Daily Writing

Monday, 13 July 2026

And when the disciples saw it, they marveled, saying, “How did the fig tree wither away so soon?” Matthew 21:20

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And having seen, the disciples, they wondered, saying, ‘How, straightaway, it desiccated, the fig tree?’” (CG)

In the previous verse, Jesus cursed the fig tree, telling it that no fruit would grow on it again. Matthew recorded that the fig desiccated straightaway. As noted, Mark’s gospel gives more detailed information on the event. Unfortunately, the Pulpit Commentary says, “St. Mark’s more accurate account.”

There is a world of difference between a “more detailed account” and a “more accurate account.” There is nothing inaccurate about Matthew’s record. The word translated as “straightaway” means that it took place forthwith. For example, in Acts 16:33 it says, “And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately [parachréma] he and all his family were baptized.”

The event happened straightaway, but it wasn’t like they were standing there and were suddenly baptized. It was the next event in their lives that took place. This is just what was the case in the life of the fig. It went from being alive and vibrant with leaves to being desiccated and dead. Understanding there is nothing inaccurate about Matthew’s words, he next records, “And having seen, the disciples, they wondered.”

In Mark 11:21, it says, “And Peter, remembering, said to Him, ‘Rabbi, look! The fig tree which You cursed has withered away.’” Of this, Barnes says, “Peter said this, Mark 11:21 Matthew means only to say that this was said to him; Mark tells us which one of them said it.”

Barnes equates Matthew’s words to Peter’s exclamation. That is incorrect. Peter noticed it and made his exclamation, but all of the disciples, once they noticed the tree, would have wondered at the matter, just as Matthew records.

Again, there is no contradiction, just more detailed information. Once this was noticed by all of them, they were “saying, ‘How, straightaway, it desiccated, the fig tree?’”

Even if someone put poison around a tree, it may die immediately, but it would take time for it to desiccate. In the case of this fig, it died and desiccated overnight. By the morning, as they passed it again, it was completely desiccated.

This is what happened to the Law of Moses and the effectiveness of the temple to bring restoration between God and men. Jesus’ passion began in the morning. By the afternoon, He had died on the cross. At that time, Matthew records –

“Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split.” Matthew 27:51

Jesus was tried, sentenced, and crucified. From there, the next thing to take place, meaning straightaway, was that the law was ended. Free, full, and forever access to God was granted, and the temporary and cumbersome connection to God that came through the Law of Moses was ended. The metaphor of the fig tree was realized in its fullness just a few days after Jesus gave it.

Life application: As you can see, commentaries are tools for us to learn information, but they are written down by fallible humans. No one is without errors in thinking. All of us are subject to biases, presuppositions, and cognitive dissonance.

When reading commentaries on the Bible, be careful to sift through them, asking questions as you go. Questions like, “How did they come to this conclusion?”, “Why did they say that?”, “Why did they say, ‘more accurate?’”, etc., are important questions to ask when we read something that doesn’t sound right.

Such questions will cause us to slow down and think through what we might otherwise have taken for granted. Once we do that, we form a brain squiggle that acknowledges that their commentary is correct. From that point on, it becomes more difficult to overwrite that bad information.

So don’t assimilate thoughts without thinking them through. You will benefit in your study by going slowly, carefully, and methodically through whatever you are reading. God’s word is important. We should not make unfounded assumptions, nor assimilate others’ unfounded assumptions concerning it.

Lord God, may our time in Your word be methodical, precise, and carefully considered at all times. It is far too precious not to spend it wanting to know Your intent for us. It is a great, wonderful, and precious word that tells us of our Lord and Savior, Jesus. Amen.

Sunday, 12 July 2026

And seeing a fig tree by the road, He came to it and found nothing on it but leaves, and said to it, “Let no fruit grow on you ever again.” Immediately the fig tree withered away. Matthew 21:19

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And having seen ‘fig tree, one’ upon the road, He came upon it, and nothing, He found in it, if not leaves only. And He says to it, ‘Not more from you fruit it should be, to the age.’ And it desiccated straightaway, the fig tree.” (CG)

In the previous verse, Jesus returned to the city early. As He went, He was hungry. Matthew continues with, “And having seen ‘fig tree, one’ upon the road.”

