Jump to content

Why Didn't Jesus Write His Own Gospel?


Recommended Posts

This is really more of a rhetorical question, since I can think of a couple of answers myself, but the question occurred to me while I was reading the "Ouroboros" thread in The Lion's Den.

 

If Jesus had really wanted us to know what he thought, to understand what he was teaching, and to instruct us how to follow him, then why didn't he write his own gospel to set everything straight in his own words?

 

If he was truly God in the flesh of a human, then he knew full well how to read and write, so illiteracy is not an excuse; even the gospels portray Jesus as reading and writing at times. If his teaching was to be so important to humankind, why would God allow it to become so twisted and misinterpreted because it was only written in secondhand accounts decades later? I have seen a number of people question why there are no firsthand historical accounts of Jesus, but I have never seen anyone ask why he just didn't write a few things down himself, instead of leaving behind a jumbled mess of parables and vague mystic statements scattered throughout a number of texts by various authors. One would think that if such a thing existed, people would have made great effort to preserve and copy it. Surely God could see into the future and see this would be a problem someday, so it's odd that he neglected to write it all down at the time.

 

It strikes me as odd that I never thought to ask this question the entire time I was a Christian, but it seems like a very obvious thing to ask now.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

That is a very good question. Unfortunately, the answer is that the Lord works in mysterious ways. I'm afraid that's the best answer you'll get from believers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

There ya go... thinking logically. GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

 

I've wondered the same thing. I've also wondered why god doesn't just do The One Thing (whatever it may be) for each and every one of us that he must know will convince us since he's supposedly all-powerful omni-everything. Either he hates us, wants us for bbq, or doesn't exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Salvation Message is true, why didn't Jesus appear to every generation of every civilization? Chinese, Japanese, Aborigines, Native Americans, South Americans, Romans, Greeks, Babylonians etc...Instead, "he" appeared to a select few people in the Middle East some 2,000 years ago, didn't leave any writings except a few cryptic messages which probably weren't actually his. Sounds like quite the effective plan to me. Kim fucking Kardashian has a better PR plan than that.

 

Also, why didn't Jesus appear to early man? Apparently, they (and the dozens of other human-like species including Neanderthals) had to toil for a few hundred thousand years before hearing the "Good News"?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Jesus had written a gospel it would have wound up just like the "Gospel of the Hebrews". Once Rome was using Christianity to unify their empire anything that didn't support the official "right belief" got burned as heresy. If you didn't like it you were executed as a heretic, which oddly enough did not prove that the heresy you died for wasn't a lie. The disciples dying for their religion proved it wasn't a lie. I guess you needed the blessing of Rome for it to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

This is really more of a rhetorical question, since I can think of a couple of answers myself, but the question occurred to me while I was reading the "Ouroboros" thread in The Lion's Den.

 

If Jesus had really wanted us to know what he thought, to understand what he was teaching, and to instruct us how to follow him, then why didn't he write his own gospel to set everything straight in his own words?

 

If he was truly God in the flesh of a human, then he knew full well how to read and write, so illiteracy is not an excuse; even the gospels portray Jesus as reading and writing at times. If his teaching was to be so important to humankind, why would God allow it to become so twisted and misinterpreted because it was only written in secondhand accounts decades later? I have seen a number of people question why there are no firsthand historical accounts of Jesus, but I have never seen anyone ask why he just didn't write a few things down himself, instead of leaving behind a jumbled mess of parables and vague mystic statements scattered throughout a number of texts by various authors. One would think that if such a thing existed, people would have made great effort to preserve and copy it. Surely God could see into the future and see this would be a problem someday, so it's odd that he neglected to write it all down at the time.

 

It strikes me as odd that I never thought to ask this question the entire time I was a Christian, but it seems like a very obvious thing to ask now.

 

 

Trapped, this is such a good question,yellow.gif I'm saving this to my favorites. I would like to know how christians would answer this!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the most logical answer is in the bible if you believe it.

 

The original greek described Jesus as a takton, I believe. Which essentially meant a manual laborer. In those times, if he existed and the story to be believe, then he was most likely illiterate.

 

:shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, why didn't Jesus appear to early man? Apparently, they (and the dozens of other human-like species including Neanderthals) had to toil for a few hundred thousand years before hearing the "Good News"?

Any Christian will tell you that's just crazy talk, since the earth is only 6000 years old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any Christian will tell you that's just crazy talk, since the earth is only 6000 years old.

 

GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif I'll rephrase.

 

Jesus should have ridden his Holy Velociraptor mount to Cain's descendants in North America and spread the good news to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any Christian will tell you that's just crazy talk, since the earth is only 6000 years old.

 

GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif I'll rephrase.

 

Jesus should have ridden his Holy Velociraptor mount to Cain's descendants in North America and spread the good news to them.

Oh good, now you're talking some sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

Jesus did write his own Gospel, but then he discovered that writing in sand wasn't as permanent as he had expected...

Ouroboros...I am in hysterics!! lmao_99.gif Thanks for the laugh tonight friend!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is really more of a rhetorical question, since I can think of a couple of answers myself, but the question occurred to me while I was reading the "Ouroboros" thread in The Lion's Den.

