How come Jesus never wrote anything down?

[MattRose]

Outside of the conjecture and speculation of "Many scholars" and your personal understanding of wikipedias' article on the subject, what real evidence is there to be had to support this line of thought? It all funnels back to one mans work does it not? Now how can this be compared to 4 separate gospel accounts of a Man who's works were not complied till hundreds of Years after His death?

Isn't it the fact that because there are slight variations in the Story of Christ the reason for so much doubt in the academic community? Now you are saying that all 4 accounts are closely collaborated accounts that make up a myth of Christ? Why the sudden paradigm shift? are you all giving up on it's too different in favor for "it's too much the same?"

"Many scholars" trump "many gospels" for, what should be, very obvious reasons. It also doesn't funnel back to one man's work. There are 3 mentioned in the article and I'm sure there are more.
As I said in the original post Socrates's teachings and historical mentions have interesting parallels to Jesus'.
1. His teachings were mostly written by people who never met him.
2. There is independent historical evidence that he existed.
3. It appears that some mentions of him are beyond anything the historical person was likely to have done or said. You may not agree on this one, but if he weren't a religious figure I'm sure you would agree.

Where do your get that I suggested that there is a "myth of Christ"? You appear to be defending something that I never impugned.

 

[LWB]

Jesus did write the Bible, through the apostles and various prophets throughout history. The Holy Spirit inspired those who had quill and parchment in hand.

 

[solarwave]

So as it stands right now, is it your opinion that the bible lacks credibility because it was written by flawed and imperfect men?

I think it has errors but that doesn't mean that Christianity as a whole is false or that God isn't real. To say that because the Bible has errors that none of it can be believed is unintellectual and bias and doesn't realise that many secular books have errors but are sources of truth.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

So the effective answer is who knows? And also, does it really matter that much anyway?

-CryptoLutheran

It matters. Imagine if a manuscript was unearthed in Israel that, after rigorous analysis, was deemed sufficiently authentic to Jesus' own hand. Imagine if this manuscript implied or stated that Jesus was God or Jesus was going to be resurrected or Jesus healed and brought Lazarus back from the dead. Written by Jesus himself. That would be some serious firepower for the proponents of Christianity.

But think of the other scenario. We find a manuscript with Jesus making clear comments that he is not the Messiah. Perhaps he makes references to the fact that he is just the one preparing the way for the Messiah, or perhaps his writings are more like Paul's, instructing people to prepare and repent. There are many ways that the manuscript could be written that would very much shake the foundations of the Christian faith. The most extreme case would be Jesus himself being quoted something along the lines of, "Some say I am the Messiah and will be resurrected, but these people are missing the point of the Kingdom of God; they are worshiping me instead of God himself." Can you imagine how incriminating that would be against the truth of the entire Christian faith?

I also think it matters because of the quote the OP mentioned from Mark Twain. The writings we have of Jesus' life and teaching are most likely not direct sources. They were likely influenced by Pauline thinking and Paul himself never saw Jesus but only 'experienced him' in a powerful spiritual way.

 

[solarwave]

3. It appears that some mentions of him are beyond anything the historical person was likely to have done or said. You may not agree on this one, but if he weren't a religious figure I'm sure you would agree.

Can you give me some examples of these?

 

[elman]

I think it has errors but that doesn't mean that Christianity as a whole is false or that God isn't real. To say that because the Bible has errors that none of it can be believed is unintellectual and bias and doesn't realise that many secular books have errors but are sources of truth.

 

[MattRose]

Can you give me some examples of these?

I was pointing to the fact that people who wrote about Socrates gave him more credit than he probably deserved. What Plato and others said Socrates said may be different than what he really said. Follow me? I didn't mean to imply I had some great examples of what Jesus or Socrates didn't actually do, but were attributed to them anyway. Consider this, if I was a loyal follower of yours and you gave a speech that I wrote about months later, I would not remember everything the way you did. If you reviewed my writings you would find some mistakes and want to make changes to reflect what you think you said, or what you meant to say. Isn't this apparent by the differences in the way the different gospels describe the same event?

Reasonable people would agree that most ancient texts have these imperfections. Unless you hold to the idea that the bible is supernaturally unflawed, then it didn't escape a similiar "enhancement".

