WHen Do we Start Afresh?

[GordW]

Over in the Splintered thread we ended up with some discussion of the passage about putting new wine in old wineskins and why that is a problematic thing to do. THe teaching in question starts with a question about fasting and is paired with a teaching about putting a patch on an old garment. It comes (apparently) from the Marcan tradition/source and is found in all three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 9, Mark 2 and, Luke 5).

One of the readings one can take from this pair of teachings is that you need to let go of the old to make room for the new. The old and new cloth shrink differently and will tear, making the damage worse than before the patch. The new wine will ferment and expand, causing the old, less flexible wineskin to rupture and then the wine is wasted.

I do find it interesting that Mark (and Matthew and Luke following him) pairs this with the teaching about to fast or not to fast when the bridegroom is present. I think there are two very different sermons that could be preached from the two different pieces in the section of the story. I need to do more reflection on how they relate to each other. (Or maybe Mark just happened to put them in that order but did not think they are related, all paragraph divisions and the little section titles we find in our English translations are interpretive choices)

But the cloth and the wine make me ponder how we mix the new with the old. At our Worship Committee meeting last week we encountered a situation where we needed to find a path forward that would respect the family who wanted to do things in a more inclusive way AND respect the people in the congregation who were not ready to move to that place (in this particular case it was about whether children could serve communion or not). Such issues arise in communities of all sorts fairly regularly.

Sometimes we can find a way through the minefield of balancing the old and the new. But sometimes I wonder if what is really needed is to blow it all up and start fresh. Is it better to patch up and try to reform an old community that maybe has started to falter or is it better to let the old die a natural death and start something new altogether. The next question is, how do you actually start something new if a bunch of people from the old are a part of the start-up? A few years back, as this congregation was wrestling with "are we actually viable anymore?", I asked the Council "If you were starting up a new congregation of the United Church what would you include, what would it look like?" It was a really hard question for many of them to answer, because they really wanted something that looked like what was familiar.

In reality we add new cloth to old garments all the time. We top up to wine skins with new wine frequently. We evolve and change as organizations, mixing old and new and trying to find a balance.

But when do we know it is time to start afresh? When does the blending become unsustainable? When do the tears get to big or things rupture and spill all over the place?

 

[KayTheCurler]

Many years ago I mentioned that quote when asked why I no longer attended church. The energetic young people 'broke; the traditional stodginess causing much nastiness.

 

[Mendalla]

Starting afresh is a lot harder than I think most people think. You can never completely put the past behind you. People carry baggage in their memories or habits or just how they are. It's not like cleaning out your basement where you can literally take all the old furniture and other stuff stored down there and sell it or put it our for scrap or whatever. And in an organization where you have dozens or hundreds of people, each with their own memories, habits and experiences? Good luck. You can certainly change things, but it is unlikely you can clean out that "basement" and start completely fresh. Humans just don't work that way. There's a reason Charlie Kaufman's Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind had memory erasure as the way to "start fresh". It is almost the only way we truly can.

So it is not just a question of when to start afresh, but how "afresh" can you even get?

 

[unsafe]

It comes (apparently) from the Marcan tradition/source and is found in all three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 9, Mark 2 and, Luke 5).

So lets look at this Marcan theory or tradition -----is it Bibical ---that is a Question ------there is never any mention in Scripture about this being a Marcan tradition -----where Mark is the first Gospel ----and does it really Matter ???????---it would matter to prove the Scripture is not truth and can't be relied on ------LOL

From Google
What is Marcan in the Bible?

Marcan priority (or Markan priority) is the hypothesis that the Gospel of Mark was the first of the three synoptic gospels to be written, and was used as a source by the other two (Matthew and Luke).

Why did the church refuse to accept Marcion's Bible?

Marcion's theological errors (and there were many) came from one main root:
he refused to believe that the God of the Old Testament was the same as the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. Marcion simply could not believe in a God full of wrath and justice.

I say ---this shows right here that Marcan is spiritually dead not a True Christian -----as he cannot understand Spiritually who God is

So this has to be man using his intellectual worldly thinking to come to This conclusion that Mark was written first ------here lies the problem ------

I say-----and many people believe that -----a Loving God could not be a God of Justice
and Judgment ----that shows their Spiritual ignorance of what God says in His word and who God is -------

From Google
Is proven that Mark was the first gospel written?

It is commonly accepted in biblical scholarship that Mark was written first and Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of their sources.

The question that arises is how to account for material that is shared by Matthew and Luke but not found in Mark.

