| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Matthew's Feeding Miracles and Astro-Theology

Page history last edited by John F. Felix 14 years, 10 months ago

A Possible Astro-Theological Interpretation of Matthew's Feeding Miracles

 

The two miracles of Jesus, feeding the five thousand and later the four thousand is quite a puzzle, as Jesus intimates that both have a message, concerning the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees, and the key is numerical, in relation to what I believe is a message concerning the astro-theological concept of the Age of Pisces.

 

That Jesus is the Lord of the Piscean Age is symbolized by the "two fishes" of the feeding of the 5,000, and "a few little fishes" of the miracle of the 4,000, as first proposed by numerous authorities. In either case, the disciples have received their spiritual food, symbolized by the five loaves, but little understanding of the astro-theological message that Jesus proclaims. They are, in addition, selfish, knowing that the two fish can be divided into 12 equal parts, and the five loaves each into six parts, all twelve disciple receiving three equal pieces of bread but, alas, 1/6 of a fish, however enough to sustain them for the night. Spiritually they are like Jesus' enemies, coming to Jesus first, wanting to dismiss the crowds, so they can partake of their privileged position as disciples, thus showing no concern that the people may have difficulty getting food, whether you take food to be the Gospel or real nourishment.

 

In contrast, Jesus comes to the disciples first when the 4,000 need food, saying he does feel compassion, unlike them, who complain that they don't have enough to feed the 4,000, but again enough for themselves. After the second miraculous feeding, he casually mentions that the message of both occurrences was to teach them to beware the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducess. Why?

 

He then elaborates a numerical puzzle which, hitherto, was very opaque. He asks how many loaves they had in relation to the 5,000, and how many loaves they had in relation to the 4,000, then asks them to say the remainder collected in baskets.

 

The disciples reply, and Jesus chastises them for mistaking leaven for the leaven of bread, rather than the doctrine of his enemies. The connection becomes apparent when the numbers are put into a ratio, for that is what Jesus is constructing. The first miracle fed 5,000 with five loaves, with 12 baskets remaining, while the second time, 4,000 were fed with 7 loaves, with 7 baskets remaining. Notice that the second miracle produces a perfect ratio: 7 loaves/4,000 in ratio to 7 baskets/x, or 7x = 28,000, so x = 4,000. Jesus' wisdom, and the significant perfect number seven, is exactly what they need.

 

In the first miracle, the ratio is, 5 loaves/5,000 in ratio to 12 baskets/x, or = 5x = 60,000, so x = 12,000, the disciples therefore producing an inflated amount of food in over-abundence, the effect alluded to by Jesus as the result of putting leaven in bread, causing the dough to rise.

 

So one point Jesus may be making with these miracles is that the disciples taught nothing different from the enemy doctrine the first time, which they wish to keep as elitist knowledge (symbolized by their selfishness), with only a little Piscean understanding at first, then later, when their knowledge has improved, they preach the true Gospel, yet they still wish to be elitist. The selfishness of the Twelve is a lesson they must learn in due course. Also note that the disciples fed more people with less bread the first time (gaining many converts), implying that more people will flock to the false doctrines the disciples/Pharisees/Sadducees preached than to the truth that Jesus preached.

In any case, in Matthew, Jesus goes from explaining parables to explaining miracles, implying either that he can control each miraculous outcome precisely to fit a later point, or that he is explaining a parable, which has somehow become written up as an historical event.

Copyright (c) 2008 by John F. Felix. All rights reserved.

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.