Gen. 17:15-27

15 God said to Abraham, "As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. 16 I will bless her, and moreover I will give you a son by her. I will bless her, and she shall give rise to nations; kings of peoples shall come from her." 17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said to himself, "Can a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Can Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?" 18 And Abraham said to God, "O that Ishmael might live in your sight!" 19 God said, "No, but your wife Sarah shall bear you a son, and you shall name him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him. 20 As for Ishmael, I have heard you; I will bless him and make him fruitful and exceedingly numerous; he shall be the father of twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation. 21 But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this season next year." 22 And when he had finished talking with him, God went up from Abraham.

23 Then Abraham took his son Ishmael and all the slaves born in his house or bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house, and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskins that very day, as God had said to him. 24 Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 25 And his son Ishmael was thirteen years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 26 That very day Abraham and his son Ishmael were circumcised; 27 and all the men of his house, slaves born in the house and those bought with money from a foreigner, were circumcised with him. (Genesis 17:15-27, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of February 1, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two), that were repeated from January 27, 2006 (Friday in the week of the Third Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two). The opening verses about the renaming of Sarai as Sarah (Genesis 17:15-16) are part of the reading for Holy Name, Year One (most recently, Jan. 1, 2009), and comments from there have been compared as well.

In yesterday’s reading, Abram’s name was changed to Abraham (Gen. 17:5). Today’s reading begins with God changing Sarai’s name to Sarah. “God said to Abraham, As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name” (Gen. 17:15). According to Rabbi J. H. Hertz, this “brings out more forcibly the meaning ‘Princess’ than the archaic form Sarai” (Pentateuch & Haftorahs, 2^nd ed., 1981, on Gen. 17:15). God’s promise continues. “I will bless her, and moreover I will give you a son by her. I will bless her, and she shall give rise to nations; kings of peoples shall come from her” (v. 16). Jon D. Levenson says, “Unlike its parallel in ch. 15 (J), the P account of the Abrahamic covenant specifies Sarah as the mother of the promised son, and thus makes her indispensable to the fulfillment of the promise to her husband” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Gen. 17:15-22). But, as indicated yesterday, there are alternatives to the commonly held sources theory. Christina de Groot seems to suggest a certain neglect of Sarah in the failure to keep her informed. She points out that “up to this point in the narrative [chap. 17], we have not been told if Sarah is aware of the promise God made to Abraham. In the next episode Sarah finally learns that she is to bear a son” (The IVP Women’s Bible Commentary, 2002, p. 12, on Gen. 12-21, specifically on chap. 17). She will get the news in tomorrow’s reading (Gen. 18:10). Abraham seems to object; we are told that he “fell on his face and laughed (qH!7c4y09va, wayyitschāq; cf. 18:12 where Sarah ‘laughed,’ qHac4T9va, wattitschaq, same verb, feminine form), and said to himself ‘Can a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Can Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?’ ” (17:17). Later, when Sarah reacts to this news with laughter (18:10-12), she is rebuked (vv. 12-13), but for essentially the same reaction here (17:17), Abraham is not rebuked. When he adds, “O that Ishmael might live in your sight!” (v. 18), we are told, “God said, ‘No, but your wife Sarah shall bear you a son, and you shall name him Isaac (qH!7c4y9, yitschāq)” (v. 19a). Note that the name is the masculine form of the verb as in 17:17, not the feminine form as in 18:12. According to de Groot, we get

yet another reiteration and narrowing of the promise (Gen. 17:1-5). For the first time we learn that Sarah is to be the mother of the son. Considering the patriarchal milieu of the story, this is interesting. The seed of Abraham is not enough to create the favored line; the mother must be Sarah. Abraham’s response to hearing that Sarah will be the mother is to laugh and say, ‘Can a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Can Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?’ (ibid.)

As noted yesterday, the word “covenant” appears thirteen times in this chapter, including three times in this passage, but the first ten relate to Abraham, and the remaining three relate to the promised child Isaac (vv. 19, twice, and 21), but they are only indirectly related to Sarah as Isaac’s mother.