A new word is seen, suké, fig tree. It is derived from sukon, a fig. In the Garden of Eden, this is the third tree mentioned by name. The first was the tree of life. The next was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The third is implicitly mentioned in the fig leaves referred to in Genesis 3:7. If there are fig leaves, then there is a fig tree to put forth the leaves. Of this fig tree, “He came upon it, and nothing, He found in it, if not leaves only.”

Another new word is seen, phullon, a sprout, thus a leaf. The tree had sprouted leaves. Thus, it was a show of liveliness and health. However, that is all there was. No fruit was evident on it. Mark adds the words “the ‘for season, not it was, figs.’”

The earliest types of figs will appear before the spring leaves unfurl, around the Passover. At this time, they are unripe early figs known as taksh. That serves as an early indicator of the expected harvest. The first ripe figs are generally around May or June, with the main harvest being August to September.

Jesus went to the tree because it said in the previous verse that He was hungry. Even if He knew that the first figs would not be ready, He could at least expect to see fruit on the tree, expecting there to be some if it had leaves. This is human nature. We may be hungry for something and just curiously go to the tree to see what it is doing, even if we know that the tree is not yet ready with ripe fruit.

In the case of this fig, because it had leaves, it would be expected to have fruit (as noted, the fruit will appear before the leaves). With no figs on it, this was an unproductive fruit tree – flashy with leaves but lacking any hope for a harvest. As such, Matthew next says, “And He says to it, ‘Not more from you fruit it should be, to the age.’”

Another new word is seen, méketi, no more. It is from the negative particle mé, not, never, etc., and eti, yet, more, still, etc. Jesus’ words mean that the fig tree, which has failed to bear fruit, will continue to do so “to the age,” meaning henceforth. There will never again be a time when this fig tree bears fruit. With that stated by Him, it next says, “And it desiccated straightaway, the fig tree.”

And yet, another new word is seen, parachréma, instantly or immediately. Mark’s gospel further explains what happened. Jesus spoke the words to the tree. After that, Jesus went to Jerusalem and turned over the money tables, etc., and then He went out of the city. At that time, it says, “Now in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots.”

In other words, the same condensed nature of Matthew’s gospel that was seen in the previous verses is seen again here. Thus, the word “straightaway” means “within 24 hours.” There is no contradiction, just more detail concerning the matter.

As has been explained in previous commentaries, the fig is a symbol of a connection to God or its lack thereof. In the Garden of Eden, after the fall took place, it said, “Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.”

There was a showy presentation of fig leaves, but there was no fruit. The connection to God had been severed. The fig that Jesus has cursed is a metaphor of where He was going, meaning to the temple in Jerusalem. It was a place that was showy and seemingly alive, but it was dead, having never brought a single place to the life it promised –

“And you will guard My enactments and My verdicts, which he will do them, the man, and he will live in them. I, Yehovah.” Leviticus 18:5 (CG)

The temple, which is the place where the Law of Moses is centralized for the people of Israel, never bore fruit to life eternal. Therefore, in cursing the tree, a metaphor for the officiating of the Law of Moses, He took away its right to bear life. Rather, it bore death, and it would continue to bear death, including the death of Jesus.

Only with the introduction of the New Covenant would the fruit of life and a restored connection to God be realized. The Law of Moses had run its course as an attempt to restore life. Its time had come to an end. One can clearly see that those who now attempt to obtain life through the law are performing a self-condemning act.

The temple that will be rebuilt for law observance will be the Antichrist’s temple. It is wholly opposed to what God in Christ has done. People should mourn over what lies ahead, not excitedly rejoice in it.

Life application: As noted in the commentary on verse 17, there are quite a few possibilities for the meaning of Bethany. Now that the living metaphor has been explained, we can guess at the likely meaning of the name. It would be House of Figs, based on the Hebrew təenah.

