New Wine, Old Wineskins

PDF

As I mentioned this morning, there is, without question, a concerted effort on the part of Evangelical Christians to make Jesus fit into our culture, to make Him acceptable to the culture around us. As I considered that this week, I was struck with the fact (as I studied this next passage in the Gospel of Mark) how contrary to the spirit of Jesus that is. Because as you look at Jesus in the first century, as you see Him unfolded and unpacked on the pages of the New Testament. He is anything but in step with the culture around Him.

In fact, we are in the middle of a section in Mark's Gospel that begins in 2:1, and runs through 3:6, that documents this sort of rising opposition against Him in Galilee. All five episodes in this section come from the Pharisees and the religious rulers of Israel.

The first episode comes in 2:1-12, and it's followed by a sort of unspoken criticism and questioning in the hearts of these religious leaders.

The second, third, and fourth episodes in the rest of chapter 2, issue forth in three verbal confrontations between Jesus and these religious leaders.

And the fifth episode in chapter 3:1-6, initiates a plot to take the life of Jesus Christ.

Tonight, we come to the third in this series of five confrontations. It's in Mark 2, and it begins in verse 18 and runs down through verse 22. Let me read it for you. Mark 2:18,

John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting; and they came and said to Him, "Why do John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?" And Jesus said to them, "While the bridegroom is with them, the attendants of the bridegroom cannot fast, can they?

So long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. But the days will come

when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day. No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; otherwise the patch pulls away from it, the new from the old, and a worse tear results. No one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the wine will burst the skins, and the wine is lost, and the skins as well; but one puts new wine into fresh wineskins."

Now on the surface of this section the issue seems to be fasting, and it certainly is. But as Jesus' answer will show, and as you saw in those last couple of verses, the real issue was much deeper and much more far reaching than fasting. Now, this passage that we want to look at tonight divides easily into three parts.

You have, first of all, a specific question about fasting in verse 18.

Then you have a specific answer from our Lord about fasting.

And that's followed then, the third part, by a general principal about Jesus' kingdom. And we learn that general principle in two parables that I just read for you.

So then, let's look at each of these in order. Let's begin then with their specific question about fasting. Verse 18, it says, "John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting; and they came to Him and said to Him, 'Why do John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but your disciples do not fast?'" Now John's disciples here refer of course to John the Baptist. John the Baptist was the forerunner of the Messiah. He had made the point that he was merely the forerunner, that Jesus was the Messiah. You'll remember those immortal words in John 4 where He says, I'm about making sure He increases, and it's OK for me to decrease. John did everything he could to direct his disciples to then become the followers of their Messiah. At least two of Jesus' Apostles had been disciples of John: Peter and Andrew. You could read that in John 1:40.

Now, by the time of this encounter in Mark 2, significant time has passed in Jesus' ministry, and John the Baptist has been arrested for sure, and he may even have already been executed. We're not sure. But there were still some of John's disciples who continued to be more John's disciples than they were Jesus, their Messiah's disciples. In fact, if you fast forward some twenty years after Jesus died and was resurrected and ascended into heaven, some twenty years. Paul shows up in Acts 19 in Ephesus and there meets those who had been baptized with John's baptism who didn't yet know of Jesus. So, there's John's disciples, and there're the Pharisees. John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting. Mark lets his Roman audience understand what this was all about.

Now all three Synoptics, that's Matthew, Mark, and Luke (The word "synoptic" – you'll hear me use that from time to time – "syn" means "together," and "optic" means "to see." "To see together." The three Gospels that tend to see the events in the life of Christ very similarly: Matthew, Mark and Luke. John sort of goes his own way; he records a lot of material the others do not.), so the Synoptics: Matthew, Mark, and Luke, in all three of them this account follows the feast that Matthew gave in Jesus' honor that we've just recently studied. And it's possible there's a good reason they're connected.

It's possible that while John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting, Jesus and His disciples were feasting at Matthew's house, and so that prompts this question. So, Mark says, "they came." You notice the "they" pronoun? They came. We can't be sure exactly who it was that came and asked the questions. In Matthew's Gospel John's disciples ask the question. And the implication in Luke is that the Pharisees did, and so it's very likely that there was a mixed group of both. That's the implication here in Mark. Verse 18 says they came, and they asked a basic question. Here's how Luke puts it, he says, "And they said to Him, 'the disciples of John often fast and offer prayers; the disciples of the Pharisees also do the same; but Yours eat and drink.'" What do you mean skippin' out on the fast days?

