Wineskins? And Why Old and New do not Mix.

[MatthewG]

Matthew 9

15 And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast.

16 No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment, for that which is put in to fill it up taketh from the garment, and the rent is made worse.

17 Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.

This notion of wineskins, are speaking of how the Old Covenant and the New Covenant coming are incompatible with each other. It's impossible for either one of them to mix. Therefore New Wine is placed in new wineskins, "so both are preserved." Meaning Gentile and Jew alike, in and through Christ and the new Convenant, make them all one.

Paul wrote this to the people at Coloasse,
Colossians 3:11 Here there is no Gentile or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.

 

[chandlere880]

perhaps it has multiple and multiplicity of meaning s


Could it be that Jesus was answering the question specifically about what he being asked, concerning John, in fasting -

- and that Jesus was explaining that in his new ministry, his own purpose and his new message was to deliver a new part of God’s plan, to teach and nurture the people concerning things that he was purposed to bring to the world and that fasting at this specific time,

while he was just beginning the teaching and revealing of his new message and ministry, it was not the time and his purpose to suddenly compel and call people to fasting.

and that fasting at this time would be like piecing in a new cloth onto an old garment -

or putting new wine into old containers - it was time for a new beginning to treat and deal with the people he was teaching as new garments and new wineskins - pertaining to fasting as well

John was the forerunner of the New Covenant in Jesus - Aman

 

[Rockerduck]

The old wineskin represented the Mosaic Law and the new wine represented the age of Grace. The Mosaic Law was a works law. The age of Grace is not, you cannot work for it.

 

[MatthewG]

Thank you for sharing, rocker. While some believe we live in the age of grace, I’m someone who believes we live in the age of fulfillment. However one’s view point may be, we are fulfilled in Christ whom by his righteousness, wisdom, holiness and redemption helps us by his spirit, the spirit of Christ.

 

[Soyeong]

Matthew 9


This notion of wineskins, are speaking of how the Old Covenant and the New Covenant coming are incompatible with each other. It's impossible for either one of them to mix. Therefore New Wine is placed in new wineskins, "so both are preserved." Meaning Gentile and Jew alike, in and through Christ and the new Convenant, make them all one.

Paul wrote this to the people at Coloasse,
Colossians 3:11 Here there is no Gentile or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.

A new covenant does not nullify the promises of a covenant that has already been ratified, so God's covenants are cumulative. The Mosaic Covenant is eternal (Exodus 31:14-17, Leviticus 24:8), so the only way that it can be replaced by the New Covenant is if it is cumulative, which is what it means to make something obsolete (Hebrews 8:13). So the New Covenant still involves following God's law (Hebrews 8:10) plus it is based on better promises and has a superior mediator (Hebrews 8:6).

Jesus did not establish the New Covenant until the end of his ministry, which means that everything that he taught prior to that point was in regard to how to live under the Mosaic Covenant. Jesus gave the parable about the wine skins in response to him being questioned about his selection of disciples and why they weren't fasting, so you are blatantly misapplying it in a way that undermines Christ's ministry.

 

[MatthewG]

Hey Soy,

I figured his new covenant was established when the new Heaven and new earth had came which is spiritual by nature. That’s the way I take it.

 

[MatthewG]

I could be wrong, but I do know that they were living in the last days.

Peter proclaimed in Acts 2, of the Prophet Joel, and in Hebrews it mentions the last days that they were in, and I believe the Mosaic age completely ended at the white throne judgement wrapping of the entire age and being replaced with the new heavens and earth.

And establishing the new covenant.

“Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: but this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”
‭‭Jeremiah‬ ‭31‬:‭31‬-‭34‬ ‭KJV‬‬

 

[Rockerduck]

A new covenant does not nullify the promises of a covenant that has already been ratified, so God's covenants are cumulative. The Mosaic Covenant is eternal (Exodus 31:14-17, Leviticus 24:8), so the only way that it can be replaced by the New Covenant is if it is cumulative, which is what it means to make something obsolete (Hebrews 8:13). So the New Covenant still involves following God's law (Hebrews 8:10) plus it is based on better promises and has a superior mediator (Hebrews 8:6).

Jesus did not establish the New Covenant until the end of his ministry, which means that everything that he taught prior to that point was in regard to how to live under the Mosaic Covenant. Jesus gave the parable about the wine skins in response to him being questioned about his selection of disciples and why they weren't fasting, so you are blatantly misapplying it in a way that undermines Christ's ministry.

Jesus disavowed the Mosiac Law and said not to teach it again. Jesus predicted the destruction of the temple and never let it be built again for sacrifices', because the Mosiac Law was a law of works. Jesus died on the Cross for sins once and for all and nullified the Mosiac law and covenant. The wine skins parable was to show that the old Mosiac law of works was not compatible with the new covenant of Grace, without works. You can't earn salvation.

