Mark 2:18-28 Jesus questioned about fasting and the Sabbath - a podcast by Dr David Petts - Pentecostal preacher, former AoG Bible College Principal

Talk 8     Mark 2:18-28     Jesus Questioned About Fasting and the Sabbath

Welcome to Talk 8 in our series on Mark’s Gospel. Today we’re looking at Mark 2:18-28 where Jesus answers questions about fasting and the Sabbath. As we shall see, these questions arose, partly from a genuine desire to know the answer, but more often from the critical attitude of the Pharisees who, like many people today, were only looking for a reason why they should NOT believe the claims of Jesus.

 

In the first part of this chapter, we saw the beginning of opposition from the Jewish religious leaders, especially the Pharisees. They question his right to forgive sins. They ask why he keeps company with tax collectors and sinners. Now they’re asking why his disciples don’t fast and why they’re breaking the law regarding the Sabbath. And in chapter 3, which we’ll look at next time, they look for an excuse to accuse him by watching to see if he will heal on the Sabbath day. They even start to plot about how they can kill him. It’s important to bear this overall context in mind as we consider the two issues raised in today’s passage which relate to the disciples’ behaviour with regard to (1) fasting and (2) the Sabbath.

 

Questions about fasting (vv18-22)

18 Now John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting. Some people came and asked Jesus, "How is it that John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees are fasting, but yours are not?" 19 Jesus answered, "How can the guests of the bridegroom fast while he is with them? They cannot, so long as they have him with them. 20 But the time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them, and on that day they will fast. 21 "No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. If he does, the new piece will pull away from the old, making the tear worse. 22 And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine into new wineskins."

 

18 Now John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting. Some people came and asked Jesus, "How is it that John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees are fasting, but yours are not?"

 

Now John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting

Although regular fasting wasn’t part of the Law of Moses, by the time of Jesus it had become an important part of Jewish practice and was observed not only by the Pharisees but also by the disciples of John the Baptist. But the behaviour of Jesus and his disciples seemed to call into question the ceremonial law of the Old Testament and how it was currently interpreted and put into practice. In particular, it raised questions about fasting, and, as we shall see, the observance of the Sabbath (vv23-28 and 3:1-6).

 

Some people came and asked Jesus

The Greek just says, they came and said to him. So, in the context, the question is asked by John’s disciples and the Pharisees. Interestingly, Matthew (9:14) only mentions the disciples of John, and in Luke (5:33) it’s the Pharisees who asked the question. As we’ve already seen, the Pharisees were constantly looking for opportunities to catch Jesus out, but the motive of John’s disciples may well have been genuine.

They were probably fasting and mourning because John had already been imprisoned (1:14), and John would soon be taken from them.

 

How is it that John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees are fasting, but yours are not?

Whatever the motivation behind it, the question is quite understandable. Why weren’t Jesus’ disciples fasting? Jesus’ replies by using three different analogies – a bridegroom, a patch of cloth, and a wineskin.

 

Vv19-20 The analogy of a bridegroom

19 Jesus answered, "How can the guests of the bridegroom fast while he is with them? They cannot, so long as they have him with them. 20 But the time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them, and on that day they will fast.

 

To understand what Jesus is saying here we need to remember that in both Old and New Testaments God’s people are referred to as his bride. For example, Isaiah 62:5 God says:

 

As a bridegroom rejoices over his bride, so will your God rejoice over you.

(cf. The parable of the ten virgins in Matthew 25:1-14, and Revelation 21:2).

 

God is the bridegroom, and his people are his bride. So, in using this analogy and applying it to himself, Jesus is surely implying his deity. But that is not his primary purpose here. His main point is that the period that he was with his disciples was not a time for them to fast. Fasting was usually associated with repentance, sorrow and mourning. But, in leaving everything to follow him, Jesus’ disciples had already repented and the time of fellowship while he was with them was a time for joy, not sorrow. The time for sorrow and mourning would come when he was taken from them – an early indication that Jesus already knew that he would eventually die for their sins.

On that day (NIV) is literally in those days. This suggests that the time for sorrow and mourning after Jesus’ crucifixion would be limited. It would soon give place to the joy of resurrection and would hardly be true of the disciples after Pentecost. But that does not mean that there is no place for fasting today. It’s clear from the book of Acts (e.g. 13:1-3) that there are times when fasting is appropriate especially when it's accompanied by prayer.

But personally I see no clear basis in this passage for ritual fasting or for the observance of Lent, and although it’s right to remember regularly Christ’s suffering and death as we take communion (1 Corinthians 11:23-26), whatever the date on the calendar might be, I cannot help rejoicing in the knowledge that Christ is risen! If I mourn anything, it’s that my sin made his suffering necessary.

 

So the first part of Jesus’ answer to the question was that it was not the right time for his disciples to be fasting because they were enjoying fellowship with him while he was still with them. And, as we have seen, it also includes an implicit claim to deity and a prediction of his death.

But the second part of his answer, where Jesus uses two further analogies, makes another astounding claim. The kingdom of God which he had come to proclaim (1:14-15) could simply not be contained within the framework of Judaism. What Jesus had come to introduce was entirely new.

 

V21 The analogy of a patch of cloth

So in verse 21 Jesus says:

No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. If he does, the new piece will pull away from the old, making the tear worse.

