15 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.
. Fasting, 9:14–17
14 Then the disciples of John came to
him, saying, “Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but your
disciples do not fast?” 15 And Jesus said to them,
“Can the wedding guests mourn as long as the bridegroom is with
them? But days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them,
and then they will fast. 16 And no one puts a patch
of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for it pulls its overlap away
from the garment, and the tear gets worse. 17 Neither
do people put new wine into old wineskins; if they do, the skins
burst, and the wine pours out, and the skins are ruined. But they put
new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”
A further aspect of discipleship is brought out with a
paragraph on fasting, a practice that occupied a large place in the
religious observances of some of the Jews (and for that matter other
people). Matthew makes it clear that fasting was not a feature of
discipleship while Jesus was with his followers, but he leaves the
way open for it in the days after Jesus would be “taken away from
them.” As usual, Matthew’s account is shorter than those in Mark
and Luke, but he has some touches peculiar to himself (e.g., the
reference to mourning in v. 15 where the others have fasting).
14. For Matthew’s favorite then see on
2:7; it does not point to strict sequence. But it may well be that
John’s disciples were fasting on a day that the followers of Jesus
were feasting (cf. Mark 2:18). Matthew generally uses the term
disciples (see on 5:1; 8:21) for the disciples of Jesus, but
he can use it for the followers of other teachers, such as those of
the Pharisees (22:16) or, as here, of John the Baptist. In the word
“disciple” there is the thought of personal adherence to a
teacher in the pursuit of learning. The Baptist is simply John
without qualification. There is probably no great emphasis on we
(despite the use of the pronoun): the pronoun had to be inserted so
that John’s people could link themselves with the Pharisees.
Fasting was a common religious practice in the ancient world. The
only fast prescribed in the Law was that on the Day of Atonement, but
in New Testament times pious Jews fasted every Monday and Thursday,
and they might employ the practice at other solemn times. Perhaps we
could say that whenever people felt that God should be approached in
special humility for help in some time of trouble they saw fasting as
the appropriate way. Fasting regularly twice a week and on other
occasions as well certainly merits the description often.38
Fasting could be seen as a way of gaining merit before God, and thus
it is not surprising that Jesus and his disciples eschewed the
practice. But this certainly marked them out as distinctive; John’s
men say that Jesus’ people do not do it (GNB has a strong
antithesis, “fast often … don’t fast at all”). Jesus himself
fasted at the time of the temptation in the wilderness, but there is
no record of him engaging in the practice subsequently.
15. Jesus countered their question with one of
his own. His question looks for a negative answer, and the negative
along with the verb can points to a complete impossibility.
The bridegroom’s attendants cannot be fasting while the feasting is
at its height! The expression wedding guests (more literally
“the sons of the bridal hall”) refers particularly to “that
group of the wedding guests who stood closest to the groom and played
an essential part in the wedding ceremony” (BAGD). These people are
necessarily preoccupied with the marriage; that is why they are
there, and such practices as mourning are far from their minds. As
long as is necessary because a wedding feast could go on for
several days, but Jesus does not say “as long as the festivities go
on” but as long as the bridegroom is with them; he
concentrates on the presence of the bridegroom. The bridegroom
(again in 25:1, 5–6, 10; 22:2, and developed toward the close of
Revelation) carries on the same imagery, and, of course, John the
Baptist spoke of himself as “the best man” and Jesus as “the
bridegroom” (John 3:29). Mourn points to an activity proper
at a funeral (and other sad occasions), but not at a wedding. Bonnard
well remarks that the Pharisees and the disciples of John had not
recognized that Jesus was the messianic Bridegroom: “their pious
sorrow is the sign of their refusal of Jesus and of the true
repentance.” But “Fasting is not appropriate if the kingdom is
being manifested in Jesus’ mighty deeds” (Johnson).
But joy in the presence of the bridegroom is not the
whole story. Jesus points to a future time when the bridegroom is
taken away. There can be no doubt that by the bridegroom
he means himself, nor that is taken away refers to his death.
This is not part of the marriage imagery but an alien element, and it
shows us that from quite early in his ministry Jesus faced the fact
that it would end in rejection and death. John the Baptist had been
put into prison and opposition to Jesus was growing, so it is not
surprising that he should think of his death. When the bridegroom is
no longer with them the disciples will fast. Cf. Carr, “There is a
time of sorrow in store for my disciples when fasting will have a
real meaning, now in my presence they can but rejoice.”
Jesus does not command them to fast; he simply prophesies that they
will. And they did (cf. Acts 9:9; 13:3; 14:23; 27:9).1
the
fact that the will of man is counter to God’s will.
A message from this passage could follow the theme,
“Heralds of the New Order,” or “The New versus the Old.” (1)
In Christ religion is not meritorious exercises, vv. 14–15; (2) in
Christ religion is not monitoring an old traditionalism, vv. 16–17a;
(3) in Christ religion is the miraculous inbreaking of a new order,
v. 17b. In some degree this is “realized eschatology,” for the
new is happening. But, from the teachings of Jesus, we know there is
more to come. It is evident that the old has run out, that it isn’t
worth patching in comparison to the new creation in Christ. This is
the new age, and Jesus began His miracles by the miracle of wine
(John 2)—an illustration of the wine of the new age fulfilling the
prophecy of the time of our salvation (Is. 12).
Two illustrations express this. The first, not putting a
piece of unshrunk cloth into an old garment, is self-evident. He was
not simply introducing a new code of laws, for laws alone, applied to
the stresses of life, would tear persons apart. Nor is His ministry
the pouring of new wine into old wineskins, for the vitality of the
new life of love could not be contained or controlled by the old
structures or institutionalism of their religious orders. Yet there
is structure, for there are new wineskins for the new wine so that
both are preserved. This is the challenge of new ideas. It includes a
call to objectivity which frees one from prejudice and opens one’s
mind to the Spirit’s guidance. This is a contrast “between the
legal and the evangelic dispensations.” The new wine of Christian
faith could not be poured into the old wineskins of Judaism. The Book
of Acts demonstrates this fact, and the Letter to the Galatians
interprets it from Paul’s mission work.
JESUS DID NOT COME TO MAKE A NEW SET OF
LAWS HE CAME TO FREE YOU AND TO MAKE LOVEING JESUS THE LAW.
Our Lord is saying this: The old covenant, the old
dispensation of law, was ending, and He had not come to project it or
to continue under that dispensation. Actually, He had come to provide
a new garment, and that new garment was the robe of righteousness
which He gives to those who do nothing more than to trust Him.
The “bottles” were the wineskins of that day. They
were fashioned of animal skin. You can see that when new wine would
be put into a new wineskin, it would expand. But an old wineskin had
reached the place of maximum expansion; when it was filled with new
wine, it would naturally burst open and the wine would be lost.
Our Lord is saying this, “I haven’t come to sew
patches on an old garment. I have come to present a new garment,
something which is altogether new.” This was very radical. John
summed it up in his Gospel when he said, “For the law was given by
Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ” (John 1:17).3
JESUS DID NOT COME TO IMPROVE THE LAW.
JESUS CAME TO START GRACE AND TRUTH
1
Morris, L. (1992). The Gospel according to Matthew (pp.
223–225). Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans;
Inter-Varsity Press.
2
Augsburger, M. S., & Ogilvie, L. J. (1982). Matthew (Vol.
24, p. 18). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Inc.
3
McGee, J. V. (1991). Thru the Bible commentary: The Gospels
(Matthew 1-13) (electronic ed., Vol. 34, p. 132). Nashville:
Thomas Nelson.
No comments:
Post a Comment