Who or what is the source for thoughts and actions only known to Jesus?

[Chan26]

There are many occasions in the New Testament in which Jesus had a thought or engaged in action that no one else saw or could have witnessed. EG. Our Lord’s thoughts, actions and events in the Garden. They are depicted as occurring in private. How did any writer of the NT know of these thoughts, events, etc.?
NOTE: In fiction this is referred to as View Point. The NT view point purports to be the personal observations of the author. Eg, Mark is telling us what he heard and saw. The gospels are not presented as someone telling a story about things he’d heard but things as witnessed. For example, who witnessed the events and conversation between Judas and the Priests?
I am a Roman Catholic but I was raised in a foreign country and my parents were Catholic but also ISHKCON. I am US citizen but also live in BC.Canada, so I have much to learn and it is a wonderful experience to hear Catholic scholars discuss the matters that are presented here…
thank you
chan

 

[guanophore]

There are many occasions in the New Testament in which Jesus had a thought or engaged in action that no one else saw or could have witnessed. EG. Our Lord’s thoughts, actions and events in the Garden. They are depicted as occurring in private. How did any writer of the NT know of these thoughts, events, etc.?
NOTE: In fiction this is referred to as View Point. The NT view point purports to be the personal observations of the author. Eg, Mark is telling us what he heard and saw. The gospels are not presented as someone telling a story about things he’d heard but things as witnessed. For example, who witnessed the events and conversation between Judas and the Priests?
I am a Roman Catholic but I was raised in a foreign country and my parents were Catholic but also ISHKCON. I am US citizen but also live in BC.Canada, so I have much to learn and it is a wonderful experience to hear Catholic scholars discuss the matters that are presented here…
thank you
chan

Well Chan you have sure come to the right place for Catholic answers! I did not think it was possible to be ISHKCON and CAtholic.

You pose a very good question here. There are a variety of ways that the disciples might have learned those things that happened to Jesus when He was alone. The Aposltes in the Garden were intermittently awake, and they might have also have had parts of His prayer seep into them while they were asleep. He might have told them about His experience after His resurrection, during which time He met with them for 40 days.

He also might have revealed these things in visions during prayer, as several of the Apsotles reported.

 

[Chan26]

Well Chan you have sure come to the right place for Catholic answers! I did not think it was possible to be ISHKCON and CAtholic.

You pose a very good question here. There are a variety of ways that the disciples might have learned those things that happened to Jesus when He was alone. The Aposltes in the Garden were intermittently awake, and they might have also have had parts of His prayer seep into them while they were asleep. He might have told them about His experience after His resurrection, during which time He met with them for 40 days.

He also might have revealed these things in visions during prayer, as several of the Apsotles reported.

Thank you. and just discussing, I would have expected the writers of the gospels to say, Jesus told me this or that, or that I had a vision, or that when Jesus woke them, he was covered with blood , etc., but I don’t find those explanations.

The story of Judas is a very troubling one and it would be illuminating if there was a witness to what transpired, if anything, between Judas and the Priests.

Thank you so much and if you gain some insight, I would be grateful if you would share it.
PS I was taught that Hare Krishna means praise and love to Jesus, Hare Rama means praise and love to the Father. Chanting involves the physical body, the mind and the soul. Except for receiving the body and blood of our Lord, nothing brings me as much joy as chanting.

It is sunny and beautiful here in Vancouver. Whatever the weather, I hope it is beautiful where you are.
chan

 

[guanophore]

Thank you. and just discussing, I would have expected the writers of the gospels to say, Jesus told me this or that, or that I had a vision, or that when Jesus woke them, he was covered with blood , etc., but I don’t find those explanations.

The story of Judas is a very troubling one and it would be illuminating if there was a witness to what transpired, if anything, between Judas and the Priests.

Oh, I am sure there were witnesses! Some of them were secret followers of Jesus. And later, many of the priests converted.

Acts 6:7
7 The word of God continued to spread; the number of the disciples increased greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests became obedient to the faith.

The Scripture was never intended to contain all these details. We rarely read of Jesus eating, never bathing or other matters of personal hygiene, for that matter. We trust that the HS included those things that needed to be written.

Thank you so much and if you gain some insight, I would be grateful if you would share it.

PS I was taught that Hare Krishna means praise and love to Jesus, Hare Rama means praise and love to the Father. Chanting involves the physical body, the mind and the soul. Except for receiving the body and blood of our Lord, nothing brings me as much joy as chanting.

