INTRODUCTION

Adam and Eve by Raphael (Raffaello Santi of Urbino), 1509-1511.

When God created Adam and Eve the world was good. They fell into disobedience and sin was brought into the world. This tainted everything and brought death to all. But before the creation God had a plan in place to restore mankind. Even as he put a curse on the world, he made this promise of a future redeemer:

And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel. Genesis 3:15

Although created by God, Adam and Eve inclined toward their own desires and by listening to Satan man became the Devil’s adopted offspring. But there would be a future offspring of woman, one not of any man, who would eventually crush the head of evil. His name would be Jesus.

However, in those early times, men grieved God so much by their depravity he considered wiping all off the face of the Earth. Still, he remembered his promise of The Redeemer and God never breaks a promise. God found one righteous man and his family to save a sample of each living creature. Noah was not the promised Redeemer of course. Noah did not redeem mankind. He merely preserved it and allowed it to start anew. The sinful nature that began with Adam was preserved along with mankind and the promise of a coming Redeemer was still needed.

Among the survivors, of the Flood God had used to destroy his creation were Noah’s three sons. All the people living upon the planet today descended from those three.

The inhabitants of what we call the Middle East basically descended from Shem. Thus they are known as Semites.  Shem’s grandson was Eber. Jewish tradition holds that Eber refused to help in the building of the Tower of Babel and he was allowed to retain his own language, the original language of mankind. Eber’s descendents were Eberites. However, the name Eber was sometimes shown as Heber (I had an Uncle Heber named for him) and in time his descendents and their language was called Hebrew. A further descendent of Eber was Abrams, who was renamed by God as Abraham. He was to become the great patriarch of the Hebrews and they were God’s Chosen people from whom the Redeemer would one day come and they were to show God’s way to the world. (The name Jew referred to those of the Tribe of Judah, but the name eventually came to mean all those of the Hebrew faith.)

Despite the fresh start, as the population grew, people again turned to wickedness, even the Chosen People. God sent prophets to warn them and call them to repentance, but they ignored and sometimes even killed these messengers. Finally, God dispersed the Hebrews and sent many into captivity in Babylon. The country of Israel and Judah was taken from them and Jerusalem and the temple destroyed. The Law itself was lost to the people for decades.

In 539 B.C., King Nabonidus surrendered Babylon to the Persian King Cyrus without a fight.  Within the year, the first Jews were allowed to return to their former homeland. By 516 B.C. a new temple had been built.

Ezra, accompanied by about 5,000 former exiles, arrived out of Babylon in 458 B.C. Nehemiah was overseeing the building of a reconstructed wall around Jerusalem, and after its completion in 445 B.C., Ezra stood and read the Law of Moses to the assembled people. (The Book of the Law had been rediscovered during construction.) Since the Law had been lost, the people were overjoyed at hearing it again. They forsook idols and returned to accepting the One and Only Mighty God.

Despite these incredible events, a mere 15 years later the Jews had strayed again. They were sacrificing blemished animals, showing their disrespect to God, and they were marrying foreigners. Why was it bad to marry foreigners? Because God had promised a redeemer and he had promised this redeemer would be a direct and unblemished descendent of Abraham and of David. If the Jews continued to marry with foreigners that ancestry would be lost and God’s plan could not be fulfilled.

So in 430 B.C., God raised up a prophet named Malachi who warned the Jews of coming judgment if they didn’t repent. His prophecies came with assurances of God’s love for them and a promise of salvation. And so it was with these words in Malachi quoting God that the Old Testament comes to an end:

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse. Malachi 4:5-6

We have 400 silent years between the Old and New Testaments; between the prophesies of Malachi and the Birth of Our Lord, Christ Jesus. Much changed in the world in those years.

Alexander the Great defeated Persia in 331 B.C. King Darius was killed by his own men. Alexander went on to rule the known world until 323 B.C., when he died under mysterious circumstances.

His empire was divided among four of his top generals and split into four sectors ruled thusly: Seleucus (Asia), Ptolemy (Egypt), Lysimachus (Thrace) and Cassander, son of Antipater over Macedonia/Greece. (Many think of Cleopatra VII [69 B.C. - 30 B.C.] as Egyptian, but she was Macedonian/Greek being the last Ptolemy ruler of Egypt, which upon her death became part of the Roman Empire. Her father was Pharaoh Ptolemy XII Auletes his sister, Cleopatra V Tryphaena, was most likely her mother. (Cleopatra VII was married to two of her own brothers, before having her famous liaisons with Julius Caesar and Marc Antony.)

