The following blog post consists of some of the notes that I’ve taken on the synoptic account of Jesus’ miracle of providing food to 5,000 people. This miracle occurs in all of the gospels but is most emphasized in the synoptics (i.e., Matthew, Mark & Luke). In fact, the feeding of the 5,000 is the only miracle of Jesus recorded in all four Gospels and thus warrants a synoptic overview. The following are my notes and observations without any reference to commentary material whatsoever. It’s important to go through exercises like this once in a while so that the reader (in this case, me) of the text can make observations within and by the text alone without any dependence on commentary material or theological analysis from an outside source. Obviously those sources are paramount in understanding a text, but sometimes it’s up to the reader to just read the text for what it is without any external help. All I have used in this exercise is a Synopsis, a Greek Synopsis, a Bible, and a concordance.

For reference, here are the NT passages that record this event (click on reference to follow to Scriptural text):

• Matt 14:13-21
• Mark 6:30-44
• Luke 9:10b-17
• John 6:1-15

Walking Through the Synoptics…

Both Matthew and Mark report that Jesus and his disciples withdrew in a boat to be by themselves in an anonymous place. It is interesting that both accounts use vivid language to describe Jesus and the disciples withdrawing to a place described as “lonely”. This withdrawing and lonely language contrasts the subsequent event of the crowds following. Luke, on the other hand, gives the specific location of Bethsaida as the place where they went. Could it be that Luke wants to identify the “lonely place” based on his historical based inquiry? This is certainly possible. Further, it also seems evident that Luke is much more descriptive in his Gospel with respect to dates and places, this being such an example. Additionally, John’s account simply describes the lake they presumably crossed, which is also interestingly mentioned first as the Sea of Galilee, and then, for the audience, identified as the Sea of Tiberias. Mentioning the lake under these two different names may be demonstrative of his audience, one which might have not been familiar with the name Galilee. Nonetheless, each author essentially makes the point that Jesus went away.

As noted above, all four gospels mention that after the ‘withdrawing’ event, crowds followed Jesus and the disciples. The word choice to make this point is interesting in all of the accounts. For example, Matthew recalls that the crowds “heard” and then followed, while Mark writes that they (e.g., the crowds) “saw” and ran ahead. Luke notes that the crowds “learned” and then followed, while John says that the multitude followed because they “saw the signs” that Jesus performed. Whatever the reason, each author found it reasonable to describe that the people followed Jesus as a result of who he was and what he was doing. This event in all four accounts is the precursor for one of the great miracles that Jesus would perform not only in the sight, hearing, or learning of the people, but actually for all of the people. As a side note, there is a good deal of additional information that John provides to his readers. He includes a section describing where Jesus is at the time of his seeing the multitudes, as well as noting the coming Passover celebration. Being on a “mountain” with his disciples, Jesus looks up and sees a multitude. John’s perspective indicates for the reader that Jesus is on a mountain, which is indicative of many OT allusions, and reminds his readers of Jesus’ association with the Passover. This is obviously significant because it’s a clear OT allusion, as is the fact that God fed Israel in the Exodus account.

Matthew and Mark are the only ones to note Jesus’ coming ashore. They are also the only ones to clearly indicate that he went into a boat. Moreover, these two accounts present for the reader what Jesus experienced after coming ashore, namely, seeing a “great throng”. Both authors set up Jesus’ compassionate response: “and he had compassion on them”. This tandem account indicates what will come of Jesus’ compassion, that is, the miracle of the feeding. However, Mark gives additional reasoning for Jesus’ compassion. He indicates that the people were like sheep without a shepherd, they were lost (see Matthew 9:36 for parallel). The result is that Jesus began to teach them many things (in addition to healing them as describe only in Matthew and Luke). What did Jesus teach them? Mark doesn’t say, but Luke includes that he taught them of the “kingdom of God.” Interestingly, John doesn’t record any part of these accounts from the synoptic tradition. A reason for this may be that, according to John’s context, Jesus starts to address his disciple Philip about the crowd. In John’s view, Jesus’ interaction with the crowd is turned toward his disciples.

