Am not a theologian but a lifetime seeker of the of the Holy One; who finds me. Cannot help but wonder if festi ities, dance, humor and joy.......in seeming polarity with, orthodoxy and Contemplation, reverent worship and loving discipline is not "the dance" itself. Lived long enough now to have experienced that any extreme of any of these has potential for harm and choking of life force. Something I will ponder....in prayer and dance and laughter and worship. A dance of living polarities perhaps?..... Centering in Christ in all of these is a key for me....ground. Appreciate the discussion. Thank you very much for all your gifts, Michael
I think you’re right, just look at the church calendar and there’s times for fasting and times for feasting. Times to celebrate and times to mourn and contemplate. That being said I think this guy is getting hung up on the idea that people are saying Jesus didn’t have a sense of humor or was always serious when 1) it’s just a fact that there’s no account of him laughing in the Bible and 2) I think this is because he is our leader. Like a good comedian he doesn’t laugh at his own jokes and he’s not surprised by anything in a way that makes him lose control and have an involuntary reaction like laughter. I sort of equate this to the drinking issue, some people are puritans who never drink and think it’s wrong because you can get drunk and lose control while others gladly point to Jesus drinking in the Bible to justify themselves getting drunk (tbh I’m probably more in this crowd) where as Jesus is depicted as someone who makes and consumes wine and even enjoys drinking it with friends and family but who doesn’t lose control and get drunk or drink to excess. To get back to laughter I can see how it seems less human not to laugh but honestly think about it, you laugh at a joke because of the surprise of the punchline. It catches you off guard and the unexpected joy of the situation makes you laugh involuntarily… but if you’re God and you know everything how could that be possible? As far as I’m aware the gospels only depict Christ being surprised by the strength of faith someone has
Jesus gets a bad rap as weak by some, and or is put on a pedestal unreachable by churchianity. He was a carpenter for God’s sake, hanging out with regular folk ie us. He specifically said, I’ve come for the regular people who are sick and tired of this place to give them hope. He has a sense of humor in many verses, like telling the blind man after he healed him, go before something worse happens to you, or the Pharisees accusing him of using demons to cast out demons, so he made the demons their judges, shiver me Timbers.
Jesus was not a carpenter he was an Essene. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the apostles and published soon after Jesus left them on their own (John 21.24). The Catholic church broke it up and scrambled the text among 4 falsely attributed authorship.
There’s certainly a difference between having a sense of humor, telling jokes and laughing. I don’t see why this is so complicated, there’s no account of Jesus ever laughing. Laughing, drunkenness and to an extent dancing are all seen as a loss of control and laughter usually occurs when someone is surprised. I could be wrong but I believe the gospels only describe Jesus as “surprised” by the strength of certain peoples faith, the Roman officer jumps to mind
Dance, then, wherever you may be; I am the Lord of the Dance, said he. And I’ll lead you all wherever you may be, And I’ll lead you all in the dance, said he.
I love the story of the Wedding at Cana, and I also see a lot of endearing quality and humor in the story of the water and the wine. Love your videos!! Happy New Year!! Quick question - what do you think of Prometheus Bound by Aschylus? I am slightly obsessed with it lately
A merry heart doeth like a medicine - from Proverbs, Who needs the gnostic gospels to justify joy, laughter , and silliness and drinking and dancing and feasting when you got loads of stuff in the OT. It says to become like a little child to enter the kingdom. And it says the kingdom of God is rightwiseness (older version of righteousness), peace and JOY in the Holy Spirit - AND he was “a man of sorrows well acquainted with grief” He being fully human had the whole package. As Irenaus said “the glory of God is man fully alive” I also am known as BeardTree.
This was amazing Mike. I'll never read these 3 scenes and the Gospels the same way again. And your take on them absolutely changes the tone in a hilarious and human way. 😅
Your God the ETERNAL One is in your midst- A warrior who brings triumph- Who will rejoice over you and be glad, Who will shout over you with jubilation Who will lovingly soothe Zephaniah 3:17 (Hebrew translation from Sefaria)
Michael Martin. May i ask what your thoughts are on Jesus and his " missing years"? Did he travel through england, europe, india, tibet, china ? Is there a link with buddhism. I would really appreciate your thoughts.
