Miracle
Commentary
For the month of August, lessons from the Gospel of John will explore insights related to Jesus' feeding of 5,000 people with a minimal supply of food, which was the lesson for last week. Old Testament lessons will show a close correlation to the issues raised by the discourse in the gospel. Throughout, miracle appears as a significant concern.
What can be learned from miracle stories? John's gospel gives a very clear answer. A miracle should not become basis for expecting similar events regularly. Such a false hope dominated the crowd that followed Jesus after the miraculous feeding. To the extent that their hope was connected with religious faith, it anticipated a messianic age of perpetual miracle, continual supernatural resolution of all problems, provision for all needs.
By contrast, the gospel does not suggest a future without worldly problems and material needs. Rather it interprets the miracle as a sign, specifically a sign of Jesus' divine power to establish a new intimate relationship with God. The fundamental miracle is the incarnation of Christ, the Word become flesh (John 1:14). The attendant miracle is eternal life in the relationship with God in Christ that believers experience.
Throughout the gospel narrative, references recall the feeding of Israel in the wilderness. Quite properly, therefore, the Old Testament lesson for this Sunday places that story before us. Before considering any more generalized application, we must honestly admit that the story illustrated the distinctiveness of the elect people and God's particular concern for their survival and their faith. In other words, the Old Testament portrays the special character of ancient Israel as the lesson from the gospel emphasizes the uniqueness of Jesus. By the way, throughout the month, the lessons from Ephesians will emphasize the distinctiveness of the church and its teaching.
I hesitate to characterize this approach to miracle as a spiritualizing interpretation. The Bible is too concerned for the whole of human life to warrant such a reductionism. Rather, the connection with special revelation militates against a misuse of miracle. The stories are not opposing the use of human science, hard work, organization and the like for producing food or for healing and preventing disease. Rather, God's creation is still a matter of wonder as surely as God's new creation through salvation.
OUTLINE I
God's gift of food
Exodus 16:2-15
A. vv. 2-3. Having been delivered from the oppression in Egypt, the people complain that starvation makes freedom intolerable. Better to have died well fed. No one seemed able to care for the people, not even Moses and Aaron, in spite of their claim to divine appointment.
B. vv. 4-5. God cared for the people and for the chosen leader. The beleaguered Moses received a solution to the problem; the people would have food. Yet, more was involved. The people's faith would be tested, because they would not be able to produce the food nor store it up for security (Exodus 16:19-20; Deuteronomy 8:3, 16). Food was God's gift.
C. vv. 6-8. Whatever leaders might have to do with the food supply, God was the ultimate source. Consequently, discontent about material needs related to God and God paid attention, regardless of the ill will of the people. So it was that Moses taught. He encouraged the people to see God the savior, who had delivered them, as the God of providence, giving food. He inspired them to acknowledge God's glory as they started out each day to gather food.
D. vv. 9-16. For modern readers, credibility for the account may increase from the knowledge that birds, migrating south over the Mediterranean Sea, often drop exhausted in the Sinai Peninsula and that tamarisk shrubs in the region accumulate an edible honey-like substance produced by insects. Whatever the facts, the interpretation is the same: daily food is a mark of God's care.
OUTLINE II
Distinctive ethical resource
Ephesians 4:17-24
A. vv. 17-19. Not from the environment. The section starts from the negative in order to work toward the positive. In part, the strong emphasis opposes the previous manner of life in those who have recently become Christians; but closely related to the other part, namely, the ongoing un-Christian ethics of the world around. Hence the reference to Gentiles or nations. This split with some aspects of a person's society and culture (always one of the more difficult implications of Christian faith) is similar to Romans 1 :21-32. Both begin with expressions that might pertain to faith as well as ethics: futility of mind or thinking, darkened in understanding or mind (heart). Both move on to impurity and greed or covetousness. Here, Ephesians focuses on sexual indulgence.
B. vv. 20-24. But from Jesus Christ. In making a transition, there is reference to learning and being taught, first in relation to Christ as present, transcendent power; then to Jesus, the distinctive historical figure whose teaching of truth could be remembered.
The metaphor about a change of clothes would fit the use of a baptismal gown. Literally, the Greek text speaks of putting off the old man and putting on the new man. While the reference includes a change for one's self, it does so in relation to Adam the representative of all humanity in its sinfulness and in relation to Christ who provides righteousness (Galatians 3:27; Romans 5:14-15; 1 Corinthians 15:21-22).
OUTLINE III
Christ's unique food
John 6:24-35
A. vv. 24-25. "When did you come here?" is the question from the crowd. It begins a dialogue which will eventually lead to an unexpected answer. The people are still wondering how Jesus was able to get away after feeding them on the other side of the Sea of Galilee.
B. vv. 26-27. Jesus' initial reply pushes the people to look more deeply at their motivations and convictions. Bread was not an adequate reason for following him. He wanted people to understand the meaning of the sign of feeding the multitude. He wanted them to know there was more to life than temporary bodily satisfaction. He could give food for life with an eternal quality.
C.vv. 28-29. If the people were working for he wrong ends, what should they be doing to accomplish the work of God? Simple, Jesus says, accept the one God has sent, trust him in a personal relationship of faith.
D. vv. 30-31. Not so simple. The people want proof. They prefer someone like Moses, who provided bread from heaven for the lifetime of a whole generation.
E. vv. 32-35. Not Moses but God had given bread. Now God was giving the ultimate bread from heaven and for the life of the whole world. If Jesus had seemed cryptic in identifying himself, he now asserted his special relationship to God by referring to "my Father" and he answered the opening question by asserting that he was "sent from heaven" by God to be "the bread of life."