 

[solarwave]

I was pointing to the fact that people who wrote about Socrates probably gave him more credit than he probably deserved. What Plato and others said Socrates said may be different than what he really said. Follow me? I didn't mean to imply I had some great examples of what Jesus or Socrates didn't actually do, but were attributed to them anyway. Consider this, if I was a loyal follower of yours and you gave a speech that I wrote about months later, I would not remember everything the way you did. If you reviewed my writings you would find some mistakes and want to make changes to reflect what you think you said, or what you meant to say. Isn't this apparent by the differences in the way the different gospels describe the same event?

Reasonable people would agree that most ancient texts have these imperfections. Unless you hold to the idea that the bible is supernaturally unflawed, then it didn't escape a similiar "enhancement".

I agree. I was just asking because I thought you had certain examples of certain things Jesus is recorded to have said that are unlikely to have actually been said.

 

[bling]

There are lots of excellent logical reasons why Jesus did not write anything.

1. God/Jesus does not want us to “commit” to some “teaching” words written on a page. The “message” itself is not the Good News, but the messenger is!

2. The “teachings” of Jesus had already been presented and written down in the Old Testament, so there is nothing really knew about His “words”.

3. We are not “selling” some words to people, handing them a Bible, people need to see God/Christ eyeball to eyeball, have time with God one on one, let God listen to them, show He really cares, hug them, support the good in them and Love them as they are. That is the way it is to work and the best way it does work: Christ living through true Christians serving non Christians and other Christians with true Godly type Love. Christians themselves are to be the source for experiencing Godly type Love for the non Christian and not some “book”. The Church grew very rapidly without the Bible to show this.

4. It is only after you have many scattered Christians do you need a written message to support them and assure them; that they are being led by the correct Spirit. It is not designed for the non Christian.

5. It has already been stated some of the problems with having words written by God Himself: we would wind up worshipping the words (like the Muslims do). In addition: we would all have to learn Greek (a big waste of time), we would not be able to translate it for fear of losing something, the exact words would have to be memorized (big waste of time), we would not using the Bible like the common tool for daily support, since it is “Holy”, and it deemphasizes the messenger.



There are other reasons that take lots of explaining so let us see what you do with these first.

 

[Harry3142]

We don't know that Jesus didn't write down something. We know that the gospel's authors received at least part of their information from someone else. Who's to say that it wasn't Jesus' writings that they used?

 

[Ken-1122]

Sketcher (quote)”Jesus did what he needed to do.”


(reply) well if that’s what you wanna believe; but if you ask me, when you acknowledge the fact that worldwide, only a small percentage of people follow your Jesus; I would say he could have done a lot more; I’m just sayin.

(quote)” And I don't consider the Apocrypha to be divinely inspired, nor authentic, nor consistent with real Scripture. How about that.

(reply) Very good! Now how bout the bible? Do you feel it is authentic and consistent with what Jesus had in mind?

Originally Posted by Ken-1122(reply) You say that now because that’s all you have to work with. But common sense tells me that words of wisdom should come from the source rather than 2nd hand information thus actions of God AND written word of God is better.

Drich0150 (quote) Not according to the culture in which first received the word of God. Your "common sense" did not mean much to them. So the question should be should God have forsaken all of those generations of believers for the sake of your "common sense" for this and maybe a few generations before us?

(reply) Pardon my ignorance but I’m just not getting this; you have A and B
a. Jesus preaching, teaching, and working miracles,
b. Jesus preaching, teaching, working miracles, AND writing stuff down so future generations can know what he was about.
Please explain to me exactly how A is better than B

(quote)” Again look at the structured belief of Islam They worship the texts of their prophet as if it were a god unto itself. And they always had what they believe the divine inspired words of their god.”

(reply) Maybe you should talk to an actual Muslim and learn how they believe. They see the Koran as “sacred” but they don’t worship it, they worship Allah. They consider it a sin to worship anything but Allah. Tell you what; talk to an actual Muslim, learn how they precieve the Koran then get back with me on what he said.

(quote)” My observation of Muslims is not to identify them as Good or bad. i reserve judgment for God. the point i was trying to make was that this system of belief has a text supposedly written to the equivalent of Jesus (In their eyes.) Because of this, it stunts their spiritual growth, and forces all believers to partake in the worship of their version of the holy texts. this divided worship limits what they can give to their god.”

(reply) Again, talk to a Muslim before accusing them of worshiping paper and ink.
Next when I said: “As I said before, why not all that AND his written word?”

