Comedy, Humor, and the Gospel of John Craic R. Koester, Comedy is eminently well suited to serious subjects. I celebrates the triumph of life over death, love over hate, and truth over falsehood—and few subjects are more serious than these. Threats and entanglements have an integral place in comedy, for without the fear of loss there can be no delight at deliverance. At its best, comedy may brave the darkness before coming to the light or plumb the depths of despair before claiming the promise of hope. Comedy follows what Johu's gospel calls the movement “from death into life” in 5:24). Many readers, of course, may find it imprudent to speak of scripture and comedy in the same sentence. Comedy is often associated with what is trite rather than profound, and when reduced to buffoonery, comedy offers momentary amusement rather than religious insight.,The hemor associated with comedy can wound rather than heal when aimed at a ‘vulnerable opponent, prompting Charles Baudelaire to conclude that""Holy| Books never laugh, to whatever nations they belong.” The danger of allowing a place for humor in a sacred text increases when we note that John’s gospel does not refer to laughter, nd if no one in the gospel laughs, ‘why should readers think that anything in the story is humorous? Moreover, experience teaches that cues to discerning humor often come from a speaker’ tone of voice and facial expression, but ehese details are generally 123124 Word, Theology, and Community in John lacking in John’ gospel. For example, Jesus’ mother observes that the wedding party has run out of wine, and Jesus cryptically replies that his hhourhas not yet come (2:3~4). His mother’s reply would seem humorous ifehe evangelist told us that she rolled her eyes in exasperation when she said to the servants,“Do whatever he tells you” (25), but humor would be less evident ifthe gospel said that she spoke in a hushed and earnest The author of John’s gospel seems to cll the story of Jesus with a straight face, yet at least some interpreters have found it dificult 10 resist the conclusion dhat the evangelist had a sense of humor and that the humor is deeply consiscent with the gospel’ stated purpose, which is chat readers might have life in Jesus’ name (20:31)? Humor operates at che level ofthe “implicit commentary” through which "the reader finds that the evangelist sys a great deal without actualy saying it” In indivece communication, signals in the text resonate with signals from below the surface of the text allowing the gospel to say more than it otherwise aight seem co be saying. Since the gospel’ humor constitutes a form of commentary that is by definition implicit, our task is to make some ofthe Iumorous elements explicit and to consider how the humorovs elements fonction and how they relate o the gospel’ message. What Is So Funny? The broad forsnal distinction between comedy and tragedy offers a helpful way to begin. Comedy can be described as a story that follows a “U-shaped plot, with ation sinking nto deep and often potendaly tragic ‘complications, and then suddenly turning upwaed into a happy ending.”* ‘Comedy does not remain on a continuously happy plane, but it takes its «central figures int situations that atthe very least complicate the realization ‘of their plans, and that may threaten to bring grief, broken relationships, and dashed hopes. ln the end, however, the heroes and heroines ascend to joy, restored relsonships, and the promise of new life. Tragedy moves in the opposite dizection, with a plot that follows an inverted “U"The central figures in a tragedy may momentarily ascend to promising heights, but in the end, their story descends into a victory for estrangement, defeat, or death ‘The basic shape of John’s gospel follows the U-shaped movement of comedy, though individual scenes and subplots include deeply tragic clements. The Prologue (1:1-18) begins on a high point, where the Word is identified with God, light, and life; there is downward movement as the Word enters the world, wheze its rejected by many and accepted by some, ten a final upward swing as the Word chat bestows grace andComedy, Humor, and the Gospel of John 125 ‘uth is identified with the Son who is with God, The gospel narrative ‘moves in the same way After an opening chapter in which a stmall circle of disciples gathers around Jesus, the plot moves downward as Jesus’ words and actions provoke increasing confusion and hostility from those he meets, ‘The story reaches its low point at the end of Jesus’ public ministry, when Jesus hides himself and the evangelist declates chat despite Jesus’ signs, people do not and cannot believe in him (12:36~40). Darkness and ‘estrangement persis as Judas plunges into the night to betray Jesus (13:27 30), but afterward Jesus charts an upward path by speaking of his glorification and return to the Father (13:31; 17:13). His crucifixion is not depicted as defeat, but as the completion of his ministry (19:30) Following the resurrection, the disciples are reunited with Jesus,and their sorrow turns into the jay that Jesus promised (16:20-22; 20:20), The format distinction beoween comedy and tragedy provides a way to speak about the gospel’: movement toward the triumph of fife a restored relationship rather than into a wagie victory for death and alienation. Humor is related to comedy but is not identical with it, since ‘humor pertains to clements that seem funny within the story rather than 10 the movement ofthe plot, Comedies regularly include humorous scenes, ‘but they may also have scenes ofa more serious nature, Conversely, tragedies usually have a serious tone, but it is also common for them co include humorous characters or scenes that add variety ¢0 the story, Humorous elements within the gospel story are difficult ro define. E. B,White observed that analyzing humor is ike dissecting a frog, since the subject inevitably dies in the process.’ Humor is so closely tied to spontaneity that readers who see something humorous do not need (© have it explained, while dose who do not see anything humorous are rarely satisfied with explanations, since explanations fail to recapeure the spontaneity: One factor that contributes 10 humor’s effectiveness is that readers have a basic Jevel of crust in the author and sympathy for the author’ case. Those whom John persuades to be favorably disposed toward Jesus and who want Jesus to prevail are the most likely to see the humor §n scenes in which Jesus” opponents make absurd replies to his elevated comments. Conversely, those who want Jesus to fail probably find these exchanges more annoying than amusing. A second factor is that che auchor and readers need to share certain information and perspectives. Those who lack necessary information will find certain exchanges in the gospe! peculiar bue nor humorous, like the joke that falls flat because the listeners do not understand the context out of which it comes.