Latest / Reformed Thinking / On the Feeding of the 5000 | D. A. Carson

Transcript

On the Feeding of the 5000 | D. A. Carson · Reformed Thinking

0:00
You know, usually when you look at a map there is this
0:03
expectation of objective clarity.
0:06
Right. Yeah, like geographical fact, it
0:08
is straightforward. Yeah, you see a solid blue line,
0:11
you know it is a river. Spot on.
0:13
Or a black dot with a star. And that is the capital city.
0:17
It is binary clean, broken down into simple coordinates.
0:22
And I mean, we like that, right? We find comfort in that
0:25
visibility. Oh, absolutely.
0:26
We want things categorized. Categorized and easy to
0:30
interpret on our own terms. But then you step into the world
0:33
of biblical interpretation, yes. Specifically looking at how
0:36
human beings react to divine revelation.
0:39
And suddenly you realize that map is being read by people who
0:42
just absolutely refuse to look at the compass.
0:46
That is a great way to put. It you have people holding the
0:48
correct map, but their internal compass is entirely broken,
0:51
right? In fact, in the Gospel of John,
0:53
Jesus encounters 2 distinct groups of people with broken
0:56
compasses. You have the religious elite who
0:58
want a rule book and then the political zealots who, well,
1:02
they want a mercenary. Yeah, they do.
1:04
Welcome to Reformed thinking. Today we are taking a deep dive
1:07
into the source material, specifically excerpts from
1:10
Doctor DA Carson's commentary on the Gospel of John, and we are
1:14
asking you, the listener, to consider how our human desires
1:17
constantly clash with God's sovereign plan.
1:21
So, setting the stage here, we are viewing the historical
1:25
events of John chapters 5 and 6 through a reformed theological
1:29
lens. Right, very much in line with
1:30
the Westminster Confession. Precisely.
1:32
And when you read the source text, two things become
1:35
glaringly obvious right out of the gate. 1st, the absolute
1:39
unyielding authority of Scripture, yes.
1:41
And 2nd, the total inability of humanity to grasp the true
1:45
mission of Christ without divine grace.
1:48
Which is a pretty heavy reality to face.
1:51
It is. The text highlights our radical
1:53
depravity. Yeah, left to our own devices,
1:55
we do not want a sovereign Lord. I mean, we want a cosmic vending
1:58
machine. Oh man, we want a king who does
2:01
our bidding. So true.
2:02
Before we jump in, let's just establish a ground rule for this
2:04
conversation. We are going to keep a relaxed,
2:07
methodical pace today. Right, we want to give these
2:09
ideas full space to lands. We won't be talking over one
2:11
another. Yeah, these concepts need room
2:13
to breathe. So let's look at the first group
2:16
with a broken compass. Jesus is in Jerusalem.
2:19
This is John chapter 5, and he is in this direct, escalating
2:24
confrontation with the religious leaders.
2:27
And the core accusation Jesus levels at them is just.
2:31
It is staggering to me. It really is a massive shift in
2:34
the dynamic. He tells them that Moses
2:36
himself, the very guy they based their entire religion around,
2:39
will be their accuser. I've always found that so
2:43
fascinating. It is quite the theological plot
2:45
twist for them. Right.
2:46
How does the guy who wrote the law become the prosecuting
2:49
attorney against the people who dedicate their entire lives to
2:51
memorizing it? Well, it happens because the
2:53
religious leaders view the law covenant as an end in itself.
2:58
OK, unpack that a bit. They see it as a way to achieve
3:01
salvation, and in the context of covenant theology, that is a
3:05
fatal error. They view the law as a final
3:09
destination rather than a witness pointing to Jesus
3:12
Christ. So they missed the point
3:13
entirely. They did, and to understand the
3:15
gravity of this, we really need to look at the Greek text of
3:18
verse 46. It begins with the word gar,
3:22
which translates to 4. Just a tiny little linking word.
3:26
Right. But Jesus says, For if you
3:27
believe Moses, you would believe me.
3:29
That little word connects everything.
3:31
They pinned their entire hope on Moses.
3:33
Their whole identity. Yeah, but Jesus is saying that
3:37
if they actually believe what Moses wrote, they would
3:40
recognize the Messiah standing right in front of them.
3:42
Wait, so Jesus is not just nitpicking their behavior here?
3:47
He is attacking their entire framework, isn't he?
3:50
Spot on he is. He is saying that any accusation
3:54
Moses brings against them will not be based on like their
3:57
failure to obey this or that specific command.
4:00
Right, it's not a behavioral checklist.
4:01
It is not about dropping the ball on one minor provision of
4:04
the covenant. The accusation is based on their
4:07
total failure to understand the law covenant at all.
4:10
And this ties directly into the Reformed view of the Law.
4:13
We understand that the Law is a mirror revealing our sin, and it
4:17
is a tutor leading us to Christ. It was never, ever designed to
4:22
be a ladder you climb to reach self righteousness.
4:25
Ever. If scrupulous adherence to the
4:27
Law brings people to hope for salvation in the Law itself,
4:31
then the Law itself and its human author, Moses, must stand
4:36
up in outraged accusation. Oh wow.
4:39
The very thing they thought was saving them is the thing that
4:42
condemns them, because they fundamentally misunderstood its
4:45
purpose. It is like, it is like staring
4:48
at a massive signpost on the side of the road, OK, a sign
4:50
that says City of Refuge 10 miles ahead, right?
4:53
And deciding to just set up camp right under the sign.
4:56
That is a great analogy. You sit there praising the wood
4:59
the sign is made of, polishing the paint, memorizing the
5:01
dimensions of the post while completely ignoring the actual
5:04
city it points to. Which is madness.
5:06
Total madness. And Jesus does not even quote a
5:09
specific chapter and verse from the Torah here, does he?
5:12
No, he doesn't. So is he indicting their entire
5:15
way of reading the Bible? Like their whole hermeneutic.
