Old garments and wineskins

Mark 2:21-22 ~ "No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; otherwise the patch pulls away from it, the new from the old, and a worse tear results. No one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the wine will burst the skins, and the wine is lost and the skins as well; but one puts new wine into fresh wineskins."

This was Christ's way of explaining how revolutions should proceed, giving his disciples and listeners the information that revolutionaries should have. In summary, "You should not change this system; fixing its holes will only causes further issues. This system must be created anew." This is how revolutionary the Church once was - a very long time ago. This is why the Jews and Romans hung Christ up on a cross, and not because of the weird excuse of him calling himself "God" and the "son of God". The Jews were well aware of what Christ was doing and what he was teaching, and it's why he taught people in parables. If he hadn't, he would have died much sooner than he had.

Fortunately, unlike any other revolutionary, Christ belonged to God and Christ's flesh was God's glory, so there was just no way God was allowing death to keep him.

The author of the gospel of Mark typically wrapped stories around Christ's teachings; Matthew and Luke copied Mark in this regard, but "fixed" the stories. The author(s) of Luke was not a fan of revolutionary Christ (as it seems), and changed things for his own whitewashed agenda: "No one tears a piece of cloth from a new garment and puts it on an old garment; otherwise he will both tear the new, and the piece from the new will not match the old. And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the new wine will burst the skins and it will be spilled out, and the skins will be ruined. But new wine must be put into fresh wineskins. And no one, after drinking old wine wishes for new; for he says, 'The old is good enough.'" ~ Luke 5:36-39.

This is blatantly insulting.

The Church had changed into something unfamiliar. They had become faithless fearful people, and very prone to judgment (thanks much to the teachings of Paul). They had accepted the new gospel of death, heaven and hell; where salvation is for the dead and not the living; where the understanding and tangible compassion of God is for later and not now. They had become godless while holding on to a few teachings of Christ, not understanding them or him.

========================================================

It's not the only reason he taught people in parables. Going around openly speaking about eternal life, eternal life, eternal life would have gotten him tossed in whatever version of a psych ward they had. So he taught with parables.

This of course makes no sense if "eternal life" is the same as "dying and going to heaven" - which was nothing different, more of the same, just a different God. Eternal life is eternal life - Christ is experiencing it to this day as we speak; he knew exactly what he meant.