Don't Lose Your Juice - Luke 5:33-39

Introduction

Have you ever spilled your drink, or in some vernacular “drank?” There is a difference between spilling water and spilling your “drink…”. Not too many people get upset when you spill their water accidently, or their juice or soda, but I could imagine that it is a whole lot different when they spill your “drank.” That’s causes a whole fight and then someone is paying to replace the spilled drink. Spiritually, no one spills our “wine” or accidently knocks our glass over. We lose wine because we place it in things that are not designed to hold it, or it has served its usefulness. In this post-pandemic, post- Roe V. Wade, current systemic and ideological racism, violence in the school and the streets, the church cannot afford to lose her wine. It is an indictment when the church does not assign equal value to the skin as much as the contents. The skin is just as important as the wine itself…. Often, Christ is rejected because of presentation….

Background

Luke, the Gentile physician and companion of Paul writes his gospel to his good friend, highlights Jesus as the perfect Savior. Most scholars argue Luke’s gospel is chronologically accurate and provides Jesus’ early childhood. He was prophesied by Gabriel, born in his stable, visited by angels, shepherds and wise men, taken to his temple for circumcision, spoken over by the old saints, left by Joseph and Mary, grew in favor and wisdom with God and man, baptized by John in Jordan, tempted of the devil, rejected at Nazareth for reading “His” word, almost tossed over the mountain, healed a man with an unclean spirit, conducted his first healing crusade, preached the good news of the kingdom. He did this in the first four chapters.

Chapter five, Jesus calls the first of his disciples, Andrew, Peter, James, and John with a miracle draught of fish, cleanses a leper and a paralytic. He calls the tax collector Levi and conducts a practical, prolific, and prophetic lesson on the danger losing your wine due to inelasticity. The conversation begins when religious leaders question the Lord of the Sabbath about the frequency of their fasting and prayer. AS LEADERS BEWARE THE SENTENCE THAT BEGINS WITH “THIS IS THE WAY WE USED TO…” John the Baptist and the Pharisees’ disciples fast and pray according to the law, but Jesus’ disciples were still eating and drinking. Fasting was a means of expressing sorrow and gloom, and it was not appropriate with the joy of being with the bridegroom. Jesus regarded fasting as an expression of grief rather than a required religious duty. Jesus said there is no reason to fast while the bridegroom is present, but it should occur when the bridegroom is taken away. Fasting is not to be a mechanical arrangement set for fixed days since fasting is determined by the conditions. Rather than the idea of forcing them to fast, the meaning is closer to expecting them to fast.

“Practice that does not produce power is just religious calisthenics.”

He begins his parable by condemning those who try to and mix and match old and new. The church today just might be mix and match because we “tear” a piece of the new and “patch” it with the old and think it makes the church new. “A patch does not make an outfit new; it highlights where it’s worn out.” The point is the incompatibility of the two pieces of cloths and the application is that the old and new ways cannot be combined. Attempting to graft the new upon the old spoils both systems in that the new system loses its completeness and the old loses its consistency. Jesus has generalized beyond the subject of fasting and explains that it is not right to attempt to contain the new affairs he has inaugurated within the constraints of the old. The ways of Jesus and traditions of the religious hierarchy cannot be mixed without damaging the new since the two approaches do not really go together. No one should take away the joy that Jesus’ disciples experienced by requiring them to conform to the old Jewish practices because the new and the old do not fit one another.

Assess the value of the contents

Whereas the “patch” made from the new garment represents only part of the new system, the wine represents the whole of it. The new garment and the old garment were only marred, while all of the new wine was lost, and the old wineskins were destroyed. The phrase “new wine” refers to newly pressed grape juice which is unfermented or is in the initial stages on fermentation. In biblical times, water was often scarce, so wine became a necessity, rather than a luxury. It was equated with life…. Wine represents God’s covenant blessing promise to Israel for obedience. Wine represents joy, celebration, and festivity, expressing the abundant blessings given to us by God. “You can never appreciate your full value until you appreciate the process.”

