The indefinite connecting phrase some time after this (v. 1; cf. 5:1) introduces a narrative that abruptly locates Jesus in Galilee, crossing from one side of Lake Galilee to the other.
Such a beginning suggests that the Gospel writer is picking up a narrative source in the middle of things. The only real link to the two preceding incidents in John is the mention in verse 2 of the miraculous signs he had performed on the sick (cf. 4:43–54; 5:1–18). There is no way to be sure how much time has elapsed since the miracle and controversy of the previous chapter. If the “feast of the Jews” of 5:1 was the Passover, then at least a year has gone by, for it is again the Passover season (v. 4). The author’s interest at this point is not in chronology but in providing a sample glimpse of Jesus’ Galilean ministry (in addition to 2:1–12 and 4:43–54), and particularly of his Galilean synagogue teaching (cf. 6:59).
The story of the feeding of the five thousand is found in all four Gospels (cf. Mark 6:32–44; Matt. 14:13–21; Luke 9:10b–17), while the account of Jesus walking on the water is paralleled in Mark (6:45–52) and Matthew (14:22–33). The theme by which John’s Gospel draws this material together is the familiar synoptic theme of the pursuit of Jesus by large and persistent crowds (vv. 2–5, 14–15, 22–24; cf., e.g., Mark 1:35–37; Matt. 4:25–5:1). This pursuit becomes the occasion for Jesus to teach the crowds what “following” or coming toward him (vv. 2, 5) actually entails (6:26–59). Many turn back when they learn discipleship’s cost, but “the Twelve” (with Simon Peter as their spokesman) affirm their faith and are established as Jesus’ helpers and companions (6:60–71).
The reference to the Passover (v. 4) is in keeping with the author’s tendency to place Jesus’ deeds and discourses in the context of Judaism’s major religious festivals (cf. 2:13; 5:1; 7:2; 10:22; 11:55), but this is the only instance in which Jesus is not in Jerusalem for the occasion. Why is the season mentioned in a context that otherwise shows little interest in chronology? Is the reference intended to characterize the feeding of the five thousand as a kind of Christian Passover anticipating the Lord’s Supper? Does it set the stage for the subsequent controversy over Moses and the manna in the desert (6:30–32; cf. Exod. 16:4, 15)? The feeding of the crowd is indeed described in terms reminiscent of the institution of the Lord’s Supper: Jesus then took the loaves, gave thanks, and distributed to those who were seated as much as they wanted. He did the same with the fish (v. 11; cf., e.g., 1 Cor. 11:23–25). Moreover, the synagogue address on “Jesus the Bread of Life” (vv. 26–59) concludes with what many regard as a meditation explicitly on the Lord’s Supper as a Christian sacrament (6:52–58). Yet in itself, the mention of Passover in verse 4 carries no hint that the emphasis of the narrative is to be on the Passover meal as such or any adaptation of it.
In the two other places where the Passover is said to be near (i.e., 2:13; 11:55; cf. 12:1; 13:1), the statement introduces material that in some way points forward to Jesus’ death at the last Passover in Jerusalem (i.e., 2:14–22; 12:1–36). In the present passage the effect is similarly to introduce a reflection on Jesus’ death, but this time with particular focus on its implications for discipleship. The chapter as a whole functions in much the same way as Jesus’ first Passion prediction in the synoptic Gospels, with its accompanying call to discipleship (cf. Mark 8:31–9:1 and parallels).
John’s account of the multiplication of the loaves and fishes begins with the approach of a great crowd that had seen Jesus’ healings and with Jesus’ consequent withdrawal to a hill where he sat down, probably to teach his disciples (vv. 2–3; cf. Matt. 5:1–2). It ends with his solitary retreat to the same hill to escape the crowd’s attempt to make him king by force (vv. 14–15). Between the two withdrawals, Jesus encounters the crowd and ministers to its needs. As he looks out over the crowd (v. 5), Jesus looks at the same time into the future (cf. 4:35). He has already formed a plan (v. 6) in anticipation of a problem that in the other Gospels arises only later: How will the crowd be fed? (cf. Mark 6:35–36 and parallels). He elicits from Philip and Andrew, two of his first disciples (cf. 1:40–44), that it would be virtually impossible to provide food for so many (vv. 7, 9b). Andrew mentions in passing, however, a boy who has brought five barley loaves and two fish (v. 9a), and with these Jesus feeds the whole crowd (vv. 10–13). All the Gospels are specific about the five loaves and two fish, but only John tells the story of the anonymous youth who brought them. The human interest touch is most easily explained as an actual recollection of what happened. Though certain aspects of the narrative are reminiscent of the story of Elisha and twenty loaves of barley bread in 2 Kings 4:42–44 (e.g., the emphasis on what is left over), the OT incident is not a sufficient model to explain either Jesus’ actions or the Gospel writer’s account of them.