The Jews, after Alexander, came under Seleucid rule. However, when the Seleucid King Antiochus defiled the Jewish Temple in 167 B.C. (a foreshadowing of the future Antichrist), Judah Maccabeus led a Jewish Army, which defeated the Seleucids. This began what is called the Hasmonean Rule of Palestine. However, in 63 B.C., the great Roman general Pompey captured Jerusalem and Israel once again lost its independence and came under Roman Rule.

In 42 B.C., Mark Antony appointed Herod tetrarch of Galilee. The Jews resented him because he wasn’t a Jew. He was an Idumean with an Arabian mother. (Idumea was the Greek name for Edom, which bordered Judea on the south. This was a land populated by the descendents of Esau, Edom being another name of his. Esau was the brother of Jacob. The Edomites were perpetual thorns in the side of the Israelites. Given the history between Israel and Edom, it is no wonder the Jews were not happy to have Herod named their king.)  During the Parthian War, Herod had to flee because the Jews sided with the Parthians. But after the war and order was restored, Rome reinstated Herod as the sole ruler of Judea. Thus in 37 B.C., Herod the Great was King of the Jews. He was ruling when Jesus was born.

During the Hasmonean Rule arose three important factions among the Jews: Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes.

The Pharisees were spiritual leaders to the extreme. They not only embraced the Law, but also began to add to it their own interpretation and traditions. They did, however, believe in an afterlife, the judgment of the wicked and a coming Messiah.

The Sadducees were an elite priestly group, yet liberally embraced Greek ways into their lives. They insisted on a literal interpretation of the Law rejecting the ideas of the Pharisees, including resurrection. Their lives revolved around ritual and the Temple. They disappeared from history with the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.

The Essenes didn’t like either of the other two groups. They became monks, moved to the desert and strictly obeyed dietary laws and being celibate. They are associated with the Dead Sea Scrolls.

During this time a body came into existence known as the Sanhedrin (sitting together). It was a ruling institution for the Jews, a sort of Supreme Court and legislature rolled into one. It consisted of 71 Jewish elders and was presided over by a President and a Chancellor. Members of the Sanhedrin did not gain a seat by election. The supplanted a sitting member on the council be establishing superior knowledge of the Law. (Nicodemus and Saul [Paul) held seats in the council at times.) Both Pharisees and Sadducees were members of this group.

Another group often mention is Scripture were the Scribes. These were akin to attorneys.

So when we come to the beginning of the New Testament and the birth of Jesus, the world is quite different than it was when Malachi talked of a coming prophet like Elijah. The Persian Empire has been replaced by the Roman Empire. The King of Judea is not of the line of David, but a non-Jew named Herod. The Jewish religion and tradition is not being directed by God’s chosen prophets, but is in the hands of the Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes. It is also a time when many Jews are earnestly expecting the promised Messiah to come as a king that will defeat Rome and rule as David once did. This is the world at the time the Christ came.

PALSIED MAN LOWERED THROUGH A ROOF

The Palsied Man Let Down Through the Roof by James Jacques Tissot, c.1886-94

Matthew 9:1-8; Mark 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-20

Back in Capernaum

And after some days he entered into a ship, and passed over and came into his own city again. He entered Capernaum and it came to pass on a certain dayit was noised that he was in the house.

Jesus made his initial tour about Galilee and gained a good bit of fame as a result, enough so it has become difficult to move about freely. He couldn’t even find solitude in the wilderness; the people followed him there. After several days of this, he returned to his base city, Capernaum. He crossed the sea in a ship, possibly escaping notice briefly. Eventually word on the street grew that he “was in the house”.  This is probably the house where Jesus was living, which many scholars believe was the home of Peter and Andrew. It had to be a house the people associated with Jesus being in town, since it was rumored he “was in the house”.

This is an artist’s rendering of what Peter’s mother-in-law’s house in Capernaum might have looked like. It was probably sketched from the archeological foundation claimed to be her house. Whether Peter and his mother-in-law lived in the same house it is difficult to say, but if not, their home would have probably been similar.

