Mythra

Something struck me as odd today while reading a thread in GRD. We all know (or at least assume) that Jesus didn't write anything down. But, with all of the pseudepigraphic works being pumped out then, it doesn't make sense that no one tried to write a first-hand account and attribute it to Jesus. It would have carried the ultimate authority.

We have writings attributed to Mary. And Pilate. And Judas. And a myriad of other NT characters. Yet no one tried to pass off any writings from Jesus.

It doesn't add up.

Or, are there writings out there, long ago deemed spurious and quickly dismissed, which claimed to be authored by Jesus?

Toto

There are a few letters allegedly written by Jesus to King Agbar (copied here). Eusebius includes them, but no one else thinks they have any possibility of being valid.

If someone had written a gospel written by Jesus, it would have taken some of the mystery out of the religion. (My theory, anyway).

Elijah

Well for me first off it seems that what Jesus did was what was important not anything he had to say or write down. Actions speak louder then words.

Secondly Jesus laying his life down for his friends sounds a lot better coming from his grieving friends then a story of Jesus by Jesus.

Lastly, no one could understand what Jesus was talking about back then or now. Him writing it down probably wouldn’t have made it any easier for us to understand it. And if it was easily understood then Rome would have understood and burned his words on site much less made it the Roman religion.

Jesus wasn’t bringing a new set of laws he was trying to rid us of the lawmakers.

Mythra

Well, that's certainly true. Since there has never been any confusion about the message or division amongst believers.

tjakey

I love irony....

Mythra

But seriously, I'm not asking why Jesus didn't write anything down. I'm pretty sure I already know the answer to that one.

It just seems incredible that no one in the second century "miraculously" found some first hand teachings or first person accounts of Jesus that supported their position and views.

Unless scrupulous scribal integrity is the reason....

Euphen

There is, actually, at least one. The Second Treatise of the Great Seth.

http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/2seth.html

Mythra

Thanks Euphen!

I knew there had to be at least one. I've never read this before.

I have to admit I paused when I came to this:

And do not become female, lest you give birth to evil and (its) brothers: jealousy and division, anger and wrath, fear and a divided heart, and empty, non-existent desire. But I am an ineffable mystery to you.

:huh:

fromdownunder

I have read a book by Barbara Theiring (of Pesher "theory" fame) in which she claims that Jesus was the real author of the Gospel we know as John. She bases this on interpretation of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and argues that multiple "layers" of information are contained in the Bible which need to be interpreted correctly for the "true story" to be revealed. Personally, I find her ideas about as convincing as Erik Von Daniken's. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Thiering

Norm

Euphen

This language of "becoming female" or male is also in the Gospel of Thomas.

I guess it must have been a gnostic idea. I don't know if it appears in any other gnostic texts.