Sermonstudio

Most of us remember from our nursery rhyme days a little old lady by the name of Mother Hubbard. The story went like this:

Old Mother Hubbard
Went to her cupboard
to get her poor dog a bone.
When she got there
the cupboard was bare
and her poor dog had none.

This is really a poem depicting the poverty that constantly plagues humanity. The poverty of bread -- the perennial problem of feeding the vast population of our world. We who live in supermarket America where we weekly push carts through crowded aisles surrounded by shelves loaded with abundance often forget that the majority of the people of the world go to bed hungry and wake up in the morning wondering where their next meal is coming from. Our only problem is what kind of bread to buy. Because of this it is easy to overlook the impact the multiplication of bread had on those poor Galileans who first witnessed this miracle.

The average man in the days of our Lord worked for a denarius a day and that was the amount needed to feed his family. Fail to work and you and your loved ones failed to eat that day. There were no unemployment benefits, no credit cards, no food stamps. It was a hand-to-mouth existence. If you did come by some extra food, there was no way to store it up for a rainy day, for there was no refrigerator or handy deep freeze in the kitchen. If the people had a theology, it was concerned, therefore, not so much with grace as with groceries. If God were good, it meant one thing -- he provided their daily bread.

This is undoubtedly one of the reasons why the Jewish faith was marked so consistently with meal images. Sacrifice was the offering up to God of scarce and, therefore, sacred food -- the roasted lamb and the freshly baked bread. Family worship was a table fellowship of a shared meal. Heaven was a banquet with the Messiah as the host.

The priest talked of ritual cleanliness, and the Pharisees argued the fine points of the Law, and the rabbi reminded the people of the great heritage of their race, but the common, ordinary people looked to God as the giver of groceries -- food -- daily bread. This was their understanding of religion and the level of their theology.

So when the people heard that Jesus was the Bread of Life, they knew at once that he was their kind of man. And when they heard the story about how he multiplied the bread and fed the multitude, he was their kind of Messiah and they wanted to hear that story over and over again.

This is why the feeding of the multitude was the most popular miracle in the whole New Testament. Every Gospel writer records it once and Matthew and Mark tell it twice. It was not the miracle of the story that made it attractive, but the simple fact that it concerned the most ordinary and yet most important thing in the daily lives of people -- bread.

Banking With God

Now as the word "bread" appealed to the hungry first-century Jews, the word "multiplied" appeals to the ambitious and security-minded among us today. In our financially-dominated culture, multiplication is a key concept of our economy and is translated "rate of interest" or "dividend." How much profit does an investment yield?

When we are children we first learn to add -- two plus two equals four. Then we learn to subtract and finally we advance to the stage of multiplication. At this stage we begin to learn what life is all about. We are no longer satisfied with getting things to add up; we want them to multiply. We are no longer satisfied with placing three apples on a table, taking away one and having two apples left. Now we figure out how to invest in an apple orchard and make a few apples produce an abundant harvest and enormous profits.

A person who hides his money in a tin can and buries it in the backyard is an eccentric old fool. Now we invest our money in a government-guaranteed bank where it will draw the maximum interest and multiply. This means success and security. So it is in all areas of life. We want our personal possessions to multiply -- not just to add up, but to multiply.

So when we read this miracle of the feeding of the multitude it sounds good. Rely on the Lord and the power of God will multiply the loaves and the fishes of our lives. In the long run, God and God alone pays the highest rate of interest on the investments of our time, our talents, and of life itself. So invest in him and success and security will be ours. But is this the message of the miracle? Let us see.

The Popular Jesus

Ronald Wallace1 makes much of the fact that this miracle occurs at the heights of Jesus' popularity. Expectations were running high. The crowds thronged about Jesus wanting to hear about the Kingdom of God and all the good things which were to come. They wanted their sick healed and their broken spirits lifted. The crowds always make demands of their popular heroes. And when the long, hard day came to an end, they looked to Jesus to be fed.

Wallace believes the practical issue here is, could Jesus deal with the demands and problems raised by his own sheer popularity? It is obvious that the disciples could not. They were embarrassed and helpless and said, "Send them away."

