Parable of the Barren Fig Tree

A man planted a fig tree in his garden and came again and again to see if there was any fruit on it, but he was always disappointed. Finally, he said to his gardener, ‘I’ve waited three years, and there hasn’t been a single fig! Cut it down. It’s just taking up space in the garden.’

The gardener answered, ‘Sir, give it one more chance. Leave it another year, and I’ll give it special attention and plenty of fertilizer. If we get figs next year, fine. If not, then you can cut it down.’ ~~ Luke 13:6-9

My question is, what is the moral of the story? Does it pertain to Israel and Jesus’s ministry of three years? It seems like there should be more to the story. Thoughts?

Good question. For Mid Acts dispensationalists, we use this to form a doctrine that there was a one year extension period where the Gospel of the Kingdom continued to be preached exclusively to the Jews after Jesus's resurrection.

Jesus earthly ministry was 3 years. When Jesus was on the cross, he asked his father to forgive them for this act, because they know not what they do, the Father agreed to Jesus request. That one year expired roughly around the time Stephen was stoned.

This doctrine has several important implications that may make Christians uneasy:

1. The Great Commission was only meant for Jews to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom to other Jews, it was never meant for Gentiles who believed.
2. The Body of Christ could not have started in Acts 2, since Gentiles were not part of the Kingdom program. It only started with the saving of Paul after Stephen was stoned.
3. For that one year extension, the Law of Moses continue to be binding on Jews even after the resurrection of Jesus.

A man planted a fig tree in his garden and came again and again to see if there was any fruit on it, but he was always disappointed. Finally, he said to his gardener, ‘I’ve waited three years, and there hasn’t been a single fig! Cut it down. It’s just taking up space in the garden.’

The gardener answered, ‘Sir, give it one more chance. Leave it another year, and I’ll give it special attention and plenty of fertilizer. If we get figs next year, fine. If not, then you can cut it down.’ ~~ Luke 13:6-9

My question is, what is the moral of the story? Does it pertain to Israel and Jesus’s ministry of three years? It seems like there should be more to the story. Thoughts?

That one year expired roughly around the time Stephen was stoned.

This doctrine has several important implications that may make Christians uneasy:

1. The Great Commission was only meant for Jews to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom to other Jews, it was never meant for Gentiles who believed.
2. The Body of Christ could not have started in Acts 2, since Gentiles were not part of the Kingdom program. It only started with the saving of Paul after Stephen was stoned.
3. For that one year extension, the Law of Moses continue to be binding on Jews even after the resurrection of Jesus.

This is bad doctrine.

1. Go read the Great Commission again and pay close attention to the words 'all nations'.

2. The Body of Christ began on the day Jesus was baptized.

3. The Law of Moses was no longer binding on anyone the moment Christ died on the cross and the temple veil was rent.

Have you not realized that Peter paid so much attention to "all nations" until the Holy Spirit had to show him a vision three times before he was willing to go to Cornelius?

And he even paid so much attention that he had to remind him that it was unlawful for Jews to associate with a Gentile.

I mean, if he understood "all nations", and he understood your point 3, like you claim you do, it will contradict how he reacted to Cornelius.

Yes, but just because Peter appeared to have it "laid out for him" how does that negate what was said?

Have you not realized that Peter paid so much attention to "all nations" until the Holy Spirit had to show him a vision three times before he was willing to go to Cornelius? (Acts 11:1-12)

And he even paid so much attention that he had to remind him that it was unlawful for Jews to associate with a Gentile. (Acts 10:28)

I mean, if he understood "all nations", and he understood your point 3, like you claim you do, it will contradict how he reacted to Cornelius.

I believe you are misinterpreting the passages of scripture you have referenced.

This is bad doctrine.

1. Go read the Great Commission again and pay close attention to the words 'all nations'.

2. The Body of Christ began on the day Jesus was baptized.

3. The Law of Moses was no longer binding on anyone the moment Christ died on the cross and the temple veil was rent.

Seems to be the case.....He alludes to this MANY times in his ministry which was to the los sheep of the house of Israel...

a. His disciples were sent to the cities of Israel

b. He sought Jerusalem to be gathered under his "wings" like a hen gathers chicks

c. He sent John the Baptist (straight as they come) and Jesus came eating and drinking...either way they would not dance

etc.......Even though there was a transition period between Jews and Gentiles being grafted back together as one, the ministry of Jesus and the apostles (other than Paul who was specifically appointed to the Gentiles) was directed at Israel.....

The Body of Christ began on the day Jesus was baptized.

Amen 🙏😎

Is not believing in the d,b,r for sins the requirement to be a part of the body of Christ, the Church? Paul says yes.

Is not believing in the d,b,r for sins the requirement to be a part of the body of Christ, the Church? Paul says yes.

Good question. For Mid Acts dispensationalists, we use this to form a doctrine that there was a one year extension period where the Gospel of the Kingdom continued to be preached exclusively to the Jews after Jesus's resurrection.

Jesus earthly ministry was 3 years. When Jesus was on the cross, he asked his father to forgive them for this act, because they know not what they do, the Father agreed to Jesus request. That one year expired roughly around the time Stephen was stoned.

This doctrine has several important implications that may make Christians uneasy:

1. The Great Commission was only meant for Jews to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom to other Jews, it was never meant for Gentiles who believed.
2. The Body of Christ could not have started in Acts 2, since Gentiles were not part of the Kingdom program. It only started with the saving of Paul after Stephen was stoned.
3. For that one year extension, the Law of Moses continue to be binding on Jews even after the resurrection of Jesus.

And he even paid so much attention that he had to remind him that it was unlawful for Jews to associate with a Gentile. (Acts 10:28)

unlawful according to who though? jewish customs yes. but i dont see it in the bible old testament anywhere. im happy to be proven wrong tho

Those people did not appear until the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came down and enterd into the Apostles.. So for me that was the start of the Body of Christ..