5:18
That is precisely what he is doing.
5:21
It is much more likely that Jesus is referring to a certain
5:24
way of reading the books of Moses than to one specific
5:28
passage. Although you know Deuteronomy
5:30
18.14 regarding a promised prophet could definitely be in
5:33
the background there. But the Jewish leaders failure
5:36
to grasp what Moses was writing about is described by Jesus as
5:41
literally not believing what he wrote In John's gospel.
5:45
Believing includes far more than simple intellectual ascent.
5:49
It requires right understanding and hearty obedience.
5:52
To reject Jesus is to prove you never actually believed Moses in
5:55
the first place. The writings of Moses and the
5:58
words of Jesus are so closely linked that they share similar
6:01
authority. That is a staggering claim to
6:03
make to a group of 1st century Pharisees.
6:05
That was incredibly provocative. And this leads right into the
6:08
rising opposition against Jesus, which will, you know, culminate
6:12
in his crucifixion. The irony is massive.
6:15
It is very dark irony. They will publicly justify
6:18
executing the author of life by appealing to the very law that
6:21
was written to reveal him. Yeah.
6:23
But before we leave Chapter 5 entirely, there's some
6:25
fascinating technical details regarding textual variants that
6:29
we should unpack from the source material.
6:31
Oh, let's hear them. Let's look at verses 31 and 32
6:34
where Jesus talks about another who testifies in his favor.
6:38
OK, historically a lot of scholars have noticed that the
6:41
Greek word used for another in verse 32 is alos alos.
6:46
Yes. In classical Greek, alos
6:49
frequently denoted 1 in addition to the ones mentioned, and
6:53
usually of the same sort. OK, I see where this is going.
6:56
And this is often contrasted with the word heteros, which
6:59
denoted one of two, sometimes with an implied contrast.
7:04
Right, so the classic argument goes, Jesus uses aloes to mean
7:07
another of the exact same divine substance.
7:10
Yes, placing himself on the same level as God the Father.
7:12
I mean, it sounds like a fantastic proof text for the
7:14
Trinity. It sounds great on paper, but we
7:16
have to issue a massive caution here.
7:19
Really. Why?
7:20
Well, this distinction between aloes in heteros was common in
7:23
classical Greek, sure, but it is actually quite rare in the New
7:27
Testament coin Greek. Well, interesting.
7:29
The word heteros only occurs one single time in the entirety of
7:33
the fourth Gospel. It's.
7:34
Just. Once, just once over in chapter
7:37
19, verse 37, and in that context it is completely
7:41
indistinguishable from the classical use of alos.
7:45
Oh wow, so the linguistic rule broke down over the centuries?
7:48
Yeah, like between classical Greek, what Plato wrote, and the
7:52
street level coin Greek spoken in the 1st century.
7:55
Precisely the language evolved. Furthermore, the use of allos
7:59
just a few verses later in John 5.43 where Jesus talks about
8:03
someone else coming in his own name, clearly cannot mean
8:06
another of the same sort. Right, because that would mean
8:09
another divine person coming in their own name, which breaks the
8:12
theology entirely. Spot on.
8:14
If we force that classical distinction there, the tech
8:17
stuff's making sense. So the conclusion drawn from the
8:19
commentary is that no Christological weight can rest
8:22
on this specific choice of pronoun.
8:24
You know, I really appreciate rigorous exegesis like that.
8:27
It is necessary. It protects us from making bad
8:29
arguments for good doctrines. Yes, that is a great way to
8:31
phrase it. We believe in the deity of
8:33
Christ absolutely. The rest of John's Gospel
8:36
screams it, but we do not need to twist the grammar of verse 32
8:40
to prove it. And we see something similar
8:42
with a textual variant in verse 39 in a few Old Latin and Old
8:46
Syriac manuscripts, and in something called Papyrus Egerton
8:50
2 there is a variant in the punctuation.
8:52
Punctuation can change everything.
8:54
It reads verse 39 as a statement rather than a command.
8:57
So it says you search the scriptures in which you think
9:00
you have eternal life. Interesting.
9:02
This is almost certainly secondary, a later alteration,
9:06
but either way the central point remains entirely secure.
9:10
The Scriptures testify to Jesus Christ.
9:12
I'm curious about the physical mechanics of these textual
9:14
variants. You have another one in verse
9:16
44, right? Yes, the King James Version, the
9:18
honor that cometh from God only. But the New International
9:22
Version translates it as the glory that comes from the only
9:25
God. Right?
9:26
And I read that some manuscripts omit the word God entirely,
9:29
reading the glory that comes from the only one.
9:32
How does a word like God just fall out of a manuscript?
9:34
It comes down to the grueling reality of how these texts were
9:37
preserved. The actual copying process.
9:40
Yes. Imagine a scribe sitting in a
9:42
dimly lit room copying a text by hand.
9:45
Hour after hour. Right.
9:47
Early unshell manuscripts were written in all capital letters
9:51
without any spaces between the words.
9:53
That sounds like a nightmare to read.
9:55
It was the phrase the only God in Greek.
9:58
Look like a solid block of repeating letters. 2Y mono 8th
10:04
UEI ascribes. I likely just skipped over the
10:07
similar repeating letters. They literally lost their place
10:10
on the page for a fraction of a second.
10:12
It is a tiny detail, but it shows the meticulous care taken
10:15
by modern textual critics in reconstructing the text.
10:20
Theological meaning is barely affected, but it underscores the
10:23
historical, tactile reality of the documents we are dealing
10:25
with. Yeah, these were copied by real
10:27
people in real historical settings.
10:29
That physical reality makes the text feel so much more alive.
10:33
It really does. So in Jerusalem you have the
10:35
religious elite using the Bible as a shield to hide from the
10:39
very Messiah it points to. But when Jesus leaves the
10:42
capital and heads out to the rural working class region of
10:45
Galilee in chapter 6, he runs into the exact opposite problem.
