see some verses that you are not yet able to understand. If you really want to understand them then you must first accept that the "problem" is in you and not in God's Word.

Many here have given you the correct answers to solve your so called problem with God's Word. You have chosen to ignore what the Spirit has shown you through these brothers and sisters.

Your focus is on God's Word having a problem. There is no such thing. Problems in God's Word or contradictions do not exist! If you believe they do or might then the Bible is worthless to you. Don't bother trying to "understand" it until you accept that it is "God's Word", not just contains God's Word.

Jam 1:5If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all [men] liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
Jam 1:6But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.
Jam 1:7For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.
Jam 1:8A double minded man [is] unstable in all his ways.



Your problem in a nut shell is more serious than the fig tree scenario. If you doubt that this passage is correct, then why should you believe that the passage stating that Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life is correct?

Either you accept that the whole Bible is the truth and study and pray to have it complement itself in all passages or you shall receive nothing in the form of knowledge from the Lord and you will toss and turn on the waves your entire life here on this earth, and on this BB.

God Bless!:thumbs:

 

[tamborine lady]

:type:

Hi xdx,

Here's something else to confuse you further. I read both accounts,(and I must admit I just quickly skimmed them, so I could be wrong).

But from what I see, and in case no one else has mentioned it, I see a strong possibility that there were 2 different fig trees, just from the things that occured in the Matthew rendition and the one in Mark after they talked about the fig tree.

They describe different things after each fig tree incident.:saint:

Just some more food for thought.

Working for Jesus,

Tammy

 

[Eliyahu]

Everyone here!

The main questions raised by XDX were :
1) How come Presently in matthew coincide with the next morning in Mark ( for withering)
2) Mark wrote that the Cursing happened before the Temple Cleansing but Matthew wrote that the Cursing took place after the Temple Cleansing.

Especially Question 2) was the main point which caused the confusion to XDX, though he could accept the meaning of Presently relatively easily.

That's why I explained the possible interpretation there sayng the Gospel Matthew was not written in Time Sequence.

To the questions, one need to explain the Key points, I believe.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

:type:

Hi xdx,

Here's something else to confuse you further. I read both accounts,(and I must admit I just quickly skimmed them, so I could be wrong).

But from what I see, and in case no one else has mentioned it, I see a strong possibility that there were 2 different fig trees, just from the things that occured in the Matthew rendition and the one in Mark after they talked about the fig tree.

They describe different things after each fig tree incident.:saint:

Just some more food for thought.

Working for Jesus,

Tammy

GE:

The chaps above you gave better answers than yours, if I may compare. What makes me sure yours is the wrong explanation, is the chronological setting of the fig-tree experiences - experiences on two consecutive days. The same tree is involved, or the two stories do not make sense when read.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Eliyahu:

"Mark wrote that the Cursing happened before the Temple Cleansing but Matthew wrote that the Cursing took place after the Temple Cleansing."

GE:

Here is where the actual problem lies - not with the two same fig tree incidents.

Please explain you remark further to me?