New & Old
Introduction
Major Ideas
Notice first, the INQUIRY in .
Now, notice how Jesus ILLUSTRATES his point in .
Finally, notice the INSIGHT of Jesus in .
Conclusion
The exact relationship of John the Baptist to the new covenant is not clear. In this passage it seems that he was understood as part of the old since his disciples fasted whereas Jesus’ disciples did not (cf. Luke 7:28). Yet it seems best to see John as a transitional figure who in one sense belonged both to the “old” and the “new.”
Jesus refers to himself as the bridegroom, who in the OT was the Lord (cf. Isa. 62:5; Hos. 2:19–20). While Jesus is present with his disciples, they are to rejoice; when he is taken away from them … then they will fast
The name “bridegroom,” like every other name given to our Lord in the Bible, is full of instruction. It is a name especially comforting to all true Christians. It teaches the deep and tender love which Jesus has for all sinners who believe in him. Weak and unworthy as they are in themselves, he feels toward them a tender affection, just as a husband does toward his wife. It teaches the close and intimate union between Jesus and believers. It is something much closer than the union between king and subject, master and servant, teacher and pupil, or shepherd and sheep. Above everything else the name teaches that entire participation in everything that Jesus is and has is the privilege of every believer. Just as the husband gives to his wife his name and makes her joint owner of his property and home, so does Christ deal with all true Christians. He takes on himself all their sins. He declares that they are part of himself and that he who hurts them hurts him. He gives them, even in this world, such good things as pass man’s understanding. And he promises that in the next world they will sit with him on his throne and never leave his presence.
Guests of the bridegroom. There is no OT or rabbinic example in which the term, bridegroom, is used as a messianic title. As a result Jesus appears to have been using this term as a simple metaphor and not making a specific messianic claim by applying a well-known messianic title to himself.
Various kinds of fasts were commonly practiced in OT times, though the law required only one fast a year, on the Day of Atonement (though fasting is probably implied by the command to “afflict yourselves”; Lev. 16:29–34; 23:26–32). In addition to abstaining from food, people were to humble themselves by praying, mourning, and wearing sackcloth. As with giving (Matt. 6:2–4) and praying (vv. 5–15), fasting is to be a matter of the heart between the Christian and God.
35. “In those days they will fast.” The complete absence of any direct command to keep fasts in the church of Christ, either in the Acts of the Apostles or in the letters of the New Testament, and especially in the letters to Timothy and Titus, makes it clear that the matter is one which should be handled with caution and on which everyone must be persuaded in his own mind.
In those days. The contrast is not between the time of Jesus’ ministry and the time of the church after the resurrection, as in 22:35–36, but between the period of Jesus’ ministry and the time between his arrest and resurrection (24:17–20; cf. also John 16:20; 20:11–13). The period after the resurrection was not characterized by sorrowful fasting but rather by joy (Luke 24:41, 52; Acts 8:8; 13:52).
new wine into old wineskins. Animal skins were used for fermentation of wine because of their elasticity. As the wine fermented, pressure built up, stretching the wineskin. A previously stretched skin lacked elasticity and would rupture, ruining both wine and wineskin. Jesus used this as an illustration to teach that the forms of old rituals, such as the ceremonial fastings practiced by the Pharisees and John’s disciples, were not fit for the new wine of the New Covenant era (cf. Col 2:17). In both analogies (vv. 16, 17), the Lord was saying that what the Pharisees did in fasting or any other ritual had no part with the gospel.
5:39 The old is good enough. Those who had acquired a taste for Old Covenant ceremonies and Pharisaic traditions were loath to give them up for the new wine of Jesus’ teaching. Luke alone adds this saying.
5:39 The old is just fine This saying is found only in Luke. Jesus’ point seems to be that those who are content with the current way of doing things tend to resist anything new—even when it involves God’s work of salvation.
No one is best understood as an ironical condemnation of the Pharisees, who favored the past and rejected the arrival of the kingdom and the “new covenant” (22:20) it brought. The point of these two metaphors is that one cannot mix the old and the new covenant, and that the new covenant era inaugurated by Jesus’ coming will require repentance (Matt. 4:17), regeneration (cf. John 3:3), and new forms of worship (cf. John 4:24).
Although the content of this account is basically the same in Matthew, the conversation in Matt 9:14–17 takes place between Jesus and the disciples of John the Baptist
New wine must be put into fresh wineskins. Both this and the previous illustration drive home the point that Jesus is not simply patching up Judaism: he is teaching something radically new. If the attempt is made to constrict this within the old wineskins of Judaism (e.g. by imposing fasting), the result will be disastrous. He sees that this teaching will not be palatable to some. A man drinking old wine does not want even to try the new. The old is good, he says (not ‘better’, as the margin). He is not even comparing them. He is so content with the old that he does not consider the new for a moment. ‘It’s the old that’s good!’