If there is a connection between Buddhism and Christianity it’s in Alexandria and in the development of monasticism (not implying a copy & paste but for sure there is at least a partial connection in Egypt) and the influence of Indian but also Persian and Native Egyptian thinking on Alexandrian Neo-platonism and Christianity. I don’t know why but I see some Indic elements in Origen’s speculative theology. There is also the fact that the Buddha is a “covered” Christian saint through the Georgian story/legendary hagiography of barlaam and Josephat. Georgia and Armenia are so underrated in terms of theology and Neo-platonic Christianity with figures like Narek (doctor of the Catholic Church thanks to Pope Francis) and Joane Petrizi.
13:13 YES, again. I really appreciate this commentary. I'm extremely fascinated by prechristian cultures and beliefs but find some aspects of Christianity comforting or even true (unless thats the socio linguistic programming kicking in). If I only I could set aside the paranoia that Christianity is just a civilization cohesion project (to make disparate groups get along and trade nicely with each other...)😅 Otherwise you're hittin' bullseyes on what I consider the hold ups to engaging with Christian doctrines.
What would you say or recommend to a neoplatonist who accepts the christian gospel philosophy and admires the tradition of christian mysticism but is agnostic or even suspicious (a suspicion which extends to all specific personal entities towards which worship can be directed, as they might be demons in disguise) about the true identity of the historical Jesus and even more so with respect to the old testament deity?
It’s so funny, I always thought that life on the road with 12 knuckleheads living in barns and quasi homeless must have been chock full of cracking up. GOD created humor after all. Omniscient omnipotent and omnipresent. GOD created laughter. Cmon! Sense of humor, a sign of intelligences !
Obviously he didn't laugh, because he was perfect and the pleasure of laughter came as a terrible consequence of the Fall. Just like using the restroom.
I think it highly probable that Jesus laughed at some point or another. He surely had a sense of humour. Another matter is your assertion that he told a joke ergo he laughed. This is an insubstantial argument. Have you noticed how often times the best joke tellers do not gush and laugh at themselves? They know how to keep a straight face, for the dry delivery. I have no idea whether he was joking with his mother that time, as you assert,,but it's sn interesting interpretation, one I had not heard before.
@michaelmartin8681 good point. Then how is it that you come to make your own presentation of certainty, in the absence of certain proof? I don't know whether Jesus laughed or not. What I do know, is that I don't know. Moreover I suspect that those Twitter-Christians don't; you don't and nobody else does. Logically speaking, this is self-evident: unless someone alive today has had personal experience of Jesus the man. Which is logically impossible . There are many who claim that they have some experience with some spirit or other and I accept all such claims as claims and proof of entirely nothing. I find I have no problem with you and your beliefs. As I begun by saying, in a debate I would likely argue alongside you that Jesus laughed and again I would do so from inference. Still I would also wish to acknowledge the point that neither I or anyone else is more or less qualified to make any assurances on the matter. All anyone can do is infer probability and make conjecture. The title of your video attracted me because I like to learn about Jesus or otherwise argue with Christians. I suppose I learned nothing about Jesus himself but only about your presentation: which not only presents to my mind as refutable but moreover you appear to invite refutation. How do you know that Jesus was joking with his mother that time? You say why you think so. Others think otherwise. I will go look into it again and if I think something interesting I will say it here. Thank you for your fellowship.
I think that the conversational transactions between Jesus, Mary and the servants were conducted deadpan because they were all quite serious people, about a serious matter. You say "party", "liked to drink" and so forth. Revelry, indulgence, fooling around, jesting with covert or inverse meanings... What you appear to be describing is the Bacchanalia of the Roman culture that coopted Jesus' legacy. There is no evidence that the wedding in question was anything but a highly formal, ceremonial event. Do you think that because they had wine, drunkenness was encouraged? - that would be a hard argument to make from a Biblical perspective.
You take the old Goethe much too seriously, my young friend. You should not take old people who are already dead seriously. It does them an injustice. We immortals do not like things to be taken seriously. We like joking. Seriousness, young man, is an accident of time. It consists, I don't mind telling you in confidence, in putting too high a value on time. I, too, once put too high a value on time. For that reason I wished to be a hundred years old. In eternity, however, there is no time, you see. Eternity is a mere moment, just long enough for a joke. #HermannHesse #Steppenwolf
10:09 So… you don’t want the God of the Bible because you have no use for Him? I don’t see why this is an issue, there’s no account of Jesus ever laughing in the Bible. He certainly has a sense of humor and while I can nit pick the examples you gave I agree he tells jokes (not sure how that’s evidence of him laughing) but it’s clear that the gospel writers chose not to depict Jesus as laughing. He’s depicted as drinking but not getting drunk and I think it’s a similar thing, he doesn’t lose control because he is God. Laughter is involuntary and a loss of control and whether or not Jesus actually laughed or not it’s clear the scriptures doesn’t depict the God you seem to want.
