Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 6:43
And they took up twelve baskets full of the fragments, and of the fishes.
43. they took up ] in obedience to our Lord’s command (Joh 6:12), Who would teach them that wastefulness even of miraculous power was wholly alien to the Divine economy.
baskets ] “tuelue coffyns full,” Wyclif. All the Evangelists alike here use cophinoi for the small common wicker-baskets, in which these fragments were collected, at the feeding of the Five Thousand, and the word spurides, or large rope-baskets, when they describe the feeding of the Four Thousand. These wicker baskets were the common possession of the Jews, in which to carry their food in order to avoid pollution with heathens; “Judaeis, quorum cophinus foenumque supellex,” Juv. Sat. III. 14. The same distinction is made by our Lord when He alludes to both miracles (Mar 8:19-20; Mat 16:9-10).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 43. Twelve baskets] These were either the baskets used by the disciples, see Mt 14:20, or baskets belonging to some of the multitude, who might have brought some with them to carry provisions, or other things necessary for the sick, whom they brought to Christ to be healed.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
43. And they took up twelve basketsfull of the fragments, and of the fishes“Therefore (saysJoh 6:13), they gathered themtogether, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the fivebarley loaves, which remained over and above unto them that hadeaten.” The article here rendered “baskets” in all thefour narratives was part of the luggage taken by Jews on a journeytocarry, it is said, both their provisions and hay to sleep on, thatthey might not have to depend on Gentiles, and so run the risk ofceremonial pollution. In this we have a striking corroboration of thetruth of the four narratives. Internal evidence renders it clear, wethink, that the first three Evangelists wrote independently of eachother, though the fourth must have seen all the others. But here,each of the first three Evangelists uses the same word to express theapparently insignificant circumstance that the baskets employed togather up the fragments were of the kind which even the Romansatirist, JUVENAL, knew bythe name of cophinus, while in both the narratives of thefeeding of the Four Thousand the baskets used are expressly said tohave been of the kind called spuris. (See Mar 8:19;Mar 8:20.)
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And they took up twelve baskets full of the fragments,…. Of the broken pieces of bread, after all had eaten, and were satisfied:
and of the fishes; what remained of them:, for though there was but one loaf for a thousand persons and more, and two small fishes to be divided among five thousand and more: yet, through the wonderful power of Christ increasing both, as they were distributing and eating, there was enough of both for them all, and such a quantity of each left as filled twelve baskets.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Baskets full [ ] . Lit., fillings of baskets. See on Mt 14:20. Mark alone adds, and of the fishes.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And they took up twelve baskets full,” (kai eran dodeka kophinon pleromata) “And they gathered up twelve full baskets,” more than twelve times the original quantity, or baskets that they had filled, when the much people or the multitude had finished eating, or filling themselves, Mar 6:34.
2) “Of the fragments, and of the fishes.” (klasmata kata apo ton ichtuon) “As fragments (of bread) and from the fishes,” frugal, wasting nothing, as an expression of gratitude for what God had done before and for them, Pro 18:9; Luk 15:13.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
‘And they took up broken pieces, twelve basketfuls, and also of the fish. And those who ate the loaves were five thousand men.’
The term for ‘basket’ denotes the wicker basket (kophinos) carried regularly by Jews, (and for which they were well known), so that they could take their provisions with them, undefiled by the world. It was indeed a popular joke among Gentiles. From where did the baskets come? They probably belonged to the disciples, although being empty.
The broken pieces would not have been gathered from the grass, (poor men did not throw away food), but would be those left over after the distribution. They were gathered so as to be eaten later. The significance of the twelve basketfuls over was that God’s supply was not only for the present but continued into the future. There was sufficient for the twelve tribes of Israel to go on being fed by Him.
‘Those who ate the loaves were five thousand men.’ The disciples had good reason to know. They had arranged the crowd in groups and had distributed the bread to the men of the households, although five thousand may be a round number. Five is the number of covenant, and ‘a thousand’ means ‘a large number’. Here the large covenant community had been fed.
