Were the apostles illiterate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mimi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It seems to me that the Jews during the time of Our Lord and the apostles, observant Jews saw to it that their male children could read so they would be able to read the sacred scriptures.

Also; did they have the bar mitzvah then? A young man would be required to read from the Torah for this ceremony, right?

This query is prompted from a book I browsed while at the library today (Atheist answers to Christian Fundamentalists or something close to that). The book throws out assertions, then does not, IMO, give enough information to back up the assertions.

One was that “we know that Jesus didn’t exist because none of the writers during the time he lived mention him”, and then goes on to list Josephus, Justin Martyr and some others. But they lived decades after Jesus lived, so they don’t count. Guess they forgot about John (who wrote Revelation). It’s shoddy writing like this that can pull those weak in faith and in knowledge of their religion away from really digging into those important issues. Well, unless they are like me!

Thanks in advance for all answers. I would particularly appreciate titles of books or reliable internet sites for more info.

Mimi
  1. I think the argument against the idea that ALL apostles are illiterate (or could not write) has been already proven wrong in the previous answers.
  2. The argument proposing that the early disciples (and Apostles) does not need to write what was already there (the OT) has also been already made.
  3. The NT was written after the Apostles because it is an account made by the next generation(s) about them. The Apostles themselves did not see that writing their ideas would impact greatly to the Jews, given the culture (Laws will be planted in the hearts of the People of God).
I have another proposal that I believe most atheist ignore about their biased history. The NT is recorded within at most two generations stating the facts about Jesus and his works. On the other hand, many Greek philosophers are believed to have existed based only on the writing of others more than 2 generations later. I think one should be able to come up with a list of Greek philosophers and historical figures and their respective “deeds” according to an account that was (finally) written several generations later (even later than those with NT).
 
  1. I think the argument against the idea that ALL apostles are illiterate (or could not write) has been already proven wrong in the previous answers.
  2. The argument proposing that the early disciples (and Apostles) does not need to write what was already there (the OT) has also been already made.
  3. The NT was written after the Apostles because it is an account made by the next generation(s) about them. The Apostles themselves did not see that writing their ideas would impact greatly to the Jews, given the culture (Laws will be planted in the hearts of the People of God).
I have another proposal that I believe most atheist ignore about their biased history. The NT is recorded within at most two generations stating the facts about Jesus and his works. On the other hand, many Greek philosophers are believed to have existed based only on the writing of others more than 2 generations later. I think one should be able to come up with a list of Greek philosophers and historical figures and their respective “deeds” according to an account that was (finally) written several generations later (even later than those with NT).
The Newt Testament was written BY the apostles. This can be gathered from bith internal and external evidence.
 
What do we mean by il/literate?
Very late into English history reading and writing were considered and taught as separate skills so the percentage who could read and write was a fraction of those who could only read.

Did this apply in the 1st century Middle East? I’d assume so due to frequent mention of “scribes” and amanuenses – writing specialists. But probably all male Jews could at least read Hebrew for use in synagogue.
Paul, Matthew & Luke were perhaps the most literate in Greek?

As for Peter, et al. being fisherman I’ve read that wood being so scarce in Palestine it would have required a huge investment to purchase a boat. Interesting if true & I wonder if this means they were “wealthy” by current standards or had a hell of a mortgage to meet.

I’d appreciate more info on any of these points.
 
What is totally ignored and left out of the equation is what God can do and did[just imagine speaking languages unknown to the Apostles].Many Catholics and other Christians just gloss over the fact that God is really and truly and in more ways than we can imagine the author of Scriptures and not just the NT and the Apostles but the OT also especially Genesis when nobody was there - the answer for those who can grasp it is to be found in the NT and given by Jesus,so please go to Jn.7:15 - twinc
 