"37 And taking with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, he began to be sorrowful and troubled. 38 Then he said to them, “My soul is very sorrowful, even to death; remain here, and watch with me.” 39 And going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.” (Mathew 37-39) Do you worship control? Is Control your god? Or do you worship love? If your God is love (1 John 7), then why must He remain in control? Is control necessary for love? Are humans in complete control? Insofar as Christ's nature is fully God, of course he is in control; but insofar as his nature is fully human, then he is not fully in control. Jesus Himself prays to the Father (an intra-Trinitarian communication) saying "let this cup pass from me." Why should he ask to be freed from the Cross, when he is fully in control? If he did not want to die on the Cross, he didn't need to. But "not as I will, but as you will." Jesus GIVES UP HIS CONTROL to the will of the Father; yes, One God in three persons, but the person of the Son is here shown as submitting Himself to the will of the Father. It should go without saying, but if Christ asks to be free from this cup, from his death, then to die is a loss of control. And what else could it be? Do not all humans die? And what more profound loss of control is there than to die?
@@mindhack2878 I don’t see how I’m not taking in the totality of what he’s saying or how I’m twisting anything he said, he seemed very clear that he believes in a God that laughs and has no use for a God that doesn’t. What did I twist? Even the title of the video has him literally asking for a fight about this so I gave him what he asked for, perhaps you’re the one not taking the totality of what he said
@@flavertex658 But Jesus didn’t lose control even in death, it literally says he gave up his spirit not that it was taken from him. It was also a strategic move to defeat death by death. It’s like you’re arguing that the Trojan army lost control by being inside a wooden horse and brought behind enemy lines… even though they put themselves in the horse and wanted to be brought into the city. My God is in control, not sure how you’re jumping from the fact that the Bible never says Jesus laughed and depicts him as being in control to someone has to be worshiping control to notice that he never laughs in the Bible. I don’t see why you’re fighting this so much, the Bible doesn’t depict Jesus as laughing… do you worship laughter? Is Laughter your god? Is laughter necessary for love?
@FightingMyPassions I admit to having a faulty argument and that I am largely ignorant. I'm glad there are people like you who know the truth, value it, and take the initiative to correct people like me who speak without knowledge. You'll go a long way.
Thank you Michael. Now you just need to go read C.S. Lewis on the joy of the puritans and how they get a bad wrap. Of course everything you said was absolutely true of the Islamic faith, which denies even the spiritual fatherhood of God.
Yeah, I wouldn't be going to the gnostic texts for any form of Christological truth. If he is fully man and fully divine it seems self evident he laughed. laughter cant be inherently evil, there just isnt anything to support that, however we do know that laughter based hysteria can absolutely be a symptom of demonic influence. I go to a Charismatic church but I think most of that stuff is not... shall we say... good.
Do you know your Gospel? The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the apostles and published soon after Jesus left them on their own (John 21.24). The Catholic church broke it up and scrambled the text among 4 falsely attributed authorship.
@joshuasy10 I told you John 21:24 to start with; "This is the disciple (whom Jesus loved, Lazarus) who wrote these things...". The Gospel and Acts narrative proves it.
@EdwardSchwarz-n9j The Bible does not say it was Lazarus, and I think it's quite clear it is John, which church history and tradition agrees with. I asked you for evidence and you gave me an assumption, you are still yet to explain how "The Catholic church" broke up and scrambled the text, it's clear they had different authors and were written at different times.
@joshuasy10 The Gospel explicitly says three times that Jesus loved Lazarus. Do you know your Gospel? It never says nor alludes that John is this disciple. You ask for evidence - what evidence does the Church give to claim John is this disciple? Zero. None.
