The virtues of sarcasm

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Would Jesus use sarcasm?

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 42.9%
  • No

    Votes: 4 57.1%

  • Total voters
    7
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Splat

Guest
#21
If you want examples in scripture of Jesus's use of Mockery/Impersonation, Sarcasm and Exaggeration and Name calling, this website gives a few:

http://jamescary.blogspot.com/2009/03/jesuss-use-of-humour-sarcasm-and-other.html
ok, I looked at this link but the James Cary's category is "sarcasm/exaggeration" and he is putting them both in one basket. Cary also has a slightly different definition of "sarcasm" here which might be better classified as irony?

MahononySnail, are you saying that Jesus sometimes rebuked people and are you equating rebuke with sarcasm? (This is what Cary appears to be doing in his post).
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#22
Admittedly it is only rendered with a ? in the MKJV as far as I can tell, but the language must allow for that to be done, the MKJV is supposed to be a better rendered or corrected version to the KJV. KJV scribes merely copying words from greek into english don't allow for expression or punctation very well, or the ironic meanings behind each word Christ chose to use.

Concerning the verse where it is claimed Jesus used sarcasm. We could read it as a genuine question, a rhetorical question. But even as a question, it is still sarcastic. I never had in mind that Jesus's type of sarcasm ever carried lies or mistruths. Sarcasm is not all about lying, It can be a form of expression. In the dictionary one of its definitions is a "sharp , ironical taunt". Jesus used irony when he called them white washed tombs. Because they had a practice of white washing graves at certain times of the year. I think it's a sharp ironical taunt. It's at least a taunt, because Christ is basically asking them, "you've got all your traditions, how's that working out for you?" , or in the more ironic sense "so you're telling me that you're blaming me and my disciples for not hand washing, when you yourself don't bother to follow God's commands?"

Reading Mark 7 from beginning to end, his sarcastic question comes after an exchange of words with Pharisees who accuse him and his disciples of transgressing the tradition of the elders with hand washing. His question comes after calling them "you hypocrities". The exclamation marks emphasise that Jesus is shouting, Jesus is obviously upset. Jesus never lost his cool you say? Are we talking about the same Jesus who cursed a fig tree because it had no fruit, because he was hungry?

"Oh no you say, there must have been some more deeper meaning behind it ,and Jesus never did anything out of anger. " Let's not go there for now. That's a lie my friend from the Dalai Lama followers.

Concerning Jesus's supposed sarcastic statement, Gill commentary on the bible confirms the verse in question should be question marked, and that is an ironic statement:


ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition: these words may be considered, as spoken ironically, thus; as pious and excellently good men, you in a very fair and handsome manner, reject and make void the commandments and laws of God; and it is very fit it should be so, in order to preserve your own traditions, that nothing may be wanting to keep up the honour of them, and a due regard to them. The Arabic version reads the words by way of interrogation, "is it fit that you should omit the commandments of God, and keep your own statutes?" and so the Ethiopic, "do ye rightly make void the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own commandment?" Which makes them come nearer to the passage in Matthew; See Gill on Mat_15:3.


Whether or not Jesus's tone was sarcastic or merely straight to the point, takes nothing away from the statement Christ made nor makes Christ wrong if he did use sarcastic tone of voice. Although, we can never know for sure how Christ said those words as we were not actually there.



I don't doubt for one minute that everything Jesus said was done in love, even when he called them white washed walls and children of satan.
But that's when we shouldn't confuse the Dalai Lama's kind of love and peace, with God's love and peace. Even God's correction and offense is done in love. Was Elijah being loving to the prophets of baal by mocking them and saying their god must have gone to the toilet? If Elijah said those things today, many of you would probably condemn him as being unloving and quote 1 Cor 13 on him. It's only a symptom of our politically correct times I'm afraid, and such extremes are not evident in the scripture. Right now there's a case where a woman was taken to court for spanking her child with a wooden spoon. That's where all your Dama Lamai like love leads to, not to mention the many liberal "christians" who claim fundamentalist christians are pharisees or hypocrites for saying homosexuality is wrong.
 
Last edited:
S

stlstang

Guest
#23
I think sarcasm is usuaully negative, not necessarily a lie something that isn't the truth. I think it's a matter of knowing your audience.

"let no corrupt communication come from your mouth except that wich is used for edifying..."

