Yeah sure, God become man. And He definitely rose from the dead. But there’s no way he multiplied loaves and fishes for people to eat.
That’s the logic of so many when they deny the physical nature of the miracle of loaves and fishes from yesterday’s Gospel. What is the problem some people have with this miracle?
I’ve heard it argued (even from the pulpit) that this was not a physical miracle but a spiritual one in that the people were so moved by Jesus’ words that they shared. Come on, if it was just about sharing, do they really believe all four gospel writers would’ve mentioned the story.
Case in point. I read this today from the Arkansas Catholic:
Did Jesus really create miracle of multiplying loaves, fishes?
Q. We heard at Sunday Mass the Gospel (from Matthew) on the miracle of the loaves and fish. Our priest said the miracle was a spiritual one, in which everyone shared what they had and everyone ate. He never stated that it was indeed a physical miracle of multiplying the bread and fish, as I was led to believe in reading the Bible. Which is true? (Seeds of Faith, Question Corner)
At it’s heart, isn’t questioning this physical miracle questioning Jesus himself. Why can you believe that God created the heavens, man, earth, fish, the stars but have a problem believing He multiplied loaves and fishes?
Never mind the implications that particular gospel has on the Eucharist. Is it an overall problem with the miraculous. I mean, perhaps it’s easier for some to believe in the huge miracle of creation than in the more “mundane” miracles of water into wine and multiplying loaves and fishes. Don’t know why though.