@EdwardSchwarz-n9j John’s Name Is Absent, Despite His Prominence in the Synoptics In the Synoptic Gospels, John is one of Jesus’ closest disciples, present at major events (e.g., the Transfiguration and Gethsemane). Yet in the Gospel of John, his name is missing entirely. This suggests John is the Beloved Disciple, referred to indirectly out of humility. Lazarus Is Explicitly Named, John Is Not Lazarus is named repeatedly in John 11-12 but disappears from the narrative afterward. The Beloved Disciple, on the other hand, is present at key moments (e.g., the Last Supper, crucifixion, and empty tomb) where Lazarus is absent. If Lazarus were the Beloved Disciple, his name would likely be mentioned. Key Eyewitness Events Where Lazarus Is Absent The Beloved Disciple is: Reclining next to Jesus at the Last Supper (John 13:23). At the crucifixion, where Jesus entrusts His mother to him (John 19:26-27). First to reach and believe at the empty tomb (John 20:2-8). Lazarus is never associated with these events, while John fits the role as one of Jesus’ inner circle. Early Church Testimony Irenaeus (c. 180 AD), a disciple of Polycarp (who knew John), explicitly states that John the Apostle wrote the Gospel and identifies him as the Beloved Disciple. The Beloved Disciple Is the Gospel’s Author John 21:24 identifies the Beloved Disciple as the eyewitness who authored the Gospel. John, one of the Twelve and an intimate follower of Jesus, is far more likely to have written it than Lazarus, whose role in the Gospel is limited to John 11-12.
Puritanism is rearing the ugly head again! In this same realm are those that complain about the Jesus portrayed by The Chosen series, He is too human, He jokes, He swings His Mother around in greeting Her at the wedding of Cana! We tend to forget that while Jesus is as God as He can be He is also the most human man that ever humanned! Love this from Orthodoxy by Chesterton and this is how he ends the work: "There was one thing that He covered constantly by abrupt silence or impetuous isolation. There was some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth; and I have sometimes fancied it was mirth." At first glance somebody might say this is actually evidence for the position that He did not laugh but I think not. Chesterton is not saying that He did not laugh, he is saying that it was so great a glory as to be in need of being restrained. Meaning He did laugh, but it did not even come close to the mirth that we will experience from our Lord when we join the Cosmic Dance of the Beatific vision. The great Heavenly Liturgy is full of unending joy! Also, whenever you speak of Pan being like Christ I also think of Bacchus in Lion, Witch, and Wardrobe.
If Jesus took a Nazerite vow and he drank any kind of drink that had any grapes? Then the Nazerite vow to God is no good any longer, for as long as his vow was ,he can't cut his hair,drink strong drink,or go around dead bodies,there are very strict rules. Go look at the Nazerite vow. And if he did then he definitely wasn't the messiah. Because the vow just like his mother and family did the Nazerite vow,and that includes they ate no meat. Only fruit,nuts,vegetables it is in thier ways of being part of thier tribe, they take it very seriously. A Vow like that was not to be broken to God.
The Eastern Church does tend to the ascetic, as do the Protestants. This goes hand in hand with their diminishing of the Feminine. Both the Roman Catholic and the Grail Mysteries restore the balance and place the Feminine with the Masculine at the Godhead, which is BOTH male and female. And I will say this, Christians who focus mostly on the Old Testament and the Epistles of Paul are only somewhat Christian...at best.
I'm actually sympathetic towards your position here and thought Pageau was wasting energy and time on this but you made a fool of your self going to The Last Temptation, Gnostic 'gospels' and Paganism to make the point, two of which is blasphemous, only to punctuate it with the declaration that you have no use for God unless he's like Pan, as if you're god himself. You are a cautionary tale in flippancy and folly. Very unwise for the sophiologist.
I even think laughter can be a form of exorcism of an atmosphere.
The idea that Jesus didn’t laugh is also in Umberto Eco’s The Name of the Rose.
Am not a theologian but a lifetime seeker of the of the Holy One; who finds me. Cannot help but wonder if festi ities, dance, humor and joy.......in seeming polarity with, orthodoxy and Contemplation, reverent worship and loving discipline is not "the dance" itself. Lived long enough now to have experienced that any extreme of any of these has potential for harm and choking of life force. Something I will ponder....in prayer and dance and laughter and worship. A dance of living polarities perhaps?..... Centering in Christ in all of these is a key for me....ground. Appreciate the discussion. Thank you very much for all your gifts, Michael
I think you’re right, just look at the church calendar and there’s times for fasting and times for feasting. Times to celebrate and times to mourn and contemplate. That being said I think this guy is getting hung up on the idea that people are saying Jesus didn’t have a sense of humor or was always serious when 1) it’s just a fact that there’s no account of him laughing in the Bible and 2) I think this is because he is our leader. Like a good comedian he doesn’t laugh at his own jokes and he’s not surprised by anything in a way that makes him lose control and have an involuntary reaction like laughter. I sort of equate this to the drinking issue, some people are puritans who never drink and think it’s wrong because you can get drunk and lose control while others gladly point to Jesus drinking in the Bible to justify themselves getting drunk (tbh I’m probably more in this crowd) where as Jesus is depicted as someone who makes and consumes wine and even enjoys drinking it with friends and family but who doesn’t lose control and get drunk or drink to excess. To get back to laughter I can see how it seems less human not to laugh but honestly think about it, you laugh at a joke because of the surprise of the punchline. It catches you off guard and the unexpected joy of the situation makes you laugh involuntarily… but if you’re God and you know everything how could that be possible? As far as I’m aware the gospels only depict Christ being surprised by the strength of faith someone has
Jesus gets a bad rap as weak by some, and or is put on a pedestal unreachable by churchianity. He was a carpenter for God’s sake, hanging out with regular folk ie us. He specifically said, I’ve come for the regular people who are sick and tired of this place to give them hope. He has a sense of humor in many verses, like telling the blind man after he healed him, go before something worse happens to you, or the Pharisees accusing him of using demons to cast out demons, so he made the demons their judges, shiver me Timbers.
