A Study by Scott Sperling Matthew 9:14-17 - New Wineskins 14 Then John’s disciples came and asked Him, “How is it that we and the Pharisees fast, but your disciples do not fast?” 15 Jesus answered, “How can the guests of the bridegroom mourn while he is with them? The time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; then they will fast. 16 No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse. 17 Neither do men pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”   In the last few sections of Matthew’s Gospel, the author, in addition to recounting some of the miracles that Jesus performed, has recounted some instances of opposition to Jesus’ ministry.  In Matthew 8:34, the townspeople in the Gadarenes pleaded with Jesus to leave their region because some demons that Jesus exorcised caused a herd of pigs to jump off a cliff.  In Matthew 9:3, some teachers of the law accused Jesus of blaspheming when He told a paralytic on a mat that his sins were forgiven.  In Matthew 9:11, some Pharisees implied to His disciples that Jesus shouldn’t be eating with “sinners”.  Here in this section, the opposition comes from an unlikely source:  “Then John’s disciples came and asked Him, ‘How is it that we and the Pharisees fast, but your disciples do not fast?’” (vs. 14).  The opposition in this case is coming from the disciples of John the Baptist. From the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, John the Baptist acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah.  When asked who he was, John said:  “I am the voice of one calling in the desert, ‘Make straight the way for the Lord’”  (John 1:23).  When Jesus came to John to be baptized, John said:  “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” (Matt. 3:14).  And when some of John’s disciples pointed out that many of his followers were leaving him to follow Jesus, John told them:  “He must become greater; I must become less” (John 3:30). “It was the design of John’s ministry to bring men to believe on Jesus as coming, and to follow Him when He came; and he took great pains to prevent the people from regarding himself as the Messiah (see John 1:20; 3:28-30; Acts 19:4).  Yet there were some who, failing to follow out their master’s teachings, felt jealous of the growing influence of Jesus (see John 3:26), and continued to hold exclusively to John” [Broadus, 201].  In the question that John’s disciples posed, there was a clear implication that Jesus’ disciples were being less godly by not fasting.  Pious Jews of the time fasted twice a week (Mondays and Thursdays) [Morris, 223].  However, no such fasts are instituted in the Law of God.  In fact, only one regular fast is instituted in the law, and that is the command to deny oneself on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:29).  Yes, fasting at certain times is proper:  such as, times of despair when the will of God needs to be discerned.  But according to God’s law, regular institutional fasts were not a part of worship.  God’s law is perfect.  What He instituted constitutes proper worship.  When men add to God’s law, the cause of God is invariably harmed.  In this case, Jesus’ godly disciples were unjustly criticized as being ungodly.  As a result, the teachings of Jesus were tainted in the minds of the hearers. Jesus pointed out to John’s disciples that there are proper and improper times to fast:  “Jesus answered, ‘How can the guests of the bridegroom mourn while he is with them?  The time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; then they will fast’” (vs. 15). “By this illustration our Lord teaches that fasting is not to be regarded or observed as an arbitrary institution, 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.  In some situations it is appropriate and may be made beneficial; in others, it is out of place” [Broadus, 202].  The times when Jesus was present with the disciples was a time of great joy, not a time of mourning.  To be in the presence of the Lord!  How could one consider fasting then?  To hear His wonderful teachings!  To witness His marvelous miracles!  The problem with the Pharisees and John’s disciples was that they didn’t understand the religious ritual that they were observing.  They were merely going through religious motions.  If they truly understood fasting, and the purpose of fasting, they would have realized how improper it was to fast when the Messiah was in their presence.  We must take care that we do not merely “go through the motions” in our religious observances.  Do we pray because “we have to”, or do we pray with the desire to communicate with God?  Do we attend church on Sunday because “we have to”, or do we attend church to worship our Risen Lord?  Do we read the Bible because “we have to”, or do we read it as the living Word of God, seeking to understand what He has to say to us? By the way, note that Jesus alludes to His leaving this earth, “when the bridegroom will be taken from them.”  This is the first time recorded in the Gospels that Jesus alludes to His leaving this earth.  At this point, of course, the disciples had no conception of all that would happen:  Jesus’ crucifixion, His resurrection, His ascension into heaven.  And, after these things, the disciples themselves would face much persecution.  Oh yes, Jesus was right:  “The time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; then they will fast.”  The followers of Jesus did have many occasions to fast after He was “taken from them” (see, for example, Acts 9:9; Acts 13:3; Acts 14:23; Acts 27:9).  Jesus ended His answer to John’s disciples with a couple of illustrations:  “No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse.  Neither do men pour new wine into old wineskins.  