 

[MatthewG]

Founded in Colossians 2:14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of legal demands [which were in force] against us and which were hostile to us. And this certificate He has set aside and completely removed by nailing it to the cross.

This was wrote by the Apostle Paul, also further signifying that Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic law. How did he do that?

Matthew 22:

34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together.
35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

 

[quietthinker]

Matthew 9


This notion of wineskins, are speaking of how the Old Covenant and the New Covenant coming are incompatible with each other. It's impossible for either one of them to mix. Therefore New Wine is placed in new wineskins, "so both are preserved." Meaning Gentile and Jew alike, in and through Christ and the new Convenant, make them all one.

Paul wrote this to the people at Coloasse,
Colossians 3:11 Here there is no Gentile or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.

It's talking about paradigms Matthew.

 

[MatthewG]

Im not familiar with paradigms personally. I do believe what Jesus said though.

 

[quietthinker]

Im not familiar with paradigms personally. I do believe what Jesus said though.

Look the word up in the dictionary. It is HOW you see.

Here are a few simple examples,
1. Young men drafted into the military are programmed to see/ think the enemy is evil, even if they are not. It makes it easier for them to kill
2. Young women wear make up because they see/ think themselves as prettier....even if they are not.
3. It is generally assumed that if you have gone to University you are smarter than if you haven't ....even if you aren't
4. Religious people of all stripes adhere to a set of beliefs because they think/ see them as right....even if they're not
5. A thief will steal because he sees/ thinks it will give him advantage....even if it doesn't

All these are paradigms. Paradigms, (we all have them) they determine how you feel, how you evaluate, what you deem good or bad ...and ultimately, how you behave and relate.

If you have a faulty/ unhealthy paradigm, you draw faulty/ unhealthy and erroneous conclusions.
If your paradigm has integrity/ healthy, you will see the world and the information coming you way accurately.

If you think 2+2=5 and you maintain and justify this view, you will never objectively excel in mathematics
If you kill someone in war or privately you will suffer from PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) What you have done stays with you the rest of your life and affects how you feel and think and behave, particularly in stressful situations.

I hope this has been helpful.

 

[MatthewG]

I just go by the spirit, that won’t mean I don’t mess up sometimes. Thanks for your information.

 

[MatthewG]

If you find something you would like to add to the original post that’s fine. Most have, and that’s cool. It took me a long time to figure this parable out. It always confused me and never made any sense until it did.

 

[Jay Ross]

The old wineskin represented the Mosaic Law and the new wine represented the age of Grace. The Mosaic Law was a works law. The age of Grace is not, you cannot work for it.

Perhaps the old wineskins represent a stiff-necked person, whereas a renewed/refreshed wine skin represents a person who has had oil rubbed onto them and a good massage to make them work better in God's realm.

 

[Rockerduck]

Perhaps the old wineskins represent a stiff-necked person, whereas a renewed/refreshed wine skin represents a person who has had oil rubbed onto them and a good massage to make them work better in God's realm.

When Jesus told a parable it had a meaning, it was compatible or not. Old wine didn't work with new wine. It was a simple illustration of out with the old and in with the new.

 

[MatthewG]

I believe that the spirit is needed when it comes down to reading the Bible. If we base things on how we feel or in a sense of our human ways of thinking it seems that people may go off the mark. It took me a very long time to understand this parable for a very long time, I was thankful when it finally made sense. I’m not sure if it was by way of someone else or through study. Either way, I believe the spirit has given me a reasonable way to explain it, because it just makes sense that this new wine was the blood of Christ and the old wine was the blood of sacrifices which Yahavah got tired of, “he desired mercy not sacrifice.”

 

[Jay Ross]

When Jesus told a parable it had a meaning, it was compatible or not. Old wine didn't work with new wine. It was a simple illustration of out with the old and in with the new.

It seems that you have never used a wineskin before or know that leather ages and becomes brittle, but with the right oil and waxes it is possible to refurbish the old leather such that it is like new again.

It's a bit like leather shoes, if you do not polish them with wax, they become hard and brittle and crack and split when used with no old or new wine in them.

What we have is the misunderstanding of the Greek words "neo" and "kaneous." "Neo" is associated with the "young age" of the item whereas "kaneous" is associated with the condition of the item as to whether it is fit for use.

I can have a "neo" car, i.e. a new car, whereas, I can also have a "kaneous" which has been made like new again. Which car might be the better car for my purposes and use?

We simply cannot trust the "English translations" to provide the intent of the original context that is expressed in the source language in which it was recorded.

It is a bit like what Paul recorded a number of times in his letters, Like Ephesians 4:20-24: -

Ephesians 4:20-24: - 20But you have not so learned Christ, 21 if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught by Him, as the truth is in Jesus: 22 that you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, 23 and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, 24and that you put on the renewed/refurbished man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness.

We need to exercise our laughing matter more often.