Matthew and Mark both identify that the “lonely place” where Jesus, the disciples, and the crowds are present is now a place that is getting dark. The day has turned to night and the disciples are concerned with the welfare of the crowd. The synoptic accounts (John doesn’t come in until Jesus’ question to Philip) all note that the disciples ask Jesus to “send” the crowd away to get something to eat (Luke includes lodging). It seems that the authors all point out that the disciples are concerned with the crowd, but they fail to take into account that Jesus is the shepherd of these people, he is responsible for them. In light of this, Jesus admonishes his disciples and tells them to feed the people.

At this point, Mark gives additional information that Matthew and Luke do not. Mark indicates that the disciples ask the rhetorical question: “should we go buy two hundred denarii worth of bread…?” (John’s account also mentions this: Philip says that “Two hundred denarii” wouldn’t even be enough to buy the bread. Luke’s account also alludes to this rhetorical question in v. 13 about buying food.) It seems that the question is meant to show that it is practically impossible to feed all the people. Jesus, however, asks his own question: how much bread do you have? Matthew and Luke come back into the picture at this point, but it is interesting to note John’s take on all of this. In John, Jesus’ question to Philip, i.e., how are we to buy bread for all these people? is indicative of his omniscience. John says that Jesus already knew what he was going to do! Evidently John is pointing out that Jesus is aware and able to accomplish what is to come. Furthermore, this puts Jesus in the role of a divine teacher for his disciples as well. Simply put, he’s testing them.

The synoptic accounts are fairly similar in their rendition of the disciples’ response to Jesus’ question. They all include “they said” for example. What’s particularly interesting, however, is Luke and John’s text. Luke chooses to echo Mark v. 37 about the cost of food for all the people. Moreover, Luke is also the first to point out how many people this “crowd” is composed of: 5000 men. Alternatively, John’s account is more focused on the particular disciples. For example, Andrew is the one who gives the answer about the bread and fish, but he follows his answer with a skeptical response; “what are they among so many?” Thus, in this section, Luke chooses to place the question and the number of people strategically before the feeding, while John chooses to focus on the dialogue between particular disciples of Jesus.

The next section includes a consensus between all of the evangelists that Jesus ordered the people to sit down. Matthew and Mark imply that Jesus directly ordered the crowds whereas Luke and John report that Jesus, through his disciples, made the people sit down in groups upon the grass (Luke doesn’t mention grass, however. John inserts the 5,000 here). Perhaps the authors here are indicating that Jesus’ strategy is clear and orderly, that is, the miracle is to be performed not in frenzy, but in a reverent fashion. The next lines indicate a very strong consensus between the synoptic accounts. Clearly the synoptic accounts are drawing from some standard feature of this miracle story that was well known. Perhaps it is an allusion to the last supper language in 26:26 where Jesus blessed, broke, and gave the bread to his disciples. Basically, the only dissimilarity between the gospels is that of John, who only gives short summary of the blessing and distribution. It is, however, interesting that John mentions that they ate “as much as they wanted.” This statement clarifies that this is indeed a miracle; it’s an ‘all you can eat buffet’ as it were. At the end of the miracle account, Matthew and Mark both report on the amount of people whom were there, five thousand men (Matthew is the only evangelist to report “besides woman and children”).

John’s account includes an additional declaration. The people knew that Jesus was special, so much so that they were going to make him king by force. John tells that because of this, Jesus withdrew again. It is possible that John includes this information due to the explicit nature of his gospel. Nevertheless, we move on to the next section.