Now to fully understand the question here, you have to understand a little background – both Old Testament and New Testament. And so, let me just take you through a little tour of fasting, because it's important for you to understand this. The three pillars of first century Judaism were prayer, alms giving, and fasting. These were the most important expressions in a private individual's life. Of course, going to the temple, the sacrificial system, all of that, but in an individual's life these were the three pillars: prayer, alms giving, and fasting. Fasting is simply abstaining from all food for some period of time.

When you look at the Scripture there is non-religious fasting. That is there's fasting that has nothing to do with God; it's simply a response to violent emotions. We see this even today, don't we? But you had Jonathan's anger at his father Saul, and so he didn't eat. And you even had wicked Ahab who was mad that he didn't get Naboth's vineyard, and he fasted. So sometimes people go without food simply to demonstrate, or in response to, a violent emotion.

But there is also religious fasting, fasting for religious purposes, and that's what I want to give you a brief survey of in the next few minutes. I want to look first at the Old Testament, fasting in the Old Testament. In the Old Testament law there was only one fast that was required, and that was the Day of Atonement. You can read about it in Leviticus 16. And essentially this is what it says, "… you shall humble your souls." That came to be understood as refraining from food, as not eating, and so it was a required fast. One day a year in the fall, you were required as an Israelite to go without food for twenty-four hours.

After the Babylonian captivity, about five hundred B.C., the Jews added four more annual fasts; all of them related to the destruction of their country under the Babylonians. You can read about these in Zechariah 7:5 and 8:19. There was a fast on the tenth month to commemorate Nebuchadnezzar's siege of Jerusalem; a fast in the fourth month, his breaching the walls of Jerusalem after the siege; the fifth month, the burning of the temple and other important buildings; and the seventh month, the assassination of the then leader of Israel, Gedaliah. So, there were these five compulsory annual fasts.

But fasting was often practiced in the Old Testament voluntarily for a variety of reasons. There was fasting for national tragedies of various kinds, various crises on a national level like war and plague and drought and famine, etcetera, etcetera.

There was also fasting for personal reasons. Some of them for example were for sickness. Some people fasted as David did. You remember when his child, born to Bathsheba grew ill David fasted. Also, the Psalmist fasted for his sick friends in Psalm 35.

There was fasting as an act of mourning over the death of someone you loved. For example, David and the children of Israel did it over Saul and Johnathan after their death.

There was also fasting for penitence because of sin. You see it in the life of Ahab in 1 Kings:21, and even in Ezra after the people hear the law read. They're repentant for their sins, and they go without food as an expression of that.

Another personal reason to fast in the Old Testament was impending danger. You anticipated danger, and you fasted and prayed in hopes that that danger would not come. For example, you remember Esther encouraged all of the people to fast before she went into the king to submit her request. You see it also in the journeys back from Babylon, and in these other, in other passages as well. So, these were some of the voluntary reasons. You had the five: one in the Law, the Day of Atonement; four others added after the Babylonian captivity that are not in the Scripture, that are not required by God but were simply added by the Jews. And then there were all these voluntary reasons to fast.

Now when people fasted in the Old Testament, the duration of time varied. The most common amounts of time were from sunrise to sundown for one day. Another would be for one night, and a third would be a 24-hour period such as on the Day of Atonement. Those were the most common time periods in which to fast.

There're others mentioned in Scripture. There's a fast of three days that's mentioned, a fast of seven days, and of course, the extreme in three cases (Moses, Elijah, and Christ), forty days fast; miraculously sustained by God. A number of Old Testament characters fasted. David, Nehemiah, Esther, and Daniel all fasted.

