Why didn't Jesus write anything to give to future generations?


#1

There are so many gospels. Not just the four we receive as canonical, but many others as well, such as the Gospel of the Hebrews and the Gospel of Thomas. Why, if God knew that there would be so many different gospels being passed off as truth, did he not have Christ, after his ressurrection, and before ascending into heaven, write an account of his own life – The Gospel according to Jesus Christ [himself]? It just seems odd to me that Christ wrote absolutely nothing, save, perhaps (if my memory serves me well), the letter he wrote to the King of Edessa, which is recorded by Eusebius. Are there any good reasons why Jesus chose NOT to write a gospel of himself? :slight_smile:


#2

We can only speculate why Jesus did or didn’t do a certain thing. What is clear is that he never meant for his people to be “a people of the book,” that is, depending only on written Sciptures for every possible contingecy that would come up within his Church until his return. That is why he established a Church that would be led by the Spirit into all truth. It is only when people reject the authority of the Church Christ establish that they are led to distort the Scriptures, as well as remove or create new ones to suit their tastes.


#3

I can think of a couple:

1.) What would we be more prone to believe: the writings of a man who “claimed” He was God? or The reports of several eye witnesses to the life of a man who “claimed” to be God, who were willing to dedicate there lives, without reward and at much cost to sharing that belief?

2.) If He had written a book Himself, rather that empowering His apostles and His Church, He would have “had to” address every issue that was every going to face man kind until his return which wouldn’t be a problem unto itself, but, because it was His directly written book it could superceed the authority of the Church He intended to establish and become the “sola scriptura” that he probably wished to avoid that has led to the sorce of so many conflicts in the church.

In any case, if he had written all of scripture Himself (with quill and parchment rather than through the Holy Spirit) we’d still have to intepret the writing. And we end up right back where we started.

Chuck

[quote=Madaglan]There are so many gospels. Not just the four we receive as canonical, but many others as well, such as the Gospel of the Hebrews and the Gospel of Thomas. Why, if God knew that there would be so many different gospels being passed off as truth, did he not have Christ, after his ressurrection, and before ascending into heaven, write an account of his own life – The Gospel according to Jesus Christ [himself]? It just seems odd to me that Christ wrote absolutely nothing, save, perhaps (if my memory serves me well), the letter he wrote to the King of Edessa, which is recorded by Eusebius. Are there any good reasons why Jesus chose NOT to write a gospel of himself? :slight_smile:
[/quote]


#4

A life lived in a certain way communicates meaning perfectly; trying to write a commentary on your own life is sort of profane.

If you have to call attention to the greatness of your life in a written commentary, explaining what you did, what you were thinking at the time, why it was important, or sacred, then your life couldn’t have been a life of greatness.

People who do this seem to do it for superficial reasons, such as to make money selling books, stroking their egos, or trying to acquire power.

I’m thinking for example of John Kerry and why he lost the election: he kept saying he was a war hero. Far from imparting information, he managed to alienate even those who were disposed to admire him.

Maybe this isn’t a direct answer, but hopefully it gets at the point in a tangential manner.


#5

[quote=Madaglan]There are so many gospels. Not just the four we receive as canonical, but many others as well, such as the Gospel of the Hebrews and the Gospel of Thomas. Why, if God knew that there would be so many different gospels being passed off as truth, did he not have Christ, after his ressurrection, and before ascending into heaven, write an account of his own life – The Gospel according to Jesus Christ [himself]? It just seems odd to me that Christ wrote absolutely nothing, save, perhaps (if my memory serves me well), the letter he wrote to the King of Edessa, which is recorded by Eusebius. Are there any good reasons why Jesus chose NOT to write a gospel of himself? :slight_smile:
[/quote]

Because He left us something better a living organism called - The Church. In which the Holy Spirit dwells and through which Jesus Himself speaks and in which He left us Himself in Sacramental form. What more do we need?


