Miraculous Feeding Question
I know there has been significant discussion as to why there are two miraculous feedings in the synoptic gospels. Why 5000 men and then 4000 shortly thereafter. What's with the significance of five loaves and two fish and seven loaves and a few little fish? Then there's the leftovers, and the apparent significance of them (Mk. 8:19ff). And I'm sure these are all important questions and fruitful discussions. But I'm just amazed at the disciples. Even granting that there may have been weeks or months between the two feedings, how could the disciples have forgotten? Why do they seem just as troubled with the same setting: a great, hungry multitude in the wilderness in need of bread. Was there something about the first miracle that made it seem less miraculous? If I were a disciple, I would have been looking for more chances to get stranded in the wilderness and hungry. Maybe instead of bread, I would have brought four crab cakes and two bowls of coconut shrimp soup. Or whatever sounded good. I just don't get how the disciples seem at such a loss for how a great multitude could possibly be fed. Is that the point? Mark wants us to think the disciples were dull? Or is something more going on here?
Monday, August 14, 2006
Posted by Toby at 8:51 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
I'm sure there's a good sermon on this and you could say some very true things regarding the disciples, but dad has said that there are many good sermons he preached, true sermons, but sermons that had little to do with the text he started from. I feel like you could miss the text with that sort of question.
Do we have to say that there were two events? I understand this is done because otherwise the Bible would have "mistakes" but we know that the Bible does not give details to paint a "realistic" picture, but for theological reasons.
Take for example the Temptation of Christ. The order is different in the Matthew account than the Luke account. Does this mean that there are two Temptations? I doubt it. Rather than the Word giving us a journalistic witness, the Word is shaped for theological emphasis. Our questions, when dealing with the text, must be taken from the text. The Bible doesn't make a question of whether there were two feedings or one, or whether the disciples were dumb or ninnies. But there are some numbers that are raised and perhaps we miss the point if we insist that they're literal numbers. Perhaps Mark's emphasis is different than Matthew's.
Jimbo has some compelling stuff on those numbers, which I hardly profess to have any knowledge of, but I would feel better with more attention being given to those details rather than speculation that these are separate events and what could being going on, et cetera.
You're right; one might easily turn any phrase or incident into a wild goose chase. And it's no different here.
However, Mark has just recorded the feeding of the five thousand only two chapters ago (6:30-44). So Mark and his readers are fully aware that this is meant to be understood as a different event; I'm not just speculating. The clincher is that Jesus speaks of both of these feedings as two events (8:19-20). Jesus was puzzled by the disciples over the same question. He's done a very similar thing two times, why don't they understand? Of course, you're right, his assumption is that the number of leftovers should have also been significant. But it's still the same question at the core. Why didn't they remember or why didn't they understand?
Post a Comment