Abraham seems to object. As noted above (in the citation from de Groot), he asks whether people his age and that of Sarah can have a child (v. 17), and adds, “O that Ishmael might live in your sight!” (v. 18). “Abraham,” says Rabbi Hertz, “despairing of the possibility of having issue by Sarah, expresses the hope that Ishmael ‘might live before Thee’, in order that the promises made to Abraham might be fulfilled through him” (op. cit., on v. 18). “It is also possible,” says Rabbi Hertz, “to understand it as a prayer that, though Ishmael is excluded from the spiritual heritage, he may yet live under the Divine care and blessing” (ibid.). But God repeats the promise, naming Isaac: “No, but your wife Sarah shall bear you a son, and you shall name him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him” (v. 19). There is a promise for Ishmael. “As for Ishmael, I have heard you; I will bless him and make him fruitful and exceedingly numerous; he shall be the father of twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation” (v. 20). The Rabbi points out that the “twelve princes . . . are enumerated in xxv, 13-16” (ibid., on v. 20). “Ishmael, however,” says Levenson, “is not dispossessed. Whereas only Isaac inherits the covenant (and its attendant promise of land), Ishmael inherits a large measure of the Abrahamic promise (vv. 20-21; 12:2). Like his nephew Jacob (35:22b-26, he will become the patriarch of a twelve-tribe confederation and thus the father of a great nation (v. 20; cf. 25:12-18; 12:2)” (on vv. 15-22). But the covenant will be established “with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this season next year" (v, 21) .This promise concludes the conversation of God with Abraham. “And when he had finished talking with him,” says the narrator, “God went up from Abraham” (v. 22).

Abraham then proceeds to carry out the instructions about circumcision. He “took his son Ishmael and all the slaves born in his house or bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house, and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskins that very day, as God had said to him” (v. 23). After noting the ages of Abraham and Ishmael at the time of their circumcisions, “Abraham was ninety-nine years old” (v. 24), and “Ishmael was thirteen years old” (v. 25), the narrative repeats for emphasis: “That very day Abraham and his son Ishmael were circumcised; and all the men of his house, slaves born in the house and those bought with money from a foreigner, were circumcised with him” (vv. 26-27). And so the chapter concludes by reporting Abraham’s compliance with God’s instructions. Rabbi Hertz sees in the words “in the selfsame day” (v. 23 JPS trans., cf. “that very day,” NRSV) an indication of Abraham’s readiness to perform his obligations without delay” (on v. 23).

Heb. 10:11-25

11 And every priest stands day after day at his service, offering again and again the same sacrifices that can never take away sins. 12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, "he sat down at the right hand of God," 13 and since then has been waiting "until his enemies would be made a footstool for his feet." 14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. 15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us, for after saying,

16 "This is the covenant that I will make with them

after those days, says the Lord:

I will put my laws in their hearts,

and I will write them on their minds,"

17 he also adds,

"I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more."

18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin. (Hebrews 10:11-18, NRSV)

A Call to Persevere

19 Therefore, my friends, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, 20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain (that is, through his flesh), 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us approach with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who has promised is faithful. 24 And let us consider how to provoke one another to love and good deeds, 25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day approaching. (Hebrews 10:19-25, NRSV)

The following comments are based on comments on Hebrews 10:19-35 of January 25, 2009 (the Third Sunday after the Epiphany, Year One), on those of February 1 and 2, 2008 (Friday and Saturday in the week of the Third Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two), and earlier comments as noted there.

The Epistle to the Hebrews alternates between interpretations of a series of texts from the Hebrew Bible (from the Septuagint version, if there is a difference, as in the use of Psalm 40:6-8 [7-9] in Hebrews 10:5-7), and a series of admonitions and exhortations based upon these texts. The central section of the Epistle to the Hebrews (8:1-10:18) describes the main thrust of the author’s argument: the new covenant has superceded the old (8:1-13), in the old covenant the sanctuary and it’s sacrificial system were both temporary (9:1-10) and ineffective (10:1-4), but Christ, the perfect sacrifice (9:23-28) and the mediator of the new covenant (9:15-22) has provided eternal redemption (9:11-14). “For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified” (10:14).