* The Prologue to the Fourch Gospel provides readers with essential information about Jesus! divine origin, and from this vantage point, readers can appreciate the126 Word, Theology, and Conny in John humor in scenes in which Jesus speaks about things above while his incerlocutors, fixed on things below, completely miss his meaning, On 2 fundamental level humor revolves around incongruity’ A writer may set up humorous incongruity by establishing a pateern in which people expect things to go one way, only to discover that they go in an unexpected but not unrelated ditection, Consider the humorous dimension of Jesus’ initial conversation with Nicodemus. The evangelist introduces Nicodemus as a rabbi or teacher who is a Teader among his people (3:1), Since Nicodemus is noted for his learning, readers might expect him +o follow clevated discourse easily, and he gets his opportunity when Jesus tells him chat one must be bora anew to see the kingdom of God G:3) Readers usually sense that Jesus is speaking of divine things, but precisely at the moment where Nicodemus should make a comment about the ‘activity of God, readers watch him flounder as he completely misses the tmetaphorical sense of new birth and thinks only about the physical impossibility of reentering his mother’s womb (3:4).Without missing a beat, the esteemed teacher takes the conversation from the sublime to the ridiculous, Jesus accents the irony by pointing out that the teacher who initially seemed to know all about Jesus has shown that he has no clue as to what Jesus is talking about (3:2, 10). ‘Many of the elements in this scene are typical of humor."” Wordplays are pethaps the gospel’: most common humorous device. A wordplay ‘commonly uses a term that has two meanings. Readers expect one meaning to be used, but the text surprisingly invokes the second meaning, In John 3, the play om the spiritual and physical senses of the metaphor “born anew" allows Jesus to soar co transcendent heights while Nicodemus spotters on the earth below. Using exaggeration enhances the incongruity. Note that Nicodemus does not simply ask Jesus what being “born anew” imieans; he constructs a scenario in which 2 man—an old man no less— finds ie impossible o reenter the womb of his mother. Although Nicodems phrases the question to show that he knows that this scenario is absurd, the abrupt juxtaposition of Jesus’ reference co God’ kingdom with Nicodentus’s impossibly physical reply invites a humorous response from the readers, Humorous scenes frequently involve surprising sronies and reversals, such as a dignified person doing something ridiculous ora sage saying something foolish. John 3 follows the pattern by transforming Nicodemus, the respected rabbi, into 2 pupil who fails on his first day of chs. Literary devices such as those noted above ewoke 2 humorous response only within the fabric of the larger narrative. The appropriate response depends to a large extent on whether they serve the upward swing of theComedy, Humor, and she Gospel of John 127 U-shaped plot of comedy or the downward swing of eragedy, and éiscemning the quality of humor is not ahways easy. Comedy promotes life, truth, and love, yet it must fequently resort to ridicule and satize—the ‘most thoroughly critica types of humor—in order to undo the pretentious ‘who stand in the way-The humorous aspect of comedy “perennially kes up arms agains the forces that stifle life and laughter, though even here its barbed arrows generally only sting, nat Kill" There are pons, however, where satirical humor ceases to be humorous, If ts critical edge “fails to move on to the genuinely restorative and celebrative, it is questionable ‘whether it still remains in the domain of comedy." In John’s gospel the ‘misunderstandings most often “sting, bt do not kill, by exposing hur pretensions without necessarily consigning the victims to permanent condemnation. frony’s role is more mixed. In the case of Nicodems, the ironic exposure of the teacher's ignorance can be read humorously, but it is dificult to see anything fanny in the ironic reversal in John 5, where Jesus, the accused, points out that his adversaries are ruly the ones who stand under judgment (5:45-47). In this context, irony is more tragic than comic because it moves toward alienation rather than toward hfe and restored relationships ‘Comedy and humor are best considered not only in terms of what they are but also in terms of what they do. In a complex way they tear down and build up, even in the same situation: With one atitude comedy sees the failure of the world, morally, ethically, socially; it ridicules, condemns, cortects, uproots, and subverts. With the opposite attitude it sympathizes, celebrates, accepts, confirms, and embraces. The comic attitude is a restless cone: it disrupts the norm even as it creates one; it disturbs our values even as it delights.” The critical and che affirming sides of humor work cogether in the gospel of John. Humor targets Jesus’ most ardent opponents as well as his ‘most devoted followers. No one isspared, Humor relentlesily attacks human pretensions of all sorts, so that friend and foe alike endure misunder: standings, ironies, and reversals. The difference is not in the form of the hhumor, but in its effects. Paradoxically, humor can subvert pretensions in otder to cteate relationship or to bring freedom. When humor is largely sympathetic, it exposes human pretensions in the interest of maintaining or renewing relationships on a truthful basis. This is what happens to Jesus’ followers. When humor is essentially critical, however, i ridicsles ‘human pretensions in order to bring freedom fiom them. Therefore, when the gospel satirizes Jesus’ opponents, it does so to fice the readers from128 Word, Theology, and Comunity in Johor fear of these opponents and from being attracted coward their views of Jesus. Redeeming Those Who Are All Too Human Humor’ ability to subvezt with one hand while it erabraces with che other is clearest in the Fourth