The exegetical origins of the feeding of the 5000 (or 4000).

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The exegetical origins of the feeding of the 5000 (or 4000).

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Bernard Muller wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 1:27 pmI think your 3 bases are very far-fetched and, at least for the two last bases, you have to take a long and tortuous route marked by tiny pieces of evidence.
Well, I expected no less from you. I disagree with you completely on this one. Thank you for your feedback.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: The exegetical origins of the feeding of the 5000 (or 4000).

Post by Bernard Muller »

to Ben,
You did not answer my other points in my earlier post. Did you find them too difficult to tackle?
A reminder:
That would entail that "Mark" had done an exegetical study like yours in order to make his story about the feeding of the 5000. In a time there was no internet, no display on the web of Jewish scriptures and no sophisticated search tools.
I cannot imagine that: "Mark" reading a huge number of scrolls (with no punctuation and no space between words) for his story. That would require weeks or rather months to accomplish that
...
Let's not forget the targeted audience was mostly Gentile (many of them not educated), not modern scholars
...
A lot of tedious & time consuming investigation according to the low technology in antiquity.
Occam's razor again would be against any exegetical data gathering by "Mark".
("data gathering added")

BTW, "Mark" never said Jesus ordered the two crowds to recline (could they, with no support for their back). Here goes one of your argument for putting the feeding of the 5000 in a Passover context.
And your desert has green grass and villages nearby which can supply food. Not exactly the Sinai desert of Exodus! If "Mark" wanted to connect his feeding to Exodus, he did a terrible job.

Your exegetical approach is totally unrealistic, and more, very wrong, especially when you consider "Mark" as a scholar just as what you want to be.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The exegetical origins of the feeding of the 5000 (or 4000).

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Bernard Muller wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 5:33 pm to Ben,
You did not answer my other points in my earlier post. Did you find them too difficult to tackle?
No, of course not. Rather, I found it too tedious to have to explain things to you. Case in point:
BTW, "Mark" never said Jesus ordered the two crowds to recline (could they, with no support for their back).
Reclining for the meal is mentioned twice. The first is with the infinitive ἀνακλῖναι in verse 39 (what he told them to do):

LSJ: A. lean one thing upon another, [τόξον] ποτὶ γαίῃ ἀγκλίνας having laid it on the ground, Il.4.113; “Ἔρως ἀνακλίνας τοῦ τόξου τὸν πῆχυν” Philostr.Im.2.1; ἀ. ἑαυτοὺς ἐπὶ τὸ ἐναντίον, of sailors struggling against the wind, Arist.Mech. 851b13; cause to recline at table, Plb.31.4.5, Ev.Luc.12.37:—mostly in Pass., lie, sink, or lean back, recline, “ἀνακλινθεὶς πέσεν ὕπτιος” Od. 9.371; of persons asleep, 18.189; of rowers, 13.78; of the elephant, Arist.HA498a11; to be strung, of strings of lyre, Philostr.Im.1.10.

3 Maccabees 5.16 (RSV): 16 The king, after considering this, returned to his drinking, and ordered those present for the banquet to recline [ἀνακλῖναι] opposite him.

The second is with the indicative ἀνέπεσαν in verse 40 (what they did):

A. .... 5. recline at meals, like ἀνάκειμαι, Alex.293, Com.Adesp.638, PPar.51.4, Ev.Marc.6.40, Luc.Asin.23.

This should have been clear enough from the OP — I gave both Greek words in my quotations of these verses as I introduced the Mishnaic parallels — and it gets tedious to have to constantly go over old ground. At least in this case I can just copy and paste from a standard Greek lexicon. In other cases I have to devise the explanations myself, and I cannot always find it in me to do so.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: The exegetical origins of the feeding of the 5000 (or 4000).

Post by andrewcriddle »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 12:21 pm
Stuart wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 11:31 am My only comment is I think Fish was added to the story, not original.
I am highly sympathetic to such an analysis:
Ben C. Smith wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2016 6:55 am In both of the multiplication miracles, the bread seems to be more important than the fish. It is in both cases the bread that is called for at the beginning of the pericope, and the fish are discovered only during the course of trying to find bread.