Notes: The Gospel of Matthew 14:13-21

The content of this pericope is strategically placed between the larger context of Herod’s execution of John the Baptist and Jesus’ walking on the water. When reading the pericope, one notices several features from 14:1-12 that add tremendous weight and are directly connected to the miracle account. For example, the scene is set up by Herod hearing about Jesus’ powers (v. 2b). Instead of focusing on Jesus, however, Herod recalls his execution of John the Baptist. Regarding the Baptist, it is interesting that the author emphasizes Herod’s fear of the crowd due to the fact that they regarded him as a prophet. In 13:57, Jesus, being rejected in his own land, said that “Prophets are not without honor except in their own country and in their own house.” Nonetheless, the atrocious execution of the Baptist is told to Jesus by John’s disciples. As a result, we enter into our pericope on a very sad note (contrast this with the subsequent miracle of the four thousand in ch.15).

It’s clear that the author extends the grief of the execution and its emphasis into the miracle account. It seems difficult to imagine Jesus’ grief and sadness upon hearing about John’s death. In response to the death, we are told that Jesus “withdrew to a deserted place by himself.” The author, here, emphasizes Jesus’ great love of John, for his reaction is a very somber one (recall John’s in ch. 3). With that, the crowds are introduced back into the story (13:13b). Perhaps the author’s reference to the crowds is related to the earlier crowds spoken of in 14:5, the ones that regarded John as a prophet. Moreover, there may be a reference here to crowds spoken of further back in 9:36 (e.g., “When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd.) If this is the case, then just as Jesus is grief stricken as a result of hearing about John’s death, then the crowds too are just as distressed. Thus, when Jesus saw these very crowds and their anguish, “he had compassion for them and healed their sick.” (v. 14b) The story is quite comforting at this point due to Jesus’ role as a compassionate and caring figure for the ones whom regarded John as a prophet (again, recall 13:57). Even though originally Jesus left to be by himself, he’s not about to allow the crowds to be by themselves. Clearly without the preceding context of John’s execution by Herod, the placement of our pericope doesn’t have the weight or substance that the author intends it to have.

The context proceeding the pericope is the event of Jesus’ walking on the water. Before the water event, however, and directly after the feeding of the five thousand, Jesus instructed his disciples to go in the boat and he dismissed the crowds. At this point, Jesus, like in v. 13, goes to a place on the mountain to pray (v. 23). The author’s emphasis on Jesus going up on a mountain is reminiscent of Moses (e.g., Exodus 19 and 24), and in light of the prophet language interwoven through this episode, this reference to the mountain is particularly interesting. What’s also noteworthy is that twice before this pericope Jesus is described as being on a mountain in the context of a crowd (5:1; 8:1). This time, however, Jesus is alone and praying. The scene that follows is similar to Jesus’ compassion for the people. Before Jesus performed a miracle for all the people in the presence of and through his disciples, but this time he performs a miracle to the effect that his disciples worship him. Thus, it seems also that the subsequent context of the mountain and water event are a further accentuation of the person of Jesus. This also seems to indicate that the pericope’s inclusion between these contexts serves multiple functions for the reader. On the one hand, it is concerned with the death of John and Jesus’ compassion for the crowds in light of this tragic event. On the other, it is a miracle account that precedes a much more intense and personal miracle for the benefit of the disciples, one that is also illustrative of his divinity (e.g., 14:27).

In closing, we have seen that the contextual placement of 14:13-21 by the evangelist is intended to serve multiple functions for the reader. Additionally, within this context, there are various emphases such as compassion and mourning for the death of a friend, compassion and comfort for a mourning crowd, allusions to a great prophet on a mountain, and unambiguous miracles performed by the person of Jesus. The intent and aim of these emphases within the pericope and its surrounding context by the author portray Jesus in a very vivid manner. They highlight his humanity as well as his divinity.

Theological Summary of Matthew 14:13-21

The theology of this pericope presents the person of Jesus as a compassionate leader who both loves and will provide for people in need. The need of the people, however, is not just for bread alone, but is for compassion and love. The people in this account needed comfort and in Jesus’ providing for them, one presumes that they received more than just a meal. Moreover, in being compassionate toward the crowd, Jesus is also similar to the OT concept of Yahweh providing for his people in the wilderness. Yet in this account the grace and provision of Jesus is amplified compared to the OT. When the disciples want the crowd to leave, Jesus, in his compassion, freely provides for them.