Wallace then adds that popularity often embarrasses and frightens the church. When faced with the vast responsibilities of dealing with the whole community, today's distressed disciples want to cry out, "Send them away." We cannot meet all the demands made upon the church. "Charity begins at home," we think. It is impossible for us to feed the world and support missions and evangelism in every dark corner of the earth. But, Wallace points out, we must remember the thrust of this miracle of the feeding assures us that when Christ is in our midst, "The church is always adequate for the emergency or crisis in the affairs of his people."2

A Tired Jesus

The popularity of Jesus did, however, take a great deal of his energy. He was every inch a man and he got tired just as we do. When our story opens he is seeking a place to rest. He was not only physically tired; he was mentally exhausted. He had just heard of the death of his cousin, John the Baptizer. It was a great personal shock and he undoubtedly saw, even in this moment of popularity, the shadow of the cross falling across his path. He sensed in a special way that John's death foreshadowed his own.

Mark points out that the seventy had just reported back -- mission accomplished. The time seemed right for a much-needed vacation for them all. So he got into a boat with the disciples and headed for "a lonely place apart."

Then a touch of pathetic humor enters the story. When Jesus and his disciples arrived at their vacation spot, they discovered the crowd had circled the lake on foot, had arrived ahead of them, and were waiting eagerly for a full day's activity of teaching and healing. It would be like a weary pastor taking a day off to go to the beach with his family only to discover the young people of his church had decided to hold a beach picnic at the very same spot he had chosen to relax.

Here in our story we see a miracle almost as great as the multiplication of the bread. Tired, exhausted, tense over the thoughts of his coming death, he was not annoyed at the demanding crowd, but had compassion on them and actually welcomed the opportunity of teaching the people and healing their sick. As the day wore on and our Lord was wearing out, the setting sun indicated the meeting should come to an end. Now our Lord was faced with the task of feeding the people. They had received the bread of his words; now they needed bread for their physical hunger. It was a big task, for they were a big crowd.

Many

The number 5,000, or 4,000 according to one account, should not be taken as a mathematical count. Such precise head-counting is not typical of the Hebrew mind. They were not concerned with statistics. Rather, it should be taken as a dramatic expression meaning "many people were there." When they did count people, only men were counted, which would mean that if you did want an exact figure, it would have to be doubled or even tripled when considering the women and children who must have been present. Knowing the population of this area, a crowd of ten to fifteen thousand seems to be extremely unlikely. Therefore, the figure 5,000 or 4,000 should not be pushed. Simply accept what the Gospel writers meant by using these figures. They meant that many people were present.

When Jesus remarks, "Some of them have come a long way," this could be explained by the fact that this was the time of the Passover and many in the crowd may have been pilgrims on their way to the Passover Feast at Jerusalem. This could explain the unusual size of the crowd. But it also creates a problem, for pilgrims would have undoubtedly brought along sufficient food for their journey. The role of the little boy in the story might shed some light on this.

Philip, Andrew, And A Little Boy

Then Jesus suggests to the disciples that the people should be fed. John has Jesus turning to Philip and asking of him, "Where can we buy enough food to feed all these people?" Philip was a local boy; he had come from Bethsaida (John 1:44) so it was only natural that Jesus would turn to him, for if anyone knew the local situation Philip would. But Philip isn't much help; he is more concerned with the fact that they have little or no money. Among them all the disciples had only a denarius which was an average day's wage. And Philip points out that it would take at least six months' wages to feed this mob.

Then Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, speaks up, "There is a boy here who has five loaves of barley bread and two pickled salt-fish." When the other disciples heard Andrew report, they must have had a good laugh. Five loaves of barley bread and two salt-fish would not provide a picnic for a small family, let alone this huge crowd of hungry guests waiting to be fed. But Jesus did not laugh. He willingly took this lunch box belonging to a little boy and he made of it a catering service that satisfied the needs of a crowd.

Miracle Of Generosity

Some scholars have suggested that the actions of the boy shamed the crowd into sharing what they had been holding back for themselves. Many in the crowd, knowing that they would be away from home all day, had brought food for their own needs. But when they noticed that some brought nothing they were unwilling to produce their lunches for the simple reason that they did not wish to share it with others. Then there were the pilgrims in the crowd. They certainly had supplies along with them. But they had a trip ahead of them and they needed all the food they had for their journey.