He replied (quote)” And as I asked before; When was all of this to take place? With what resources was Christ to be supplied with Paper? With what authority would He have written? to whom? Especially in a culture who prizes Oral tradition over that of written expression?”

(reply) It could have taken place anytime during the 33 years he walked the Earth. He could have done this by the authority of God, and as far as resources, I am sure if God has the Cattle of a thousand hills, he can supply his son with the tools to write his message for future generations. And where did you get this information that this culture prized Oral tradition over writing stuff down?

LWB (quote)” Jesus did write the Bible, through the apostles and various prophets throughout history.”

(reply) So why did some prophets claim him to be the son of God and others did not?
Next when I asked: “So as it stands right now, is it your opinion that the bible lacks credibility because it was written by flawed and imperfect men?”

Solorwave replied: “I think it has errors but that doesn't mean that Christianity as a whole is false or that God isn't real. To say that because the Bible has errors that none of it can be believed is unintellectual and bias and doesn't realise that many secular books have errors but are sources of truth”

(reply) I didn’t ask if the Bible has errors, I didn’t ask if Christianity as a whole is false, and I didn’t ask if God was real.
You answered a lot of questions I didn’t ask, but you neglected to answer the one question I did ask so I shall repeat: Is it your opinion that the bible lacks credibility because it was written by flawed and imperfect men?

Bling (quote)” There are lots of excellent logical reasons why Jesus did not write anything.

1.God/Jesus does not want us to “commit” to some “teaching” words written on a page. The “message” itself is not the Good News, but the messenger is!
2.The “teachings” of Jesus had already been presented and written down in the Old Testament, so there is nothing really knew about His “words”.
3.We are not “selling” some words to people, handing them a Bible, people need to see God/Christ eyeball to eyeball, have time with God one on one, let God listen to them, show He really cares, hug them, support the good in them and Love them as they are. That is the way it is to work and the best way it does work: Christ living through true Christians serving non Christians and other Christians with true Godly type Love. Christians themselves are to be the source for experiencing Godly type Love for the non Christian and not some “book”. The Church grew very rapidly without the Bible to show this.
4.It is only after you have many scattered Christians do you need a written message to support them and assure them; that they are being led by the correct Spirit. It is not designed for the non Christian.
5.It has already been stated some of the problems with having words written by God Himself: we would wind up worshipping the words (like the Muslims do). In addition: we would all have to learn Greek (a big waste of time), we would not be able to translate it for fear of losing something, the exact words would have to be memorized (big waste of time), we would not using the Bible like the common tool for daily support, since it is “Holy”, and it deemphasizes the messenger.

There are other reasons that take lots of explaining so let us see what you do with these first.”

Okay how’s this
1.Then why was the bible written at all?
2 So why did Jesus do any teaching at all if he didn’t have anything new to say?
3 See answer #1
4 Well there are plenty of “scattered Christians” and one of the reasons is probably because the various authors who wrote about him are inconsistent about what he said.
5 That argument has already failed. As far as translating, that was a problem with the current bible; for many years people were afraid to translate it into English for fear of getting it wrong. They say some people were even put to death for improper translating; but it exists today! The same would be if Jesus wrote the bible.

How did I do? Let’s hear some more.

Harry3142 (quote)” We don't know that Jesus didn't write down something. We know that the gospel's authors received at least part of their information from someone else. Who's to say that it wasn't Jesus' writings that they used?

(reply) If that were the case I am sure that information would have been uncovered by now.

Peace
Ken

 

[drich0150]

Drich0150 (quote) Not according to the culture in which first received the word of God. Your "common sense" did not mean much to them. So the question should be should God have forsaken all of those generations of believers for the sake of your "common sense" for this and maybe a few generations before us?

(reply) Pardon my ignorance but I’m just not getting this; you have A and B
a. Jesus preaching, teaching, and working miracles,
b. Jesus preaching, teaching, working miracles, AND writing stuff down so future generations can know what he was about.
Please explain to me exactly how A is better than B

perhaps it would benefit your understanding of this process if you took the time to understand what the typical scribe had to do to procure writing material to practice his craft, let alone preserve his work. (It not like he could have went to office max and got what He needed. Plus keep in mind the current generation of that culture would not preserve his work unless it was admitted to a Scripture, which the Pharisees controlled. Most likely his writings would have been washed from the parchment on which it was written and some other document carefully drafted. (The Pharisees were Not exactly the biggest Jesus fans) This is why i keep asking when would He have the time, and to whom would he be writing??? Remember only those who lived in the temple generally could read and write, most of all the people Christ spoke to could not.