Although the sketch gives the appearance of a large compound, the actual dwelling would most likely be only one of these structures, not the whole complex. Homes tended to be simple affairs with only one or two rooms. The roof was flat and often people sat or slept on the roof to keep cool. Homes were clustered, like this sketch, around common courtyards. The courtyards would contain cisterns where water was carried in daily and stored. The neighbors would all use a common courtyard for such tasks as laundry and cooking.

And straightway many were gathered together, which were come out of every town of Galilee, and Judea, and Jerusalem: and the power of the Lord was present to heal them and they come unto him. Insomuch that there was no room to receive them, no, not so much as about the door: and he preached the word unto them.

We have seen such scenes today, large crowds surrounding a place because some celebrity is there. Back in 1968 during the Presidential campaign, Robert F. Kennedy came to Philadelphia. He was to speak at the Democratic Headquarters on the corner of Fifteenth Street and Chestnut Avenue at noon. Before he arrived, people had crowded into that intersection and all along the adjoining streets. The police could barely keep the streets clear for traffic and people were being pressed into the sides of buildings. It was so crowded that when Kennedy arrived, he couldn’t even get out of the car, but had to stand up in the seat to address the people. There must have been a similar scene at the house. Every part of the grounds around it occupied. Perhaps some early arrivals actually gained entry, but now one couldn’t get close. Jesus probably stood in the doorway to address the mob.

As he was teaching, there were Pharisees and doctors of the law sitting by and, behold, men brought to him a man, one sick of the palsy, lying on a bedwhich was borne of four,and they sought means to bring him in and to lay him before him.

And when they could not come nigh to him for the press and could not find by what way they might bring him in because of the multitude, they went upon the housetop. They uncovered the roof where he was and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy layand let him down through the tiling with his couch into the midst before Jesus.

At the end of the last passage and the beginning of this it was stated that people came “from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judaea, and from beyond Jordan.” This was the result of the cured Leper telling people about Jesus and how he cured him. The leper had also went to the temple and told the Priest there. Word spread. The Priest probably sent messages to the religious leaders in Jerusalem.

Remember, Jesus had begun his mission in a dramatic way, driving Moneychangers out of the Temple in Jerusalem during the Passover week. This got the religious and secular leaders attention. Jesus did not hang around in Jerusalem, but basically fled into the wilderness, then through Samaria and settled in Galilee. The leaders in Jerusalem probably dismissed this rebel rouser as just another lone fanatic. He disappeared north, out of sight and out of mind, until rumors and stories about the preacher and his healing began floating south to the capital. Now along those flocking to hear Jesus were the Scribes (doctors of the law) and Pharisees, examining Jesus and his purpose as they had John the Baptist. They may have been dispatched to follow Jesus and report on his activities by their superiors in Jerusalem. Notice these men were “sitting by”, implying they were not active participants, but were observers.

In these early days of his ministry, Jesus was obviously being seen as a healer more than a teacher, many, if not most, of this multitude were looking for a cure.  One such person was a man suffering from palsy.

We can’t know the exact nature of the man’s illness. Palsy is a somewhat general term meaning the lost use of some body part. It is usually accompanied by a loss of felling as well. The causes can be various. It could be something from birth, such as cerebral palsy or it could be the result of some trauma or other illness. It can afflict the whole person or be confined to one area.

From the description given, this man was affected at least in his legs and/or feet since he couldn’t walk. He has to be carried by four friends and they came too late to be near Jesus. With a burden of a man and his pallet, they found it difficult to even make a path through the crowd.

Now, some might question if they could not get through the crowd, how could they get to the roof. If we look at the earlier sketch we can certainly picture the scene. The particular house in question is blocked all along the front by this multitude. Jesus is most likely in the doorway. There may be some people inside the house listening from behind him.

But the houses are somewhat adjoined around the courtyards. The men took their friend to the side or rear of this block, hoisted him up and carried him over the flat roofs to the house of Jesus. Here they tore up the tiles and lowered the man through the hole they made.

And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to him, the sick of the palsy, “Son, be of good cheer; man your sins be forgiven you.”

Let’s look closely at this statement. This is the first time we know of that Jesus has said such a thing. He spoke to Nicodemus about salvation, about being “born again”, and he spoke to the Samarian Woman at the well about the need for “living water”, but he has not until now said to anyone, as far as is recorded, “Your sins are forgiven”. Why here, why now and what does he mean?