Gospel’ portrayal of Jesu’ disciples John’s gospel was written to draw readers into the circle of Jesus followers, yet, the disciples are among the most consistently humorous figures in the seory The evangelist repeatedly exposes their foibles and shortcomings, depicting them as ll too human. Net in dhe end, these same qualities make the followers of Jesus all the more appealing precisely because it shows that choy cee human beings, bke the weaders themselves. Humorous exposure ofthe disciples limitations is part ofthe gospel’ U-shaped plot.The disciples are periodically brought down in order to be hited back up. Despite all their misguided and befuddled responses, Jesus continues to call hem his fiends (15:15), and the inclusion of les-than-perfect people in the community of faith is a triumph of love. Three episodes in the gospel alustrae the poi. First, the humorous portrayal ofthe disciples in John 1:29-51 begins with che evangelists establishing a pattern that leads readers to expect poxitive responses to testimony about Jesus.* Initially, God tells John the Baptist thae the One on whom the Spirit descends and remains will baptize with the Holy Spisit, After seeing the Spirit descend and remain on Jesus, John dutiflly testifies that Jesus isthe Son and Lamb of God (1:33-36). ‘Next,Andrew and another disciple continue the pattern, for after heating John they follow Jesus and soon declare that he is the Messiah. When Peter hears this cestimany. he coo duciflly comes to meet Jesus (1:37-42). Having established this patern of responsiveness the evangelist deviates fiom it in several bumorous exchanges between Philip, Nathanael, and Jesus (1:43-51), Initially there is nothing to warn readers about the twists ‘hat are about to appear in the story Jesus commands Philip, “Follow me; and Philip responds favorably adhering to the pattern of his predecessors Yer Jesus’ nvo-word command, which is given without any elaboration ‘whatsoever, prompts Philip to construct an astonishing rower of assertions. He tacks fit claim onto faith claim until he reaches a pinnacle of insight and declares to his friend! Nathanael, "We have found him about whom ‘Moses in the Law and also the prophets wrote Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph’ (1:45). Having heard Philip speak from such heights, readers ‘might expect Nathanael co respond as duiflly as everyone else has, but ‘Nathanael breaks the pattern with a question that seems designed to topple Philip from his perch"Can anything pood come out of Nazareth?” (1:46).Comedy, Humor, and the Gospel of John 129 ‘The abrupt contrast between Philip's exalted confession and Nathanael’ tater skepticism sets the stage for further surprises. Nathanael agrees to meet Jesus, who catches him (and many readers) off guard, One might well expect Jesus to chide Nathanael for his disparaging remark about Nazareth, but Jesus meets the skeptic with seemingly openhanded greeting: “Behold an Israclite indeed in whom there is no deceit!” (1:47). Although one might wonder whether Jesus said this tongue-in-cheek, Nathanael accepts the compliment and asks how Jesus knows him. Jesus replies with an enigmatic comment about seeing Nathanael under the fig wee before Philip called him, and the mention of the fig tree topples Nathanael from his skepticism, so that he acclaims Jesus as Son of God and King of Israel (1:48-49}, Jesus was apparently alluding to Old Testament verses that associated the Messiah's ‘coming with one person calling another under a vine or fig tree," but his ‘wry comment, “Because I said that I saw you under the fig tree do you believe?" (1:50) heightens the delightfully unexpected way in which Jesus’ seemingly innocuous remark about a fig tree trips up the skeptic, who then fills into faith, Humor plays both subversive and alfirming roles in this portrayal of ‘Nathanael. On the one hand, the humor undermines what would appear to be a valid skepticism about Jesus: Philip may have claimed that one foretold in the Law and the Prophets came ftom Nazareth, but the Old Testament scriptures make no mention of Nazareth. Therefore, the humorous overturning of Nathanael’ position shows that what appears to be a serious objection is not so serious afterall. On the other hand, the inclusion of Nathanael breaks up what could have become a suffocating pattern in which the only peaple who relate well to Jesus are those who never speak a critical word. Andrew, Peter, Philip, and an unnamed disciple ‘may have come to Jesus without resistance, but this is not a mold into which everyone must ft. There is room ir Jesus’ circle for the eritie who ceareens from doubt into faith, A second instance of critical yet sympathetic humor occurs during Jesus’ journey through Samaria in John 4.As che story opens, the disciples have gone into a nearby town to buy food, leaving Jesus beside a well." (One of the loeal women comes to draw water, and Jesus asks her for a rink, but instead of granting the request she demands to know what ‘business a Jewish man has asking her for water Jesus reverses che challenge by telling her that she could have asked him for living water. The woman rightly seizes on the expression “living water” only to take it in exactly the wrong direction, Readers who sense that “living water"is a metaphor that is designed to launch a conversation concerning divine things are130. Word, Theology, and Community in Joke \well positioned to see humorous incongruity in the woman’ response. Missing the upward flight of the metaphor, she moves straight ahead on ‘ground level and voices her ineredoliy that a man without a bucket could sive her a drink. While the meaning goes over her head, she objects that Jesus cannot be greater than Jacob, allowing readers to savor the iony that Jesus isindeed greater than Jacob, although she cannot see that:The humor ‘continues as Jesus explains that “living water” is a power that rises up to eternal life, and the woman thinks fondly of magical plumbing that will save het from making future cips to the well ‘The episode takes a more serious turn when Jesus discloses what he knows about the woman’ personal lif@ and the conversation takes up matters of worship (4:16-24). Jesus’ comments about spirit and truth lead the woman to voice her hope fora Messiah, and when Jesus declares that he is the Messiah (4:25-26), the plot seems well on its way toa satisfactory resolution with the woman recognizing Jesus, But at the moment that