Is sarcasm sin?

(I originally wrote this in response to an email my wife got about content on a different site, and it dealt specifically with the content of that email.  Since then, my wife has asked that I think about removing the post, since she and the author have had a chance to talk through things productively.  Since I think the general question is still a valid one that many people struggle with, I've recast what I wrote to address that, rather than the initial impetus for my response.)

Sarcasm is a communication tool that tends to produce strong reactions in people when it's done really well or really poorly.  When the speaker is a Christian, the reaction from other believers is often especially harsh.  I frequently get the impression that even if sarcasm isn't sinful, one can't use it without sinning, so the Christian should avoid it. (This sort of rationale should sound very familiar to anyone familiar with pietism.)

I've heard several arguments against the Christian using sarcasm, but they fall into two categories:

1) Sarcasm always tears down and mocks other people

The follow-up, of course, is that behaving in such a fashion is prohibited to believers. This is an easy facile argument; even the dictionary definition of sarcasm emphasizes its mocking quality.

It's true that sarcasm has a cutting edge, and that can be wielded viciously by an expert. But all types of humor are to some extent personality- or culture-based. Some families express their bond through mutual teasing, for example; this is not inherently wrong. That doesn't answer the question of whether it's a proper tool for a Christian in discussing ideas, but the objection regarding sarcasm is rarely raised with that qualification.

I also deny that mockery is always wrong, especially when discussing ideas. There are times when it might be the only way to pierce a shell of complacent self-righteousness; Jesus often did that with the Pharisees (it's pretty obvious in Mt 23:23, but I think it's present in Lk 18:9-14 as well).

2) Sarcasm inflames and divides people

The idea here is that since sarcasm offends and encourages response in kind, it reduces the opportunity to spread the gospel.

I'll grant that we should allow the gospel to be the offense, and not our proclamation style; I'm not trying to make the case that the sarcasm hammer is meant for every rhetorical nail. But...

Sometimes, you need a hammer.

A fire alarm going off in a house of sleeping people may produce strong emotions (it had better produce a reaction!), but it does not inflame the house; it warns of that which is inflaming it.

Yelling "Hey, idiot! Stop running toward the edge of the cliff! What are you, brain-dead?" is mocking only if there isn't a cliff.

We need to be careful about critiquing others for being divisive or otherwise having unloving (and by inference un-Christian) tones. I admit that I really enjoy wordplay, and the right biting comment can be a thing of beauty to me. Yet, as someone who tends more to appeasement than conflict, I've struggled with too-quickly judging someone in my family on this issue; in the past, I've often felt she went too quickly or too often to the long knives when talking about Christian discernment. It's been a learning process for me, and we still disagree on this regularly, but I'm trying hard to evaluate the situation now, rather than immediately judging her motives when speaking.

I bring two big questions into play when thinking about such things:

1. What does speaking the truth in love mean, and what does it look like?
2. How does the "weaker brother" concept come into play when talking about tone, sarcasm, etc.?

That first question is huge, and I'm convinced I'll be trying to answer it for the rest of my life. For now,  I'll just say that I think people fall into two extremes: those who sacrifice truth for the sake of seeming loving, and those who use truth as an excuse to say anything, no matter how hurtful. You'll have to decide which camp you're in (better yet, ask your spouse), but both miss the mark. The problem is that people in one group are sure people in the other group are missing it worse!

The "weaker brother" idea crops up a lot in pietistic circles, and it can become a useful stick to beat others into doing whatever the "weaker" person wants about dress, hair length, alcohol, or whatever. Typically, the argument goes, "If you do X, then you'll be causing me to sin against my conscience by my doing X." That is, X is not sinful per se, but for whatever reason, the weaker brother's conscience considers it to be so, and as Luther said, it's never wise to go against one's conscience. This is a valid consideration that Christians need to keep in mind.

However, in this critique about tone, the argument shifts a bit! Although people may still say the same thing, what they really seem to mean is:

If I said what you just said, then I know I'd be sinning, so you must be sinning, too.

That's an abuse of the concept of the weaker brother, because it labels something as universally sinful because of one's reaction to it, not because of a Scriptural statement.

We need to respect the freedom of conscience in other believers when it comes to non-essentials of the faith and even more so regarding adiaphora. I'm arguing that speaking tone and use of sarcasm and parody fall into that category far more often than many of us are willing to admit.