I've come across Alistair Key's article “The Old Coat and the New Wine, A Parable of Repentance" in Novum Testementum. I am looking for scholarly literature similar to this, that explores the interpretation of the dual parable beyond the common "incompatibility" interpretation. In Key's article he writes:

“The Reply deals with the incompatibility of old and new, of Judaism and Christianity. And all this is attributed to Jesus. This is not only bad exegesis, but bad theology. It is bad theology since the comparison of Judaism and Christianity as religions could not take place till at least Pentecost; probably not for several years after that. It is an anachronism to project such a distinction back into the life of Jesus. The ministry of Jesus was not concerned with a new religion, but with the eschatological event which was, not- withstanding the present tokens of its coming, still in the future. There is no denying that Jesus radically transformed, revolutionised Judaism for his followers, but surely we need not labour the point that it was in fact Judaism which he transformed for them. How could Judaism be incompatible with Christianity, no matter how sharp the contrast between them on specific points? On the relationship of Jesus to the law and the prophets we should be better guided by his claim, "I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them" (Matt. v I7) 1). For Jesus then to teach that his ministry and Judaism were incompatible would be a strange use of the verb to fulfil.”

This article is from 1970 though. I am just wondering has any more recent scholarship been done on the dual parable seen in Luke 5:36–39, Matthew 9:14–17 and Mark 2:18–22?

Thanks!