10:50
Completely different dynamic. They don't want a theological
10:52
debate down there, they want a political revolution.
10:54
Yes, they do. The narrative shifts to the Sea
10:57
of Galilee, which John also notes is called the Sea of
11:00
Tiberias. Right?
11:01
John chapter 6 begins with the phrase sometime after this and
11:06
suddenly Jesus is crossing to the far shore of the lake.
11:09
Let's talk about that timeline gap, because I know some
11:12
scholars get very uncomfortable with John's itinerary here.
11:16
Well, they certainly do. This is a crucial point for
11:19
understanding how we read the Gospels.
11:21
OK, because of this leap from Judea back to Galilee, some
11:25
scholars have argued that chapters 5 and 6 have somehow
11:28
been displaced. Displaced.
11:30
Yeah, they argue that Chapter 5 should actually be placed
11:33
between Chapter 6 and 7 to make the geographical movement
11:36
smoother on a map. Wait, so they want to literally
11:39
cut and paste the chapters of the Bible to make the travel
11:42
itinerary look cleaner? That is the actual proposal from
11:46
some circle. That is what.
11:47
But the commentary pushes back hard on this.
11:50
Rearranging the chapters offers only a marginal geographical
11:54
improvement anyway, right? You still have a massive leave
11:57
from the end of chapter 5 if placed later to the beginning of
12:00
Chapter 7. Plus, rearranging the text
12:04
destroys the narrative motivation for the comments made
12:07
by Jesus Brothers in Chapter 7. Oh, so it breaks the actual
12:10
story? It does, yeah.
12:12
It is difficult to understand how an ancient editor could be
12:15
sensitive to such fine literary subtleties, trying to keep an
12:20
impression of constant movement while simultaneously being such
12:23
a dimwit that he failed to perceive the geographical
12:26
problem the transposition allegedly introduced.
12:29
That is a brilliant defense of the text.
12:31
I love that. Lot.
12:31
It makes a lot. And John uses the Greek
12:34
expression meta tauta which translates to sometime after
12:37
this. It is purposely vague, right?
12:39
It established a sequence, but it does not demand a tweet.
12:42
Day by day log book. Correct.
12:43
John is writing theological history.
12:46
He's not keeping a daily planner.
12:48
And Speaking of geography, John gives us a parenthetical note
12:51
that the Sea of Galilee is also called the Sea of Tiberias.
12:55
Which is interesting. Why add that?
12:56
It is in a great historical marker.
12:59
In the Old Testament this body of water was called Kinnarith,
13:03
which means liar because of its harp like shape.
13:06
But around 8020, Herod Antipus founded a city on the western
13:11
shore and named it Tiberius in honor of the Roman Emperor
13:15
Tiberius Caesar. Sucking up to the boss.
13:17
Exactly that. Over the decades, the name of
13:20
the city transferred to the lake itself.
13:23
However, that name change likely did not become common in popular
13:27
parlance until much later in the 1st century.
13:30
Right around the time John was writing his gospel.
13:32
Precisely so. John includes the Roman name to
13:35
help his late 1st century audience who might be living far
13:38
away, know exactly where this is taking place.
13:40
So Jesus goes over to the east side of this lake, and verse 2
13:43
says a great crowd of people followed him, but they were not
13:46
following him because they wanted to obey his teachings.
13:49
The text says they followed him because they saw the miraculous
13:52
signs he had performed on the sick.
13:54
They are drawn to the spectacle. They want the benefits of the
13:57
miracle worker without the authority of the Lord, and this
14:01
connects to the setting John gives us in verse 4.
14:03
OK, what does he say? John notes, almost casually, the
14:09
Jewish Passover feast was near. Just a little calendar update.
14:14
But it is a massive theological key to the entire chapter.
14:17
Wait, John casually mentions the Passover is near?
14:20
I usually think of Passover as just a religious dinner back in
14:22
Jerusalem. Why does it matter that they are
14:25
out in a field in Galilee? Because of what Passover
14:27
represents, the Jewish Passover celebrated the exodus from
14:31
Egypt, right? The intrinsic central act of
14:34
that celebration was the slaughter of a lamb in each
14:36
household and the eating of that lamb.
14:38
OK. Throughout the 4th Gospel, John
14:40
portrays Jesus as the Lamb of God.
14:43
We saw it back in Chapter 1. Behold the Lamb of God.
14:45
Yes, the first Passover mentioned in chapter 2 is the
14:49
context for Jesus saying destroy this temple and I will raise it
14:52
again in three days pointing to his death.
14:54
Yeah, and the third Passover mentioned in Chapter 11 occurs
14:58
at the actual time of his death. So this intermediate Passover
15:01
right here in chapter 6 sits directly in the middle of
15:04
Jesus's ministry. Yes it does.
15:07
And the events that happened around this Passover,
15:09
specifically the feeding of the 5000, they precipitate the
15:13
massive bread of Life discourse later in the chapter.
15:15
Where he says some incredibly hard things.
15:18
Very hard things. Jesus will identify his own
15:21
flesh as the true bread giving for the life of the world.
15:26
The theological connections become so incredibly complex and
15:29
beautiful. The sacrifice of the Passover
15:32
lamb anticipates Jesus's death on the cross, right?
15:36
The Old Testament manna in the wilderness is superseded by the
15:39
real bread of life. The Exodus from Egypt
15:43
typologically sets forth the eternal life that delivers us
15:46
from the slavery of sin. The movement in this chapter
15:49
from the miracle to the discourse, from Moses to Jesus,
15:52
and from physical bread to his flesh, it just makes so much
15:55
more sense when you read it through the lens of the
15:57
Passover. It really opens up the text.
15:59
But there is also a huge cultural and political layer to
16:02
the Passover, isn't there? Oh, absolutely.
16:04
The Passover was not just a quiet, solemn religious
16:07
observance. Like a quiet Sunday service.