As for how this account could be used in preaching or teaching, I believe that the Matthean version needs to be read in light of its surrounding context. As mentioned above, the weight and substance of the account hinges on the execution of John the Baptist. Thus, for a contemporary person to understand this pericope, in the context of preaching or teaching, they must be aware of its placement in the author’s account. It might be helpful to highlight the ministry of John the Baptist as well. Additionally, one must always remember that Jesus was not just handing out free meals and making the people feel good just in a temporal sense (though this can’t be discounted). He is more than a miracle-maker in terms of feeding thousands of people; he is the Christ, the Son of God. The latter context makes this rather clear (e.g., 14:27 εγω ειμι “I AM”).

Notes: The Gospel of Mark 6:32-44

Mark places this pericope in the middle of a larger context which is quite interesting. The preceding milieu has to do with the rejection of Jesus in his own village (6:1-5), Jesus sending out his disciples with authority and power (6:7-13), and also Herod hearing and speculating about Jesus and the things done in his name (6:14-29). The result of these events gives way to inquiries regarding just who he is. Herod, for example, was concerned with the person of John the Baptist and his execution when contemplating the person of Jesus. One of Mark’s emphases in this context seems to draw attention to the death of John, and to draw further attention to the person of Jesus. Furthermore, what’s interesting is that in v. 30 the apostles’ report to Jesus about their deeds and actions has no reference to the death of John. It is important to note that there is no reference about Jesus being distraught about John’s death in this context. (This is different than the Matthean account.) Mark’s emphasis in this context is hard to decipher as a result. Is it that he just moves on to the feeding pericope without considering the execution of John, or is it that he is concerned with the actions of the disciples being sent and reporting back to Jesus?

The placement of the pericope in relation to the preceding context seems to draw attention to defining the power and authority of Jesus. For example, earlier when Jesus sent his disciples out, they were told to bring neither food nor money (v. 8). In the pericope at hand, there is an emphasis on the disciples’ perspective about not having any food (well, only five loaves…) for the crowd and specifically not possessing any money to buy food for the people. Again, Jesus simply asks a question of how much food they have, and then miraculously provides for all. (This is somewhat similar to Elisha’s feeding in 2 Kings 4:42-44.) Nonetheless, the proceeding context, I believe, is very important for understanding the magnitude of this pericope.

After the feeding of the people, Jesus sends his disciples across the lake. What is rather interesting is Mark’s emphasis of the mysterious nature of Jesus (recall earlier guesses of just who he is vv. 14-15). The emphases regarding his divine nature are obvious, however. When the storm hits the lake, Jesus makes the “I AM” declaration in addition to calming the winds. Mark then provides for his reader a very revealing statement after this account, namely, “…they did not understand about the loaves…” What exactly does this statement refer to? Perhaps it is a further accentuation of his power and authority in light of the miracle feeding. If he can feed five thousand with a little bit of food, and he can compare himself to Yahweh as well as calm the winds, then the result is that he is likely divine. Mark’s pointers are therefore very influential for his readers.

In conclusion, it seems that Mark’s account has less to do with John the Baptist’s execution (in contrast to Matthew’s account), and more to do with the authority and unfolding of whom Jesus is in his divinity. He sends out his disciples with power and authority, but when questioned about not having food or money by these same disciples, he feeds five thousand with his power and authority. The scene’s climax takes place on the lake with the disciples “terrified” and “utterly astounded, for they did not understand about the loaves…” Mark’s context and emphases are rather clear. This person named Jesus is neither John come back from the dead nor Elisha; instead, he is the “I AM.” For the reader, there is no doubt that Jesus is proclaimed to be God almighty.

