Why did Jesus not write?

[AmbroseSJ]

LilyM:

They weren’t recorded because they weren’t significant.

Now there I must disagree with you Lily. It says in the Gospel that Jesus worked many similar works, but they were just too numerous to mention. In other words, they were definitely significant, but not important to OUR salvation. There was no effort by the Evangelists to write everything significant Jesus did, as that was not their aim. They wrote the Gospels to guarantee our Faith for the sake of our Salvation.

So something like the letter to Agbar is not important to the Church’s deposit of Faith, or to our Salvation, but that doesn’t mean it is unreasonable to believe such a letter existed, based on an eyewitness account of a 4th century Bishop of the Church, who was trained by a Saint (Pamphilus) and a venerable and trusted Church Historian.

 

[Peter29]

He left us something much more important than writing… the prairie tortoise!

Noone liked that?

‘The prayer he taught us’?

 

[AmbroseSJ]

oh. ah.

 

[manualman]

I have no position on the alleged letter. But back to the original topic, it seems simple to me:

God’s plan was for Jesus to establish one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church on earth which would have the sacred role of preserving, teaching and interpreting the gospel for thousands of years after the ascension of Jesus back into heaven.

He simply had a bigger plan than just leaving us a book.

 

[roanoker]

He wrote in the sand at the stoning of the prostitute, remember. But then he erased it. So we know He could write…

 

[Jerry-Jet]

If Jesus really did write the letter could it be possible that just because He wrote it–that doesn’t necessarily mean that it was His will that it be considered scripture?

What if we had a copy of grocery list that Jesus was supposed to use at a market as a teenager for His family or a list of carpeter supplies that He was supposed to pick up for Joseph?

Would such writings necessarily be scripture?

Whatever Jesus wrote in the sand was not scripture.

Now I don’t believe the letter is genuine–if it was something tells me that it would have become part of the scriptures.

All I’m saying is that it is POSSIBLE that it could be genuine.

Maybe it was God’s will for the Holy Spirit to inspire scripture.

And it is altogether possible that Jesus taught the disciples things that are not in the scriptures.

If that is indeed true then the possibility that Jesus could have written a letter that is not in the scriptures is also possible.

When we get to heaven I have no doubt that we’ll learn even more about Jesus than are in the scriptures.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Very true Jerry! If everything was in the Scriptures, then we could be Protestants too.

 

[MarcoPolo]

Noone liked that?

‘The prayer he taught us’?

I don’t get the prayer tortoise analogy.

Edit: Oh, I get it now, word sounds…

 

[MarcoPolo]

I am aware of that letter, and believe that because Eusebius had made such inquiries into it

Interesting…anyone besides Eusebius in the early Church?

 

[Payoip]

Now I don’t believe the letter is genuine–if it was something tells me that it would have become part of the scriptures.

All I’m saying is that it is POSSIBLE that it could be genuine.

.

If the letter is genuine and it still exist, is it not possible that we would make much fuss about it? Like what we do with the Shroud of Turin?

 

[Benadam]

When I considered what it would be like to look at something Jesus wrote with His own hand you know what my first thought was? Not what it said. It was, if His handwriting had any characteristics that my handwriting has. No, Jesus didn’t do this for the same reason He wouldn’t allow them people who wanted to make him their King.

 

[juliamajor]

The site is called 'Pseudepigrapha"!Does that give you a clue as how reliable the material is?

 

[Axion]

I think Jesus deliberately didn’t write, nor did he command anything to be written.

This I think was because he didn’t come to establish another dry book of written laws - such as was being pedantically and unspiritually applied by the Pharisees and Saduccees. He came to establish a living Church.

 

[yellowbicycle]

I think Jesus deliberately didn’t write, nor did he command anything to be written.

This I think was because he didn’t come to establish another dry book of written laws - such as was being pedantically and unspiritually applied by the Pharisees and Saduccees. He came to establish a living Church.

Axion, I think this is completely right.
To the OP - I’ve been giving this alot of thought lately…why didn’t Jesus write the Bible?
And the answer I came up with was this - because that was not what he came here to do.
He didn’t come here to write down instructions for how we should live.
He came to SHOW us.
Why write the Word when you ARE the Word?
He came to live the life of a man, and die. That’s really what he came here to do, die. (and then rise of course). I reflect on that sometimes…that the point, the real point of his whole life, was his death (or, more accurately, his resurrection).
So, I have to believe the reason he didn’t write the Bible is because he gave us a living Church instead. That was his purpose and intent.
Just my two cents.