In my opinion, I think it could be part of fellowship.
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#24
So I personally believe it's likely Jesus used sarcasm but not in a nasty way. It was insulting to them because they were entrenched in their own ideas.
But it can never be proven if Jesus did or did not use sarcasm as we were not there. I do think however, that our modern translations and how they are interpeted misses the emotional and humorous or ironic aspects of Jesus's statements. I have heard Christians say that they believe Jesus just floated along the ground with not a care in the world , no great expression. That's not the real Jesus the real Jesus was a human being. He got angry, upset, mad , you name it. He offended, laughed, cried, jumped for joy , you name it. He may n ot have used sarcasm at all, I don't know. But I think that's like saying an American will never say the word "dude" or "man" or "cool". I do think Jesus used the language of his day. When Jesus told them to eat his flesh, I take that to mean in a symbolic offensive way. Jesus meant them to leave him because they were following him for the fish and loaves. Catholics take it seriously, but in my opinion only, seem to miss the whole purpose and context of the situation and why Jesus said it.
 
Last edited:
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#25
Say, using sarcasm can't be any worse than slapping someone on the head with a KJV and saying "repent, sinner, or you're going to hell".

I've seen rather harsh methods of evangelism and they do seem to work. No worries there's plenty of lovey dovey evangelists around to balance it out.

I think any way works because it is the power of the Gospel which saves, not our own evangelism methods. God could use a donkey if he wants to.
 
G

Groundhog

Guest
#27
I wish we could see Jesus' humorous more often in scripture. From what we know of his character, I think it i safe to say that if/when he used humor, he never did so in a way that hurt or demeaned anyone.

As a side note, one of my favorite images is this one of Jesus laughing:

http://uthpstr.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/jesus-laughing.jpg
 
D

DieuMerci

Guest
#28
Well you really dont seem to be responding to my second post. The reason i do not condone sarcasm, is because of what i said in the beginning of my first post: generally speaking it is lying. Saying the opposite of the truth is a lie. And like i said before that: Im not engrossed in this kind of so called humor, so i can't tell you all the nuances of meaning for the term. It hasnt been expedient, nor has the Spirit led me to ever use sarcasm for any purpose. I speak of the new man and not the old, even so the spirit never led my old man to use sarcasm. And in regard to expediancy, I didn't know sin from 'fun' or sexual immorality, homosexuality, or perversion from 'love'. I was very engrossed in this kind of writing, speaking, and rapping, among many other worldy things. So i know what it's like to be where alot of people are in those regards, yet i didn't even have the appearance of a christian, I was a ravenous wolf, and I would have rather boasted about it then to conceal it with a sheeply appearance. I was extremely engrossed in what was called 'braggadocio' rap, which eventually developed from blatant lies, for the sake of some supposed lyrical supperiority, or simply to be 'cool'-- i was very very much a child of the world, and loved the world with all my heart, soul, and mind, rather than the One who created me, and reconciled me to himself through his Son-- to extreme perversion blasphemy and warped mindedness, steming from and budding pure evil pride.

Explaination and testimony aside, I don't claim to be wise, nor am I in my own eyes. So if you've really got sound doctrine from the scriptures and not a distorted view of them based on worldliness, then let's proceed this discussion in peace, and collate the different witnesses from scripture, and come to a common doctrine about this.

Yes Elijah mocked the Baal worshipers. But according the Christ's defenition of what a nieghbor is, they were his neighbors, or the reverse, and they had been left on the side of the road beaten by their own disobediance which, let's not debate, was because they gave into the temptation of satan. So was it not then satan who had left them on the side of the road? I don't want to delve too deeply into that. The point is that they were his neighbors, and according the proverbs of Solomon, a fool makes fun of his neighbor. So was he really being wise here? Even so, to say that because he treated them that way, which is only a portion of the account, means that we have justification from God to make fun of unbelievers, doesnt stand because he was not attempting save anyone! He wasnt using mockery as a means of turning them from their sin, he just manifested the power God had verses the power that Baal didnt have, in the process humiliating them. But what does he do after this? He has them killed! Now how is this a justification for mockery of unbelievers in order to lead them to repentence?
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#29
DieuMerci I don't believe ALL sarcasm is bad or lying, because it is intended not to be a lie. Sarcasm is more about irony than lying. While sarcasm can be based around a lie, it can also be based around a truth. See the last website I posted and see what you think. I agree with that website.

