Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professors, theologians, and those interested in exegetical analysis of biblical texts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The Gospel According to Mark, in contrast to the other three gospels, provides two separate feeding miracles wherein Jesus multiplies loaves and fishes to feed five thousand and four thousand respectively. Both accounts are very similar, though they differ on subtle details (for instance, the number of baskets remaining). Why then include both miracles?

Mark 8:18-21:

18 Having eyes do you not see, and having ears do you not hear? And do you not remember? 19 When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces did you take up?” They said to him, “Twelve.” 20 “And the seven for the four thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces did you take up?” And they said to him, “Seven.” 21 And he said to them, “Do you not yet understand?”

share|improve this question
possibly relevant verses: Mark 8:18-21 – Jack Douglas Apr 17 '13 at 11:47
This is an excellent question!! – swasheck Apr 22 '13 at 19:05
I not have time to defend answer and write a book for you so I only comment on this site now. First account is on west side of lake (Jewish side), but second feeding is on east side (Gentile side). Also follows is an encounter with woman from southern Syria then Jesus heals deaf and mute person. Mark is telling us something important in second account. I don't think they describe same incident. – user1985 Apr 25 '13 at 21:03
Augustine allegories both accounts, Chrysostom treated them as separate events, most modern scholar think it is same event. That is a valid argument though. Greek very similar between 6 and 8 (πολυν οχλον in 6:34 vs. οχλου in 8:1, many more paradigmatic and syntagmatic structural similarities). – user1985 Apr 25 '13 at 21:03
Just a minor correction. Matthew also records two feedings. – Matthew Miller May 9 '13 at 16:55
up vote 3 down vote accepted

In these two feeding accounts, Mark signals to his primarily listening audience a portion of his books structure and point.

(This is probably the most overlooked aspect of our study of the bible's stories and should be considered carefully. Please see this video for a visual and more detailed discussion of how and why stories in the ancient world used aural signals to indicate structure.)

While visual signals such as chapter numbers and verses, section titles, paragraph indentations, highlighted words etc. help modern readers orient themselves to a stories structure and point, ancient books had no graphic signals, not even spaces between words. Literacy was relatively rare and thus visual cues on the page were deemed far less important than giving meaning to the work through aural signals.

Private reading, which we of course enjoy today, does not require repetition since we have the ability to go back and check what we've just read. But an aural culture, one that learns and memorizes through hearing, demands it. A point is highlighted and emphasized in repetition. Think of Martin Luther King's "I Have Dream" speech. For Mark, these type of parallels proved crucial for indicating his structure and by extension his message.

David A. Dorsey in his book the Literary Structure of the Old Testament offers a list of the ways matching conveys meaning. Among them are

  1. Emphasis: matching can emphasize a point by reiterating it...
  2. Comparison: two or more units may be matched in order to draw out the similarity of two things not readily seen as similar...
  3. Contrast: conversely, matching may highlight the contrast between two things that are in some respects alike...
  4. Reversal: matching may highlight the reversal or undoing of something...
  5. Resolution (or fulfillment): an author may highlight the close connection between story's opening tension, suspense, or prediction and its closing resolution or fulfillment, by placing the two in matching positions at the beginning and end of the story...
  6. Totality: matching units may convey the idea of the totality of a phenomenon by featuring both halves of a merism (day and night, man and woman, etc.)...

Depending on the precise arrangement of these matching sections there may be other ways as well.

Mark's accounts of the two feeding form part of a literary unit between 6:7 and 8:22. The repeated emphasis in this section revolves around the topics of eating, bread, purity codes, gentiles and miracles related to hearing and seeing.

Taken together, as Mark's structure demands, Mark appears to be making a point through these stories about the disciples total insufficiency but Christ's all-sufficiency to feed/save the world. And that includes gentiles, hinted at in the Syrophoenician (gentile) woman's request for bread crumbs. The subtle difference between the two feedings, such as the number of baskets of bread left over and even the different greek words used for baskets indicates that Jews are in mind in the first feeding while Gentiles are in view in the second.

share|improve this answer
Hey Matthew, thanks for the answer and welcome to Biblical Hermeneutics! Hope you'll stay around and continue to provide answers like this one. – Soldarnal May 4 '13 at 1:03
"...Jews are in mind in the first feeding while Gentiles are in view in the second..." I think the geography of the narrative also supports this theory - Jesus has been criss-crossing the lake of Galilee and at the point of feeding the 4,000 he seems to be on the Gentile side. – Jack Douglas May 27 '15 at 19:37

First of all, the two feeding accounts form part of an integrated set of passages with ten references or allusions to food, including a summary by Jesus of the two feasts in 8:19-21, maintaining a consistent theme of food, plus a minor theme of not understanding:

  • Jesus and the disciples had no leisure so much as to eat , so they went into a desert place (6:31-32)
  • Feeding the 5000 (6:33-44)
  • When Jesus walked on water the disciples were amazed, for they considered not the miracle of the loaves (6:45-54)
  • Pharisees complain about the disciples eating with unwashed hands (7:1-8)
  • Discourse - what goes into a man goes into his belly and does not defile (7:9-23)
  • Greek woman metaphorically begs for crumbs from the table (7:24-30)
  • Feeding the 4000 (8:1-9)
  • Disciples are hungry and have only one loaf of bread (8:13-14)
  • Jesus warns the disciples about the leaven of the Pharisees and they reason, "It is because we have no bread," showing they do not understand (8:15-17)
  • Summary by Jesus of the two feasts (8:18-21)

Clearly the two feeding accounts are given because repetition provides emphasis. Not only are the contexts so very similar, but the narratives follow much the same pattern: Jesus asks the disciples how many loaves they have, Jesus commands the 5000/4000 to sit, Jesus blesses and breaks the loaves, after they had finished eating there were twelve/five baskets of leftovers, then the disciples got into the boat and departed for Bethsaida/Dalmanutha. But why emphasise these two miracles in particular?

A number of scholars have noticed a three-way parallel between the feeding of the 5000, the feeding of 4000 and the Last Supper. Among these, Paul J. Achtemeier (Jesus and the Miracle Tradition, pages 72-74) says that the feeding story appears to have been accommodated to the celebration of the eucharist, including by the use of the four words: taking, blessing, breaking and giving, all of which are in the same order in the two feeding accounts and in the Last Supper.

In a proposed parallel structure that frames the entire Gospel, the ten references to food that we see here in Mark 6:31-8:21 form a pair (pair R) with the Last Supper. I believe the Last Supper was one of the most important events in Mark's Gospel, so justified a good deal of emphasis. Mark achieves this with the sequence of ten events and discourses, and uses repetition to add emphasis to the allusion to the eucharist. Linking these earlier references to the Last Supper through Mark's parallel structure emphasises the importance of the Last Supper, proportionate to the emphasis within the earlier set of events. We may fail to see this emphasis when we only read short extracts from the Gospel, but Mark was intended to be read aloud to an audience in its entirety.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.