Assess your elasticity

The Israelite, like the modern Arab and Syrian, used mainly the skin of the goat and the sheep, but the skins of the ox and the camel have also been put to this purpose. The skin is removed from the animal by drawing it over the body from the neck downward, half the skin on each of the limbs being also retained. It is then tanned, the hair cut close, turned inside out, and has all the openings save one closed with cords, when it is ready for use. The reference to “a wineskin in the smoke” in Ps 119:83 is generally explained on the supposition of its being hung there for mellowing purposes, but this can scarcely be accepted, for wine is never left for any length of time in the skin on account of its imparting a disagreeable flavor to the contents. The explanation of the NT passages is that the new wine, still liable to continue fermenting to a small extent at least, was put into new, still expansible skins, a condition that had ceased in the older ones.[1]

We tend to frustrate ourselves with people that are: CAN I CALL THE ROLL!!!

Absent Bossy Cantankerous Detached Envious Gossipy Hindering Invisible Jumpy…. listless malcontent narcissistic oblivious petty run with the rumor slippery tipsy undercutters vicious waffling eXtinict yes men lack zeal….These people can never admit they’ve served their usefulness.

This parable is a rebuke to those who insist on remaining in the inflexible traditionalism of the Pharisees. Taking this proverb as a factual statement, it seems to excuse the Pharisees for rejecting Jesus’ teaching. However, it was said in irony, and indicates that they are wrong and should accept the new. This is a rebuke to those who reject the new way, and it indicates that it is likely that many Jews will reject the new message because they do not sense the need for it. The other parables were concerned with the value of the new and so here this must be an ironical condemnation of those who cling to the past and will not accept the present realization of God’s kingdom. Jesus did not excuse such people for clinging to practices such as fasting but pointed out that their difficulty was the fact that they just did not want to change. He did so as a gentle call for them to abandon the old for the new. This comment on the ultraconservatism of the Pharisees warns that their rejection of the new life-imparting teachings of Jesus will be their downfall.

“THE WINE DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE SKIN; THE SKIN CONFORMS TO THE WINE.”

The conclusion is that the radically new gospel must be allowed to express itself in its own way. The old forms of the Jewish religion were inadequate for the new way of life that Jesus offered and trying to force conformity would cause the loss of significance for both. There is a need for compatibility and Jesus’ new system of salvation must have its own forms of piety that are suited to it. New contents require new forms. The old Pharisaic ways are to be left behind and only the new ways of life that fit the new teachings are to be taken. The parable does not deny the continuity of Jesus’ teaching with Judaism but illustrates the need for the new to be allowed to have its own integrity and not be constrained within the limitations of the old. Or, both parables illustrate the fact that things that are not suited for each other should not be joined together, and both teach that the observance of fasting which expresses sadness was not them fitting for Jesus’ disciples at that time.

An acquired taste

This parable is an admission that the old ways are more satisfactory to those who are accustomed to them, and new ways are less attractive. This parable indicates that it is natural for those who have been brought up under the old forms to be unwilling to abandon them for something that is new and untried. Some people are set in their ways and will reject the new way Jesus brings. The Pharisees disliked the teaching of Jesus because the old religion had become so dear to them that they wanted to cling to it. This reveals Jesus’ understanding of the difficulty the disciples of John and the Pharisees had in accepting his new way of life. In treating John’s disciples with consideration, Jesus made this ‘genial apology for conservatism in religion. This parable holds out hope for the eventual acceptance of the new. The use of εὐθέως‘ immediately’ is vital to this parable and in saying that the person does not ‘immediately desire the new’ the parable points out that change from the law comes slowly. It is difficult to leave a lifelong system to adopt a different way of life and Jesus understood that such people must be given time to familiarize themselves with it. This parable affirms that the old is best. It was conventional wisdom and common experience that recognized that old wine was good. So, Jesus regarded his ways as showing God’s old purposes coming to fruition while the Pharisees’ criticisms are rejected as being new and inconsistent with God’s program.