Why do we have no writings from Jesus?

[Jagella]

I think almost all of us can agree that the writer of the Epistle to the Romans, Paul, existed. Obviously a person needs to exist to write an epistle. So if we understand "Paul" to be the person who wrote Romans, then Paul's historicity is assured. (There are historical problems regarding the details of Paul's life, but that's another issue.)

Unfortunately, we have no such luxury with Jesus because we have nothing he may have written. Real-Jesus apologists explain away this lack of evidence telling us that Jesus, like many other people, could have existed without writing anything. And neither should we expect Jesus to have written anything because he was an illiterate country bumpkin, after all. Besides, Jesus believed the world would soon end, so who needs anything written down for posterity?

I disagree with this reasoning. For starters, explaining why we have nothing written by Jesus isn't evidence. It's just an attempted explanation for why we have no such evidence.

Another objection I might raise is that the Jesus as he is portrayed in the gospel tale is no dummy. He was very erudite and a first-class communicator. He could have been literate and able to write, and if he was illiterate, then he could have recruited a literate disciple to write down what he said.

Finally, Jesus believing that the world would end soon is not necessarily a good reason for his not having anything written down. It wouldn't take that long to commit his ideas to written form. And soon after the time Jesus presumably lived, Paul got busy writing about Jesus. A few decades later more Christians wrote of Jesus in the many gospels. So if these Christians saw the necessity for writing about Jesus even though they believed the apocalypse was near, then it's a mystery that Jesus didn't bother to commit anything to writing.

Question for Debate: Why do we have no writings from Jesus?

[Tcg]

You (and some others) also seem to be under the mistaken impression that I am trying to convince you that Christ speaks (to me).

How could this be a "mistaken impression" when in post 15 you made the following claim?

I know this is true -that He is alive and that He speaks- from hearing His voice, and from speaking with Him.

If you weren't trying to convince people that Christ speaks to you, then what was the purpose of claiming you hear his voice?




Tcg

[tam]

Peace to you,

Didn't Jesus realize that the New Testament would be written?

Sure but if this is something you could accept, then why would you have an issue with Him never having written something Himself?

The obvious answer to your question is that Jesus should have realized that we would prefer to read something directly from him rather than some other person who might mistakenly or deliberately misquote him. Moreover, anything written by Jesus would be very good evidence that he existed.

To the bold:

IF it could be proven to you that He wrote it, you mean. Right? Because it is a sure bet that even if He had penned something Himself, there would be people calling that authorship claim into question. And even if it could somehow be proven that He wrote it Himself, there would be people making the exact same claims as they make now about what is written (and about what He said in what is written): such as calling it fiction (pious or otherwise).





To the rest:

I (me personally) would prefer to hear straight from Him. This is more personal, this is more powerful, and in hearing the voice of the person speaking to you, you are able to hear the love from that person, and you get the proper emphasis and tone. Plus, if you do not understand something, you can ask questions and learn more.


But since you say that you prefer to read something from Him (and I assume you are willing to accept a scribe/secretary recording His words at His direction), then we have at least one occasion of that from the NT:

Revelation: John received the revelation from Christ and he was specifically told to write down what he heard, and also what he saw (now, what he saw is going to be described in his own words). But the seven letters to the seven congregations... those are Christ speaking, and John is merely writing down the direct words that Christ has told him to write.




Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 31 by Tcg]

It is explained in the entire quote (and not just a section) which I bolded below:

You (and some others) also seem to be under the mistaken impression that I am trying to convince you that Christ speaks (to me). When I am merely explaining to you how/why I could never accept your 'myth or dead' premise.

Peace again to you.

[tam]

[Replying to post 32 by tam]

Oh, and to add a second point to the bold:

Moreover, anything written by Jesus would be very good evidence that he existed. - Jagella

We already have very good evidence that Christ existed. Realworldjack outlined some of it earlier in this thread (and he makes a good argument as well). If I am not mistaken, most scholars agree that the man did exist, so there is obviously already compelling evidence that He did indeed exist.


Peace again to you.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 32 by tam]

But since you say that you prefer to read something from Him (and I assume you are willing to accept a scribe/secretary recording His words at His direction), then we have at least one occasion of that from the NT:

Revelation: John received the revelation from Christ and he was specifically told to write down what he heard,

Are you trying to say Revelations is a book dictated by Christ, and presenting that as a fait accompli, as if you don't have to actually substantiate that claim?

those are Christ speaking, and John is merely writing down the direct words that Christ has told him to write.

Citation needed...geez...do you know what the concept is? To substantiate, justify claims made?
Or are you here merely to repeat over and over "I hear Christ" "Christ told me this" "Christ says this"?