The action of the little boy touched them and shamed them and they opened their picnic baskets and shared what they had with those around them. When the available resources were thus pooled, there was enough food for all. Barclay states, "If we take it that way, this would be a miracle where the influence of Jesus changed the crowd of selfish people to a crowd of people willing to share what they had."3

This, of course, dismisses the idea that this was a nature miracle where the loaves are multiplied and establishes it as an event of Christ's influential power over people. The conclusion would be that Christ brings out the best in people. This is true, but it hardly seems to do justice to the fact that this story was important enough for it to find a place in all four of the Gospels.

Actually this interpretation would seem to suggest that the main character in the story was the little boy rather than Christ, for it was what he did that changed the people and not the influential power of Christ. Knowing John and his theological interests, he certainly would not give room in his Gospel for a neat little moral story about a small boy who moved a crowd of people to be generous. This event had greater significance than such a simple interpretation would suggest.

Organization

After Jesus had the meager contribution of the lad's lunch, he turned to the disciples and gave them directions: "Make the people sit down." The people, the story recounts, sat down in sections. The word used here [Prasiai] is normally used for rows of vegetables in a garden. The picture is made quite clear by the writer. The vast number of people ceased to be a chaotic crowd and became an organized congregation.

This would suggest the importance of organization in the work of the Kingdom. If we are to accomplish anything positive in the process of establishing the Kingdom of God in the world, there is a need for an organization -- an administrative structure. Sometimes it is difficult to appreciate the vast machinery of the church. It seems contrary to the breath of the spirit that moves in the realm of faith. But when faith takes on the dimensions of the world, efficient organization becomes necessary if we are to work effectively in our contemporary culture. There is a vast difference between a picnic lunch for the family and feeding a multitude of people.

So the people were gathered into well-ordered groups and sat down on the "green grass." This detail would suggest that the feeding took place in the spring of the year.

Table Grace

Then Jesus took the bread and looked up to heaven. Sometimes it is assumed that Jesus blessed the bread, which suggests a sacramental aspect of the miracle. Now the sacrament may be implied here by the author, but it should be noted that Jesus does not bless the bread; rather, he gave thanks to God. More than likely he used the common prayer of Jewish family life:

Blessed art thou
O, Lord our God
King of the world
who has brought forth
bread from the earth.

There is a Jewish saying, "He who enjoys anything without thanksgiving is as though he robbed God." The fact that Jesus looked up to heaven and gave thanks could mean that the intention of what he did when he fed the multitude was simply to get them to see that all good things come from God. He wanted the people to see not bread multiplied, but God glorified. As he had taught the multitude with words, now he was teaching them with actions. As he fed them, he was teaching the people that beyond the bread was the God who provides all bread and provides it abundantly.

But the crowds that day, much like us today, were blinded by bread and abundance. That's all they saw, a miracle of multiplied bread. They left convinced that Jesus was a great Bread Messiah. They wanted to hear more from this fabulous fellow who was able to more than adequately supply and satisfy all their needs. This is just what they have been looking for -- a leader with great power potential. If anyone could solve their needs, this Jesus appeared to be the hottest prospect in all Judea.

They Left A Tip

Each account agrees that the crowd had as much as they could eat and when every person was full, Jesus said to his disciples, "Pick up the pieces left over; let us not waste a bit." The leftovers are frequently translated as "fragments." The Greek word [Peah] used here is suggestive. It refers to the fragments left over at a social banquet. It was the food for the servants who had attended the guests. It was very much like what today we call tips. Our word for tip comes from an old English custom where a small box was placed in eating establishments. Printed on the box were the letters T-I-P, which stood for, "To Insure Promptness." So the guests at this lakeside party politely left tips for the disciples -- twelve baskets full, one basket for each of the disciples.

Allegorical Interpretation

Many approaches have been made in an attempt to make this scriptural passage preachable in all times. The earliest interpretation was allegorical.

Ever since the time of Augustine the feeding of the 5,000 has been taken as a sign of Jesus' self-communication to the Jews, and the feeding of the 4,000 has been a sign to the Gentiles.