16:09
Not at all. It was a massive celebration,
16:11
the liberation of National Liberation.
16:13
The commentary makes a great comparison.
16:16
The Passover feast was the Palestinian Jews what the 4th of
16:20
July is to Americans, or maybe even better, what the
16:25
anniversary of the Battle of the Boeing is to Loyalist
16:28
Protestants in Northern Ireland. Oh wow, so it was a political
16:32
powder keg Completely. I am picturing thousands of
16:35
people gathered together remembering how God literally
16:38
crushed a foreign empire to set them free and they are currently
16:42
living under the boot of the Roman Empire.
16:44
The nationalistic zeal must have been off the charts.
16:47
It was fever pitch. You would have families telling
16:50
stories of the 10 plagues, looking at the Roman soldiers
16:53
walking through their towns and just waiting for God to drop the
16:56
hammer again. It was an atmosphere entirely
16:59
ripe for insurrection, and that fervor goes a long way in
17:02
explaining why this crowd tries to force Jesus to become their
17:05
king later in the chapter. Oh, that makes perfect sense
17:08
now. They're looking for a new Moses
17:09
to lead a new Exodus, this time against Rome.
17:12
Before we move to the actual feeding, how does John's account
17:16
of this event relate to the other Gospels?
17:19
Because if I'm not mistaken, this specific miracle, the
17:22
feeding of the 5000, is the only miracle during Jesus's ministry
17:26
that is recorded in all four gospels.
17:29
You are correct. It is in all four.
17:31
Some scholars argued John wrote his account completely
17:34
independently, without any knowledge of Matthew, Mark or
17:36
Luke. Just in a vacuum.
17:38
Right, but a closer look reveals that John likely knew of Mark's
17:42
account. He's not copying Mark slavishly,
17:44
of course, but he was intimately familiar with the details Mark
17:47
recorded. I love how John and Mark
17:49
actually provide clarifying details that help explain each
17:52
other's texts. Yes, they complement each other
17:54
beautifully. For example, John skips the
17:57
setup of Jesus teaching the crowd for hours and goes
18:00
straight to the problem of feeding them.
18:02
Right, because John's purpose in this chapter is to preserve the
18:05
initiative with Jesus. Right, the Sovereign Initiative.
18:08
Exactly. It demonstrates the organic
18:09
inspiration of Scripture. Right?
18:11
God did not mechanically dictate the exact same words to four
18:15
different men. Right, they aren't robots.
18:16
No, he used their distinct viewpoints, their personalities,
18:20
and their immediate theological aims to create a perfectly
18:24
unified divine revelation. OK, so knowing that this crowd
18:28
is a political powder keg energized by Passover zeal, how
18:32
does Jesus choose to interact with them in their physical
18:35
hunger? Let's look at the text.
18:37
We look at John chapter 6, verses 5 through 9.
18:40
Jesus looks up, sees the massive crowd approaching, and turns to
18:44
Philip with a question. He asks where shall we buy bread
18:47
for these people to eat? And John immediately adds A
18:51
clarifying note in verse 6 to protect the readers
18:54
understanding of Christ's omniscience.
18:56
Right, so we don't think Jesus is actually confused.
18:58
Right, John writes. He asked this only to test him,
19:02
for he already had in mind what he was going to do.
19:04
That is a crucial caveat. Let's examine the Greek word
19:07
used here for test, which is perazzo.
19:09
Perazzo And normally we hear that word and think of something
19:12
sinister, like a trap, right? Yes, often the evangelist use
19:15
perazzo in the bad sense of tempt, meaning to solicit
19:18
someone to do evil. Like Satan tempting Jesus in the
19:21
wilderness. Spot on.
19:24
But the word itself does not carry that inherently sinister
19:27
weight. In this context, it is entirely.
19:30
Appropriate. It's a different kind of test.
19:32
It is a sovereign testing of faith.
19:34
Jesus is not stumped. He is not surprised by the
19:37
logistical nightmare of feeding 20,000 people.
19:40
He's not sweating the budget. Not at all.
19:43
He already possesses his own sovereign plan.
19:47
He uses the problem as an opportunity to reveal the
19:50
condition of Phillips faith. And Phillips faith, well, it
19:53
relies heavily on his calculator.
19:55
It really does. Phillip looks at the crowd and
19:57
says it would take more than half a year's wages to buy
20:00
enough bread for each one to have a bite.
20:02
He specifies 200 denarii. Let's put that in perspective.
20:06
A denarius was a day's pay for a common laborer.
20:09
OK, so 200 denarii represents roughly 8 months wages.
20:12
That is a lot of cash to carry around.
20:14
Yes, and since a substantial proportion of workers wage in
20:18
the ancient world went into daily food, this sum was enough
20:21
to provide for a family for eight months or more.
20:23
But the crowd is so unimaginably large that even this massive sum
20:28
of money would not buy enough bread for everyone to have a
20:31
single crumb. Philip is stuck doing
20:34
marketplace math. Yes, he has an Excel spreadsheet
20:37
open in his mind. He is looking at the deficit in
20:40
the budget and he has completely forgotten that he is standing
20:44
next to the Creator of the universe.
20:46
Which is a profoundly the human reaction.
20:48
It is. We do this all the time when
20:50
faced with a crisis. Our analytical minds, our
20:53
obsession with logistics and natural resources, they
20:56
completely blind us to God's Providence.
20:58
We really do engineer God right out of our daily logistics.
21:01
It is a symptom of relying on our own strength, isn't it?
21:04
Absolutely. Philip evaluates the situation
21:07
entirely on the level of the natural world.
21:09
He sees the physical lack but fails to factor in the divine
21:13
presence. I'm curious, why does Jesus
21:16
single out Philip for this test? John doesn't just say Jesus
21:19
asked the disciples. He names Philip specifically.
21:22
That is a great detail from the text.
