My late wife and I shared the same relationship as yours with humor. It was wonderful. I miss her laughter so much. But soon, through His grace, I’ll get to make her laugh again.
Thank you for this helpful point about Paul (and merriment). A precious wanderer I love has gone down this decent and one thing said is that Jesus said some good things we should follow like "neither do I condemn you" and "love" but Paul was some grumpy old guy we shouldn't bother with. I think it's just easier for those descending to say "Paul isn't Jesus" and therefore not worth listening to. So you point that he is given such a weighty task is a good response I'd like to hang on to.
Anyway, I stopped arguing with that precious person. It's really obvious only Jesus can save the ones who choose such a descent. I just get to be there with them and love them, hopefully with some laughter.
I think you have found the explanation for the cryptic "Paul isn't Jesus" remark. It's meant to convey the reasoning of those who want to selectively discount the writings and authority of Paul whenever they perceive a conflict between Paul's teaching and those of Jesus.
That second paragraph will head up my journal tonight. What would the world be without humor? Especially one’s ability to laugh at oneself? I will forever thank my father (who could be quite the gruff) for my sense of humor. Despite his “grouchiness” as he used to describe himself, he had a killer sense of humor, and my mother - probably like your wife - would just howl with laughter. Eventually our parakeet imitated my mom’s laugh. So dad would crack a funny, mom would laugh, the parakeet would laugh, and the whole dinner table was filled with merriment.
You know, at my door, should you ever happen by, look down (that’s just a direction to look, not a pointer on a map for anyone’s soul). You’ll see a welcome mat that merrily says, “Let the shenanigans begin!”
It’s what we Irish do and, for all I know, there’s a similar welcome mat at the gates of Heaven. I’m certain God has a sense of humor, after all. Take, for example, hair. A man can grow a fine crop of hair on his head and, as he ages, sculpt a set of manly whiskers. But then he starts to lose the hair where he wants to keep it, and starts growing it where he never thought he’d ever have it.
Shenanigans. There must be shenanigans in heaven too. ☺️☘️🇮🇪
I've often thought God gave us just enough hair to look ridiculous, but not enough to be useful. He could have given us a beautifully luscious and warm fur coat like a cat, but no, just enough to look funny.
When St. Paul was speaking of judgement, he was judging acts that would violate any number of commandments or other (religious or moral) law. He could not send any one to Hell, but he could remove that person from the community, until and unless that person relented from the infraction that was felt to be so egregious that it was a threat to the community.
The Catholic view of excommunication is that the sin is so great that the person committing the sin has removed himself from the church, and to receive sacraments (other than reconciliation) n such a state of sin would be also sinful and harmful for the person as well as the community. Reconciliation (I'm old enough to still call it confession--after all, one does not enter the reconciliational for the sacrament, does one?) allows one to acknowledge the sin, repent and resolve to not continue sinning. In this way the person can be reinstated into the community. So both "your sins are forgiven you" and "go and sin no more" must be taken together, not one or the other.
The analogy is a person committing a felony, being convicted and receiving a punishment. It does not condemn a person to losing his soul to perdition. Just so, if a person within a church or other religious community acts so wrongly as to endanger that community, and does not relent, he must be removed for the good of the community as well as for that person's good as well. This is not done in a vacuum, but with much counselling and repeated calls for repentance.
The Roman Church is very reluctant to pull this string, although it is richly deserved in our "devoutly Catholic" president and his unstinting dedication to abortion, gender transition, and a host of other grave moral misdeeds. He is committing theological scandal as well, that is making it appear that these viewpoints are acceptable and leading others to sin in the same way. Do I want him, Pelosi, and pretty much any Catholic Dem or Rep who supports such deeds publicly excommunicated? Yes. Do I want them to go to Hell? Not my call, and I pray for all persons' reconciliation, but that is between each person and his creator.
Great topic for me to bloviate on for a column regarding humor. Sorry, had to get it off my chest. Sorry about the length.
This is an interesting piece. So many thoughts come to mind from reading it and the comments of my fellow sojourners. Paul is such a remarkable man and someone who defies being compartmentalized, pigeonholed though countless have tried through the ages. In addition to his miraculous experience with the risen Christ on the Road to Damascus, his time in Arabia, his known and theorized missionary journeys, there is his turning from a zeal to convict the early Christians to his zeal to walk out (literally) his commission to be a light (small l) of the Divine Light (Jesus) to the Gentiles. Perhaps that is why he was chosen, elected by God to fulfill this role.
