Why didn't Jesus write anything? Or did he?

[trashtalkr]

Plato didn't pen anything himself either. Who cares. We still have their words from reliable sources

I'm still caught up on this.

Can you give me any number of criteria for "reliable sources" that the bible follows?

EDIT: I just reread and saw the "who cares" part..... First off, clearly the postmaker cares, because he's asking about it. Secondly...I think A LOT of people care about whether or not Jesus wrote anything, or why he did or didn't. Some people aren't willing to shrug it off and go with whatever they hear in Sunday school. Not that I'm trying to peg you as that type of person...but I feel like you're treating his perspective on the issue with no respect....and that seems silly when we're talking about religious doctrine. Essentially all we have are opinions.

Wow LG (yes...I do know it's you), you just come right back in and slam me for what I say. By who cares, I'm saying we still have the words from Jesus through those reliable sources. Also, that was a very oral tradition, so just because Jesus didn't write anything himself, doesn't mean we can't trust what's said about him.

Reliability of the Bible? First of all, a lot of the NT was written by eye witnesses. Second, we have thousands of biblical manuscripts. That's more than we have for Homer's Illiad (8) and even Shakespeare (300s). We are more sure what Jesus said than we are about Shakespeare

[Drew]

Lol I've made like 40 posts so far and only one has even been in a thread you're in. I'm not here to carry on or start some ish...and I'm not even sure where I slammed you? I just expressed that I didn't think it was appropriate for you to just dismiss the topic or his question so easily. This topic interests me, so a 10 word response saying "who cares" felt counterproductive.

[Aemeth]

TT, I'm not taking sides bc I don't do that, but to say LG was slamming you is hardly the case...

Oral tradition, over centuries, is still going to break down some. And thousands of manuscripts might actually hurt the argument for reliability, especially when the manuscripts differ. I'm not saying throw away your Bible, I'm saying that it is most likely silly to go word-for-word rather than use your God-given intellect and experiences and prayer/meditation to figure out NT concepts.

Anyway, this is not a discussion of textual criticism. I want to know why you all think Jeshua didn't write anything. TT, defending the fact that he didn't right away somehow implies it is a weakness of Christianity, that Christ didn't write anything. I think it is one of Xianity's greatest strengths!

[deepsepia]

Plato didn't pen anything himself either. Who cares. We still have their words from reliable sources

Reliable sources? From two thousand years ago? We have no real idea whether Plato said what he's said to have said. There's an internal consistency to the thought that's reported to have been his, and the ideas are impressive.

But that doesn't prove that he said them, or even that he existed.

As to Jesus, he's far murkier than Plato, and his reported comments aren't even consistent with themselves. Its worth noting that there's essentially zero third party (eg non-Christian) description of him in either Roman or Jewish sources (a purported description in Josephus is regarded as the later work of Christians).

Proof for the idea that Jesus even existed is no more solid than Muslim's belief that Mohammed flew to jerusalem on his magic horse.

[Aemeth]

^Historical Jesus or Biblical Jesus?

[raum]

um, the stories of jesus speak of how absolutely well educated he was, rabbin, and capable of debating and winning any point of the torah or tanakh. he was formally educated in religious and secular ways - as all students in the synagogues. i think the idea of him not writing his own words was portrayed more as he was not preaching to literate people, and himself shunned wordly things after his own baptism.

as far as those stories, most of them are NOT by aspostles, they are by followers of paul (saul of tarsus) who commissioned the best he could. Only Matthew is the exception - and take that to the bank. Paul believed that this was the true gospel of matthew, who was friend and disciple to jesus.

Note, if that is true, matthew is decidely light on the topics of immaculate conception, ressurections, or even a geat deal of preachy inspirational picnics.

[AYHJA]

There he is...On cue... :D Hey there old friend...

[Dietrich]

Why didn't Jesus write anything? He was too busy to write anything -- traveling throughout Judea, talking face-to-face with people, spreading "the good news of the kingdom". His purpose, his raison d'etre, was to get the word out, and that's what he did pretty much all the time until he got executed. (And no, I don't mean "crucified". The Romans didn't uses crosses; they use simple long stakes driven into the ground. Besides, why would they bother to attach a crosspiece when a plain ol' plank or tree trunk would do?)

People think faith means believing something regardless of supporting evidence or a lack thereof. The Bible defines faith rather differently: "Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld." (Hebrews 11:1) Having faith doesn't mean being gullible or credulous. It means being confident in something you have a basis for being confident in. And no, I'm not just talking about the religious sort of faith. Think about it: You have faith in your best friend. Why? Because he has consistently and repeatedly proven that you can count on him. (Unless, of course, your best friend happens to be someone who is kinda flaky or whatever.)

Just my two bits (two cents adjusted for inflation).

[AYHJA]

See..? I know an AF'er when I see one... :D

[Skinny Bastard]

as far as I know, the Flying Spaghetti Monster did not write anything either... but that doesn't shake our faith in him...



OK - on a serious note... I have to ask... does it matter if he wrote or not? Does it change your personal relationship with God? Faith is just a conduit - find it where and in what you can.