21:24
Back in chapter 1, John mentions that Philip is for the nearby
21:27
town of Bethsaida. Jesus asked him where to buy
21:29
food. Because Philip was the local, he
21:32
knew the area. He knew where the bakeries and
21:34
markets were. That makes perfect sense, and
21:37
critics often assume these specific names were just made-up
21:40
by a later author to make the story sound more realistic.
21:42
Right. Yes, adding details for quote UN
21:45
quote verisimilitude, but textual scholars push back hard
21:50
against that skepticism. Why is that?
21:52
Well, in the growth of Christian tradition, names are just as
21:56
frequently omitted by later writers as they are added.
21:59
Assuming John made-up the names is intellectually presumptuous.
22:02
Right, it assumes bad faith on the author's part.
22:05
Exactly. Rather, the specification of
22:08
such exact details, Philip Andrew Bethsaida, is much more
22:12
reasonably taken as solid evidence for the recollection of
22:14
a direct eyewitness. So Andrew chimes in, he brings a
22:17
boy forward, and John gives us the exact inventory of the
22:20
lunch. He does John chapter 6, verse 9.
22:23
Here is a boy with five small barley loaves and two small
22:27
fish. The Greek vocabulary here, it
22:29
gives us a vibe picture of the poverty of the situation.
22:32
OK, let's hear the Greek. The word translated boy is
22:35
Padarian. In ancient literature, this
22:38
could refer to a young man or even a young slave.
22:41
Interesting. Interestingly, in the Greek
22:43
translation of the Old Testament, the situagen Elisha's
22:47
servant is twice called a Pedarian in 2 Kings chapter 4.
22:51
Wait, 2 Kings 4? Yes, which is the very chapter
22:54
where Elisha assists with a miraculous feeding.
22:57
Oh wow. Some see an intentional
23:00
linguistic illusion there, pointing to Jesus as a prophet
23:03
greater than Elisha. That is a fantastic connection.
23:06
Let's paint a picture of this food too, because I always
23:08
imagined 5 nice fluffy loaves of bread and two big roasted
23:12
salmon. That is definitely not what
23:13
Andrew was holding. Only the 4th Gospel specifies
23:16
that these were barley loaves. What is the significance of
23:18
barley? The ancient Jewish philosopher
23:21
Philo noted that barley bread was the inexpensive bread of the
23:24
poorer classes. It was peasant food, often very
23:27
hard and dry. Like Hardtack?
23:29
Yeah, quite similar. Furthermore, the small fish
23:31
translates the Greek word absaria.
23:34
These were not large Hardy fish. They were likely small pickled
23:38
fish or dried sardines, meant to be eaten as a little side dish
23:42
or relish. Just to give flavor to the dried
23:44
barley cakes. Right, it was a pathetic little
23:46
pile of food. Andrew looks at these five cheap
23:49
hard biscuits and a couple of sardines, looks out at this
23:52
sprawling multitude covering the hillside and states the obvious.
23:57
But how far will they go among so many?
24:00
He introduces the food only to highlight the sheer
24:02
impossibility of the situation. Yeah, almost makes the situation
24:05
look worse. Andrew's point is that the meal
24:08
is ludicrously inadequate to the need and John deliberately
24:12
includes this detail to heighten the magnitude of the miracle
24:16
that is about to occur. It really sets the stage.
24:18
It sets the stage for the absolute sovereign provision of
24:21
Christ. So the sheer impossibility is
24:23
established. Phillips budget is blown.
24:25
Andrew scouting report is depressing and Jesus simply says
24:29
have the people sit down. Are in command.
24:31
We are looking at John 6 verses 10 through 13.
24:34
John notes there is plenty of grass in that place and the men
24:37
sat down about 5000 of them. Let's examine the wording John
24:41
uses here, because it is crucial.
24:42
OK, in Greek there is a word for people in general, anthropoi,
24:47
and a word specifically for adult males.
24:50
Yeah, Andres. Anthropoi and indracings.
24:52
Yes, Jesus commands the anthropoi, the people, to sit
24:56
down, but when John gives the count of 5000, he specifies it
25:01
was 5000. Andress men, ah.
25:03
Settle shift. The other gospels make this same
25:06
distinction, with Matthew explicitly stating 5000 men
25:10
besides women and children. So the total crowd size is
25:13
massive. The total number of people may
25:15
well have exceeded 20,000. Wow.
25:17
But there is a specific reason John highlights the number of
25:20
men given the political context of the Passover that we
25:23
discussed earlier. Right, the nationalistic zeal.
25:26
Yes, the intense nationalistic zeal against Rome, the
25:29
specification of 5000 men is a way of drawing the reader's
25:33
attention to a potential guerrilla force.
25:35
That is wild, I never thought of it like that.
25:37
You have 5000 military aged males gathered in the wilderness
25:41
fired up about the exodus just waiting for a commander.
25:43
Yes, it is a volatile, dangerous mob.
25:47
And Jesus orders this potential guerrilla army to sit down on
25:51
the green and. Grass, just sit down.
25:53
By the way, Mark's mentioned of the green grass in his gospel is
25:56
another proof of eyewitness testimony.
25:58
How so? It confirms the event happened
26:00
in March or April near the Passover, before the hot summer
26:03
sun scorches the landscape brown.
26:06
The details just keep lining up. So they are seated, and then
26:09
Jesus takes the loaves, gives thanks, and distributes to those
26:13
who are seated as much as they wanted.
26:15
He does the same with the fish. The phrase gave thanks is really
26:19
interesting to me. The text uses the word Eucharist
26:23
stasis, which sounds exactly like the Eucharist it does.
26:26
Does this mean Jesus is performing a Catholic Mass right
26:28
here in the field? No, we strongly reject that
26:31
interpretation based on the source text.
26:33
OK, explain why. The verb itself is entirely
26:35
insufficient evidence to suppose that John is being
26:38
anachronistic. We're trying to portray the
26:40
feeding as a Eucharistic celebration.