Who would Christ be helping by spend all of his time money and or effort writing to some unnamed generation, if the first was neglected and forgotten?

Now to directly answer you question A is better than B because Christ was not speaking to a "b" community. Further more in order to avoid setting up a religion that would worship the very Word of God as a God it self, He refrained in leaving such a "relic" to worship.

This thread was started because you wanted to know why Christ did not write anything down. As many have told you, it was because it was not the tradition to do so. God did not come to abolish tradition for the sake of doing so. As witnessed by the actions of Christ throughout out His ministry He worked well with the traditions and beliefs of man when ever it did not conflict with the expressed will of God. this was no different.

 

[Ken-1122]

Drich0150 (quote)” perhaps it would benefit your understanding of this process if you took the time to understand what the typical scribe had to do to procure writing material to practice his craft, let alone preserve his work.”

(reply) This didn’t seem to be a problem with the many men who wrote about him beginning 40 yrs after his death!

(quote)” Plus keep in mind the current generation of that culture would not preserve his work unless it was admitted to a Scripture, which the Pharisees controlled. Most likely his writings would have been washed from the parchment on which it was written and some other document carefully drafted”

(reply)Then why wasn’t this a problem when the Apostles wrote about him? Couldn’t Jesus do what they did?

(quote)” Who would Christ be helping by spend all of his time money and or effort writing to some unnamed generation, if the first was neglected and forgotten?”

(reply) Okay he was ready to do the will of his Father at age 12, he didn’t start preaching and teaching till age 30; that’s 18 years he could have spent putting God’s message down for future generations. And it’s not like it had to be a million pages long, maybe all that was needed to be put down could fit on 3 or 4 pages!
He had the time and the ability to do it; but thus far I haven’t heard a decent argument as to why he shouldn’t have done it.

(quote)” in order to avoid setting up a religion that would worship the very Word of God as a God it self, He refrained in leaving such a "relic" to worship.”

(reply) Oh stop with that! Christians aren’t that stupid! If Jesus had written the bible, they would worship the author of the bible; God not the book itself! Their rationale would be; why worship the book when you can have the real thing! I’m just a stupid atheist and even I can see that!

Ken

 

[solarwave]

I didn’t ask if the Bible has errors, I didn’t ask if Christianity as a whole is false, and I didn’t ask if God was real.
You answered a lot of questions I didn’t ask, but you neglected to answer the one question I did ask so I shall repeat: Is it your opinion that the bible lacks credibility because it was written by flawed and imperfect men?

Well I thought I was answering your question because it isn't clear what it would mean for something to 'lack credibility'.

In my answer I suggested that some of it can be believed as a source of truth. So I don't think it lacks credibility.

 

[drich0150]

(reply) This didn’t seem to be a problem with the many men who wrote about him beginning 40 yrs after his death!

I have pointed out several times now why that was.

(reply)Then why wasn’t this a problem when the Apostles wrote about him? Couldn’t Jesus do what they did?

After Pentecost the "Church" was established. Pentecost happened After the death of Christ (about 50 days) so who, exactly was going to hold onto 20 years (as you suggested 3 if he went along with tradition) of writings until then?

Again your questions do not take into account the method or the tradition of passing information for the day. It would be like some like Christ not writing something down today.
(quote)” Who would Christ be helping by spend all of his time money and or effort writing to some unnamed generation, if the first was neglected and forgotten?”

(reply)

Okay he was ready to do the will of his Father at age 12, he didn’t start preaching and teaching till age 30; that’s 18 years he could have spent putting God’s message down for future generations.

Where would they get the money for the "paper/parchment?" Do you know where parchment comes from? For every page written a lamb had to be slaughtered. This is why then temple priests were the only one who could afford to write anything down. Not to mention have you asked yourself why Christ waited till He was thirty to begin teaching? Because it was not lawful for a "rabbi" to freely teach until that age.

And it’s not like it had to be a million pages long, maybe all that was needed to be put down could fit on 3 or 4 pages!

What do you think needed to be written that would limit itself to just 3 or 4 pages? If He did not first establish His deity (Which only could be done through the testimony of others witnessing His good works) none of what He said or wrote down would mean anything to those people.