But while the disciples were aware of the extent of this miraculous feeding we must recognise that that was not necessarily so for the crowds. What the disciples saw close up they only saw at a distance, and many were quite some distance away. They obviously realised that there were not huge stocks of food there but it would seem to them that the disciples (or someone) had at least twelve baskets of food available, for they saw at least twelve baskets and were not to know that the twelve baskets were empty. What they saw was the food coming round in abundance, more than twelve basketfuls could hold. They did not know exactly where from, and they probably remembered the parallel incident with Elisha From what John tells us they must have suspected that something unusual was happening, but they were probably not quite sure what.
John, however, tells us that they certainly saw it as a sign sufficient to arouse their interest so as to want to press home claims to make Him king (Joh 6:14), although nowhere in all four Gospels is any great surprise revealed as there would normally have been at a miracle He had performed. It seems that most knew that a miracle had happened, but did not realise the extent of it. To both Mark and the Apostles, of course, it was a genuine ‘sign’ of Who Jesus was. Thus we are probably safe in assuming that the crowd themselves did not realise quite how great a miracle it was. Probably the main significance to them of the event was that it was the initial experience of the coming of the good times promised by the prophets. On the other hand they did see it as ‘bread from Heaven’ and perceive that a miracle had taken place (Joh 6:14). And sadly what they then sought was not spiritual life but more of such physical bread (Joh 6:26).
So What Message Was Jesus Seeking to Convey?
Firstly we must recognise that this was an act of compassion. It was not something for which Jesus had prepared. He had been trying to avoid the crowds, not arranging to see them. It was because He had compassion on them that He did what He did. However there can be no question that what He did He did for a purpose, for He knew what might ensue as news of the miracle spread round. Thus we can be sure that it had been His intention to do this at some stage in His ministry.
The major question is what further significance it had. The following should be considered.
1) He was revealing that He had come as the bread of life (Joh 6:35). Just as Moses had fed God’s people in the wilderness with bread from Heaven, so Jesus was now here to feed men with the new bread from Heaven which was Himself (Joh 6:31-33). Those who came to Him would never hunger. Those who believed on Him would never thirst (Joh 6:35). They would partake of bread from heaven which would give them life for ever (Joh 6:51), and they would do so by coming to Him and believing on Him (Joh 6:35). The bread they had already received was a promise of the sufficiency and certainty of this new bread (see Isa 55:2; Pro 9:5), and He would achieve His purpose by giving His flesh for the life of the world so that He could give everlasting life to those who came to Him (Joh 6:51).
2) It was an indication that the One had come Who would introduce the new age promised by the prophets when men would feast at God’s table, the so-called Messianic Feast (Isa 25:6-8; compare Luk 13:29; Luk 14:15; Luk 22:16; Luk 22:30).
3) It looked forward to a day when through His death, and participation in the benefits of that death, men would find forgiveness, justification and new life in Him (Joh 6:51-58). This latter was a different lesson from 1) which was spoken to the crowds. This was spoken to His opponents who were planning His death. It finds its final portrayal in the bread and wine at the Lord’s Table. There are verbal similarities in Mark between this passage and the Last Supper.
4) It indicated that One was here Who was greater then Moses (who received bread from God for the people, but did not provide it himself – Exodus 16), greater than David (who provided holy bread for his followers, but by natural means – 1 Samuel 21), greater than the prophets whose representatives Elijah and Elisha also fed men miraculously (1Ki 17:8-16 and especially2Ki 4:42-44) but to a more limited extent. 2Ki 4:42-44 was the pattern for this feast, but whereas Elisha had fed a hundred, Jesus fed five thousand. The expectancy of the Jews was that the coming Messiah would provide manna, as Moses had, in the coming age. This revelation of Jesus as greater than Moses and Elijah, who in Jewish eyes represented the Law and the Prophets, is also found at the Transfiguration where both point to Him (Mar 9:4-5 see also Joh 3:14; Joh 5:45-46).