Now if you were going to fast, even in the Old Testament it had to be for the right reason: the idea of humbling yourself before God. Listen to David in 2 Samuel 12:22. He fasted, you remember, for the child, and he said this to his attendants who were surprised that once the child died, he stopped fasting. "He said, 'While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, 'Who knows, the LORD may be gracious to me, that the child may live.'" Now what's very important to notice here is that David didn't think that his fasting would earn the child's healing. That's how most people think about fasting, and as we'll see, that's how the Jews of the first century thought about fasting. That their going without food would earn brownie points with God, would earn something from God.

But David says no, I'm hoping and praying that the LORD will be gracious to me. That He will show me grace. There will be no attachment between my fasting and His responding to my prayers. If He responds, it will be all grace. It was David's way of humbling himself before God, of acknowledging his own sin and involvement in this situation with the child – Bathsheba's child.

You also have Ahab, wicked King Ahab, in 1 Kings 21. You remember he's told that he will face judgment because of his sin, and verse 27 says, "It came about when Ahab heard these words, that he tore his clothes … [put on sackcloth and fasted, and he lay in sackcloth and went about despondently." Listen to how God responds to His prophet as a result of that. He says, "Do you see how Ahab has humbled himself before Me? Because he has humbled himself before Me, I will not bring the evil in his days, but I will bring the evil upon his house in his son's days." So, it was about humbling yourself before God, not earning something from God, but an act of humiliation of yourself before God, praying for grace. That's Old Testament fasting.

Now, let's fast forward the four hundred years between the Testaments to the New Testament. There's no question but what fasting was practiced in Jesus' time. In Luke 2 we learn that Anna, you remember the righteous woman Anna, was involved in fasting. John the Baptist, as we're seeing in this passage, apparently taught his disciples to fast. Other first century disciples fasted, you remember, because Jesus in Matthew 6, the Sermon on the Mount says, when you fast, don't do like the hypocrites. Don't make it obvious that you're fasting so that everybody thinks "what a spiritual person." Instead, clean your face and anoint your hair; make it look like everything's fine, and do it in secret before God.

Apparently, however, Jesus Himself and His disciples didn't fast. The one exception was the forty days and forty nights at the temptation at the beginning of His ministry. There is no other biblical record of Jesus fasting. And in fact, in the passage we just saw in Luke, what do they say? We fast, John's disciples fast, but You and Your disciples eat and drink. That's why they called Him and winebibber and a glutton.

You move to the Apostolic Age. We know that Paul fasted after his conversion on the Damascus Road. Cornelius fasted in prayers hoping that God would answer and provide someone to tell him the Gospel. The early Christians in Antioch fasted as they decided who it was that they would set apart for the missionary ministry. But when you look at this issue of fasting in the Scripture, there are two interesting observations.

Number one, fasting is never commanded of Christians, and there is no mention of fasting at all in the Epistles. In a couple of translations you'll find the word "fasting" related to Paul, but when you look at it in its context, the word is actually a word which means "to go without food." It's not "voluntary" going without food; it's "involuntarily" going without food. So, those are some interesting observations as you look at it.

So, when you come then to Mark 2, both John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting, apparently on the same day. Now it may have been for different reasons; we don't know. It may be that John's disciples were fasting as the Pharisees did (as we'll see in a moment), or it may be that John's disciples were fasting because John was in prison or had just been executed, and they were mourning. And the Pharisees were fasting because it was their regimented thing to do. So, Jesus and His disciples were not however, and they ask Jesus why.

Now we know that the Pharisees maintained a regimented system of fasts that included every Monday and Thursday of every week. You remember in Luke 18, the Pharisee as he's praying there in the temple, he says I thank you God that I'm not like this terrible sinner over here, but I fast twice a week. We learn from a number of first century writings that that was Monday and Thursday. And they, apparently, concluded that all of those who were really serious about their faith would fast regularly as well. I think their question implies that their fasting demonstrated that they were superior in their religious devotion to those who didn't fast, and I think that's implied in how this question comes to Jesus. Now, that's the question. We do. We do it regularly. We do it twice a week, Monday and Thursday, along with those five other annual fasts: one of them prescribed by the Word of God, the Day of Atonement, the other four added. So why don't you? And why don't your disciples?

