Bart:
Interesting thought that you postulate.
- Matthew 14:14-21 - Starting with 5 loaves & 2 little fishes; Ending with 12 baskets full of leftovers.
- Matthew 15:32-39 - Starting with 7 loaves & "a few little fishes"; Ending with 7 "provision baskets" of leftovers.
- Presumably, the leftovers refers to the loaves; the fish bones and pieces being discarded.
Both 7 and 12 have significance elsewhere. Thus the question, Did Matthew or Jesus intend any significance to these numbers? Or was that simply the chance beginning and ending numbers?
The NICNT-Matthew commentary (R. T. France, pp. 558-59) has some thoughts in its introduction to Matthew 14:13-21.
[Start quote]
The consistancy in reporting the numbers reflects the way oral stories are passed on, with the key elements maintained even when the surrounding narrative is differently framed. In this case there is the further consideration of comparison with the second feeding miracle, where the numbers are different (and, again Matthew and Mark agree on them). The point was clearly significant, as both sets of numbers are taken up in the discussion in the boat in 16:9-10 - and in Mark's fuller version the numbers are repeated in greater detail.
The significance of the verbs used becomes clear when the five Synoptic feeding narratives are compared with the three Synoptic accounts of Jesus' eucharistic action at the Last Supper. In all eight pericopae we find the same sequence: "took . . . blessed/gave thanks . . . broke . . . gave."The same sequence of verbs also occurs in Luke 24:30, where Jesus "presides" at the meal at Emmaus. This can hardly be accidental, and suggests that the evangelists framed their accounts of the feeding (and of the Emmaus story) to reflect the wording of the eucharistic formula with which they and their readers were by now familiar. The feeding of the crowd is therefore presented as a "foretaste" of the central act of worship of the emoergent Christian community, even though the menu was not quite the same. And since the Last Supper was itself a foretaste of the messianic banquet ([Matthew] 26:29), that dimension, too, can be legitimately be discerned in this story.
[End quote]
There is more of interest in the commentary, but I thought I would stop for the moment and mention an interesting difference between the significance that the commentary finds versus the significance that the Society finds in the narratives of the feedings.
The Society always highlights the millenial significance in the feedings. The NICNT commentary mentions that as a legitimate thought that can be discerned from the stories. But the NICNT commentary also highlights the close connections the stories have with the Last Supper narrative. This aspect is totally ignored by the Society, which, by chance, is totally against participation in the Last Supper by "the crowds."
In regard to the actual numbers, I didn't find any thing significant other than the fact that the largeness of them gives some indication of how great the miracle was. The gospel accounts don't seem to press their significance beyond that aspect.
Incidentally, in connection with the Society's idea of "feeding the many by means of the few," see my post here. Also compare Luke 6:17, which describes a time is prior to the feeding of the 5000 in Matthew 14:13-21. Jesus already had "a great crowd of his disciples." Hardly the "few" that the Society would like you to think of with regard to spiritual feeding. It wasn't until sometime after this feeding that "many of his disciples went off to the things behind and would no longer walk with him." (John 6:66)
Take Care