#6

[quote=Madaglan]It just seems odd to me that Christ wrote absolutely nothing, save, perhaps (if my memory serves me well), the letter he wrote to the King of Edessa, which is recorded by Eusebius. Are there any good reasons why Jesus chose NOT to write a gospel of himself? :slight_smile:
[/quote]

That letter Jesus supposedly “wrote” to the King of Edessa is apocryphal at best. There are no historical evidences that prove its authenticity, despite Eusebius’ comments.

Everything that is needed for the salvation of man, was already written down by His disciples, through the inspiration of God, or handed down through sacred oral tradition from apostle to disciple, in unbroken succession, through the centuries.

Christ perhaps wanted to give us an example of profound humility, which is why He, despite the many mighty acts He did, and the great words He spoke, never wrote down anything about Himself, unlike many latter-day authors who sometimes write down fanciful accounts of their lives and adventures to sell to the public.

Gerry :slight_smile:

Gerry :slight_smile:


#7

Yes, thank you for your comments. I think Jesus was very smart in giving the Church as a whole the authority to interpret the Scriptures.


#8

[quote=Madaglan]There are so many gospels. Not just the four we receive as canonical, but many others as well, such as the Gospel of the Hebrews and the Gospel of Thomas. Why, if God knew that there would be so many different gospels being passed off as truth, did he not have Christ, after his ressurrection, and before ascending into heaven, write an account of his own life – The Gospel according to Jesus Christ [himself]? It just seems odd to me that Christ wrote absolutely nothing, save, perhaps (if my memory serves me well), the letter he wrote to the King of Edessa, which is recorded by Eusebius. Are there any good reasons why Jesus chose NOT to write a gospel of himself? :slight_smile:
[/quote]

Even that letter is not His :slight_smile:

There is a book or fragments of one, called “the Sophia of Jesus Christ” - not authentic, though:

earlychristianwritings.com/sophia.html

There may be some genuine sayings of Jesus preserved outside the NT - St. Paul quotes a saying of Jesus in Acts 20.35 that is not found in our four gospels.

The thing about a gospel - about the Gospel, indeed - is that it is the testimony of others to Him. And it is not primarily a written thing, but something preached, announced. There is essentially only the one Gospel - the individual gospels, are different forms of it, in writing. ##


#9

:hmmm: …how about when he wrote in the sand… now that was a message we can all think about…


#10

I think the reason Jesus did not write the new testament was not to confuse just what the Word of God is. Since protestantism has been establshed the line have become blurry but the Word of God before protestants was primarily Jesus Christ who was the Way the Truth and the Life. The written word of God is the Bible and testifes who Jesus was. In Essence he is TRUTH and since TRUTH cannot be multiple in interpretation sola scriptura has reduced the impact of what the Bible and Jesus really are. THe Bible witnesses to the One TRUTH of JESUS CHRIST and his teachings through the church. Now you have many versions of who Jesus was and many interpretations of what really was the truth of scripture thus more opinion and less truth. One faith, one lord, one baptism the testifies scripture only the unity of the truth of the church can properly testify to the unity of the truth of the trinity.
The classic text of Matthew 16 tells us their is only one Truth of the many opinions of who Jesus really is.
It is no accident that Peter tells us who Jesus was then and He still tells us who Jesus is today. He alone has told us without error who Jesus was for 20 centuries. Even the Eastern Orthodox bishops of Constantinople have slipped in error through the ages. IF they can error protestantism have erred as well. Just look what the offshoots of protestantism has brought us the resurgance of Arianism in Oneness Pentacostals and Jehovah’s Witnesses and whole another gospel that Paul predicted that we now know as the Mormon Church. All this has brought our opinions of Jesus to a state of Confusion. Only in a society so unsure of truth could a book like the Davinci Code thrive and be taken seriously.
Like I said earlier the Bible says one baptims but not even a basic sacrament such as this can the protestants agree. Some say baptize in the name of Jesus othe rs only in the Trinue formula. Others pedo baptism is ok others only beleivers baptism. Some believe it regenerates, some believe it is only a smbol. Some insist only on dunking. SOme insist on immersion 3 times, others insiste on immersion only once. some bless the water, some don’t bless the water, some sprinke some don’t , some pour, some don’t. The variations and opinions go on and on on something that was settled very early church history we have had church splits over since the reformation. All this opinion denies truth this why Jesus provide a church to witness to the truth instead of giving us a book to fight over and argue over interpretation. IF the Bible never existed catholics would recognize a Word of God we did it before christian scripture was even penned. Protestants can make no such claim.


