At ICEBOX.COM, they have a series of animations about Jesus and His brothers. It’s very irreverent and pretty funny. Go here to see it.
But this got me thinking; did Jesus have a sense of humor? Could He tell a good joke (so these two Pharasees walk into a bar in Jerusalem…) or pull off a prank? The Bible shows Him as being so serious all the time, was there any laughter or levity amongst the Apostles?
The Apostles make a joke in Luke 9:
51 As the time approached for him to be taken up to heaven, Jesus resolutely set out for Jerusalem.
52 And he sent messengers on ahead, who went into a Samaritan village to get things ready for him;
53 but the people there did not welcome him, because he was heading for Jerusalem.
54 When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, “Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them ?”
55 But Jesus turned and rebuked them,
56 and they went to another village.
Of course, if you don’t know 2nd Kings 1:9-16 you won’t get it. And apparently Jesus didn’t think it was funny.
In my experience, no one can be as charismatic as the Christ obviously was without a sense of humor.
And, of course, if we assume that he was God, and that God created the Earth and all in it, we then have to figure that the platypus required some modicum of humor.
I’m not your typical believing Christian person, but I tend to agree with most of what he said and he strikes me as having a definite sense of humor and wit. A huge portion of what he said was said in the form of allegories and parables and whatnot, deliberately creating hypothetical situations in which to disagree with the point he was making would cause you to look ridiculous and/or where the characters in the stories who had behaved foolishly looked as foolish as all get-out.
I think he was serious, but was also having fun doing it. His more provocative actions indicate a delight such as you’d expect from a proficient chess-player setting up clever moves.
I’ve always thought that perhaps the bible make Jesus seem so serious because men laughing is normal and men crying is less normal. We’ve only got the highlights of his life and surely the rare moments of anger or sadness were more noteworthy than the day-to-day jokes like “how many roman soldiers does it take to screw in a light bulb?”.
Agree. Think about the parable about “the speck in your brother’s eye” versus “the log in your own.” Absurd hyperbole.
I think it likely that there was some chuckling in the audience at those kinds of statements. And some of the things he says to the pharisees drip with sarcasm.
I would guess he told jokes as often as the next guy, but as xtal notes, the gospel writers usually chose not to record that kind of day-to-day stuff. At the end of his gospel, John makes it clear that he has made specific choices about what to include and what not to. And while I’d love to know more details about his humanity, it’s probably best that we don’t.
Additionally, I should mention that (I’m told) both the OT and Paul’s writings contain puns and wordplays, often for humourous effect, that are lost in translation.
I think that the examples cited above are NOT examples of humor. I note that several “puns” reported in the NT probably aren’t intended as humor, either. (For example there’s a saying that I cannot recall exactly now, but involves “gamal” = camel and “gamla” = ?) Jesus in the NT does not appear to crack a joke, probably because most people prefer to keep their religion and deep philosophy distinct from what they see as a lighter, if not somewhat debased side of humanity. Read or see the movie version of “Name of the Rose”.
I have to point out that in the 1960s Playboy published a full-page drawing of “The Laughing Jesus”. I don’t know which issue it appeared in, but they reprinted it in their 20th anniversary issue. They said it was their most-requested picture ever. This in a magazine noted for its nudes. It shows that the picture touched a nerve – I think people today WANT to believe in a Jesus with a sense of humor. He’d probably seem incomplete without one today.
The statement that Jesus is reported to have made with regards to the apostle Peter (This is the rock upon which I shall build my church- or some such) is generally considered to be a pun. (“Peter”=“rock” in latin, and considering that Peter was not exactly the most reliable of the various followers( denying Christ 3 times before the cock crowed and so forth) that referring to him as a rock, or a foundation is often considered to be a joke on the part of Jesus.
What about the whole, let the children come to me, thing?
I’m sure he told the kids jokes and made them laugh…
hehehe…is that a Caesar behind your ear…
Of course the lord has a sense of humor, we have duck-billed-platypus?! 
I think he absolutely had a sense of humor. Look at the nicknames he gave his disciples:
Peter: petros means a little piece of rock, not a large rock suitable for a foundation.
James & John, sons of Zebedee: In the incident Jmullaney posted above, because they wanted to call down fire from heaven to destroy that town, Jesus later nicknamed them “The sons of thunder”.
So the gospels at least hinted at his sense of humor.
Peter wasn’t his given name. Since there were two Simons in the Diciples, one Simon was called Peter (rock) because he was the rock upon…
This is true. But Peter wasn’t the rock that Jesus built the church on. Jesus was. Peter was a little piece of rock. See above. You must be catholic?
Jesus is THE ROCK. Peter was [sub]a pebble[/sub].
Jesus was (metaphorically or prophetically, you choose) the stone referred to in Psalm 118:22, the rock Moses struck to get water in the desert (Exodus 17:6 and Numbers 20:8-1, which incidentally was the reason he wasn’t allowed to lead Israel into the promised land), the stone in Romans 9:33 and in Isaiah 28:16.