We must be careful we don’t take this statement out of the context of the situation. There is a danger of pulling individual parts out of Scripture and misapplying them. The danger here is one that many have fallen into, even in Jesus’ day, of associating a serious sickness with a serious sin. Because someone falls sick, we should not assume they committed some sin. Job was the most righteous man around and he fell sick. Some may get a disease as a result of their sins, such as sexually transmitted diseases, but innocent people can get these diseases passed to them by an unfaithful spouse. Some people may sin greatly and remain very healthy in body, while other people may sin little and suffer terrible sicknesses throughout their life. We must show compassion and care for the ill, not condemn them or accuse them of anything.

Jesus is not saying here that the Palsy was the result of sin. (That is not to say it couldn’t have been, only that this is not the point of what Jesus says or does here.) We know we are all sinners, whether we show it in any outward way or not. Certainly, then, this man was a sinner, whether palsied or not.

So why did Jesus say this? It certainly must have surprised the man. It wasn’t what the guy expected to hear; not what his friends had went to such effort to hear. Jesus said this here and now because the Pharisees and Scribes were there and he was about to prove a point and begin an adversarial dialogue that would follow his ministry from this point to the Cross. Whenever Jesus did something, it was to the purpose of furthering God’s plan.

And, behold,but there was certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, said within themselves, “This man blasphemes. Why does this man thus speak blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God only?”

Who were these certain scribes? The scribes were the trusted and venerated experts on Scripture. They wore three hats. One, they were the transcribers, the people who copied and preserved the Holy texts. They were very familiar with the writings. Two, they were the Teachers of the Scripture to the populace. It was their duty to interpret the text’s meaning and teach the people what Moses and the Prophets had set down for them to follow. They were responsible for giving the people the moral principles of their religion. Three, they were also the Lawyers who were looked to for settling all disputes, questions or controversies concerning Scripture.

In other words, they were men who knew Scripture inside and out. These were the men in the profession that advised Herod when and where the Messiah was to be born back when the Magi appeared. If anyone in the crowd listening to Jesus should have understood his preaching, it was these certain scribes. But they didn’t.

And immediately, when Jesus knowing their thoughts, perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, “Wherefore think you evil? Why reason you these things in your hearts, for whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, your sins be forgiven you; or to say, Arise, and take up your bed, and walk?

 “But that you may know that the Son of man has power on earth to forgive sins,” …

Jesus knew what these men thought. It must have been stunning to these men when he addressed them this way as if he could read their minds.

Jesus says something it is hard to believe these men missed. That is when he said, “but that you may know that the Son of man…” These experts in Scripture must have understood that term immediately. Although the term “son of man” was used to mean human being, it had a precise meaning these men would have been familiar with. It came from Daniel 7.

Daniel was given a vision of history. In this vision he saw the rise and fall of the great empires. He was also shown the rise of the Antichrist and the fate of this final dictator. Daniel saw Christ given dominion over all by God.

I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. Daniel 7:13-14

They must have caught the assertion by Jesus that he was this person predicted by Daniel.

…(then he said to the sick of the palsy) “I say to you, arise, and take up your bed, and go your way into your house.”

And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; and departed to his house. But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelledinsomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, which had given such power to men saying, “We never saw it on this fashion.”

But did the scribes witnessing this also glorify God?

CALLING OF MATTHEW

“The Feast in the House of Levi” by Paolo Galliari Veronese, 1573

CALLING OF MATTHEW

Matthew 9:9-17; Mark 2:13-22; Luke 5:27-39

And he went forth again by the sea side; and all the multitude resorted to him and he taught them.

Jesus fame and popularity grew in Galilee, especially along the coast of Capernaum. Multitudes of people follow in his comings and goings. Many have come to hear what he says, but a great number are interested in his ability to cure.

And after these things, as Jesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man as he passed by named Matthew Levi, the son of Alphaeus, a publicansitting at the receipt of custom: and he said to him, “Follow me.” And he left all, arose, and followed him.