 

If Jesus had really wanted us to know what he thought, to understand what he was teaching, and to instruct us how to follow him, then why didn't he write his own gospel to set everything straight in his own words?

There really wasn't any need for him to write a gospel because he expected to return within the lifetimes of his immediate associates. (Matt 16:27-28)

An oral tradition would serve the purpose because Jesus said he would return before all his disciples were dead. That would be within 30-50 years at the most.

That's why he gives them instructions to spread the word orally.

I can't think of any instance where Jesus told them to write anything.

Of course, Jesus never came back and the need to put the story in writing became more important to keep the cult going as the deadline came and went.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supposedly he did. It's a coptic text.The Gospel of the Savior or P. Berolinensis 22220 is dated to about 120-180 CE. Charles Hedrick and Paul Mirecki wrote book on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have also heard some apply The Sophia of Jesus Christ as a gospel but it simply seems to be a Gnostic tractate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard the excuse before that god is not in the book writing business. But one must retort that he is in fact in the tablet writing business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
. But one must retort that he is in fact in the tablet writing business.

 

And now that iPads and other tablet computers are all the rage, god has no excuse in not sending each and every one of us our very own personal email or facebook message.. He's god, so he knows our addys and usernames. GONZ9729CustomImage1539775.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have also heard some apply The Sophia of Jesus Christ as a gospel but it simply seems to be a Gnostic tractate.

 

Some 150 to 200 years before Saul of Tarsus got on the Jesus ban wagon there was a real teacher who had real disciples. His name was Jesus and he wrote the book Sirach. Personally I think the Christ story was based on several men who's memory was blended together into a myth. Clearly "Jesus the Rabbi" was a known historical name before Saul of Tarsus was born, that is before the supposed Jesus of the Bible was born so I doubt it's a coincidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have also heard some apply The Sophia of Jesus Christ as a gospel but it simply seems to be a Gnostic tractate.

 

Some 150 to 200 years before Saul of Tarsus got on the Jesus ban wagon there was a real teacher who had real disciples. His name was Jesus and he wrote the book Sirach. Personally I think the Christ story was based on several men who's memory was blended together into a myth. Clearly "Jesus the Rabbi" was a known historical name before Saul of Tarsus was born, that is before the supposed Jesus of the Bible was born so I doubt it's a coincidence.

 

I have heard this before. It would be somewhat weird if you could link Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) to a Jesus. Good insight!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supposedly he did. It's a coptic text.The Gospel of the Savior or P. Berolinensis 22220 is dated to about 120-180 CE. Charles Hedrick and Paul Mirecki wrote book on it.

 

P.Berolinensis 22220

 

Or/

 

The Gospel of the Savior

 

 

And yet these aren't fragments written by Jesus. They're like the other texts that have been found. Gospel of Thomas, Gnostic Gospels, that speak about Jesus. They're not written by Jesus.

 

And I too have wondered why a man who wanted to teach people a new way of seeing god, wouldn't have insured his message be spread in his own words, by writing his message with his own hand. So that other generations later on would have access to the good news.

 

And also about god showing himself in ways his omniscience would know would convince each person, so that we'd have a world of believers in fact. Not a near majority holding hope in faith.

Then again, Christians would say god does just that every day. We're just not ready to receive or admit the proof that's right in front of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supposedly he did. It's a coptic text.The Gospel of the Savior or P. Berolinensis 22220 is dated to about 120-180 CE. Charles Hedrick and Paul Mirecki wrote book on it.

 

P.Berolinensis 22220

 

Or/

 

The Gospel of the Savior

 

 

And yet these aren't fragments written by Jesus. They're like the other texts that have been found. Gospel of Thomas, Gnostic Gospels, that speak about Jesus. They're not written by Jesus.

 

And I too have wondered why a man who wanted to teach people a new way of seeing god, wouldn't have insured his message be spread in his own words, by writing his message with his own hand. So that other generations later on would have access to the good news.

 

And also about god showing himself in ways his omniscience would know would convince each person, so that we'd have a world of believers in fact. Not a near majority holding hope in faith.

Then again, Christians would say god does just that every day. We're just not ready to receive or admit the proof that's right in front of us.

 

Agreed. It is just a Gnostic writing.

 

Concerning the writing of a gospel and preserving thought...maybe Jesus bought into the Proto-Orthodox Christian endorsed idea of oral tradition.

 

Game of telephone anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand, the NT writers didn't know they were writing what would become the canonical scriptures. Look at the dates the books were written in relationship to the time of Jesus' death.

 

Apparently those of us who like to read the Bible are somewhat nosey since we like to read others' mail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rabbi's rarely wrote down their thoughts back then, but disciples often did. We don't have anything written down by Socrates, either. All your objection does is discredit a certain kind of fundamentalist Christian mindset, there are still other Christian points of view that would withstand this kind of reasoning (some think that Jesus didn't come into the world to give instructions so much as serve as an example or accomplish a victory or work). Framing Christianity as primarily propositional truth is the attitude of the fundamentalist or conservative evgangelical, but there's plenty of more savy Christians that see the narrative dimensions to their faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.