One basis for this is that Mark uses two different words for "basket" in his two accounts of the story. In the feeding of the 5,000, he uses kophinos, which describes the food basket the Jews carried to insure they would have ceremonially clean food when they were away from home. It was a jug-like basket, narrow at the top and wide at the bottom. In the feeding of the 4,000, he uses sphuris, which describes a type of basket used by the Gentiles. It was shaped like a hamper.

The allegorical approach has its adherents up to this day. Scholars like Alan Richardson, Vincent Taylor, and John Sunduall point out that the feeding of the 5,000 is located on the western side of the lake of Galilee in Jewish territory, whereas the feeding of the 4,000 is placed in Gentile territory on the eastern side of the lake.

Other facts are also given to support an allegorical approach. The number of people -- 5,000 -- and the five loaves of bread refer to the five books of the Jewish Torah. The twelve baskets which are taken up represent the twelve tribes of Israel and therefore suggest a Jewish audience. On the other hand, in the account of the 4,000 the number seven takes the place of the five and the twelve. The people receive seven loaves which would be understood as a reference to the seventy nations into which the Gentile world was traditionally divided.

Voobus, however, categorically denies the validity of the allegorical approach. He states, "The scrutiny of the facts shows that in the evangelist's mind no such allegory was involved when he wrote the narratives."4 And the balance of modern scholarship would tend to agree. Particularly is this true of those who view the feeding of the 4,000 and the 5,000 as a doublet, a twice-told story.

Most interpretations of this miracle can be placed in two categories: those that look backward and those that look forward.

The Backward-Looking Interpretation

Scholars find in this story a considerable resemblance to certain Old Testament narratives. Two of the Hebrews' great heroes, Elisha and Moses, had been providers of miraculous bread.

The Lord Of Plenty

When Elisha came to Gilgal (2 Kings 4:38) there was a great famine in the land and he took a few loaves of barley bread and ears of corn and fed the people.

When the children of God were in the wilderness they murmured to God and against Moses because they were dying of hunger. They even wished to be back in slavery where they could at least eat. Then God spoke to Moses, and manna from heaven was provided to fill their empty stomachs.

The feeding of the multitude, therefore, appears as an antitype pointing back to the feeding of Israel in the biblical past, with one great difference. Whereas Elisha and Moses provided food only to meet the needs, Jesus provided an abundance, more than enough. Therefore, a greater one than Elisha and Moses has come. Jesus is not only the prophet who provides bread; he is the Lord who provides plenty!

Forward-Looking Interpretations

Many scholars, when interpreting this miracle, look forward rather than backward and, it should be noted, a few look both ways. When they look forward, they see the event of the miracle pointing toward the future toward events which are to happen.

Some see in it a prefigurement of the Eucharist. The terminology -- "he took, he blessed, he brake, he gave" -- suggests the four-fold action of the Eucharist so firmly established by the great liturgical scholar, Gregory Dix.

Alan Richardson picks up on the phrase "having given thanks" and points out that this literally means "having made eucharist." Richardson continues, "The lakeside meal is a foreshadowing of the church's Eucharist and of the feast of the redeemed in the Kingdom of God."5 A. M. Hunter goes so far as to say that this event is "the Galilean Lord's Supper."

Voobus finds great difficulty with this interpretation. He sees no mention of forgiveness in the account and he points out, "The Eucharist does not mean just free admission for everyone, but that personal repentance is as necessary as belief that Jesus is the Christ." Neither repentance nor belief in Christ is mentioned in the account and, therefore, the early church could not have seen in this event a connection to their Eucharist.

It is also true that there is no evidence in the story that the group fed was a community of the faithful. The Eucharist at the time this event was recorded was a closed cultic act. It was limited strictly to baptized believers. A public picnic could hardly symbolize such a carefully guaranteed experience.