He is also such a polarizing figure, within and without Christianity. Just days ago, I was witness to a dialog, at times contentious, regarding his epistles. It was a discussion over free will vs theistic determinism. One side argued that the Church would have been better off without them, something ludicrous to me. Their reasoning was that Paul wasn’t concise enough when he used the word, “election.” If he had been we wouldn’t have all these issues with the subject. The other side thought the expulsion of Paul’s letters and writings ridiculous regardless of his use and/or our misuse of this word. Peter agrees, although like me, he finds some of Paul difficult to understand, and that from a disciple of Christ. We are all in good company. What was revealed to Paul had been hidden throughout the centuries of the Old Testament, the Law and the Prophets. Is it any wonder we scratch our heads and throw up our hands at times. Still, I thank God and the early church fathers for Paul and his writings. To discount Paul at all is a sure way to an eventual discounting and unbelief in Jesus.
I believe that the first step down from Christianity to Atheism is not the revelation that Paul isn’t Jesus. It’s the worship of Paul as Jesus and the resulting disillusionment that comes from the worship, active or passive of anyone or anything other than Jesus. As many have so eloquently said, only Jesus saves. Paul would be the first to tell you that.
The conflict between free will and theistic determinism isn’t, I think, a problem with Paul but a misunderstanding of Paul. Christ is the elect and chosen one, before the foundation of the world, if you are in Christ by faith, then you are elect and chosen ( see Eph 1).
A progressive would use a handicap ramp in their cartoon depiction.
I would caution those thinking that an error in the direction of Gods love is somehow more acceptable. Why do we assume that we can dissect Gods love from Gods judgement? Sure Jesus and Paul had different missions but they operated through the same Spirit. I would rather not dichotomize Gods Agape for a cheapened sentimentality. Human sentimentality is like a charcoal fire, barely a little heat and even less light.
Jesus actually said the same as Paul, John 7:24: 24 “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.” The misuse of the “judge not” verse has lead to the corruption of the church and the culture, from the sparkle creed to the redefinition of marriage to the redefinition of a woman. I think though, there should be a difference in approach when dealing with individuals (more gentle) vs. cultural problems (“principalities and powers” as Paul would say).
You make me laugh and I love that but Christians can only laugh because of the Resurrection and the only Way to that is the Cross and the Cross is no laughing matter. “Blessed are they who mourn”.
We need laughter but more than that right now we need lament.
I feel the comments were split between light and "humorous" and deep and philosophical. I felt like my brain was split in half. And then I read the title again - The Last Laugh and my heart opened up with a fond memory of my dad. I told this story in his eulogy. My dad always made people smile. He talked to everyone and was a great storyteller. On one of our last walks together, we went into a store and the man behind the counter looked miserable. We looked and each other and set a challenge to see who would be the first one to make him smile. I don't remember who won, but I won't forget how close we felt on our mission of sharing joy.
I grew up watching my Dad and his two brothers, of Irish descent, crack each other up. Red- faced laughter at every gathering crackled through the room. My wife Mary and I laugh together, often at each other, after 20 years together. We met at age 50. My first wife and I had it along with our siblings on both sides. She passed of ovarian cancer 22 years ago. Mary is Gods miracle for me and the bonus includes laughter. If we are indeed made in His image, God has got to love a good laugh.
If you have never heard the song "No Hard Feelings" by the Avett brothers, I strongly urge you to look it up on the YouTubes. It's a contender for the most poignant and meaningful modern song; it's about confronting one's own mortality and casting off the things of this world as we leave it---including "hard feelings." The lyrics wonder what we will find when we pass and include the delightful line (Will I) "run into a Savior true, and shake hands, laughing."
I really appreciate the lane of “defining the point of it all” being separated from the lane of “build a religion around that to preserve and propagate that.”
Andrew, I'm sorry, Supreme Ruler of the Multiverse, can you elaborate further on what that means about Paul not being Jesus? Is it a trend amongst certain denominations to deify Paul, like those islanders that saw Paul get bit by the venomous snake? This feels very evil and Satanic. And can you do an article about Pilate asking, "What is truth?"
My late wife and I shared the same relationship as yours with humor. It was wonderful. I miss her laughter so much. But soon, through His grace, I’ll get to make her laugh again.