 

[unsafe]

But the cloth and the wine make me ponder how we mix the new with the old.

your in dangerous territory if your trying to mix the New Covenant with the old in your preaching -----according to scripture

Galatians5:4
Berean Annotated Bible
You⁺ who are trying to be justified by the law have been severed from Christ (the Anointed One); you⁺ have fallen away from grace.

 

[Luce NDs]

I can see why one has to go to the far reaches for change (Pharaoh/) consider the forgoing demands for no change or learning ... traditionally knowledge is said to be evil ...

Yet there is a force that says stupid does not exist ... to the contrary I've been called stupid for decades because of my interest in alein people, things and concepts ... an enigma?

Then if one considers that the land of Pharoah was once know as the land of imagination that could cause a gyre in the rations of Noetic! The psyche can get intoxicated on so many things ... old Judah declared power was like wine ... maybe warning against strong essence and phantom!

Thank God few read the posts of the eliminated ... thus stupid can be contained. What to you sur mise from that? Dead heads do rise with NU life according to Vu Dues ... paying for visions? Then some say El Vis is living ... is a Vis vital carrier? Critical decisions ...

 

[GordW]

Marcan priority (or Markan priority) is the hypothesis that the Gospel of Mark was the first of the three synoptic gospels to be written, and was used as a source by the other two (Matthew and Luke).

Why did the church refuse to accept Marcion's Bible?

Marcion's theological errors (and there were many) came from one main root:
he refused to believe that the God of the Old Testament was the same as the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. Marcion simply could not believe in a God full of wrath and justice.

I say ---this shows right here that Marcan is spiritually dead not a True Christian -----as he cannot understand Spiritually who God is

MAarcan/Markan tradition and Marcion/Marcionism are two totally different things. Not sure how you could even read what you posted and think they are the same or that MArcionism is relevant to this topic (or why you bring Marcion into the discussion)

 

[unsafe]

The next question is, how do you actually start something new if a bunch of people from the old are a part of the start-up?

This is where it get dicey GordW when your the preacher in a Denominational Church ----you have people above you that have a say -------

Like it or not Denominational Churches are a Business -----they want and need people in the pews who give financially -----and so changing the Old to the New does not bring out the welcome matt for change ----it is a scary deal for the hierarchy of the Church ------it may clear out the people and the church will die ----

I asked the Council "If you were starting up a new congregation of the United Church what would you include, what would it look like?" It was a really hard question for many of them to answer, because they really wanted something that looked like what was familiar.

And there lies your problem ----Fear ----from your council ----not Faith ----and to change you need deep Faith and Trust in God to maintain the Health of the Church ---Trying to Change in Fear will bring disaster -----

We evolve and change as organizations, mixing old and new and trying to find a balance.

A Hard sell I say -----

But when do we know it is time to start afresh?

Make sure your Born Again and ask the Holy Spirit who is the only one who knows when your to start Afresh ----The Holy Spirit sees what lies ahead ---no man has that ability ------

When does the blending become unsustainable?

Blending in your church is being under Lukewarmness -----your neither hot nor cold ---your stagnate and sluggish ---not fruit bearing happening -----

When do the tears get to big or things rupture and spill all over the place?

When the wine skin burst and everything spills out it is an indication that it is time to get rid of all the rigid rules of a dead Faith Religion bearing no fruit and exchange it for a Living Faith Way that brings in transformation and fruit bearing -------

 

[GordW]

your in dangerous territory if your trying to mix the New Covenant with the old in your preaching -----according to scripture

Galatians5:4
Berean Annotated Bible
You⁺ who are trying to be justified by the law have been severed from Christ (the Anointed One); you⁺ have fallen away from grace.

THe Old Covenant is the tradition OF Jesus, OF Peter, OF Paul (and the rest of the first generation of what we now call Christians). It is what formed them. Jesus himself says he comes not to end the law but to fulfill it. THe New Covenant is contiguous with the old. It feeds upon it. So it is inextricably mixed. Law and Grace are part of Jewish Scripture and the Mosaic covenant, as well as part of Christian Scripture and the New Covenant.

But that is not really relevant because I was not talking about that anyway. I was talking about how communities change and evolve and try to balance old understandings/traditions/ways of doing things with new ones.

 

[unsafe]

It is what formed them. Jesus himself says he comes not to end the law but to fulfill it. THe New Covenant is contiguous with the old. It feeds upon it. So it is inextricably mixed. Law and Grace are part of Jewish Scripture and the Mosaic covenant, as well as part of Christian Scripture and the New Covenant.