He had the time and the ability to do it; but thus far I haven’t heard a decent argument as to why he shouldn’t have done it.

Then you are simply not listening. The biggest reason He did not write anything down was because there was no one to write to. Because one no one in that culture except those who hated Him could read, and everyone in subsequent cultures would be dramatically effected dynamic dramatic change it would have on Christianity. We would look to worship more like Muslims. If this is what Christ wanted then He would have done so. As it is Christians are free from relics and methods to worship.

(

reply) Oh stop with that! Christians aren’t that stupid! If Jesus had written the bible, they would worship the author of the bible; God not the book itself! Their rationale would be; why worship the book when you can have the real thing! I’m just a stupid atheist and even I can see that!

There are Christians who worship the bible now. Some will not even consider a king James version printed before 1800 a true copy of the bible. Maybe you should spend sometime in the "other" parts of this board and discuss what others believe about the bible.

Marry is not God, and yet we manage to worship her as one, the Apostles are not God and yet we pray and bow down to them, the relics that supposedly have touched Jesus are not God and yet some how there are those of us who's entire faith hinges on their authenticity.

We are not all as "progressive" as you think all of us to be. The "real thing" is often time traded for things we can see hold and completely understand.

 

[bling]

Sketcher (quote
Okay how’s this
1.Then why was the bible written at all?

1. I already stated that: “It is only after you have many scattered Christians do you need a written message to support them and assure them; that they are being led by the correct Spirit. It is not designed for the non Christian.”
You write to those that you love that are not with you and you will not be seeing soon. A letter sent with a loving companion is second to a personal visit. Those letters can also help fellow Christians in the future, but that was not the authors original intent.

2 So why did Jesus do any teaching at all if he didn’t have anything new to say?

Could you not say the same thing about any teacher today?

One of the ways we know Jesus is from God is He is saying the same thing as God’s former prophets.

Jesus is really teaching by being a living example (serving, loving, confronting others) and it is really directed at the 12 and to some degree the 120. The “method” is different (since the indwelling Holy Spirit will be made available) and is the way we are to all be following (we don’t do it [but that is another subject]). The method is small groups, daily extended contact, in all kinds of situations with a Christ like person (the Holy Spirit is living through them) to the point (may take years) the individuals become like the leader and allow Christ to live through them leading their own group. If out of the small group you average one Christ like person per year in 36 years you run out of people on earth (all 6.5 billion).

3 See answer #1

Same as my #1 this page.

4 Well there are plenty of “scattered Christians” and one of the reasons is probably because the various authors who wrote about him are inconsistent about what he said.

There are some “word for word” differences, but Christ could have said them both with one recording one thing and another recording something else the “message” is 100% consistent, which you would totally not expect if these scattered individuals were making up the story and had their own hidden agenda.

Witnesses that say the exact same thing are not credible witnesses.

5 That argument has already failed. As far as translating, that was a problem with the current bible; for many years people were afraid to translate it into English for fear of getting it wrong. They say some people were even put to death for improper translating; but it exists today! The same would be if Jesus wrote the bible.

We have today hand written ancient manuscripts of the Bible in 17 different ancient languages ( English is not ancient). The Catholic Church did not want an English version to remain in power.
I do not see this addressing my comment.

How did I do? Let’s hear some more.

You gave some answers, but I do not see much thought going into your answers.

One more concept:
As a Christian, I read what fellow Christians wrote not expecting it to become an all time best seller, but a letter to fellow Christians at the time. They were like me, yet God could work through them to produce the Bible! Wow! If that is what God can do through just everyday Christians, what can God do through me, if I were to allow Him? You do not have to be Jesus himself or a modern day Moses in order to do unbelievably great things, but it will not be you doing them but Christ living through you and He deserves all the glory.

 

[Ken-1122]

Solarwave said concerning the bible lacking credibility (quote)”
Well I thought I was answering your question because it isn't clear what it would mean for something to 'lack credibility'.

In my answer I suggested that some of it can be believed as a source of truth. So I don't think it lacks credibility.”

(reply) What I meant by “lack credibility” is, if it isn’t seen as written the way Jesus would have wanted it to be written.

