jump to last post 1-40 of 40 discussions (304 posts)

Was Jesus literate?

  1. Randy Godwin profile image93
    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago

    Why is there no book of Jesus?  The main character in the cult and not much is known about him.  Just a little when he is born, when he was 12, and not long before his supposed death.

    If he had just had the aforethought to pen his thoughts for his future adherents it might have helped some have a little more faith in him.  All we have is hearsay reports by suspect authors long after his supposed existence.

    But could he read and write?

    1. Ruben Rivera profile image80
      Ruben Riveraposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Who cares his legacy is already there

      1. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Who cares?  Just those of us who desire the truth.  You are apparently happy with hearsay evidence and that's okay for those who are easily manipulated.

        1. Ruben Rivera profile image80
          Ruben Riveraposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          The fact is that you will never get it, so why ask a question that has no answer, only theories and speculation, I get what I like and apply it and the rst discard it, obviously not everything is truth but I don't think we will ever know.

          1. Randy Godwin profile image93
            Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I am so glad I do not have your burning desire for truth!  LOL!

            1. Ruben Rivera profile image80
              Ruben Riveraposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Yeah spend the rest of your life worrying about your truth while I relax just experiencing the now and enjoying it, maybe you find some evidence but doubt it lol

              1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Who is worried? LOL!  It must be terrible to be so afraid of the truth.  Your last post proves what I meant when I said "ignorance is bliss."  Thanks!

                1. Ruben Rivera profile image80
                  Ruben Riveraposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Who is afraid?  You think I am afraid of a punishing god and eternal hell, nah.  I'm well beyond those human concepts.  All I know is that I'm here to experience and enjoy the ride, hey maybe when you discover "YOUR TRUTH" you get a nice trophy, LOL

      2. Cagsil profile image84
        Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        His legacy has been tainted by the "church". wink

    2. libby101a profile image60
      libby101aposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Randy I think you have Jesus confused with Muhammad! Jesus taught from the scriptures in the synagogue therefore he could read!

      1. thewholetruth profile image61
        thewholetruthposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        absolutely.  Luke 4

    3. Beelzedad profile image61
      Beelzedadposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      If we're to accept the Christian doctrine that Jesus was god, or the son of god, or whatever... perhaps, Jesus then had all the knowledge of the universe, just like dear old dad... smile

      1. Druid Dude profile image60
        Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        And we are all the sons and daughters of God (Don't keep excluding the girls. You're ticking off the Earth Mother) So.. where is your depository of Cosmic Knowledge hidden Beel? Oh... you missed that part. Oh... the cat ate your homework? Bad CAT!

    4. HubCrafter profile image80
      HubCrafterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Hi Randy:

      That's a good question..could Jesus read and write..and why didn't he write down his beliefs for us to read.

      As far as why he didn't write...who knows. It's just speculation, I guess.

      But we certainly know that he could read.

      According to the New Testament, Jesus went into his hometown synagogue and read out loud from the scroll of Isaiah.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I do remember JC discussing the scripture with the Rabbi priests or some such, but as far as him reading scripture is concerned, I'm sure someone will know the verses which support your post, if they indeed exist.

    5. Bruce_Leiter profile image60
      Bruce_Leiterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Randy, this is all speculation, because the Bible's focus is on what Jesus did and said.  Do you believe that Socrates existed?  I would assume so.  However, we only know about him through his follower Plato.  We have eyewitnesses' many accounts or those of his followers like Mark and Luke who got the accounts from the eyewitnesses in the four gospels.  We also have Paul's very credible eyewitness accounts of his dramatic conversion and his reflections on the meaning of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection.  We don't need Jesus' own written books because of all those eyewitness accounts by people who were willing to be persecuted and to die for their testimonies.  Who cares whether Jesus was literate?  He is the God-man who came to show us God and to live, die, and rise again for believers' deliverance.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Unless you are equating Socrates with Jesus, your point is useless.  I've never heard of anyone, who didn't believe Socrates existed, threatened with eternal damnation.

        No one depended on the wisdom of Socrates to rule their lives, or live imperiled if they did not.  The disciples had to keep the story alive, not only for their own self importance, but for the perpetuation of Christianity itself.

        Our history is full of such self appointed men.  Swaggart, Roberts, Jones, Bakker, and let's don't forget Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.  All with their own personal agendas, these self proclaimed spokesmen of God.  Men were the same in JC's time.

        1. Bruce_Leiter profile image60
          Bruce_Leiterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You missed my point, Randy.  Historical eyewitnesses like Plato and the apostles validated their testimonies by their lives.  I wasn't equating Socrates with Jesus but making the point that you can believe the writers of the New Testament that Jesus actually lived, died, and rose from the dead so that you can be delivered.  Believing in him avoids eternal punishment.  Jesus came to enable us to escape eternal separation from God that our own selfish rebellion brought upon ourselves.  He didn't come to condemn us but to rescue us through faith in him.  Those are biblical truths that I believe; you can believe as you wish.

          1. Randy Godwin profile image93
            Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            But why should I believe something there is no evidence of?  You have shown me nothing more than anyone can.  Just your own assumptions and nothing more.  Unless you have some proof any of the writers were actually who they said they were.  Do you have anything other than your assumptions?

            1. Bruce_Leiter profile image60
              Bruce_Leiterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I hope that my assumptions are the assumptions of the Bible.  If you can't believe in the testimonies of the biblical writers, given their willingness to stand up to persecution for their testifying to Jesus' resurrection (Acts 4 and 9), I don't what will convince you, Randy.

              Anyway, merry Christmas and happy new year!

              1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                There is no assurance JC'a followers ever wrote anything, Bruce.  All of the gospels were written long after the supposed death of JC took place with absolutely no evidence of his followers doing the writing.

                But anyway, Happy holidays to you!


                Randy

                1. Bruce_Leiter profile image60
                  Bruce_Leiterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Happy holidays to you as well, Randy!  You keep writing about the need for evidence.  Do you mean scientifically-proven evidence?  Science can never prove whether or not God exists, because he is spirit, not flesh and blood.  Science deals only with the material universe, not with spiritual matters. 

                  If you look at the Gospel of John 19:33-35, you will see one of the many evidences of the Bible's authenticity:  "But when they [the Roman soldiers who were sent to take the bodies down from the cross] came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.  Instead one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water.  The man who saw it  has given testimony, and his testimony is true.  He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe."  John testifies that he saw Jesus die and, later (John 20) appear to his disciples after he rose from the dead.  We know that his testimony was true because he was persecuted for that testimony without giving it up, even being exiled to the penal island of Patmos. 

                  You can find that evidence in Revelation1:9:  "I, John, your brother and companion in the suffering and kingdom and patient endurance that are ours in Jesus, was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus."  John was willing to suffer and die for his testimony.  Therefore, he was a trustworthy testifier.

                  Furthermore, a lot of people in the disciples' day charged that they made it all up.  Peter responded in his second letter (2 Peter 1:16), "We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty."  He goes on to describe Jesus' revealing his divine brightness on the mountain and the heavenly voice of approval.  Then, he says, "We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the mountain."  He goes on to claim that God inspired the whole Bible (the Old Testament at that time).

                  As to the length of time until Jesus' followers wrote the gospels and letters of the New Testament, that era was a listening time rather than a visual time in terms of people's learning unlike our time.  In addition, John's gospel reports that Jesus would send the Holy Spirit to remind them what he taught them.  The books were only written in the following 40 years after AD 30, when Jesus died on the cross by the eyewitnesses or by people like Luke who got the eyewitness accounts from the eyewitnesses. 

                  It is for these reasons and many more that God talked me into believing in him and his inspiration of the Bible when I was 16.  You're perfectly free to believe as you wish, however, Randy.

                  1. Beelzedad profile image61
                    Beelzedadposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    While it's wonderful to read such things about science, it should cause one to reflect on all the many, many technologies science has indeed brought for their convenience, health and well-being, all so that we may read of them to boast just how ineffective and impotent science can be in detecting their gods. 

                    What's interesting to note is that scientific instruments usually detect and measure effects that the human bodies sensory perception cannot, so we are to stand in awe and amazement of those whose sensory skill sets are well beyond anything science is able to muster as they fervently believe their "spiritual" world is something only they can see and hear.

                    They call it an 'experience'



                    The fact that people would rather suffer and die for their beliefs does not give their testimonies any credit whatsoever, in fact, one is to be quite suspicious of those who would offer such unbelievable testimonies as people rising from the dead in exchange for persecution. Clearly, they are psychotic.




                    But, never saw anything themselves, just accounts from so-called eyewitnesses.



                    Yikes! smile

                  2. Randy Godwin profile image93
                    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    You are a willing believer of someone who says "it is true because I say it is"  nothing more.  History if filled with martyrs.  I don't think even you would say they all died for a righteous cause. 

                    Those who died bringing down the World Trade Center thought they were sacrificing themselves for a righteous cause.  Many have also lied and cheated to promote the christian cause.  This is nothing new and went on even during the time of your favorite biblical storybook characters.

            2. Woman Of Courage profile image60
              Woman Of Courageposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Randy, If you don't believe a word of the bible, why waste time here asking believers for evidence? Shame on you to start a thread to mock and ridicule believers. hmm I guess you have nothing better to do. How can you say that someone is assuming when you are an expert of making assumptions with misinformation? Just wanted to give you something to think about. Enjoy your favorite hobby and a have a Happy New year.

              1. habee profile image90
                habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Randy, I was wondering...what was your purpose in starting this thread? You believe the Bible is fictional, filled with "fictional characters," I think you said. So why would it matter to you if one of the characters in a "myth" could read or not?

                1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                  Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  I am more interested in why believers never question why there is no book of Jesus.  But this seems pretty understandable when they give their excuses for the lapse. 

                  No writer was willing to write as Jesus because of the eventual screw-ups they would make in the book.  This would not look good for the perfect man.

                  There are so many mistakes in the gospels that it is apparent they did not wish to write one in JC's name.  No one forced any of you to post or read in this thread. Feel free to ignore it if you wish.

              2. Randy Godwin profile image93
                Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Who said I did not believe a word of the Bible, Woman of Courage?

                There are some things in the Bible which are known to history and have documents to support their existence.  King Herod is just one historical figure which comes to mind.  The writers of the bible use these known historical figures to lend credibility to the book.  Much like Margaret Mitchell did in Gone With The Wind.

                And what assumptions have I made, WOC?  Foolish things are often ridiculed, but you know that.  And who says there is anything better to do?  I think preventing delusional people from spreading false doctrine to others is well worth my time.

                1. habee profile image90
                  habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  So you really think you will change some minds with this thread?

                  I've always told you that I think some mistakes were made in the Bible, over years of different translations. Just like Herod. How can we be sure the Bible was referring to Herod I and not to one of his sons - especially since much of history was oral at the time. Most kings and other leaders aren't referred to as "the Great" until after their demise. I'm sure all the Herod rulers were pretty hard to keep up with. Historians can't even agree on the year of Herod I's death.

                  I find it strange that no one tried to claim their writings as Jesus's.

      2. Cagsil profile image84
        Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Actually, this statement is untrue. Socrates was known for his own work, regardless of Plato's false ideology which is derived from mystical thinking and not reality thinking.

        Actually, I think you should do a little bit more research on the topic, because apparently you have half-truths here in this statement.

        B.S.- Paul's interpretation, along with the Pauline Letters and the ideology of Plato is what makes up the NT. All of it is false. There is nothing credible in Paul's interpretation.
        Again, research might help you- I find your statement here completely out of context, considering the disciples, his loyal followers, never wrote anything down until some of them started to die off, before the supposed resurrection. Hence, the reason for many of the gospels to be written some 40-50 years later.

        False, but nice try. I'll give you the "God-Man", because he was the first unbeliever of religion to realize that "religion" and it's rulers were the ones who were deceiving humanity at the time.

        He even pointed it out so as to inform his follower who not to listen to and who to listen to. Jesus despised religion and his teachings were not religious in any manner- his teachings were about oneself learning how to become "God" in their own life, because there was no god.

        It's truly unfortunate that Jesus had to pay with his life, so the rulers at the time and of religion could keep their nasty little secret.