One day walking through the streets of Capernaum he looks at a publican working in his stall. The man has two names, Levi and Matthew. Some critics have tried to insist Levi and Matthew were two different persons, but it is obvious from Scripture they were the same man. It was not unusual for people to have two names in those times.  Levi was the third son of Jacob whose descendents became the priestly class. It was common practice to name a child after past important figures in Jewish history. There is some speculation that Matthew was a name given to him by Jesus, much as Christ renamed Simon to Peter. Matthew is also from a Hebrew root and means Gift of Jehovah. It is interesting that Levi means, “joined”. Perhaps the naming was the other way around since Matthew joined with Jesus.

There are also critics who claim there are two different Matthews, the tax collector named here in scripture and some anonymous person who wrote the Gospel of Matthew. These critics do what all elitist and cynics do, base their judgment on the basis that someone couldn’t have accomplished certain things because they lacked the background and education of the elitists. But Matthew was an educated man to be a publican and probably versed in Latin, Greek and Aramaic. Because these men who became Jesus’ followers did not have college degrees did not mean they lacked knowledge or understanding of God and the Jewish Scriptures.

Matthew’s background is unknown, except for a few passages of the Gospel. He was the son of Alphaeus. This may mean that Mathew was the brother of James the Less, son of Alphaeus. That is not illogical. It is quiet possible, just as Andrew fetched his brother Simon to Christ, Matthew may have brought his brother James.

Jesus passed by and said, “Follow me” and Matthew got up, left his occupation on the spot and did. I don’t think it was a sudden whim. Jesus was preaching in Capernaum for a while by now. Matthew may have heard him at times, may even have been following him about. He may have had good reasons to be seeking a new life.

He was a publican, not a particularly admired profession. No one likes the tax collector and when the collector is more often than not corrupt and overcharging it borders on hatred. This was doubly so for Matthew, a Jew collecting duties for Rome. His people viewed him as a traitor.

Tax collectors were not as we have today. The publicans were freelancers, not elected or appointed. They placed bids with the Roman senate to acquire a post. They made their money by charging a fee over and beyond what the tax was. It was also common practice to exaggerate the tax and keep the difference.

There were two levels of publicans. Those who made the bids at the Senate were the chief publicans and generally came from the elite class of Romans called Equites. These were the ancestors of the equestrian or knight class. Matthew most likely belonged to the second level of publicans, who we can view as franchisees. These men worked for the Chief Publicans. All publicans could become wealthy within such a system.

And it came to pass that Levi made him a great feast in his own houseand as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, a great many publicans and other sinners came and sat down also together with Jesus and his disciples, for there were many and they followed him.

From this passage we see Matthew was among the publicans who did well financially. He also must have had influence among the others in his trade for a great many came to this feast he threw. Why did he have this feast? He wanted his friends to see and hear Jesus. This also tells us not to avoid those we know are sinners, but to reach out to them and try to help them see just who Christ is.

But when their scribes and Pharisees saw it, him eat with publicans and sinners, they murmured against his disciples and said to his disciples, “Why do you eat and drink with publicans and sinners? How is it that your Master eats and drinks with publicans and sinners?”

Jesus has acquired enough notice by this time that the Scribes and Pharisees are dogging his steps. They aren’t interested in his message as much as catching him in some blasphemy. These men would not ever sit down and eat with the type of person Matthew is or his friends. They were too Holier-than-thou to mingle with sinners, seeing themselves as above sin.

But when Jesus heard that, answering, he said to them, “They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. But go you and learn what that means, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

I doubt that these Scribes and Pharisees understood this explanation. They were too committed to judgment of those not like themselves. This is a warning to us as well. We as saved Christians must never see ourselves above the sinners we once were. Jesus saved and guides us, but our human natures are no different from the corrupt and lost around us. I think we look too forward to judgment rather than concentrating on mercy. It isn’t our job to condemn the sinners of this world, but to lead them to salvation. 

QUESTIONING BY THE DISCIPLES OF JOHN

“Christ Eating With Sinners” Artist Unknown, from Christ The King College, Isle of Wight

QUESTIONING BY THE DISCIPLES OF JOHN

Matthew 9:14-17; Mark 2:18-22; Luke 5:33-39

Jesus was at the banquet thrown by his latest recruit, Matthew Levi, the Tax Collector. The Pharisees and Scribes are critical of his sitting down with such people as Matthew’s friends. Jesus tells them, “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” He then orders them to “go you and learn what that means, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

What then did the Pharisees and Scribes think of this order? These were men that were very familiar with scripture. The would probably immediately turn to Hosea 6:6, “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgement of God rather than burnt offerings.”