....

I am sensitive to the eucharistic overtones in these passages (the verb sequence of taking, blessing, breaking, and giving is exactly replicated in Mark 14.22, for example, at the Last Supper); but, if they were composed with the eucharist in mind, why are the fish there? If, on the other hand, there was an original story that had only bread (and it ought to be admitted that, especially in the second feeding, the fish are superfluous), why were fish added? Finally, if these stories are based upon actual incidents in which fish played a part, why do the fish appear to be so extrinsic to the proceedings (again, especially in that second feeding)?
Meier in Marginal Jew suggests that an actual incident involving bread and fish has been rewritten to bring in eucharistic and other symbolism. The fish play no role in this symbolic reinterpretation so they become marginalised in the developed versions of the narrative.


Andrew Criddle
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The exegetical origins of the feeding of the 5000 (or 4000).

Post by Giuseppe »

andrewcriddle wrote: Sun Sep 20, 2020 4:41 amThe fish play no role in this symbolic reinterpretation
why no symbolic role for the two fishes ?

They are Behemoth and Leviathan.

10 Then adorn yourself with glory and splendor,
and clothe yourself in honor and majesty.
11 Unleash the fury of your wrath,
look at all who are proud and bring them low,
12 look at all who are proud and humble them,
crush the wicked where they stand.
13 Bury them all in the dust together;
shroud their faces in the grave.
14 Then I myself will admit to you
that your own right hand can save you.

15 “Look at Behemoth,
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
16 What strength it has in its loins,
what power in the muscles of its belly!
17 Its tail sways like a cedar;
the sinews of its thighs are close-knit.
18 Its bones are tubes of bronze,
its limbs like rods of iron.
19 It ranks first among the works of God,
yet its Maker can approach it with his sword.
20 The hills bring it their produce,
and all the wild animals play nearby.
21 Under the lotus plants it lies,
hidden among the reeds in the marsh.
22 The lotuses conceal it in their shadow;
the poplars by the stream surround it.
23 A raging river does not alarm it;
it is secure, though the Jordan should surge against its mouth.
24 Can anyone capture it by the eyes,
or trap it and pierce its nose?

41 [a]“Can you pull in Leviathan with a fishhook
or tie down its tongue with a rope?
2 Can you put a cord through its nose
or pierce its jaw with a hook?
3 Will it keep begging you for mercy?
Will it speak to you with gentle words?
4 Will it make an agreement with you
for you to take it as your slave for life?
5 Can you make a pet of it like a bird
or put it on a leash for the young women in your house?
6 Will traders barter for it?
Will they divide it up among the merchants?
7 Can you fill its hide with harpoons
or its head with fishing spears?
8 If you lay a hand on it,
you will remember the struggle and never do it again!
9 Any hope of subduing it is false;
the mere sight of it is overpowering.
10 No one is fierce enough to rouse it.
Who then is able to stand against me?
11 Who has a claim against me that I must pay?
Everything under heaven belongs to me.

12 “I will not fail to speak of Leviathan’s limbs,
its strength and its graceful form.
13 Who can strip off its outer coat?
Who can penetrate its double coat of armor ?
14 Who dares open the doors of its mouth,
ringed about with fearsome teeth?
15 Its back has[c] rows of shields
tightly sealed together;
16 each is so close to the next
that no air can pass between.
17 They are joined fast to one another;
they cling together and cannot be parted.
18 Its snorting throws out flashes of light;
its eyes are like the rays of dawn.
19 Flames stream from its mouth;
sparks of fire shoot out.
20 Smoke pours from its nostrils
as from a boiling pot over burning reeds.
21 Its breath sets coals ablaze,
and flames dart from its mouth.
22 Strength resides in its neck;
dismay goes before it.
23 The folds of its flesh are tightly joined;
they are firm and immovable.
24 Its chest is hard as rock,
hard as a lower millstone.
25 When it rises up, the mighty are terrified;
they retreat before its thrashing.
26 The sword that reaches it has no effect,
nor does the spear or the dart or the javelin.

(Job 40:10-41:26)

in addition, Psalm 74:14:

It was you who crushed the heads of Leviathan
and gave it as food to the tsiyyim of the desert.