readers might expect the woman to make her confesion of faith, the scene is interrupted by the disciples (4:27), who return fom their shopping trip at this singularly inopportune moment co create one of the most humorous interludes in the gospel. Role reversals, wordplays, and comic irony all ply their part. ‘The Samaritan woman and the disciples exchange positions ina simple sense as she returns to town and they engage Jesus in conversation by the swell, but che result is actually a more far-reaching and humorous reversal of roles Fits, consider how the disciples take the woman's place. Earlier chapters of the gospel established a pattern in which the disciples were remarkably responsive to Jesus, quickly confessing him to be the Messiah Yet here—in contrast to the woman who eventually left the topic of ‘water in order to speak about things divine and who left her water jar in ‘otder to speak to the townspeople—the disciples prove unable to speak about anything more than lunch:“Rabbi, eat something!” (4:31)-When Jeses replies, using the metaphor of “food” for the accomplishment of ‘God's will,the meaning goes over the disciples’heads,and they mirror the Samaritan’ woman's earlier confusion by wondering whether someone brought Jesus a sandwich without their knowledge (4:32-33). Second, ‘consider how the woman takes the disciples’ place. The earlier pattern wa that the disciples were the ones who invited others to “Come and see (1:46), yet here its the woman who invites the townspeople to "Come and sce” (4:29). The disciples went to town and brought some lunch to Jesus, but the woman went to town and brought the whole community to Jesus, and her question,“He can't be the Messiah, can he?” (4:29) does, not even make clear whether she herself was convinced about his identity at this point." “i ARSE SSE Se aaa ge ee SSR ET SR TEComedy, Humor, and the Gospel of Johns 131 In history the eritical dimension of Johannine humor appears most strongly in the way that the disciples’ attention remains fixed on food while everything Jesus says about accomplishing the will of God goes right by them. The similarities between the disciples’ and the Samaritan woman's confusion show that insiders to the faith may be no more perceptive than outsiders, while the differences in the results of their respective trips into town show that a person on the margin may be a more effective evangelist than those at the center. By lampooning de disciples in the story, che gospel gives readers who include chemseives among Jesus’ disciples a reason to laugh at themselves, helping, insiders develop 2 capacity for self-criticism and a greater commitment to outreach.” Nevertheless, the subversive side ofthe humor ultimately serves the upward swing of comedy, forthe episode ends not with dissolution of community, but an expansion of the community The disciples are not ctitiqued in order to exchide them from Jesus’ circle but to draw them more fly into Jesus’ work, so that“sower and reaper may rejoice together” atthe harvest (4:36), [A thied instance of John’ critically sympathetic humor oceurs in what ‘would otherwise seem to be a somber situation: the illness and death of Lazarus in John 11.As the story begins, Jesus fles from Judea because of death theeats against him, but he receives word that in the heart of Judea, near Jerusalem his good friend Lazarus has become seriously ill (1:1-3), Instead of going to Lazarus's bedside, Jesus announces thatthe illness will not lead to death and he stays put;then two days ater he els the disciples that they should return co Judea, without offering a word of explanation about why they shoukl go (11:7). Given Jesus’ assurance that Lazarus’ illness will not culminate in death, che disciples find it absurd that Jesus should now court death by returning to Judea (11:8). Therefore, Jesus declares that Lazarus has fallen asleep and that he goes to awaken him 19-11) The double meaning of “sleep” triggers a comedy of errors in this sober scene. The context leads readers rightly to assume that Jesu is using sleep as a euphemism for death,"* but the disciples promptly seize on the ordinary meaning of sleep, announcing that if Lazarus is merely taking 2 nap he will sarely recover (11:12-13).The unspoken implication of this happy misinterpretation is that these i no poiat in facing the perils of Judea merely to rouse a napping Lazarus Jesus dispels one form of confusion by bluntly announcing chat they are going because “Lazarus is dead” (11:14), but confusion takes over again when Thomas declare,*Let us also go that ‘we may die with him” (11:16). No voice tones are indicated, so that readers might picture Thomas either speaking with bravado in dhe face of ddanger of throwing up his hands in utcer exasperation at Jesus’ suicidal132. Word, Theology, and Community in John plan. What is clear, however, is that everything Jesus has said about awakening Lazarus has slipped right by Thomas, This creates a ludicrous situation in which Jesus ets out 0 call Lazarus out ofthe tomb, while the disciples trudge along under the assumption that they will join Lazarus in the tomb.” [cis perhaps sunprising thac the fourth evangelist would allow a place for humor at a point where life and death hang in the balance, but the ‘humor underscores the point of the passage, which is to show Jesus’ power to give life. The episode as a whole follows the upward swing of comedy, for life prevails over death when Jesus calls Lazarus out of the tomb. This Js important because the disciples’ responses to Jesus’ plan to return t0 Jadea would not seem so funny if, as Thomas expected, they all perished oon the trip. Within this context, the gospel’s humor subverts the two atsitudes toward death cepresented by the disciples: avoidance and resignation. On the one hand, the gospel writer humorously critiques the disciples" increasingly lame attempts to avoid the trip to Judea and th inability to grasp either the reality of death or the promise o (On the other hand, humor does not spare Thomas, who rightly recognizes the reality of death only eo wrongly resign hisnself to death’ triumph, This critique, howeves, takes place within the context of an ongoing relationship, for despite the confusion, the disciples do continue accompanying Jesus. Humor subverts avoidance of and resignation toward death in order to promote authentic faith in Jesus as the resurrection and the life (11:25-27), Subverting the Opposition The basic plot of