If they do, the skins will burst, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined.  No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved”  (vss. 16–17).  These illustrations seem to have a wider application than this question of fasting.  Both illustrations contrast the old with the new, showing that mixing old systems with new systems ruin both the old and the new:  new, unshrunk cloth sewn on an old garment will tear the old garment, thus making the patch ineffective; new, unfermented wine, if poured into an old, hardened wineskin, will burst the skin as it ferments, thus ruining both the new wine and the old wineskin. “These illustrations show that the new situation introduced by Jesus could not simply be patched onto old Judaism or poured into the old wineskins of Judaism.  New forms would have to accompany the kingdom Jesus was now inaugurating; to try to domesticate Him and incorporate Him into the matrix of established Jewish religion would only succeed in ruining both Judaism and Jesus’ teaching” [Carson, 227]. John’s disciples came to Jesus questioning the way that Jesus’ disciples were practicing religion, as Jesus’ disciples were not observing the same rituals that they were.  Jesus, with these illustrations, was preparing John’s disciples for even greater changes concerning the practice of religion after the Messiah versus before the Messiah.  The old rituals would not be part of the new religion, for Jesus, by His death and resurrection, would do away with the need for the old rituals.  Christianity would not be a “patch-up” of Judaism.  It would be a new garment.  To disregard this would bring harm to true worship. “While the principle here illustrated was introduced with regard to fasting, it is obviously of wider application, extending to everything in which the two dispensations characteristically differ; and the great mass of the Christian world, from an early period, has sadly exhibited the evil results of disregarding this principle.  They would, notwithstanding this and numerous other warnings, connect Levitical rites with Christianity.  The simple preacher and pastor must be regarded as a priest, and spiritual blessings must depend on his mediation, as if it were not true that all Christians are priests, and all alike have access through the one Mediator.  The simple memento of the Saviour’s death must be a sacrifice, offered by the priest for men’s sins.  Numerous religious festivals and stated fasts must be established and enjoined, tending to make religion a thing only of specials seasons.  The buildings in which Christians meet to worship must be consecrated as being holy ground, like the temple, and splendid rites, in imitation of the temple worship, must lead men’s minds away from the simple and sublime spirituality of that worship which the gospel teaches.  With good motives, no doubt, on the part of many, was this jumble of Judaism and Christianity introduced, and with good motives do many retain it; but none the less is it the very kind of thing the Saviour here condemned; and with results as ruinous as he declared” [Broadus, 203].  Oh, Father, help us to focus not on rituals as we worship, but on our relationship with You, made possible through Your Son Jesus Christ.  May our worship be true to the principles of worship that Jesus, our example, set forth.  Be glorified in our lives.  Guide us by Your Spirit, through the study of Your Word, that Your will may be done in our lives.  In the name of Your glorious Son, we pray these things, Amen.   ——————————————————————— Bibliography and Suggested Reading Alexander, Joseph Addison. The Gospel According to Matthew.  New York: Charles Scribner Publishers, 1861.  Broadus, John.  Commentary on Matthew.  Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1886. Calvin, John.  Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark and Luke.  3 Vols.  Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society, 1846. (Originally published in Latin in 1555).  Carson, D. A. “Matthew” from The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. VIII, ed. by Frank Gaebelein.  Grand Rapids:  Zondervan, 1984. Clarke, Adam. The New Testament of Our Lord Jesus Christ.  Vol. I.  New York:  G. Lane & C. B. Tippett, 1846.  (Originally published in 1831).  Dickson, David. A Brief Exposition of the Evangel of Jesus Christ According to Matthew. Cornhill, U.K.:  Ralph Smith, 1651.  Exell, Joseph S. and Henry Donald Spence-Jones, eds. The Pulpit Commentary. Vols. 33 & 34. New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1884.  Henry, Matthew.  An Exposition of All the Books of the Old and New Testament.  Vol. IV.  London: W. Baynes, 1806. (Originally published in 1710). Jamieson, Robert; Fausset, A. R.; Brown, David.  A Commentary: Critical, Experimental, and Practical on the Old and New Testaments.  Glasgow:  William Collins, Queen’s Printer, 1863. Lange, John Peter, ed. and Philip Schaff, trans.  A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical.  New York:  Charles Scribner & Co., 1865.  Morgan, G. Campbell. The Gospel According to Matthew. Grand Rapids: Revell, 1929. Morris, Leon. The Gospel According to Matthew. Grand Rapids: Eerdman’s, 1992. Ryle, J. C.  Expository Thoughts on the Gospels:   Matthew.  New York:  Robert Carter & Brothers, 1857.  Spurgeon, Charles.  The Gospel of the Kingdom:  A Popular Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew.  New York: The Baker and Taylor Co., 1893. Thomas, David. The Genius of the Gospel:  A Homiletical Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew.  London:  Dickinson & Higham, 1873.   ------------ Most of these books, those in the public domain, can be downloaded free of charge from:  http://www.ClassicChristianLibrary.com