#11

Simple answer: the Word was already ‘written’, before the beginning of Time.


#12

[quote=Ahimsa]Simple answer: the Word was already ‘written’, before the beginning of Time.
[/quote]

Hi Ahimsa,
I hope you dont mind my tagging onto your post.

  1. Jesus knew what our bible would be and that it was sufficient. Look it is, because catholics believe in Jesus and so do many other people. It is not for us to judge, to point the finger at some denomination. Whoever does is looking for a good pruning. Me, the less pruning to me the better as long as I receive my glorious promise, which without doubt I will, through trusting in His abiltity to keep me safe.
  2. The Holy Spirit. He guides all on their individual paths after our belief has us as members of the kingdom of God.
  3. Christ wants us to listen, not be confused with reading.
    Christ be with you
    walk in love
    edwinGhttp://forums.catholic.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

#13

Sola Scriptura is one thing.

If Jesus had written a gospel or epistle, can you imagine how some people might only pay attention to what Jesus had written. Instead of looking at the rest of the OT and NT?

I like to read a red-letter version (Jesus’s words in red) sometimes, but I’ve known a few fairly new Christians who only look at what is written in red and ignore the rest.

Fact is, that all scripture is inspired (God breathed). So it is the same thing as if Jesus had written the Bible anyway.

There is much to be said that many books of the Bible are written from different human points of view (Moses, David, Solomon, Paul, Peter, John) and yet all these books are consistent. It shows that God was working at all these various times. And the books written before Christ contain pre-announcements of Christ. If Jesus had instead written the whole Bible only when He came, there would have not been those pre-announcements.


#14

[quote=Annunciata]:hmmm: …how about when he wrote in the sand… now that was a message we can all think about…
[/quote]

Whatever Jesus wrote in the sand was not recorded in scripture, although some had speculated that those were the names of the mistresses of the men who wanted to stone a woman for adultery.

Gerry :slight_smile:


#15

If God is the author of scripture and Jesus is likewise God, then it is perfectly logical to say that, in a sense, Jesus already wrote something** for** us and to us.

Gerry :slight_smile:


#16

Jesus demonstrated what we all should be doing–LIVING the gospel life. His life was a life of unconditional love given freely to all who would listen and respond. He didn’t NEED to write anything, his life spoke volumes.

St. Francis lived the same way, “Preach always, and when necessary, use words.”

St. Paul also warned that “In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures.” How prophetic."

Lindalou :wink:


#17

[quote=RobedWithLight]Whatever Jesus wrote in the sand was not recorded in scripture, although some had speculated that those were the names of the mistresses of the men who wanted to stone a woman for adultery.

Gerry :slight_smile:
[/quote]

Gerry,
Sorry, I was thinking of “He who is without sin, cast the first stone”, which was a ‘message’ for ALL…In the words of St Francis, “Always preach the ‘Good News’ of Jesus Christ and when necessary use words”… Annunciata:)
p.s. maybe it didn’t need recording?:twocents:


#18

[quote=Madaglan]Are there any good reasons why Jesus chose NOT to write a gospel of himself? :slight_smile:
[/quote]

Yes! He chose for His church to write them instead. In my humble opinion Jesus did not want to detract from the authority of the church by writing his own scripture. Instead, he selected twelve men and left it to them to either write the scripture, select writings for scripture, or allow future men to select writings.

The New Testament came from the church that Jesus established.


#19

maybe another reason why Jesus didn’t write anything is that most of the people in the world at the time of CHrist were illiterate. Writing wouldn’t reach many people - but a teaching, preaching church would.


#20

[quote=Minerva]maybe another reason why Jesus didn’t write anything is that most of the people in the world at the time of CHrist were illiterate. Writing wouldn’t reach many people - but a teaching, preaching church would.
[/quote]

Good answer…plus books were rare!


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.