Jesus was not a carpenter he was an Essene. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the apostles and published soon after Jesus left them on their own (John 21.24). The Catholic church broke it up and scrambled the text among 4 falsely attributed authorship.
@@EdwardSchwarz-n9jThat's absurd
There’s certainly a difference between having a sense of humor, telling jokes and laughing. I don’t see why this is so complicated, there’s no account of Jesus ever laughing. Laughing, drunkenness and to an extent dancing are all seen as a loss of control and laughter usually occurs when someone is surprised. I could be wrong but I believe the gospels only describe Jesus as “surprised” by the strength of certain peoples faith, the Roman officer jumps to mind
Dance, then, wherever you may be;
I am the Lord of the Dance, said he.
And I’ll lead you all wherever you may be,
And I’ll lead you all in the dance, said he.
I love the story of the Wedding at Cana, and I also see a lot of endearing quality and humor in the story of the water and the wine. Love your videos!! Happy New Year!! Quick question - what do you think of Prometheus Bound by Aschylus? I am slightly obsessed with it lately
@@thevintagemom5455 Happy New Year!
A merry heart doeth like a medicine - from Proverbs, Who needs the gnostic gospels to justify joy, laughter , and silliness and drinking and dancing and feasting when you got loads of stuff in the OT. It says to become like a little child to enter the kingdom. And it says the kingdom of God is rightwiseness (older version of righteousness), peace and JOY in the Holy Spirit - AND he was “a man of sorrows well acquainted with grief” He being fully human had the whole package. As Irenaus said “the glory of God is man fully alive” I also am known as BeardTree.
Damn, that book collection is collected properly and is collecting dust. God bless.
This was amazing Mike. I'll never read these 3 scenes and the Gospels the same way again. And your take on them absolutely changes the tone in a hilarious and human way. 😅
Thank you so much! Yes! Choose Life!
Your God the ETERNAL One is in your midst-
A warrior who brings triumph-
Who will rejoice over you and be glad,
Who will shout over you with jubilation
Who will lovingly soothe
Zephaniah 3:17 (Hebrew translation from Sefaria)
Amen, brother. :)
Michael Martin. May i ask what your thoughts are on Jesus and his " missing years"? Did he travel through england, europe, india, tibet, china ? Is there a link with buddhism. I would really appreciate your thoughts.
I don't really have an opinion, but the idea that he went around to all the ancient traditions collecting wisdom always struck me as phony.
Jesus was in Glastonbury England 🏴. One guy said he came to America 😊
@@michaelmartin8681Do some research. We know he was in Glastonbury
@@michaelmartin8681What do you think he did in those years ?
If there is a connection between Buddhism and Christianity it’s in Alexandria and in the development of monasticism (not implying a copy & paste but for sure there is at least a partial connection in Egypt) and the influence of Indian but also Persian and Native Egyptian thinking on Alexandrian Neo-platonism and Christianity. I don’t know why but I see some Indic elements in Origen’s speculative theology. There is also the fact that the Buddha is a “covered” Christian saint through the Georgian story/legendary hagiography of barlaam and Josephat. Georgia and Armenia are so underrated
in terms of theology and Neo-platonic Christianity with figures like Narek (doctor of the Catholic Church thanks to Pope Francis) and Joane Petrizi.
13:13 YES, again. I really appreciate this commentary. I'm extremely fascinated by prechristian cultures and beliefs but find some aspects of Christianity comforting or even true (unless thats the socio linguistic programming kicking in).
