Log in to become a member of Carson Day's Fan Club!
Some today are given to taking exception to the use of parody in defending the Christian faith. But the truth remains that this has a longstanding, and quite biblical, tradition standing behind it. One could easily cite numerous examples in the persons of the prophets. Micaiah, in mocking King Ahab, and Elijah reproving the pseudo-deity Baal after the fashion of Monty Python, provide the most obvious examples from the First Testament. We could add Job's chiding of his friends, "Surely you are the people, and wisdom will die with you."
Numerous examples of similar sardonic logic hail from the pages of the New Testament, both from the apologetics of the Lord Jesus (though postmodern readers often miss the barbs for the lack of familiarity with Aramaic idioms and first-century Palestinian culture) and those of the apostles, especially of Paul's letters.
The healed (formerly blind) man of John 9 clearly heckles the Pharisees into a "holy fury" -- and refutes them soundly -- which apologetic in the narrative lands him reverently at the feet of the Lord Jesus, whom the Pharisees had banned from the synagogues as well.
The Lord Jesus openly made an open display of the Pharisees' hypocrisy as a kind of Lex Talionis against their self-promoting open displays of "piety." He publicly and repeatedly denouced them for prefering the highest places in seating arrangements, wearing long robes, and loving the praise of men.
His own analysis compared them to children -- who played at religion saying, "we played a song and you did not dance; we sang a dirge and you did not mourn."
The spoiled brats could not get him to go along with their man-made traditions, and He did not hesitate to indict them for it.
His charge, "You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel!" would surely have enjoined laughter since he was recognized as the "prophet from Galilee," and we always expect prophets to say solemn things. Here the play on the twoAramaic words, gnat (Gamla) and camel (Galma) would have added a distinct cutting humor as naming two things which sound nearly identical but name wildly different kinds of things.
John recounts that the consequence was that the people "loved to hear him speak"and "hung on his every word." He was unlike anything anyone expected, including most of his friends. The apostle Paul likewise chided that he wished the circumcision group would "go all the way." This gives new meaning to, but applies the same dominical principle of, "If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out."
It's okay to say ouch now. Pauline hyperbole was often as witty as it would have been offensive to its targets. My favorite example of sarcastic apologetics in the Word comes from John 7 and it often goes unnoticed as an example of just what it is -- an implied ridiculing of their opponents agruments, which stood against the notion that Jesus was in fact the Messiah. This was holy heckling. Here we observe certain unnamed people in a crowd heckling the opposition to Jesus by faith.
So let us proceed then to the text which forms the main point: faithful heckling is thorougly biblical and often mandatory. It follows from the nature of the reductio ad absurdum of which Solomon required us, "Answer a fool as his folly deserves, lest he be wise in his own eyes."
Note that the nature of this apologetic precept is two fold: it requires a refutation of a particular kind, one which shows the utter folly (a form of ridicule) of a counter-biblical view. It aims to point out the implied absurdity, which is bound to be funny in many cases. That is the nature of surprising absurdities. This explains why the prophets, apostles and our Lord Jesus never tire of poking fun at their opponents views. They obeyed the Proverbs.
Here is the text in question (John 7:31-32):
"And many of the (Jewish) people believed on Him, and said, "When the Christ comes, will He do more miracles than these which this man hath done? The Pharisees heard that the people murmured [i.e. heckled] such things concerning Him, and the Pharisees and the chief priests sent officers to take [seize, arrest] him."
The context makes this all the more interesting. The word for "murmur" clearlymeans to speak out against the Pharisees openly, of which it says in verse 13"Howbeit no man spake openly of Him [Jesus] for fear of the Jews [Jewish authorities]."
These hecklers proved 1. Faithful to Jesus 2. Courageous (Fearless) 3. Intelligent [Their argument (implied) was in fact correct] 4. Much funnier than the Pharisees, who had not a funny bone between them.
