Freethought & Rationalism Archive

09-10-2002, 06:25 AM

Skeptical, yours looks like a typical "if I were an omnipotent God I would..." like argument that we theists tend to ignore. If you rephrase it as a historical question it would be more interesting.

B

Amen-Moses · 09-10-2002, 07:09 AM

I supoose a more important question (assuming the illiterate peasant motif) is why didn't he get someone else to write stuff down at the time? Why do we have to wait post Paul for anyone to think it required?

Amen-Moses

CX · 09-10-2002, 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bede:
Skeptical, yours looks like a typical "if I were an omnipotent God I would..." like argument that we theists tend to ignore. If you rephrase it as a historical question it would be more interesting.

B

Suprisingly I agree. If you are starting with the premise that an all powerful, ominsicient god exists and sent his son to earth to atone for the sins of mankind (and all the metaphyscial baggage associated with that) you set up the question itself to be unanswerable, since one could not possibly imagine the motivations and methods of such a being unless one was one.

It seems to me the historical question is pretty easy to answer and already has been in this thread. A)Jesus was most likely illiterate as were his followers, save possibly Levi the publican B)Jesus appears to have preached either an immanent or imminent kingdom of god and expected things to wrap up pretty quickly (i.e. "This generation shall not pass away" etc. etc.). So the answer becomes that he couldn't write anything down and wouldn't anyway since the end was nigh.

Skeptical · 09-10-2002, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bede:
Skeptical, yours looks like a typical "if I were an omnipotent God I would..." like argument that we theists tend to ignore. If you rephrase it as a historical question it would be more interesting.

B

I didn't make an argument, I asked a question. I'm not sure how to rephrase it other than as I asked it, but I'll try:

The NT portrait of Jesus is that at the very least, he was the most important human being who has ever lived. If this is true, and Jesus believed this was true as well, it seems logical that he would have left some of his own teachings in writing. It appears that he obviously did not do so and I'm am trying to understand why this would be the case from a theists point of view.

Skeptical · 09-10-2002, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by leonarde:
My (theistic) ruminations on the topic:

1)though the function of writing was a very important one in ancient times when a small percentage of the population was literate, these
writers (frequently they were a priest class)were
usually working for someone (the monarch).
In the religious scheme of things the monarch is
Jesus/God. Others write what He tells(inspires)
them to.

Are you saying Jesus was illiterate? This may be true but it seems to be a problem to reconcile this with the picture of Jesus in the NT.

Quote:

2)a Gospel written by the pre-Crucifixion Jesus
would not have included the Crucifixion and Resurrection (ie the most important events of the
NT by far).

Jesus is reported in the NT to have known what was going to happen to him. He could have written about them prior to the events and he also could have left information regarding his teachings that would have cleared up a lot of questions.

Quote:

3)had Jesus written anything, there would be no
way many centuries later to verify that HE was
indeed the author: the given work would be in the
same gloom of doubt by disbelievers as Matthew,
Mark, Luke and John are today.

This may be true in a sense, but it would seem that if Jesus had written anything it would certainly have been commented on by Paul in his letters only 20 years after the fact. On top of this, believers would have a document that they could at least plausibly claim was from Jesus himself, I don't see how this could do anything but help the cause.

Quote:

4)since His human/divine Presence was the important thing for his earthly followers, his
teachings, even in written form, would have been
terribly overshadowed. It was only when He left the earth bodily that written works began to be
important. Yet even THIS took decades: as long as
the LIVING witnesses to Jesus' life were around,
written documents were an afterthought.

So you don't think Jesus knew it would be 2,000 years or more before his return? Again, it would seem that this is hard to reconcile with the picture of Jesus given in the NT.

Quote:

5)since ancient parchments were not made to last
centuries, a permanent record of his life (even
if written by Him) would depend on diligent copying of same. This dependence on a FUTURE class
scribes meant that there was for His purposes little difference who wrote the Gospels: if people
wouldn't trust the copiers/translators (almost all
of whom were faceless monks, at least during the
Middle Ages) then they probably wouldn't trust that a Jesus-written Gospel was indeed Jesus-written.

Your assuming again that documents written by Jesus would only be useful for non-believers, when this is clearly not true. The exact same argument your making could be given for all of the NT documents, and the documents we currently have are very important for the church.

Quote:

6)the Gospels contain (and this is most explicit
in John) an element of WITNESS: hey, I saw this
guy raise Lazarus with my own eyes! If Jesus had
written a Gospel it would have been one guy "witnessing" to himself. Not so persuasive; what if he really WERE loco?

Your assuming what the content would be. It could just as easily have been Jesus simply relating his teachings and philosophy first hand.

Honestly, I don't think these are very strong arguments unless your saying that Jesus was just a typical 1st century peasant who became a teacher and then by chance a religious figure.

[ September 10, 2002: Message edited by: Skeptical ]

Skeptical · 09-10-2002, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by CX:


Suprisingly I agree. If you are starting with the premise that an all powerful, ominsicient god exists and sent his son to earth to atone for the sins of mankind (and all the metaphyscial baggage associated with that) you set up the question itself to be unanswerable, since one could not possibly imagine the motivations and methods of such a being unless one was one.

It seems to me the historical question is pretty easy to answer and already has been in this thread. A)Jesus was most likely illiterate as were his followers, save possibly Levi the publican B)Jesus appears to have preached either an immanent or imminent kingdom of god and expected things to wrap up pretty quickly (i.e. "This generation shall not pass away" etc. etc.). So the answer becomes that he couldn't write anything down and wouldn't anyway since the end was nigh.

I tend to agree with your assessment, it just seems pretty difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile this view of Jesus with the picture of him as portrayed in the NT. While this is not a problem for non-theists, it seems like it would be for Christians. I don't think Behe, for example would agree with your asessment of Jesus, but I might be wrong.

MOJO-JOJO · 09-10-2002, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by CX:
Because he was an illiterate peasant.

But he was "GOD" too, so all intelligence and worldly knowledge would have simply been imparted upon him, as was supposedly done to Paul on the road to Damascus (the 'real' father of the church).

Wyz_sub10 · 09-10-2002, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Secular Pinoy:
Impossible! Everyone knows in his heart that "Jesus Saves!"

Classic!

Clarice O'C · 09-10-2002, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Secular Pinoy:
Impossible! Everyone knows in his heart that "Jesus Saves!"

Heard this one written by Jesus?

"Let me save you from drowning" said the bird as it lifted the fish up out of the water to place it safely in a tree.

Bird = Jesus
Fish = Unbelievers

Best,
Clarice

Skeptical · 09-10-2002, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Clarice O'C:


Heard this one written by Jesus?

"Let me save you from drowning" said the bird as it lifted the fish up out of the water to place it safely in a tree.

Bird = Jesus
Fish = Unbelievers

Best,
Clarice

If your going to post in a thread, it's common courtesy to actually address the question the thread is dedicated to. If you have an actual answer, I'm willing to listen.

So I ask again, why didn't Jesus leave any personal writings?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-10-2002, 06:25 AM	#11
Bede Guest Posts: n/a	Skeptical, yours looks like a typical "if I were an omnipotent God I would..." like argument that we theists tend to ignore. If you rephrase it as a historical question it would be more interesting. B

09-10-2002, 07:09 AM	#12
Amen-Moses Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Portsmouth, England Posts: 4,652	I supoose a more important question (assuming the illiterate peasant motif) is why didn't he get someone else to write stuff down at the time? Why do we have to wait post Paul for anyone to think it required? Amen-Moses

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.