        So please.

        1. hanging out profile image60
          hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          unfortunate the jesus had to pay with his life...... so pleaseeeee.

          all credibility for interpreting the bible correctly.. falling like lightning in flames and shot down in that one sentence.

          seems your boat has been drifting from shore for a very long time.

        2. Bruce_Leiter profile image60
          Bruce_Leiterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Hi, Cagsil!  We meet again.  If Jesus hated religion, why did he say that he would build his church on the foundation of Peter's confession that Jesus is the Messiah (Matthew 16:16-18)?  Where did you get those ideas about the New Testament, which certainly does not even hint at them? 

          I was merely making the point that we know the reality of historical figures and their teachings through eyewitnesses like Plato and the Apostles who followed Jesus for three years. 

          I don't agree with your assessment of the New Testament as the result of Paul's ideas.  Matthew was a tax collector who followed Jesus, Mark was his follower, though not part of the 12.  Luke was a doctor who accompanied Paul on a missionary journey and who researched his books, Luke and Acts, thoroughly with the original Apostles.  John was the Apostle "whom Jesus loved," an eyewitness of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, who was willing to be persecuted and die for his testimony about Jesus.  They are credible eyewitnesses, to say the least.  That's why I believe that Jesus didn't have to write his own book.  You can believe or not believe as you wish.  But I believe that Jesus is the way to God. 

          If Jesus was teaching us how to be our own gods, why did he command us to be perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect (Matthew 5:48) and to seek first God's kingdom and righteousness (Matthew 6:33)?  I believe that the Bible says that we can only begin to fulfill those commands by accepting Jesus' life, death, and resurrection as the only way to God and then living with God's power flowing into our lives.  Some day believers will be perfect, but not until Jesus returns.  Again, those are my responses to your comments, which you have a right to make.

          1. Cagsil profile image84
            Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            And you make the same mistake that Paul did of Jesus' work.

            You assume too much and fail to accept the fact that Jesus spoke in metaphors and parables. You also fail to understand that the only language available at the time was the primitive "religious" terms.

            You apparently do not take in account the "metaphors" that Jesus used, so you have things out of context. wink

            But, nice try again. Btw- Do have a safe and happy holidays. smile

            1. Bruce_Leiter profile image60
              Bruce_Leiterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              You too, Cagsil!  What "metaphors" was he using when he commanded us to perfect as our heavenly Father was perfect and to seek God's kingdom and righteousness first?  Those commands are in Jesus' teaching in his "Sermon on the Mount."  Anyone can allegorize Scripture to make it mean what he/she wants it to mean.  However, I was an English teacher 8 years with an English Master's.  I was then a pastor of 7 churches in 27 years until God sent me into retirement to write Christian books.  As a result, you're comments are right up my "alley," so to speak :-)!  You might be interested in reading my books (I hope, next year), since you will be able to ask for them at your local library (to show you that this is not an advertisement :-). 

              I don't believe that Paul made any mistakes interpreting the meaning of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection.

              You're right that Jesus spoke in metaphors and parables, but not even close to all of his sayings are metaphorical or parabolic.  His Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) is certainly notl.  Rather, it's Jesus' law or goals for his followers, who can make a beginning following them in God's power after their new birth by the Holy Spirit.  God has done that miracle in my life without my deserving it, and I wish that he would in your life.  However, what you believe is up to you.

              Anyway, merry Christmas and a greatly-blessed 2011, Cagsil!

              1. hanging out profile image60
                hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                somethings are parables and others are not. To assert that ALL things jesus said are parables is wrong.  Jesus spoke plainly quite often. Yes jesus used the language of the times which we are not unable to understand.
                Those who mystify jesus words too much are drifting ever so slowly away from the shore (which is christ)

                1. Bruce_Leiter profile image60
                  Bruce_Leiterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Amen, hanging out!  He did speak in Aramaic, and his followers wrote his sayings in Greek, both languages that people know today.  That's how we got the English translations.  Experts in those languages and Hebrew (Old Testament) translate those languages of the original into English.  I find it very helpful to compare those translations with the languages of the original Bible to enrich my understanding of it.  However, reading a good translation like the New International Version will give anyone the meaning that God meant to give us.  It's great to "hang out" with you :-)!

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                    Mark Knowlesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    I do not think you are being truthful, Bruce. How many ancient languages do you speak? In any case - ancient Greek is nothing like modern Greek - any more than English is.

                    Dear me. I wonder why so many believers tell so many lies. Is this wot god sed to do? sad

              2. thewholetruth profile image61
                thewholetruthposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                It is only possible to correctly interpret scripture within context.
                When you take a verse out of context, it becomes a pretext and can be made to mean anything.
                Regardless of the language of origin, many things in life remain the sme. There is a contextual precept to which something refers--common sense.
                If Jesus speaks about life and death--pretty simple to see what he is referring to. John 3 itself has some tricky stuff--born a second time--Jesus sticks with his analogy and interprets for Nicodemus what this means--born of the spirit.
                Many times the answer to the questions we have are within the passage we are reading or within a passage of reading about the same topic.

                1. Woman Of Courage profile image60
                  Woman Of Courageposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Amen!

    6. pennyofheaven profile image82
      pennyofheavenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      While he may have been able to write. He may not have been a writer.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Why?  Was he shy, lazy, self-conscious, a bad speller, lack of imagination, writer's block, bad penmanship, or what?  Any reasons I've missed?

        1. Cagsil profile image84
          Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          lol lol lol lol lol

        2. pennyofheaven profile image82
          pennyofheavenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          No idea?

          Does everyone you know, who knows how to write, write? If not why not? What percentage of mankind who know how to write, make up writers that we know, are published?

          It is not uncommon for one not to write.

          We have healers here who do not write about their experiences or their life. Simply because they are not writers. Their abilities lie in healing not writing.

          1. Randy Godwin profile image93
            Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Claiming to be the son of God infers certain things.  So does supposedly performing miracles.  Somehow I can't imagine an entity such as JC having to ask his dad for the ability to at least write "Jesus was here" on a wall somewhere. 

            Either he was special, or he wasn't.  Which is it do you think?

            1. pennyofheaven profile image82
              pennyofheavenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Not any more special than you or I except in the fact that he had more insight into the nature of our essences. He even stated this somewhere. I am capable of many things but you are capable of far greater...or something like that. This for me says he realized the limitations of our finite world but overcame much of them and knew that if he could we could and more.

            2. Cagsil profile image84
              Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Hey Randy, don't mean to interrupt your conversation with Penny, but I think it might help to remember, that Jesus spoke in metaphors and parables, so as to confuse those who destroy him.

              Seriously, "son of God" is a metaphor in the old religious primitive language.
              No miracles were perform, that which were real at least. Imagined yes, but not real.

              He was the first truly honest man, who grasp what life truly needs, so co-existing among one another can be done in peace.

              It's the greedy power-grubbing elite who want to dominate and control others.

              1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                I would like to think you are right, Cags.  In fact, I would like to believe lots of stuff in the bible is right.  I would also wish some was wrong too.  But there is no proof of either.

                I am willing to listen to anyone with anything to show things are one way or another.  Unfortunately, so far there is merely speculation and hearsay to wade through in the endeavor to find something of substance to authenticate JC's existence.

              2. hanging out profile image60
                hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Son of God has more meaning than you think.  The son is the inheritor of all that the father has. When referred to this way, Son becomes an icon for "one who inherits all".  Son of God when kept in biblical perspective has two meanings... one.. Jesus was born of God through the flesh = son, male, member of the family. two....Son = first harvest -  the son of God, a direct lineage... we are sons of God (those who are born into the family of God) and God is waiting for more sons.

                1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                  Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  You forgot to mention "sun," the very first god to be worshiped, and also the myth which Jesus sprang from.  I'm sure it was merely an oversight on your part, right? hmm

                  1. pisean282311 profile image56
                    pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    ultimately all religions lead to sun...sun is first thing humans worshiped along with rain god ...we cant blame them...with what ever knowledge they had they atleast made sure that we as species survived...as we gained more knowledge sun was replaced by other deity and finally to current position...

                  2. habee profile image90
                    habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    I lika da apple pie!!!!

                  3. hanging out profile image60
                    hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    no not an oversight at all. God said not to worship the sun so why would He do that?  Son is in the correct context and without need for correction.

                    if you don't understand something ask more question but please don't infer to add some truth to a statement you quite obviously didn't grasp.

                    Yes sun is the first thing man conjured up to worship from the imagination of his mind.. but God presented himself to moses by a sign of a bush not burning up and said .. "i am God.. and you will lead my people out of egypt".
                    Pretty cool thing for God to do. And sure enough Gods people came out of egypt and in due process, egypt and its imagined Gods were defeated, humiliated and God proved to be the only true God.

                    Previously to moses' pharaoh, the story of joseph and his brothers who threw the boy and his coat of many colors into the well, sold him to egyptians and he spent time in jail where he interpreted the dreams of the cook and that other guy. 2 yrs later pharaoh had a dream and no one could interpret it but joseph and the cook told pharaoh that in prison joseph told him the meaning of his dream.. the prior pharaoh to moses' pharaoh thanked the God of joseph and acknowledged josephs God as a God of wonder and joseph was promoted over all of egypt to handle the food.
                    This is why God hardened the heart of this second pharaoh because moses' pharaoh forgot the God of joseph (all roads do not lead to the God of the bible) and because God wanted to show himself supreme to the made up beliefs of man, mans imagination and mans socio-political regime.
                    Just thought i would share that with ya.

            3. Bruce_Leiter profile image60
              Bruce_Leiterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Randy, you can believe as you wish.  Why did you pose this unanswerable question?  There is no evidence in or outside the Bible about the answer.  Did you just want to needlessly speculate with people?  I prefer questions that can be answered with some obtainable basis.  Of course, Jesus was raised as a Jewish lad, and the boys especially went to Synagogue school to learn how to read and write.  He also read the book of Isaiah in the Nazareth synagogue after he started his ministry and was persecuted in his hometown.  Therefore, he was literate. 

              Why none of his writings are in the Bible, no one knows.  It's all needless speculation.  Just my opinion.

              1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                Mark Knowlesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Only the wealthy went to LOL "Synagogue School". Seeing he woz a poor carpenter's son - I think this unlikely - therefore he woz illiterate.

                1. Bruce_Leiter profile image60
                  Bruce_Leiterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  How do you know that Joseph was a "poor" carpenter?  He owned land around or in Bethlehem; that's why he had to go there for the census.  So he had means.

                  1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    What year was the mentioned census, Bruce?  And what did the census require of non-Roman citizens.  I will accept the answer in ancient Greek if I have to.

                2. classicalgeek profile image87
                  classicalgeekposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Ancient illiteracy is based on assumption, not on evidence.

                  "So R. Jehudah said in the name of Rabh: May the memory of Joshua b. Gamla be blessed, for, were it not for him, Israel would have forgotten the Torah, as in former times the child who had a father was instructed by him; but the one that had not, did not learn at all. The reason is that they used to explain the verse [Deut. xi. 19]: 'And ye shall teach them to your children,' etc., literally--ye personally. It was therefore enacted that a school for the education of children in Jerusalem should be established, on the basis of the following verse [Is. ii. 3]: '. . . for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord out of Jerusalem.' And still the child who had a father was brought to Jerusalem and instructed; but the one who had not, remained ignorant. It was therefore enacted that such school should be established in the capitals of each province; but the children were brought when they were about sixteen or seventeen years of age, and when the lads were rebuked by their masters, they turned their faces and ran away. Then came Joshua b. Gamla, who enacted that schools should be established in all provinces and small towns, and that the children be sent to school at the age of six or seven years..." (Babylonian Talmud, Tract Baba Bathra (Last Gate), Chapter II, p. 62)

                  This education was at municipal expense:
                  "Raba further said: The number of pupils to be assigned to each teacher is twenty-five. If there are fifty, we appoint two teachers. If there are forty, we appoint an assistant, at the expense of the town." (Babylonian Talmud, Baba Bathra, 21a).

