LUKE 5:39

“And no one after drinking old wine desires new wine, but says, 'The old is good.'” (NRSV)

This verse at the end of the Parable of New Wine in Old Wineskins only appears in Luke's account. The problem is basically this: In the parable itself, old wine stands for OT laws and customs while new wine stands for the message of the Gospel. Taking Luke 5:39 literally appears to endorse the keeping of Old Testament traditions rather than accepting Christ's teachings.

Because of this apparent discrepancy, Marcion (who didn't think much of the OT) and those influenced by him removed this verse from their versions of the text. Another probable reason for some early manuscripts deleting this verse was to bring Luke's account more completely in line with the other Synoptic accounts. (Bruce Metzger)

But rather than just remove this verse because it is difficult, it is preferable to wrestle with the apparent contradiction. Here are a few of the approaches that have been taken:

    1. The early manuscripts are evenly divided in this verse between the use of “good” and “better.” TEV and KJV use “better” in their translations, but that is not the preferred choice. “The comparative degree of the adjective is probably a scribal emendation introduced in order to make the comparison more apparent. Actually, however, the point is that the prejudiced person does not even wish to try what is new (the Gospel), for he is satisfied that the old (the Law) is good.” (Metzger)

Thus, if it is “good,” then the meaning is “good enough,” as in NASB. In other words, he who drinks old wine does not compare old and new; he is content not to try the new.” (I. Howard Marshall) Similarly, “The point at issue here has nothing to do with the comparative merits of old and new wine, but refers to the predilection for old wine in the case of those who are accustomed to drink it.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer) In other words, these people say, “The OT law is good enough for me. Why should I even try to listen to any new teachings?” R.P. Martin also agrees with this understanding.

However, it should be pointed out that in Hebraic thought, the comparative and superlative forms of adjectives were sometimes expressed by the declarative form. Thus, even if the preferred textual reading of this verse is “good,” it may still infer the comparative “better” or even the superlative “best,” as The Living Bible translates it.

    2. Some other manuscripts add the word “immediately” before “desires.” The same occurs in a similar saying in the Gospel of Thomas, which may actually preserve some early versions of Christ's original sayings. (Fitzmyer) If this is the intent of the verse, then it means that most people are not likely to immediately adopt new teachings without first thinking them over.

As Geldenhuys says, “In these words our Lord explains why the followers of the old form of religion are not immediately inclined to accept the new forms which He brings.” But Fitzmyer disagrees: “This introduces a different nuance into the comparison, one which implies that in time one may so desire, but on the basis of external evidence of the mss, it is to be omitted.” However, KJV and J.B. Phillips so contain the word “immediately” or an equivalent.

    3. Since Luke tends elsewhere in his Gospel to group together diverse sayings that possess the same catchwords or themes, there is also the possibility that the saying in v. 39 is an isolated one coming from a completely different original context. If so, then there may be no real logical connection between it and the preceding parabolic saying.

    4. But finally, almost all commentators labeled it as an ironic or wry comment by Jesus not to be taken literally.

New Bible Commentary: “An ironic comment on Jews who rejected the new wine of the gospel and held that the old ways are better. Jesus quotes the saying without endorsing it.”

Hard Sayings of the Bible: The saying “far from expressing the mind of Jesus, could well express an attitude that he deplores it because it hinders the advance of the kingdom of God.”

Fred B. Craddock, Luke: “Luke's verse 39 is unique and unusual. Is it humor or irony? A literal reading is inconsistent with the previous parable."

Sourds: “Found only in Luke, this saying is difficult to interpret. It may be ironic, indicating that contentment with the old prevents openness to the new.”

Fitzmyer: “On the face of it, the saying would support Jewish rejection of Jesus' preaching. But by its irony the saying carries just the opposite meaning...Verse 39 does not contradict the sayings in vv. 37-38, but it points up the difficulty that those who cling to the old have in accepting the new – the 'new wine' that Jesus offers.”

Marshall: “39 is probably an ironic comment on Jews who rejected the new wine of the gospel and held that the old ways were better.”

One additional caveat against taking this verse at its face value, is expressed by C. Brown: “This statement is not intended to be a rule-of-thumb guide for wine connoisseurs. It is a warning against over-estimation of the old by those who think they know best.” The Message paraphrase should have listened to this warning instead of needlessly confusing the issue by saying, “And no one who has tasted fine aged wine prefers unaged wine.”

F.F. Bruce summarizes Luke 5:39 well when he says, “New teaching is disturbing; it forces people to think, to revise their ideas and attitudes. Religious people tend to be conservative, to suspect innovations... Ultimately, the question to ask about any new teaching is not 'Is it old?' or 'Is it new?' but 'Is it true?'”