It is probably wise to look at the whole passage in Hosea, because I think it is key to understanding what Christ then tells the disciples of John and his two parables.

Come, let us return to the Lord. He has torn us to pieces, but he will heal us; he has injured us, but he will bind up our wounds. After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will restore us that we may live in his presence. Let us acknowledge the Lord; let us press on to acknowledge him. As surely as the sun rises, he will appear; he will come to us like the winter rains, like the spring rains that water the earth.”

What can I do with you, Ephraim? What can I do with you, Judah? Your love is like the morning mist, like the early dew that disappears. Therefore I cut you in pieces with my prophets, I killed you with the words of my mouth—
then my judgments go forth like the sun.

For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings. As at Adam, they have broken the covenant; they were unfaithful to me there. Gilead is a city of evildoers, stained with footprints of blood.

As marauders lie in ambush for a victim, so do bands of priests; they murder on the road to Shechem, carrying out their wicked schemes. I have seen a horrible thing in Israel: There Ephraim is given to prostitution, Israel is defiled. Also for you, Judah,
a harvest is appointed. Whenever I would restore the fortunes of my people.”

--Hosea 6: 1-11

Hosea was a prophet living in northern Israel between 780 and 725 BC. His name means, “He saves” and was the original name of Joshua. The Book of Hosea is prophecies concerning Israel’s infidelity to God. These prophecies came just before the Northern Kingdom fell. Using the marriage of Hosea to Gomer and their children, the Book outlines God’s “divorce” from Israel as his people, but with the promise he will one day restore them. The book points toward Christ as Savior and of a new covenant in which God makes the sacrifice and sheds his mercy on those people who will accept it.

In other words, in hindsight, we can see the coming of Christ to people who are not Israel, who will be accepting of God’s love and mercy, but with the promise that God will not desert Israel completely. It points to not following some list of rules to gain God’s mercy, but an acknowledgment of God.

The Pharisees, however, had long followed a growing list of dos and don’ts. This we see implied in their condemnation of Jesus sitting down to eat with Publicans and sinners. We see this futher in the question about fasting put forth by the disciples of John the Baptist and the Pharisees’ followers.

And Then came to him the disciples of John and of the Pharisees used to fast and they come and say to him, saying, “Why do we the disciples of John and likewise of the Pharisees fast oft, but your disciples fast not, but eat and drink?”

And Jesus said to them, “Can the children of the bridechamber mourn while the bridegroom is with them? As long as the bridegroom is with them they cannot fast? But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast in those days.”

John the Baptist has been jailed. Perhaps his disciples have come to Jesus looking toward him as a possible new leader to follow. They have been devout Jews and now they find Jesus and his Disciples behaving in ways that seem wrong to them. John had lived an ascetic life, eating locust and honey and here is this man Jesus feasting and drinking with sinners. The disciples of John probably have more in common with the Pharisees and Scribes at this point than in what Jesus is teaching.

When they ask about this, Jesus’ explanation must have been somewhat mystifying to them. “Can the children of the bridechamber mourn while the bridegroom is with them? As long as the bridegroom is with them they cannot fast? But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast in those days.” They would understand such a saying as it applied to the betrothal traditions, but how did that apply to this situation? We can look at this and associate it with Christ being the groom and the church being his bride. We can look at this and understand that Jesus will eventually be crucified. But John’s disciples would not have understood those things at this time. And then Jesus follows this up with a couple of mystifying parables that seem unrelated to anything.

And he spoke also a parable to them. “No man also sews a piece of new cloth to an old garment, for else the new piece that which is put in to fill it up takes from the old garment, and the rent is made worse. If otherwise, then both the new makes a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agrees not with the old. And neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the new wine burst the bottles and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred, perish: but they put new wine into new bottles and both are preserved.

“No man also having drunk old wine straightway desires new: for he says, the old is better.”