26:43
The word is perfectly appropriate in the standard
26:45
Jewish setting of the 1st century.
26:47
So it's just a normal prayer. It was used in many different
26:50
thanks situations. What would a standard Jewish
26:53
blessing have sounded like in that moment?
26:55
Like what did Jesus actually say?
26:57
If Jesus used the common form of Jewish Thanksgiving, he said
27:01
something very close to this. Blessed art thou, O Lord our
27:05
God, King of the universe, who bring his forth bread from the
27:08
earth. That is.
27:10
Beautiful. Notice the theology there.
27:12
Jesus blesses God, He thanks God.
27:16
He does not bless the physical food itself.
27:19
Right, He isn't turning the food into something else.
27:22
No, He is acknowledging the Creator's provision.
27:25
If John were actually trying to project a heavy Sacramento
27:28
Eucharistic symbolism into this text, he missed several golden
27:32
opportunities, didn't he? He certainly did.
27:34
He doesn't even mention the breaking of the bread, which
27:36
Mark does include. That seems like a glaring
27:38
omission if you were trying to write a liturgy.
27:41
Right. John's focus is entirely
27:43
different. John's focus is on the
27:45
lavishness of the supply. The people ate as much as they
27:49
wanted. As much as they wanted.
27:51
It far outstripped the tiny tidbit that Philips massive
27:54
budget of 200 denarii would have failed to supply.
27:57
This lavishness connects to the Old Testament promises.
28:01
This is the ample provision of the Lord fulfilling the prophecy
28:04
of Jeremiah 31.14, where God declares my people will be
28:09
filled with my bounty. And the theology of that is
28:12
beautiful. Just as the physical bread was
28:15
overwhelmingly abundant, the true bread from heaven, Jesus
28:19
Christ, who gives life to the world, infinitely outstrips the
28:22
manna in the desert. It really does.
28:24
The grace of God is not measured out in stingy rations.
28:27
It is a flood. The text says all were
28:30
satisfied. Everyone had enough to eat.
28:33
John portrays this as an objective historical miracle of
28:36
sovereign creation, right? It is not, as some skeptical
28:39
scholars have absurdly suggested, a moral lesson where
28:42
Jesus shamed a selfish crowd into sharing the secret lunches
28:45
they had hidden in their coats. I have heard that theory, it is
28:47
so ridiculous. That's the strips, the text of
28:49
its power. This is divine provision out of
28:50
nothing. And then even in the midst of
28:52
this overwhelming abundance, there is an incredible
28:55
orderliness to it all. Jesus says, gather the pieces
28:59
that are leftover. Let nothing be wasted, they
29:03
gather them and fill 12 baskets with the broken pieces of the
29:06
five barley loaves. Collecting leftovers was a
29:08
common Jewish custom, as noted in rabbinic sources.
29:12
OK, there is an ethical note of social responsibility here, an
29:16
injunction against wastefulness even when supply is infinite.
29:21
But the staggering reality is the volume.
29:24
Right, let's talk about the volume.
29:25
After 20,000 people eat to absolute satisfaction, there's
29:29
more food leftover than there was at the very beginning.
29:31
It breaks all the laws of physics.
29:33
Let's look at the baskets themselves, because the text
29:36
says 12 baskets. That is a very specific number.
29:38
It is almost certainly significant.
29:40
The Lord has enough to supply the needs of the 12 tribes of
29:43
Israel. So it's a symbolic number.
29:45
Yes, the position is complete and perfect for God's covenant
29:49
people, but there is a fascinating linguistic and
29:52
historical detail here when we compare this event to the
29:56
feeding of the 4000 recorded in Matthew and Mark.
29:59
Right, because there are two miraculous feedings in the
30:02
synoptic gospels. Yes, and for the time of
30:05
Hillary, of Poitier and the 4th century, theologians have
30:09
noticed a pattern. What's the pattern?
30:11
The feeding of the 5000 represents the Lord's provision
30:14
for the Jews, and the feeding of the 4000 represents His
30:18
provision for the Gentiles, and the linguistic evidence supports
30:22
this. All four Gospel accounts of the
30:24
feeding of the 5000 use the Greek word kofinos for basket.
30:29
Kofinos. Yes, which has peculiarly Jewish
30:32
associations. There were small stout Wicker
30:35
baskets, but the accounts of the feeding of the 4000 use the word
30:39
spirus for basket, which does not have those strict Jewish
30:43
ties. It was a larger, flexible
30:45
basket, the kind they used to lower Paul out of a window in
30:48
Damascus. That is the kind of detail that
30:50
proves the historical reliability of these texts.
30:52
The vocabulary changes based on the specific cultural context of
30:56
the miracle. It is remarkably consistent.
30:58
So a massive, politically volatile crowd, potentially A
31:01
guerrilla army, has just been miraculously fed by a man who
31:05
can conjure bread out of thin air.
31:07
How do they react? Well, we look at verses 14 and
31:09
15 for that. OK, The crowd sees the
31:12
miraculous sign. Some early manuscripts say
31:15
miraculous signs plural, but the overwhelming majority of
31:19
witnesses point to the singular sign linking their reaction
31:24
directly to the specific miracle of the bread that just occurred.
31:27
The crowd sees what Jesus did and they come to a theological
31:30
conclusion. They say surely this is the
31:33
prophet who is to come into the world.
31:35
They're connecting the dots back to Deuteronomy 18 verses 15
31:38
through 19 where God promises to raise up a prophet like Moses.
31:43
Some 1st century Jews definitely interpreted that passage
31:46
messianically, and the specific nature of the miracle providing
31:49
bread in the wilderness immediately triggered thoughts
31:52
of Moses in the manna. They made the connection fast.