Pliny’s Epistle To Trajan About 112 CE
Sir,

It is my constant method to apply myself to you for the resolution of all my doubts; for who can better govern my dilatory way of proceeding or instruct my ignorance? I have never been present at the examination of the Christians [by others], on which account I am unacquainted with what uses to be inquired into, and what, and how far they used to be punished; nor are my doubts small, whether there be not a distinction to be made between the ages [of the accused]? and whether tender youth ought to have the same punishment with strong men? Whether there be not room for pardon upon repentance?" or whether it may not be an advantage to one that had been a Christian, that he has forsaken Christianity? Whether the bare name, without any crimes besides, or the crimes adhering to that name, be to be punished? In the meantime, I have taken this course about those who have been brought before me as Christians. I asked them whether they were Christians or not? If they confessed that they were Christians, I asked them again, and a third time, intermixing threatenings with the questions. If they persevered in their confession, I ordered them to be executed; for I did not doubt but, let their confession be of any sort whatsoever, this positiveness and inflexible obstinacy deserved to be punished. There have been some of this mad sect whom I took notice of in particular as Roman citizens, that they might be sent to that city. After some time, as is usual in such examinations, the crime spread itself and many more cases came before me. A libel was sent to me, though without an author, containing many names [of persons accused]. These denied that they were Christians now, or ever had been. They called upon the gods, and supplicated to your image, which I caused to be brought to me for that purpose, with frankincense and wine; they also cursed Christ; none of which things, it is said, can any of those that are ready Christians be compelled to do; so I thought fit to let them go. Others of them that were named in the libel, said they were Christians, but presently denied it again; that indeed they had been Christians, but had ceased to be so, some three years, some many more; and one there was that said he had not been so these twenty years. All these worshipped your image, and the images of our gods; these also cursed Christ. However, they assured me that the main of their fault, or of their mistake was this:-That they were wont, on a stated day, to meet together before it was light, and to sing a hymn to Christ, as to a god, alternately; and to oblige themselves by a sacrament [or oath], not to do anything that was ill: but that they would commit no theft, or pilfering, or adultery; that they would not break their promises, or deny what was deposited with them, when it was required back again; after which it was their custom to depart, and to meet again at a common but innocent meal, which they had left off upon that edict which I published at your command, and wherein I had forbidden any such conventicles. These examinations made me think it necessary to inquire by torments what the truth was; which I did of two servant maids, who were called Deaconesses: but still I discovered no more than that they were addicted to a bad and to an extravagant superstition. Hereupon I have put off any further examinations, and have recourse to you, for the affair seems to be well worth consultation, especially on account of the number of those that are in danger; for there are many of every age, of every rank, and of both sexes, who are now and hereafter likely to be called to account, and to be in danger; for this superstition is spread like a contagion, not only into cities and towns, but into country villages also, which yet there is reason to hope may be stopped and corrected. To be sure, the temples, which were almost forsaken, begin already to be frequented; and the holy solemnities, which were long intermitted, begin to be revived. The sacrifices begin to sell well everywhere, of which very few purchasers had of late appeared; whereby it is easy to suppose how great a multitude of men may be amended, if place for repentance be admitted.

TRAJAN’S EPISTLE TO PLINY
My Pliny,

You have taken the method which you ought in examining the causes of those that had been accused as Christians, for indeed no certain and general form of judging can be ordained in this case. These people are not to be sought for; but if they be accused and convicted, they are to be punished; but with this caution, that he who denies himself to be a Christian, and makes it plain that he is not so by supplicating to our gods, although he had been so formerly, may be allowed pardon, upon his repentance. As for libels sent without an author, they ought to have no place in any accusation whatsoever, for that would be a thing of very ill example, and not agreeable to my reign.

pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/maps/primary/pliny.html
 
The Apostles came from all walks of life, and Paul was an Apostle and he was also a Genius and attended a rabbinic academy. Be Jesus didn’t.

They were unlearned in the rabbinic teaching system. Not in the word of God.
 
They were literate. Simon, Andrew, James, and John were fishermen in Galilee, and as a result were probably fairly wealthy. Matthew (also called Levi) was a tax collector, and therefore educated and in the elite. Jesus himself was raised in the home of a carpenter, yet he could read. My guess is that you are underestimating the literacy rate among Jewish males in 1st century Palestine.
Literacy at the time of Christ

1% in the small towns
3% for the total population

faculty.biu.ac.il/~barilm/illitera.html
 
And therefore the Apostes MUST have been illiterate, and then wrote?
They were literate. Simon, Andrew, James, and John were fishermen in Galilee, and as a result were probably fairly wealthy. Matthew (also called Levi) was a tax collector, and therefore educated and in the elite. Jesus himself was raised in the home of a carpenter, yet he could read. My guess is that you are underestimating the literacy rate among Jewish males in 1st century Palestine.
My post was in reply to this portion of the above quote:

"My guess is that you are underestimating the literacy rate among Jewish males in 1st century Palestine."

Peace, Jim Dandy
 
And therefore the Apostes MUST have been illiterate, and then wrote?
That depends on what we mean by “writing”. Are we to take “writing” as ‘penning the letters with their own hands’ or ‘dictating their words to someone else, who then wrote it for them’?
 
