Why was Jesus illiterate?

Mark
Matthew
Luke
John
Paul

and for those of you with Gnostic leanings:

Judas
Thomas
Mary Magdalene

But not Jesus. So why didn't Jesus write anything for the Bible? Why didn't he record his own preachings so we could settle certain questions about what is and is not canonical and which positions the church should take?

Was he illiterate? That seems like an awfully odd thing for an omnipotent deity.

So he was unwilling? Why? If Jesus was half the man the Christians claim he is, he should have seen the European religious wars coming from a mile away and anticipated how horrible things would be without him laying down the law.

So what excuse is there for Jesus not writing his own book? I do accept that it would have been difficult to recount his own death, except for the fact that the Bible claims he came back.

So what's the reasoning here?

Well I don't believe in Jesus and I doubt he ever exist. Just an identity someone created to control the people.
Here is a great site that discusses on Christianity. Might be useful.
www.messiahtruth.com...

www.messiahtruth.com...

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
So what's the reasoning here?

Your guess is as good as mine Brother.

With love,

Your Brother

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


Just because Jesus didnt write any books (that we know of) in the NT or otherwise dosent mean He was illiterate. In fact in Luke 4:14-20 it says that Jesus teaches and reads from the book of Isaiah. So therefore He was not illiterate if He could read from a book and then proceed to teach from it. In John 8:6-8 it says that Jesus wrote something mysterious on the ground. So in fact Jesus could read and write. Why He chose not to write a book Himself is a mystery. Also i am curious why do you wish that thor was real sort of? Again just curious.

[edit on 6-9-2010 by I Want To Believe]

[edit on 6-9-2010 by I Want To Believe]

Because Jesus workd through his prophets and was the ultimate of simplicity.

As a matter of fact we have something in our belief called grace and the holy ghost.

Those apostles went to communion on the first day of the week. They had God living in them, so it was actually God inspiring them working through them.

it's all grace.

After death God will show you what I mean.



I don't think God was illiterate. He made our tounges a reality and our hands and languages. lol.


peace.,

It would be interesting to find out that he actually did write something, yet, because it would counter the Super Mafia-Church, it was "deleted". If it were me, however, I would probably be like "Hey, did ya not just see me walk on water!? I ain't gotta write $!@#." Hahaha, no but seriously, I never thought about it before.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


I believe the answer to your question is that he was dead at the time of the writing of the books therefor unable to contribute, so it was left to others to record and interpret his teachings

And no i doubt he was illiterate

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


A person can write a book about how to love others so that others can read that book and learn from it. Or a person can teach others by example by showing love for others such as showing forgiveness, loving their enemies, being kind to others, being unsefish and having compassion.

Jesus is the living word of God. He didn't need to write a book 'about how to live and relate to God' because Jesus is the LOGOS - the word of God.
At the time of Jesus the Pharisees were already taking the Torah to extremes and focusing their lives on living to the letter of the Law while sinning as they totally disregarded their inner man. For example they washed their hands before eating and did all the ceremonious things but disregarded the inner things such as their outward pride, evil thoughts, greed, malice, deceit and arrogance. They were self righteous hypocrites who prided themselves in not having outward sins.

In my opinion Jesus would not have written a book because He was a humble servant who would have seen himself writing a book as a proudful thing to do.

I recommend some research on the word logos

reply to post by LAinhabitant


I do agree here, from what is in the gospel we do know Jesus was able to read and write and was an articulate speaker. My best guess is it would have to come down to its meant to be a test of faith all on its own. Besides I think it would be hard for people to read a book by someone with his message and not have it come across as him being self righteous, which is not his character. I mean even today which comes across as the least self-promoting an autobiography or a biography?

But yes while it would be easier to have the gospel of Jesus written by him for people to believe. It would also kind of defeat the purpose of just having faith.

The Bible asserts that Jesus was a Rabbi. Assuming that he did exist, and that he was a Rabbi, then he was not illiterate.

Originally posted by Hefficide

The Bible asserts that Jesus was a Rabbi. Assuming that he did exist, and that he was a Rabbi, then he was not illiterate.

Do you know what a Rabbi is and what a Rabbi does?
www.messiahtruth.com...
Jesus was never a Rabbi! I could care less how many people would of worshiped him.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul

Obviously not illiterate, because he was able to go into the synagogue and read aloud a passage from Isaiah.
He wasn't putting things in writing because his work was with the people immediately around him.
Writing only became necessary when people began transmitting his words on to others.
No great mystery involved- you're just creating an issue out of nothing here.

reply to post by Romantic_Rebel


Jesus was allowed to teach in the temple by the Pharisees. Can you find an example of anyone being allowed to do this who was not a Rabbi?

[edit on 9/6/10 by Hefficide]

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel

 

Jesus was allowed to teach in the temple by the Pharisees. Can you find an example of anyone being allowed to do this who was not a Rabbi?

[edit on 9/6/10 by Hefficide]

From the what the New Testament says; Yes they did allow him. But once he started changing the Torah around he was rejected.
www.messiahtruth.com...
So if you compare the OT and the NT you get two combustible text that do not support one another.

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel

From the what the New Testament says; Yes they did allow him. But once he started changing the Torah around he was rejected.
www.messiahtruth.com...
So if you compare the OT and the NT you get two combustible text that do not support one another.

Then we agree, until the Pharisees began the process that led to his crucifixion, he was a Rabbi who was welcome to teach in the temple.

And that means that Jesus was literate.

[edit on 9/6/10 by Hefficide]

Originally posted by Hefficide

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel

From the what the New Testament says; Yes they did allow him. But once he started changing the Torah around he was rejected.
www.messiahtruth.com...
So if you compare the OT and the NT you get two combustible text that do not support one another.

Then we agree, until the Pharisees began the process that led to his crucifixion, he was a Rabbi who was welcome to teach in the temple.

If you read my link Jesus started to start his own ministry counter to that of mainstream Judaism in his time. Like today there are numerous strict rules and Jesus acted against those rules.
www.messiahtruth.com...
www.messiahtruth.com...
www.messiahtruth.com...

reply to post by Romantic_Rebel


I fully understand that you contend that Jesus was apostate, or whatever the Hebrew version of apostate would be, and that he was stripped of his Rabbinical status.

Do we agree that he did teach in the second temple?

And if so, do we agree that he, by default, would have been literate as would have been required of anyone teaching in that temple?

reply to post by Hefficide


Well most likely. I believe he spoke Aramaic and probably Latin. Since Roman rule was in power. I doubt what we read about him today (if he did exist) was what he did in life.

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
reply to post by Hefficide

 

Well most likely. I believe he spoke Aramaic and probably Latin. Since Roman rule was in power. I doubt what we read about him today (if he did exist) was what he did in life.

That's all I was getting at. I think that if Jesus did exist there is nobody, outside of possibly a few documentarians in the bowels of the Vatican, who will ever know much about the historical figure, as opposed to the iconic and manufactured version we've been handed down in the NT.

reply to post by Hefficide


Well even though I'm an Atheist. I still enjoy trying to figure what did all these religious figures had to offer on the table. Jesus is like a chameleon in the religious world. I can write a book of Jesus being apart of numerous of religions. A lot of them are very different and similar. Like the Virgin Birth is in Islam. Yet it was more of profound message of Jesus Messiah concept since the people thought his mother commented adultery.