Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
The main argument for the second idea is that in the Hebrew bible the fig tree would allegedly symbolize Israel, what I would judge as wrong. There are only two verses in which good or early figs (and not the tree) symbolize good Isrealites.
In the Hebrew bible the fig tree is (together with the vine) simply a sign of the times. In the good times "every man is sitting under his vine and under his fig tree” and in the bad times “the fig tree should not blossom, nor fruit be on the vines”. I have counted 20 of 28 “fig tree”-passages in the Septuagint with this or a similar meaning.
Mark used the fig tree in Mark 13 also as a sign of the end times. Therefore I suspect that the fig tree in Mark 11 participate also in this image.
Two points:
first: thanks, for an interesting, and informative thread, very much welcomed. good job.
second: I wonder if you have considered, instead of "the Hebrew bible the fig tree would allegedly symbolize", perhaps, a review of ancient Greek texts devoted to study of the Fig tree, its fruit, its harvest, its role in society, and any apparently descriptive, mythological characterizations?
Here is an example of what I am getting at, regarding a statement ostensibly written by Xenophanes of Colophon (570-475 BCE):
http://www.iep.utm.edu/xenoph/
A better reading of Xenophanes’ skeptical statements is to see them not as an attack on the possibility of knowledge per se, but rather as a charge against arrogance and dogmatism, particularly with regard to matters that we cannot directly experience. The human realm of knowledge is limited by what can be observed. “If,” for example, “god had not made yellow honey [we] would think that figs were much sweeter.” (frag. 38)
I view Mark's text as a GREEK, not Hebrew story. Yes, there are certainly Jewish traditions, language inferences, and cultural insertions in the text. But, in my opinion, one not shared by most people surely, an interpretation of the text of Mark, ought to commence with comparison to Greek texts regarding Herakles, a mythical figure who serves, in my view, as the model for Jesus' fictional existence.
Ancient Greek culture was filled with anecdotes, hints, and overt textual elaboration regarding culture and harvest of figs. They were an important component in Greek civilization, just as were bees/honey, grapes/wine, olives/oil. Starting point in analyzing the Greek fairy tale, about Jesus, ought to be Greek, not Hebrew, mythological traditions, at least, until one can demonstrate a text more ancient than those we currently possess for the "original" Hebrew books of the Torah. As far as I am aware, we lack even agreement about whether or not, the Masoretic text (9th century CE) or the LXX (4th century CE), or DSS fragments, equate to the "original" reading.
Same could be argued, of course, for Xenophanes, I agree. We have only fragments of his thoughts. But, what about Aristotle, and many other Greek authors, whose works would have been known to Mark, and whose writings, including some regarding figs, still exist today? Starting with a goal of analyzing the underlying meaning of Mark's reference to fig trees, by reading one version or another of the Hebrew bible, without knowing the origins of that text, i.e. how that text had been derived from older Greek mythological concepts, seems to me, misdirection. Nothing wrong with including Hebrew texts in your analysis, but, in my opinion, if no one else's, Hebrew quotes should not form the
starting point for analysis of a Greek mythological tall tale.