GordW ------you can think that but that is not what the Scriptures say ---the law was given to show the Jews their Sin ---the law was a schoolmaster a Tutor ----the Jews were in Bondage to the Law ====

the Gentiles were never under the laws -----the law was based on self righteousness -----you keep the law you get blessed ---you don't keep the law --your get the Curse --there was no faith in keeping the law --the law was given for a time -----Period

Saving Grace is Saving Faith Based ----and is Grace is Christ driven not human driven -----Salvation is through Jesus ---not the law -----

So you can argue till the Cows come home that your right but that is not what God says ------maybe this will help you with your Spiritual understanding

AI
Key Aspects of the Law as a Schoolmaster:

Purpose: The law acted as a guardian or tutor (Greek: paidagōgos) to manage, discipline, and lead people to Christ, fulfilling a temporary role until faith was revealed.

The "Schoolmaster" Role: In that era, a paidagōgos was often a trusted servant or tutor responsible for a child's safety and discipline until they reached maturity. The law protected and disciplined until the maturity of the gospel.

Significance: It serves to show that salvation comes through faith in Jesus' grace, not by personal attempts to perfectly keep the Law.

Transition: Following the coming of Christ, believers are no longer under this tutor (Galatians 3:25). [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
The verse is located in Galatians 3, which contrasts justification by faith against trying to earn salvation through the "works of the law"

Now you won't like this scripture -----and you won;t believe it but here it is

Hebrews 8:13
AMP
When God speaks of “A new covenant,” He makes the first one obsolete. And whatever is becoming obsolete (out of use, annulled) and growing old is ready to disappear.


The Mosaic Law is made Obsolete -----the Gentiles are not under the Bondage of the Law and never were ---

Key Aspects of the Law as a Schoolmaster:

Purpose: The law acted as a guardian or tutor (Greek: paidagōgos) to manage, discipline, and lead people to Christ, fulfilling a temporary role until faith was revealed.


The "Schoolmaster" Role: In that era, a paidagōgos was often a trusted servant or tutor responsible for a child's safety and discipline until they reached maturity. The law protected and disciplined until the maturity of the gospel.

Significance: It serves to show that salvation comes through faith in Jesus' grace, not by personal attempts to perfectly keep the Law.

Transition: Following the coming of Christ, believers are no longer under this tutor (Galatians 3:25). [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
The verse is located in Galatians 3, which contrasts justification by faith against trying to earn salvation through the "works of the law"

 

[unsafe]

MAarcan/Markan tradition and Marcion/Marcionism are two totally different things

Ya Sorry --My bad ---see that now ---disregard ----

 

[unsafe]

So here we have this that says that Matthew w written first ----not Mark -----go figure

All Speculation ---no real proof ----by any body ----but God knows who was written first ---and He is the only one who Matters ----

and look who it is from ----Good Old
AI

Early patristic writers (Church Fathers) almost universally held that Matthew was written first, a tradition known as Matthean Priority. This belief, which reigned from the 2nd century through the Reformation, asserted that Matthew wrote his Gospel first in Hebrew/Aramaic for a Jewish audience, influencing the later Greek Gospels of Mark and Luke. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Key Patristic Evidence for Matthew's Priority:

• Papias of Hierapolis (c. 100-125 AD): The earliest witness, cited by Eusebius, stated that "Matthew compiled the sayings [of the Lord] in the Aramaic language, and everyone translated them as well as he could".
• Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 180 AD): In Against Heresies, he wrote that "Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome".
• Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD): He formalized this view, cementing the view that the Gospels were written in the order they appear in the Bible: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
• Origen (c. 244 AD): Confirmed, "I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew". [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Contextual Beliefs of the Early Church:

• Hebrew/Aramaic First: Patristic sources often stated Matthew wrote first in a Semitic language, explaining its placement at the top of the canon to address Jewish Christians first.
• Mark as Interpreter: Mark was widely seen as a companion of Peter, writing a shorter version based on Peter's teachings, appearing after Matthew. [1, 2, 3, 4]

While modern critical scholarship (since the 19th century) generally favors Markan priority (Mark was written first), the belief in Matthew's priority was the absolute consensus of the early

 

[Luce NDs]

And here we work towards an end ... when the cussed thing goes on and on as is the nature of the story ... gives even the frogs the urge to sing.

Then there is this end search deontological conflict with ontology? Let us get on with it for it seems we have a long way to go to get anything out of it ...

The damn word has a lot of variance as it creeps out many ... the power of the alternate (that one that is counter to intelligence and wisdom and all that crap). Follow some leaders and you see "will" is the overcoming power that removes one from any category to another. Thus the imperative of examining the impulsive --- Kant? Some people may but just can't because of powerful will ... like an old coyote! It can bite if cornered ...