That brings us to the second part of this passage, and that is Jesus specific answer about fasting, Jesus' teaching on fasting. Notice in verse 19 what He says to them, "Jesus said to them, 'while the bridegroom is with them, the attendants of the bridegroom cannot fast, can they?'" That is a most unusual response from Christ. The question that He asks them, He asks them a question in return, the question both in Greek and in English expects a negative answer. "Of course not," would be the answer Jesus expects. Notice though what happens. Jesus has turned the tables on these people. These people come to Him saying, "we are mourning and fasting," and Jesus changes the entire image over to a celebration, to a wedding.

Now, it's pretty interesting what happened at a first century wedding. The wedding itself and the celebration for the wedding occurred after the bridegroom went with his groomsmen to the home of the bride and brought her back to his house, to their new house in a kind of parade that transpired. You read about that in the parable of the virgins – you remember in Matthew's Gospel. It's interesting, they were waiting for the bridegroom to come and get the bride. That evening when they got back to their new home, the marriage was consummated. And instead of a honeymoon (Which is what we do, where the couple leaves their family and friends and goes off somewhere privately.

Instead of a honeymoon like that), a wedding party would begin. And it would last – and you can judge which of these would be the better by the way – but it would last close to seven days for a virgin bride, and three days for a widow who was remarrying. This was some party. And you fathers (and I feel your pain) who've thought about wedding expenses – imagine that! The whole town shows up for a week! And there was food, and there was wine, and there was music, and there was dancing. And the guests had no responsibilities at all but to party.

To help the bridegroom with all the details, he would select a group of men much like our groomsmen, but instead of just standing on the stage and looking pretty, they would actually be responsible. They would be responsible to make sure that everything was prepared, and that the feast ran smoothly. They were called the "sons of the bridal-chamber." That's what it says in the Greek text here by the way. The New American Standard has translated it, "the attendants of the bridegroom" which is exactly the idea.

Here's what's interesting. Even the rabbis, even the Jewish rabbis of the time, taught that these attendants and the bride and groom and all of those attending the wedding celebration, were free from any of the religious requirements or observances that would hinder the celebration in any way, including the weekly fast. You didn't have to do it; you could party. You could enjoy because it was a great celebration. Weddings were an occasion of laughter and song and feasting and enjoyment, and that was universally recognized. So, Jesus takes that reality that was part of their life, and He gives it a different meaning.

So, what exactly did Jesus mean? Well, the bridegroom in His little statement here is obviously Himself; it's Jesus. You remember John the Baptist in John 3 had said, "He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom [referring to Himself, who stands as kind of the best man in our scenario, that's John the Baptist], who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom's voice. So, this joy of mine has been made full." So, the disciples were like the groomsmen, and John the Baptist was the best man. That's the image He's using, and Jesus Himself is the bridegroom.

Now obviously, that's not obviously Messianic; there's no place in the Old Testament where it said the Messiah would be the bridegroom. However, if you read the Old Testament, you're familiar with the Old Testament, you know that often God, Jehovah, Yahweh, calls Himself the Husband of Israel. And so, for Jesus to claim to be the bridegroom was a subtle way for Him to claim to be equal with God.

Now in His little statement here, not only is He the bridegroom, but the attendants of the bridegroom are Jesus' disciples. And Jesus … [says], "While the bridegroom is with them, the attendants of the bridegroom cannot fast, can they?" [expecting a negative answer. But then Jesus goes ahead and makes a definitive-positive statement.] "So long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast." [Of course not! It's ridiculous Jesus says, for My disciples to fast as long as I'm here. I love that because Jesus was saying this about His ministry: listen, there's a reason to party! I'm here! Let's have a feast! I've brought forgiveness and joy! This isn't a time to mourn; this isn't a time to weep; it's ridiculous for my disciples to fast. It would be like the attendants at a wedding fasting – and of course the Pharisees knew that didn't happen. That never happened. They themselves had freed them from having those responsibilities.

And then Jesus makes this amazing statement, verse 20, "But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day." Now that is a strange statement. Because in a first century wedding, the bridegroom and his bride stayed in their new home, and after the seven days were over it was the guests who left. But in this case Jesus says the bridegroom will be taken away. It's interesting, the word "taken away" here may imply a sort of violent removal. The bridegroom will be forcibly, violently taken away, and every commentator agrees that this a veiled reference to Jesus' crucifixion. And He says, "… then they will fast in that day." Their sorrow will make fasting perfectly appropriate then.