As today’s reading begins, the writer to the Hebrews reiterates his contrast of the first covenant with the new covenant. In the former, “every priest stands day after day at his service, offering again and again the same sacrifices that can never take away sins” (Heb. 10:11). In the latter, however, “when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, ‘he sat down at the right hand of God’ ” (v. 12, citing Ps. 110:1a), where he waits “until his enemies . . . be made a footstool for his feet” (v. 13, citing Ps. 110:1b). The writer summarizes: “For by a single offering (miva prosforav, mia prosphora) he has perfected (teteleivwken, teteleiōken, perfect tense) for all time those who are sanctified (oiJ aJgiazovmenoi, hoi hagiazomenoi)” (v. 14). According to Frederick William Danker, the verb translate “has perfected” means “ ‘bring to a point at which nothing is missing’ . . . [that is] of bring to the ultimate point of maturation complete [as a verb], to perfect . . . in reference to ethical/spiritual perfection” (The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, 2009, s.v. teleiovw, teleioō, meaning c.a.). Danker says the verb, of which the participle is translated “those who are sanctified,” means, “ ‘set apart into the realm of the sacred,’ in our literature with focus on elimination of that which jeopardizes access to God. . . . of persons purify, set apart, dedicate” (ibid., s.v. aJgiavzw, hagiazō ). Atonement through the sacrifice of Christ accomplishes what was impossible under the old covenant (9:9-10; 10:4).

The section based on Jeremiah’s New Covenant prophecy (Jer. 31:31-34), which began with the quotation in Hebrews 8:8-12, is brought full circle with a somewhat paraphrased repetition of part of the quotation (Heb. 10:16-17). “And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us, for after saying,

‘This is the covenant that I will make with them

after those days, says the Lord:

I will put my laws in their hearts,

and I will write them on their minds,’ (Heb. 10:16 NRSV, citing Jer. 31:33)

he also adds,

‘I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more’.” (Heb. 10:17 NRSV, citing Jer. 31:34b)

Harold W. Attridge points out that this is “a modified citation of Jer. 31:33, cited in 8:10 [in which] with them replaces ‘the house of Israel’ ” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Heb. 10:16), and that “Jer. 31:34b, cited in 8:12 [is cited] here with the addition of and their lawless deeds” (ibid., on v. 17). According to Cynthia Briggs Kittredge, “The Holy Spirit is understood to be speaking a paraphrase of Jer. 31:33-34. The new covenant assures full and final forgiveness of sins” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Heb. 10:15-18). “Where there is forgiveness of these,” says Hebrews, “there is no longer any offering for sin” (v. 18).