The old garment of ceremonial Judaism was torn, but the new piece of Christ’s kingdom would only pull away from it, as it very quickly did as we see in Acts 15 with the church’s decision not to insist on circumcision for Gentile believers. The same point is made in verse 22 by Jesus’ use of the analogy of a wineskin.

 

V22 The analogy of a wineskin

And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine into new wineskins."

Wineskins were watertight bags made from a goatskin. New wine was always put into new wineskins, because in time it would expand and stretch the bag. Old wineskins had already been stretched, and so if new wine were put into them, as the wine expanded it would only burst the wineskin. The lesson goes even further than the illustration of the patch of cloth. The new and the old are incompatible. Jesus had come to introduce something entirely new that would not only break free from the old (Judaism) and, if it didn’t, it would ultimately destroy it. But that brings us to verses 23-28 where Jesus is questioned about his disciples’ behaviour on the Sabbath.

 

Questions about the Sabbath (vv23-28)

23 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain. 24 The Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?" 25 He answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? 26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions." 27 Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."

 

23 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain. 24 The Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?"

It wasn’t unlawful for the disciples to pick the heads of grain. This was explicitly permitted by the law of Moses for the benefit of the poor (Leviticus 19:9-10). But Exodus 34:21 did say that even in the time of harvest the people must rest on the Sabbath. This is presumably what the Pharisees had in mind. But what the disciples were doing was hardly harvesting.

 

It’s interesting that Jesus doesn’t get into a debate on the correct exegesis of these Old Testament verses – the Pharisees would probably have loved that – but he gets to the heart of the question, the purpose for which the law was given. It was given for the benefit of man.

The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (v27). All God’s commandments are given for our benefit. God loves us, and he knows what’s best for us. What matters is not the letter of the law, but its intention. This is made clear in verses 25-26.

 

25 "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? 26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions."

This is a reference to 1 Samuel 21:1-6 where David clearly broke the letter of the law given by Moses in Leviticus 24:9. And Jesus condones his actions! But why? Didn’t Jesus say that he had not come to destroy the law but to fulfil it? Yes, but he also taught that love (for God and for one’s fellow man) is the fulfilment of the law. So David had acted correctly because he understood that human need must take precedence over ceremonial law. So, as we shall see next time, Jesus taught that the Sabbath was a day to do good (Mark 3:4).

 

27 Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.

God created the Sabbath for our benefit, not his own. The laws about the Sabbath were given to ensure that God’s people took time to rest, did not exploit those who worked for them, and made time to worship the Lord – even the command to worship him was given for our benefit, not God’s.  

 

It’s noteworthy that in the teaching of Paul, the question of observing the Sabbath was a made a matter of individual conscience (Romans 14) and it’s worth remembering that the Sabbath was the seventh day of the week (i.e. our Saturday), not Sunday which was and – despite the wrong impression created by modern secular calendars – still is the first day of the week. Nowhere does the New Testament refer to Sunday as the Sabbath.

 

I’m so glad that most churches have now broken free from the restrictions that used to be placed on what Christians were allowed to do on Sundays. For example, we were told that it was wrong to buy anything on a Sunday as that made other people work when they should have been in church. I well remember putting a coin in a vending machine to buy a bar of chocolate as a group of us were travelling to take the Sunday evening service in another church. I was quickly challenged by one of my friends who told me that I shouldn’t be buying anything on a Sunday. Of course, the rebuke was well intentioned, but rather like the Pharisees, they had forgotten the intention behind the rule. The only thing I was making work that Sunday was a vending machine! And, incidentally, as we were travelling by rail to get to our destination, there were real people who were working to make our journey possible. My friend hadn’t thought about that.

 

But that brings us to the final verse in the chapter.

 

 

 

28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath

Wow! What a claim! We have already seen how, by referring to himself as the bridegroom, Jesus has made an implicit claim to deity. But now the claim is far more explicit. Not only does he again use the messianic title, Son of Man, to refer to himself, but as the last Adam, the representative man who came to succeed where Adam failed, he claims to be Lord of the Sabbath.

 

In making this statement Jesus is claiming to be the ultimate interpreter of the entire law of the Old Testament. He has the last word on the subject. How often did he say, You have heard it said of old time… but I say unto you? To understand it correctly the Old Testament must always be read in the light of the New, and especially in view of the teaching of Jesus.

 

So let’s conclude by reminding ourselves of the indications of Jesus’ deity we have seen in Mark chapters 1 and 2.

 

In 1:1 he is introduced as Jesus Christ the Son of God

In 1:3 the quote from Isaiah identifies him as YAHWEH

In 1:11 God’s voice is heard from Heaven saying, You are my Son…

In 1:34 we’re told that the demons knew who he was

In 2:10 he demonstrates supernaturally his authority to forgive sins

In 2:19 he refers to himself as the bridegroom, a title used of God’s relation to his people in both Old and New Testaments

In 2:28 he declares himself to be The Lord of the Sabbath.

 

It’s clear that the Pharisees understood what Jesus was claiming. And, as we shall see next time, that’s why they wanted to kill him.

Further episodes of Great Bible Truths with Dr David Petts

Further podcasts by Dr David Petts - Pentecostal preacher, former AoG Bible College Principal

Website of Dr David Petts - Pentecostal preacher, former AoG Bible College Principal