If I only I could set aside the paranoia that Christianity is just a civilization cohesion project (to make disparate groups get along and trade nicely with each other...)😅
Otherwise you're hittin' bullseyes on what I consider the hold ups to engaging with Christian doctrines.
I am waiting for, "Jesus did not use the bathroom".
It's in there!
And he was the first Breatharian!
@@Mooseman327 no wonder why in is pictures he has a nice tan
😂
What would you say or recommend to a neoplatonist who accepts the christian gospel philosophy and admires the tradition of christian mysticism but is agnostic or even suspicious (a suspicion which extends to all specific personal entities towards which worship can be directed, as they might be demons in disguise) about the true identity of the historical Jesus and even more so with respect to the old testament deity?
I'd say, "Don't sweat it. You'll figure it out eventually."
What translation of Scripture are you reading from? Also, have you watched the series "The Chosen" at all? I have not.
NRSV
It’s so funny, I always thought that life on the road with 12 knuckleheads living in barns and quasi homeless must have been chock full of cracking up.
GOD created humor after all. Omniscient omnipotent and omnipresent. GOD created laughter. Cmon!
Sense of humor,
a sign of intelligences !
And King David danced naked!
Obviously he didn't laugh, because he was perfect and the pleasure of laughter came as a terrible consequence of the Fall. Just like using the restroom.
7:24 YES, something about that Orthobro strangles the levity out of Christianity, makes it too serious, too logical, if I dare say so...
I think it highly probable that Jesus laughed at some point or another. He surely had a sense of humour.
Another matter is your assertion that he told a joke ergo he laughed. This is an insubstantial argument. Have you noticed how often times the best joke tellers do not gush and laugh at themselves? They know how to keep a straight face, for the dry delivery.
I have no idea whether he was joking with his mother that time, as you assert,,but it's sn interesting interpretation, one I had not heard before.
It was a inference. People who tell jokes are not averse to laughing.
@michaelmartin8681 how did the "Jesus didn't laugh" people come to an opposite conclusion to yours, if not also by inference?
@@dongkhamet1351 I don't think that was due to inference at all. That's due to a kind of myopic, concrete, fundamentalist reading.
@michaelmartin8681 good point. Then how is it that you come to make your own presentation of certainty, in the absence of certain proof?
I don't know whether Jesus laughed or not. What I do know, is that I don't know. Moreover I suspect that those Twitter-Christians don't; you don't and nobody else does.
Logically speaking, this is self-evident: unless someone alive today has had personal experience of Jesus the man. Which is logically impossible .
There are many who claim that they have some experience with some spirit or other and I accept all such claims as claims and proof of entirely nothing.
I find I have no problem with you and your beliefs. As I begun by saying, in a debate I would likely argue alongside you that Jesus laughed and again I would do so from inference. Still I would also wish to acknowledge the point that neither I or anyone else is more or less qualified to make any assurances on the matter. All anyone can do is infer probability and make conjecture.
The title of your video attracted me because I like to learn about Jesus or otherwise argue with Christians. I suppose I learned nothing about Jesus himself but only about your presentation: which not only presents to my mind as refutable but moreover you appear to invite refutation.
How do you know that Jesus was joking with his mother that time? You say why you think so. Others think otherwise.
I will go look into it again and if I think something interesting I will say it here.
Thank you for your fellowship.
I think that the conversational transactions between Jesus, Mary and the servants were conducted deadpan because they were all quite serious people, about a serious matter.
You say "party", "liked to drink" and so forth. Revelry, indulgence, fooling around, jesting with covert or inverse meanings... What you appear to be describing is the Bacchanalia of the Roman culture that coopted Jesus' legacy. There is no evidence that the wedding in question was anything but a highly formal, ceremonial event. Do you think that because they had wine, drunkenness was encouraged? - that would be a hard argument to make from a Biblical perspective.
You take the old Goethe much too seriously, my young friend. You should not take old people who are already dead seriously. It does them an injustice. We immortals do not like things to be taken seriously. We like joking. Seriousness, young man, is an accident of time. It consists, I don't mind telling you in confidence, in putting too high a value on time. I, too, once put too high a value on time. For that reason I wished to be a hundred years old. In eternity, however, there is no time, you see. Eternity is a mere moment, just long enough for a joke. #HermannHesse #Steppenwolf
10:09 So… you don’t want the God of the Bible because you have no use for Him? I don’t see why this is an issue, there’s no account of Jesus ever laughing in the Bible. He certainly has a sense of humor and while I can nit pick the examples you gave I agree he tells jokes (not sure how that’s evidence of him laughing) but it’s clear that the gospel writers chose not to depict Jesus as laughing. He’s depicted as drinking but not getting drunk and I think it’s a similar thing, he doesn’t lose control because he is God. Laughter is involuntary and a loss of control and whether or not Jesus actually laughed or not it’s clear the scriptures doesn’t depict the God you seem to want.