It would thus be the “House of the connection to God.” Jesus was there, went to the temple, on the way there, He saw the fig tree, the expected symbol of a connection to God. However, it had no fruit, just as the connection to God was lacking in the Law of Moses and the temple in which the rites of the law were officiated.

Hence, Jesus cursed the fig as a metaphor of the ending of the law. Henceforth (to the age), the temple and the law would never again be acceptable to God as an expected bearer of fruit. For fourteen hundred and fifty years, it had failed. Something new was coming, something glorious.

Stick with the New Covenant. In pursuing the law, you will only find death and continued separation from God.

Lord God, may we be responsible Christians who trust solely in the merits of Jesus Christ our Lord for our interactions with You. May we never assume that we can merit Your favor apart from Him. To Your glory, we pray. Amen.

Saturday, 11 July 2026

Now in the morning, as He returned to the city, He was hungry. Matthew 21:18

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“Daybreak, also, returning to the city, He hungered.” (CG)

In the previous verse, it said that Jesus went out of the city to Bethany, where He overnighted there. It next says, “Daybreak.”

There is a difference in texts here. Some use the adverb prói, translated as early. Others use the noun próia, the earliest part of the day, meaning the time around daybreak. At this early time, it next says, “also, returning to the city.”

As it was the time of the Passover, Jesus knew that every hour was precious. Therefore, He set out early to head back to Jerusalem. Along the way, His actions will form a living parable. That begins to be seen with the next words, “He hungered.”

This highlights His human nature. He was bound to the same rules of physical operations as anyone else. It is natural to be hungry after a night of sleeping, conversing, or whatever went on throughout the night. His physical needs, however, are something seen elsewhere. Matthew’s purpose for including this will be seen as the account continues to unfold.

Life application: Understanding Jesus’ nature, an overall doctrine known as Christology, is important. Slight variations in how Jesus is perceived can lead to great theological error. One of the heresies concerning His nature is known as Docetism. This teaches that Jesus only appeared to be human.

The word is derived from the Greek word dokein, “to seem.” This heresy makes the claim that Jesus’ physical body was an illusion or phantom, thus denying His true incarnation, suffering, and death.

The reason for this stems from the Docetist belief that matter is inherently evil or corrupt. Because of this, they felt that the divine Son of God could not have taken on real human flesh. The heresy is similar to Gnosticism, a view that the spiritual realm is good but the material world is evil.

This heresy was strongly opposed by right-thinking members of the early church, defending the truth that Jesus was fully human in a tangible, physical body. In denying Jesus’ true humanity, the heresy of Docetism would undermine core Christian doctrines, such as the Incarnation and the substitutionary atonement provided by Jesus.

Orthodox theology adamantly avows that Jesus was truly human. It was necessarily so for Him to die for human sins. At the same time, He must also be truly divine for Him to save humanity. To have been only human, He would have inherited Adam’s sin through a human father. Being born of Mary and of God, no sin traveled from His Father.

Jesus Christ is the God/Man. Without this, man is left without hope in a corrupt and fallen world. Even though God proclaimed the material creation to be good in Genesis 1, sin has caused a breach in its goodness that can only be overcome through the incarnation.

Hold fast to the truth of God in Christ. Subtle heresies can easily pull a person away from what is sound and appropriate concerning Jesus’ nature.

Lord God, thank You that Christ Jesus our Lord shared in our humanity, thus enabling us to be restored through His perfect substitutionary death. We exalt You, O God, for what You have done to bring us back to Yourself. Amen.

Friday, 10 July 2026

Then He left them and went out of the city to Bethany, and He lodged there. Matthew 21:17

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And having left them, He proceeded out of the city to Bethany, and He overnighted there.” (CG)

In the previous verse, Jesus cited Scripture to the chief priests and scribes, noting that out of the mouths of babes and nursing infants the Lord had perfected praise. Matthew next records, “And having left them, He proceeded out of the city to Bethany.”