A few points of note. God the Holy Spirit saw fit to enshrine their words in the biblical record by the hand of John the apostle, who doubtless enjoyedtheir sound and faithful jab. "A word timely spoken is as apples of gold in settings of silver," said Solomon. John included this text to show what faith and courage born of the Holy Spirit looks like. These were not merely the words of men, but the words of God also; for they are holy Scripture. What makes the passage even funnier is that they issued the hecking challenge in the midst of a solemn feast of Israel.
John 8:39 says "But this he [Jesus] spake of the [Holy] Spirit, which they that believe on Him should receive..." Now compare these words with 7:31 -- "And many of the (Jewish) people *believed on Him," and said..."
"believe on Him" is common to both passages, showing an exegetical link. Their faith the text ties immediately with a simple "kai" in Greek ("AND") to the next word "said" showing that the Holy Spirit was alive and well in them, uttering"When the Christ comes, will He [really] do more miracles than these which this man hath done?"
This carries the implied charge, in the colloquim, "How blind are you people? "Here is a man in your midst who claims to be the Messiah and proves it with more and mighty miracles that clearly show God is willing to confirm his claim. This is a no brainer. He is obviously the Messiah. In John 10, the Lord Jesus protested that if they did not believe Him [because he was testifying of Himself], they should at least believe Him on account of the works that He does. "Many miracles [note the repeated MANY] from My Father have I shown you," said Jesus, "For which one do you stone me?" "From my Father" highlights just point of the man in John 9. God has confirmed the claims of Jesus the Messiah. John adds the resurrection as God's final testimony to vindicate the Lord Jesus at the end of the account.
The man from John 9 who also verbally whiplashed the Pharisees by the Holy Ghost, straightly told them, "If this Man were not from God he could do nothing." Again,given the theology of the Bible, this was impeccable logic. When they began to hound the man in John 9, he added: "You already asked me this stuff, why do you want to hear it again? Do you want to become his disciples too?" This heckling, of course, enraged them. But the two chapters here, John 7 and John 9 are related.
John is found of, and so is God the holy Spirit, of showing how -- by His Wisdom -- even the "unschooled" are able to overcome the "wise and learned." For such was God's good pleasure. And God the Holy Spirit is not above adding what clearly shows the same kind of contempt for their arrogance as they show for the "low-brow" commoners. God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble. This means that the hecklers were actually the humble in this text. This point usually goes unnoticed. So much so, you might say to the point is utterly sneaky.
Lessons learned: holy heckling is not only acceptable to God, but it forms an ordinary part of Christian apologetics. But this is not pointless hammering. The sardonic aspects of holy arguments accomplish three goals.
First, they aim to show the absurd nature of the particular kind of folly presently levered against the Gospel of Jesus.
Second, they add a kind of locutionary force, persuasive power highlighted by the clear courage and bold confidence which stands behind them. It encourages others to wax bold in the faith, and not sit idly by tolerating Dagon when he needs a good, old-fashioned fish-tipping.
Third, they glorify God by adding verve to the logical strengths of sound arguments, adorning the Gospel by contrasting its glory and soundness over against the silliness of unbelief. "Glorify God" in fact represents a Hebraism meaning "confess the truth," in the Bible.
It says to the audience, "There is unbelief that is simply wrong. And there is unbelief that is simply goofy. "That" is both kinds. How much better to prefer the soundness of the Gospel of the Lord of Wisdom!"
By the Word of God, we may feel free to join in the Holy heckling of Paul:
"For it is written, 'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.' Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?"
By way of current application then, we might join in the call to redefine marriage. Californians may now marry their cars, lawns, pets and mortgages, but we draw the line at injury-accident lawyers. We still have our morals.
Hi Carson, this is a great topic to write about. I am often amused at the "personality" of Scripture. I love God's sense of humor and I love that we see the humanity of the great men and women who walked with God so long ago. Thanks for bringing it up. Lord bless you and welcome to searchwarp.
Disclaimer: All information on this site is provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any
information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice provided to you by any health care or other professional
or organization.