Theological Summary of Mark 6:32-44

Not surprisingly, the theology of this pericope is principally tied to the larger context. Although the pericope is representative of Jesus having compassion on the people because they are “like sheep without a shepherd,” it is also telling about the nature of Jesus himself. He feeds the people because he has compassion on them, but he also teaches them many things. Unlike the people whom rejected him earlier, these five thousand receive his blessings. The real unfolding of his person, however, seems to be revealed in the latter context of his calming the winds (which one can’t help but think of the Genesis account where the spirit/wind is hovering over the waters), and the “I AM” statement (recall Exodus).

Teaching or preaching from this pericope has to take into account the previously mentioned contexts. For example, the account is extremely similar to that of Matthew’s, but when placed in Mark’s larger context, which is also somewhat similar to Matthew’s, we can see different emphases by the author. A clear example of one of these emphases is Mark’s divergence from focusing so much on John the Baptist in the feeding account. Furthermore, I think there are quite a few allusions to the OT throughout the pericope that are necessary for supplementary insight. For example, there’s the mountain reference, prophet references, Elijah, Elisha, “I AM”, calming of the winds, power, authority, etc. These are examples that demonstrate the richness and complexity of the pericope and its surrounding context. Thus, all of these topics have to be taken into account when preaching or teaching on this pericope.

Notes: The Gospel of Luke 9:10b-17

The larger context into which Luke places the feeding miracle is chiastic. For example, Jesus’ sending of the twelve with power and authority is followed by Herod pondering who this Jesus is. The speculations consisted of John the Baptist returned, Elijah, or perhaps one of the ancient prophets. The episode after the miracle puts Jesus in the context of asking his disciples a similar question of who he is. Again, the crowds ponder the question, like Herod, and answer with John the Baptist, Elijah, or one of the prophets. Thus, Luke places the miracle in a context that begs the question: Who is Jesus? As this question was profoundly important to the first century audience, it is also equally important for us today (actually yesterday, today, and tomorrow).

In Luke’s account, the placement of the pericope influences the way it’s read in the sense that it’s right in the middle of the bigger question of Jesus as messiah. The climax is clearly in the latter context of Peter’s confession (v. 20). This doesn’t mean that the pericope can’t be read and analyzed by itself, but it does imply a building up of the bigger messianic question by Luke. This Jesus, the one who can feed five thousand, is the messiah. Perhaps this is Luke’s larger emphasis. From the larger context it’s evident that Jesus is obviously special and everyone around him is wondering, but it’s in Peter’s confession that the suspense is revealed.

Furthermore, the situation with the crowd in v. 11 is emphasized differently by Luke compared to that of Matthew and Mark. Luke, for example, says that Jesus welcomed the crowds instead of having compassion on them. The word for welcome in Luke (αποδεξαμενος) is wholly different than compassion (εσπλαγχνισθη) in the other synoptic accounts. That being said, Jesus’ welcoming of the people is akin to his welcoming answers to the question of who people say he is (v. 18). This further accentuates Luke’s description of Jesus after welcoming the crowd, and then speaking to them of the “kingdom of God and healing them.” These are probably illusions to Isaiah 61.

In sum then: it seems that Luke is emphatic about his placement of the miracle account. It comes (1) after Jesus’ sending of his disciples with authority and power, as well as the ensuing question of his theological role, and (2) before the important messianic question that he asks his disciples. The answer that Luke emphasizes of course is that Jesus is the Messiah.

Theological Summary of Luke 9:10b-17

The principle theological point of this pericope within its larger context has to do with Jesus as “The Messiah of God.” This is clear from the references to John the Baptist, Elijah, and one of the prophets before the pericope and following it. Clearly the crowds perceive that Jesus is “from” God in some special way, but it is only with Peter’s confession that we realize that Jesus is the Messiah. Here there is unequivocally something to be said for special revelation. It is also significant to note that shortly after the confession, Luke includes the transfiguration account. Thus, the feeding miracle is strategically placed by the author to begin a theological inquiry into the person of Jesus. This is the beginning of Luke’s Christology as it pertains to the divinity of Christ.