John’ gospel culminates in the triumph of lif, love, and truth, but long the way, Jesus i repeatedly challenged by fguzes who seck to discedi him and thwart his mission. suggestive way to consider the rale of humor in che gospel’ treatment of these fares comes from an observation by Northrop Frye, who noted that in comedy the principal barrier to the happy ending comes more offen from what is absurd than fiom what is villainous.” This is not entirely true of Job's gospel, of course,since the power of evil is vividly portrayed at key points, incloding Satan’ entry into Judas, who becomes the agent ofthe powers of darkness (23:27-30), Nevertheless, the role of the absurd provides valuable perspectives on some dimensions of the narrative, Frye observed that comedies regulaely include one or more characters who try to black the successfal resolution ofthe story and thac these figures are generally absurd bhecause they are dominated by 2 ruling passion fiom which they do not deviate even when the result is nonsensical. They offen have a good dealComedy, Humor, and the Gospel of Joh 133 of social prestige and try to force others to conform to their obsession, but humor undermines ther influence in order to set people free from their contol ‘The principal blocking chatacters in John's gospel are“the Jews" and “the Pharisees" These groups enjoy the usual high level of prestige, and seck to impose their willincleding their opposition to Jesus, on the entire community. Although the gospel sometimes discredits them by pro- nouncing judgment against them, another strategy isto show that they ate absard. The Jews and Pharisees exhibit an obsession with maintaining a social order based on their reading of the law of Moses, an obsession ‘ae presses chem into positions that che evangelist seeks to show are ridiculous. To accomplish his task, che evangelist sometimes casts them in the classic role of the imposter or know-it-all (Greek alazds), whose prctensions are exposed forthe readers by situations that demonstrate the Tints of theit knowledge. At other times, the evangelist employs the comment of another character (Greek en), who subverts ther overblown and erroneous claims to knowledge by an understated expresion of the euch? Debates over Jesus" identity in John 7—8 illostace how the evangelis: uses humor to subvert the opponents of Jesus.The prelude to the debates takes clear that Jesus" adversaries want co kill him and that they are among those who hate Jesus because of his testimony that the world’s works are evil (7:1,7).The evangelist notes that many people consider Jesus opponenis to be fearsome (7:13), but he provides his readers with opportunities to move beyond fear by coming to regard Jesus’ adversaries 25 ridiculous. The devices used agains the Jews and Pharisees—misunderstanding, irony, and reversal—are the same as those used against Jesus’ disciples. The difference is that when wielded agains Jesus’ opponents, the humor reins its ritical edge bue loss its sympathetic dimension, because its primary purpose is not to correct and renew an existing relationship, but to fee readets from the impression chat unbelief is credible ‘The ironic exchanges that occur at the beginning ofthe debates help to undermine Jesus’ detractors, though these initial reversals are not necessarily humorous. The Jewish leaders challenge Jesus’ teaching ‘credentials yet ignore their awn Law by Seeking to commit murder (7 4= 24),and chey insist that they know where Jesus comes from even though they are oblivious to the fact that he is actually from God (7:25-29), Humor enters the scene more clearly when the Pharisees summon the temple police and send them off to arrest Jesus. One would assume thata display of police power would be intimidating, bus inthis case i is merely ridiculous, for Jesus stops them in their tracks by informing them that he134 Word, Theology, and Community in Joh ‘will soon go to the one who sent him, and “You will search for me, but you will not find me; and where I am, you cannot come” (7:34). Jeses’ ‘words direct attention to his heavenly origin and destiny, which readers have known about since chapter 1, but his detractors respond with what amounts to an inelegant “Huh?” Apparently forgetting that Jesus was supposed to be arrested, they scratch their heads and wonder ifhe mighe be planning an out-of-town trip to see some Greeks (7:35), ‘The temple police return to the chief priests and Pharisees empty- handed only to find thatthe rage of Jesus’ detractors now fills on them (7:45-47).Assuming the role ofthe know-it-all the Pharisees et themselves Up for a fall by their sweeping declaration that it would be ludicrous to think that any Jewish leader would be deceived into believing in Jesus. ‘They insist that if the crowd has been duped, itis because the people do rnot know the frst thing about the Law (7:48-49}.At this point Nicodemus reappear to play the subversive role—witingly or unwittingly—by asking about the Law's stipulation that the accused be given a hearing before Judgment is pronounced (7:50-51). This seemingly innocent question effectively subverts the Pharisees’ pretensions by showing how absued itis for those who do not know the frst thing about due process to charge that others are ignorant of the Law, or for those who are so adept at sei deception to accuse Jesus of deceiving the people. The flow of the episode suggests that the best response to such seemingly serious opposition to Jesus isthe readers’ laughter. Humor continues its subversive role even when the debates become ‘more ominous. The Jewish leaders dismiss Nicodemus’ guestion about due process and attempt to reassert their own expertise by flatly declaring that there s no biblical warrant for thinking that a prophet will arise from Galilee (7:52). Readers might recall that the prophet Jonah came from Galile (2 Kings 14:25),and they might alo be amused when Jesus identities himselfas the Light ofthe world in John 8:12, since the scriptures link the coming of the heir to David's dhrone with light shining on Galilee (Isa. 9:1-7).Jesus’ opponents apparently had forgotten that.” When Jesus warns that his opponents will die in their sins 2s he goes to a place where they cannot come, they miss the gravity entirely: Now they wonder if might be contemplating suicide instead of planning a tip to Greece (Jn. 8:21~ 2sef. 7:33-36), “Tensions in these chapters finaly lead to mutual vilification as Jesus calls his opponents