Four Points of the Compass? A base for what? Ba's ... sheepish humbugs in the backbenchers ... at arms length from the council of Nyce to Ceia! Imagine taking a chance to poke you head into reality ... natural cute ness???? Alas still little demons ... they bother the lords with what to do with the labor group as they get cultivated (Luddites) little ditties ...

Conundrum will appear ... as metaphorical chaos ... and the great waters stir ... that's Marah ... not merry ... astern force? Rudder ham ... a "get behind me" expression ... diabolical if the drag causes a shift in direction!

Basis of the Bernoulli Enigma ... pressure shifts! Very much mis understood ... then the luff and love of sails ... and break from the surely thing ... poetic?

Imagine a mad earth syndrome ... can it be construed? Is that being particular? Outlying specks, motes and denotations of something in it ...

 

[Luce NDs]

When given a story, ballad, or myth do you suspect something is in and behind it? Hmmmmm ... & al!

Some ask me why I howl and sing ... its the things that people do without something of virtue! Valued delinquents ... prodigal gatherings?

Why people are eclectic ... once meaning scattered ... Je suis ... or I am ... and thus it spreads until very thin ... ethereal?

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

Old wineskins are better than no wineskins (double them up). Also better than a bunch of wineskins and no love available to fill them. Thought and intellect is important but without love all you have is the mechanics of a dead world. Some people hate life so much they don’t want this world to survive and are trying to topple it strategically to satisfy their own morbid curiosity instead of bringing people together using the power of thought and mustering up some love. They have exclusive ways of doing that, to block mercilessly, mutual understanding or growth from their underlings. It’s very sad. Nihilistic. Love is life, not death.

I have a lot of problems in my life. Probably ptsd at this point. Feeling very alone. I don’t have many who care about that. We have a bootstraps mentality that prevails in society even in families and communities - a very unequally distributed one where some people have very durable bootstraps and others don’t even have boots.

As for when we start fresh…if those who need support are being marginalized, start there. The fresh start happens when actual progress isn’t being blocked because the marginalized people don’t have a voice. Not just helped with charity but with support for their voices and concerns.

In past times of strife the only thing that got people through was supportive communities where those who had more invested it voluntarily into supporting those who had less, to keep everybody going. We’ve lost that. Even in churches.

 

[WhyCzar]

In past times of strife the only thing that got people through was supportive communities where those who had more invested it voluntarily into supporting those who had less, to keep everybody going. We’ve lost that. Even in churches.

A fresh start, has to begin within the reality of the way things are now - not the way things were before.

Your experience of marginalization and longing for real solidarity is your voice.

Mutual Aid Communities are often started by voices such as your own.

Perhaps you could join a supportive (church?) community that could benefit from your insight.

 

[Luce NDs]

One may draw a line from what was to the present and note how it wends to estimate the curve ... it is pure chance ... due to excess irrationality as it clusters! Adjust as you go along ... and then one could backstep and look at the collective mess from further out to escape some of the gravity of it ...

Collectiveness is said to be a failure as the individuals attempt to control the collective find Eire ... out of place ... delinquent portions ... that's Loo Ciel ... when the sky fell as rain? Wetted a cat in one movie ...

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

Maybe but in the past I often just ended up feeling mostly unheard or dominated by the status quo, and like a freeloader because of my own needs whether that was their intention or not - I felt lesser-than because I was struggling in ways they didn’t understand. Like, I need some help. I can never pull myself up alone as expected… but it reminds me of when I went to a UCCan service for the first time with a curious friend - they were setting up a lunch/ snack table in a side room when we got there - and we heard an usher say under their breath (“probably just here for the food”). We weren’t there for the food at all. We didn’t even expect any to be there. We wanted to learn about the church. It was my friend who suggested it. Years later I gave UCCan another try. A different congregation. I met a lot of nice people but if you lack confidence, people with status will ignore it and stifle it and take over without understanding the problem. In church and everywhere else. I think it was a good church overall though - actually should’ve kept on but I was having problems in life then, too. I feel bad for saying that because there is lots good about it. Some of my gripes are unfounded, maybe. I miss it sometimes. …but I’m in a different city now with probably the least church going population in Canada. .

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

That church with the food table, folded, by the way. It’s gone and amalgamated with another one.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

I’ve gone to a couple of churches but always felt insecure when I had problems that were too complex for people to understand and have simple solutions for. Seems they always are.