Hebrews next turns to a “call to worship, faith, and perseverance” (10:19-12:29). He encourages the readers (and us) to take advantage of our “access to God through the sacrifice of Christ” (10:19-25), and warns in his “fourth admonition” against “the wilful sin of apostasy” (10:26-31; cf. the outline of F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, NICNT, rev. ed., 1990, p. ix). The writer appeals at length to the readers. “Therefore, my friends, since we have confidence (parrhsiva, parrēsia, cf. Acts 4:13, ‘boldness’) to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain (that is through his flesh), and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us approach with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water” (vv. 19-22). “For the recommended confidence,” says Attridge, “see 3:6; 4:16 [where parrhsiva, parrēsia is translated ‘confidence,’ and ‘boldness’]” (op. cit., on v. 19). According to Kittredge, with the words, “that he opened for us through the curtain (that is, through his flesh), the writer perhaps means that “the curtain symbolizes Jesus’ physical existence, which separates the holy of holies from the outer sanctuary; or the physical existence of Jesus symbolizes the path of access to God. The flesh of Jesus is the means for approaching God” (op. cit., on v. 20). After considering other suggestions, Bruce says, “it is better . . . to take the line more naturally suggested by the word-order and conclude that our author looked upon the veil as symbolizing our Lord’s human life, presented to God when he ‘suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God’ (1 Pet. 3:18)” (op. cit., on v. 20). A significant reason for our confidence (see above) is because “we have a great priest over the house of God” (v. 21), which refers, of course, to Jesus, exalted to heaven. And so we are invited to “approach” (prosercwvmeqa, proserchōmetha, cohortative, ‘let us approach’) under the stipulated conditions, as noted above, “with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from and an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water” (v. 22). “No longer,” says Bruce, “is the privilege of access to him [i.e., to God] carefully fenced about by conditions like those laid down for the high priest when he made his annual entrance into the holy of holies on the Day of Atonement; the ‘better hope’ of 7:19, ‘through which we draw near to God,’ has now been realized” (op. cit., on v. 22). Bruce adds: “That the sprinkling of the heart denotes an inward and spiritual cleansing is obvious; it is equally obvious that our author has in mind the counterpart under the new order of the old ritual cleansing with the ‘water for impurity,’ the water prepared with the ashes of the red heifer” (ibid.). Bruce goes on to relate this to Christian baptism. But one must insist on the “inward and spiritual cleansing.”

“Let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering,” says the writer, for he who has promised is faithful” (v. 23). And the writer adds another exhortation: “And let us consider how to provoke one another to love and good deeds” (v. 24). These are the second and third of what Kittredge calls “three privileges and duties of Christians: Let us approach God in faith and worship (vv. 22, 25); let us hold fast the public confession of our hope (v. 23); let us consider how we can help others in love (v. 24)” (op. cit., on vv. 22-25). “For holding to the confession,” says Attridge, “see 3:1-6; 4:14” (op. cit., on v. 23). “On hope,” he adds, “see 3:6. For God being faithful, see Deut. 7:9; Ps. 145:13” (ibid.). And “for more moving deeds,” says Attridge, “see 13:1-16” (ibid.). A part of this helping “others in love” is “not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day approaching” (v. 25). According to Attridge, “Israelite prophets (Isa. 2:12; Joel 1:15; 3:14; Am. 5:18; 8:9; Zeph. 1:14; Ze3ch. 14:1) expected the Day of the Lord, as did early Christians; see Mt. 10:15; 1 Cor. 1:8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor. 1:14; 1 Thess. 5:2, 4; 2 Thess. 2:2; 2 Pet. 3:10; 1 Jn. 4:17” (ibid., on v. 25).

The exhortations in Hebrews 10:19-24 are based on the demonstration that the offering of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary is the one effective sacrifice for sins, the point of the section that extends from 8:1 to 10:18.

John 6:1-15

Feeding the Five Thousand (Mt 14.13-21; Mk 6.30-44; Lk 9.10-17)

6:1 After this Jesus went to the other side of the Sea of Galilee, also called the Sea of Tiberias. 2 A large crowd kept following him, because they saw the signs that he was doing for the sick. 3 Jesus went up the mountain and sat down there with his disciples. 4 Now the Passover, the festival of the Jews, was near. 5 When he looked up and saw a large crowd coming toward him, Jesus said to Philip, "Where are we to buy bread for these people to eat?" 6 He said this to test him, for he himself knew what he was going to do. 7 Philip answered him, "Six months' wages would not buy enough bread for each of them to get a little." 8 One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, said to him, 9 "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves and two fish. But what are they among so many people?" 10 Jesus said, "Make the people sit down." Now there was a great deal of grass in the place; so they sat down, about five thousand in all. 11 Then Jesus took the loaves, and when he had given thanks, he distributed them to those who were seated; so also the fish, as much as they wanted. 12 When they were satisfied, he told his disciples, "Gather up the fragments left over, so that nothing may be lost." 13 So they gathered them up, and from the fragments of the five barley loaves, left by those who had eaten, they filled twelve baskets. 14 When the people saw the sign that he had done, they began to say, "This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world."

