I have been looking at the metaphor (or parable) about the cloak and the wineskins in Mark 2.21-22. It seems to me it would most plausibly be interpreted as a reference to the Christian becoming a new person in baptism through reception of the holy spirit. That interpretation seems fairly obvious to me (i.e., it’s an obvious possibility that should be considered), but I could not find it discussed in the dozen or so commentaries on Mark that I checked, and that puzzles me.
Mark 2.21-22 reads:
21 “No one sews a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old cloak; otherwise, the patch pulls away from it, the new from the old, and a worse tear is made. 22 And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise, the wine will burst the skins, and the wine is lost, and so are the skins; but one puts new wine into fresh wineskins.” (Mark 2.21-22).
There are several passages in the New Testament that are generally accepted to refer to the belief that a Christian becomes a new person through baptism. It’s found in Paul:
19 For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ; 20 and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. (Gal. 2.19-20)
6 What then are we to say? Should we continue in sin in order that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin go on living in it? 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin. 7 For whoever has died is freed from sin. 8 But if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. 10 The death he died, he died to sin, once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God. 11 So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus. (Romans 6.1-10).
And Deutero-Paul:
5 Put to death, therefore, whatever in you is earthly: fornication, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed (which is idolatry). 6 On account of these the wrath of God is coming on those who are disobedient. 7 These are the ways you also once followed, when you were living that life. 8 But now you must get rid of all such things—anger, wrath, malice, slander, and abusive language from your mouth. 9 Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have stripped off the old self with its practices 10 and have clothed yourselves with the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge according to the image of its creator. (Col. 3.5-10).
And John:
3 Jesus answered him, “Very truly, I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God without being born from above.”[or “anew”] 4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can anyone be born after having grown old? Can one enter a second time into the mother’s womb and be born?” 5 Jesus answered, “Very truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit. 6 What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.(John 3.3-6).
The Romans 6 and Colossians 3 passages suggest that the reception and indwelling of the holy spirit is incompatible with the old sinful or sinning nature. Colossians 3.9-10 even employs a clothing metaphor. The good wine, which Jesus had made into wine from water in The Wedding a Cana (John 2.1-11) is sometimes taken as a metaphor (or symbol) for the holy spirit; more often commentators relate it to supercessionism, that is, Jesus’ new wine (or new faith) is better than the old wine of Judaism. Raymond Brown considers the possibility it symbolizes the wine of the eucharist. C.K. Barrett and Andrew Lincoln suggest that John may have consciously developed his story from the metaphor of the wineskins in the synoptics.
Perhaps commentators are just not expecting Jesus to compare people to cloaks and wineskins or take the metaphor on a more general level. Are there serious weaknesses for this interpretation of Mark 2.21-22 that I’m missing?
Best,
Ken