In earlier posts, I discussed how some of the miracles of Jesus were derived from his parables. The Resurrection of the Rich Man miracle in Secret Mark 10 and John 11 was likely derived (at least in part) from the Parable of the Rich Fool (cf. Luke 12:16-21; Gospel of Thomas 63:1) and the Parable of Rich Man and Lazarus (cf. Luke 16:19-31). Another example is the Abundant Harvest miracle in Infancy Gospel of Thomas 12:1-2, which was inspired by the Parable of the Sower (cf. Matthew 13:3-9; Mark 4:2-9; Luke 8:4-8; Gospel of Thomas 9:1). Compare the language in the following two texts:
"A sower went out to sow his seed. And as he sowed, some fell along the path, and was trodden underfoot, and the birds of the air devoured it. And some fell on the rock; and as it grew up, it withered away, because it had no moisture. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns grew with it and choked it. And some fell into good soil and grew, and yielded a hundred fold." (Luke 8:4-8)
"In the time of sowing the child went out with his father to sow wheat in the land. And as his father sowed, the child Jesus also sowed one corn of wheat. And when he had reaped it and threshed it, he brought in a hundred measures; and he called all the poor of the village to the threshing-floor and gave them the wheat, and Joseph took the residue of the wheat. He was eight years old when he worked this miracle." (Infancy Thomas 12:1-2)
The parables of Jesus often employ hyperbole and exaggeration which lend themselves into reinterpretation as miracles; this is what is happening in the example above. This same parable was also reinterpreted in two other ways: as a prophecy of millenial abundance (cf. Papias 14, cited in Irenaeus, AH 5.33.3-4) and as a prophecy of the Resurrection (cf. 1 Clement 24:5). I believe I have found another example of this process in action: The Parable of the Fig Tree (cf. Luke 13:6-9) which was converted into the Cursing of a Fig Tree miracle (cf. Mark 11:12-14, Matthew 21:18-22). Here is the Lukan version of the parable, which unfortunately is only one of two versions of the parable extant (the other version is found in the Apocalypse of Peter):
"And he told this parable: 'A man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came seeking fruit on it and found none. And he said to the vinedresser, "Lo, these three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and I find none. Cut it down; why should it use up the ground?" And he answered him, "Leave it alone, sir, this year also, till I dig about it and put on manure. And if it bears fruit next year, well and good; but if not, you can cut it down." ' " (Luke 13:6-9)
In the OT, fig trees are a traditional symbol of prosperity and divine blessing (Deuteronomy 8:8; Judges 9:10-11; 1 Kings 4:25; 2 Kings 18:31; Isaiah 36:16; Hosea 9:10; Joel 2:22; Micah 4:4; Zechariah 3:10), for instance: "Every man will sit under his own vine and under his own fig tree, and no one will make them afraid" (Micah 4:4). Barren fig trees, on the other hand, signify a divine curse: "There will be no harvest, says Yahweh. There are no grapes on the vine, no figs on the fig tree, even the leaves are withered" (Jeremiah 8:13; cf. Haggai 2:19, Habakkuk 3:17). In rabbinical literature, the fig tree represents the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and thus the Torah, and reading of the Torah, is likened to eating figs (Berachoth 40a, 57a; Eiruvin 54b).
The parable plays on this notion of barren fig trees as cursed and reverses the usual expectation: Jesus says that there is still hope even in things that are believed to be lost so be patient. This theme is consistent with Jesus' other sayings and parables on forgiveness and repentance. Luke however has embedded this parable into a new context: it directly follows a denunciation of the people living near Jerusalem where Jesus says, "unless you repent you will all perish as they did" (13:5), and after the parable, Jesus again denounces Jerusalem (13:34-35). Such references look back to the Jewish War and destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and Luke adapts the parable as a prophecy: Like the fig tree, Israel still has some time left to repent but when the appointed time ends, it will be "cut down" if it doesn't "bear fruit". The implication is that the religious order in Jerusalem was found to be "barren" and thus was cursed. This application resembles an apocalyptic saying in Luke 3:9 that is attributed to John the Baptist: "Even now the axe is laid to the roots of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire."