It is sunny and beautiful here in Vancouver. Whatever the weather, I hope it is beautiful where you are.
chan

I am glad that your chanting brings you joy in the Lord Jesus.

Here is another example of someone who might have seen what happened inside;

Mark 14:66-67

While Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant-girls of the high priest came by. 67 When she saw Peter warming himself, she stared at him and said, “You also were with Jesus, the man from Nazareth.”

We don’t know if this servant girl later became a Christian, but there were many people that observed the activities, and may have talked about what they saw to the believers.

In this passage:

John 18:15-17
Simon Peter and another disciple followed Jesus. Since that disciple was known to the high priest, he went with Jesus into the courtyard of the high priest, 16 but Peter was standing outside at the gate. So the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out, spoke to the woman who guarded the gate, and brought Peter in. 17 The woman said to Peter, “You are not also one of this man’s disciples, are you?”

It is clear that, for reasons we are not given, John was known to the high priest. John was able to get Peter into the gate. Was John a relative of the high priest? We are not told how they were acquainted, but he had enough influence to get the woman who guarded the gate to open it. When she asks “your are not also one of the disciples” it sounds as if she knew that John was.

 

[Dudamis]

I would say its possible that some of these things were relayed to the apostles during Jesus’ time He spent with them after the resurection. There is much teaching given in that time and its not recorded exactly what Jesus told them. I assume much of it makes it way into the epistles and into early Church teaching. The sort of details you ask about may also have been passed on then. This is just conjecture though, of course.

 

[Cranch]

It is not necessary for there to have been a witness to the events in question. Scripture was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit who is God. As Leo XIII expressed in Providentissimus Deus:

For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. (P.D., 20)

The Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms this, quoting Dei Verbum 11:

105 God is the author of Sacred Scripture. “The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”

 

[Chan26]

It is not necessary for there to have been a witness to the events in question. Scripture was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit who is God. As Leo XIII expressed in Providentissimus Deus:

For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. (P.D., 20)

The Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms this, quoting Dei Verbum 11:

105 God is the author of Sacred Scripture. “The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”

Seems to me, Pope Benedict recently said, that the bible is not to be read literally that many parts of it, although inspired, are not the word of God. If it were dictated by God, then commands to kill and unruly child, or stone an unmarried daughter who is pregnant and many others, would not be changed unless specifically, a change is dictated. I have never seen such a change. I’m not taking issue with your post, just telling you what i have heard so I am confused.
thank you and I welcome being pointed to answers.
chan26

 

[guanophore]

Seems to me, Pope Benedict recently said, that the bible is not to be read literally that many parts of it, although inspired, are not the word of God. If it were dictated by God, then commands to kill and unruly child, or stone an unmarried daughter who is pregnant and many others, would not be changed unless specifically, a change is dictated. I have never seen such a change. I’m not taking issue with your post, just telling you what i have heard so I am confused.
thank you and I welcome being pointed to answers.
chan26

No, Pope Benedict would never say any such thing.

First of all, the nature of inspiration is to be the Word of God, so if it is inspired, it is automatically the Word of God. It was not 'dictated by God". This has never been the understanding of inspiration. His use of the term “dictation” here is a reference to the writers being “moved by the Holy Spirit to write from God”.

Of course not all parts of the Scriptures are to be understood literally. If that were true, then a lot of holy people would be going around with their eyes put out and their hands cut off.

The passages need to be understood in context, and be read with the mind of Christ.

 

[jonathan_hili]

Seems to me, Pope Benedict recently said, that the bible is not to be read literally that many parts of it, although inspired, are not the word of God. If it were dictated by God, then commands to kill and unruly child, or stone an unmarried daughter who is pregnant and many others, would not be changed unless specifically, a change is dictated. I have never seen such a change. I’m not taking issue with your post, just telling you what i have heard so I am confused.
thank you and I welcome being pointed to answers.
chan26

I’m of a slightly different opinion to Cranch, as I think there would have needed to be some kind of human communication. I don’t think the Holy Spirit would have just moved the sacred writers with visions in their heads or some such. Christianity is very much rooted in history, time and space.

