What deeper message in John's account of Jesus feeding the five thousand, particularly regarding the food originating from "a boy"?

Question

The account of Jesus feeding the five thousand is recorded in the Synoptic Gospels: Matthew 14:13-21, Mark 6:37-44 and Luke 9:10-17. The Gospel of John also recounts this miracle in John 6:1-14, but it highlights two distinct features;

1. Jesus tests Philip regarding how to feed the crowd (John 6:6)
2. The only food that the disciples found comes from "a boy", and the portions are described as "small" (John 6:9)

My focus of the question is on the second feature. While both Matthew and Mark emphasize that there were five thousand men present - implying the presence of women and children - it is striking that only a boy is mentioned as having food. Is it plausible that in such a large crowd, no one else, especially mothers, had food for their children?

This detail in John's account may carry significant meaning. What deeper message might John be intentionally highlighting by emphasizeing this feature?

Answer 1

John is also the only gospel that tells us the loaves were made of barley. In that case there are several facts we can drawn from his involvement.

• Because his bread was made from barley, he was not wealthy.
• He gave all that he had, while it seems no one else did.

This harkens back to Jesus' saying that one must become like a little child to enter the kingdom (Luke 18:17) and one must also give all that one has (Luke 18:22). The boy's charity could even be seen as infectious, a sign that the gospel message will spread in miraculous fashion if John's readers are similarly unselfish in their giving.

We cannot be certain that John had these teachings in mind, but the lad's unselfish charity does fit the gospel's theme of childlike discipleship (John 13:33) and sacrificial love. (John 15:13)

Answer 2

That the basis of Jesus’ miracle is food that comes from a small boy is significant because of the lesson it holds about spiritual childhood. Looking at the narrative structure, the boy’s offering lies between two expressions of doubt from Jesus’ disciples. Philip is doubtful that such a crowd can be fed due to the enormity of the costs. Andrew is doubtful given the meagerness of the available resources.

John 6:7-8 ESV

⁷ Philip answered him, “Two hundred denarii worth of bread would not be enough 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 for so many?”

The OP asks, “Is it plausible that in such a large crowd, no one else, especially mothers, had food for their children?” The doubts expressed by Jesus’ disciples are characteristic of the way adults generally think. Even if others had food, it is not surprising that they did not offer to share, not necessarily because they are selfish but because they did not believe it would make a difference. Exemplifying the childlike spirituality that allows for miracles to happen, the child offered what he had, trusting that God will provide the rest.

Answer 3

So much is unsaid, but I imagine the child overhearing the need, willing to help, and totally unaware of the insignificance and futility of his offer.

When we are aware of our own inadequacy, do we fail to offer the tiny tidbits we do have to Christ?

Answer 4

This is a very good observation.

We do not get much context from the other texts of the NT, since the word paidarion was only used in John 6:9. I checked the Septuagint, and it usually replaces the Hebrew word naar. Which already proves that John was using it purposefully.

https://lexicon.katabiblon.com/index.php?lemma=%CF%80%CE%B1%CE%B9%CE%B4%E1%BD%B1%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%BF%CE%BD

The Hebrew word is not very specific when it comes to the age of the person described as a naar. It can be a boy or a youth. But it also described a young man fit for the war, which would make him +20 years old (Genesis 14:24):

I will take nothing except what the young men have eaten, and the share of the men who went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their share.

The word naar appears in many stories of the OT, foreshadowing the Christ himself.

Isaac is called a naar in Genesis 22. Once by Abraham and once by the angel of the LORD. Since the exact age of Isaac during the akedah is unknown and has been strongly debated, let's look at other examples.

Joseph is called a naar on many occasions. Even just before his release from prison, when he was thirty years old (Genesis 41:12):

Now a young Hebrew was there with us, a servant of the captain of the guard. We told him our dreams, and he interpreted them for us, giving each man the interpretation of his dream.

The rebellious Absalom was called a naar by David just before his downfall (2 Samuel 18:5):

The king commanded Joab, Abishai and Ittai, “Be gentle with the young man Absalom for my sake.” And all the troops heard the king giving orders concerning Absalom to each of the commanders.

A type of Messiah that was released from the pit to be exalted. An antitype of the Messiah whose death on a tree reunited the nation and returned the throne to his father. Both were in their early thirties.

On top of that, the secondary meaning of paidarion in Greek is young slave. And this is another motive linked to the person of the Messiah. Jesus was the servant of God. It is no coincidence that the law for the servant, who loves his master and wants to stay with his master forever, follows the ten commandments. Jesus is the pierced one that stays in the house of the Father forever.

In conclusion, John uses the paidarion purposefully, and with just one word, he hyperlinks the symbolical story of multiplying the bread with so many more christological texts in the OT. Additionally, the mention of barley, is just another rabbit hole that the apostle gives us to explore.

Answer 5

We just had this reading last Sunday, and I did a short clergy eMail: "Way too late, but I just looked at the readings. A note on the 12 basketfuls of bread and fish.

The theme is always the Gospel, not from Mark this time but from John, the Multiplication of the Barley Loaves and Fish. First, the parallel columns of pilgrims up to Passover are women and children in one column, and the grown men in the other. We know from Luke that when Jesus turned 12 and became subject to the Law, that he could go with either column back and forth. The men can pick up or buy provisions along the way, and supply the women to prepare the meals if they have to. No wheat, only barley, since the wheat harvest will be offered at Passover. (Even in Mark, there is plenty of grass, as in spring---Though Mark's writing is in teaching order only, and he was not a witness.) So, here in John it is a boy who brought 5 loaves and two fish filets (from the mom for his father or older brother), so after the men had their fill, the 12 baskets are there to return the favor to the women and not let the food go to waste.

But there is more in John: a witness to the temptations in the desert. This follows chapter 5 where Jesus speaks of John the Baptist in the past sense as a lamp that burns away. It was then that Jesus chose the Twelve on the mountain (not mentioned in John), and---as the only witness to his own 40 days in the desert and the Temptations (not mentioned in John)---he must have explained the temptations, at least to Peter James and John. Because here he miraculously makes bread, and then after popular acclaim would make him king, he forces the Twelve to leave on boats, while he dismisses the crowd with the baskets for the women and children, since the men had all "eaten their fill." The Lord then "flees" (in the correct wording) to the mountain alone, and in chapter 7 John records that the "brothers" of Jesus (women and men on the father's side, including in-laws) want him to go up to the Feast and win the approval of authorities in Jerusalem.

Those are the 3 temptations."