Questions About Fasting

Luke 33-39

A cracked and split old clay vessel on a stone shelf, a dark stain spreading from the crack across the pale stone surface

“John's followers fast and pray,” they said. “The Pharisees' followers fast and pray. Yours eat and drink.” The accusation came from an unlikely alliance: John's radicals and the establishment Pharisees, who agreed on almost nothing, now agreeing on this — that Jesus' movement lacked discipline.

“Can you force wedding guests to mourn while the groom is right there with them?” Jesus asked. “But days will come when the bridegroom is taken from them.” Taken— not gone, not departed. Taken. The word held violence in it, a shadow passing across a celebration that nobody yet understood. “Then they'll fast.”

He told them a parable. “No one cuts a piece from a new coat to patch an old one — you'd wreck the new coat, and the patch wouldn't match anyway. And no one pours fresh wine into old wineskinspublicCultureWineskinsWineskins were made from whole animal hides (goat or sheep), sewn and sealed for liquid storage. New wine, still fermenting, produces carbon dioxide gas that expands the leather. New skins are supple enough to stretch with the pressure. Old skins, already stretched to capacity by previous use, have no flexibility left — new wine will burst them. The metaphor is precise: the issue is not that old skins are bad but that they have already given all they can. Jesus' new reality requires containers that can accommodate growth and pressure. Both wine and skins are lost in a mismatch — the incompatibility is total.. The wine is still fermenting. The skins have already stretched as far as they can. The skins will split, the wine will spill— you lose both. Everything gone. New wine needs new skins.” And then, almost as an afterthought: “No one who's been drinking aged wine wants the new vintage. They say, 'The old is good.'” He said it without judgment. Without argument. He left it there.

Additional Notes

public
Culture Fasting practices expand_more

The Torah commanded fasting only on Yom Kippur (Lev. 16:29-31). Pharisees voluntarily fasted twice weekly — Monday and Thursday — as acts of personal piety and national mourning. John the Baptist's disciples fasted in apocalyptic anticipation, mourning Israel's condition under Roman occupation. Jesus' followers conspicuously did not fast, which looked like religious laxity — or worse, a claim that there was nothing to mourn. The accusation comes from an unlikely alliance: John's radical ascetics and the establishment Pharisees, who agreed on almost nothing, now united in their critique.
link
Context Bridegroom = Messiah expand_more

In the Old Testament, Yahweh is Israel's bridegroom (Hosea 2:16-20, Isaiah 62:5, Jeremiah 2:2). The messianic age is depicted as a wedding feast (Isaiah 25:6-9). By calling himself the bridegroom, Jesus makes an implicit messianic claim — and more: he claims the role that the Hebrew scriptures assign to God. The shift from “groom” (v. 34) to “bridegroom” (v. 35) heightens the claim. “Taken away” (ἀπαρθῇ) is a violent passive — the bridegroom will not depart willingly but be forcibly removed. This is the first hint of the cross, spoken inside a wedding metaphor.
translate
Text “The old is good” (ὁ παλαιὸς χρηστός ἐστιν) expand_more

This verse appears only in Luke — absent from Mark and Matthew. Its tone is deliberately ambiguous. Is Jesus endorsing the old? Critiquing those who resist the new? Simply naming the human tendency to prefer what's familiar? The text doesn't resolve the tension, and interpreters have divided sharply. Some read it as sympathetic — Jesus understands why people resist change. Others read it as ironic — the preference for old wine will cause some to miss the new thing God is doing. The variant reading χρηστότερος (“better”) in some manuscripts sharpens the comparison but is likely secondary. The ambiguity may be the point: Jesus names the reality of resistance without condemning those who feel it.

menu_book Study Notes

public
Culture 5:33

Fasting practices

The Torah commanded fasting only on Yom Kippur (Lev. 16:29-31). Pharisees voluntarily fasted twice weekly — Monday and Thursday — as acts of personal piety and national mourning. John the Baptist's disciples fasted in apocalyptic anticipation, mourning Israel's condition under Roman occupation. Jesus' followers conspicuously did not fast, which looked like religious laxity — or worse, a claim that there was nothing to mourn. The accusation comes from an unlikely alliance: John's radical ascetics and the establishment Pharisees, who agreed on almost nothing, now united in their critique.
link
Context 5:34-35

Bridegroom = Messiah

In the Old Testament, Yahweh is Israel's bridegroom (Hosea 2:16-20, Isaiah 62:5, Jeremiah 2:2). The messianic age is depicted as a wedding feast (Isaiah 25:6-9). By calling himself the bridegroom, Jesus makes an implicit messianic claim — and more: he claims the role that the Hebrew scriptures assign to God. The shift from “groom” (v. 34) to “bridegroom” (v. 35) heightens the claim. “Taken away” (ἀπαρθῇ) is a violent passive — the bridegroom will not depart willingly but be forcibly removed. This is the first hint of the cross, spoken inside a wedding metaphor.
public
Culture 5:37

Wineskins

Wineskins were made from whole animal hides (goat or sheep), sewn and sealed for liquid storage. New wine, still fermenting, produces carbon dioxide gas that expands the leather. New skins are supple enough to stretch with the pressure. Old skins, already stretched to capacity by previous use, have no flexibility left — new wine will burst them. The metaphor is precise: the issue is not that old skins are bad but that they have already given all they can. Jesus' new reality requires containers that can accommodate growth and pressure. Both wine and skins are lost in a mismatch — the incompatibility is total.
translate
Text 5:39

“The old is good” (ὁ παλαιὸς χρηστός ἐστιν)

This verse appears only in Luke — absent from Mark and Matthew. Its tone is deliberately ambiguous. Is Jesus endorsing the old? Critiquing those who resist the new? Simply naming the human tendency to prefer what's familiar? The text doesn't resolve the tension, and interpreters have divided sharply. Some read it as sympathetic — Jesus understands why people resist change. Others read it as ironic — the preference for old wine will cause some to miss the new thing God is doing. The variant reading χρηστότερος (“better”) in some manuscripts sharpens the comparison but is likely secondary. The ambiguity may be the point: Jesus names the reality of resistance without condemning those who feel it.

Stay Updated