The last word tsiyyim is enigmatic.

2 Baruch 29:36-38 makes YHWH say:

"As soon as the Messiah will begin to reveal himself, Behemoth will also reveal himself from his place and Leviatan will rise out of the sea, and these two mighty sea monsters I created on the fifth day, and kept in reserve for that day, will be the food for those who remain (...) and in those days, supplies of manna will fall from the sky and they will feed for one year because they will live to the end of time".

How is it possible that prof Meyer ignores this point?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The exegetical origins of the feeding of the 5000 (or 4000).

Post by Giuseppe »

As to the little fishes, the quails were sent as a substitue for fish, because they are meat of the sea, much more, according to Wisdow 19:11-12, flesh born from the sea.

Later, when they desperately wanted better food, quails came up from the sea to satisfy their hunger. The quail was a bird they had never seen before.

And obviously the "quails"(fishes) are mentioned in Numbers (11.5, 6, 22, 31) where YHWH sent a strong wind from the sea and it brought quails.

Therefore quails==fishes implies loaves of bread==manna.

I wonder why prof John P. Meyer claims that there is no symbolic meaning for the fish. It is there.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The exegetical origins of the feeding of the 5000 (or 4000).

Post by Giuseppe »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2016 6:55 am why were fish added?
The midrashical reasons are explained above. The real goal was one and only one: Jesus has to be identified with the Messiah, with Christ.

Obviously, against who denied, previously, the equation Jesus==Christ.

But who were these deniers?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: The exegetical origins of the feeding of the 5000 (or 4000).

Post by Bernard Muller »

to Ben,
Yes, I missed on "recline". But most bibles translate the Greek word by "sit down", which make sense because there was nothing to support the back of these 5000 for this impromptu meal outside.
"recline" is never associated with the Passover meal in the gospels, but seems to describe a relaxed sitting down as for banquets and when invited for a meal. (3 Maccabees 5.16, Lk 12:37, Lk7:36).

I suppose, if anyone wants to play the exegetical game, any piece (including tiny and very remote) of so-called evidence can be found to support a particular agenda.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: The exegetical origins of the feeding of the 5000 (or 4000).

Post by Bernard Muller »

Meier in Marginal Jew suggests that an actual incident involving bread and fish has been rewritten
I agree, except that incident was never written but known by hearing an eyewitness and remembering his words.
to bring in eucharistic and other symbolism.
I don't think the miraculous feedings brings the eucharist, except if you have a lot of imagination or do an agenda-driven exegetical exercise.
The fish play no role in this symbolic reinterpretation
Exactly.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The exegetical origins of the feeding of the 5000 (or 4000).

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Bernard Muller wrote: Sun Sep 20, 2020 10:10 am to Ben,
Yes, I missed on "recline". But most bibles translate the Greek word by "sit down", which make sense because there was nothing to support the back of these 5000 for this impromptu meal outside.
"recline" is never associated with the Passover meal in the gospels....
Refer to Matthew 26.20 (ἀνέκειτο) and Luke 22.14 (ἀνέπεσεν, same word as in Mark 6.40). Also:

Mark 14.12-18: 12 On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb was being sacrificed, His disciples say to Him, “Where do You want us to go and prepare for You to eat the Passover?” 13 And He sends two of His disciples and says to them, “Go into the city, and a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; follow him; 14 and wherever he enters, say to the owner of the house, ‘The Teacher says, “Where is My guest room in which I may eat the Passover with My disciples?”’ 15 And he himself will show you a large upper room furnished and ready; prepare for us there.” 16 The disciples went out and came to the city, and found it just as He had told them; and they prepared the Passover. 17 When it was evening He comes with the twelve. 18 As they were reclining [ἀνακειμένων] and eating, Jesus said, “Truly I say to you that one of you will betray Me — one who is eating with Me.”

LSJ (ἀνάκειμαι): A. .... III. lie at table, recline, S.Fr. 756, Philippid.30, Arist. Cat.6b12, Fr.607, Diph.40 Mein. (om. Kock), Plb.13.6.8, Ev.Matt. 9.10, al.; cf. Phryn.191.

ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply