In the Fulness of Time/Part 49

By: Dr. Thomas O. Figart; ©2007

Why didn’t Jesus disciples fast? How does Jesus’ teaching concerning weddings and wineskins apply to us today?

Previous Article

Question Concerning Fasting: From John the Baptist’s Disciples. Matthew 9:14-17

The Occasion and Question. 9:14

Matthew 9:14 “Then came to him the disciples of John, saying, Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but thy disciples fast not?”

Jesus had recently come from a feast in Matthew’s house; perhaps it was held on one of the traditional fast days, which occurred twice a week according to Luke 18:2-12. Apparently John the Baptist taught a more rigid lifestyle than did Jesus. In the matter of fasting he must have taught similarly to the Pharisees. Jesus was certainly not against fasting, as indicated in Mat­thew 6:16-18, saying that it should be sincere, with no outward show. But to require fasting twice a week was contrary to the Law; only one day a year, on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atone­ment, when they fasted and gave sin offerings (Leviticus 23:27). So, Christ and His disciples were not contradicting the Law.

The Reply. 9:15-17.

The principle from the social world: Weddings. 9:15

Matthew 9:15 “And Jesus said unto them, Can the sons 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.”

Jesus was referring to the marriage feast, which lasted seven days. It was all feasting and no fasting; even on the Day of Atonement the bridegroom and the bride did not have to fast: “Even on the Day of Atonement a bride was allowed to relax one of the ordinances of that strictest fast. During the marriage week all mourning was to be suspended—even the obligation of the prescribed daily prayers ceased. It was regarded as a religious duty to gladden the bride and bridegroom” (Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Vol. 1, p. 663).

Only two facts about the wedding feast are mentioned: the disciples are related to Jesus as the groomsmen are related to the bridegroom; and second, that at a Jewish wedding only rejoicing was permitted. Jesus does add that He will be taken away and then there will be mourning. He does, therefore, anticipate His death, and this is in accord with the prophecies given at His birth and in His early ministry. At His birth the angel said to Joseph that Mary’s child should be called Jesus, “for he shall save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21. In Luke 2:11 the angel gave “good tidings of great joy which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior who is Christ the Lord.” In that same chapter, is Simeon’s prophecy of the rejection and death of Christ; “Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel: and for a sign which shall be spoken against (Yes, a sword shall pierce through thine own soul also), that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed” (Luke 2:34- 35). Then in John 1:29, 35 at the very introduction of Christ by John the Baptist he refers to Jesus as the “Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world.”

Now here in Matthew 9:15 after the criticism by the Pharisees, Jesus prophesies of His being taken away from the sons of the bridechamber. At this point He does not indicate a revelation of the detains of His death nor anything about His resurrection, and nothing at all of

the Church. These things will come later, in Matthew 12:38-41; 16:18-23; 17:22-23; 18:15-18.

The principle from the commercial world. 9:16-17.

Textile Illustration. 9:16.

Matthew 9:16 “No man putteth a piece of new cloth on an old garment, for that which is put to fill it up taketh from the garment and the tear is made worse.”

Two illustrations are given to show that the new ministry of Christ and the old traditions of the Pharisees are incompatible. The first illustration shows that you cannot preserve the old by patching it with a little of the new. New material, possibly of linen, or wool, was not pre-shrunken in those days and this kind of patching would make the old robe worse than it was before. You must get a completely new garment! But how is this related to the illustration of the sons of the bridechamber?

It is simply this: Christ has presented Himself as Messiah/King, and His disciples have accepted Him as such. Therefore they cannot fast while He is with them. They cannot keep the old traditions of the Pharisees and merely add a little of Christ’s teaching. This would only make matters worse; they would not only be sad, but frustrated in a way similar to the confusion of John the Baptist’s disciples.

Wineskin Illustration. 9:17

Matthew 9:17 “Neither do men put new wine into old wineskins, else the wineskins break, and the wine runneth out, and the wineskins perish, but they put new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”

Wineskins were made from the skins of animals which were carefully removed without slitting, and then the legs and tail openings sewed up, the neck opening serving as the spout. New skins were flexible and could withstand the expansion of the new wine, but old wineskins became brittle and could not handle such expansion. In this illustration it is not merely adjusting or adding a little new to the pharisaic traditions, but an attempt to combine both systems of teaching. Jesus says that this would only result in both systems being completely lost! What Jesus presented was a true interpretation of the Law which would be the standard for His Messianic Kingdom. He and His disciples could not tolerate pouring Christ’s teachings into the mold of the Pharisaic traditions; it would result in confusion. The sons of the bridegroom would never be happy in such a situation.

While it is true that certain disciples of John were confronted with the necessity of receiving the teachings of the Age of Grace in Acts 19:1-7, and while Paul had difficulty in Galatians 5:1-6 with Judaizers attempting to mix Law and Grace, neither of these is parallel with Matthew 9:14- 17. Christ was not presenting the dispensation of the Church Age; He was presenting the dispensation of the Kingdom, and specifically, Himself as the Messiah/King. So the question about His authority to forgive sins (proven by His ability to heal the paralytic) showed that He is Lord (Matthew 9:1-9). His eating with the publicans and sinners in Matthew 9:10-13 and His desire to call sinners to repentance rather than the self-righteous, showed that He was the compassionate Jesus, the Son of Man Who came to seek and to save that which was lost. Finally, in Matthew 9:14-17 the difference between the traditional fasting and the joy of the disciples gave evidence both to John’s disciples and the Pharisees that He is Christ, the Mes­siah with His program that would not destroy, patch up, nor combine the Law with the Kingdom teachings, but would, in the fulness of time, fulfill completely the Law and the Prophets!

Read Part 50