                  It is alleged that there were 480 elementary schools in Jerusalem at the time of that city's destruction by Vespasian:
                  "There were 480 synagogues (batte kenesiot) in Jerusalem, each containing a bet ha-sefer, (primary school for the Scriptures), and a bet Talmud, for the study of the Law and the tradition; and Vespasian destroyed them all" (Yer. Meg. iii. 73d; Lam. R., Introduction 12, ii. 2; Pesik. xiv. 121b; Yer. Ket. xiii. 35c)." (quoted in article, Jewish Encyclopedia, 'Bet Ha-Midrash.'

                  1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Gamla was born many years after the supposed death of JC.  Got anything from anyone supporting JC's education who personally was there?

                  2. Mark Knowles profile image60
                    Mark Knowlesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    So - you are assuming he could read based on the fact that there were public religious schools instituted decades after his supposed existence? You have no actual evidence of this. Nor - of course - do you have any actual evidence that this person even existed.

                    Assumptions and faith based beliefs is what you have, Thrown on a good dose of wishful thinking and away you go.

                    The school system of which you speak was instituted in 64 C.E. Somewhat after your non-existent friend.

                    Assumptions dude. Lots of them. The school system of which you speak also relied heavily on "developing good memory skills in addition to comprehension by practice of oral repetition."

                    Until such time as you have some sort of evidence - both for your invisible super being's only son - and his supposed skills as a writer, I will continue to use logical deduction.

                    Yes - like all good religions a free school system was instituted for children as young as possible in order to maintain the congregation. But - really? The Son of God couldn't manage to write anything down? How remiss..... Surely He could do anything He wanted to and would not have needed to go to school? He was teaching the teachers was he not? lol

              2. Beelzedad profile image61
                Beelzedadposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                So do I, but I'm quite puzzled as to why anyone would want to accept wholeheartedly on faith those questions that have no obtainable basis?  smile

                1. hanging out profile image60
                  hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  why am i not surprised

        3. HubCrafter profile image80
          HubCrafterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Perhaps there are other reasons why Jesus did not leave any writings...

          Jesus quoted the scriptures, "By the mouth of two witnesses a thing is confirmed" -He left it up to the four gospel writers to speak of his work.

          Jesus said he did not come to promote himself...but (rather) his Father in heaven.

        4. Darrke Thoughts profile image59
          Darrke Thoughtsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Too busy to write... all that healing, not to mention pubic speaking. Besides, how many people could read back then.  Maybe he could reach more folks talking than writing.

          1. pisean282311 profile image56
            pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

            well he could not reach many in his life time it seems...he had very few followers in number during his life time...after he left the world , his legend grew ...phenomenal rise of religious figures have been that of muhammad and Buddha...they virtually took over every one...buddha was more of miracle because he didnt use force but sheer logic...

          2. Woman Of Courage profile image60
            Woman Of Courageposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Darrke, Great point! smile Jesus was a very busy man doing what's more important.

    7. 61
      KennyLynnCobbJrposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      The whole new Testament is the book of Jesus. Yes, Jesus was literate. He read the Torah in the temples. Matbe you need to reread the entire Bible again. But, reread it slowly. Do not do like most do, fast as lightning. When you get to Romans Chapter 13 do not believe the propaganda that states that you are to fear all governments. "We the People" of this entire world are the government.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        The NT writers profess to be reporting about the life of Jesus, but it could easily be fiction written merely to bolster the  Christian faith.  I will revisit the part about JC being in the temple and discussing the Torah with the Rabbis.

        1. hanging out profile image60
          hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          If you take GOD out of the equation you will stumble over everything. To take GOD out of the bible is to remove all the pages. The two are inseparable. When discussing bible... please remember that GOD is the author and finisher of that particular book.

          1. Randy Godwin profile image93
            Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            You are correct.  Take Scarlett out of Gone With The Wind and Tara gets taken by the carpetbaggers.

            1. habee profile image90
              habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Damn yankees!

    8. qwark profile image60
      qwarkposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Randy:
      How would one know?
      Qwark  smile:

      1. Druid Dude profile image60
        Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        That which dwells within you will tell you.

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          The good guy or the bad guy?

          1. pennyofheaven profile image82
            pennyofheavenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Which ever one you feed.

      2. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Easy!  His writings would make perfect sense with no chance of misinterpretation or misunderstanding of its meaning.  Surely a deity would have the ability to do this, especially if he wanted his message to be received and understood.

        If not, then he was only a mortal like the rest of us.

        1. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Randy:
          Ah but this jesus fellow never wrote anything that is available for us to read.
          So I ask again: How would one know if he was literate? If in fact he even existed.
          If you think he wrote something, would you pls tell me where to find it? I'd love to read it.
          Thanks.
          Qwark

          1. Randy Godwin profile image93
            Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Of course he didn't write anything!  Even if he did exist he didn't have the ability to write or he would have done so and not depended on unknown Greek writers to quess about his life.

        2. hanging out profile image60
          hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You have to know that to follow GOD is not easy. GOD must be followed from the heart, not the mind. To follow anything from the heart there must be patience, trust, loyalty and determination.
          A simple text will not produce this.
          The scriptures are in such a way that people who sincerely want to know GOD have to search for him. GOD is not worried about revealing his word the parts the unsaved need to know are quite plain. The deeper parts of GOD are a matter of context and perusal, seeking and desiring. GOD wants people to lean on Him, not to their own understandings and this they will get IF they lean on Him and what better way to lean on Him than to find a scripture that peaks ones interest and having some difficulty, the christian begins to pray for understanding to the GOD who wrote the book.
          The inference above by randy goodwin omits Jesus as GOD in the flesh or that jesus even had a connection with GOD in the first place. This is wrong. GOD invented language, speech and pens, GOD works through people and jesus was a fleshly husk which contained fully GOD inside, therefore GOD could write in all earthly languages and speak all earthly languages fluently.

          1. Randy Godwin profile image93
            Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            You're not serious.  I'll bet you cannot tell me what language the Ten Commandments were written in.  And does the Bible mention if Moses could even read them or not?

            1. hanging out profile image60
              hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              moses was brought up in the pharoahs house, naturally he would have been educated by that school system of the time. I assume egyptian since they all came out of egypt and moses was learned in egypt.

              Exodus 2:10   And the child grew, and she brought him unto Pharaoh's daughter, and he became her son. And she called his name Moses: and she said, Because I drew him out of the water.

                Exodus 2:11   And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was GROWN, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren.

          2. habee profile image90
            habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Randy Goodwin and I had this same discussion this evening at my house. I say the Bible was inspired by God, but it was written by man, and it's been translated many times. Man is fallible, and as you know, the early Church had a difficult time even deciding which books to include in the Bible. Who got to decide? How were the decisions made?

            Jesus is a great role model to emulate. Be caring, loving, honest, unselfish, and nonjudgmental. That message is pretty clear. Too bad a lot of "Christians" seem to overlook His example. I believe Jesus existed and that He was/is the son of God. But even for those who don't believe in a Supreme Being, Jesus sets an excellent example of how to be a "good person." Practically every society values the traits He embodied.

            1. Randy Godwin profile image93
              Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Goodwin?  Now you're talking like a Yankee!

          3. Woman Of Courage profile image60
            Woman Of Courageposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            hangingout, Exactly! God is all-powerful and Great. There is nothing to hard for God to do. He is a miracle worker and I give him the highest praise of all big_smile

            1. 0
              jomineposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              magic worker or magician  would have been a better term

            2. hanging out profile image60
              hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              yep WOC its a much more beautiful life with God in it. i often am amazed that the unsaved can't grasp the basic principle that God works through people. That people are made of the same stuff (molecules, atoms) that the wind and the sea are made of and jesus spoke to the wind and sea to calm them (but the wind and sea dont have ears and neither can they hear?)
              God is on every level even the molecular.

        3. Darrke Thoughts profile image59
          Darrke Thoughtsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          If he wanted to make the message clear.  I think you got it there.  Maybe a clear message wasn't the point at all, but one that people had to puzzle over and think about and decide to believe or not to believe. Faith is about believing things you can't prove.  But there are also some types of knowledge that you have to learn for yourself. Someone else can't just tell you.

          1. pisean282311 profile image56
            pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

            well humans already have lot of puzzles to solve...teaching should be easy and not puzzling...if teacher doesnot make it simple to understand , that teacher needs teaching about how to teach...

          2. Randy Godwin profile image93
            Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            In other words, ignore the sense god gave you?  If something smells fishy then never mind?  Do you look before crossing the street or merely trust god will protect you as you run across?

            You trust your common sense, I hope.  Why should we follow our sense of logic in everything but religion?

            1. thewholetruth profile image61
              thewholetruthposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              When you have the need to live by the heart and the mind, you will see that God doesn't have to make sense--to our puny minds.
              He is too infinite for us. He lives in a continuum of the everlasting.
              He was present before creation and He will never cease to exist.
              The proof of His existence is in your words--He made you in His own image--He made us to be like gods--with the ability to reason, communicate--superior to the animals. This freedom to think gives us the freedom to choose rightly or wrongly and therefore to be responsible for the eternal consequences of our decisions.
              If the Son makes you free you will be free indeed.

              1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                Mark Knowlesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                So - are you claiming that this god thing does make sense to you because your mind can grasp it as it is superior to the puny minds around you?

                Or are you saying that god just does not make sense?

                Seeing as you know so much about this god - I am going with the former.

                1. hanging out profile image60
                  hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  so are you claiming this evolution thing does make sense to you because you can grasp it? but the God thing does not make sense to you because you cannot grasp it? So are you claiming that this quantum physics thing does not make sense to you because you cannot grasp it? So does the nebula thing not make sense to you because you cannot grasp it? but you will believe in the nebula thing because you have seen a picture of it.
                  upright monkey indeed.

              2. Randy Godwin profile image93
                Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Not in my words!  And not in yours either.  Just wishful thinking on your part, nothing else.

                1. Druid Dude profile image60
                  Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  How much of a trail through the forest can you see without a flashlight?
                  Why does toilet water rotate in the opposite direction on opposite sides of the equator? How were the Mayans able to descride a galactic phenomenon that NASA has verified? Who built the city in S. Turkey, purposely buried it, that blowns Sumer out of the water for age? What does it mean that modern man's trek upon the planet has just been doubled by the discovery of Homo Sapien teeth? Why is so much ignored, totally missed by those of you who think you hold all the answers and place your faith in those who are responsible for your guinea pig status? You think that certain beliefs make no sense. Ever honestly examine your own? If some veiw you as less intelligent, can you really blame them? Peace guys!

                  1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Thanks for that..whatever it was, Drudu.  LOL!  It certainly cleared things up for me!


                                                          How much of a trail through the forest can you see without a flashlight?

            2. hanging out profile image60
              hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              There is nothing common sensical about God. He is very imaginative. God never does things the same way twice. He is creative beyond any creativeness we have ever had on the planet.
              Jericho.. walls felled by yelling and trumpet blowing
              Moses.. hold staff over the sea and it will part
              etc and so on.

    9. Shahid Bukhari profile image60
      Shahid Bukhariposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Not in the Ivy League sense of the term ... The Lord Teacheth Believers.

    10. rebekahELLE profile image91
      rebekahELLEposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I don't really know the answer, but I have read that Galilee was not as technologically advanced as Jerusalem or other cities where government and religious scribes knew how to read and record.

      he may not have wanted to carry around an armload of scrolls. hmm
      there's reference of him writing with his finger in the dirt.

      he probably knew how to read the old Hebrew scrolls. I believe they spoke Aramaic.
      Matthew the tax collector would have known how to write. they carried around small tablets to collect data.

      the fishermen ran businesses in those times, sometimes having small fleets to oversee. some of his disciples may have known how to record earnings/payments.

      I don't know. I'm just speculating from history during those times.

    11. chatpilot profile image76
      chatpilotposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      John 8:6  This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. (KJV)

      The answer is obvious, if he could write then surely he could read as well. I agree with you that it was a shame that he did not write anything himself. But I know the reason he did not write anything his self it was because Jesus did not exist as an historical person. But that is a subject for another forum or even hub.