children of the devil and they retort that he is demon, possessed (8:44, 48). Questions and responses lead to charges and counterchatges in a downward spital of enmity that approaches its nadie atthe end of chapter 8.Yet before the exchanges disintegrate into a threatComedy, Humor, and the Gospel of John 138 of physical violence against Jesus, humor makes last fleeting appearance ‘When Jesus declares that Abraham saw Jesus’ day and rejoiced (8:56), his, opponents are brought up short and wonder how someone less than fifty years old could have seen Abraham, who had lived centuries earlier (8:57) ‘Questions in John’s gospel are often framed 50 as to show whether the speaker expects a negative or a positive answer, but this question does not dictate a response and serves mainly to accent the incongruity of Jesus’ chim, For a moment, the incongruity allows Jesus’ detractors to assume the befuddled postute that is so often taken by his friends and foes alike. ‘The confusion subverts Jesus’ opponents by humanizing them rather than by demonizing them—undil Jesus’ remark about being the “I am” thas ‘existed before Abraham teiggers more hostilities (8:58) The story of the man born blind in John 9, which follows on the heels of these debates, directly discredits Jesus’ detractors by declaring that their opposition toward Jesus isa kind of blindness or delusion that manifests sin (9:39-41).At points during the episode, however, the evangelist uses satirical humor to demonsteate that their views are not only sinful but ako ridiculous. The Pharisees again assume the role of know-it-all when teying to deal with an apparent violation of Sabbath regulations, while their subversive counterpart this time isa beggar whom Jesus heals.'The episode begins when Jesus makes mud, places the mud on the eyes of a blind beggar, and sends him to wash in the pool of Siloam, where his vision is restored (9:6-7). The Pharisees question the beggar, who simply gives them the fats, and in so doing, he confounds the would-be exper. ‘They realize that the acts of making mud and healing violace God’ command to rest on the Sabbath, implying that Jesus is an opponent of Gods yet since the healing itself was a miracle it ako implies that Jesus is am agent of God's power (9:13-17)-To escape the dilemma, the Pharisees question the beggars parents in the hope of discovering that the miracle never happened, but the parents’ testimony confirms the healing (9:18 21). The next scene follows the classic pattern of the pretentious know. itll being undermined by one who undersates the truth. Having received firm evidence that the beggar has been healed from congenital blindness, the Pharisees follow their obsession for regulation and declare that since Jesus did a miracle on the Sabbath, they now know that he isa si (9:24). In contrast to this erroneous claim, the beggar makes the undersated point that he does not know whether Jesus isa sinner, but he does know that he can see (9:25). The Pharisees ae reduced to repeating their earlier questions about what happened only to have the beggar slyly ask iftheie interest in hearing it again means that they want to become Jesus disciples136. Word, Theology, and Community in John too (9126-27), They roundly reject this idea and declare that they don't know where Jesus comes from, which brings about a humorous reversal in which the know-it-all now claims to know nothing at all about Jesus origin (9:28-29).TIhe begear heightens the humorous effect by observing that what is truly astonishing is that a man about whom the Pharisees have not a clue has performed the unprecedented act of opening the eves, of the blind (9:30-33). Humor fades after this point, though irony does not, since Jesus declares that those who are teuly blind have the delusion of sight, and those who remain deluded in this way remain in sin ss, humor does its work during the course of the chapter by showing thac the Pharisees’ position is nonsensical ‘The final scenes in Jesus’ public ministry offer additional glimpses into the way that humor points to the absurdity of Jesus’ opponents. The last sign that Jesus performs before his crucifixion isto raise Lazarus from the dead, and when Jesus’ popularity surges because of this act, che chief priests and Pharisees become alarmed (11:45-48). Readers sympathetic to Jesus might find it amusing to watch the authorities fretting over the prospect of everyone coming to faith in Jesus, though the scene alo has a grim ironic undertone. The Jewish leaders conclude that by allowing Jesus to perform signs such as raising the dead, hey are inviting the Romans to come in and raze the temple. Therefore, to prevent people from dying at the hands of the Romans, they determine to kill the One who raises the dead (11:49-53}. ‘The sitte is unrelenting as the evangelist develops his portrait of the authorities in the next chapter, Hee observes that in addition to viewing Jesus. as a threat, the Jewish leaders come to regard the now famous Lazarus a8 major source of irritation. Crowds flock to Lazares's home, curious to see a man who had been in the tomb for four days before Jesus restored him to Life, Since the popularity ofthis corpse wiao came back to life fuels ‘Jesus’ reputation, the Jewish authorities conclude that a double assssination is in order: They will kill both Lazarus and Jesus (12:10).The authorities’ annoyance with the power of life and their determination to stamp it out at any cost push them over the line from villainy into absurdity. Such a satirical portrayal can be as devastating as outright condemnation, One tmay recognize that something is evil and stil be awed by it, but a ludicrous villain is worthy only of contempt Satire robs Jesus’ opponents of credibility, helping to free readers ftom their influence. If the Jews and Pharisees are the principal blocking figures in Jobn’s gospel, “the crowd” plays an important supporting role. Although the crowd finds itself at odds with the Pharisees when it shows a favorable inerest in Jesus, the crowd never joins che ranks of Jesus’ followers. Like NevertComedy, Humor, and the Gospel of John 137 the Pharisees the crowd is dominated by obsessions that ultimately subvert their inclinations toward faith. Therefore, the evangelist uses humor to show that the positions taken by the crowd are as absurd 3s those taken by the Jews and Pharisees. The crowd makes its first major appearance in John 6, in which Jesus transforms five loaves