Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to his disciples to set before the people. He also divided the two fish among them all.(Mark 6:41)
I would like to say something more on human hands. The hands of men are quite different from that of other animals. Chimpanzee and gorilla are known for their close resemblance with men and they have great strength in their hands but they can not be compared with the strength, multifunction and versatility of human hands. If they hold a baseball bat, human holds it by separating the thumb and other fingers but a chimpanzee holds it with all the fingers in same direction. This is the big difference; men can grip a bat correctly and firmly but a chimpanzee can not. The gap of difference between man and chimpanzee becomes even bigger as we study more and more about them.
Nowadays there are some zoologists who treat a chimpanzee or a gorilla or an orangutan as their family. They become friends of the wild animals. They protect them from the hands of a poacher as they study them. When they pour out their affection for a long time there developed mutual trust between them. Men learn their language and teach them men’s language.
However, I have never heard teaching them how to play the piano. Probably it will be impossible. Besides music experience involves delicate motion which is impossible for them. I neither heard that they taught them how to sew. It is clear that their hands are not skillful enough to sew clothes.
The hand is the most important gift of God, which make human beings a unique creation. Just as the hands of Jesus that broke “Five loaves and two fish”, our hands also may be used in such precious work. It would begin by sharing of a meal together.
20100511
Five loaves and two fish (29)
Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to his disciples to set before the people. He also divided the two fish among them all.(Mark 6:41)
In the preceding meditation, I mentioned that the hand of man is none other than the hand of God. Here the hand of man signifies the real hand while the hand of God is the instrument accompanied with the hand. However, it is clear that hand is the most important tool in creating a man materializing the plan of God.
Generally, the closest anthropoid is Homo sapiens (a man of thinking) and Homo erectus (pithecanthrope) is the next older and Homo Habillies(a man of using tool) is the oldest of the three. Recently some confusion has occurred in this a chronicle because of finding of Homo Habilllies who had lived in the next generation of Homo erectus. Whatever the order may be, it is clear that we see the character of human as thinking, standing, walking and using a tool.
Homo Habillies used a tool with his hand. It is a deceptive cause to go ahead in a competition with other animals. When they wanted to use their hand freely then definitely they should walk with two feet. They could use their hands even though it was not meant for standing straight. At this point there is high possibility that Homo Habillies was in the contemporary of Homo erectus.
Today we are also receiving such Homo Habillies’ genetic effects. It means the blood of the ancient anthropoid that made a tool with their hand 18 billionaires ago is flooding to us. Our descendants also may live by using this hand. They may make a spaceship with this hand and migrate somewhere else inhabitable in universe. After all, there is not other important hand than Jesus’ hand which breaks the loaves. I hope our hands also busy in breaking loaves in this manner.
In the preceding meditation, I mentioned that the hand of man is none other than the hand of God. Here the hand of man signifies the real hand while the hand of God is the instrument accompanied with the hand. However, it is clear that hand is the most important tool in creating a man materializing the plan of God.
Generally, the closest anthropoid is Homo sapiens (a man of thinking) and Homo erectus (pithecanthrope) is the next older and Homo Habillies(a man of using tool) is the oldest of the three. Recently some confusion has occurred in this a chronicle because of finding of Homo Habilllies who had lived in the next generation of Homo erectus. Whatever the order may be, it is clear that we see the character of human as thinking, standing, walking and using a tool.
Homo Habillies used a tool with his hand. It is a deceptive cause to go ahead in a competition with other animals. When they wanted to use their hand freely then definitely they should walk with two feet. They could use their hands even though it was not meant for standing straight. At this point there is high possibility that Homo Habillies was in the contemporary of Homo erectus.
Today we are also receiving such Homo Habillies’ genetic effects. It means the blood of the ancient anthropoid that made a tool with their hand 18 billionaires ago is flooding to us. Our descendants also may live by using this hand. They may make a spaceship with this hand and migrate somewhere else inhabitable in universe. After all, there is not other important hand than Jesus’ hand which breaks the loaves. I hope our hands also busy in breaking loaves in this manner.
20100417
Five loaves and two fish (28)
Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to his disciples to set before the people. He also divided the two fish among them all.(Mark 6:41)
Jesus ‘broke’ the loaves and gave them to his disciples to set before the people. It is a very simple action if we see it externally. Jesus probably held the loaves as he was getting ready to break them. If Jesus was not a left-handed he must have taken hold of it with his left hand and broke it with his right hand. Now the loaves handed over from Jesus’ hand to the hand of the disciples and they were again handed over to the hands of the people. It is a simple act of transfer of food from one hand to other hands one after another and it eventually solves the problem of hunger of the people and this further leads them to the stream of salvation.