    12. 0
      Sweetnslateposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      This is where as Followers of Jesus Christ we get it all wrong. WE beat people over the head with our believes. Don't get me wrong---I truly believe that the BIBLE is the INFALIABLE WORD OF GOD!  However, when we focus so much on proving our point we leave out Grace. Jesus came for the sinner not the righteous...he accepted all. When it is clear that one refuses to believe such as Randy, then we need to back off and pray. Has anyone at one given point in this thread---shared a personal experience with Jesus Christ with Randy?  However, the fact that Randy is even asking these questions proves that God is up to something. Remember, Paul was Saul a man set out to destroy all followers of Jesus---GOD CHANGED HIS LIFE AND CAN CHANGE RANDY'S! You can not convince a man to change his mind once he has set it---prayer goes along way.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Give me a break!  This is so funny!  Okay, who's the sockpuppet joker?  Pretty good imitation of a Jehovah's Witness but I know it can't be real!


        Good one guys!->

      2. Woman Of Courage profile image60
        Woman Of Courageposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Sweetnslate, Excellent point. Yes God is up to something. I, along with others have shared our personal experience with Jesus Christ on previous threads, but he reject it, so I have been praying for him. God is Great, and prayer goes along way indeed.

    13. Claire Evans profile image89
      Claire Evansposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Jesus taught in the temple so He must have been literate.  Why didn't He write about Himself? Paper was very expensive and, why, wouldn't have lasted since He'd have to carry it around with Him whereever He went.  Practical reasons must have played a part.  Jerusalem was also razed to the ground with the destruction of the Temple in 70AD.  Even if Jesus had written anything, it would have been destroyed then.  Also, how would we authenticate any document written by Jesus? Someone could argue it's a fake.  There's no way of proving otherwise.

      No amount of writing in the Bible can prove the resurrection.  Only a personal relationship with the Holy Spirit can.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Illiterate preachers are nothing new to history, Claire.  I seriously doubt any of JC's group were literate, if they existed at all.  One doesn't have to read or write to speak or to use myth and parables in their sermon.  Or do you disagree?

        Why do you assume everything he wrote would have been destroyed?  Check out how many relics, including pieces of the cross, are claimed to be in existence.  LOL!


        Which Holy Spirit?

        1. pisean282311 profile image56
          pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

          well after 4 large pecks..every spirit looks holy....

        2. Claire Evans profile image89
          Claire Evansposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Jesus had quite a number of disciples outside of the 12 from all walks of life.  I'm sure they had to have been a literate person or two.  However, the vast majority of them would have been illiterate. 

          Jesus was able to debate the Scriptures with the Pharisees who were professional Scribes themselves.  He was probably taught how to read and write the Scriptures. 

          Then there is the case of Jesus writing the names of the men who slept with the prostitute they condemned in the sand. 

          http://www.catholicireland.net/pages/in … mp;art=971

          I don't assume everything would have been destroyed in the fire but name me one document that has survived prior to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD?  I mean, the chances are so remote and as I have asked, how could anyone authenticate it? We already have fake gospels like the one of Judas.  Jesus travelled a lot.  Where was He to keep His papers from His childhood? It just doesn't seem practical.

          1. Randy Godwin profile image93
            Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            There are no original papers or scrolls from any of the gospel writers either.  But we supposedly have their accounts.  Why couldn't JC have done the same?

            1. Jerami profile image79
              Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              The followers of Christ had all flew from Jerusalem by 62 AD.
                Anything that was in the synagogue would have had nothing to do with Jesus, remember they did not accept him.

                The disciples wrote letters to each other in different towns.
                Remember these followers had gone underground.
                It is these letters that are the only writings that were preserved. 
                Small groups of believers were scattered through out the Roman empire and all that they had were these letters confirming the life of Jesus. 
                They would have been studying and preaching from what we call the OLD Testament.
                The early church mostly consisted of the old ways with the fulfillment of those prophesy (substantiated by the letters) as a small portion of their Doctrine.
                 They were still of the Hebrew faith until the Roman Empire called together all of these religious leaders together, collected these letters and established Christianity as we know it today.

                 Read between the lines and go figure whatever ya want to.
                It doesn't matter if Jesus was literate or not.
                Don't ya know?  the cards was stacked against him from the Get-Go   

                 Just like when the Hebrew people wanted a king like other nations and god Gave them Saul then David.. 
                The people didn't want to follow the Lord, they wanted a religion.

              1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Reading between the lines is not my goal, Jerami.  Only finding facts will satisfy me.  There are already too many bible based faiths around using pure conjecture as truth.  Most disagree with the others about what role Jesus played and with the meaning of the words in the bible.

                There is already too much hearsay and plagiarism in the bible itself.  Jesus could have helped out a bit and wrote down his wishes.  Surely a god could do this and save it for his followers.  If not, he wasn't much of a forward thinker either.

                1. Cagsil profile image84
                  Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Hey Randy, if you simply pull Jesus' message out of religion, escape the myth aspect, you'll find the truth of it.

                  His message of Love, Compassion and Mercy is the path to peace. If that isn't forward thinking, then I'm not sure what qualifies?

                  Love yourself and Love your fellow human as yourself.

                  Have Compassion for those who do not understand or know better.

                  Have Mercy on those who act against others, because they do not understand or know better.

                  In the present day situation- if there truly was more love in the world, as described above, then the world would be a better place.

                  If people truly had compassion for those who do not understand or know better, then we would have a more tolerant way of life.

                  If people practiced mercy for others, then revenge type acts would be less, along with many other acts of violence.

                  Just a thought. hmm

                2. Jerami profile image79
                  Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  OK ...  even if Jesus had written a book. This would change nothing concerning who believes in him and who don't.

                     I know you don't kike this word ..  but..  tough

                  Maybe    he wouldn't want us to have a book that he had written cause he knew that people would worship it.

                     And he don't want us to worship a book.

                  1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    So you don't think Jesus could write a book which left no doubt as to it's authors identity?  Obviously, the god you worship must be rather ordinary.  And worshiping a book is exactly what you have now, Jerami. 

                    Without your Bible you have no god to worship.  Without the Bible there would be no variety of different christian beliefs.  The "Holy Bible" might give you a hint of how it is regarded.

                    More "ifs" "maybes"  help nothing does it.  Well like you said, it's "tough" there is so little factual evidence of Jesus even existing, much less being a god's offspring.  Conjecture doesn't get it. Tough!

              2. pylos26 profile image76
                pylos26posted 5 years ago in reply to this

                In your first paragraph I believe you are referring to Jews when you use the pronoun “they”, and in your teachings you say one cannot inter the kingdom of heaven without Jesus.
                So, its pretty sensible to assume that you are saying that Jews are doomed to hell. Just 'reading between the lines" as you put it.

                1. qwark profile image60
                  qwarkposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Go git'im Pylos!  smile:
                  Qwark

                2. Randy Godwin profile image93
                  Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Of course, the only cult members actually going to heaven are the "Church of God" members. Everyone else is doomed!  LOL!

            2. Claire Evans profile image89
              Claire Evansposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              So if you concede there are no original scrolls left from the original gospels writers, then why should an original scroll from Jesus be around? The Gospels are essentially reporting Jesus' gospels.

              Is that not enough? This is a silly conversation. I'm not sure what you are hoping to gain by this thread.  Common sense ought to tell you that it doesn't matter if an original scroll existed or not because there is no way to authenticate it.  No amount of scrolls from Jesus could prove His divinity as the Son of God without the resurrection, anyhow.

              Why do you even care what Jesus did?

              1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                So, are you saying the son of a god's words would be no different than the hearsay accounts?  That it would be impossible to differentiate between writings by common mortals and those of an omnipotent deity? 

                I would think Jesus would be a bit better at not confusing his followers than his mouthpieces.  But then again, when I think of omnipotent beings, I consider them infalible, not uncertain.

                As I said, I question to learn.  Others are easily sated.

                1. Claire Evans profile image89
                  Claire Evansposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Okay, would you be able to recognise what was written by the son of God? Tell me what Jesus would have had to have written that would make you say, "Now I'm convinced.  This has been written by a divine person".

                  The point I'm trying to make is that if someone doesn't want to believe something, they won't, no matter how many perfect gospels are written.  Even with the fallible gospels, we know what Jesus was about, the claims He made and His gospel.  We don't get to know the Holy Spirit through writings but through a personal relationship.

                  Now if there was no evidence of the Holy Spirit and I just had the gospels, I wouldn't be impressed.   I tend to believe things only when I have evidence for it.

                  1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Certainly a god's writing would not appear the same as a mortal's.  If it did, then I would be highly disappointed at how JC's ability to convey a message was no better than thar a mere mortal was capable of.

                    And if a person convinces themselves they are being spoken to by god they won't believe anything else, no matter how true it is.  A form of self-hypnosis which hinders the truth from being accepted.  I see this frequently.

    14. ediggity profile image60
      ediggityposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Yes, Jesus could read:

      Luke 4:16–20
      {4:16} And he came to Nazareth, where he had been
      brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the
      synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to READ.
      {4:17} And there was delivered unto him the book of the
      prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he
      found the place where it was written, {4:18} The Spirit of
      the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach
      the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the
      brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and
      recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that
      are bruised, {4:19} To preach the acceptable year of the
      Lord. {4:20} And he closed the book, and he gave [it] again
      to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that
      were in the synagogue were fastened on him.


      and write:


      John:


      {8:6} This they said, tempting him, that they
      might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and
      with [his] finger WROTE on the ground, [as though he heard
      them not.


      Hope this helps answer your question.smile

      1. Jerami profile image79
        Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I don't think that they hear answers. 

          Tomorrow they will ask this same question wanting to hear something else.

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Well, if one of you can prove he wrote something and wasn't just doodling in the dirt we might give it a little more attention.  Can you tell us if he actually spelled something out or if he was merely drawing in the sand?  There is quite a bit of difference between the two.

          And no, we do not hear speculation as answers.  Have you heard this question asked before, Jerami?

          1. Jerami profile image79
            Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            after 260 posts and more than a few good answers to the question. It seems that no one remembers those good answers.
                  Not just this thread but any thread in general.

                There have been plenty of valid answers as to why there isn't any documented records as to if Jesus was literate.

               Josephus is a recognized historian yet anything that doesn't agree with your point of view is discredited by you because
                You say that they were altered!
               
                Answer as to why there are none ..
              There was a civil war going on between the three religous sects for a number of years.
               Titus destroyed the temple and the city in 70 AD
               In 135 AD Hadrian piled up ever written document that they could find in town and had a bond fire.

               The Roman Empire was doing everything that they could do to destroy what they called  this new cult.  Which would include any of their holy writings.

               When the church that Rome built was created, they tried to wipe out anything that might be seen to disagree with their NEW Doctrine, the canon.

              All of the writings that were considered worthy was gathered in Alexandria.   Which was also burned destroying a great deal of its contents.

                And we are looking for a book that Jesus should have written??
               
                Why should he have written a book?  As he said ...  He has fulfilled all prophesy concerning him.
                And he promised that he was coming back soon. 
                He didn't need no stinking book.

                Does this qualify as a reasonable answer?

            1. Randy Godwin profile image93
              Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Some of these excuses are possible, but it is also possible Jesus was not literate.

              Where did Josephus say anything about Jesus?  He wasn't around when Jesus was and didn't mention him anyway.  Yes, the catholic church altered some work of Josephus and this is no secret. 

              And as far as Jesus fulfilling all prophecy is concerned, according to the OT, Micah if I remember correctly, the messiah was supposed to be a great military leader.  Spin this Jerami.smile

              And all these things you listed are not answers, they are guesses.  I do not accept guesses as facts.  Sorry!

    15. 60
      cjeaniposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Hi Randy, I was reading the post that you started and would like an opportunity to discuss these questions that  you have further.  I was so compelled by the conversations, that it prompted me to join this site just so that I could reply to you.  It is late right now, but I don't believe that I stumbled across this site by accident.  Give me a day or two, and I would love the opportunity to try to answer some of your questions.  What moved me was your post where you said that you wished some of the bible was true and some of it wasn't.  I heard in that a heart truly seeking answers and wanting to do what is right  and live right. I use to be very skeptical too about the bible.  I am willing to share my revelations and experiences with you.  Hope your New Year is off  to a great start.  Please reply if you read this so I know that you are still interested.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Of course, answer at will, cjeani.  I hope you have something better than bible scripture and personal witnessing to support your views.

    16. Dave Mathews profile image61
      Dave Mathewsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Christianity is not a cult, is not a religion, it is though a belief through faith that Jesus is the Messiah fortold of God. It is also a belief that He will return again to bring an end to all evil.

      Your main question asks whether Jesus was literate, meaning could he read and the answer is yes he could. He was witnessed reading often in the Temple on the Sabbath.

  2. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 5 years ago

    I just said on the other post: I've always wondered if He could read and write. And if He couldn't, I wonder why someone didn't write something and claim that Jesus wrote it in His own hand.

    1. brotheryochanan profile image60
      brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      because that would be lying. There are many psudopigrapha books, one of which is called the book of enoch, but it wasn't written by enoch. When discussing jesus it would be wise to consider that He was God in the flesh. God created all languages (remember babel?) God stooped down and wrote in the ground (although it is not mentioned what he wrote) Lets remember that Jesus, God in the flesh, created writing.

      1. Darrke Thoughts profile image59
        Darrke Thoughtsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        There you go.  What about the story of the lady caught in adultery.  Jesus started writing something in the dirt and then told the guys that wanted to stone her whoever is without sin, cast the first stone.  Ever wonder what he was writing? I bet it was a list of sins...

  3. 0
    china manposted 5 years ago

    There is not even any external proof that he existed yet, never mind where he went to school in the village that he is suppposed to have lived - that wasn't even there until several centuries later.

    1. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Have you read about this 2009 discovery?

      http://www.archaeology.org.il/newsticker.asp?id=65

    2. Claire Evans profile image89
      Claire Evansposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Really? Never heard of Josephus, Tacitus and the like, china man?

  4. pylos26 profile image76
    pylos26posted 5 years ago

    The word on the street is that some dudes are about to discover new evidence hidden in the caves near the dead sea. further rumers have it that this new evidence will reveal an earned degree in theology from Oral Roberts University for Jesus of Nazarath...well... its about time.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Don't believe the rumers, whatever they are!

    2. 0
      china manposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Rumour also has it that some dudes are busy making a big boat on a mountain somewhere from fossilised wood and dinosaur droppings - that should just about convince everyone - especially them what believe the giants of Canaan skeleton spoof is just a media cover-up of the real thing big_smile

  5. kess profile image61
    kessposted 5 years ago

    He was smart enough to know the dangers of having written records.
    People had enought already and did not need any more..

    Take for example, they still found a way to make his institute Laws to live by even though he has not written anything.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      So, are you saying JC could read and write but was afraid to do so?  And how could written records have implicated him in anything he would not freely confess to doing?

      There is no record of Jesus being tried in the Roman records.  And contrary to popular belief, the people of Rome did not usually condone innocent people being railroaded or being unlawfully executed. 

      Do you know how long after the supposed Crucifixion the first account of this event was written?

  6. Ron Montgomery profile image61
    Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago

    He was actually the first tweeter.

    JC: WTF? my bff just Randy Godwined me for $30! Fckng Ahol mad

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      That is a great price!  Xmas special?

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
        Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Closer to Easter.

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Ah yes..the Easter Pig.... outlawed now in Georgia!

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
            Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Only from behind.

  7. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 5 years ago

    Randy said, " And contrary to popular belief, the people of Rome did not usually condone innocent people being railroaded or being unlawfully executed."

    Huh??? So you're saying that the Romans didn't feed innocent people to the lions and execute them in other horrific ways? 

    Read Tacitus: "Nero punished a race of men who were hated for their evil practices. These men were called Christians. He got a number of people to confess. On their evidence a number of Christians were convicted and put to death with dreadful cruelty. Some were covered with the skins of wild beasts and left to be eaten by dogs. Others were nailed to the cross. Many were burned alive and set on fire to serve as torches at night."
    Tacitus

    And here's more: http://abacus.bates.edu/~mimber/Rciv/gladiator.htm

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      No, I am not saying the Romans didn't feed people to the lions, especially Christians.  I'm sure they ticked people off back then too. 

      But think about it.  If Jesus was so wonderful, had healed the sick, raised the dead, fed the multitudes, walked on water, and so on, would his followers merely stand by and see their Messiah tortured?

      If they didn't think he was special enough to save after seeing him perform miracles in person, how can you expect merely reading about him through hearsay accounts could do any better?

      And why didn't he write something down?  Could he read or write?

      1. habee profile image90
        habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        If they believed that He was fulfilling the Biblical prophecy, they would.

        As for Jesus' being able to read and write, I have wondered about that, too. There is a verse in the Bible that seems to describe His reading from a scroll.

        Have any Christians ticked you off enough to kill them in a brutal manner - other than your wife and me? lol

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Actually, the Roman persecution of christians happened largely in the 2md century, not in the first.  During JC's supposed existence the only Christians were from a very small Jewish cult.


          Well, as many so called "pieces of the true cross" as there are in existence, wouldn't you think someone would have something JC wrote?  It's almost as if if he didn't want to leave any proof of his existence here.  And he didn't.

          1. habee profile image90
            habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            True, but there was some in the first century, too. Much of it was done by Nero, who served during the first century. He lived AD 15-68.

            1. Randy Godwin profile image93
              Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Can you imagine what the bar tab from the last supper and signed by JC would bring on ebay?  Hmmm.  Could it be proven a forgery with nothing to compare it too?

              1. hanging out profile image60
                hanging outposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Actually, the Roman persecution of christians happened largely in the 2md century, not in the first. 

                     True, but there was some in the first century, too. Much of it was done by Nero, who served during the first century. He lived AD 15-68.

                shot down your theory randy.... i see a goodwin theory fall like lightning from heaven.
                now apologize and try to be accurate next time.

                1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                  Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  There were no Christians until after JC's death.  This was the point of the "christians being fed to the lions" Scenario.  This was in reference to christians being persecuted during JC's lifetime.  Still up and flying, unfortunately for you, HO.

  8. Cagsil profile image84
    Cagsilposted 5 years ago

    Hey Randy,

    I will go as far as to say that yes Jesus could read and write. His followers were the illiterate ones, who couldn't distinguish from between real or fake.

    And you would be correct, Jesus' life account, only talks about when he was 12 and then later when he is about 30 years old.

    Remember that Jesus was an outcast of the Hebrew faith, because he refused to teach what was in the original Torah.

    But, yes he could read and write. As for why didn't Jesus write anything down? Jesus already knew that anything written could be manipulated by the rulers, so as to obscure his message.

    I ran across in my research, that many historians and scholars, requested from the "church" all available documents accounting for Jesus' teachings and accused the "church" of destroying at least 4 books on Jesus. The "church" denies destroying such books, but never denied the existence of said books.

    The "church" claimed not to have what was being requested.

    I hope that helps answer your question.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I don't know, Ray.  That doesn't sound too logical to me.  In your scenario, anything written could be obscured by the rulers, or priests, I suppose.

      But the same could be said for anyone's written account, including the gospels.  If JC was afraid of a little obstruction, then he wasn't much of a messiah after all!

      No, if he wrote much at all there would be some zealot stowing a sample of it away somewhere.

      1. Cagsil profile image84
        Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        But, you have to realize, before science determined that the Sun was the center of the Universe and not Earth, all historical documents and the such were strictly controlled by the educated elite of that time. wink


        Edit: That's why it takes so long to determine what's what in the past, like what is myth and what was real. wink

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          But the dead sea scrolls survived and I wouldn't think Jesus, nor his followers, would just hand over any writings JC would have authored.  What a cool title for a book if they were to be found.

          How I Did It -by J.C. Godson

          1. Cagsil profile image84
            Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            That brings up another topic of discussion, one I'm not willing to get into here, because then it will most certainly be off topic. lol

    2. 60
      C.J. Wrightposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      This is my belief as well. He tought in the temple. He would have been literate. His writtings would have been destroyed or hidden. It's possible his writings were contrary to the "churches" theology. It wouldn't be the first time the "church" has declared one thing, only to find evidence to the contrary and subsequently disposed of the evidence.

      In regards to his followers. Matthew and Luke were probably literate. However many were illiterate. Peter comes to mind. There was a text found that was supposed to be the gospel of Peter. However, Peter was a fisherman and likely illiterate. The stories in the text include accounts of a very young Jesus turning children into birds because they were picking on him.

      1. pisean282311 profile image56
        pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        The stories in the text include accounts of a very young Jesus turning children into birds because they were picking on him.????????? lol poor kids...innocent kids...jesus could have been tried in court today for this act...

        1. 60
          C.J. Wrightposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          The Catholic and Orthodox church made most of the decisions of "WHAT" was included in the bible's text. Ironically the Catholic and Orthodox bible includes books not included in the KJV.

        2. Darrke Thoughts profile image59
          Darrke Thoughtsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Just think what a great story that would be to terrorize young school-yard bullies.  They should have put that one in the Bible.

  9. 67
    paarsurreyposted 5 years ago

    The Christian religion and their Jesus-god is just confusion. If Jesus knew how to read and write; why didn't he himself write a Gospel?

    1. pisean282311 profile image56
      pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      well may be because jesus knew that no matter what he writes ultimately we would end up having 20+ holy books...

    2. Jerami profile image79
      Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      He didn't write then because he knew how people reads.
         He knew that direct communication worked much better than writing would have done.
         Direct communication   THEN  ..  with all that were willing to listen

         Direct communication   NOW  ..   with all that are willing to listen.   

         If we do not want to listen ...  He doesn't argue.

         Ya can't see it unless you are looking for it.

  10. arb profile image81
    arbposted 5 years ago

    Hey randy! Don't mean to dismiss the question, but, if His intent was to generate a following, perhaps those of us seeking the same, have something to learn.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Perhaps, but allowing others to record happenings when it would be more believable to get things straight "from the horses mouth" so to speak, doesn't make a lot of sense to me.  Besides, those whose writings do exist cannot seem to agree on the facts.

      1. arb profile image81
        arbposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        HeyRandy! Appreciate your reasoning. Perhaps, the principle that applies is simply this, do we believe more in what someone tells us about themselves, or more in what others have to say about them. Credit checks, calling references, back ground checks? If you tell me you single handedly wrestled a grizzly to the ground, I would probably be more inclined to dismiss it, than if 40 people wrote about it.

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I suppose this could be considered as Jesus "taking the fifth" to avoid self-incrimination.  But being a self-proclaimed deity, Jesus might have a little more to prove than I.  And supposedly, a mite more power to do so.

          1. Jerami profile image79
            Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            If we do not want to believe something?  there is never enough evidence to make us change our minds no matter what subject we are discussing.
               
                 So why would he bother?

            1. Randy Godwin profile image93
              Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I would assume JC would bother because his purpose was said to be to save us from our sins.  Are you saying it is easier to believe the supposed writings of self-promoting authors than it would be believing the words written by the self-proclaimed son of God?

              The only reason there is no book of Jesus is no writer felt capable of speaking for a god.  As mortals, they knew they could not pull it off.  The slightest mistake in judgment by the author writing the "Gospel According to Jesus" would show the main character as being flawed.  The writer's were afraid to take this chance.

              1. Darrke Thoughts profile image59
                Darrke Thoughtsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Wait a minute... if Jesus didn't exist, then how could he be the "self-proclaimed" anything? If he Bible is inaccurate then how do you know that self-promotioanal bit wasn't added later?

                1. pisean282311 profile image56
                  pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  i believe jesus did exist...but not in way believers perceive him to be...infact all miracles attached to jesus have been part of traidition in most civilizations...be it be walking on water or virgin birth...those were alread there...even becoming alive after dying is there...so there is no new story or anything which was not already there...

                  for me jesus was great man who preached moral values to society...

                2. Randy Godwin profile image93
                  Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  The self-promotional writers touted JC as the self-proclaimed son of god.  I didn't say I believed them, did I?

          2. arb profile image81
            arbposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            If proof was His intention, He would not have said "by faith". I think it was Augustine that said " man needs to know in or to believe; God says, believe and you will know".  In fairness to your assertions, I have often wondered, wouldn't proof have served the purpose better than faith? As yet, I have not determined why He chose faith rather than proof. That would be an interesting thread! Questions and only hypotheticals. Sorry! Today, that is all I have.