Some suggestions for how this pericope could be used in preaching or teaching are to draw on Luke’s emphasis of Jesus’ theological significance for the story. A decent way to go about this might be to study and contrast the characters of John the Baptist, Elijah, and some of the prophets with the way in which all the evangelist’s portray the person of Jesus. Secondly, it might be helpful to call attention to the fact that Luke emphasizes Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom of God and his healing of the people.

Notes: The Gospel of John 6:1-15

The larger context into which John places the feeding miracle is a fascinating one that contains a good deal of rich and complex theology. The context preceding the pericope involves Jesus in a heated theological discourse of which he rebukes some Jews over Sabbath observance. Using this as a springboard, Jesus speaks a great deal about his Father and references John the Baptist as a witness to himself and the person of Moses. John decides to place the pericope at hand directly after this episode.

The author chooses to follow this pericope with the walking on the water event. However, the feeding metaphor is emphasized by the evangelist all the way from the literal feeding of the five thousand to Jesus speaking about his own flesh and blood for consumption. Clearly the placement of this pericope is essential for John’s overall theological emphasis of Jesus being the bread of life.

One of the especially important features in John’s account is the fact that Jesus is described as already being aware that the multitude coming toward him will need food to eat. He is also described as already knowing what he will do when he tests Philip with the question. This important element of the story fits very nicely into the way Jesus is speaking before and after the miracle event. Jesus is very bold and clear in his proclamation and the author is drawing attention to this. In fact, Jesus’ feeding miracle is so awesome in the sight (and stomach) of all the people, that he perceives that they would make him king by force, which is a unique addition to the feeding story in all of the gospels. There is no ambiguity here, Jesus is regarded as “…the prophet who is to come into the world!”

The following episode (6:22-34) portrays some type of super natural “teleport” (what else can it be referred to?) of which the previous crowd, i.e., the ones who were fed, are now looking for Jesus. His rebuke is clear in that he accuses them of just wanting to fill their stomachs with bread. It is interesting that Jesus moves from the literal feeding of the people to the metaphor of himself being the bread of life that people need to eat (e.g., 6:35, 41, 48, 51). The emphasis John is making is dependent on our original pericope of the five thousand.

In conclusion, John’s account of the miracle seems to be the most theologically explicit. The miracle is really a type of springboard for which Jesus declares that he is the living bread. In this sense, John uses the miracle as a basis to amplify its theological significance. This analogical method is one of the main emphases that John uses and is therefore crucial for directing the reader of his gospel. Just as Moses was there when the people received food, this Jesus is now bringing the bread of life for the people, the true food from heaven itself (vv. 31-34). It is unmistakable that the way John intends his theological perspective to be read is dependent on his placement of the feeding miracle before Jesus’ declaration about being the bread of life.

Theological Summary of John 6:1-15

John’s account of the miracle and its surrounding context is extremely rich in Christological content. The theology of the section finds its apex in Jesus declaring that the ones who eat his body and drink his blood have eternal life (vv. 52-59). Eternal life is the culmination of the bread analogy. For this reason, the feeding miracle really finds its true meaning within the subsequent context and should be read in relation to it.

This section could be used in teaching and preaching to really dig into the nature of Christ as well as the purpose that the incarnation serves. Although there is so much theology in this section, much can be drawn out about Jesus’ mission and what certain persons wanted to impose on his mission (e.g., vv. 14-15). It would probably be helpful when teaching about this particular account of scripture to emphasize Jesus’ authoritative perspective regarding his mission. Perhaps reading the feeding miracle and then analyzing Jesus’ later discourse with the crowd he admonishes (vv. 26-35) would be insightful for both the physical bread he provided, and the eternal bread which requires belief in him whom God has sent (v. 29).