of bread and two fish into an ample meal for five thousand people. On seeing this miraculous sign, the ‘crowd wants to make Jesus a king, but Jesus slips away until the crowd catches up with him the next day (6:14=15, 22-25). Jesus’ exchange with the crowd travels in a circle with the humor becoming evident at the end, when readers discover chat the entire ‘complicated pathway incongruously leads back to the starting point (6:26— 534), Jesus declazes that the people seek him not because they saw signs but because they ate their fil of the loaves, which is odd because ic would appear that they followed Jesus precisely because they had seen the sign he performed (cf. 6:14), na rapid series of exchanges, Jesus tells them to labor for the food chat endures to eternal life;they ask what to do in order to perlorm God's works; and Jesus identifies God’s work with faith. Since God's work is faith, chey ask fora sign so that they might believe and they propose that Jesus give them some bread (6:26-31)—all of which creates a ridiculous situation in which they ask for precisely the sign that they have already received (and missed). Jesus feeds their interest, though not theirstomachs, by declaring that God himsel® gives them the true bread from heaven, and this raises their expectations to new heights (6:3233). Like the buffoon in many a comedy, the crowd, which so recently reveled in having mote bread than could be eaten at a sitting, remains absorbed in fantasies about the next meal" Anticipating a repeat of the previous day’s banquet, they say""Sin give us this bread always” (6:34), only to have Jesus change the ‘expected menu by declaring himself to be the bread of life (6:35). The humorous critique of the crowd’ food obsession in John 6 resembles the critique of the disciples’ preoccupation with food in 4:31— 38, but where the disciples follow the upward movement of comedy, the crowd follows the downward movement of tragedy. The disciples were lampooned only to be rehabilitated so that they could share in the joy of an expanding community of faith. The crowd is similarly lampooned, but no restoration follows. Instead, the voice of the crowd becomes the voice of a group of Jews grumbling at every turn (6:41, 52), Misunderstandings over Jesus’teachings persist, but the humorous elements fade as the passage moves grimly toward a parting of the ways.’The humor in this passage subverts the views of the crowd not to rehabilitate the crowd, but to fiee readers from inclinations to identify with 2 crowd whose perceptions are misguided.138 Word, Theology and Community in John ‘The crowd's final appearance during Jesus’ publie ministry is also marked by the use of satire. Critical humor initially appears inthe aftermath of che raising of Lazarus, when the crowd seems a least s eager to ee the corpse that came back to life as to sce Jesus (12:9). Later, as Jesus enters erusalem, the crowd greets him with palm branches and acclaims kim “King of Israel” (12:12-13). Intensity builds as the Pharisees observe helplesly that the world has gone after Jesus, and aif to reaffirm the accuracy of this statement, some Greeks ask to see Jesus (12:19-20) Solemly announcing that the hour has come for him «0 be glorified, Jesus speaks of dying being like a grain of wheat that falls into the earth Confessing that he is troubled, Jesus nevertheless prays that God’ name will be glorified, and a voice from heaven declares,"I have glorified it,and I will glorify itagain”—only to have the crowd wonder if it thundered or ifan angel might have said something to Jesus (12:27-29}.The incongruity between the heavenly pronouncement of glory and the crowds remarks about weather conditions is only heightened when Jesus says that the voice came for the crowd’ sake, since the crowd seems impervious to direct message from heaven (12:30) Comedy, Humor, and Faith John’s gospel follows the U-shaped movement of a comedy in which God's Word enters che world, s rejected, and finally triumphs through Jesus’ death and resurrection. The gospel tells of Jesus, the Word, in onder that readers might receive life through faith in him (20:31). Thus, faith and life are tied to the ultimate truth of the gospels U-shaped message. Humor arises from the incongruities that oceur in the course of the story: Its role is penultimate, The evangelist uses humor to subvert the false impressions and pretensions thacinterfeze with faith, He can do this because humor presupposes and reinforces a sense of congruence or truth, One must recognize what makes sense in order to see the humor in nonsense: “Confivsion is funny only to che unconfused. Laughter isthe judgment of order upon dsorder””® The gospel’ wordplays, misunderstandings, and ironic reversals sharpen the incongruities that arise from the Word’ entry into the world so that readers can both see them and see beyond them, Humor sometimes erupts when what appears to be rational proves to be ridiculous. In the Fourth Gospel, the Pharisees’ opposition to Jesus follows its own relentless internal logic to the incongruous conclusion that they must kill he giver of life. Logic is shown to be illogical; sense is reduced to nonsense. Those who glimpse such absurdity under wisdom’ veil frequently find themselves poised between laughter and tears. Humor brings them to a no-man'-land between faith and despair,and the directionComedy, Humor, and the Gospel of John 139 they take depends on what they believe about the story’s end. In tragedy, humor is a prelude to despair and laughter points to the triumph of ‘meaninglessnes, but comedy exposes the absurd in order to overcome the absurd, making humor, as Niebuhr put it,"a prehude to faith” John’s gospel also uses humor to promote faith by showing that what appears to be ridiculous may actually prove co be tru. In such cases, the surface incongruities give way tothe underlying congruities of the gospel message. Those whom Jesus meets find i udicrous t think that the One of whom Moses in the Law and also the Prophets wrote might come fiom Nazareth (1:45-46), that an old person can be born anew (3:34), or thata man without bucket can provide living water (4:10-11). Yet the ‘evangelist discloses the deep humor ofa story in which these prove to be true. Humor does not eliminate the incongruities, bu points beyond them to the One in whose presence tears and laughter resolve into joy. Comedy is an escape, not from truth but from despair: a narrow escape into faith. NOTES "chases Baek "On the Esene of Lauter da Generon the Comic in the Pai ‘sin Comedy: Meaning and Frm, 3 Robert W, Corgan, 24 of (New York Harper fc Rom, 1981) 311-35 ep 316.6) Willan Whedbee, Te Be the Come Van (Cambridge: Ca Ibsdge Unneaty Pro, 1098), - Yehuda T Ry sn "On Ming the Humour the ise An Teuodacton” in On Fla and he Cnt in he Hate idee Yeh Tey Bremner ISOTSup 82 (Shei Almond Pres, 194), 21-28 for example kb Joon, annul ony se New tame Binal Pall nad ad heh (Repke Boks Manon, 1965, 200-207 An Calpeppes, “Homor and Wie New fetament” ABD 233% Pal Dub, any ite outh Cape lant ohn Kot Pres 1985), 11-3, 21-25 George W Maclae eke the apposite view commenting tht che och Goel, though fen hel ori sessguady mous” [Theology td ray inshe Fourth Gospel in The Cope as Lit An Anny of tenet Cay Peopries SEMA W.G Sule Leen: Br 993), 103-L vep 105).0n humor and Biel sud neal ‘Se Rdny tnd Brenner On lor od te Co te He ie "On impli commentary in Jo, sce Re Alan Cab Ansomy fhe Pow Carel Sul Lory sg Poel: ots Pres, 1985, 151 "Norte aye, Fale ney Se in Poe Mylpy (New York court, Bre 8 ‘Worl, 1969, 25: Whedbee keane Come sen, 7 Se ao | Chery Exam dj Wiliam “Whedbor fa, Spon and Sal ReDeionson ehe Come and TgseViaann” Some 82 (1985) S-40.A these in Sonne 2 cel with apy ne comedy inthe be "Using Northrop ategorir Mork WC Se hv oberved tach" Corp a whsle ts» Usanped ld hat tha t's enetlyconaeplotanpe though he gee elas ‘ene fgets and ottanc bn, JSOT [9933-19 ts eater wor, Sbbe mentors "hose who sen the gopel 3 razedy and empha the agi men cven tah hea les Oat the gorpl savers tagedy se Stl: Namatoe Ca ad the Fou Cops SNTSNS 73 [Cumteidge: Camby Uneersty Pr, 192) 68 1I-147, 15940, 198-99) ‘Alas Culpepper recent eaten of Jos plat ho note he ee of zed (The Capel Lee140 Word, Theolggy, and Conomunity in Jol oo Sahil: Abingdon Pry 198), 62-86) ora ri dcwsion othe ration op” an {palestine propolis Fernando FSepon" The Journeyt) ofthe Word of God Rescing of ‘he Dl of he Foun Gospel Sees 53 199): 29-85 “on te Ushapes movement of Joh Psi ce Raymond E Brown, The Gael coding ‘afoin,AB 29,294 (Green Cie Ys Doble, 966 70).298sAdele Res, Teh in Te Cull a in se Fou Cpl, SBLMS 45 (Aan Seas Pes, 992), 16-28. "EB Whats The Saal Tf he Carew Yok Harper & Row 1980) 173 "Ste Hes ensom, Lahn Ey te Mg of the Cone (Landos: Mazin, 195), ‘ced Cale Menphor andthe Canon olny Coal nga 9 (19795 2, e9 10-1) The wnnwcionBenseennongruy ang haror his Deen ote yh in various ee ‘Among thecloins see Retold Nitin, -nsour ane Fath in aly Langton Eu on Rin Inthe Come Peery, of M Conrad Hyer (Mew York: Senbuy Pros, 1969), 134-49. Arnone Pilvophors se Michel Clik, Hlumor nd Incongy” in The spy of Lan ond Hua John Morea (Albee NY Sate Urvesty ef Nis ok, 987), 139-5, Among soaps {pst Mary Doug ners that eb te relic dpe ements nh a a {hone ancsptd patent challenge by the appestance of another which ore way won er tthe Se inp Meri ay np [Londo Roaecs Kegan Pal 1975) 9) For aaomnnuaty of dence pay wd sn enor ee Whedbee, Bleed he Comic Vion 8 On sasundersanding sn nny in ob ae Culpepper Anatomy of te Foun Go (82-8, aks ny i the Furth Cove Cal O'Day, Ret te Fh Cop Nara Made od ‘Pos Cla Peds: Foes res, 1985), 1-32. "The quotations ae Whedbee, ike a th Cmca, 9-On the ats of ume see ko Ronald de Sous "Wen ee Winng to Lisp? Morel, apy of an and har "Ace Raynes, Conic Peasn: Mol Seca in Bit Comey om Shape Sepa (Beakcey Univer of alsa Bre, 1987 1S quoted a Whedbee Bie ond he Com an, "sor ako Fanci Maloney, iin th Win Roig te Foch Cel: fo} (Min. poli Feries hess 1993) 63-P6)Crig Koester, Spl he Poth pl enn Mey ‘Comm (Minespo Fes Pros 1995, 39-43, 57-89. "Zechariah 8 fr cathe comung ofthe Banc" which was a msn er 286 32:16 Zach, 612-13) Two see aes the page tp that wea the mene Branch comes, ‘erjone willl i aeghor ander te and water Big tee" ach. 0. See Cg ower "Mewianc Exope nd the Cal of Nathanael i {49-51} JSNT 39 (1980): 25-3 "Sthe ory can be reid i pracy of he cour ea I to the marrage of aa ad Rebel aes and Race and Moves and Ziporsh (Gen 261-€7;29:1-20 Be 215-20) Se or ‘ple detin Pinte, The Qu fone Mea Te Hig ita ad heey of be ohne ComoniyEnbugh T&T Cla, 1991, 16-69, Dake oy te Fath Gop 101-3.On he Compl suaregy of comms ns pge se Le Engen The Woorng of he Warman {he Wal eon the Render, spd eenerfespnae Coc” bbe, Geof bea ee, 165-82:) Eugene Botha anran Homa A Seth Rea fo =, NorTSup (5 flee Bil, 1991), 188-200. Om the soles ofthe Samorian woman and she disp, ee Tees Oke, Te Js “Appa te Mision &t Cera Saly off 42, WONT ingen Mola Seb, 1988, TS, Sanden Rh. Schneider The Revetty Tn: interping he No Hotamt Saed Seip {Sin Fence’ HarerSarFance, 190), 185-98; Gu R_ O'Day."The Gael of Joh.” NIB 9 {Krovi Abington Bea, 199) 389; Rebee Goon Mach ie Teun 1 Te Wc ines tod, JSNTSup 125 (Shell. heel Acad Py 1996), 18-¥ "on mer and siete Neth" Hurmoue sd Fath” 0-41 "Ds woud fo "Soop as euphemisms fr dent ws craton (fy Me, 27:52 Act 7.60 1 Coe 18461 Thes. 13-15) rThomar commen could aan eat he expect the ciples tod long with Jess or slong wih Lasts In er cnet len that he ous tt the vietoy wl go 0 eh, not (O'Dage Gong aff 6, "Sorte ge cnn of Crit FE (incon: Princzon Univers Pres 1957, om the oe ofthe asin and nin cial comesee Pye Anson of Cio, 172-75, ‘Onthe we afthese posi ns gpl es Calpepper natn fe Fouts Cape, 18:2nd Dake Inn ne Paar Gel, 9Comedy, Humor, and the Gospel of John 141 the exes eo gpe, J’ chim n be the ph ofthe word is 812 lows imedstey sir he Dare ear sovt 0 prophesy Eom Cale in 7 52-The ere Ing eres (7.5512) were ae ler On the ue bp ragery sa Uns sage ee Roser Syne the Bure Cope 137-39. Oe te complen porno the erm in Joho 625 Panter, The Qa Moti, 227 Siders Jos ad the Gust for Real Lif? in hel Resa of 6 0 Ale Copper (desde beat, 61-44 lobe Kop" The Danning of DeoondlFath-A Reading oo 25-71" im Culpepper Chia Reais fa , 16-8: Kaeser, Spe i te Fo Gs), 55-0. “40m fod ane in contd se Faye, Ansty of Con 178 Pander wos asecned wih Ga vies and angel were tderenod 2 be God men en which could suggen taste cowed egy somtng fe dvi see toed hou Soin level of misntertndngrecesinedl See Robert Ky Jom ACN (Miespais: Agar 586), 198, O'Day "Gorpel of Joba” 712 ED Liston Hamer inthe Bible” ISBE 2.78-80,<9.778 Rebun "Huanoue and Fuh 14: "*Chwiope Fry-Comedy bs Corrigan, Coney 17-19, Tie Nathan Scone," The Bias of Comedy and she Nato Escape ino Fath er, Hl Langit, 8-73WM Theology Corifiuniy inJohn JOHN PAINTER, R. ALAN CULPEPPER AND FERNANDO F. SEGOVIA, EDITORS CHALICE