From practical application we know what is stated is true. If you patch an old garment with new cloth that has not been shrunk, then the patch does not match the old garment so that when it is washed the new patch shrinks. When this happens the shrinking patch will pull taunt and make the original tear worse. We also realize that the bottles being referred to here are not glass, but animal skins. Wineskins are filled with new wine and as the wine ferments it stretches the skins. If the old wine is used up and the skins dry they become cracked and weak. When refilled with new wine they are at risk of bursting.

But what has patches and old wineskins to do with the question asked by John’s disciples and the Pharisees concerning their fasting verses Jesus and his band feasting? Everything. These parables are very difficult. I have heard people say the new wine and the new patch represent Christianity. It is said then that the old garment that is rent further by the new patch or the bottles destroyed by the new wine is Judaism. Christianity replaces Judaism and old wine is the Old Testament and the new wine the New Testament.

But this doesn’t make a lot of sense. Both parables say you don’t put something new on or in something old without destruction to the old. How could this be so? Did the appearance of the New Testament do away with the Old Testament? Was it Jesus’ purpose to destroy Judaism? If this is the meaning of these parables, than how do we square it with what Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount?

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.– Matthew 5: 17-20 (KJV)

And how does such an explanation fit with the statement stated immediately after he tells these parables? “No man also having drunk old wine straightway desires new: for he says, the old is better.”

Where did this section begin? It began with Jesus calling Simon Peter, Andrew, James and John from their nets to follow him and be fishers of men. This question by John’s Disciples about fasting is raised right after Matthew leaves his tax stand to also follow Jesus. What lies not far ahead in this time frame is Jesus is naming his twelve Apostles.

And who are these Disciples of Jesus in the eyes of the Pharisees and Scribes, and probably John the Baptist’s Disciples as well? They are riff-raff, common ignorant men, and in the case of Matthew, a traitor. Here comes this bunch of fishermen and a tax collector joining Jesus as his closest companions. Why these guys? Why didn’t Jesus take in John the Baptist’s Disciples or recruit from the highly educated Pharisee class? If you were sent from God, wouldn’t you surround yourself with the “godly” people?

When Jesus tells the two parables there is no indication anyone present asked any questions. Is this because the Gospel writers choose not to present any opposing remarks or is it that what Jesus said was not altogether unfamiliar to the “godly” people asking him about fasting?

There are Jewish writings called Avots that the Pharisees and Scribes were probably familiar with. These were writings by Rabbis and teachers that dealt with religious thought and interpretation of the Torah. Contained in one of these called the Pirkei Avot (Chapters of the Fathers or Ethics of the Fathers) is a discussion with some similarity to these parables.

Elisha ben Avuyah said: "He who studies as a child, unto what can he be compared? He can be compared to ink written upon a fresh sheet of paper. But he who studies as an adult, unto what can he be compared? He can be compared to ink written on a smudged sheet of paper.

Rabbi Yose ben Yehudah of the city of Babylon said, "He who learns from the young, unto what can he be compared? He can be compared to one who eats unripe grapes, and drinks unfermented wine from his vat. But he who learns from the old, unto what can he be compared? He can be compared to one who eats ripe grapes, and drinks old wine.

Rabbi (Meir) said: Do not pay attention to the container but pay attention to that which is in it. There is a new container full of old wine, and here is an old container which does not even contain new wine.

In essence, Jesus has chosen untrained men who will study ink on fresh paper. This will allow them to see clearly what the truth of God’s words are rather then losing sight of the meaning in old ink that shows through the smudges of used paper.

Jesus is not bringing a new religious, he is bringing the truth to the old, which has been distorted and smudged with the ideas of men to the point the original truth God intended seems like some radical new idea. The Pharisees and Scribes have been taught since youth the wrong things, but this makes them like used wineskins, they will not easily accept the truth. The old wine is the previous teachings of men and the new wine is Jesus’ new teaching of the truth. The old cloth are the over-educated, the new cloth those who are teachable. It will be easier for these uneducated fishermen and sinners to understand the message Jesus is bringing, that God desires mercy, not sacrifice, then those long fermenting in the idea of sacrifice, not mercy. They are, as an old saying goes, “Too heavenly minded to be any earthly good.” Or perhaps, they “can’t see the forest for the trees.”

“No man also having drunk old wine straightway desires new: for he says, the old is better.” Do you understand? This is like all those people who tell you, “That’s how we always did it.” Once you have been thoroughly inebriated on the old, it is difficult to enjoy the new.