Thank you for this helpful point about Paul (and merriment). A precious wanderer I love has gone down this decent and one thing said is that Jesus said some good things we should follow like "neither do I condemn you" and "love" but Paul was some grumpy old guy we shouldn't bother with. I think it's just easier for those descending to say "Paul isn't Jesus" and therefore not worth listening to. So you point that he is given such a weighty task is a good response I'd like to hang on to.
Anyway, I stopped arguing with that precious person. It's really obvious only Jesus can save the ones who choose such a descent. I just get to be there with them and love them, hopefully with some laughter.
I think you have found the explanation for the cryptic "Paul isn't Jesus" remark. It's meant to convey the reasoning of those who want to selectively discount the writings and authority of Paul whenever they perceive a conflict between Paul's teaching and those of Jesus.
That second paragraph will head up my journal tonight. What would the world be without humor? Especially one’s ability to laugh at oneself? I will forever thank my father (who could be quite the gruff) for my sense of humor. Despite his “grouchiness” as he used to describe himself, he had a killer sense of humor, and my mother - probably like your wife - would just howl with laughter. Eventually our parakeet imitated my mom’s laugh. So dad would crack a funny, mom would laugh, the parakeet would laugh, and the whole dinner table was filled with merriment.
You know, at my door, should you ever happen by, look down (that’s just a direction to look, not a pointer on a map for anyone’s soul). You’ll see a welcome mat that merrily says, “Let the shenanigans begin!”
It’s what we Irish do and, for all I know, there’s a similar welcome mat at the gates of Heaven. I’m certain God has a sense of humor, after all. Take, for example, hair. A man can grow a fine crop of hair on his head and, as he ages, sculpt a set of manly whiskers. But then he starts to lose the hair where he wants to keep it, and starts growing it where he never thought he’d ever have it.
Shenanigans. There must be shenanigans in heaven too. ☺️☘️🇮🇪
I've often thought God gave us just enough hair to look ridiculous, but not enough to be useful. He could have given us a beautifully luscious and warm fur coat like a cat, but no, just enough to look funny.
Lol! That’s a good point ☺️
When St. Paul was speaking of judgement, he was judging acts that would violate any number of commandments or other (religious or moral) law. He could not send any one to Hell, but he could remove that person from the community, until and unless that person relented from the infraction that was felt to be so egregious that it was a threat to the community.
The Catholic view of excommunication is that the sin is so great that the person committing the sin has removed himself from the church, and to receive sacraments (other than reconciliation) n such a state of sin would be also sinful and harmful for the person as well as the community. Reconciliation (I'm old enough to still call it confession--after all, one does not enter the reconciliational for the sacrament, does one?) allows one to acknowledge the sin, repent and resolve to not continue sinning. In this way the person can be reinstated into the community. So both "your sins are forgiven you" and "go and sin no more" must be taken together, not one or the other.
The analogy is a person committing a felony, being convicted and receiving a punishment. It does not condemn a person to losing his soul to perdition. Just so, if a person within a church or other religious community acts so wrongly as to endanger that community, and does not relent, he must be removed for the good of the community as well as for that person's good as well. This is not done in a vacuum, but with much counselling and repeated calls for repentance.
The Roman Church is very reluctant to pull this string, although it is richly deserved in our "devoutly Catholic" president and his unstinting dedication to abortion, gender transition, and a host of other grave moral misdeeds. He is committing theological scandal as well, that is making it appear that these viewpoints are acceptable and leading others to sin in the same way. Do I want him, Pelosi, and pretty much any Catholic Dem or Rep who supports such deeds publicly excommunicated? Yes. Do I want them to go to Hell? Not my call, and I pray for all persons' reconciliation, but that is between each person and his creator.
Great topic for me to bloviate on for a column regarding humor. Sorry, had to get it off my chest. Sorry about the length.
This is an interesting piece. So many thoughts come to mind from reading it and the comments of my fellow sojourners. Paul is such a remarkable man and someone who defies being compartmentalized, pigeonholed though countless have tried through the ages. In addition to his miraculous experience with the risen Christ on the Road to Damascus, his time in Arabia, his known and theorized missionary journeys, there is his turning from a zeal to convict the early Christians to his zeal to walk out (literally) his commission to be a light (small l) of the Divine Light (Jesus) to the Gentiles. Perhaps that is why he was chosen, elected by God to fulfill this role.