That depends on what we mean by “writing”. Are we to take “writing” as ‘penning the letters with their own hands’ or ‘dictating their words to someone else, who then wrote it for them’?
The Apostles were not stupid, and I think tht there is internal evidence that those to whom the Gospels are attributed were wealthy and therefore educated. There is no reason to believe that thhey did not write the gospels themselves.
 
The Apostles were not stupid, and I think tht there is internal evidence that those to whom the Gospels are attributed were wealthy and therefore educated. There is no reason to believe that thhey did not write the gospels themselves.
Obviously yea!
So I’m assuming that by ‘writing’ you mean that they wrote it themselves without amanuenses, yes?
 
instead of surmising and presuming see Acts 4:13 and Jn.7:15 and perhaps we may ask can God and/or the Holy Ghost read and write - see Ex.31:18 and Deut.9:10 and Jn.9:6 - twinc
 
Obviously yea!
So I’m assuming that by ‘writing’ you mean that they wrote it themselves without amanuenses, yes?
Absolutely. Some NT writings were possibly done with amanuensis, (for example, Hebrews is Pauline in character but probably not written by his hand), but the Gospels and Acts are not among those.
 
instead of surmising and presuming see Acts 4:13 and Jn.7:15 and perhaps we may ask can God and/or the Holy Ghost read and write - see Ex.31:18 and Deut.9:10 and Jn.9:6 - twinc
In this context "uneducated: was anyone who did not have a formal education as a scribe or lawyer. Iti not in the broad sense that you are interpreting tit.
 
In this context "uneducated: was anyone who did not have a formal education as a scribe or lawyer. Iti not in the broad sense that you are interpreting tit.
unfortunately you have jumped to your own conclusions and interpretation and missed the seond part in which the first part would have explained itself - twinc
 
Absolutely. Some NT writings were possibly done with amanuensis, (for example, Hebrews is Pauline in character but probably not written by his hand), but the Gospels and Acts are not among those.
Paul, although able to both read and write in multiple languages, always used amanuensis - we know this because he made a point of signing his letters himself and occasionally pointed this out (Gal. 6:11, Philemon 1:19, 1 Cor. 16:21, for examples). Hebrews is Pauline in theology but not in language - that’s not a scribe taking dictation, that’s someone (I suspect Barnabas) who heard Paul’s preaching, probably numerous times, and then wrote it up independently.

In the case of the Gospel of Mark, to cite another example, most people accept that Mark recorded what he had heard from Peter. Note that Mark is an unusual case in that he was apparently a very young member of the group of followers - an eyewitness but not an apostle or even a leader in the community. Luke, of course, tells us right up front that his two books are written based on his interviews and research - he wasn’t an eyewitness to Jesus’ ministry and was only involved in part of what is recorded in Acts.

And there are plenty of faithful, orthodox scholars who hold that other NT books (most controversially, Matthew) were also written not by the named author but by a disciple who committed that person’s teaching to written form. During the lifetimes of the Apostles, the gospel was proclaimed. As they died off, it was necessary to protect the authentic accounts by committing it to writing. I know this gives some people the heebie-jeebies but it is not an assertion that the material isn’t apostolic.
 
Literacy at the time of Christ

1% in the small towns
3% for the total population

faculty.biu.ac.il/~barilm/illitera.html
Research also, shows the opposite is true, that they were in fact literate.

Reading and Writing in the Time of Jesus (The Biblical Seminar, 69) [Paperback]
Alan R. Millard (Author)

denverseminary.edu/article/reading-and-writing-in-the-time-of-jesus/

freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1573658/posts

about Jesus,
craigaevans.com/evans.pdf

If people could not read, then why even bother to,

John 19:20
This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.
 
They were unlearned (agrammatoi eisin). Present indicative retained in indirect discourse. Unlettered men without technical training in the professional rabbinical schools of Hillel or Shammai. Jesus himself was so regarded ( John 7:15 , “not having learned letters”). And ignorant (kai idiwtai). Old word, only here in the N.T. and 1 Corinthians 14:24 ; 2 Corinthians 11:6 . It does not mean “ignorant,” but a layman, a man not in office (a private person), a common soldier and not an officer, a man not skilled in the schools, very much like agrammato. It is from idio (one’s own) and our “idiosyncracy” is one with an excess of such a trait, while “idiot” (this very word) is one who has nothing but his idiosyncracy. Peter and John were men of ability and of courage, but they did not belong to the set of the rabbis.

biblestudytools.com/commentaries/robertsons-word-pictures/acts/acts-4-13.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top