            1. Woman Of Courage profile image60
              Woman Of Courageposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              arb, I love your response. God ways is not our ways and his thoughts is not our thoughts. God is full of wisdom and he choose for us to have faith in him rather than proof. smile

      2. brotheryochanan profile image60
        brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        The horses mouth is "inspired by the Holy Spirit" remember how the scriptures are inspired by GOD. Once again when dealing in matters of GOD, the atheist takes GOD out of the picture and then fails to understand anything about GOD. GOD is completely and really the author of the bible, although written by hand of man was under the power and influence of GOD.

        While Jesus was busy teaching and healing and doing many miracles... must he also be steadfast upon a diary? This is one of the reasons Jesus, who was God in the flesh, had disciples. So while Jesus was busy teaching and healing and going about His work, the disciples were busy keeping notes.

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Where do you get your information JC's disciples were literate themselves?  Some may have had the ability to write, but during this period, only priests and the elite were literate.


          And the notes? I cannot envision common fishermen carrying around a notepad.  If they did so, these "notes" would be treasured and we would have them today.  Nice thought, but no evidence or even claim of "notes" being taken is evidenced in the Bible, that I am aware of.  But feel free to point out any scripture suggesting such if I am mistaken.

        2. Cagsil profile image84
          Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Almost every single follower of Jesus at the time he was alive was illiterate. Knowledge, Education and the such was strictly for the elite class who was wealthy.

          Those who had no wealth were enslaved.

          Any reference in the bible to Jesus needs to be put into the context it should be, not out of context like "Christianity" has done.

          1. Jerami profile image79
            Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            And yet,  some of the wisest people that I have ever known were without formal education, ...   
                Very little  "Book  learnin"

            1. Cagsil profile image84
              Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Hey Jerami, everyone learns differently and how they come to gaining wisdom is the same. wink

              1. Jerami profile image79
                Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Cagsil,  I agree,   Maintaining curiosity while keeping eyes and mind open ????  and never get tired

                    The wisdom bucket never gets full.

  11. Jerami profile image79
    Jeramiposted 5 years ago

    Jerami wrote:
       If we do not want to believe something?  there is never enough evidence to make us change our minds no matter what subject we are discussing.
       
         So why would he bother?
    = = = = = = = = = = = =
    Randy Godwin  wrote 
       I would assume JC would bother because his purpose was said to be to save us from our sins.  Are you saying it is easier to believe the supposed writings of self-promoting authors than it would be believing the words written by the self-proclaimed son of God?
    -  -  -=  =  =   -  -- =  ==
       ME ...

       WELL,  Jesus did say that he was coming back soon and establish his kingdom! If fact, he said that some of them standing right there were not going to taste of death until they see him coming in the clouds of heaven sitting at the right hand of power.
       I think that Jesus was expecting them to keep the story straight till he returned?
    ============================================================

        Randy Godwin  wrote   
    The only reason there is no book of Jesus is no writer felt capable of speaking for a god.  As mortals, they knew they could not pull it off.  The slightest mistake in judgment by the author writing the "Gospel According to Jesus" would show the main character as being flawed.  The writer's were afraid to take this chance.
    - - - - - - - -
      ME ...
      NOT   ONLY   THAT ! ...   But   >>>
        That is why personal interpretation of prophesy was invented.
       




         That way the OT prophesy concerning ..Church worship..  rising up out of the sea having seven heads and ten horns with ten crowns would not be as easily recognized.


         But thank God for sending his two witnesses down to the earth to infiltrate the two religiosity organizations, adding some sense of balance to their teachings. 
       Thus keeping God in the church that those with an ear to hear did hear the right message.
       
       
            Something like that anyway??

  12. lorlie6 profile image85
    lorlie6posted 5 years ago

    This query has the qualities of a 'loaded question.'  "Was Jesus literate?" seems to imply ignorance-shades of meaning-if he was unable to read.  If Christianity were my faith, I would hope I would believe in a man with or without the ability to read.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I suppose you might think the question "loaded" if you looked at it in a certain way. Does the offspring of an omnipotent deity, who was reported to accomplish miracles, and had the ability to save the souls of the multitudes of followers, also have the ability to read and write?

      I agree that being literate isn't required for a mortal to be good or moral.  But for a god child, born of an immaculate conception, able to tell the future, raise the dead, and so on, to not be able to write his own name, is a mite suspicious.

      Unless of course, one has not only blind faith, but deaf and dumb faith to go along with it.  Or as some might say, use the sense god gave you.  LOL!

      1. Rishy Rich profile image79
        Rishy Richposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Nicely replied smile

  13. Rishy Rich profile image79
    Rishy Richposted 5 years ago

    Whether he was literate or not, it doesn't matter. He could not/did not write, because he had nothing to write. Even if he did write, who would read them? He was not popular at his living time. He was not even familiar to the educated society of his time, who were mostly Romans.


    Among the few followers he had, most were lower class illiterate people who lacked the ability to read or write or were too busy to earn their day to day living. So none of them would read it either! Then why waste time writing? 

    Besides, he didnt know that he would be considered Son of God in the coming days, nor realized his teachings would form the basis of a major world religion in the future. If he knew that, I think he would have written at least a Good Bye note.

    1. pennyofheaven profile image82
      pennyofheavenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Haha! You made me laugh big time!...about the goodbye note.

    2. Druid Dude profile image60
      Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Your knowledge of history is APPALLING! I wouldn't talk about it anymore If I were you.

      1. Druid Dude profile image60
        Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Qumran and the Nag Hammadi texts, including other Gnostic texts say that literacy in Judea was at a high level during the time of the Roman occupation. Jesus, being a Rabbi is said to have read the books of Moses in the temples. You're the ones who can't seem to read.

        1. Rishy Rich profile image79
          Rishy Richposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          How many native scholars of Judea can you name against the Roman scholars?

          How many people actually heard of them against cicero, virgil, tacitus, Pliny, Petronius & the list continues...

          Whats their contribution to science, history, philosophy, theology compared to the Roman influence on our culture & knowledge?

          Does reading a couple of books from Moses truly makes a man worthy of being called Scholar? I have seen hundreds of Muslim Mollahs, who in their entire life not only read the books of Moses but also covered all religious books of Islam but has no idea of modern science & philosophical fields. Are they deserving candidate for the title 'Scholar'?

          1. Druid Dude profile image60
            Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            History is written by the conqueror. Means theres a lot we don't know. Josephus was well regarded by some, but keep in mind, Rome dissolved the Judaen state, culminating at Masada, another event which has been understood outside of it's true context. Further, there are as yet connections to be made which will propel Israel as a whole into a new understanding. I am referring to the city which is being revealed in Turkey, apparently, the oldest on Earth. Leaves Sumer in the dust. Actually, leaves everything we thought we knew in the crapper. More revelations to come. It's all going to happen really fast, now.

            1. Druid Dude profile image60
              Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Case in point: How many Men Of Reknown do you know of from the Native American culture? Bet you can't name a dozen, probably can't name any.

              1. mega1 profile image79
                mega1posted 5 years ago in reply to this

                just cuz they're not egotists like you ol druids are!  and shy, and also, how about the way you comb your hair?

                dude, do you think it matters much if Jesus was illiterate? to us? right now?

                or whether I just jumped your train!  muwahhhhahahahah!

                1. Druid Dude profile image60
                  Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Actually, they were well known among the people. You just proved that you don't know the names of the famous men  who were conguered just within the past five hundred years. Either it doesn't matter to the conquerors to know, and therefore was excluded from your knowledge by them (You). Or, Native Americans had no men of reknown to be proud of. So, are you an uncaring conqueror utilizing a concept known far and wide as historic reveisionism, or just a bigot?

                  1. Rishy Rich profile image79
                    Rishy Richposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Aztech leaders:

                    Acamapichtli,  Chimalpopoca, Itzcoatl, Moctezuma ilhuicamina, Axayacatl, Tizoc, Ahuitzotl, Cuitlahuac, Cuauhtemoc & of course Moctezuma Xocoyotzin, the last great Aztech ruler who died during spanish conquest.


                    Inca leaders:

                    early 1200s     Manco Cápac I.           
                    1230s     Sinchi Roca           
                    1260s     Lloque Yunpanqui           
                    1290s     Mayta Cápac           
                    1320s     Cápac Yupanqui           
                    1350s     Inca Roca           
                    1380s     Yahuár Huacác           
                    1410 - 1438     Viracocha   early 1200s     Manco Cápac I.           
                    1230s     Sinchi Roca           
                    1260s     Lloque Yunpanqui           
                    1290s     Mayta Cápac           
                    1320s     Cápac Yupanqui           
                    1350s     Inca Roca           
                    1380s     Yahuár Huacác           
                    1410 - 1438     Viracocha 

                    Now are these names good enough for you or Do you want me to start with their achievements in science, architecture, astrology, mathematics, medicine & geometry?

    3. 67
      paarsurreyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      It is  Paul who made Jesus son of god; Jesus never knew it;had he known it, he would have denied it that he was literally son of god or god, he was just son of man/woman called Mary.

      1. Allan McGregor profile image60
        Allan McGregorposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Then the Jews encircled him, and said to him, "Until when do you lift up our soul? If you are the Christ, tell us publicly."

        Jesus answered them, "I told you, and you did not believe. The works which I do in the name of my Father, these bear witness about me. But you do not believe for you are not of my sheep, as I said to you.

        "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. And I give eternal life to them, and they shall not perish to the age, never! And not anyone shall pluck them out of my hand.

        "My Father who has given them to me is greater than all, and no one is able to pluck out of my Father's hand.

        "I and the Father are One!"

        Then again the Jews took up stones, that they might stone him.

        Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from my Father. For which work of them do you stone me?"

        The Jews answered him, saying, "We do not stone you concerning a good work, but concerning blasphemy; and because you, being a man, make yourself God."

        Jesus answered them, "Has it not been written in your Law, 'I said, you are gods'? If He called those gods with whom the Word of God was, and the Scripture cannot be broken, do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme', because I said, 'I am Son of God?'

        "If I do not do the works of my Father, do not believe me." (John 10:24-27)

        Maybe if you had been there, paarsurrey, you could have persuaded the Jews not to take up stones to kill Jesus for what they clearly regarded as blasphemy.

        It seems that they fully recognised and understood what Jesus meant, even if you do not.

    4. Darrke Thoughts profile image59
      Darrke Thoughtsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      He was only going to be "gone" for 3 days... why bother with goodbye? wink

      1. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        He is still gone, if he ever existed at all.  Sorry!

      2. Beelzedad profile image61
        Beelzedadposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Of course, and everyone knows what Jesus' last words were, he made them famous:

        "I'll be back."

        smile

        1. xixi12 profile image81
          xixi12posted 5 years ago in reply to this

          lol  sounds funny in that context. i'll be back

        2. mrpopo profile image87
          mrpopoposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          lol

        3. Allan McGregor profile image60
          Allan McGregorposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Close! - But it wasn't Jesus who said that.

          Although you intended your remark to be facetious, in Acts 1:10-11 we read:

          And as they were intently looking into the heaven, he having gone, even behold, two men in white clothing stood by them, who also said, "Men, Galileans, why do you stand looking up to the heaven? This Jesus, the One being taken from you into the heaven, will come in the way you saw him going into the heaven."

      3. Woman Of Courage profile image60
        Woman Of Courageposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Darke, That's a good one big_smile Jesus rose from the dead in 3 days, and his spirit is alive today. No need for him to say goodbye. I accepted Jesus in my life and his spirit dwells inside of me everyday. It's an awesome and real experience.

  14. iceangel profile image59
    iceangelposted 5 years ago

    Yes of cos,jesus was a literate.He attended one of the best bible school of his time.

    1. pennyofheaven profile image82
      pennyofheavenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Really which one was that?

      1. Druid Dude profile image60
        Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        University Of The Holy Spirit. The Haaavaard of it's day!

        1. pennyofheaven profile image82
          pennyofheavenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Well thats not exactly a school. Cause if you were in and of it what is there to learn?

