This is just an ad homonem against the JS. It doesn’t address the reasons for their arguments (and it isn’t just the JS). The John 8 account is not found in the earliest manuscripts.
The story of Jesus reading describes Jesus reading from the Septuagint rather than the Hebrew and conflates two different passages which indicate that this story is a literary construction rather than an anecdote from history.
If it is the End of an Era, it does less in explaining why he would not write down his teachings.
If he trusted his followers to keep accurate records, why would he have taken the time? He was always walking & talking & doing stuff. Let the record-keepers in the bunch take the notes, especially if he thought his Father would make sure to keep his teachings alive.
This is a good point. Let’s assume that tomorrow I come to believe that I am a prophet of God, and that He has revealed things to me. Let’s also assume that I have a charismatic personality, and I am able to persuade a cult of followers to believe that I am indeed a prophet of God. Even those that don’t believe Jesus was divine likely would accept that these assumptions are true for Jesus. Why would I necessarily have to write down what God had told me, when I had a group of disciples who could take notes? Particularly if my ministry actively involved preaching the word of God to others.
It also occurs to me that at the time Jesus lived, as was mentioned in the play “Jesus Christ Superstar”, Israel in 4 BC had no mass communications. (And of course in the first century AD.) It isn’t like Jesus could at that time put up whatever he wanted to say like I can on my websites. Jesus needed a medium with which to propagate his message. Assuming he could write, it isn’t like doing so on scrolls alone would be adequate to get the word out. The only effective medium for Jesus to get his message out was to recruit devoted followers who would spread the word as far as they could. Scripture states the ministry of Jesus was a scant 3 years or so. FAR better for him in that 3 years to devote his time to recruiting disciples rather than just writing himself the message that he wanted the world to know. Jesus need to recruit propagandists. And he did a damn fine job. At the moment, Christianity has more adherents than any other religion.
But does this make any sense from the Christian perspective? If Jesus could raise the dead, I’d think being able to write would be a far less miracle. 
And from a non-Christian perspective, it isn’t that outrageous to think Jesus would have learned how to read and write in the “lost years”. From the non-Christian perspective, it seems plausible that Jesus had a highly charismatic personality. It would have been all kinds of unlikely in his day that a boy raised in a family headed by a stonemason would have been schooled in youth in reading and writing. However, if Jesus had put his mind to it to learn how to read and write, he could have found teachers who would instruct him about this.
Well, I said the Essene stuff was speculative.
Another theory is - and note, I am pointing out it is a THEORY - that he never existed. No writing by him, but just as importantly, no writing about him during his time, so no Jesus.
There are plenty of books / data assertign this particular viewpoint. It seems odd that 500 years went by before anyone decided to write down this great man’s ideas. People say he wasn’t a big deal for 500 years, but I find that hard to believe, as we’ve had many people not write stuff down but stuff was still written about them, even though they were not very important in their lifetime.
The gospel of Mark was probably written sometime around 70 CE, maybe as late as 80 CE. Considering that Jesus probably died around 30 CE, that’s only 50 years at most, not 500.
The Epistles of Paul date even earlier than Mark. 1 Thessalonians dates to c. 50 CE.
The first stratum of Q sayings could have been compiled as early as the 40’s.
There are some mythicists who argue for second century dating of everything except Paul but they’re a minority.
And Anaamika, look at this:
http://www.request.org.uk/main/history/jesus/Jesus04.htm
Josephus in the first century C.E. makes reference to Jesus being said to have existed, and there were also claims about him working miracles.
http://www.request.org.uk/main/history/jesus/Jesus05.htm
“To dispel the rumour, Nero substituted as culprits, and treated with the most extreme punishments, some people, popularly known as Christians, whose disgraceful activities were notorious. The originator of that name, Christus, had been executed when Tiberius was Emperor, by order of the procurator Pontius Pilatus. But the deadly cult, though checked for a time, was now breaking out again not only in Judea, the birthplace of this evil, but even throughout Rome, where all the nasty and disgusting ideas from all over the world pour in and find a ready following.”
Annals 15 : 44.
In 115 C.E Tacitus records that Nero in 64 C.E. made early Christians the scapegoat for the great fire. Obviously from the above, Tacitus was NOT a Christian. If Jesus is a pure myth made up whole cloth, this was done so by people in the first century C.E.