There is no correct answer on this issue because we cannot prove whether Jesus did or did not use sarcasm. We weren't there and didn't know the tone of His voice.

The word cool is not only for rappers it has become a part of our culture. The thing is, we use the language or expressions common to our culture. If sarcasm was common or used in Jesus's culture, I'd say he'd use it. We also have examples of his discples using sarcasm so it lends more weight to the idea that there's nothing wrong with the good kind of sarcasm.
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#30
I'm trying to find a book on biblical interpretation that may shed some light on this issue. I've found this one:
http://books.google.com.au/books?id...resnum=1&ved=0CA8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

where it describes irony and sarcasm to be the same sort of thing, but sarcasm often is caustic and intended to wound. Other than that I don't know any books that discusses the issue.

Irony is a more subtle form of ridicule. We know that irony is in scripture. Whether or not the author intends to wound we will never know. But the fact that they were offended many times at Christ's words, shows either that Christ must have been saying it in a caustic or offensive way, or those he was speaking to were very sensitive in their feelings. That will determine whether they are merely ironic words, or sarcastic words intended to hurt. Sometimes, they might be intended to be humorous to the disciples, but hurtful to those who they applied to. Jesus's audience of outcasts would have been entertained by Christ's disapproval of the elitist pharisees and oppressors.
 
L

Leilaii425

Guest
#31
i am unfamiliar with sarcasm
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#32
Well here you go I have found a quote from one expert in theology and biblical interpretation who says irony and sarcasm was used:

Irony :

Irony is a kind of ridicule expressed indirectly in the form of a compliment. Irony is often conveyed by the speaker's tone of voice (as in sarcasm) so that the hearers know immediately that irony is intended. See 2 Samuel 6:20; 1 Kings 18:27; Mark 7:9; 1 Corinthians 4:8,10. According to Grant R. Osborne, Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School: "Irony is an important rhetorical device that consists of stating one thing while meaning the direct opposite. It is frequently employed in polemical contexts and is accompanied by sarcasm or ridicule, as in Michal's retort to David, 'How the King of Israel has distinguished himself today' (2 Samuel 6:20), with open contempt for his dancing before the ark . . . In such cases irony becomes biting sarcasm" (The Hermeneutical Spiral, p.107).

http://www.theologue.org/HERMENEUTICS-DMERKEL.html

So DieuMerci , it seems that "stating one thing and meaning the opposite" is not seen to be a lie as you call it, I think that's exaggerating what irony and sarcasm really is. It is an "important rhetorical device". If it's important, why can't we use it ? It has its place.
 
D

DieuMerci

Guest
#33
Well Ive said the word 'cool' only in criticism of it, and its russian equivalent, to be in harmony with someone, who I believe was using the word innocently. It is not a part of my vocabulary in terms other than those. It's connotation's are equivalent to use of the word 'wicked' usually describing something that the user either likes, in varying degrees, or out habitual use, as a robotic response. But just like using the word wicked to describe something the user thinks is good, it is the subject of the quote i made from the prophet earlier: Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter. The terms 'righteous' and 'wicked' have been used interchangably in the past decades, as though they mean the same thing! Even then what people describe using these terms they niether imply are either wicked or righteous, they just mean cool, or to say 'wicked cool' to emphasize how cool it is. But i don't say dude or man either, intentionally. I've refrained from all that language that hasn't proven to have any significance in truth, and in the fulfilment of my mission. It's only the pattern of this world, which i no longer conform to, but am rather transformed by the renewing of my mind. This applies to what weve been talking about here. Sarcasm, and in my first post I included silly talk, and unrighteous joking. I've refrained from these things. It's more of a problem for others confessing the name of Christ to continue in this pattern, than it isnt. But those of us who do that typically hold doctrines that arent sound about other things. They say that we dont have to agree, we're all different, we have different roads to God, no ones perfect, we'll never stop sinning here, the Spirit has no power of the flesh, its the flesh that dominates, God also gave us brains, so we can rely on our own understanding, everyone interprets scripture differently, evolution is possible, besides hypocritical tendencies like persecuting some who puts a hyphen between the G and d in God, as a sign of reverence for him, yet everytime we refer to the diety using a capital, God wants us to have fun so we can be silly and say things that arent true because their funny, they often get bored, they complain God isnt there, they live as though they were engrossed in the things of this world, like sports, secular movies, music, art, literature, that women can teach men, that people can get divorced for physical abuse, that to a christian we arent commanded to call no man on earth Father, and so we can call the man, who was the father of our flesh, father, or with catholics that we can call priests father, and the so called roman bishop pope, and that the leader of a monastary is an abbot, that we can call members on here papa, and words meaning father, that it's ok to wink, that we can make fun of eachother, that we have to only use the kjv, that the niv is evil, that the MT is what the orignal hebrew said, that the nt wasnt written in greek, and that they didnt use the septuagint in their quotes from the old testament, that old new testament writers arent aluding to or quoting from certain apocrypha/pseudepigrapha, that its ok to bow down to and kiss an image of men and women and angels, thats its ok to pray dead men and women, that what the lutherans call the antelogomena, isnt authentic, that we will never know, that we cant know something other than the day and hour, that God didnt appoint healers in the church, that we need to go to the world to help us with our sicknesses, that we dont have to interpret publically spoken tongues, that we dont have to do everything here in an orderly and fitting way, that its ok to talk to unbelievers like their christians, that we dont have to tell them gospel, or when theyve sinned, but rather spend most our time talking to them about wordly things...that its ok to speak evil of men, and accuse elders, and slander other christians, that every well known evangelist is a false prophet, that we dont have to repent, but mahogony, none of this is sound.
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#34
It seems you've withdrawn from society how on earth can you reach unbelievers?
 