5) It was a reminder to the disciples that God could provide their physical needs and that therefore they should concentrate on things of the Spirit (Mar 8:14-21).
6) It was an indication that One had come Who had such power over nature that He could produce food from mere remnants and control creation. It was a pointer to the Kingly Rule of God (see Mar 6:51-52; Mar 8:14-21).
7) As a pointer to the Kingly Rule of God it was in direct contrast to the ‘meal’ that men’s rule provided, the head of a godly prophet (Mar 6:28). Here was clearly portrayed the contrast between the two ‘kingly rules’.
There are good grounds for seeing in this feeding God’s offer of salvation to the Jews through Jesus, and in the later feeding (Mar 8:1-10) God’s similar offer to the Gentiles. This feeding was of people who had specifically come from Galilee, and the baskets that gathered the fragments were distinctively Jewish baskets by which Jews were recognised everywhere. Furthermore the number five is prominent here (five thousand men, five loaves) and that was the covenant number of Israel. The covenant of God was given specifically on two tablets in two sets of five (Exo 32:15-16; Exo 34:1); there are five books of the Law in the covenant; the five books of Psalms govern covenant worship; there are five fingers to the hand with which a covenant is sealed (Gen 14:22; Gen 24:9; Exo 17:16; Job 17:3); five and its multiples are predominant in the Tabernacle and the Temple, thus the measurements in the Tabernacle were mainly in multiples of five; the altar was five cubits by five cubits; peace offerings for the people were in fives (apart from oxen) – Num 7:17-83; the cost of redemption was five shekels – Num 18:16.
The other feeding was in Gentile territory and followed Jesus’ dealings with the Syro-Phoenician woman. The number of persons there was four thousand, four being the number of mankind. Four rivers from Eden encompass the world (Gen 2:10); there are four ‘corners’ of the earth (Rev 7:1; Rev 20:8); the four winds or spirits of earth and heaven affect mankind (Jer 49:36; Daniel 2, 7; Zec 6:5; Rev 7:1); the four angels of judgment affect mankind (Rev 9:14); four horns in Zechariah represent the outside world’s attack on God’s people (Zec 1:18-19; four beasts represent world empire in Daniel; four living creatures represent creation in Ezekiel and Revelation. The other prominent number in the account is seven which was the universal sacred number. (Compare also the five kings who represented the covenant land as against four kings representing the outside world in Genesis 14).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
43 And they took up twelve baskets full of the fragments, and of the fishes.
Ver. 43. See Trapp on “ Mat 14:20 “ See Trapp on “ Joh 6:12 “ See Trapp on “ Joh 6:13 “ See Trapp on “ Joh 6:14 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Mar 6:43 . , etc., and they tool up, as fragments ( , [57] [58] ), the fillings ( ) of twelve baskets. , and of the fishes, either over and above what was in the twelve baskets (Fritzsche), or some fragments of the fishes included in them (Meyer).
[57] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.
[58] Codex Regius–eighth century, represents an ancient text, and is often in agreement with and B.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
baskets. Greek kophinos = a Jewish wicker travel ling basket. The same word as in Mar 8:19; not the same word as in Mar 8:8, Mar 8:20.
of = from. Greek. apo. App-104.
of the fishes. Only mentioned here.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Mar 8:19, Mar 8:20
Reciprocal: 2Ki 4:43 – They shall eat
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
3
Another proof that no miraculous effect was given to the bread so as to satisfy the hunger, is the fact that they found all these scraps left after the meal.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mar 6:43. Among the many peculiarities of the various accounts of this miracle and the similar one (Mat 15:32-39; Mar 8:1-9), none are more remarkable than the variety of expressions used to tell of what was gathered by the disciples. Among the six accounts no two are precisely alike. It is impossible to reproduce the dissimilarity.
And of the fishes. This also is peculiar to Mark, the conclusion of the previous statement (Mar 6:41). What remained of the fishes was probably included in the contents of the twelve baskets, although John seems to limit these to the fragments of the loaves.