15 When Jesus realized that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, he withdrew again to the mountain by himself. (John 6:1-15, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from January 2, 2010 (Saturday in the week of the First Sunday after Christmas, Ref. for Jan. 2, Year Two), about three weeks ago. Earlier sources are indicated there.

The Feeding of the Five Thousand is the one miracle, apart from the resurrection of Jesus himself, that is reported in all four Gospels. Compare the table in the separate file, the Feeding of the Five Thousand. For recent comments on Matthew’s version, see the Archive for November 6, 2009 (Friday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 2, Year One); for recent comments on Mark’s version, see the Archive for July 28, 2009 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 27, Year One); and for recent comments on Luke’s version, see the Archive for May 26, 2009 (Saturday in the week of the Fifth Sunday of Easter, Year One).

In John, chapter 5, Jesus is in Jerusalem, where he heals the lame man by the pool Bethzatha (Jn. 5:2-9). The discussions that follow this healing fill the balance of the chapter, so as chapter 6 begins, “After this Jesus went to the other side of the Sea of Galilee, also called the Sea of Tiberias” (6:1), one might wonder, is this “the other side” from Jerusalem? That would imply a significant journey to the “other side,” which one might locate at or near Bethsaida, at the north end of the Sea of Galilee. Obery M. Hendricks says “the other side” would be “the eastern shore,” and he adds that the “Sea of Tiberias [was] so named after the city on the western shore, founded by Herod Antipas about 20 CE in honor of the Roman Emperor Tiberius” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Jn. 6:1). Since John is being selective about what he reports (20:30), a continuous chronology or sequence is not to be assumed. But Luke also locates the feeding at or near Bethsaida (Lk. 9:10b), after the disciples returned from the Mission of the Twelve (Lk. 9:1-6) and the report of Herod Antipas’s perplexity about Jesus (vv. 7-9) when he asks, “John I beheaded; but who is this about whom I hear such things” (v. 9). For Luke, the Baptist’s beheading is a past event, but in Matthew and Mark the Feeding of the Five Thousand (Mt. 14:13-21; Mk. 6:32-41) immediately follows the account of Herod’s birthday banquet when John was beheaded (Mt. 14:1-12; Mk. 6:14-29). And they describe Jesus’ departure in a boat “to a deserted place” (Mt. 14:13a; Mk. 6:32).

“A large crowd kept following him [i.e., Jesus],” says John, “because they saw the signs (ta; shmei:a, ta sēmeia) that he was doing for the sick” (Jn. 6:2; cf. 2:11, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54). The other Gospels also report presence of the crowds. “Now many saw them [i.e., Jesus and the ‘apostles,’ v. 30, cf. the sending of the twelve, vv. 7-13] going and recognized them and they hurried there on foot from all the towns and arrived ahead of them” (Mk. 6:33). The similar statement in Matthew and Luke focuses on Jesus himself rather than the disciples/apostles (Mt. 14:13b; Lk. 9:11). Only Luke reports on the content of Jesus preaching on that occasion: “he welcomed them [i.e., the crowds], and spoke to them about the kingdom of God, and healed those who needed to be cured” (Lk. 9:11b). Matthew reports curing the sick as well (Mt. 14:14b).