The hand of people is a decisive instrument to actualize God’s salvation on earth. We arrange something to eat on the earth by this hand. The hand to cook something to eat in the kitchen is the power of salvation. We make a car with hand and do the farming with it. See the hand of a surgeon. Their hands save people’s life. Look at the hands of pianist and artists. And look at the hand of a poet who holds pen and writes a poem. Look at the hand of a pastor who prepares a sermon by tapping at the computer keyboard. The hand of man is the hand of God.
There is a scene in “The Creator”, the painting of Michelangelo that God breathed life into Adam. It is the scene that Adam who was not bestowed a soul, formed out of dust was positioned below and God who was breathing soul to him was positioned above facing each other. The center of this picture is the work of hands. God was breathing not the way of the laying on of hands but the way of breathing. Michelangelo, a scientist and artist who works by hand might feel God’s inspiration in his hand first before head. Yes. The hand of man is none other than God’s hand.
Jesus ‘broke’ the loaves and gave them to his disciples to set before the people. It is a very simple action if we see it externally. Jesus probably held the loaves as he was getting ready to break them. If Jesus was not a left-handed he must have taken hold of it with his left hand and broke it with his right hand. Now the loaves handed over from Jesus’ hand to the hand of the disciples and they were again handed over to the hands of the people. It is a simple act of transfer of food from one hand to other hands one after another and it eventually solves the problem of hunger of the people and this further leads them to the stream of salvation.
The hand of people is a decisive instrument to actualize God’s salvation on earth. We arrange something to eat on the earth by this hand. The hand to cook something to eat in the kitchen is the power of salvation. We make a car with hand and do the farming with it. See the hand of a surgeon. Their hands save people’s life. Look at the hands of pianist and artists. And look at the hand of a poet who holds pen and writes a poem. Look at the hand of a pastor who prepares a sermon by tapping at the computer keyboard. The hand of man is the hand of God.
There is a scene in “The Creator”, the painting of Michelangelo that God breathed life into Adam. It is the scene that Adam who was not bestowed a soul, formed out of dust was positioned below and God who was breathing soul to him was positioned above facing each other. The center of this picture is the work of hands. God was breathing not the way of the laying on of hands but the way of breathing. Michelangelo, a scientist and artist who works by hand might feel God’s inspiration in his hand first before head. Yes. The hand of man is none other than God’s hand.
Five loaves and two fish (27)
Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to his disciples to set before the people. He also divided the two fish among them all.(Mark 6:41)
I would like to meditate John 1:14 that I quoted yesterday. According to John, incarnated Jesus’ glory is the glory of the only son of God. What does it mean? Is it Jesus’ glory? Jesus lived on earth with the same limitations and condition like each of us. Most of the time the Bible depicts somebody with messianic and supernatural power according to the belief of the early Christian community but we have to consider the fact of the historical background. He ate, excreted, caught cold, felt lonely and was even joyful at times like us. Then what is the glory that was revealed to him?
John’s gospel described it as the glory that revealed to the only son of God. It doesn’t mean that God bear a son like man. It is a sort of religious metaphor to point out the one who has the same true nature with God, though he is not God himself. It means that the glory of the only son is exactly the glory of God himself. According to this logic, Jesus’ glory is no other than God’s glory.
At last, we came back to the term of ‘glory’ again. Glory is a theological term which is applicable to the creator only. We cannot describe it in detail. The creature cannot recognize the creator directly but glorify him alone. We can put in this way; the power of creation is, that is to say, glory. According to John verse 1:3, logos is the very power of creation.
We can say that Jesus’ ‘Five loaves and two fish’ points out the power of the creator. He broke himself and gave it to us as he broke ‘Five loaves and two fish’. Only the creator can give us life.
I would like to meditate John 1:14 that I quoted yesterday. According to John, incarnated Jesus’ glory is the glory of the only son of God. What does it mean? Is it Jesus’ glory? Jesus lived on earth with the same limitations and condition like each of us. Most of the time the Bible depicts somebody with messianic and supernatural power according to the belief of the early Christian community but we have to consider the fact of the historical background. He ate, excreted, caught cold, felt lonely and was even joyful at times like us. Then what is the glory that was revealed to him?