Mark draws on the same parable, most likely in a different form from oral tradition, but he shows no awareness of a prophetic application to the destruction of Jerusalem. He instead develops it into a narrative about Jesus cursing a fig tree. I have placed both versions side by side:
"And he told this parable: 'A man had a fig tree [suken] planted in his vineyard; and he came [elthen] seeking fruit [karpon] on it [en aute] and found none [ouk heuren]. And he said to the vinedresser, "Lo, these three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and I find none [ouk heuren]. Cut it down; why should it use up the ground?" And he answered him, "Leave it alone, sir, this year also, till I dig about it and put on manure. And if it bears fruit next year, well and good; but if not, you can cut it down." ' " (Luke 13:6-9)"On the following day, when they came [exelthonton] from Bethany, he was hungry. And seeing in the distance a fig tree [suken] in leaf, he went to see if he could find anything on it [en aute]. When he came to it, he found nothing [ouden heuren] but leaves, for it was not the season for figs. And he said to it, 'May no one ever eat fruit (karpon) from you again. And his disciples heard it....As they passed by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered away to its roots. And Peter remembered and said to him, 'Master, look! The fig tree which you cursed has withered.' And Jesus answered them, 'Have faith in God.' " (Mark 11:12-14, 20-22)
Mark has omitted the theme of patience but the narrative begins much the same way as the parable: (1) someone came to a fig tree, (2) seeking to find any fruit on it (3) but found nothing. There is also a mention of something adverse happening to the tree: cutting it down in the case of the parable, and withering up the tree in the case of the narrative. Mark's narrative makes the rather bizarre statement that Jesus was looking for figs on a tree though it wasn't fig season! This statement forestalls the reader from assuming that the fig tree was barren because it was already cursed -- this was not the case, it bore no fruit simply because it wasn't fig season yet. The incident seems to have been modeled somewhat on the curse God declared on Jonah's castor-oil plant (Jonah 4:5-10). Jonah was in ill spirits because God did not attack Ninevah as he had warned and God made a castor-oil plant to grow over his head to give him shade and soothe his temper. The story continues: "But at dawn the next day, God arranged that a worm would attack the castor-oil plant -- and it withered (apexeranthe)" (Jonah 4:6; LXX). This story shares several similarities with the Cursing of a Fig Tree miracle: (1) the discovery of the cursed tree the next day, in the morning, and (2) the motif of "withering," utilizing the same Greek root (apexeranthe in Jonah 4:6, exerantai in Mark 11:21). To develop this narrative episode, Mark thus appears to draw on the Parable of the Fig Tree and the account in Jonah 4.
Matthew 11:18-21 presents another version of the miracle narrative, drawing on Mark but modifying the episode in an idiosyncratic way:
"In the morning, as he was returning to the city, he was hungry. And seeing the fig tree by the wayside he went to it, and found nothing on it but leaves only. And he said to it, 'May no fruit ever come from you again!' And the fig tree withered at once. When the disciples saw it, they marveled, saying, 'How did the fig tree wither at once?' And Jesus answered them, 'Truly, I say to you, if you have faith and never doubt, you will not only do what had been done to the fig tree, but ... etc." (Matthew 21:18-21)
Matthew has altered the miracle narrative in several obvious ways: (1) Markan story was split over two days, while the Matthean version transpires on a single day, (2) the phrase "in the morning" was transferred to the beginning of the episode, (3) the fig tree withers immediately, in the presence of Jesus and the disciples rather than in their absence, (4) Matthew has omitted Mark's problematic statement that Jesus was looking for figs even though it wasn't fig season. By merging the two separate pericopes of Mark 11:12-14 and 20-22 and condensing the time frame, Matthew also departs from the parallel from Jonah where night intervenes between the planting of the castor-oil plant and its withering.