 

[Soyeong]

Jesus disavowed the Mosiac Law and said not to teach it again.

He did no such thing. It doesn't even make sense to think that God's word made flesh disavowed God's word, rather he said that man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes out of the mouth of God. In Deuteronomy 13, the way that God instructed His children to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for Him is if they teach against obeying the Mosaic Law, so you are making Jesus out to be a false prophet.

In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Mosaic Law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of the Kingdom. Furthermore, Jesus set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Mosaic Law, and as his followers we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked (1 John 2:6), so Jesus spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example.

Jesus predicted the destruction of the temple and never let it be built again for sacrifices',

Laws in regard to temple practice that were no longer followed after the destruction of the 1st temple were once again followed after the construction of the 2nd temple, so there is nothing about the predicting the destruction of the 2nd temple that means that Jesus as disavowing the Mosaic Law. It was because of Israel's disobedience to the Mosaic Law that the temples were destroyed in the first place.

because the Mosiac Law was a law of works.

In Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the Mosaic Law.

Jesus died on the Cross for sins once and for all and nullified the Mosiac law and covenant.

In Titus 2:14, it does not say that Jesus gave himself to free us from the Mosaic Law, but in order to free us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Mosaic Law is the way to believe in what Jesu spent his ministry teaching by word and by example and in what he accomplished through the cross (Acts 21:20).

The wine skins parable was to show that the old Mosiac law of works was not compatible with the new covenant of Grace, without works. You can't earn salvation.

We should seek to understand the Bible in the way that its origin audiences would have understood it. Jesus was being questioned about why his disciples were not fasting, so we should not lose sight of the fact that the correct understanding of the parable of the wineskins answers the question that he was being asked, but you are interpreting his parable in a way that has nothing to do with answering that question. Moreover, you are interpreting it in a way that undermines everything that Jesus spent his ministry teaching by word and by example and everything that he accomplished through the cross.

In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Mosaic Law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so the Mosaic Covenant is a covenant of grace and this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith. In Titus 2:11-13, our salvation is described as being trained by grace to do what is godly, righteous, and good, and to renounce doing what is ungodly, so obeying the Mosaic Law has nothing to do with trying to earn our salvation as the result, but rather God graciously teaching us to be a doer of it is part of His gift of salvation. Jesus saves us from our sin (Matthew 1:21) and it is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20), so Jesus graciously teaching us to be a doer of it is intrinsically the way that he is giving us his gift of saving us from not being a doer of it.

 

[Soyeong]

I believe that the spirit is needed when it comes down to reading the Bible. If we base things on how we feel or in a sense of our human ways of thinking it seems that people may go off the mark. It took me a very long time to understand this parable for a very long time, I was thankful when it finally made sense. I’m not sure if it was by way of someone else or through study. Either way, I believe the spirit has given me a reasonable way to explain it, because it just makes sense that this new wine was the blood of Christ and the old wine was the blood of sacrifices which Yahavah got tired of, “he desired mercy not sacrifice.”

This was at the start of Christ's ministry and Jesus did not start to speak about his death until the end of his ministry, so we should seek to understand the parable in the way Jesus intended his audience to understand it rather than a way that anachronistically inserts ideas that have nothing to do with addressing the question that Jesus was asked. If God had not desired offerings, then He would not have commanded them, so read Psalms 51:16-19 and Isaiah 1:1-20 in context until you are also wanting to argue that God does not want our prayers.

Founded in Colossians 2:14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of legal demands [which were in force] against us and which were hostile to us. And this certificate He has set aside and completely removed by nailing it to the cross.

The purpose of the barbarity of crucifixion was the act as a deterrent, so the Romans made sure that everyone knew why someone was being crucified by nailing a handwritten sign to their cross that announced the charges that were against them, such as in Matthew 27:31, where they nailed a handwritten sign to Christ's cross that announced the charge that was against him that he was the King of the Jews. This fits perfectly with the concept with the charges that were against us being nailed to Christ's cross and with him dying in our place to pay the penalty of our sins, but has nothing to do with nailing any laws to the cross. In Titus 2:14, it does not ay that Jesus gave himself to free us from God's law, but to free us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to God's law is the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Acts 21:20).

This was wrote by the Apostle Paul, also further signifying that Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic law. How did he do that?

Matthew 22:

"To fulfill the law" means "to caused God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be" (NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo), so Jesus fulfilled the law by teaching how to correctly obey it. Everything that God has commanded is either in regard to how to love God and our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandment hang on them, so the position that we should obey the greatest two commandments is also the position that we should obey the commandment that hang on them, which is why love fulfills the law.

Hey Soy,

I figured his new covenant was established when the new Heaven and new earth had came which is spiritual by nature. That’s the way I take it.

We have foretaste of the New Covenant that Jesus established at the Last Supper, but not yet its fullness that takes place in the Messianic Era, where everyone will know God from the least to the greatest.