      2. Allan McGregor profile image60
        Allan McGregorposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Possibly at Sepphoris, about four miles from Nazareth.

        It was regarded as one of the foremost rabbinical schools of the day, and may well have been where the young Jesus learned the wisdom with which he so astounded the Temple scholars of Jerusalem when he was 12.

        (Luk 4:16-21 has already been cited:

        And he came to Nazareth where he was brought up. And as was his custom, he went in on the day of the sabbaths, into the synagogue, and he stood up to read.

        And the scroll of Isaiah the prophet was handed to him. And unrolling the book, he found the place where it was written:

        "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me. Because of this he anointed me to proclaim the gospel to the poor; he has sent me  to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim remission to captives, and to the blind to see again,  to send away the ones being crushed, in remission, to preach an acceptable year of the Lord."

        And rolling up the scroll, returning it to the attendant, he sat down. And the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. And he began to say to them, "Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your ears."

        Then there is his post resurrectiona appearance in Luke 24, which includes this section:

        And he said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe on all things which the prophets spoke! Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things, and to enter into his glory?"

        And beginning from Moses, and from all the prophets, he explained to them the things about himself in all the Scriptures. (vv. 25-27)

        Jesus was a Jew. And Jesus was a Rabbi.

        He was recognised as a Rabbi because he had disciples, but also because Rabbis dressed differently and people who had never met him before could instantly relate to them as 'Teacher'.

        He did not dress as a carpenter. He dressed as a Rabbi. That's how, in John 7:10, Jesus was able to travel to Jerusalem incognito. He just needed to take his robes off.

        Not all the scribes and Pharisees who questioned Jesus were trying to trick him.

        It was the established custom of Rabbis - to follow, listen to and question other teachers, and was generally considered a sign of respect and recognition.

        Jesus was more than just literate, he was learned. And he was recognised and treated as such. It is only our historically ignorant and largely anti-Semitic society (including much of the church) that fails to recognise these realities which are entirely obvious in the New Testament scriptures.

  15. 61
    Furhatposted 5 years ago

    The only truth we know is that of which we are told.
    Also how can someone be a son of god and not know how to write? 'so hello there i can do all these miracles but you know what i find it so damn hard to learn to write' chapter 233 bible john the horseman 2nd.

    1. Druid Dude profile image60
      Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Jesus wasn't a christian, further, relied on no written texts. Full knowledge dictates that his literacy was an ambiguous issue. He was still, no matter what, a genius among clothes wearing chimpanzees. Once the full meaning of the Grail is understood, then you will all see just how badly we have all been duped by this perverse system. Merry Christmas. Peace

    2. Druid Dude profile image60
      Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Many children of God can't read or write. Where are you? On the MOON?

  16. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 5 years ago

    This "thread" is based upon pure nonsense!
    There is not a man alive today or who has lived since this jesus fellows alledged death, that can speak with credibility about him. If "he" even truly existed.
    NO ONE KNOWS!
    All one can do is base a belief in "him" on guess and hope.
    Man is an arrogant, easily fooled, easily led critter.
    A belief in his divine "salvation" is proof of that.
    LMAO!
    Qwark

    1. 67
      paarsurreyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      They don't deny historicity of Jesus son of Mary, a cousin of John son of Zeccariah and Elizabeth.
      They only deny historicity of mythical Jesus carved by Paul from thin air and made Jesus son of god and god; surely such Jesus never existed.

      1. pisean282311 profile image56
        pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        just imagine the creativity of paul...he should be respected for that...he created something from thin air according to you...if you go one step deeper you would find , all religions have been created in this fashion only...so dont blame paul...atleast he made someone else hero , not himself...you dont have to chant paul's name...he was more selfless than many religious figures...

    2. Druid Dude profile image60
      Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Everyone knows. Just many don't know they know. Like you, slick. smile You don't know where you are, when you are, why you are, or even how you are. And you think WE'RE confused. You're funny. When are you coming to Chinook Winds? We LOVE comedians; Specially those with names like qwark. Try gettin' past Pete with that one. "Back of the line please!" smilewinksmile

  17. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 5 years ago

    Hahaha...whew! Adhominem attack proves, to me, that a responder has nothing credible to add to a conversation.
    There are responses that I use to determine whether or not a "hubber" is worthy of a response.
    I have quite a few on my list of the "incredibles." lol
    Qwark   smile:

    1. Druid Dude profile image60
      Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      What happens when you pass gas? My responses are geared to how ignorant the question is. Funny question, funny answer. Stupid question, stupid answer. Want a smart answer, then stop asking dumb questions. The level of your names suggests that you might be an intelligent being, but you never pose a standout question, neither do you pose logical answers which are not based on your chosen dogma. I, on the other hand reject all dogma, and therefore am unrestrained by what others have convinced me to think. How's that, Bubba Gump?

      1. Druid Dude profile image60
        Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        What a dork. Add that to the list,,,power of ten.

  18. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 5 years ago

    ...smile: and the list grows!  smile:
    Qwark

  19. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 5 years ago

    Why is it that people who "KNOW" nothing about a subject desire to learn more about nothing and ask inane questions that the answers to, can only provide more of nothing?
    Big ? above my head!
    Qwark  :-\

    1. pennyofheaven profile image82
      pennyofheavenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Haha because you learn more about nothing!

      1. qwark profile image60
        qwarkposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        2 thumbs up Penny!!!  smile:
        Qwark

  20. xixi12 profile image81
    xixi12posted 5 years ago

    of course he was literate in his time. His teachings were Rabbinical in style, indicating literacy and knowledge of contemporary literary styles. You can not compare the literacy of then to now.
    By the way what does it matter. Bill gates wasnt, but he still had his legacy.

    1. Rajab Nsubuga profile image59
      Rajab Nsubugaposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I am yet to know of any prophet who could write. Their messages are devine. Maybe also their levels of literacy was providential.

      1. pisean282311 profile image56
        pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        seems like conspiracy by god wink

      2. Randy Godwin profile image93
        Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I seriously doubt you've ever met a prophet in person.  And if they could not, or would not write, then everything you know about them is merely hearsay information.  Not always the best source of facts.  Religious followers tend to be easily convinced by such "inspired" reporting.

        1. Rajab Nsubuga profile image59
          Rajab Nsubugaposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Suppose that upon birth a child's mother dies. Does that neget the fact that the child had a mother simply because she did not live to see her child? Some times I don't have to see to know but I always have to think to understand.

  21. 67
    paarsurreyposted 5 years ago

    Of course, and everyone knows what Jesus' last words were, he made them famous:

    "I'll be back."


    xixi12 wrote:

    sounds funny in that context. i'll be back.

    Paarsurrey says:

    And lo! Jesus is back in the form of the Promised Messiah 1835-1908 to correct the untruth invented in his name by Paul and the Church .

  22. Jerami profile image79
    Jeramiposted 5 years ago

    Of all of the stuff that was written in the first century; what percentage do you suppose survived through the centuries?

      Are you aware that after the Jewish revolt of 133-135AD was put down, that Hadrian burned all religious documentation at an official ceremony celebrating the extinction of the Hebrew Nation.
      He attempted to wipe out the memory of there ever having been such a thing. 

      Something worth thinking about?

    1. 67
      paarsurreyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Yet archaeology keeps digging out some scriptures. Don't they?

      1. Jerami profile image79
        Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Yep, sure do , new evidence of all kinds.
          It is hard to process it all.

  23. libby101a profile image60
    libby101aposted 5 years ago

    Paar-- the guy from 1835-1908 was not the Messiah. He was a false prophet. He was one of many, many who have claimed they were the return of the Messiah! Lies to deceive!

    1. 67
      paarsurreyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I don't force you; you have a free will.

  24. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 5 years ago

    There was more than one Herod. Herod's son, also named Herod, ruled after his father's death, along with Herod I's other sons named "Herod." The kingdom was divided. It must have been a "George Foreman" thing.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      There has never been any doubt as to the correct Herod.  Luke simply got the date wrong.  The same for the census he claimed Joseph had to go to Bethlehem for. 

      And besides, there was no reason for Joseph to travel to Bethlehem at all for the 6 AD census.  Luke screwed up the whole thing trying to use the works of Josephus to lend credibility to his writings.  If indeed Luke actually ever wrote anything at all. 

      This is some of the same info Bishop Ussher used to compute the date of creation as being 4004 BC.  Wrong again of course.

      1. Allan McGregor profile image60
        Allan McGregorposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Actually, Luke wrote two books of the New Testament - his Gospel, and the Acts of the Apostles.

        Matthew Levi was a Jewish disciple of Jesus, and John likewise.

        John Mark was a disciple of Peter, while Doctor Luke was a follower of Paul.

        Mark, Luke and John wrote their Gospels in Greek, but there is evidence to suggest that Matthew wrote his in Hebrew from contemporaneous notes, and this was later translated into Greek.

        Doctor Luke tells us he gathered his material by interviewing eye-witnesses. What he did not do, however, was write any it in English.

        And what Luke 2:2 actually says is:

        'Haute apographe prote egeneto hegemoneuontos tes Surias Kureniou.'

        Which can be translated: 'This first enrolment was when Cyrenius governed Syria.'

        However, if you actually know any Greek, it can also be rendered:

        'This enrolment was held before Cyrenius was governor of Syria.'

        The difference is due to what scholars call 'translational bias'. Meaning that you can fit whichever version to which you are predisposed.

        The business of travelling to one's town of birth is unusual but not unheard of in the Roman Empire, as something similar was recorded in Egypt some years later.

        So, you are basing much of the logic of your case on what we call 'arguing from silence', which is not a legitimate proof.

        If Luke were the only voice of antiquity to attest to these facts, that would still not mean that they did not occur, it would merely suggest that not many commentators thought it worthwhile to record.

        And, as a doctor, Luke was too fastitidious to record irrelevant data, and uses the same formula in chapter 3:1 & 2...

        'And in the fifteenth year of the government of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate governing Judea, and Herod ruling as tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip ruling as tetrarch of Iturea and the Trachonitis country, and Lysanias ruling as tetrarch of Abilene, upon the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the Word of God came on John the son of Zacharias in the desert.'

        It is entirely possible that Luke chose Cyrenius (Quirinius) as a familiar point of reference, because he makes an oblique mention of his governorship in Acts 5:37...

        'After this, Judas the Galilean rose up in the days of the Registration. And he drew considerable people after him. Yet that one perished, and all were scattered, as many as obeyed him.'

        We know that this refers to events during Cyrenius' tenure. What we don't know is whether he had served in the same capacity several years earlier.
        But we can say that Cyrenius was of senatorial class, who, as governor of Syria, outranked Pontius Pilate who was a mere procurator, of equestrian class. And we also know that the existence of Pontius Pilate was disputed by sceptics for centuries, until recent archaeological evidence did was it always does, and proved that he really was who the Bible says he was.

  25. Midnight Oil profile image91
    Midnight Oilposted 5 years ago

    "Why is there no book of Jesus?"   The bible was a kind of biography, not a autobiography.

    As for his literate skills, he could have had early dyslexia - The Hebrew and Aramaic languages are nightmare to follow.

  26. 0
    Over The Hillposted 5 years ago

    Randy,He could not teach in the temple,lest He could read and write. He needed not write His own biography.His miracles spoke for who He was.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Really?  Where did you get this info?  I figured the son of the most powerful being in existence could do as he pleased where mere mortals were concerned.  He raised the dead, himself included, didn't he?

      And his "miracles" were only reported by his groupies.  Not one eyewitness with any credibility has ever been found to substantiate any of his "miracles."  Didja know that?

      1. Allan McGregor profile image60
        Allan McGregorposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Wrong again Randy! - Hey that alliterates.

        Jesus limitations are well attested in Scripture:

        For think this within you, which mind was also in Christ Jesus, who subsisting in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, having become in the likeness of men and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, having become obedient until death, even the death of a cross.
        (Philippians 2:5-8)

        "I am able to do nothing from myself; just as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just, for I do not seek my will, but the will of the One sending me, the Father." (John 5:30)

        But Jesus said unto them, "A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house." And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them. And he marvelled because of their unbelief. And he went round about the villages, teaching. (Mark 6:4-6)

        What you 'figured' and what the Bible actually says are so diametrically opposed as to illustrate where your problem comes from.