An even later development was the adaptation of the parable as an end-time prophecy. This is what we find in the Apocalypse of Peter, which adapts an different version of the parable to refer to the situation in the author's day:
"Receive the parable of the fig tree: As soon as its shoots have come forth and its boughs have sprouted, the end of the world will come. And I, Peter, asked him, 'Explain to me concerning the fig tree and how we should perceive it. Fig trees sprout every year. We don't understand the parable.' And the Master answered, 'Don't you understand that the fig tree is the House of Israel? Just as a man planted a fig tree in his garden and it brought forth no fruit for many years. He said to the gardner, "Uproot the tree that our land may not be unfruitful for us." And the gardner said to God, "We your servants wish to clear it of weeds, dig around it, and water it. And then if it does not bear fruit, we will immediately remove its roots from the garden and plant another in its place." Have you not grasped that the fig tree is the House of Israel? Truly I say to you, when its boughs have sprouted at the end, then shall the deceiving Christs come, and awaken hope saying, "I am the Christ, who am now come into the world." And when they see the wickedness of their deeds they shall turn away after them and deny him to whom our fathers gave praise, the first Christ whom they crucified and thereby sinned exceedingly. But this deciever is not the Christ. And when they reject him, he will kill with the sword and there shall be many martyrs. Then shall the boughs of the fig tree, House of Israel, sprout, and there shall be many martyrs by his hand." (Apocalypse of Peter, 2)
The parable is preserved intact (in the shaded text) but it differs considerably from the Lukan version: (1) No mention of the owner coming to look for fruit but finding none, (2) Part of what the owner says in the Lukan version is part of the narration in the Petrine version, (3) The gardener replies not to the owner but to God, (4) The Lukan version refers to placing manure around the tree, while the Petrine version refers to the clearing of weeds and watering of the tree, (5) The Lukan version refers to cutting down the tree, while the Petrine version refers to the removal of its roots and the planting of another in its place. These extensive divergences suggest that the Petrine form is an independent version of the parable. More importantly, it is presented as an end-times prophecy about the coming of false Christs -- most likely a reference to the Simon bar-Kokhba revolt in A.D. 132 and the utter political devastation of Judea as a Jewish state. The interpretation of the fig tree as the House of Israel is similar to Luke's application to the parable as part of Jesus' denouncement of Jerusalem and those who do not listen to him. Both build on the traditional idea from the OT Prophets of divine judgment as making barren the fig trees of the land; in the Apocalypse of Peter, Israel has been barren for some time. The reference to the "branches" and "leaves" result from a separate Jesus saying: "From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that the summer is near" (Mark 13:28; cf. Matthew 24:32; Luke 21:29). The author has creatively interwoven both fig-themed sayings, the Matthean saying about the end of the world and the Lukan parable about the unworthiness of the "House of Israel," and produced a prophecy that expects the regeneration of the fig tree (Israel) as a Sign of the end times. This preserves part of the original point of the parable: that there is still opportunity for repentence.
The apocalyptic regeneration theme of the Apocalypse of Peter, in turn, may have also been influenced by another lost source which is quoted as "Scripture" in 1 Clement, and again in 2 Clement:
"Let this Scripture be far from us where he says, 'Wretched are the double-minded, those who doubt in their soul and say, "We heard the things even in the days of our fathers, and look, we have grown old, and none of these things have happened to us." You fools, compare yourselves to a tree, or take a vine: first it sheds its leaves, then a shoot comes, then a leaf, then a flower, and after these a sour grape, and then a full ripe bunch.' Notice that in a brief time the fruit of the tree reaches maturity." (1 Clement 23:3-4)
"For the prophetic word says: 'Wretched are the double-minded, those who doubt in their heart and say, "We heard all these things even in the days of our fathers, and though we have waited day after day we have seen none of them." Fools! Compare yourselves to a tree, or take a vine: first it sheds its leaves, then a shoot comes, and after these a sour grape, and then a full ripe bunch. So also my people who have had turmoil and tribulation, but afterward they will receive good things.' So, my brothers, let us not be double-minded, but patiently endure in hope, that we may receive the reward." (2 Clement 11:2-5)
Lightfoot believes the quoted passage derives from the lost Book of Eldad and Modad which influenced also the Shepherd of Hermas. Though the parable elaborates the maturing of the vine rather than the fig, the passage resembles the Apocalypse of Peter by linking anxiety about the delay in the Parousia with a new growth through suffering in persecution.
Finally, the Markan and Matthean miracle story possibly spawned another miracle story in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas:
"But the son of Annas the scribe was standing there with Joseph; and he took a branch of a willow and with it dispersed the water which Jesus had gathered together. When Jesus saw what he had done he was enraged and said to him: 'You insolent, godless dunderhead, what harm did the pools and the water do to you? See, now you also shall wither like a tree and shall bear neither leaves nor root nor fruit.' And immediately that lad withered up completely; and Jesus departed and went into Joseph's house." (Infancy Thomas 3:1-3)
Like the parable and the other miracle stories, reference is made to a tree that bears no fruit. The text departs from that of the Lukan-Petrine parable by the utterance of a curse and referring to the "withering" of the tree -- something peculiar to the Mark-Matthew miracle story. The resemblance appears to be shared between the Matthean and Markan versions of the story. The "withering" occurs immediately, just as in Matthew 21:19. There is also mention of "roots," which is mentioned in Mark 11:20 (and in the Petrine version as well) but not in Matthew. The reference to the tree not bearing leaves, on the other hand, recalls the tree shedding its leaves in the Clementine citations from a lost prophecy. There may also possibly be additional influence from Jonah 4. In the miracle story, Jesus asks the son of Annas: "What harm did the pools of water do to you?" This recalls God's question to Jonah: "Are you right to be angry about the castor-oil plant?" (Jonah 4:9) It also recalls Jesus' irrational anger at the fig tree in the earlier miracle stories.
The miracle stories, prophecies, and parables about the fig tree thus constitute another interesting example of fluidity in the gospel tradition.