31:55
There is an ancient Jewish writing from Rabbi Isaac written
31:58
toward the end of the 3rd century, which argued as the
32:01
former Redeemer caused mana to descend, so will the latter
32:05
Redeemer cause mana to descend. So the idea that the Messiah
32:08
would repeat the mana miracle was actively circulating in
32:11
Jewish thought. Yes, it was part of their
32:13
expectation. The crowd sees the bread and
32:15
they say he is the one. They got the theological title.
32:20
Right. They got the title right,
32:21
absolutely, but their application of that title was
32:25
entirely wrong. How so?
32:27
John is not arguing that the people are wrong in their
32:30
judgement that Jesus is the prophet.
32:32
They are absolutely wrong in their estimate of what that
32:35
significance means. OK, their attention is entirely
32:38
fleshly. It is focused on food, as Jesus
32:42
points out in verse 26. Right, you are looking for me
32:44
because you ate the loaves and had your fill.
32:46
Spot on. And it is focused on and
32:49
political victory as we see in verse 15.
32:51
They have 0 interest in the divine self disclosure mediated
32:56
through the Incarnate Sun. Not at all.
32:58
They do not want the bread of life.
32:59
They just want bread. They have no realistic
33:01
assessment of their own spiritual deadness.
33:03
That is a chilling reality about human nature, and it goes right
33:07
back to the doctrine of total depravity that we talked about
33:09
in Reformed theology. It illustrates it perfectly.
33:12
They recognized his might, but they did not want to submit to
33:16
his Kingdom. They wanted to draft him into
33:18
theirs. They wanted to harness his
33:20
sovereignty to serve their carnal goals.
33:22
If Moses led the people out of slavery to Egypt, they assumed
33:26
this second Moses would help them escape servitude to Rome.
33:29
Exactly. And verse 15 shows the climax of
33:32
this misunderstanding. What happened?
33:34
Jesus knows that they intend to come and make him king by force.
33:38
So he withdraws again to a mountain by himself.
33:41
Let's expand on the political dynamic here because it's so
33:44
critical. The Galileans were not directly
33:46
governed by a Roman prefect like the Judeans down South.
33:49
Where? Right.
33:49
Correct. They were ruled by Herod
33:51
Antipas, right? Herod Antipas was a tetrarch,
33:53
essentially a Roman puppet king. The crowd's desire to crown
33:56
Jesus doesn't necessarily mean they understood him to be the
33:59
royal Davidic Messiah. Oh, really?
34:01
The Qumran scrolls show that some Jewish sects expected
34:05
multiple figures, a prophet and a separate Messiah of David.
34:09
That is complex. The crowd doesn't have a
34:11
perfectly systematic theology. What they have is a desperate
34:15
desire for a powerful Liberator. I mean look at his resume from
34:19
their perspective. They see a guy who heals the
34:22
sick, meaning no casualties in battle, and who can feed an army
34:26
of 5000 from a peasant's lunch, meaning no supply chain issues.
34:30
He is the ultimate military asset.
34:32
A literal walking miracle for a general.
34:35
And if you won't take the throne voluntarily, they are willing to
34:38
foment a violent rebellion, crown him in the wilderness, and
34:42
force his hand against the authorities.
34:44
The background context for Mark's gospel is really
34:47
eliminating here. What does Mark add?
34:49
Mark points out that just prior to this feeding, Jesus had sent
34:53
the 12 disciples on a trainee mission through Galilee.
34:56
OK, the results were so spectacular that Herod Antipas
35:00
was terrified. Herod had recently beheaded John
35:03
the Baptist, and he started wondering if John had come back
35:06
from the dead to haunt him. So Herod is paranoid, the region
35:09
is buzzing with rumors of miracles, and Jesus has just fed
35:12
a massive crowd of military aged men who were fired up for
35:16
Passover. Yes, Jesus and his disciples had
35:18
actually crossed the lake to escape the pressing crowds and
35:22
perhaps to get out of Herod's immediate jurisdiction.
35:24
Trying to cool things down. But the crowd ran around the
35:27
North End of the lake and beat them there.
35:30
Mark 6.34 says Jesus had compassion on them because they
35:34
were like sheep without a shepherd.
35:36
We usually read that as a soft pastoral metaphor, like they
35:40
were a sad congregation without a friendly pastor to guide them.
35:43
But that is not what it meant in the ancient context.
35:45
What did it mean? Old Testament scholars note that
35:48
sheep without a shepherd is a specific military idiom found in
35:53
First Kings 22.17. Oh really?
35:56
Yes, it means an army without a general.
35:58
They were a leaderless militia, ready to fight but lacking
36:02
direction. That changes the entire tone of
36:04
the scene. He is looking at an unorganized
36:07
militia. Jesus knew that yielding to
36:09
their demands for a worldly king would divert them from the
36:12
spiritual salvation they actually needed, right?
36:15
Furthermore, leading a ragtag zealot army against the might of
36:19
the Roman Empire would result in a disastrous slaughter.
36:22
Absolute bloodbath. John doesn't bother to provide
36:25
all these political details because by the time he wrote his
36:27
gospel late in the in the 1st century, Jerusalem had already
36:30
fallen to the. Wrong.
36:31
Temple was gone. The political setting was vastly
36:33
different, but ironically, John is the one who preserves the
36:37
specific fact that they wanted to make him king by force.
36:41
It perfectly corroborates Mark's account of the political
36:43
tension. There is a quote from the late
36:46
Reformed theologian Edmund P Clowney that perfectly
36:49
summarizes substitutionary atonement and the true nature of
36:52
Christ's Kingdom in this moment. It is a phenomenal quote.
36:56
Clowney read that Jesus knew the way his Kingdom would triumph
37:00
would not be by beating the enemy in siege warfare, but by
37:04
dying and rising from the dead. Yes, he says, Jesus would go to
37:07
Jerusalem not to wield the spear and bring the judgement, but to
37:12
receive the spear thrust and bear the judgement.
37:15
That is the heart of the Gospel right there.
37:17
The crowd wanted a Messiah who would spill the blood of their
37:20
Roman enemies. God's plan was for the Messiah
37:22
to spill his own blood to save his enemies.
