chekmate

Did Jesus know how to Read and Write? If so, why are there no original writings from Jesus? All we have are preachings and stories from him and about him, right?. If not, isn't this a major shortcoming in the immortal son of a omnimax diety?

Badfish

Of course he was God. He just had someone else do it for him.

Toto

John 8:6-8 (the parable of the woman taken in adultery) records that Jesus wrote something on the ground. This parable is missing from some manuscripts, which may indicate that it was a later interpolation, or that some editions found the story too embarrassing and removed it. <gasp - tampering with the holy word>

In Luke Jesus "reads" from Isaiah in synagogue setting, but this could have been reciting from memory.

It is probably worth noting that illiteracy was not the shortcoming in 1st c. Palestine that it is today, and was not necessarily a sign of low class status. The culture was base on oral recitation and argument. Scribes, who were often slaves, might make a record of what was said. Most of Paul's letters were probably dictated to a scribe.

So if Jesus were in fact illiterate, that would 1) not be a black mark against him, but 2) not explain why there is nothing written by him.

Diogenes the Cynic

The Greek word used for Jesus' "writing" in the dirt (katagraphen) can also mean "scratch" or "draw." ("Scratch" is actually the most literal translation).

When Jesus reads from Isaiah, he not only reads from the LXX instead of the Tanakh but he also conflates a couple of different passages. That scene is clearly a literary construction not an anecdote from history (at least not as told, I suppose it's possible that Jesus quoted something).

John Crossan says that 95-98% of the Palestinian state was illiterate at the time of Jesus. Since Jesus was presumably a backwater peasant of the artisan class (a bare subsistence social class), it's doubtful that he would have had any opportunity or inclination to learn to read during childhood. I've read a couple of suggestions that he might have learned to read while he was being trained as an Essene, but that's pretty speculative. I think the odds are pretty good that he was illiterate.

dongiovanni1976x

I believe that Jesus reading in Luke, whether a literary construction or not, is Biblical evidence that Jesus was portrayed as literate. The supposed interpolation in John, adds 'a little weight' to this argument, even if we don't know what he was "scatching." This parable was likely in John's orginal Gospel, and was later edited/deleted from others because it seemed to condone prostitution in a time when misogyny was en vogue.

IMHO: If you believe the Bible literally, then I'd say yes, Jesus was literate. If you question its authenticity, believe it to be a "literary construction" (as mentioned earlier by diogenes) with a preconceived agenda in mind, then the answer is likely no.

Vinnie

Probability wise we would be inclined to say no as most Jews of Jesus' class couldn't read. Though there were exceptions to rules and there is some sparse eidence to the contrary. In the end no one knows.

Why didn't Jesus write anything? WHy should he? He thought the world was ending in a day or so didn't he?

Vinnie

Vivisector

Agree with Vinnie. A common Christian explanation for lack of Jesus's writings, though, is that God already knew he was going to inspire the Gospel authors to write, and that these writings would survive, so there was no real reason for Jesus to burden himself with writing.

Crazy Liz

Does his being addressed as "rabbi" tend to indicate he was literate?

The story of the adulteress in John 8 tends to be interpreted quite differently by male and female commentators. I once made a comparative study between this pericope and Genesis 38, the story of Tamar the widow. There are interesting parallels noted by all the female commentators I read, but none of the male commentators. Anyway, from a woman's perspective, the story in John 8 seems to indicate Jesus actually did write something, and did not just scratch. The accusers were scribes and Pharisees - members of literate classes - while the woman was almost certainly not literate. (medieval paintings of Mary with a book, notwithstanding ) Therefore, writing on the ground would have been a convenient way to communicate something to the accusers, but not to the woman or most of the crowd. The omission of what was written fits John's literary style of including details known to the person encountering Jesus in a saving way, and excluding details known to others, but not to that person. There is some dispute as to whether this pericope was originally Johannine or Lucan, but Luke's style would be to include such a detail. If Luke wrote that Jesus scratched, he would more likely mean random scratchings. For John, though, it indicates that Jesus didn't write anything the woman could read.

Of course, this is speculative, but does consider an important element of the literary styles of these two gospels.

Crazy Liz

Sounds like the people who decided to put up this mural on a Christian university campus near me.

Not all Christians would say that.

andrewcriddle

Passages like John 7:15 seem to represent Jesus as without a formal education but knowing considerably more about the Hebrew Bible than an illiterate man would be expected to. Hence presumably he is regarded as having at least basic literacy.

How far such passages provide reliable information about the historical Jesus is another matter.

Andrew Criddle