What can be learned from miracle stories? John's gospel gives a very clear answer. A miracle should not become basis for expecting similar events regularly. Such a false hope dominated the crowd that followed Jesus after the miraculous feeding. To the extent that their hope was connected with religious faith, it anticipated a messianic age of perpetual miracle, continual supernatural resolution of all problems, provision for all needs.
By contrast, the gospel does not suggest a future without worldly problems and material needs. Rather it interprets the miracle as a sign, specifically a sign of Jesus' divine power to establish a new intimate relationship with God. The fundamental miracle is the incarnation of Christ, the Word become flesh (John 1:14). The attendant miracle is eternal life in the relationship with God in Christ that believers experience.
Throughout the gospel narrative, references recall the feeding of Israel in the wilderness. Quite properly, therefore, the Old Testament lesson for this Sunday places that story before us. Before considering any more generalized application, we must honestly admit that the story illustrated the distinctiveness of the elect people and God's particular concern for their survival and their faith. In other words, the Old Testament portrays the special character of ancient Israel as the lesson from the gospel emphasizes the uniqueness of Jesus. By the way, throughout the month, the lessons from Ephesians will emphasize the distinctiveness of the church and its teaching.
I hesitate to characterize this approach to miracle as a spiritualizing interpretation. The Bible is too concerned for the whole of human life to warrant such a reductionism. Rather, the connection with special revelation militates against a misuse of miracle. The stories are not opposing the use of human science, hard work, organization and the like for producing food or for healing and preventing disease. Rather, God's creation is still a matter of wonder as surely as God's new creation through salvation.
OUTLINE I
God's gift of food
Exodus 16:2-15
A. vv. 2-3. Having been delivered from the oppression in Egypt, the people complain that starvation makes freedom intolerable. Better to have died well fed. No one seemed able to care for the people, not even Moses and Aaron, in spite of their claim to divine appointment.
B. vv. 4-5. God cared for the people and for the chosen leader. The beleaguered Moses received a solution to the problem; the people would have food. Yet, more was involved. The people's faith would be tested, because they would not be able to produce the food nor store it up for security (Exodus 16:19-20; Deuteronomy 8:3, 16). Food was God's gift.
C. vv. 6-8. Whatever leaders might have to do with the food supply, God was the ultimate source. Consequently, discontent about material needs related to God and God paid attention, regardless of the ill will of the people. So it was that Moses taught. He encouraged the people to see God the savior, who had delivered them, as the God of providence, giving food. He inspired them to acknowledge God's glory as they started out each day to gather food.
D. vv. 9-16. For modern readers, credibility for the account may increase from the knowledge that birds, migrating south over the Mediterranean Sea, often drop exhausted in the Sinai Peninsula and that tamarisk shrubs in the region accumulate an edible honey-like substance produced by insects. Whatever the facts, the interpretation is the same: daily food is a mark of God's care.
OUTLINE II
Distinctive ethical resource
Ephesians 4:17-24
A. vv. 17-19. Not from the environment. The section starts from the negative in order to work toward the positive. In part, the strong emphasis opposes the previous manner of life in those who have recently become Christians; but closely related to the other part, namely, the ongoing un-Christian ethics of the world around. Hence the reference to Gentiles or nations. This split with some aspects of a person's society and culture (always one of the more difficult implications of Christian faith) is similar to Romans 1 :21-32. Both begin with expressions that might pertain to faith as well as ethics: futility of mind or thinking, darkened in understanding or mind (heart). Both move on to impurity and greed or covetousness. Here, Ephesians focuses on sexual indulgence.
B. vv. 20-24. But from Jesus Christ. In making a transition, there is reference to learning and being taught, first in relation to Christ as present, transcendent power; then to Jesus, the distinctive historical figure whose teaching of truth could be remembered.
The metaphor about a change of clothes would fit the use of a baptismal gown. Literally, the Greek text speaks of putting off the old man and putting on the new man. While the reference includes a change for one's self, it does so in relation to Adam the representative of all humanity in its sinfulness and in relation to Christ who provides righteousness (Galatians 3:27; Romans 5:14-15; 1 Corinthians 15:21-22).
OUTLINE III
Christ's unique food
John 6:24-35
A. vv. 24-25. "When did you come here?" is the question from the crowd. It begins a dialogue which will eventually lead to an unexpected answer. The people are still wondering how Jesus was able to get away after feeding them on the other side of the Sea of Galilee.
B. vv. 26-27. Jesus' initial reply pushes the people to look more deeply at their motivations and convictions. Bread was not an adequate reason for following him. He wanted people to understand the meaning of the sign of feeding the multitude. He wanted them to know there was more to life than temporary bodily satisfaction. He could give food for life with an eternal quality.
C.vv. 28-29. If the people were working for he wrong ends, what should they be doing to accomplish the work of God? Simple, Jesus says, accept the one God has sent, trust him in a personal relationship of faith.
D. vv. 30-31. Not so simple. The people want proof. They prefer someone like Moses, who provided bread from heaven for the lifetime of a whole generation.
E. vv. 32-35. Not Moses but God had given bread. Now God was giving the ultimate bread from heaven and for the life of the whole world. If Jesus had seemed cryptic in identifying himself, he now asserted his special relationship to God by referring to "my Father" and he answered the opening question by asserting that he was "sent from heaven" by God to be "the bread of life."