John is the only evangelist who describes the location as on a mountain. Matthew and Mark have Jesus coming ashore from the boat (Mt. 14: 14; Mk. 6:34). But John says, “Jesus went up the mountain (to; o[roV, to oros) and sat down there with his disciples” (Jn. 6:3). A map of “Palestine: Natural Regions” shows Capernaum as essentially below sea level, according to the color scheme. The Sea of Galilee is shown as 695 feet below sea level (compare the Dead Sea at 1286 feet below sea level). Some twenty miles north by northeast of Capernaum according to the scale, a high point is marked as 3949 feet above sea level, and some thirteen miles northwest of Capernaum a high point in a region called “Upper Galilee” is marked as 3435 feet above sea level. In the hilly country of “Lower Galilee” (west and southwest of the Sea of Galilee) the color code shows the elevation as from seal level to 250 or more feet above, thus around 900 feet above the level of the Sea of Galilee. Mount Tabor, six miles from Nazareth and eleven from the lower end of the Sea of Galilee is marked as 1929 feet above sea level (Herbert G. May et al., edd., Oxford Bible Atlas, 3^rd ed., rev. by John Day, 1984, reprinted 1985, p. 49). In these hilly regions, local people may well have thought of certain hills as “mountains,” perhaps even a lakeside hill. Raymond E. Brown says,

This ‘mountain’ in Galilee, always with the definite article, appears frequently in the Synoptic tradition and is associated with important theological events (Sermon on the Mount, Matt. v 1; call of the Twelve, Mark iii 13; post-resurrectional appearance, Matt. xxviii 116). There is no way of localizing it, although tradition associates it with the northwest shore of the lake and a hill called ‘the Mount of the Beatitudes.’ The Gospels may have simplified several localities into one which, as ‘the mountain,’ was thought of as a Christian Sinai. John vi has the same theme as Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount, namely, a contrast between Jesus and Moses. (The Gospel according to John I-XII, Anchor Bible, 29A, 1966, on Jn. 6:3).

John is also the only evangelist who reports that “the Passover, the festival of the Jews, was near” (v. 4), which puts the time in the spring, as is implied by the “green grass” in other Gospels (Mk. 6:39; cf. Mt. 14:19). “When he [i.e., Jesus] looked up and saw a large crowd coming toward him (cf. Mt. 14:14; Mk. 6:34; Lk. 9:11), Jesus said to Philip, ‘Where are we to buy bread for these people to eat?’ ” (Jn. 6:5). In the other Gospels, the disciples take this initiative. “When it grew late,” says Mark, “his disciples came to him and said, ‘This is a deserted place, and the hour is now very late; send them away so that they may go into the surrounding country and villages and buy something for themselves to eat” (Mk. 6:35-36; cf Mt. 14:15; Lk. 9:12). In these Gospels Jesus’ response corresponds to his question for Philip in John. “But he answered them,” says Mark, “ ‘You give (Dovte, Dote, 2^nd pers. plural imperative) them something to eat” (Mk. 6:37a; cf. Mt. 14:16; Lk. 9:13). In Mark, a discussion ensues: “They said to him, ‘Are we to go and buy two hundred denarii worth of bread (diakosivwn dhnarivwn a[rtoi, diakosiōn dēnariōn artoi) and give it to them to eat?’ And he said to them, ‘How many loaves have you? Go and see.’ when they had found out, they said, ‘Five, and two fish’ ” (Mk. 6:37b-38). In Matthew, the disciples simply reply, “We have nothing here but five loaves and two fish” (Mt. 14:17; cf. Lk. 9:13b).

Again, it is only in John that we learn the source of the “five barley loaves and two fish”(Jn. 6:9): Jesus’ question for Philip (v. 5, above), says John, was only “to test (peiravzwn, peirazōn, participle of peiravzw, peirazō ) him, for he himself knew what he was going to do” (Jn. 6:6). “Elsewhere in the Gospels,” says Brown, “this verb peirazein [peiravzein, infinitive of peiravzwn, peirazōn] has a pejorative sense of temptation, trial, trickery. This parenthetical verse is an editorial attempt to forestall any implication of ignorance on Jesus’ part” (op. cit., on v. 6). “Philip answered him,” says John, “Six months’ wages (Diakosivwn dhnarivwn a[rtoi, Diakosiōn dēnariōn artoi, lit. ‘bread of two hundred denarii,’ cf. Mk. 6:37) would not buy enough bread for each of them to get a little” (v. 7). With “six month’s wages,” the NRSV interprets the Greek number “two hundred denarii” (cf. NRSV text note c; cf. “almost a year’s wages,” TNIV and text note b; cf. “two hundred pennyworth,” AV/KJV). The word dhnavrion (dēnarion), according to Frederick William Danker, is “[Lat. denarius, a Roman silver coin orig. c. 4.55 gr., worker’s average daily wage] denarius” (The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, 2009, s.v. dhnavrion, dēnarion). The NRSV interpretation undervalues the amount (ca. 180 days) by twenty days, or so. The TNIV overvalues it at ca. 365 days (by modern calendars).

