Then the disciples of John came to Him, saying, "Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but Your disciples do not fast?"
And Jesus said to them, "Can the friends of the bridegroom mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast.
"No one puts a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for the patch pulls away from the garment, and the tear is made worse. Nor do they put new wine into old wineskins, or else the wineskins break, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But they put new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved." Matthew 9:14-17
Few Christian groups can have an ugly argument like Baptists can. Born with open democracy, Baptist groups are known for some of the most horrendous behavior when confronting their own kind over things other believers regard as relatively minor. The reason I can say this is that I am a Southern Baptist, and have been most of my life. I am still amazed at the sorts of things people consider so important they would destroy the life of a fellow church member. I say this to our shame, fellow Baptists. This is nothing of which to be proud.
It can be argued that those most guilty of these un-Christlike displays are almost surely not true believers, but simply possess great influence in the local church. That is hardly an excuse, since it is still to our shame that such are permitted to gain that power. They bring into the church body the same combative incivility that we might expect from corrupt union bosses or political leaders. The archetypical redneck southern sheriff is another example.
One issue over which I've seen some of the most idiotic disputes is the consumption of beverage alcohol. It's important to note that the American Prohibitionist sentiment is pretty much a joke elsewhere in the world. One can find some support for it in the UK, but not much anywhere else. The short history lesson is this: American Baptists were born from the same stock as the social work movement, when it first appeared in England. It rose as a response to the drunken squalor one found in the cramped warrens of company housing built from scratch by coal mine operations, when major coal deposits were found away from any cities, where housing was usually to be found. The miners and their families in this company housing were ripe for every human ill, and alcohol abuse (sold at the company store) was prominent.
I do not intend to address whether Baptists are right or wrong in their doctrinaire condemnation of beverage alcohol as inherently sinful. Everyone agrees that its abuse is harmful in every way. But only a fool who knows no history, and very little of the Bible, will deny that Jews consumed wine that was fermented, and thus contained alcohol. It was rare to find any fruit of the vine that was not fermented, since it only lasted a day or two in a world without refrigeration. Let's stop being silly: Jesus drank fermented wine like every other Jew. That has little bearing on whether we ought to avoid it today. Jesus did a lot of things we would never do in modern times.
What makes the issue so ugly and contentious is that we are often guilty of something truly evil: bringing worldly ways into the House of God. Trying to force the old life to fit into our New Covenant in Jesus' Blood is an abomination. Jesus spent an awful lot of time showing how the old rabbinical traditions were just that -- traditions. They were not directly connected with the Law of Moses, but were often spurious additions that served no good purpose. Some were indeed sensible: the Feast of Dedication was not commanded by God. After the conquests of Alexander the Great in 323 BC, his successors included some pretty hateful rulers, including one who erected a pagan statue in the Temple in Jerusalem, followed by sacrificing a pig to that god on the Altar. Getting all that defilement removed some time later would be good cause for an annual commemoration.
But the silly command to fast weekly was just a bit much. John the Baptist followed an even stricter regime, as he belonged to a rather ascetic school of Judaism popular at that time. John's disciples were puzzled when, after John's public endorsement, and after several of his disciples became followers of Jesus, the rules for discipleship were quite different. Jesus and His disciples appeared to be in the party mode by comparison.
Jesus had been teaching all along that, in the first place, the Law of Moses was not what the Pharisees often claimed it was. In the second place, the Law of God was a higher standard, the real Standard. That such a higher standard did not necessarily include restrictions of the type one might expect was confusing to those who hadn't spent time with Jesus. His answer to John's disciples was attempting to point that out.
Jesus was teaching a New Covenant, a covenant that brought one into an individual relationship with Jehovah. The Covenant of the Law, while holding individuals accountable, was aimed at the nation. It was a national covenant. This New Covenant brought one into the Kingdom of God, a wholly new entity. It was clearly based on all that had gone before, but was equally clearly a totally different kind of thing.
How could the old traditional forms hold this New Life in the Kingdom? They could not. It was like demanding that the friends of the bridegroom fast before the wedding celebration was over. And in ancient times, when cloth was largely hand woven, it had to be washed at least once in order to establish its true size. Patching an old garment with this newly woven fabric was foolish without first washing it. Who knows how much and which direction it would shrink?
It's also as silly as putting new wine into old used wineskins. "New wine" was a specific term, referring to the first squeezings of the grapes. In order to get the most of what a load of grapes had to offer, they would be tromped in the vat until all that remained was a thick slurry. Of the several gallons one might get from it, only the first quart or two was of that finest quality, with a much higher sugar content, and less solids. It fermented into a rather potent wine, with a fairly high alcohol content. The last drainage of the wine vat came closer to making a brackish vinegar (the sort of low-quality stuff issued to soldiers in their rations, and what Jesus was offered while on the Cross).
In the process of fermenting, the better quality stuff released a lot of gases, and only a new wineskin could stretch enough to contain it. Old, dry, hardened wineskins had already stretched to their limit. One could put the cheap stuff in there and it might be alright. What Jesus was offering was a totally new level of faith, a higher calling to a close personal communion with God the Father, Himself. What the Father gave for the former covenants could not contain this joyful existence. They were given for a time when mankind was not ready to really know God. When the personal presence of God comes into the human soul, so very much changes that the old forms break down in the process.
Everything must be wholly re-evaluated. All that went before had to be scrutinized to see if it was useful in the Kingdom. Naturally, some things would carry over. It was the same God. Yet, much would not be useful. Paul referred to the process as "rightly dividing the Word" (2 Timothy 2:15). One had to know God the Person in order to discern what parts of Moses applied, and what did not. One had to understand the purpose of those provisions. So the old allowance for divorce was tossed out (Deuteronomy 24:1 and Mark 10:1-12). But the command to love took center place (Deuteronomy 6:5 and Matthew 22:34-40).
What came before Jesus the Rabbi was not sufficient to serve Christ the King. What is in our lives prior to Christ is subject wholly to His judgment, whether it shall go, stay, or be changed. Bitter fighting over silly, petty arguments does not belong in the Kingdom. We have the power to love those with whom we disagree. If we cannot act in love, we do not know Jesus.
[ Return to Lesson Index ]
[ <-- Previous Lesson ]
[ --> Next Lesson ]
Ed Hurst
02 November 2002
COPYRIGHT NOTICE:People of honor need no copyright laws; they are only too happy to give credit where credit is due. Others will ignore copyright laws whenever they please. If you are of the latter, please note what Moses said about dishonorable behavior -- "be sure your sin will find you out" (Numbers 32:23).