I think the two scenarios in part one come down to this distinction. The first demonstrates power followed by goodness. The second displays goodness followed by power.
With the first interpretation, a supernatural feat is performed displaying power. Power over the physical universe. But power, in itself, is not necessarily good. Do we follow someone or something because it is powerful, or because we deem it to be good?
Jesus did use his power for goodness in the story, of course - to feed people. But then should we wonder why he does not use that power today? People are hungry all over the world. One could also argue whether goodness is possible without some level of sacrifice. Conjuring food out of thin air is not an act of sacrifice, and there is no real risk involved. But sharing does demand risk and sacrifice. Of course, Jesus speaks of loving your neighbor (and your enemy), and I suppose we might take him more seriously if he has supernatural power.
Another point to consider: Is the “supernatural” more beautiful or powerful than the reality we see everyday? How is conjuring a loaf out of the air more beautiful than small seeds planted in the ground “miraculously” turning into plants which are then harvested by human hands and gradually turned into food? Which is more aesthetically pleasing? Which is more powerful?
As John Donne writes, “There is nothing that God hath established in a constant course of nature but would seem a miracle, and exercise our admiration, if it were done but once.”
In the second interpretation, Jesus demonstrates goodness itself through action. Not merely through words alone, and not through a (literally) “free lunch” approach to doing a good work. He promotes community, actively realized through a shared meal. Fear from individual separateness, from the possibility of hunger, is overcome through an example which requires risk and sacrifice. Perhaps there might not have been enough, or people would not share, or the instigator of the sharing might not get anything back....
The second situation shows a real potential power that is coiled and ready to be released at any moment in time - any time we can invoke the spirit of Jesus feeding the 5,000. It requires no supernatural ability. It requires what he have in front of us. Perhaps in our search for magic we forget that the entire world is magic. And we are here, a floating awareness here and now. Perhaps in our quest for something which can break physical laws, we miss the real question concerning that something - “What is the benefit?” When we answer that question, we might find that it is possible to reach that benefit despite our interpretation of the loaves and fishes story.
I also like this saying by Jesus when the crowd, that he has fed, finds him and questions him afterwards. Jesus says, “Very truly, I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves.”
Goodness vs. power. Which is primary? Which is more appealing to you or to me?
In scenario one, Jesus has power over natural laws through his status as a supernatural being (fully God and fully man). In scenario two, Jesus has power over people through goodness and example, perhaps appealing to the power inside each one of us, and we might argue that he could still be described as fully God and fully man, if we look to God for His goodness.