Of this, Ellicott says, “And went out of the city into Bethany.—St. Mark, as already noticed, places the incident that follows on the morning that followed the triumphal entry, and before the cleansing. We have to choose, there being an obvious error of arrangement in one or other of the narratives, between the two, and the probability seems on the whole in favour of the more precise and more vivid record of St. Mark.”

It is an appalling sentiment. There is no need to “choose” which we will believe. Nor is there an “obvious error of arrangement.” If Matthew is presenting categorical information, he is perfectly entitled to skip a day’s affairs without mentioning the greater detail of Mark’s narrative.

Mark notes that Jesus went to Bethany one night. The next night, he says, “When evening had come, He went out of the city” (Mark 11:18). That is immediately followed with, “Now in the morning.” Does Ellicott think Jesus stood outside the gates of the city all night and then walked back in?

Rather, He went somewhere. Logically, He went back to Bethany, as Matthew says in this verse being analyzed. Matthew skipping over a day does not mean we have to choose which gospel is correct. Nor does it mean there is an obvious error. As for Matthew’s words, he introduces the location Béthania, Bethany.

Depending on the root word from Hebrew, it can have one of several meanings: House of Answer, Business, Affliction, Singing, Date, Figs, etc. The root ‘ana (with an ayin) alone fits several of these possibilities. The root ‘ana (with an aleph) fits others. Without first understanding whatever typology is being conveyed, being dogmatic about one name over the other may mean you are barking up the wrong tree.

As for going to Bethany, it is a short distance from Jerusalem, being situated on the eastern slopes of the Mount of Olives. It is said to be about two miles (or three kilometers) from the city. Understanding this, it next says, “and He overnighted there.”

A new word is seen here, aulizomai. It is found only here and in Luke 21:37. It is from aulé, a yard (as in open to the wind). Thus, the word literally signifies passing the night in the open air. If there were twelve of them plus Jesus (and any other disciples), even if they went to someone’s house, it is unlikely all of them would sleep in a single house. Thus, it very well could mean that they made a bonfire in the backyard and slept there. There is no reason not to take this word in its literal sense.

Life application: Once again, we see a scholar, in this case a well-known and reputable scholar, calling into question the reliability of the word. However, if you take the two accounts and simply drop a day out of Matthew’s because he is narrowing the focus of his attention on particular details, the accounts in Matthew and Mark coincide.

After the people’s cries of Hosanna as Jesus entered the area, Mark 11:11 says, “And Jesus went into Jerusalem and into the temple. So when He had looked around at all things, as the hour was already late, He went out to Bethany with the twelve.”

From there, He went back to Jerusalem the next day. Matthew, writing categorically, left off that note, not finding a single sentence about it being late necessary. As for the timing of the cursing of the fig tree, which doesn’t seem to match, understanding that Matthew is still writing categorically, that issue is also resolved.

Take time to look at the accounts and see where the focus is. Then think about why there is a difference. Instead of dismissing things, contemplate. If you don’t come to a resolution, it still doesn’t mean there is an error. It means that you have not yet determined why there are variations in the account.

As has been explained before, we have three synoptic gospels. If all three followed exactly the same details, critics would say the texts were corrupt because they were just copied one from another. If they don’t match in every detail, critics then say the texts are corrupt because they provide seemingly contradictory information.

There is no winning with people who intentionally do not want to believe the accounts are reconcilable. Trust that God is as in control of His word as He is of the workings of the universe. In the end, even if we don’t understand everything in the Bible at this time, we will see how it all lines up someday. Until then, keep reading, researching, contemplating, and considering.

Lord God, the evidence that the Bible is Your word is overwhelming. In the places where we don’t understand what is going on, help us to keep our faith that what is presented is there for a purpose. It is a great and precious word. Thank You for it because it tells us about Jesus, our Lord and Savior. Amen.