But even their sorrow wouldn't last for long. Turn over to John 16. You remember at The Last Supper, Jesus makes this comment, (He tells them to anticipate this.), verse 16 of John 16,

"A little while and you will no longer see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me." Some of the disciples then said to one another, "What is this thing He is telling us, 'A little while, and you will not see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me'; and, 'because I go to the Father'?' So, they were saying, "What is this that He says, 'A little while'? We do not know what He is talking about." Jesus knew that they wished to question Him, and He said to them, "Are you deliberating together about this.... [Verse 20] "Truly, truly, I say to you, that you will weep and lament, but the world will rejoice; you will grieve….'"

Jesus is saying listen, there's coming a time, in a short time, when I'm going to be taken away. I'm going to be taken violently away, and then you will mourn; then you will grieve; then you will fast. But look at verse 20, but it's just for a little while because

"… your grief will be turned into joy." [And He uses an-illustration from everyday life. He says] "Whenever a woman is in labor she has pain because her hour has come; but when she gives birth to the child, she no longer remembers the anguish because of the joy that a child has been born into the world. Therefore you too have grief now; [meaning over these next three days] [but] ... no one will take your joy away from you." [After I'm raised from the dead, your hearts will be filled with joy that can never be diminished.]

What's Jesus' point then? I can't put it any better than John Broadus puts it in his commentary on Matthew at the parallel point, parallel passage. Listen to what he says,

By this illustration [that is the illustration of the bridegroom and the disciples mourning when He's taken away] by this illustration, our Lord teaches that fasting is not to be regarded or observed as an arbitrary, positive institution [In other words, it's not like fasting is something you ought to schedule into your life.], but as a thing having natural grounds, and to be practiced or not according to the dictates of natural feeling as growing out of the circumstances in which we find ourselves.

[Jesus said look, if it's a wedding – don't fast. If, on the other hand, the bridegroom is violently taken away – fast. He says] "In some situations it is appropriate and may be made beneficial; in others it is out of place. We have no evidence that Jesus ever fasted Himself except in the quite extraordinary case of the forty days, but we know that the apostles and other Christians of their time fasted on special occasions. The principle here laid down cuts at the root of fasting as a regulated observance."

In other words, fasting is a reflection of a heart devastated. To schedule fasting makes no sense. That's what Jesus is saying. There are occasions when it's appropriate, and there are occasions when it's not. We'll talk more about that in just a moment, but let's move on to the third part of this passage.

Jesus moves to the general principle about His kingdom in verses 21 and 22. Jesus has answered their specific question about fasting. Why don't my disciples and I fast now? Because this is a time for celebration. This is a time for joy. The Messiah's here! But as our Lord so often does, He goes beyond the question they ask, and He answers the question they should have asked. The question they should have been asking is this: what is the relationship between Jesus and His teaching and first century Judaism? Because it was all wrapped up together. And Jesus answers this question and explains by way of two illustrations, both of which are similar in making the same point. More accurately, they are two parables. That's what Luke calls them in Luke 9. They're the first parables by the way, in Matthew's Gospel. I'm sorry, let me say that again. These parables, that we're running into here in Mark, are the first parables in Mark's Gospel – two of them.

The first one is about new patches on old garments. New patches on old garments. Look at verse 21. "No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; otherwise the patch pulls away from it, the new from the old, and a worse tear results." No one. In other words, Jesus says listen, this is common knowledge, everybody understands this. The key word here is "unshrunk." This word describes a woolen cloth that had not yet been processed by the fuller. The fuller's job would be to clean that wool, and to comb it to remove all the natural oils and gum, and then to bleach it. And through that process it would become preshrunk. Once that process was complete, the woolen cloth was ready to use, but if you used that cloth that had not been processed like that, then once it got wet it would shrink considerably.

In the first century most of the Jewish garments were made out of a hundred percent wool, and if they had not been properly prepared, the wool of that day would have shrunk just like flannel will shrink. So, if you tried to repair an old worn-out garment with a piece of unprepared, unshrunk cloth, when it got wet, it would shrink. And in shrinking it would further tear that old garment that you had attached it to. It would pull away from the old garment and even create a worse tear that was there before the patch. That's His first parable, His first illustration.