Okey-dokey.
I’m not arguing, I haven’t done the research.
Okay, not direct evidence that Jesus could read and write, but in various places in the NT he is credited with at least being very knowledgeable about the (Jewish) scriptures.
I think I agree with those who guess that Jesus knew how best to get out the message that he wanted to get out, and direct writing didn’t figure into it. If not literate himself - um, do you suppose learning to read and write is easier than walking on water, or not - he could certainly have found any number of secretaries to take dictation.
I believe we got the important parts, nevertheless.
I’d be curious as to which Judeans or Galileans these scholars polled to deterine their numbers for literacy. Long before the destruction of the Temple, the Jews had begun to organize much of their worship around the synagogue (originally in Mesopotamia where they did not have access to the Temple) . In those services, the reading of the Law (and, later, the Prophets) was paramount. Initially, of course, the only men who would have read from the scrolls would have been from the educated upper classes. By the second century B.C.E., however, synagogues had appeared throughout Judea and Galilee–even in towns where there was no “upper class.” Along with that development, the tradition arose that any man might be called out from the congregation to read from the scrolls. Initially, of course, the majority of men would have had to demure, but there was a serious impetus for men who could find the time to learn to read (even if not to study). (They also had one whole day of the week set aside in which to perform those studies, as consideration of the Scriptures, and the study needed to perform that consideration, was not considered prohibited labor.)
With the ascension of Queen Salome to the throne in 76 B.CE and her selection of Pharisee advisors, a law was passed by the Sanhedrin under the presidency of Simon ben Shetah that every man had a duty to learn to read. As a result, schools were established throughout the region, even in the smaller towns. (Attested in the Talmud, Ketrout 8), By 60 CE., (after the time of Jesus, but indicating a continuing trend), the High Priest Joshua ben Gamala ordered that every town, regardless of size, had to establish an elementary school. (Talmud Baba Batra 21a: all children were ordered to attend those schools.)
Farmers probably missed out on these educational trends, but I have never seen evidence to indicate that a town-dwelling artisan would have missed out on this education, encouraged by tradition, mandated in law, and with a whole day each week to pursue that activity.
This is not to insist that Jesus had to be able to read. In the normal ways of the world, those who live farthest from the halls of power are rarely the beneficiaries of “good” laws, but I suspect that simpe dismissals of Jewish literacy may be based on presuppositions that education was not universal and so could not have made its way to Nazareth.
Thanks to everyone for the responses. Asking Christians that I know, I have received nowhere near the quality and variety of response I got here.
Let me re-ask my second question. Would access to Jesus’s own writings have been better for us or worse? Would it have resulted in a more monolithic Church or more fractured Christianity?
The reason no writings of Jesus exist is because Jesus never existed.
See: Jesus: Man or Myth?
People who were so accustomed to learning orally and no other way probably had better memories than we do. I don’t think someone living centuries ago would have to know how to read to be an expert on those scriptures, he might simply have heard them enough times.
well, we’d at least be spared the debate on what Jesus actually said & what was attributed to him. But as far as content went, I think it would be the same as what he’s quoted as saying in the Gospels. There’d be Volume 1, the Beginning Course, which would be the Synoptic (Matthew, Mark, Luke) teachings of Jesus; then there’d be Volume 2, the Advanced Course, which would have the freaky stuff he says in John. 
I tend to think Jesus actually existed. I just consider the “son of god” part dubious.
If we’re going to be snide, I’d be curious as to which of them YOU polled…
Cite? For any of this? According to Heather MacKay, * Sabbath and Synagogue*, p.235, claims of ANY synagogues in 1st century AD Palestine are “unproven”.
Yeah, and in my state there is a law guaranteeing every child an “adequate” education. Does that mean they get it? More to the point, how do you know these traditions (not written down until 300-400 years later) are accurate?
Um, have you ever seen evidence to indicate the contrary?
The probability is that there are no known authenticated artifacts or writings to avoid the proclivity of mankind to worship such things in place of the Christ Himself!
Romans 1:25 They exchanged God’s truth for a lie. Instead of worshiping God, the Maker, they worshiped and served something which was made.