You take one thing he said and twist it typically. Ever heard of being able to take in the totality of what someone is saying
"37 And taking with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, he began to be sorrowful and troubled. 38 Then he said to them, “My soul is very sorrowful, even to death; remain here, and watch with me.” 39 And going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.” (Mathew 37-39)
Do you worship control? Is Control your god? Or do you worship love? If your God is love (1 John 7), then why must He remain in control? Is control necessary for love? Are humans in complete control?
Insofar as Christ's nature is fully God, of course he is in control; but insofar as his nature is fully human, then he is not fully in control. Jesus Himself prays to the Father (an intra-Trinitarian communication) saying "let this cup pass from me." Why should he ask to be freed from the Cross, when he is fully in control? If he did not want to die on the Cross, he didn't need to. But "not as I will, but as you will." Jesus GIVES UP HIS CONTROL to the will of the Father; yes, One God in three persons, but the person of the Son is here shown as submitting Himself to the will of the Father. It should go without saying, but if Christ asks to be free from this cup, from his death, then to die is a loss of control. And what else could it be? Do not all humans die? And what more profound loss of control is there than to die?
@@mindhack2878 I don’t see how I’m not taking in the totality of what he’s saying or how I’m twisting anything he said, he seemed very clear that he believes in a God that laughs and has no use for a God that doesn’t. What did I twist? Even the title of the video has him literally asking for a fight about this so I gave him what he asked for, perhaps you’re the one not taking the totality of what he said
@@flavertex658 But Jesus didn’t lose control even in death, it literally says he gave up his spirit not that it was taken from him. It was also a strategic move to defeat death by death. It’s like you’re arguing that the Trojan army lost control by being inside a wooden horse and brought behind enemy lines… even though they put themselves in the horse and wanted to be brought into the city.
My God is in control, not sure how you’re jumping from the fact that the Bible never says Jesus laughed and depicts him as being in control to someone has to be worshiping control to notice that he never laughs in the Bible. I don’t see why you’re fighting this so much, the Bible doesn’t depict Jesus as laughing… do you worship laughter? Is Laughter your god? Is laughter necessary for love?
@FightingMyPassions I admit to having a faulty argument and that I am largely ignorant. I'm glad there are people like you who know the truth, value it, and take the initiative to correct people like me who speak without knowledge. You'll go a long way.
LOL, this is fun! :)
😂
Laughing means to lose control.
@@Shotzeethegamer so what? So does weeping. "Jesus wept."
Thank you Michael. Now you just need to go read C.S. Lewis on the joy of the puritans and how they get a bad wrap. Of course everything you said was absolutely true of the Islamic faith, which denies even the spiritual fatherhood of God.
Jesus lived his life as a normal man until he was 33. He was a real human being, while simultaneously divine.
You're also a normal human being, but also divine.
Jesus was crucified at 33 and began his public ministry at 30
Yeah, I wouldn't be going to the gnostic texts for any form of Christological truth. If he is fully man and fully divine it seems self evident he laughed. laughter cant be inherently evil, there just isnt anything to support that, however we do know that laughter based hysteria can absolutely be a symptom of demonic influence. I go to a Charismatic church but I think most of that stuff is not... shall we say... good.
Do you know your Gospel? The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the apostles and published soon after Jesus left them on their own (John 21.24). The Catholic church broke it up and scrambled the text among 4 falsely attributed authorship.
You're joking, right? What evidence do you have of this notion?
@joshuasy10 I told you John 21:24 to start with; "This is the disciple (whom Jesus loved, Lazarus) who wrote these things...".
The Gospel and Acts narrative proves it.
@EdwardSchwarz-n9j The Bible does not say it was Lazarus, and I think it's quite clear it is John, which church history and tradition agrees with. I asked you for evidence and you gave me an assumption, you are still yet to explain how "The Catholic church" broke up and scrambled the text, it's clear they had different authors and were written at different times.