The second one is new wine in old wineskins. Look at verse 22. "No one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the wine will burst the skins, and the wine is lost and the skins as well; but one puts new wine into fresh wineskins." Again "no one." This is common knowledge. Now the first stage of wine fermentation in the ancient world was normally done in vats. And then after that first stage of fermentation, and after straining out the lees, the wine was placed in jars or in skins to complete the process – in animal skins.

A wineskin was made of leather, normally from the skin of a goat or a kid, and typically, what they would do is they would take that goat or that kid, and they would cut the head and the feet off. And then the animal would be skinned, and they would work hard to completely preserve the rest of the skin intact. Then they would partially tan the inside, the hair of course would remain outside, and all of the extremities would be sealed except for one. One hole, usually either the neck of the animal or one leg would simply be tied with a leather cord, and that would be where the wine would be put in and poured from.

At first, the leather of that Animal would be pliable And soft and would have elasticity. It would stretch and expand with the fermenting wine, but over time that skin, over months and years, that skin would become hard. It would lose its pliability just as all kinds of leather does. And so, if you put new wine into those old brittle wineskins, as that wine fermented and began to expand, it would conceivably rip that wineskin, and you would lose both the wineskin and the wine.

So, if you had new wine that was still fermenting and expanding, you had to put it in the new wineskins that were still pliable and would expand with the fermentation process. If you didn't, as the new wine fermented, it would expand and burst the old and brittle wineskin. And as a result, you lost everything: the new wine and the old wineskins. So, everyone knew this. Now, that's the parable; those are the parables.

Let me, as we close out time together, look at both parts of this story: first of all, the issue of fasting, and then we'll look at these sort of general principles our Lord has just given us. First of all, some conclusions about the practice of fasting. It's clear in Scripture that it is an acceptable expression of grief or sorrow. There's nothing wrong with fasting. However, it is not required of us, and even in the Old Testament it was only required for one day a year. It is never acceptable if it's done for the wrong reasons. And there's several of those documented (particularly in the Old Testament): if you're doing it merely to follow a ritual; if you're doing it to impress others; if you're doing it to take personal pride in the fact that you do it; or if you're doing it thinking you're going to earn God's favor in the process, that it's somehow meritorious. That God's going to be impressed and give you what you want.

By the way, I have to tell you that early in my Christian life I read about fasting, and that struck me, and I thought, wow! I need to fast. And I really had this in mind. I didn't really think about it at the time, but I can look back now and see that it was kind of the idea that wow, if before I go to preach at the prison this coming Saturday night, if I will fast, then surely God will be somehow committed to bless my ministry in a greater way; thinking about earning something. And of course, all I did was get desperately hungry. It never earns God's favor. It's humbling yourself before God, begging for His grace.

Number four, if you're going to fast, it must always be accompanied by (and this is always true in Scripture) prayer, mourning, and confession. Fasting is always attached to mourning. Whether it's mourning over circumstances and trouble and trials, or whether it's mourning over someone else and their troubles and trials; or whether it's mourning over your own sin. And it always is accompanied by confession. Because even if the main cause of the mourning isn't your sin, there's always sin to confess. It's interesting if you look at these passages – and because of time I won't turn there – but in Isaiah 58, Jeremiah 14, Zechariah 7, in each of those passages God says listen, if you're just going to fast for a ritual, forget it. I'm not interested; I'm not going to pay attention; I'm not going to listen. Humble your heart before Me. That's what I want. And that was always the key issue in fasting.

Now, let's look at where our Lord stepped away from fasting and gave those general principles that were much larger; conclusion from the two parables that He gives. Clearly, when you look at them, the new cloth and the new wine represent the teaching of Jesus. And in context the old worn-out garment and the old brittle wineskins represent the same thing: first century Judaism. And here's what we're supposed to learn: that if you try to mix the two, you will find them to be completely incompatible, and you will find them to be mutually destructive. They'll tear each other up. You'll lose both the wine and the wineskin. You'll lose both the old garment and the patch. They are incompatible.