While the disciples are unnamed in the other Gospels, John, in addition to Philip, names “Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother,” who said to him [i.e., to Jesus], ‘There is a boy here who has five barley loaves (a[rtoi krivqinoi, artoi krithinoi) and two fish. But what,” asks Andrew, “are they among so many people?” (Jn. 6:8-9). John also is the only one who identifies the loaves as “barley loaves” (the word krivqinoV, krithinos, occurs only here in the New Testament; cf. F. Wilbur Gingrich, Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 1965, s.v. krivqinoV, krithinos). Compare “twenty loaves of barley” (Myr9foW4 MH,l,-Myr9W4f,, ‘eśrîm-lechem ś ^e‘ōrîm; LXX ei[kosi a[rtouV kriqivnouV) (2 Kgs. 4:42; cf. also Num. 5:15 LXX; Judg. 5:8 LXX A; 7:13 LXX; Ezek. 4:12 LXX). All of these have Myr9foW (ś ^e‘ōrîm) in Hebrew except Judges 5:8, where Septuagint manuscript A (Alexandrinus) misread “war in [of] the gates” (Myr97fAw4 MH,LA, lāchem š ^e‘ārîm) as “barley loaves” (Myr9foW4 MH,l,), which, in an unpointed text (i.e., a text without the vowel signs), would be the same. Jews would have been familiar with barley loaves.

John continues: “Jesus said, ‘Make the people sit down.’ Now there was a great deal of grass in the place” (Jn. 6:10a; cf. Mt. 14:19; Mk. 6:39; Lk. 9:14). In Matthew, they are to “sit down on the grass,” in Mark, “to sit down in groups on the green grass,” in Luke, to “sit down in groups of fifty.” John adds, “so they sat down, about five thousand in all” (Jn. 6:10b). The others number the crowd as “five thousand men” (Mk. 5:44; Lk. 9:14); Matthew as “about five thousand men, besides women and children” (Mt. 14:21), adding what was implied in Mark and Luke. “Then,” says John, “Jesus took the loaves, and when he had given thanks (eujcaristhvsaV, eucharistēsas, aorist participle of eujcaristevw, lit., ‘having given thanks’), he distributed them to those who were seated; so also the fish, as much as they wanted” (Jn. 6:11). For “gave thanks,” his translation, Brown says, “In both classical and secular Koine Gr. eucharistein [eujcaristei:n] has this meaning; it is distinguished from eulogein [eujlogei:n], ‘to bless’ (the verb of the Synoptic [Gospels]” (op. cit., on v. 11). Brown adds,

The relation to the thought that the Eucharist is an act of thanksgiving is obvious. However, J.-P. Audet, RB 65 (1958), 371-99, points out that the use of eucharistein-eucharistia in the NT reflects the Jewish use of bārak-b ^erākāh, ‘bless, blessing.’ He maintains that it was only in the 2^nd century A.D. that the ‘thanksgiving’ motif began to dominate in Christian circles as the ancient roots of the service were forgotten. Therefore, although for convenience we have translated eucharistein and eulogein, differently, we do not stress a difference in meaning as far as Jesus’ action in the multiplication is concern. We can see the interchangeability in Mark viii 6-7. (ibid.)