However, supporting the Eucharistic theory are the hard facts of archaeology. In the Catacombs and in much Christian art of the early centuries, the symbol of the loaves and the fishes is commonly accepted as referring to the Eucharist. For example, in the Catacomb of Calixtus in the sacrament chapel, a fish is shown with a basket of bread resting upon his back. In the funeral meal chamber in the Catacomb of Priscilla, there are seven baskets of bread placed in front of the communion table. There can be little doubt that this is an allusion to John 6.6

The most acceptable approach to this interpretation comes from Van der Loos. He states:

Establishing a connection between the miraculous feeding and the sacrament of Holy Communion doubtless has great significance from the theological point of view, provided that it is borne clearly in mind that the connection is not present in an immediate, historical sense. The text merely says that the physical hunger of the people was the issue ... As in the healings, it is obvious in the feeding that the saving love of Jesus Christ relates to man in his totality.7

What Van der Loos is saying here is that Jesus Christ is the Bread of Life and provides for the total needs of people. In the past God fed his people manna in the wilderness. That day by the side of a lake God in Christ fed the people bread to fulfill their hunger. At the table of Holy Communion God feeds us with the words of forgiveness and the assurance that we are one with him. In the future we shall all rejoice at the table of the Lord when we are privileged to partake of the great Messianic Banquet. The one common thread which runs throughout is Christ, the Bread of Life, "he who provides for all our needs."

Eschatology

As we have pointed out, some scholars who look forward when interpreting this miracle take an eschatological view of the feeding of the multitude. It is seen as a pledge and a foretaste of the celestial banquet in God's eternal Kingdom.

Even though Albert Schweitzer cannot accept this story of the feeding as a miracle, he does believe that the event actually happened. He writes, "All of this is historical but not the final remark that they were all filled. Jesus caused the food which he and his disciples had with them to be distributed among the people, so that everyone received a piece." Jesus is the coming Messiah and therefore he performs a sacramental act which is the antitype of the great Messianic Feast of the future. Schweitzer makes it quite clear that he is not talking about our current Eucharist. He goes on to say, "The feeding was more than a love feast, a communal meal. It was, from Jesus' point of view, a sacrament of salvation."8 This event was the anticipative epiphany of the Messiah, a foretaste of the future Messianic meal at the end of time.

Two Kinds Of Bread

When a survey is made of the many sermons preached on this text, it is obvious that the generosity of the boy that moved a selfish crowd to share what they had is a popular interpretation of this miracle. The idea that Jesus is concerned for the total person is also a frequently chosen theme. Luther, for example, points out that our Lord provides "the soul with the Word of God and the body with bread."

Theodore Parker Ferris9 has a sermon where he deals with two kinds of bread. There is the ordinary bread, the kind we eat. This is the bread we put on our tables and it includes the meat and potatoes, vegetables and sweets. This is the bread we live on.

Then there is another kind of bread. We don't eat it; we experience it, see it, feel it, think it, dream it, and imagine it. We devour it with the mysterious equipment of our being. It takes existence and makes of it a life worth living. This is the bread we live by. For example, when children go to school they take their lunch boxes filled with peanut butter sandwiches and an apple, a bottle of milk. This is the food they live on.

But they also need the love and affection of their parents, the interest of their teachers, the attention and the acceptance of their friends. They need the joy of play, the excitement of new ideas, the thrill of adventure, and even sometimes they need the experience of a good fight. This is the bread they live by.

Now our Lord knows we need both kinds of bread and he is concerned that they be provided for us in abundance. As the Bread of Life he feeds the total person. His message to us in this miracle is: "I have come that you might have life" -- both kinds of bread -- "and have it more abundantly."

Spotlight On The Disciples

In all six accounts, the disciples play a decisive role. They do not play the lead; Christ does. As in every miracle story, he is the greatest miracle of all. But the disciples play an important role in the story. It is they who bring the situation to the attention of Jesus. They survey the crowd to see how much food there is. They also get the people to sit down in organized groups so they can be fed. They distribute the bread and gather up the fragments that are left over.

It is true that if the feast on the grass that day would have been left completely to the disciples it would never have come off. Their solution was to send the people away and let them find something to eat for themselves in the nearby farms and villages. But once Jesus took over, the disciples became willing helpers.

The disciples actively participated in the feeding miracle. They were not only among those fed, but they helped others to be fed. They willingly submitted to kitchen work in the Kingdom of God and that says a great deal about their loyalty to their master and Lord.

This also says something directly to us as modern day disciples of the Lord. So often when we hear this miracle we tend to identify ourselves with the ones who were fed. But this is the wrong end of the miracle for us. Rather than at the receiving end, we, as part of the body of Christ, are on the performing end of this miracle.

