|
Xchange
-
Discussion Notes
Mealtimes
in Luke's Gospel (3)
Feeding 5000: Luke 9.16ff
If you don’t believe in miracles, you
would probably explain this miracle in terms of Jesus attacking
the consciences of those present – forcing them to share
the packed lunches they had secretly packed into their rucksacks.
But as with any miracle, the point is not that Jesus can perform
supernatural feats. Every miracle in the Gospel is a prophetic
pronouncement – an ‘acted parable’.
The mechanics of parables are therefore worth
revisiting: the parable is a story that draws the hearers
into a ‘new world’. Having seen how this new world
functions, the old world with which they have become familiar
is revealed for what it is. The response of those who hear
the parables is an ‘either-or’. Either they rejoice
in the glorious new world into which Jesus calls them, or
to retreat into the old world where all was familiar and comfortable.
Unfortunately those who retreat now know in their bones that
the old world does not work well. Such deep seated discontent
is usually dealt with by means of calling those around you
to confirm and strengthen by reaffirming all that is right
with that world (‘we have Abraham for our father’),
or by ridiculing the new world into which Jesus calls us (see
the Saducees excuses about resurrection).
If the feeding of the five thousand is one
such parable, what are we to make of it? What does it tell
us about the new world and the old? I think my first question
is why Jesus didn’t let those who had gone out to hear
him go off and get their own food. The disciples seemed to
be offering a pretty straightforward and sensible suggestion.
Why did Jesus need to provide food for everyone, when the
impression we have is that this was not necessary?
The first thing to notice is that although
there were 5 thousand people present, the only ones to witness
this miracle were the disciples. The parable is for them!
They learn something that no one else knows. This context
of the story helps to understand its point:
1 (9:7-9) – Herod asks ‘who is
this…?’
2 (9:10-17) – Jesus feeds those who have come to listen
to him
3 (9:18-27) – The disciples answer Herod’s question:
‘The Christ of God’. (The word for Christ is the
word for the true ‘King’, which everyone knew
Herod was not!)
Then consider the parallel:
9:9 – ‘And [Herod] tried to see him
9:27 – ‘some standing here [Jesus, in private
with his disciples] will not taste death before we see the
Kingdom of God’.
Some disciples saw what Herod did not; Peter
saw what the crowds did not. In both cases, the point of revelation
is the feeding of the 5000. The context is that Jesus provides
food for those whose attention is fixed upon him. “Tell
these stones to become bread” says the devil to Jesus
(chapter 4) – and Jesus’ response was to leave
the devil to finish the sentence, ‘man does not live
by bread alone …’ (But by every word that proceeds
from the mouth of God.)
Could it be that Peter uses the unusual phrase
‘Christ of God’ in this sense – because
Jesus has just demonstrated that he is able to satisfy those
who fix their attention upon him? The ‘prophet mighty
in word and deed’ has shown that he can do what God
alone can do.
Discussion Questions:
1. If you were a disciple, at which
point might you realise something ‘unnatural’
was at work here? How would you feel when you realise that
you are unwittingly performing a miracle? Should we expect
this today?
2. If God can satisfy hunger – why doesn’t he?
3. Herod was a king. Jesus was ‘Christ’ –
i.e., anointed king. There is a direct tension here. Where
are the direct tensions today between the authority of Christ
and secular or religious authorities that are threatened by
it? (E.g., think of the archbishop’s ‘crucifixion’
at the hands of the right wing press!)
> Questions? Comments? Let us know
your views. Click
here
> Click
here to return to programme.
|