Mark’s version says, “Taking the five loaves and the two fish, he looked up to heaven, and blessed (eujlovghsen, eulogēsen, cf. Brown’s comment above) and broke the loaves, and gave them to his disciples to set before the people; and he divided the two fish among them all” (Mk. 6:41; cf. Mt. 14:19b; Lk. 9:16). Adela Yarbro Collins says, “Jesus’ actions (taking, blessed, broke, gave; cf. 8:6 [in the account of the Feeding of the Four Thousand]) were customary for a host at a Jewish meal; see also 14:22 [at the Last Supper]” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mk. 6:41).

Mark reports that “all ate and were filled” (Mk. 6:42; cf. Mt. 14:20a; Lk. 9:17a), but John expands on the crowd’s satisfaction. “Then Jesus took the loaves, and when he had given thanks, he distributed them to those who were seated; so also the fish, as much as they wanted. When they were satisfied, he told his disciples, ‘Gather up the fragments left over, so that nothing may be lost.’ ” (Jn. 6:11-12). And he notes the leftovers. “So they gathered them up, and from the fragments of the five barley loaves, left by those who had eaten, they filled twelve baskets” (v. 13). For the “barley loaves,” see the comments on verse 9, above. The other Gospels also note the “twelve baskets” of leftovers (Mk. 6:43; Mt. 14:20; Lk. 9:17).

While the Synoptic Gospels move on to other episodes, the Walking on the Water (Mt. 14:22-33; Mk. 6:45-52) or Peter’s Declaration about Jesus (Lk. 9:18-20; cf. Mt. 16:13-23; Mk. 8:27-33), after the Walking on the Water episode (also in John 6:16-21), John continues with a related discussion of the Bread from Heaven (vv. 22-59). A transition is made with statements also unique to John’s report, the people’s response to “the sign” (Jn. 6:14) and their desire to “make him king” (v. 15). “When the people saw the sign (shmei:on, sēmeion; in some mss. shmei:a, sēmeia, plural [p⁷⁵ B 091 and others, cf. 3:2]) that he had done, they began to say, ‘This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world’ ” (Jn. 6:14; cf. Deut. 18:15, 18). “Most likely,” says Brown, “this is a reference to the expectation of the Prophet-like-Moses . . . for in vs. 31 these people draw a connection between the food supplied by Jesus and the manna given by Moses” (op. cit., on 6:14).

Today’s reading concludes at this point. But we may note that the people’s desire to make Jesus king (v. 15) anticipates the climax and conclusion of the Galilean ministry according to John in chapter six–and so, in a sense, represent John’s editorial structuring of the Feeding of the Five Thousand. But the details of time, place, the boy, the crowd’s satisfaction, strike one as details remembered by the beloved disciple. John Marsh suggests that “the nearness of the Passover is mentioned for theological rather than historical reasons” (St John, Westminster Pelican Commentaries, 1968, p. 285, on Jn. 6:4), but of the other details unique to John, Marsh mentions only the “barley” (on v. 9).

The reference to “Passover” is significant (6:4), not only because this is the only major Jewish Festival for which John does not place Jesus in Jerusalem–later Jesus will be crucified on “the day of Preparation” when the Passover lambs are being slaughtered (19:31)–but because, as a grassy place (6:10) on a mountainside (v. 3), a “deserted place,” according to Mark (Mk. 6:31, 35), the location was a reminder of the Israelites’ experience in the wilderness when, under Moses’ leadership, they were fed manna (cf. vv. 31-32). Jesus will discuss the manna (vv. 32-33), but he himself is “the true bread from heaven” (v. 32). “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty” (v. 35). The miracle of feeding satisfied the people (v. 12), but they, as others before them in John, misunderstand. They first say, “This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world” (v. 14; cf. Deut. 18:15-18), but then decide “to come and take him by force to make him king” (v. 15). According to Brown, this misunderstanding anticipates “the deep misunderstanding of the multiplication and indeed of the whole bread of life discourse that [follows]” (op. cit., on Jn. 6:1-15).

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net