From this moment, even the barren fig tree has an intercessor in the good gardener who is ready to work on it and fertilize it, just to see if it will bear fruit.
That is an interesting insight I had not heard before that the extra year is the period wherein Jesus tries to nurture the fig tree to bring forth good fruit.
Throughout the bible there is an interesting use of three types of trees to describe the people of God or Israel: the fig tree, the vine, and the olive tree. God seems to use these three as ways to express His approval or disapproval of His people, and to demonstrate who is a part of His Covenant and who is not. Jesus says I am the vine. St. Paul says that unbelieving Jews are cut off the olive tree, and believing gentiles are grafted in. And Jesus curses a fig tree that does not bring forth fruit. The tree/plant metaphor seem to express the relationship between Israel and the Church, and Jew and Gentile.
This is also interesting as it relates to Joathem's parable about the trees who wanted to anoint a king over them in Judges chapter 9. First they ask the olive tree, but it says it must provide fatness or oil. Then they ask the fig tree, and it says it must provide sweetness. They ask the vine and it says it must provide the wine. In each case the trees imply that they cannot be king because they have other duties according to their nature. Finally they ask the bramble to be king. The parable is a condemnation of the election of Abimelech as king.
There is something very important in these metaphors but I have not discovered the truth of it yet, other than that the olive, the vine, and the fig represent different aspects of the covenant between God and His chosen people.
Thorns or the bramble also play an important metaphorical role. They seem to have a clear connection with sin, the consequences of it, a curse, and/or God's judgement. Thorns first appear after the fall of Adam as a consequence of it. Jesus says seeds sown among thorns may be choked, implying thorns are the enemy of God's people. God's use of the burning thorn bush to speak to Moses and Jesus' use of a crown of thorns, however perhaps shows that God can use even the lowliest of plants or people in His plan of Redemption. Perhaps St. Paul is a perfect example of a thorn bush that God turns into a fig tree that bears immense fruit. He was an enemy of God's people, and became their greatest evangelist.
Metropolitan Hilarion makes a point regularly regarding many parables of Jesus, that Jesus would often use examples from situations and creation with which the people to whom He was speaking would be familiar. Perhaps this is the case throughout the Bible, and not merely in the parables.
Another thought: the initial command given to Adam concerned a tree, a command Adam failed to obey. It was a tree from which, at least according to some understandings, man was to eventually be allowed to eat the fruit - but only when he matured.
God could just as easily commanded Adam to not leave the boundaries of the garden, or any number of other commands, as the first step on his road to maturity. But it was a tree. Further, other than Adam and Eve and the two different trees, all else in creation is named generically: the beasts, the fish, etc. (at least to my memory).
I don't know what to do with this. Just some thoughts that come to mind based on your comment.
Yes the tree is foundational to our conception of salvation for sure. It was Adam's disobedience regarding the tree of knowledge that Christ redeemed on His own tree, the cross, with his obedience to His Father's will.
As always, Johnathan Pageau has some interesting things to say about the trees in the Garden.
That is an interesting insight I had not heard before that the extra year is the period wherein Jesus tries to nurture the fig tree to bring forth good fruit.
Throughout the bible there is an interesting use of three types of trees to describe the people of God or Israel: the fig tree, the vine, and the olive tree. God seems to use these three as ways to express His approval or disapproval of His people, and to demonstrate who is a part of His Covenant and who is not. Jesus says I am the vine. St. Paul says that unbelieving Jews are cut off the olive tree, and believing gentiles are grafted in. And Jesus curses a fig tree that does not bring forth fruit. The tree/plant metaphor seem to express the relationship between Israel and the Church, and Jew and Gentile.
This is also interesting as it relates to Joathem's parable about the trees who wanted to anoint a king over them in Judges chapter 9. First they ask the olive tree, but it says it must provide fatness or oil. Then they ask the fig tree, and it says it must provide sweetness. They ask the vine and it says it must provide the wine. In each case the trees imply that they cannot be king because they have other duties according to their nature. Finally they ask the bramble to be king. The parable is a condemnation of the election of Abimelech as king.
There is something very important in these metaphors but I have not discovered the truth of it yet, other than that the olive, the vine, and the fig represent different aspects of the covenant between God and His chosen people.
Thorns or the bramble also play an important metaphorical role. They seem to have a clear connection with sin, the consequences of it, a curse, and/or God's judgement. Thorns first appear after the fall of Adam as a consequence of it. Jesus says seeds sown among thorns may be choked, implying thorns are the enemy of God's people. God's use of the burning thorn bush to speak to Moses and Jesus' use of a crown of thorns, however perhaps shows that God can use even the lowliest of plants or people in His plan of Redemption. Perhaps St. Paul is a perfect example of a thorn bush that God turns into a fig tree that bears immense fruit. He was an enemy of God's people, and became their greatest evangelist.
Metropolitan Hilarion makes a point regularly regarding many parables of Jesus, that Jesus would often use examples from situations and creation with which the people to whom He was speaking would be familiar. Perhaps this is the case throughout the Bible, and not merely in the parables.
Another thought: the initial command given to Adam concerned a tree, a command Adam failed to obey. It was a tree from which, at least according to some understandings, man was to eventually be allowed to eat the fruit - but only when he matured.
God could just as easily commanded Adam to not leave the boundaries of the garden, or any number of other commands, as the first step on his road to maturity. But it was a tree. Further, other than Adam and Eve and the two different trees, all else in creation is named generically: the beasts, the fish, etc. (at least to my memory).
I don't know what to do with this. Just some thoughts that come to mind based on your comment.
Yes the tree is foundational to our conception of salvation for sure. It was Adam's disobedience regarding the tree of knowledge that Christ redeemed on His own tree, the cross, with his obedience to His Father's will.
As always, Johnathan Pageau has some interesting things to say about the trees in the Garden.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrfr2vUKyAM&t=1108s