He is also such a polarizing figure, within and without Christianity. Just days ago, I was witness to a dialog, at times contentious, regarding his epistles. It was a discussion over free will vs theistic determinism. One side argued that the Church would have been better off without them, something ludicrous to me. Their reasoning was that Paul wasn’t concise enough when he used the word, “election.” If he had been we wouldn’t have all these issues with the subject. The other side thought the expulsion of Paul’s letters and writings ridiculous regardless of his use and/or our misuse of this word. Peter agrees, although like me, he finds some of Paul difficult to understand, and that from a disciple of Christ. We are all in good company. What was revealed to Paul had been hidden throughout the centuries of the Old Testament, the Law and the Prophets. Is it any wonder we scratch our heads and throw up our hands at times. Still, I thank God and the early church fathers for Paul and his writings. To discount Paul at all is a sure way to an eventual discounting and unbelief in Jesus.
I believe that the first step down from Christianity to Atheism is not the revelation that Paul isn’t Jesus. It’s the worship of Paul as Jesus and the resulting disillusionment that comes from the worship, active or passive of anyone or anything other than Jesus. As many have so eloquently said, only Jesus saves. Paul would be the first to tell you that.
The conflict between free will and theistic determinism isn’t, I think, a problem with Paul but a misunderstanding of Paul. Christ is the elect and chosen one, before the foundation of the world, if you are in Christ by faith, then you are elect and chosen ( see Eph 1).
Not everyone agrees, but I do.
A progressive would use a handicap ramp in their cartoon depiction.
I would caution those thinking that an error in the direction of Gods love is somehow more acceptable. Why do we assume that we can dissect Gods love from Gods judgement? Sure Jesus and Paul had different missions but they operated through the same Spirit. I would rather not dichotomize Gods Agape for a cheapened sentimentality. Human sentimentality is like a charcoal fire, barely a little heat and even less light.
I’m with you on the side of merriment and love.
(And I bet your wife has had one wild ride:)
Jesus actually said the same as Paul, John 7:24: 24 “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.” The misuse of the “judge not” verse has lead to the corruption of the church and the culture, from the sparkle creed to the redefinition of marriage to the redefinition of a woman. I think though, there should be a difference in approach when dealing with individuals (more gentle) vs. cultural problems (“principalities and powers” as Paul would say).
Amen!
You make me laugh and I love that but Christians can only laugh because of the Resurrection and the only Way to that is the Cross and the Cross is no laughing matter. “Blessed are they who mourn”.
We need laughter but more than that right now we need lament.
I feel the comments were split between light and "humorous" and deep and philosophical. I felt like my brain was split in half. And then I read the title again - The Last Laugh and my heart opened up with a fond memory of my dad. I told this story in his eulogy. My dad always made people smile. He talked to everyone and was a great storyteller. On one of our last walks together, we went into a store and the man behind the counter looked miserable. We looked and each other and set a challenge to see who would be the first one to make him smile. I don't remember who won, but I won't forget how close we felt on our mission of sharing joy.
I grew up watching my Dad and his two brothers, of Irish descent, crack each other up. Red- faced laughter at every gathering crackled through the room. My wife Mary and I laugh together, often at each other, after 20 years together. We met at age 50. My first wife and I had it along with our siblings on both sides. She passed of ovarian cancer 22 years ago. Mary is Gods miracle for me and the bonus includes laughter. If we are indeed made in His image, God has got to love a good laugh.
If you have never heard the song "No Hard Feelings" by the Avett brothers, I strongly urge you to look it up on the YouTubes. It's a contender for the most poignant and meaningful modern song; it's about confronting one's own mortality and casting off the things of this world as we leave it---including "hard feelings." The lyrics wonder what we will find when we pass and include the delightful line (Will I) "run into a Savior true, and shake hands, laughing."
The original 1922 cartoon was far more accurate:
1. Man not made in God's image
2. No miracles
3. No virgin birth
4. No deity
5. No atonement
6. No resurrection
7. Agnosticism
8. Atheism
While I might quibble with one or two of these from the 20s (though theologically they are sound), at least it's not as broken as the redone image.
I really appreciate the lane of “defining the point of it all” being separated from the lane of “build a religion around that to preserve and propagate that.”
Andrew, I'm sorry, Supreme Ruler of the Multiverse, can you elaborate further on what that means about Paul not being Jesus? Is it a trend amongst certain denominations to deify Paul, like those islanders that saw Paul get bit by the venomous snake? This feels very evil and Satanic. And can you do an article about Pilate asking, "What is truth?"