John’s gospel described it as the glory that revealed to the only son of God. It doesn’t mean that God bear a son like man. It is a sort of religious metaphor to point out the one who has the same true nature with God, though he is not God himself. It means that the glory of the only son is exactly the glory of God himself. According to this logic, Jesus’ glory is no other than God’s glory.
At last, we came back to the term of ‘glory’ again. Glory is a theological term which is applicable to the creator only. We cannot describe it in detail. The creature cannot recognize the creator directly but glorify him alone. We can put in this way; the power of creation is, that is to say, glory. According to John verse 1:3, logos is the very power of creation.
We can say that Jesus’ ‘Five loaves and two fish’ points out the power of the creator. He broke himself and gave it to us as he broke ‘Five loaves and two fish’. Only the creator can give us life.
20100414
Five loaves and two fish (26)
Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to his disciples to set before the people. He also divided the two fish among them all.(Mark 6:41)
John 1:14 says, “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” Here ‘the word’ is a translation of the Greek ‘Logos’ which means language or reason. The philosophical term of the Greek has been accepted as a divine meaning.
In early Christianity era, Neo-Platonism of the Hellenistic philosophy blossomed and Plato took an active part in it. There was dualism in the center of this idea. They thought soul and flesh are of different entities. Soul is sacred while flesh is ugly. Soul is eternal but flesh is temporal. Soul of human is also eternal. So they thought the soul of human that is believed to be the essence of eternal life was not created. On the contrary, according to Christian faith the soul of human was created by God.
In addition, the early Christian fathers were deeply influenced by Greek philosophy, especially the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle and they did not give up the tradition of the Old Testaments. The most glaring example is the concept of incarnation. Augustine said that the Plato’s philosophy is most similar to Christian faith except incarnation. The belief on the theory of incarnation of the theological concept is the point of distinction between Plato’s philosophy and Christian faith.
The concept of incarnation that underscores the transformation of the body from the invisible and eternal God to a visible and temporal human body is not compatible with Plato’s philosophy. Yes. Not even a moment the body in Christian belief was neglected. The body requires “Five loaves and two fish”. Jesus was in humanly body which was broken and gave it to us. This is certainly a clear indication of the gift of salvation that Christians believe and talk about.
John 1:14 says, “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” Here ‘the word’ is a translation of the Greek ‘Logos’ which means language or reason. The philosophical term of the Greek has been accepted as a divine meaning.
In early Christianity era, Neo-Platonism of the Hellenistic philosophy blossomed and Plato took an active part in it. There was dualism in the center of this idea. They thought soul and flesh are of different entities. Soul is sacred while flesh is ugly. Soul is eternal but flesh is temporal. Soul of human is also eternal. So they thought the soul of human that is believed to be the essence of eternal life was not created. On the contrary, according to Christian faith the soul of human was created by God.
In addition, the early Christian fathers were deeply influenced by Greek philosophy, especially the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle and they did not give up the tradition of the Old Testaments. The most glaring example is the concept of incarnation. Augustine said that the Plato’s philosophy is most similar to Christian faith except incarnation. The belief on the theory of incarnation of the theological concept is the point of distinction between Plato’s philosophy and Christian faith.
The concept of incarnation that underscores the transformation of the body from the invisible and eternal God to a visible and temporal human body is not compatible with Plato’s philosophy. Yes. Not even a moment the body in Christian belief was neglected. The body requires “Five loaves and two fish”. Jesus was in humanly body which was broken and gave it to us. This is certainly a clear indication of the gift of salvation that Christians believe and talk about.
Five loaves and two fish (25)
Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to his disciples to set before the people. He also divided the two fish among them all. (Mark 6:41)
I mentioned in the preceding meditation that we should not miss two levels of report and interpretation. As we see in this point of view, the expression of breaking the bread and giving it to his disciples is the interpretation of the Bible author in keeping with the conduct of Holy Communion service. As time goes by the religious tradition in which the “Five loaves and two fish” are involved with are handed down through many people of the world. “While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take it; this is my body."(Mark 14:22) It indicates that the “Five loaves and two fish” and Eucharist raised fusion of horizons with the verbs “broke and gave”.
We often hear that Jesus gave himself up for us all but we do not feel it in our real lives. We think of it as a messianic role in which Jesus had to be crucified to take up my sin. It is not wrong but Christian faith cannot be explained in this manner. The word ‘Jesus broke his body’ is connected with a profound situation.
