Many people use these passages in Matthew 9 and Luke 5 about wineskins and garments as an excuse to break Mitzvoth (the Law of Moshe), but is this what these passages actually mean? To know for sure we need to first travel back to the context where this dialogue began:
“And as He sat at table in the house, behold many tax collectors and sinners came and sat down with Jesus and His disciples. And when the Pharisees saw this, they said to His disciples, ‘Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?’ but when He heard it, He said, ‘Those who are well have no need of a physician, but only those who are sick. Go learn what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice. For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.’” Matt.10.13
What did Yeshua mean when He said that He desires mercy not sacrifice. Well, the Pharisees come to judge these sinners and tax collectors because they fell short in keeping Mitzvoth, but Yeshua makes it clear that it is these very people who struggle with their faith that He came to save. He did not call the righteous because they already know Him through His Word, just like Abraham before them. But ironically, the Pharisees were not to be numbered among the righteous because they failed to cultivate true humility, which is equal to all other Mitzvoth under the Law.
Yeshua’s condemnation of their hypocrisy does not go unnoticed. Soon the disciples of John come forward with a question. No doubt these same Pharisees have used this very charge to plant seeds of doubt in the young disciples’ minds over whether Yeshua is truly HaMoshiach (The Messiah). They asked: “‘Why do we and the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast.’ And Yeshua said to them, ‘Can the wedding guests mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? The days will come, when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and they will fast.’”
The Pharisees and the disciples of John fasted for both the second and fifth days of the week (see In search of the Messiah, by Edersham). The reason they fasted was for self-punishment and mortification so that HaShem would turn away His anger for any failings they may have had in keeping Mitzvoth. Note the irony that HaShem has set up for these hypocrites. First they condemn Yeshua for sitting among sinners, then the disciples of John ask Him why aren’t your disciples worried about their weaknesses and failings. We are told that the reason these disciples of His do not mortify themselves is because Yeshua is here. Once Yeshua is taken away (crucified) they will fast (which they did), but as for now they don’t need to (if you haven’t guessed- Yeshua is alluding to the sin sacrifice, which is about to be made). Now the parable (which has everything to do with sin and the sin sacrifice):
“No one tears a piece from a new garment and puts it upon an old garment; if he does, he will tear the new, and the piece from the new will not match the old.”
If garments clothe our nakedness and sin, then what clothed our sins in the “old” covenant? Was it not the sacrificial system that required blood (Lev.5-6)? What clothes the sins of those in the new covenant? Is it not HaMoshiach that takes away our sins:
Therefore, you can’t take the system under Yeshua and paste it back onto the Levitical system. As Paul correctly says, Yeshua was under a different order. Therefore a return to the Levitical system is to nullify Yeshua’s offering. His order required only one Holy Sacrifice of His physical Body and Blood, but in the former covenant it required thousands of sacrifices given over and over (the Eucharist, though a daily sacrifice, is not included here, see Is the Eucharist the very Body and Blood of Yeshua?).“For this Melchiza’dek, King of Salem, Priest of the Most High G-d, met Abraham returning from slaughter of the kings, and blessed him and to Him Abraham apportioned a tenth part of everything. He is first, by translation of His Name, King of Righteousness, and then He is also King of Salem, that is Peace (Shalom) . . . Now if perfection has been attainable through the Levit’cal priesthood (for under it people received the Law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchiza’dek . . . “ Heb.7.1-2,11
Going on . . .
“And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; if His does, the new wine will burst the skins and the skins destroyed. But new wine must be into fresh skins. And no one after drinking old wine desires new; for old is better.”
Wine is joy and it also represents the blood of Yeshua’s sacrifice (or Life). Because of this connection, wine must be the sacrifice on Mount Calvary, however many mistakenly define the new wine as the New Covenant, but when they do this passage no longer makes sense. Literally, we’d be saying that the New Covenant was less than the Old Covenant because “the old is better”. We know this to be false.
What if the wineskins are the covenant ? Then the old wineskins would be the Old Covenant and the new wineskins, the New Covenant. Sounds possible, but this doesn’t explain what the wine (our joy) is. One clue is that this wine could inhabit the New Covenant as well as the old, but could not be contained in the old sacrificial system without being “lost” or ruined. As Mitzvoth keepers, who keep the laws of Torah out of love and still remain in excellent standing in our Church, we strongly suspect it is Mitzvah (a love from our Jewish heritage) that represents the old wine, then the new wine would represent the traditions of our Church (which are relatively new compared with Torah).
Therefore, substituting our definitions, we would have:
“And no one puts the Traditions of our Church into the old sacrificial system if His does, these traditions will be destroyed as with the meaning of the Sacrifice (Yeshua’s) and the sacrifice would be useless (another way to say this is that we are saved by faith not by our Church’s traditions) . But the traditions of our Church must be placed into the New Covenant (Salvation by faith). And no one after “drinking” or rather keeping Traditions of Torah desires the Traditions of the modern Church, for old is better.”This does make sense and the meaning carries throughout the entire passage from beginning to end. He is only saying that the traditions (both old and new) were given to enrich our lives. And that these traditions do not replace salvation by faith (relying upon works), only to help us become more appreciative of HaShem and His ways, lest we go towards damnation. This is what the Pharisees were doing when they “fasted” to overcome human weakness. Truth is you can fast until you die and this won’t perfect you one iota, we fast for other reasons. It is grace that saves which is why we say in the Act of Contrition:
“I firmly resolve with the help of Thy grace to sin no more . . .”
OK, so the Church does add one thing to grace and its that we must seek it! Salvation is not a spectator’s sport!
The above passage also affirms the traditions both the ones of old and those that would evolve centuries later in our Church as still being good. In the case of the Church’s traditions (Christmas, Easter, Novenas and rosaries etc. . .), Yeshua clearly states they can have a place in salvation by faith without the loss of grace (new wine must be placed into fresh skins). These traditions are not the issue, rather legalism is. Let’s not forget Yeshua own words about those old Jewish traditions like Pesach, Chag HaMotzi, Shavout, etc . . . He said “for old is better”. Anyone raised in a Jewish home who later enters our Church, but maintains his or her heritage knows these words are true. But even though Torah is better, as Paul correctly states in Galatians and elsewhere, it’s not for everyone. This is why Peter was given the seat and the right to loosen and bind.
Copyright (c)1999