37:25
Jesus recognized in this mobs enthusiastic violent adoration
37:29
the exact same temptation he faced from Satan in the
37:32
wilderness. The offer of a bloodless earthly
37:34
crown without the cross. Yes, a shortcut to glory.
37:38
And so he rejects it utterly. He flees.
37:42
He abandons the crowd. He walks away from the
37:45
adoration. And according to Mark, he even
37:47
forces his own disciples to get into a boat and leave, perhaps
37:51
because he feared they too were getting swept up in the crowds.
37:55
Misguided militant enthusiasm. It is highly likely they were
37:59
getting caught up in it. The disciples are sent away, out
38:01
onto the Sea of Galilee, straight into a storm.
38:04
We won't exegete every wave of the storm here, but look at the
38:07
structural necessity this paragraph.
38:09
OK? Why does John include The
38:12
Walking on water narrative when there is no specific discourse
38:15
attached to it? Good question.
38:16
First, it was firmly linked to the feeding miracle in early
38:19
Christian transmission. Second, it explains
38:22
geographically how Jesus and the disciples ended up back in
38:24
Capernaum on the western shore for the Bread of Life discourse.
38:28
It bridges the geography. And 3rd, it continues the Exodus
38:31
theme we established, with the Passover God demonstrating his
38:34
absolute sovereignty over the waters, just like the Red Sea.
38:37
There is a fascinating literary structure here as well, an ABCAB
38:41
pattern spanning chapter 6. Yes, the structure looks like
38:45
this. A is verses 1 to 15, the feeding
38:47
of the crowd. OK.
38:48
B is verses 16 through 21, Jesus walking on water to the
38:51
disciples. C is verses 22 through 26, the
38:55
transition. Then the pattern repeats.
38:57
A is verses 27 through 58, the massive Bread of Life discourse
39:01
directed at the crowds, and B is verses 59 through 71, the
39:05
private reaction of the disciples.
39:07
What is the theological purpose of arranging the text like that?
39:11
In both instances, the B section is shorter than the A section.
39:14
The narrative contracts from a wide focus on the massive,
39:17
flawed crowds down to an intimate focus on the disciples.
39:21
It zooms. In it does.
39:22
And the critical take away is that in both spheres, human
39:26
nature is inadequate. Yeah, it wasn't just the carnal
39:28
crowd that was flawed. Even the disciples, the inner
39:31
circle, were entirely incapable of saving themselves in the
39:34
storm. They were terrified.
39:35
They were rowing in the dark, getting nowhere.
39:37
They require the absolute, sovereign intervening grace of
39:41
Jesus Christ to survive. Without him, the crowd starves.
39:46
Without him, the disciples drown.
39:48
It is a totalizing picture of human inability and divine
39:52
sovereignty. Precisely.
39:54
The text strips away every illusion of human
39:57
self-sufficiency. It really does.
39:59
Whether it is religious self righteousness in Jerusalem,
40:02
political zeal in the wilderness, or nautical skill on
40:04
the lake. Christ alone is the sovereign
40:07
provider and Savior. We have covered a massive amount
40:10
of ground today. Let's synthesize the main
40:12
threads. Sounds good.
40:13
We started in Jerusalem looking at the immense danger of reading
40:17
scripture without looking for Christ.
40:19
Yes, the broken compass. The religious leaders possessed
40:22
the Law of Moses, but because they treated it as a rule book
40:26
for self salvation rather than a witness to the Savior, Moses
40:29
himself became their accuser. A tragic irony.
40:32
And we saw how rigorous textual analysis protects the integrity
40:35
of our doctrine. Then we moved to Galilee, where
40:38
we witnessed the staggering provision of the Lord the.
40:41
Feeding of the 5000. He fed a multitude from a
40:44
peasant's lunch, fulfilling Old Testament prophecy and proving
40:47
his divine authority over creation.
40:50
But we also saw the devastating reality of the human heart in
40:53
that same moment. We certainly did.
40:55
The crowd wanted the miracle, but they rejected the Master.
40:58
They tried to force God into their own political and temporal
41:02
boxes. They wanted to use Jesus as a
41:04
weapon against Rome. Entirely blind to the fact that
41:07
He came to bear the judgement of God on their behalf, right?
41:10
The disciples themselves were caught in the middle of this,
41:13
sent out into a storm to learn that they too were entirely
41:16
dependent on His sovereign intervention.
41:19
It forces a mirror onto the listener.
41:21
We have to examine our own motives when we approach God.
41:24
Yeah, we do. Are we coming to Him on His
41:27
terms or on ours? Are we submitting to His
41:30
sovereign word, or are we selectively reading the map
41:33
while ignoring the compass? A great question.
41:36
Are we genuinely seeking the bread of life to satisfy our
41:39
spiritual death, or are we just seeking temporary bread to make
41:43
our earthly lives more comfortable?
41:44
That is the critical question. God is not a cosmic vending
41:48
machine. No, he's not.
41:50
And he is certainly not a mercenary we can draft into our
41:53
own personal armies. He is the king of the universe.
41:56
And his Kingdom operates on an economy of grace that requires
42:01
our total surrender. I want to leave you, the
42:03
listener, with a final provocative thought to Mull over
42:06
today. Think about the specific things
42:09
you have been praying for lately.
42:11
Look at your prayer life over the last month.
42:13
That is a revealing exercise. Are you asking the Creator of
42:16
the universe to be the sovereign king of your heart, submitting
42:18
to whatever he ordains for your life?
42:21
Or, if you are brutally honest, are you secretly hoping to hand
42:26
him a spear so he can fight your earthly battles for you?
42:28
A. Heavy question, but a necessary
42:31
one. Thank you so much for joining us
42:32
for this deep dive into the source material.
42:34
Until next time, keep reading the Word, keep looking for
42:38
Christ, and keep your compass calibrated to the truth.