Other places Jesus/The Messiah/The Holy One is called (either directly or prophetically) The Rock:
Genesis 49:24, 1 Corinthians 10:4, Ephesians 2:20, 1 Peter 2:4-8 (direct from the rock’s mouth!)…The list goes on and on. There are places where Jesus is the Rock, and places where God the Father is called the Rock. Peter didn’t claim the title for himself because he knew it was a play on words against Jesus’s title.
I recall, of all things, a favorite picture from my youth. Playboy ran a picture, I dont recall when, that was kind of a icon-type image of Jesus, but with him busting out laughing. It was clearly an image of The Boss, long hair and beard, but with the wholly unfamiliar pose of laughter.
Scripture says, Jesus wept. If he wept, he most likely laughed. But if he made a joke, his disciples would have pounded it into a profundity, Life of Brian style.
My bet? Yeshwa, the carpenters boy, was a smart ass, and quick with a pun in Arhamaic.
No, I am not catholic. I was just explaining that I couldn’t consider this a pun (as an example of JC’s sense of humor).
Simon (son of John, brother of Andrew) was distinguished from Simon the Zealot, by the name Peter. Ref. Matt. 16:18 (NIV) “And I thell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.”
Supposedly, Jesus was God made human so that God would experience all the things that man does, or so I have heard tell. (The ways in which this questions omniscience, plus the debate as to whether a man with certain knowledge of the nature of the universe and the ability to work miracles is actually having the same experiences as the rest of humanity are for another thread.) If this idea of walking in the shoes of mortals has any merit, then Jesus must have laughed, and had to have at least a rudimentary sense of humor. If nothing else, Mary and Joseph would have made goofy faces and tickled him as a baby, Lord of Creation or not.
Freyr,
Interesting thread.
There is a passage that definetely I think shows a sense of humor. It is in Luke 24 starting on the 13th verse. Two followers(one of them named Cleopus) were walking along after Jesus was crucified and they were discussing such. Jesus kept himself from being recognized and ask them what they were discussing.
Cleopus looked downcast and ask the visitor(Jesus) if he was the only person in Jerusalem that hadn’t heard of the things that have happened over the past few days. And Jesus said, “what things?”. And then proceeded to let the two men tell Jesus what happened. I believe this showed Jesus had a sense of humor.
While I don’t know of any evidence that would argue against it, I I have no problem thinking Jesus had a sense of humor. Aside from cynical reasoning that he would have had to to deal with humans on a daily basis, stories were the easiest way to get people to understand a point. He was quick with a story to illustrate the point, so why not be proficent with gentle one-liners to turn aside what must have been “dumb” questions.
[hijack]
Which, of course, leaves out the many places where Simon bar Jona is referred to as either “Petros” (he couldn’t have been called “Petra” because petra is a feminine form) or, as Jesus called him, Cephas. There can be more than one rock, Joe. Jesus was the Rock, but he himself called Peter “the Rock on which I will build my church.”
You have to do HUGE violence to that passage of scripture to make it mean what you think it means.
Paraphrase: Jesus has just asked his apostles who they think he is. A few answer and then Simon says “thou art the Christ, the son of the Living God.” Jesus says “blessed are you Simon bar Jona, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but the Spirit. And I tell you, you are the Rock, and on this very Rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.” For your understanding to be correct, Jesus would be following a compliment with an insult “Blessed are you…and I tell you, you’re a tiny pebble, but on myself I will build my church.” It simply makes no sense.
http://www.catholic.com/ANSWERS/TRACTS/_p_rock.htm
[/hijack]
Personally, I think of Jesus as having a sense of humor. He got along well with most sections of society, from prostitutes and tax collectors to fisherman and even some Roman centurions. You have to have a deep understanding of the human condition to do that, and humor is a part of that.
I agree, there appear to be puns or jokes in the NT, but I wonder if they were originally meant that way. Between the time the NT was written down to its current translation of English, I count about 4-5 steps. Did all of those translators understand that they were translating jokes or puns and attempt to keep them? And that brings up the cultural context; what would be uproariously funny back in ancient Palestine would be “huh?” to us. So, how many Roman soliders does it take to light a candle?
**CalMeacham wrote:
I have to point out that in the 1960s Playboy published a full-page drawing of “The Laughing Jesus”.**
Is there anywhere I can find a copy of that picture? I’d never heard of it before now and would love to see a copy of it.
Given that Jesus was God incarnate (a subject for another thread); I’m sure that experiencing material existence for the first time He would partake of all that humans experience in their lives, including humor. But every portrayal of the Nazarene I’ve seen shows him solemn and dignified, almost sad. Agreed, death and resurrection are solemn, dignified subjects, but is that the only way He can be portrayed?
The NT focuses on His ministry and the last few years of His life, so jokes and humor wouldn’t be included generally. But one does wonder what sort of humor He’d engage in? Imagine Jesus with Groucho Marx glasses and cigar: “Say the secret word and sit in the right hand of God!”