@joshuasy10 The Gospel explicitly says three times that Jesus loved Lazarus. Do you know your Gospel? It never says nor alludes that John is this disciple. You ask for evidence - what evidence does the Church give to claim John is this disciple? Zero. None.
@EdwardSchwarz-n9j
John’s Name Is Absent, Despite His Prominence in the Synoptics
In the Synoptic Gospels, John is one of Jesus’ closest disciples, present at major events (e.g., the Transfiguration and Gethsemane). Yet in the Gospel of John, his name is missing entirely. This suggests John is the Beloved Disciple, referred to indirectly out of humility.
Lazarus Is Explicitly Named, John Is Not
Lazarus is named repeatedly in John 11-12 but disappears from the narrative afterward. The Beloved Disciple, on the other hand, is present at key moments (e.g., the Last Supper, crucifixion, and empty tomb) where Lazarus is absent. If Lazarus were the Beloved Disciple, his name would likely be mentioned.
Key Eyewitness Events Where Lazarus Is Absent
The Beloved Disciple is:
Reclining next to Jesus at the Last Supper (John 13:23).
At the crucifixion, where Jesus entrusts His mother to him (John 19:26-27).
First to reach and believe at the empty tomb (John 20:2-8).
Lazarus is never associated with these events, while John fits the role as one of Jesus’ inner circle.
Early Church Testimony
Irenaeus (c. 180 AD), a disciple of Polycarp (who knew John), explicitly states that John the Apostle wrote the Gospel and identifies him as the Beloved Disciple.
The Beloved Disciple Is the Gospel’s Author
John 21:24 identifies the Beloved Disciple as the eyewitness who authored the Gospel. John, one of the Twelve and an intimate follower of Jesus, is far more likely to have written it than Lazarus, whose role in the Gospel is limited to John 11-12.
Jesus never drank 🍻.
Did He have communion 🥖🍷 ? Did He also partake?
@haadidave nope
@haadidave He was the sacrificial Lamb
Puritanism is rearing the ugly head again! In this same realm are those that complain about the Jesus portrayed by The Chosen series, He is too human, He jokes, He swings His Mother around in greeting Her at the wedding of Cana! We tend to forget that while Jesus is as God as He can be He is also the most human man that ever humanned! Love this from Orthodoxy by Chesterton and this is how he ends the work: "There was one thing that He covered constantly by abrupt silence or impetuous isolation. There was some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth; and I have sometimes fancied it was mirth." At first glance somebody might say this is actually evidence for the position that He did not laugh but I think not. Chesterton is not saying that He did not laugh, he is saying that it was so great a glory as to be in need of being restrained. Meaning He did laugh, but it did not even come close to the mirth that we will experience from our Lord when we join the Cosmic Dance of the Beatific vision. The great Heavenly Liturgy is full of unending joy! Also, whenever you speak of Pan being like Christ I also think of Bacchus in Lion, Witch, and Wardrobe.
Psalm 149
If Jesus took a Nazerite vow and he drank any kind of drink that had any grapes? Then the Nazerite vow to God is no good any longer, for as long as his vow was ,he can't cut his hair,drink strong drink,or go around dead bodies,there are very strict rules. Go look at the Nazerite vow. And if he did then he definitely wasn't the messiah. Because the vow just like his mother and family did the Nazerite vow,and that includes they ate no meat. Only fruit,nuts,vegetables it is in thier ways of being part of thier tribe, they take it very seriously. A Vow like that was not to be broken to God.
I love this message. Thank you.
nuts
The Eastern Church does tend to the ascetic, as do the Protestants. This goes hand in hand with their diminishing of the Feminine. Both the Roman Catholic and the Grail Mysteries restore the balance and place the Feminine with the Masculine at the Godhead, which is BOTH male and female.
And I will say this, Christians who focus mostly on the Old Testament and the Epistles of Paul are only somewhat Christian...at best.
@@Mooseman327 but we do feast. You should come to one of our weddings!
That describes me exactly before converting to Catholicism. Since then the gospels are my main focus.
Interesting point
Some of the greatest trailblazers of comedy were Jewish! 😉
I'm actually sympathetic towards your position here and thought Pageau was wasting energy and time on this but you made a fool of your self going to The Last Temptation, Gnostic 'gospels' and Paganism to make the point, two of which is blasphemous, only to punctuate it with the declaration that you have no use for God unless he's like Pan, as if you're god himself. You are a cautionary tale in flippancy and folly.
Very unwise for the sophiologist.
I flashed the heresy sign--what more do you want?
@@michaelmartin8681you certainly did!💪