D

DieuMerci

Guest
#35
I'm not a monk Mahogony, I talk to people all over the world on here. I've testified to the lost from the begginings of my christianity, when i was in prison. I tend to be testifying to the church more than unbelievers, or those that appear to be a part of the church. But i'm very content with my ministry, and everyother aspect of my life, which includes nothing secular. I've done what God has told me to do through his Son Jesus Christ. Do you think that beyond the humilty im to have that you or anyone else holds a status equal to that of my Father? Christians are my family but their roles in my family are equal to mine in terms of being in Christ, which i dont expect anyone to feel differently about me. But Christ is our head and we are to keep his words mahogony. No one who does the will of God will lead me from the will of God. Even in terms of being subservient to you that I might be exalted, do you think that if anyone would command me to disobey my Lord and my Father, that i would? I wouldnt Mahogony. You shouldnt either.
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#36
So the fact that you disagree with the fact that Jesus used irony and sarcasm, is really because of your own bias due to the fact you don't believe it's ok for Christians to engage in regular conversation? I think you've set a high standard for yourself that Christ nor anyone else set for us, equivalent to ascetics or monks. But that's your choice. Just remember we're still human and it's ok to laugh.
 
Last edited:
Oct 16, 2009
33
0
0
#37
Funny how everything's an integral of everything else.

I got to thinking about sarcasm, and I MAY have found an example, but... I'm not sure it's smart for me to post it.

Maybe it's okay to post it, and just not talk too much about it.

It seems to be saying either Jesus used sarcasm or He isn't God.

Matthew 19:17, tell me what you guys think.
 
G

Groundhog

Guest
#38
Funny how everything's an integral of everything else.

I got to thinking about sarcasm, and I MAY have found an example, but... I'm not sure it's smart for me to post it.

Maybe it's okay to post it, and just not talk too much about it.

It seems to be saying either Jesus used sarcasm or He isn't God.

Matthew 19:17, tell me what you guys think.
That verse is in perfect keeping with everything else Jesus said, especially in his relationship with His Father. It's only the later trinitarian philosophy that would make this verse confusing.
 
S

Splat

Guest
#39
... it seems that "stating one thing and meaning the opposite" is not seen to be a lie as you call it,
I feel like I need clarification on this statement. Are you saying that if the words we are using is technically true, but the usual meaning understood by those words is different, then the statement is not a lie? For example I would give secular commercial advertising which is designed to cause you to buy their products with their statements is within the law but designed to mislead.

I am not sure what you mean by "*seen* to be a lie"? Who is the one doing the seeing?
 
S

Splat

Guest
#40
It seems to be saying either Jesus used sarcasm or He isn't God.

Matthew 19:17, tell me what you guys think.
Well, I believe that scripture is talking about the man saying that Jesus was a good teacher and not about good in terms of morality. Jesus replies, essentially, by saying that His teaching is not His but that of the Father. (cf John 7:16). So I don't think that Jesus was using sarcasm in that verse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.