[tam]

[Replying to post 35 by rikuoamero]

Citation needed...geez...do you know what the concept is? To substantiate, justify claims made?

I apologize, here you go.

Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. Rev 1:19


To the angel of the church in Ephesus write... Rev 2:1

All seven letters begin like this (with the direction to write), and then each letter is written in first person (that person being Christ, which we can see from the following examples that identify the words as being written in first person and that identify Him as the speaker):



These are the words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand and walks among the seven golden lampstands. I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false. You have persevered and have endured hardships for my name, and have not grown weary. Rev 2:1-3


These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again. Rev 2:8 (see also, 2:12, 18, 3:1, 7, 11, 14, for the identity of the one whose words are being recorded)



Peace again to you.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 36 by tam]
Jesus indicated he was coming "soon" and that the book described things that "must soon take place" Was he still out of the loop even in heaven?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 36 by tam]

I apologize, here you go.

Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. Rev 1:19


To the angel of the church in Ephesus write... Rev 2:1

All seven letters begin like this (with the direction to write), and then each letter is written in first person (that person being Christ, which we can see from the following examples that identify the words as being written in first person and that identify Him as the speaker):

This isn't substantiation. This is quotation. It seems I was right. You are unfamiliar with the concept of actually showing what it is you say to be true. When I say substantiation, I mean I need more than the text itself, the author claiming he was told by a ghost or a vision to write down some poetic words. Anyone can do that. Anyone can write down on a piece of paper that the ghost of Jesus, or Elvis or aliens or whatever told them to write the words. I can write down "The ghost of Christmas Past told me to write these words..." but that in and of itself is not evidence that I was in communication with the ghost of Christmas Past!

How is it you have been on this site for so long and yet are so unfamiliar with the concept of showing your work?

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 36 by tam]

I apologize, here you go.

Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. Rev 1:19


To the angel of the church in Ephesus write... Rev 2:1

All seven letters begin like this (with the direction to write), and then each letter is written in first person (that person being Christ, which we can see from the following examples that identify the words as being written in first person and that identify Him as the speaker):

This isn't substantiation. This is quotation.

Did you not ask for a citation, Rikuamero?

a : an act of quoting
especially: the citing of a previously settled case at law

b : excerpt, quotation
His homily included several biblical citations.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/citation

It seems I was right. You are unfamiliar with the concept of actually showing what it is you say to be true. When I say substantiation, I mean I need more than the text itself, the author claiming he was told by a ghost or a vision to write down some poetic words. Anyone can do that. Anyone can write down on a piece of paper that the ghost of Jesus, or Elvis or aliens or whatever told them to write the words. I can write down "The ghost of Christmas Past told me to write these words..." but that in and of itself is not evidence that I was in communication with the ghost of Christmas Past!

It was not presented as evidence for those things. In fact, you are proving my point to Jagella above (about people not accepting something just because it is claimed to have been written by Christ).


But Jagella is the one who is saying that he would prefer something written by Christ (and I think I recall earlier that he also said that he would accept something if Christ directed someone to write down his words, such as a scribe). So this example was for him.



Peace again to you.

[Jagella]

To the bold:

IF it could be proven to you that He wrote it, you mean. Right?

Well, of course I would want good reason to believe that the document was actually written by Jesus and not a forgery. Is that too much to ask Christ for?

Because it is a sure bet that even if He had penned something Himself, there would be people calling that authorship claim into question. And even if it could somehow be proven that He wrote it Himself, there would be people making the exact same claims as they make now about what is written (and about what He said in what is written): such as calling it fiction (pious or otherwise).

I know the scrutiny can get rough, but that's the way people nowadays judge documents written two thousand years ago by a religious sect in a primitive and superstitious culture. If Christians had acted with integrity throughout their history rather than forging many documents, then maybe it would be easier to convince people today that their sacred writings contain actual history.

I (me personally) would prefer to hear straight from Him. This is more personal, this is more powerful, and in hearing the voice of the person speaking to you, you are able to hear the love from that person, and you get the proper emphasis and tone. Plus, if you do not understand something, you can ask questions and learn more.

Do you post in this forum what Christ personally reveals to you? It seems a little odd to me that Christ would communicate in such a way that he is indistinguishable from a person who might be making it all up.

But since you say that you prefer to read something from Him (and I assume you are willing to accept a scribe/secretary recording His words at His direction), then we have at least one occasion of that from the NT:

Revelation: John received the revelation from Christ and he was specifically told to write down what he heard, and also what he saw (now, what he saw is going to be described in his own words). But the seven letters to the seven congregations... those are Christ speaking, and John is merely writing down the direct words that Christ has told him to write.

That's an interesting example, but I was hoping for a document dictated to a disciple of Jesus by Jesus while Jesus was conducting his ministry.