Do you understand what's going on here? The question was about fasting, but Jesus steps back from the question about fasting and says let Me tell you something more important: this system you have constructed, this whole first century Judaism system that you have constructed is completely incompatible with who I am and what I teach. This was Jesus' call for a faith that was entirely separate from first century Judaism.

The patch? You know what that was about? Jesus did not intend His teaching to simply be a patch on the worn-out system of Judaism. He wasn't a reformer; He was there to start something new. Now don't misunderstand Me. Jesus doesn't mean that His ministry is incompatible with the Old Testament – if it's properly understood. He came to fulfill the Law and the prophets. What He's saying is, what I bring is incompatible with your distortion of the Old Testament, with this system that you've set up, this system of legalism. I didn't come to be a patch on your perversion of the Old Testament.

The new wine in old wineskins. Jesus was simply saying this: Me and my teaching can't be contained within the old worn-out forms and ceremonies and rituals and traditions of first century Judaism. Judaism couldn't contain Him and His teaching without destroying both Judaism and His teaching. And if the disciples had tried to do that it would have destroyed what Jesus began. By the way, this is the reason that we are not a sect of Judaism, but we are connected to the Christian faith. Christianity, Jesus said, could never be a reformed sect within Judaism because it had wandered too far from the intent and purposes of the Old Testament.

So, today we no longer battle first century Judaism. So, what does it mean for us? What's Jesus' point for us with these two parables of the new wine in old wineskins and the patch, new patch on an old worn-out garment. The point for us today is really two-fold: you can't add Jesus to any religious system in order to repair it or prop it up, and you can't contain Jesus within a religious system like that.

Let me just give you a couple of illustrations. There are a number of false religions that would love to claim some relationship to Jesus. Whether it's Islam, or Buddhism, or Hinduism; Jesus is a great prophet, Jesus' teachings are to be admired. Jesus said listen, I didn't come to be a patch on somebody's worn out perversion. The same is true with the cults. Whether you're talking about the Mormons or the Jehovah Witnesses or whatever you want to name. Jesus said, I didn't come to patch up something that can't be patched.

If you're talking about a works-based righteousness that is somehow tied to Scriptural Christianity like Roman Catholicism, or Anglicism in its most Roman Catholic form, or even some in the Church of Christ who have added baptism as a work that's required and yet claim biblical Christianity. Jesus said listen, I can't be contained in a system like that. It's like an old wineskin, and it'll merely crack, and you'll destroy both My teaching and the system you try to marry it to.

The same thing is true with modern philosophies. I began by saying there is an effort among evangelicals to marry Jesus to all kinds of things: to marry Jesus to humanism, to post-modernism (The emergent church wants to say Jesus is a post-modernist.), to marry Jesus to environmentalist. There are people who read the Bible and say Jesus was an environmentalist, or Jesus was a feminist. Listen, that's revisionist history. Jesus will not be a patch on some old worn-out idea. Jesus will not be contained within some false religion or ideology. If you will read Him honestly, His teaching cuts across all those things. And eventually, properly understood, the real Jesus will invite the same anger and the same antagonism today that He experienced Himself in the first century.

But Jesus was saying here, listen carefully: I will not be managed, I will not be manipulated, I will not be marketed, I will not be packaged, and I will not be sold; I am not a patch on your worn-out ideas, and I'm not going to be contained within your system. Folks, Jesus is Lord, and we have to come to Him His way, following His teaching and not marrying Him to something else we may be attracted to. That's what Jesus was telling them. You want to come to Me? Don't try to use Me as a patch. You want to come to Me? Don't try to contain Me within your ideology in your system. I'm like new wine; I'll burst it open. I'm like a patch that will tear that old garment to shreds. When you come to Christ, you jettison everything else, and you say, Jesus is my Teacher and my Lord.

Let's pray together.

Father, thank you for our Lord Jesus. Thank you for what we have seen today about who He really is.

Father, forgive us for trying to push Him into the mold of what's acceptable in the twenty-first century. Lord, help us instead to see Him honestly on the pages of Scripture, and to understand Him for who He is, and to accept Him for who He is, and not who we want to make Him. Father, don't let us ever be ashamed to name the name of Jesus as our Lord, our Sovereign, and our Teacher.

We pray in Jesus' name, Amen.