Thursday, 9 July 2026

and said to Him, “Do You hear what these are saying?”
And Jesus said to them, “Yes. Have you never read,
‘Out of the mouth of babes and nursing infants
You have perfected praise’?” Matthew 21:16

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And they said to Him, ‘You hear what these, they say?’ The ‘also Jesus’, He says to them, ‘Yes. Never, you read that, “From ‘mouth, infants and sucklings’ You prepared praise.”’?” (CG).

In the previous verse, the chief priests and the scribes were jealous of Jesus and how the youths praised Him. They were outraged, “And they said to Him, ‘You hear what these, they say?’”

These jealous leaders thought they were supposed to be the highlight of people’s visit to the temple complex. Like someone visiting the White House would want to see the president, the chief priests and scribes would have thought they were the point of the masses’ desire to be there.

But like going to the White House, there is a reason beyond the person sitting at the President’s desk that the White House exists. The temple was erected to honor the Lord. With the children crying out, “Hosanna to the Son of David,” they were honoring the Lord who had sent His Messiah, someone of greater importance than the temporary leaders of Israel.

Scripture gave them the authority to minister, but each was only an incidental part of the ongoing line of priests. On

If Jesus were the fulfillment of those types and prophecies, He deserved their adoration. This outraged the self-aggrandizing leaders at the temple. As such, Matthew next records, “The ‘also Jesus’, He says to them, ‘Yes. Never, you read…’”

Once again, as He commonly did, Jesus answered their question with another question. He affirms that He, in fact, heard their cries of exaltation, but His question is then directed to their own Scriptures. If their Scriptures approve of what is occurring, the leaders could not reasonably find fault in it. And so He continues, saying, “that, ‘From ‘mouth, infants and sucklings’ You prepared praise.’?”

A new word is seen, thélazó, to suckle. It is derived from thélé, a nipple. Thus, it signifies a suckling infant. The word translated as “prepared” has been seen in Matthew 4:21, where it referred to the mending of nets. It signifies to complete thoroughly. It is as if God had fully prepared His praise through the praises of these little ones. The quote itself is from the Greek translation of Psalm 8:2 –

“Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou perfected praise” (Brenton Septuagint).

While the leaders of the temple complex were moaning about the prospects of Jesus being the Messiah, it was the little ones in the compound who had recognized what the leaders had intentionally shut their eyes to. As Jesus cited Scripture to back up their conduct, they would be silenced for the time being, unable to argue against what Scripture said would be the case.

The words of Jesus are a note concerning the incarnation. The Psalm notes that it is the Lord, Yehovah, who is the focus of attention by the babes and nursing infants. However, Jesus’ words imply that the praise given to Him fulfills the words of that Psalm. As such, it signifies that He is the Lord incarnate.

Life application: In once Christian nations, those who do not accept the authority of Scripture have taken over many governments. In doing so, there is no longer an established scriptural basis that is recognizable for right and proper conduct.

In other words, Christians will appeal to Scripture to justify their moral codes. But if those in government reject Scripture’s authority, there is an apples-against-oranges attitude. The philosophies of the warring bodies have nothing in common to agree on.

But more, those opposed to the Christian message hypocritically misuse the contents of Scripture to shut up or confound the masses who have no idea what “context” their hypocritical citations belong in. The reason their citations are hypocritical is that they wholly reject the authority of Scripture, and yet they cite Scripture to form illicit doctrines that have nothing to do with Scripture.

What Christians must be prepared to do when challenged about such things is to be bold enough to ask what right those citing Scripture have to cite it. In other words, “Oh, you are citing Scripture. Therefore, you must accept the authority of Scripture. Is this so?”

The trap is now set for them. If they acknowledge the authority of Scripture (which they normally won’t), and if the Christian properly cites Scripture that condemns the actions of these detestable people, then they no longer have an argument in their misciting of Scripture. Care and planning must be made to fend off the unholy attacks by such people. If handled properly, their hypocritical position will be evident, just as when Jesus challenged the leader of His day.

Lord God, may we carefully defend against those who mishandle Your word, considering how to rightly challenge them and then demonstrating where their hypocrisy lies. Give us wisdom in this so that we can stand against their ungodly attacks. Amen.