Skip to main content

Is Bread Meet?

Yes, pun intended.

With that out of the way, I've been thinking about Christ's various injunctions about bread, both the temporal and the spiritual, found in the scriptures.

On the one hand, he teaches us of our dependency on it and the provisions He makes for us to fill that need. First, he provided us the ability to work. In the garden of Eden, Christ taught Adam: By the sweat of thy brow shalt thou earn thy bread all the days of thy life. Second, he provided prayer. In the Lord's Prayer, he reminds us to pray, "Give us this day our daily bread."

We probably don't think a whole lot about our dependence on food, it being such a key part of human sustenance. I know that I don't unless I'm writing a blog post where our mutual dependence on food is a key point within it. When dinner rolls (pun intended) around, I want food, but I don't often separate myself Josh from being myself the eater of food. Perhaps someone who is dependent on smoking might have a mental separation between they the smoker and they the person, but I believe few conceptualize themselves as food-eating humans verses that non-food-eating variety.

Such a dependence is built into human nature, but Christ asks us to overcome it just like all natures intrinsic to our mortal probation. Sometimes He does this by direct schoolmaster-type commandments. The two that come to mind are fasting and the Word of Wisdom. These indeed have direct health benefits, but there is a much more fundamental reason that they are given. Indeed, one might imagine a number of people who regularly fast and devoutly obey the Word of Wisdom, but still don't "get it", whether by looking beyond the mark or by drawing their lips nigh but not their hearts.

This brings me to the other hand. The Lord, after fasting himself for 40 days, is tempted by the adversary to turn stone into bread. (In fact, he says "***If*** though art the son of God...," which is one of the most potent lessons in the New Testament, compare this "if" with the "if" in Daniel 3:18. Which "if" is yours?) Christ answers with utmost meekness, deferring not to his divine authority as the son of God which Satan had just drawn into question but instead to the written word (you think you should start keeping a journal now?), "It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God".

Wait? Not by bread alone? This comes from the Man that knows full well that the mortal vessels in which He placed the spirits of men need food to survive. Indeed, the Lord isn't advocating fruits and vegetables nor the Atkins diet. Nor is he referring to "live" as "maintain the vitality of our tabernacle of clay". He is teaching us the eternal rule that life cannot be limited to the meaningless biological and chemical processes of self-sustaining; hedonism doth not a child of God make.

Which is an interesting point at which to find ourselves. I have already admitted that I don't naturally separate myself from my eating self, yet Christ asks me to do just that. He gives us a slight out with the word "alone," but there is more to it as He clearly juxtaposes the temporal with the eternal in His answer to Satan.

We get more on the topic from Him in the Bread of Life sermon. After the miracle of the loaves and fishes--the living by bread part--many begin to follow Him a little bit more persistently, probably wanting to live a little bit more by bread. (Do we do this, by the way? Do we sometimes treat Christ as a glorified butler, fetching for us the temporal and materialistic desires of our hearts? Or, have you ever gone to a meeting *because* refreshments would follow?) He calls them out in John 6:26: "Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves and were filled."

He teaches them rather pointedly (though not as pointedly as the pharisees! =]) that if they are going to follow Him, they have to learn to seek him for spiritual reasons and not just for materialistic ones. When they see Him as the bread of *real* life, then will their physical desires for sustenance not be misdirected.

What's the big picture, then? Christ teaches that there is a distinct difference between ends and means and that while our mortal coil is desperately dependent on bread, bread can in no way be an end unto itself any more than preserving our own life is an end unto itself. These things are means by which we can accomplish the things that are the ends of mortal existence: To build a faith-based relationship with God (Hosea 6:6), to strengthen the feeble knees (Doctrine and Covenants 81:5), to prepare to meet God (John 17:3).

This is, of course, a principle for our entire lives. We are left with temporal (insufficient and meaningless) means to accomplish eternal (sufficient and meaningful) ends. We are given our ears, but then are asked to listen instead to a still small voice. We are given hunger, but then asked to not be driven by it. We are given sight, but then asked instead to walk by faith.

Distinguishing between our mortality and our immortality is the very challenge given to fallen man, and it is encapsulated in Christ's teachings about bread. It is a challenge only to be superseded by the higher laws of resurrection--where our temporal and atemporal natures are combined forever--and exaltation--where we ourselves become the end.

P.S.: A note on the word "meaningless". The words from "For the Beauty of the Earth" hardly seem to support the idea of meaninglessness when it comes to the Lord's creations. But, if God weren't really there and this were all a cosmic accident, wouldn't it be pretty meaningless in the end? I think so. Those things are meaningful not because they have any meaning on their own but because God's existence gives them meaning. Kind of like how we ourselves are nothing without God and everything with Him.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How Many Teeth Does The Tooth Fairy Pick Up Each Night in Utah?

Somebody asked me a question about my Tooth Fairy post the other day that got me thinking. How many baby teeth are lost every day in Utah? I began with Googling. Surely someone else has thought of this and run some numbers, right? Lo, there is a tooth fairy site that claims that the Tooth Fairy collects 300,000 teeth per night . That's a lot; however, when I ran the numbers, it started to seem awfully low. Let's assume that the Tooth Fairy collects all baby teeth regardless of quality and we assume that all children lose all their baby teeth. The world population of children sits at 2.2 billion , with 74.2 million of them in the United States. Of those, approximately 896,961 of them are in Utah . This means that somewhere around .04077% of the world's children are in Utah. If we assume that kids in Utah lose teeth at the same rate as all other children in the world and that each day in the year is just as likely as the rest to lose a tooth, then we have that of

BYU and the Sunday Compromise?

I read an article by Brad Rock this morning where he quoted heavily from Dr. Thomas Forsthoefel who was giving his opinion on religious institutions being involved in sports . BYU , of course, came up. I think Forsthoefel came off sounding a bit misinformed about the culture, drive, mission, etc. of BYU . Below is the email that I sent to Brad Rock this morning after finishing the article: Brad - That was an interesting article. I tend to disagree with Forsthoefel, though, or at least disagree with what I may have read into his comments. A quote in your article says: "There may be a kind of growing pain. BYU is in the real world and the real world works on Sunday. Can we (BYU) live with the adjustment? I'm empathetic with that, whatever decision is made, people are going to be unhappy.… Some will say get with the program, we'll be OK at the next level, others will say we've sold out and we've made a deal with the world." This seems to suggest one o

Baby Names: What my daughter's name has to do with an ancient Persian Fairy Tales

If you read my previous post on my sons' names, you'll know that this post is about my daughters' names. When we found out that we were going to have twins, I vowed that there names were not going to rhyme or alliterate. We weren't going to do Jadyn and Jordan, or Kim and Tim, or Esther and Edgar (all likely candidates for other, less elitist parents, especially Esther and Edgar). I did want the names to have something to do with one another somehow. Felicity Mae Cummings Felicity's first name has little to do with its underlying Hebrew meaning or its tie to Biblical history and everything to do with the fact that this was a name that Kristi had always wanted one of her girls to have because she liked that it meant "happiness". So, to tell you the truth, I didn't do a lot of research on this name because its place in our family had already been decided. But, it was excellent material to work with. The initial spark that 'Felicity' pro