My main suggestion would be to consider just how “private” some of these events would be. In reality, in first century Jerusalem, especially somewhere like the Temple, there was very little that could be done in private. And even with some of Jesus’ thoughts and words, which seem to be private, they could have been explained to the apostles by Jesus after his resurrection, or might not have been as private as suggested on a first reading. For instance, in Gethsemane it is very possible for Peter, James or John to have overheard Jesus’ prayer before they fell asleep, as he is described as going only “a little farther” from them.

 

[Chan26]

I’m of a slightly different opinion to Cranch, as I think there would have needed to be some kind of human communication. I don’t think the Holy Spirit would have just moved the sacred writers with visions in their heads or some such. Christianity is very much rooted in history, time and space.

My main suggestion would be to consider just how “private” some of these events would be. In reality, in first century Jerusalem, especially somewhere like the Temple, there was very little that could be done in private. And even with some of Jesus’ thoughts and words, which seem to be private, they could have been explained to the apostles by Jesus after his resurrection, or might not have been as private as suggested on a first reading. For instance, in Gethsemane it is very possible for Peter, James or John to have overheard Jesus’ prayer before they fell asleep, as he is described as going only “a little farther” from them.

Of course, all of this is speculation. In addition, didn’t Jesus chastise the apostles for sleeping. That would have been a perfect time for someone to say, “We weren’t asleep Lord” or “We heard you Lord.”
Equally, of course, i am not a scholar of sacred writings so I 'm not familiar with the traditions of the time. Just a layperson, asking.

 

[jonathan_hili]

Of course, all of this is speculation. In addition, didn’t Jesus chastise the apostles for sleeping. That would have been a perfect time for someone to say, “We weren’t asleep Lord” or “We heard you Lord.”
Equally, of course, i am not a scholar of sacred writings so I 'm not familiar with the traditions of the time. Just a layperson, asking.

True, it’s all speculation - but that’s part of the fun of theology (and forums)!

If you look at the text from Mark 14:33-38 (RSV):

And he took with him Peter and James and John, and began to be greatly distressed and troubled. And he said to them, “My soul is very sorrowful, even to death; remain here, and watch.” And going a little farther, he fell on the ground and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him. And he said, “Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee; remove this cup from me; yet not what I will, but what thou wilt.” And he came and found them sleeping, and he said to Peter, “Simon, are you asleep? Could you not watch one hour? Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.”

It does state that the three were asleep when Jesus returned, but there are two suggestive periods: one, before he went “a little farther”, and then following this before “he came and found them sleeping”, where they might have overheard Christ, or at least part of what he was saying.

 

[Chan26]

True, it’s all speculation - but that’s part of the fun of theology (and forums)!

If you look at the text from Mark 14:33-38 (RSV):

And he took with him Peter and James and John, and began to be greatly distressed and troubled. And he said to them, “My soul is very sorrowful, even to death; remain here, and watch.” And going a little farther, he fell on the ground and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him. And he said, “Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee; remove this cup from me; yet not what I will, but what thou wilt.” And he came and found them sleeping, and he said to Peter, “Simon, are you asleep? Could you not watch one hour? Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.”

It does state that the three were asleep when Jesus returned, but there are two suggestive periods: one, before he went “a little farther”, and then following this before “he came and found them sleeping”, where they might have overheard Christ, or at least part of what he was saying.

If this works for you, i have no argument, which brings up another question, amusingly presented by Monty Python- a group at the edges of the enormous crowd listening to Jesus teaching, get into an argument over what He said. They seem to agree it was “Blessed are the Cheese Makers”. So how did everyone in these huge crowds hear the correct words uttered by Jesus. Again, we have to fill in the gaps with what makes sense to us but then, you know about how much reliance can be placed on human “sense.”
You are right, it does make theology fun.
The best
chan26

 

[jonathan_hili]

If this works for you, i have no argument, which brings up another question, amusingly presented by Monty Python- a group at the edges of the enormous crowd listening to Jesus teaching, get into an argument over what He said. They seem to agree it was “Blessed are the Cheese Makers”. So how did everyone in these huge crowds hear the correct words uttered by Jesus. Again, we have to fill in the gaps with what makes sense to us but then, you know about how much reliance can be placed on human “sense.”
You are right, it does make theology fun.
The best
chan26

That is a good question. I guess it’s very possible that a number of people in the crowd misheard. However, since the teaching comes from the apostles and, as a rabbi, Jesus would have likely repeated himself a number of times, taught them more closely, and clarified things for them, it seems far less likely that they could have misheard or been mistaken.