The story is recognizably the same in John’s Gospel as in the Synoptics. Jesus makes the crowd of five thousand recline on the grass and distributes bread and fish to them until they are all satisfied. The distinctive feature of John’s account is that Jesus distributes the food to the crowd directly, not through the hands of his disciples (v. 11; contrast Mark 6:41). The disciples do, however, gather the pieces of bread that are left over, twelve baskets full, “that nothing may be lost” (v. 12, RSV). The effect of the shift in the disciples’ role is to enhance the symbolism, already present in the Synoptics, of the twelve baskets of surplus bread (cf. Mark 6:43). The abundance of bread points to the abundance of life that Jesus supplies, but the detail that none of it is lost or wasted anticipates the symbolism of the eucharistic prayer found in the Didache, a second-century manual of church order. The prayer appears to be based on this very passage in John or on the incident it describes: “As this broken bread was scattered upon the mountains, but was brought together and became one, so let your church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into your kingdom” (Didache 9.4). The twelve baskets of bread left over are here understood to represent the Christian church kept safe in the world by the power of God. As the bread is gathered in twelve baskets, so the church is personified in twelve apostles (cf. 6:70; 17:12; 18:9). As none of the bread is lost or wasted, so none of those who believe in Jesus will be left to wander from his saving care (cf. 6:39; 10:28).
Yet it is an oversimplification to say that the feeding of the five thousand symbolizes the Christian Eucharist. Though the distribution of the food is described in eucharistic terms (v. 11), the miracle points beyond the Eucharist to that which the Eucharist itself represents: the unity and security of Jesus’ followers as his body in the world. In his own way, Paul too sees the bread of the Lord’s Supper as the church: “Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf” (1 Cor. 10:17). The fact that Paul emphasizes the “oneness” of the bread while John emphasizes its “twelveness” should not obscure the similarity in what the two are saying. At most, however, the mention of the twelve baskets of leftover barley bread furnishes only a hint of the narrator’s intended meaning. The real theological interpretation of the feeding of the crowd comes in the synagogue discourse of verses 26–59 and in the concluding exchange between Jesus and his disciples (and would-be disciples) in verses 60–71. The unstated link between the twelve baskets of bread and the church kept safe in the world is the person of Jesus himself (cf. 6:35, 48). That the miracle says something about Jesus even the crowd could perceive (v. 14), but on its own terms. He must be the expected prophet like Moses because, like Moses, he had miraculously fed those who followed him (cf. 6:30–31). The custom of messianic pretenders in Jesus’ time was to seek credibility by either re-enacting or matching famous OT miracles (see, e.g., Josephus, Antiquities 20.97, 167–70). The men in the crowd saw in Jesus just such a potential messiah, one who fulfilled their political hopes and whom they thought they could use for their own political ends. Their intent was a violent one, perhaps nothing short of kidnapping Jesus to make him a puppet pretender to the long-vacant throne of David. But he knew their intent (cf. 2:24) and returned alone to the hill. For the time being, his manifestation to the Galilean crowd was at an end.
Additional Notes
6:1 That is, the Sea of Tiberias: The double name is striking. Tiberias appears to be the name preferred by the writer of this Gospel (cf. 21:1), while the more familiar Galilee has been retained alongside it from an oral or written source similar to the synoptic accounts.
6:5 Where shall we buy: Philip’s answer indicates that Jesus’ meaning is “How can we buy enough food? Where would we get the money?” The notion that they were in the desert, with no markets nearby, seems not to be an issue here, and there is no evidence in the text that this was the case.
6:6 To test him: Test is not used here in an ethical sense but means simply to elicit a response. Jesus wants to draw from the disciples a clear expression of the human impossibility of providing food for so many people. The purpose of the parenthetical remark is to ensure that Jesus’ question to Philip did not imply any uncertainty on his part about the outcome.
6:8 Another of his disciples: Unlike Philip, Andrew is introduced here as if he has not been mentioned before, yet cf. 1:40. In both passages he is identified as Simon Peter’s brother. Either (a) the terminology is that of John’s narrative source (which may not have included an account of Andrew’s call) or (b) the phrase should be translated, “the first of his disciples,” referring explicitly to the call mentioned in 1:40. The Greek word heis, translated as one, is occasionally used for the ordinal number “first” and it is perhaps noteworthy that some ancient manuscripts refer to Andrew as the “first” among Jesus’ disciples in 1:41 (see Additional Note on 1:41). The former alternative, however, is the more likely.
6:9 Boy: The Greek word paidarion means a child, a youth, or a young slave, and can refer to either a male or a female. A masculine relative pronoun confirms that in this instance a boy is in view.
6:10 People … men. The NIV preserves a distinction between a generic word for people (Gr.: anthrōpoi) and a word that usually (though not always) refers to adult males in particular (andres). This presupposes a situation described explicitly only in Matthew: “The number of those who ate was about five thousand men, besides women and children” (Matt. 14:21; cf. 15:38). The group is thus assumed to be a mixed group, considerably larger than five thousand (even the boy who furnished the food was probably not counted among the five thousand!). It is uncertain whether or not the Gospel writer is conscious of such a distinction.
6:11 / Gave thanks: Gr.: eucharistēsas (cf. 6:23). From this word the term “Eucharist” is derived. The parallel passages (Mark 6:41; Matt. 14:19; Luke 9:16) use a different verb eulogein (lit., “bless,” but in NIV consistently translated “give thanks,” as here). The verb in John corresponds to the verb used in the second feeding (i.e., of the four thousand) in Mark (8:6) and Matthew (15:36). The giving of thanks plays a crucial part in the working of a miracle again in John 11:41. Thanksgiving becomes Jesus’ way of calling on the Father to display his power.