As we pointed out above, God is concerned for the total needs of people. When we pray, "Give us this day our daily bread," what we mean is, "Please give us everything we need today to live." This means that this miracle should lead us to see the spiritual dimension of the common bread which is farmed and milled, baked, sliced and packaged, delivered and made possible by human sweat and toil. This bread is holy. And the need for bread to feed the hungry of our world is no longer insignificant or secondary. Meeting the needs of people is not an auxiliary function of the church considered only after man's so-called "soul" has been saved. It is, rather, a vital part of the total act of redeeming people.

As we face the feeding of the multitude, we are not just asked to believe that a certain miracle happened 2,000 years ago, but we are called to become involved in a miracle-sized job today. It is the job of feeding the multitude of hungry people in the world now -- not just those hungry for food, but for love, forgiveness, peace, and hope -- but people who are hungry for a purpose for their lives, companionship in their lonely rooms, hungry for education and beauty. It is God's will that all be fed and fed abundantly, and we are placed on the performing end of this miracle-sized task.

This does not mean we are not to be recipients of God's good work. We are! God gives and we receive far more than we deserve. As a part of all humanity, we are on the receiving end. But as people of faith, disciples of the Bread of Life, the Body of Christ in this world, we are called out of a receiving world to serve the world. We are called to be disciples who carry trays -- distribute the gifts of God's grace to others.

This does not imply the trite theology, "God has no hands but our hands," as if God is limited and his gifts are conditional, depending upon the achievement of human effort. No! The Kingdom of God is God at work in the world bringing to pass what he wills. And this he can accomplish with or without us. But the glorious good news of it all is that God has invited us to become involved with him, to become participants in his continual redemptive action whereby he brings all things to his desired end.

On my way home from class I passed the house of one of our married students. He was in the process of raking leaves in his backyard. As I passed I saw him coming around the house carrying a big bundle of leaves to put them in the street in front of his house where they might be picked up by the city. As he rounded the corner of the house, behind him came his three-year-old son holding, in his tight little fist, three or four leaves. His expression indicated the importance of his task in his own mind. He was helping his father.

The importance of this little boy's labor in the total task of transferring leaves from the back to the front of the house was insignificant. But for his personal growth and maturity that little labor was extremely vital. He had the pleasure of being part of the process. He was helping his father.

So we are to carry trays, not for God, or because we are significantly bringing in the Kingdom of God, but for our own sake and for the sake of the many hungry people who will benefit because of our involvement in God's redemptive work. Our calling to carry trays is a privilege of catching a vision of God's will for his world and an opportunity to participate in God's work of feeding the hunger of his children.

Conclusion

We began the study of this miracle with the idea that when we invest our time and talents and life itself in God they will multiply and pay great dividends. Nothing we have learned in our study of this text would deny this fact. However, an important aspect has been added. We are to see ourselves in the light of this miracle not just on the receiving end, but on the giving end.

When we hear this miracle story, we should not stand with our mouths open and our hands extended, waiting to be fed. Rather, God says to us, "I am the Bread of Life. You have been fed and you will be fed, but now I want you to take these trays and help me serve others. As I came as a servant to this world, so I send you forth as the father has sent me -- as servants." Take your trays; the evening is coming on and there is a hungry crowd gathering, waiting to be fed their daily bread. God is the good grocer and we are to be his willing servant-clerks.

____________

1. Ronald S. Wallace, The Gospel Miracles (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1960), p. 88.

2. Ibid., p. 93

3. William Barclay, And He Had Compassion (Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1967), p. 149.

4. Arthur Voobus, The Gospels in Study and Preaching (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966), p. 214.

5. Alan Richardson, The Gospel According to John Torch Commentaries, (London: SCM Press Ltd., 1952), p. 99.

6. F. Van der Meer, Atlas of the Early Christian World (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd., 1958), p. 42.

7. H. Van der Loos, The Miracles of Jesus (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1968), p. 635.

8. Ibid., p. 628.

9. Theodore Parker Ferris, "The Bread of Life," a sermon preached in Trinity Church, Boston, The Seventh Sunday after Trinity, 1965.