The reason I asked this question is because that is the claim many Muslims make against your bible, that too many flawed people had their hands in it; I was wondering if that was the same opinion that you were having. Now on 3/06/11 at 5:55 pm you said:
(quote)”I could see how Jesus writing anything down could have been very dangerous. If someone understood Him wrong or twisted the meaning it would have alot more power than if it happened to the apostles. With the Apostles people can see that they could have been fallible in their writing or at least that they were bound by their culture, but with Jesus being the Son of God it would be harder explain away anything which could be dangerous.”
Now that sounds to me like you are saying if Jesus wrote the bible, people would view it differently (more credible)than they do now. If that’s not what you are saying, please explain.

Drich0150 (quote)” After Pentecost the "Church" was established. Pentecost happened After the death of Christ (about 50 days) so who, exactly was going to hold onto 20 years (as you suggested 3 if he went along with tradition) of writings until then?”

(reply) I am sure God could have made sure his work was preserved. Next he said concerning Jesus writing stuff down

(quote)” Where would they get the money for the "paper/parchment?" Do you know where parchment comes from? For every page written a lamb had to be slaughtered. This is why then temple priests were the only one who could afford to write anything down.”

(reply) So let me see if I’ve got this straight: two pieces of fish and five loaves of bread and feeding 5000, turning water into wine, and raising the dead is a snap for the man, but acquiring the funds for simple writing utensils is too much for even God in the flesh to accomplish right???? If not please explain.

(quote)” What do you think needed to be written that would limit itself to just 3 or 4 pages? If He did not first establish His deity (Which only could be done through the testimony of others witnessing His good works) none of what He said or wrote down would mean anything to those people.”

(reply) okay so maybe his writings wouldn’t have made sense until after his death!

(quote)” The biggest reason He did not write anything down was because there was no one to write to. Because one no one in that culture except those who hated Him could read,”

(reply) are you saying all the apostles and his disciples were all illiterate? Where in the bible does it say this I must have missed it.

(quote)” There are Christians who worship the bible now. Some will not even consider a king James version printed before 1800 a true copy of the bible. Maybe you should spend sometime in the "other" parts of this board and discuss what others believe about the bible.

(reply) Do you worship the bible? Would you worship it if it were written by Jesus or would you worship God. How are most Christians different than you?

It’s getting late, I will respond to the rest later

Ken

 

[drich0150]

(reply) I am sure God could have made sure his work was preserved. Next he said concerning Jesus writing stuff down

you are missing the whole point. Christ Writing everything down changes the core dynamics of Christianity. you seem to not be addressing this central point on purpose.

(reply) So let me see if I’ve got this straight: two pieces of fish and five loaves of bread and feeding 5000, turning water into wine, and raising the dead is a snap for the man, but acquiring the funds for simple writing utensils is too much for even God in the flesh to accomplish right???? If not please explain.

Did you miss the whole Growing up in poverty thing? Where has the bible ever stated that Christ's miracles were ever used to benefit himself? He fasted in the desert for 40 days and the devil tempted Him, by telling Him to provide simple bread for Himself, by turning stones into bread. He declined and decided to follow the Will of His Father. Did you understand the explanation?

(reply) okay so maybe his writings wouldn’t have made sense until after his death!

Again what should have been written in the 4or 5 pages that you allowed Christ?

(reply) are you saying all the apostles and his disciples were all illiterate?

Yes

Where in the bible does it say this I must have missed it.

It was included in their original job titles.

(reply) Do you worship the bible?

I was originally taught to do this yes. My mother still does. In Christian terms most legalist are bound to the bible. I would say about 40% of Christians fall under this description.

Would you worship it if it were written by Jesus or would you worship God.

I can't say. I do not worship the bible because someone show me how it was wrong. If there was no one to help me see the truth then i would probably still be were i was told to be. the only reason I changed was because i wanted to worship God and not a religious expression.

How are most Christians different than you?

They are not, that is the problem.

 

[Jpark]

John 6:63 "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.

Also,

Eccl. 12:12 But beyond this, my son, be warned: the writing of many books is endless, and excessive devotion to books is wearying to the body.

Finally,

if Jesus wrote down something, would there be life in His writings?

2 Cor. 3:6 ...for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

There's a reason why we are instructed to speak the gospel.

 

[solarwave]

Now that sounds to me like you are saying if Jesus wrote the bible, people would view it differently (more credible)than they do now. If that’s not what you are saying, please explain.

I think people would view it differently, though how much different I don't know. Even now alot of people talk as if the words of Jesus in the gospels have more authority.