It is the incarnation. The Word became flesh. The invisible God became the visible one. Jesus is a visible God. He is God with the same body like ours. Here is the tension of Christian faith. Body has its limitations. But God is an unlimited being. It is a contradiction that infinite God has a finite body. Christianity began from this shrouded contradiction. To say in Barth’s way, ‘an impossible possibility’ has happened to Jesus. The confines of God and Men are found in the person of Jesus. At his point, Jesus is the only true God and true Man. He is the true “Five loaves and two fish”.
I mentioned in the preceding meditation that we should not miss two levels of report and interpretation. As we see in this point of view, the expression of breaking the bread and giving it to his disciples is the interpretation of the Bible author in keeping with the conduct of Holy Communion service. As time goes by the religious tradition in which the “Five loaves and two fish” are involved with are handed down through many people of the world. “While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take it; this is my body."(Mark 14:22) It indicates that the “Five loaves and two fish” and Eucharist raised fusion of horizons with the verbs “broke and gave”.
We often hear that Jesus gave himself up for us all but we do not feel it in our real lives. We think of it as a messianic role in which Jesus had to be crucified to take up my sin. It is not wrong but Christian faith cannot be explained in this manner. The word ‘Jesus broke his body’ is connected with a profound situation.
It is the incarnation. The Word became flesh. The invisible God became the visible one. Jesus is a visible God. He is God with the same body like ours. Here is the tension of Christian faith. Body has its limitations. But God is an unlimited being. It is a contradiction that infinite God has a finite body. Christianity began from this shrouded contradiction. To say in Barth’s way, ‘an impossible possibility’ has happened to Jesus. The confines of God and Men are found in the person of Jesus. At his point, Jesus is the only true God and true Man. He is the true “Five loaves and two fish”.
20100409
Five loaves and two fish (24)
Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to his disciples to set before the people. He also divided the two fish among them all.(Mark 6:41)
Breaking the loaves Jesus gave them to the disciples to be distributed to the crowd gathered there. He also divided the two fish among them all. Here are the five loaves. The account of the five loaves and two fish does not explain in detail to show whether Jesus gave the loaves and fish without dividing into halves or three parts. We do not also know whether the disciples distributed the bread and fish to the crowd without dividing them into small pieces. The pieces of bread might not be very big ones. According to the tradition of John’s gospel, this bread and fishes were brought by a child. Why John’s gospel did particularly mentioned about a child that the synoptic never mentions about? It signifies the fact that “Five loaves and two fish” might not be a big food material, as they are prepared for a meal or two of a child. Though the child brought it to the disciples instructed by his father, “Five loaves and two fish” is nothing but a meal of a family. The size of bread might not be bigger than a big dumpling. It is not easy to divide in a small piece for serving the public.
The author of the Bible does not report a certain historical incident in a demonstrative manner. It reports some incredible incidents that had happened to Jesus through memory, tradition and also some theological interpretation. Report and interpretation are the two pillars of the Bible. The Bible is a report one side and interpretation on the other. Report has more factual information while interpretation provides information on events. Despite this apparent differences report and interpretation serve the same purpose. These are complementary to each other. At this point, the story of “Five loaves and two fish” also is a fact on the one hand and an event on the other.
Breaking the loaves Jesus gave them to the disciples to be distributed to the crowd gathered there. He also divided the two fish among them all. Here are the five loaves. The account of the five loaves and two fish does not explain in detail to show whether Jesus gave the loaves and fish without dividing into halves or three parts. We do not also know whether the disciples distributed the bread and fish to the crowd without dividing them into small pieces. The pieces of bread might not be very big ones. According to the tradition of John’s gospel, this bread and fishes were brought by a child. Why John’s gospel did particularly mentioned about a child that the synoptic never mentions about? It signifies the fact that “Five loaves and two fish” might not be a big food material, as they are prepared for a meal or two of a child. Though the child brought it to the disciples instructed by his father, “Five loaves and two fish” is nothing but a meal of a family. The size of bread might not be bigger than a big dumpling. It is not easy to divide in a small piece for serving the public.
The author of the Bible does not report a certain historical incident in a demonstrative manner. It reports some incredible incidents that had happened to Jesus through memory, tradition and also some theological interpretation. Report and interpretation are the two pillars of the Bible. The Bible is a report one side and interpretation on the other. Report has more factual information while interpretation provides information on events. Despite this apparent differences report and interpretation serve the same purpose. These are complementary to each other. At this point, the story of “Five loaves and two fish” also is a fact on the one hand and an event on the other.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)