        You haven't read the Bible; you don't know the Bible; but based upon what you don't know you purport to be able to regurgitate correction of the Bible, based on selective second-hand acquaintance with the facts.

        The Bible even has something to say about that:

        He that answers a matter before he hears it, it is folly and shame unto him. (Proverbs 18:13)

  27. 0
    Over The Hillposted 5 years ago

    You may reference Flavius Josephus.Of course you`ll say you`ve already read his works and he was only heresay .

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Perhaps you will point out a miracle witnessed by Josephus.

  28. 0
    Over The Hillposted 5 years ago

    Read the book.

  29. DoubleScorpion profile image87
    DoubleScorpionposted 5 years ago

    There is one part in the bible that says that Jesus in fact read a section of scripture from the book of the prophets.. namely the book of Isaah...If memory serves...If I remember correctly it was in the book of St. Luke... but of course that is only using the bible as my only proof. I can not find anything else other than the bible that even proves there was such a person.

    <EDIT> St Luke 4:16-20

  30. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 5 years ago

    Okay, RD - so if we disagree with your ideas and the premise of this thread, we're not supposed to respond? Yet, how many times have I seen your responses in Christian threads?

    And to call someone's beliefs "delusional" is pretty harsh. You've complained about Christians and followers of other beliefs who say their way is the right way and all others are wrong. Isn't that exactly what you're doing by calling them delusional? Shouldn't we all just respect the beliefs (or non-beliefs) of others?

    These forums sometimes seem to bring out the worst in you. I've known you for a long time, and I've always thought of you as a tolerant person. Of course, writing on the net is far different than speaking to someone in person - the inflection, mannerisms, voice tone, and expressions are all lost.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Please do respond if you so choose.  I merely pointed out no one is forcing you to do so.  I never said anyone should not respond and am glad to hear their reasons for their beliefs.

      There is not much doubt as to which Herod was mentioned in the bible.  This has never been a real bone of contention between many biblical scholars.  If you wish to believe Luke's version, then fine.  But then Matthews version cannot be true.  One of them, if not both, were not inspired by the word of god. 

      If you guys wish to pretend there are no inaccuracies in the bible which make a difference in its reliability as both a historical and factual account of a supposed son of god, then merely say so.  I am asking questions to find answers, if you have none, say so.

      And since we are getting personal, I've known you as long as you've known me.  And your forum personae actually seems more tolerant than your real one.  HA!  Go figger!

      1. habee profile image90
        habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Randy, everyone who knows me - except for you, apparently - thinks I am a very tolerant person. Sorry you don't see it that way, but that's okay. I've had gay friends, Asian friends, Christian friends, atheist friends, black friends, Hispanic friends, etc., and they've all been welcome guests in my home. Can you say the same thing?

        As for mistakes in the Bible, have I not said repeatedly that I think innacuries are present? It was written by men, and men are not infallible. I mostly focus on the teachings and example set by Jesus. I'm not saying I'm "Jesus like" - I'm not. I'm saying that His message seems pretty clear - at least to me.

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Ha!  You speak for everyone?  Sounds like someone else I know.  Yes, I have had all sorts of friends in my home, you know that.  You also know I have problems having too many friends visiting. 

          And personally, I don't care if you worship the Jolly Green Giant and love his beans.  But don't expect me to believe in him just because the label on the can has his picture on it.


          The "teachings and examples set by Jesus" or someone who merely wrote that he did these things.  So you do not care if these things are true or not?  Or if his message was his at all?  You may be focusing on the words of a mere uninspired writer.  And it makes no difference to you.

      2. Woman Of Courage profile image60
        Woman Of Courageposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Interesting, You stated that you ask questions to find answers, and when the answers are given, you reject each one. We are not trying to convince you to believe. It's quite obvious to me your mind is already set to believe what you desire and not the truth. It's your free choice. God loves you!

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Do you expect me accept answers without any foundation of truth behind them, WOC?  I do not claim to be a Christian.  I cannot make myself believe something just because I want to, like some here.  If I could, I wouldn't need to ask anything at all.

          Unlike you, my mind is never set when it comes to looking at all aspects of a subject.  I'm sure you aren't pleased by my questioning the many "maybes," "what ifs," and "the bible sez" responses on this thread.  I certainly hope you get over it.

          And do you think it is "quite obvious your mind is already set"?  And why is it bad for me and okay for you?  Or is it bad for both of us?

  31. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 5 years ago

    You've had all sorts of friends in your home, and I know that? I guess I've forgotten all of them except for the white Americans.

    I don't expect you to believe in God, and I've never called you "delusional" for not doing so. Yes, I do believe that Jesus is real, but even if you don't, how can your argue with the message - regardless of where it came from? You think murder is wrong, but I bet you don't know the first person who stated that opinion. Still, it shouldn't matter to you who said it - it's a good policy to follow.

    I know you only believe in things that can be proven by history and science, and I accept that. There are many abstract qualities, however, that can't be proven or measured with a slide rule: love, faith, spirituality, etc. But even IF Jesus was fictional, how can you argue with the message?

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Don't ask me, ask your best friend.  In the last few weeks there have been black and Hispanic friends visiting here.  Even some yankees.  So don't try to make it seem as if I am a racist of some sort.  You know better than that.

      The message is not the problem.  The message consists of basic tribal law which has been around thousands of years before your baby Jesus showed up.

      The problem is attributing them to a character which may or may not have existed.  Most gods have the same laws, haven't you noticed?

      1. habee profile image90
        habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Yankees?? Have you no shame, man??

        Maybe most gods, but not all. Ever read much Greek, Norse, or Anglo-Saxon mythology? lol

        I never meant to imply that you're racist, either. Evidently, based on your earlier comment, you must think I'm one, which is ree-dic-u-luss! You said I'm not really tolerant. Please tell me, which group do I hate?

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Mainly waiters and waitresses share the brunt of your intolerance!  LOL!

          1. habee profile image90
            habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Lol. Yes, I hate the service staff, especially when they serve BTS!

  32. Midnight Oil profile image91
    Midnight Oilposted 5 years ago

    Jesus didn't need to write anything down as the original 'parables' were all ready written 500 years earlier by Lao Tzu, Confucious and Siddhārtha Gautama.  All Jesus did was adapt these 'parables' and teachings so the people of his home land could easily understand them. 

    Take the Christian blinkers off, and go study other religions and teachings as well.  You will be surprised by the many similarities, and most pre-date Christianity by several centuries. 

    Although, I have still yet to read the teachings of the Jolly Green Giant. wink

    1. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Most of his teachings were limited to "Ho, ho, ho!" lol. Didn't he steal that from Santa?

  33. 0
    klarawieckposted 5 years ago

    No

  34. Randy Godwin profile image93
    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago

    Works every time!

  35. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 5 years ago

    Ssssstill sssstirring up trouble, huh, Ssssuper Ssssnake?? lol!

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      No, not in the case of WOCO!  She has been fully indoctrinated, probably since she was a child. Some are easier to control than others.  LOL!

      1. habee profile image90
        habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I guess I have been, too. I don't mind, though. When I turned 12, Mom let me make the decision of whether or not to attend church. She was a real rebel - by Bible-belt standards! lol

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Ah yes!  The forerunner of the famed Red Rebels!

          1. habee profile image90
            habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            The Red Rebels ROCKED!! lol

  36. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 5 years ago

    The possibility doesn't exist that anyone "KNOWS" anything about this jesus person.
    Ya'll, everyone of ya who say ya do, are just guessing and hoping.
    Pls provide evidence that I am wrong.
    I doubledare ya....lol
    I'm waiting...smile:
    Qwark

    1. 0
      jomineposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      all believers believe in/with their heart. after all they can only do that, for they lack the brain to think ... and one need brain to THINK!!

      1. qwark profile image60
        qwarkposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Jomine:
        Amen to that!
        Qwark

  37. pylos26 profile image76
    pylos26posted 5 years ago

    yo skipper...been a while...whats happening dude?

  38. Jerami profile image79
    Jeramiposted 5 years ago

    pylos26 
    In your first paragraph I believe you are referring to Jews when you use the pronoun “they”,
    - = - = - = - = - = - =
    ME     Are you talking about this ?..
      Jerami wrote:
      The followers of Christ had all flew from Jerusalem by 62 AD.
      Anything that was in the synagogue would have had nothing to do with Jesus, remember they did not accept him.
      - = - = - =

       I was referring to the "Idea" that I do not think that the Hebrews that did not accept Jesus as their Messiah would not have kept anything as sacred; that Jesus had written, had he written anything.
    ======================================================
    pylos26 wrote..
    ......and in your teachings you say one cannot inter the kingdom of heaven without Jesus.

    - = - = - = - = - = - =
       ME
       I don't think that you have ever heard me say that!
    (saw me write)
    ==================================================
    pylos26 wrote..
    So, its pretty sensible to assume that you are saying that Jews are doomed to hell. Just 'reading between the lines" as you put it.
    - = - = - = - = - = - =
      You can assume that if you choose, but you would be wrong.

      I don't think that I have ever said that anyone was going to hell.

    =========================================================

    Just an interesting thought,   There were no believers of Christ living in Jerusalem  when Saul/Paul went out from Jerusalem looking for Christians to bring them back to the synagogue to be tried for blasphemy.
         I think it would be appropriate to read between the lines on that one.

  39. Jerami profile image79
    Jeramiposted 5 years ago

    Randy Godwin  wrote ...
    Some of these excuses are possible, but it is also possible Jesus was not literate.


    - = - = - = - = - = - =
      ME
      These events that I mentioned in the post above, are historical events.
      However I doubt that Jesus wrote any letters or books.
    That wasn't the style in which biblical accounts say that he was operating under.
       About the literacy thing?
      There is little secular "Proof" concerning 99.9% of the things that were happening at that time. 
       The Roman Empire had little interest in the things that were happening in Jerusalem.  As long as peace was being kept.
       

      Biblically speaking, ? ,  he was definitely literate, how many times did he ask, in a demeaning manner,  "Have you not read", such and such, "Where It Says"  such and such?
    This indicates that in fact he, at the very least, KNEW, that which was written.
    =============================================================
    Randy Godwin  wrote ... 
       Where did Josephus say anything about Jesus?  He wasn't around when Jesus was and didn't mention him anyway.  Yes, the catholic church altered some work of Josephus and this is no secret. 
    - - - - - - - - - -

       I never claimed to be an expert of the writings of Josephus, though I did read some of it many years ago.

       I have read several different accounts of his life which give completely different stories of his first 20 years of life.  Does this discrepancy mean that Josephus must not have existed?

      By applying your previous logic, I would have to say that Josephus is just a made up story. A Myth!

        A few scholars believe that a small amount of his work was altered.  And you choose to believe these few.
        We can choose to believe that which we choose.
    =========================================================
      Randy Godwin  wrote ... 
      And as far as Jesus fulfilling all prophecy is concerned, according to the OT, Micah if I remember correctly, the messiah was supposed to be a great military leader.  Spin this Jerami.

    - - - - - - - -

       Give me the chapter and verse if that is written there, and I will most likely be able to show you that what is written leaves room to have been interpreted that way, that is all.

       Interpretations fall away from the intended messages.
    ===================================================

    Randy Godwin  wrote ...
       And all these things you listed are not answers, they are guesses.  I do not accept guesses as facts.  Sorry!

    - - - - - - - - - - -

       If I had said that writings of Jesus were there? Which I didn't !   That would haven a guess.
       And as with choosing to believe that which we choose;  You can choose to accept that which you want to accept regardless of its validity or lack thereof.

    This is the nature of mankind.


      By the way....  Happy New Year Randy.

  40. 60
    Daewalkerposted 5 years ago

    Faulty human logic and reason when applied collectively by
    mankind as it has is exactly we are headed for nuclear
    world world 3 and none can save us from our carnal logic
    reasoning selves! see you on the other side of world war
    3 assuming some of us will survive then ask you question
    again, then!

 
working