SUMMARY

In this lecture Ehrman is inquiring into the literacy of Jesus.  Most people in that time couldn’t read unless they belonged to a wealthier class, and even fewer could write, as that was taught at a more elite level of education, and beyond mere copying even more elite still.  Ehrman thinks Jesus may have been able to read and it’s highly unlikely he could write.  Lower class peasants didn’t read and received their scripture from the 3 percent of the population that could read. 

Jesus was familiar with the Torah and could quote it, but people can quote scripture without reading it like Didimous the Blind who memorized what he heard.  Luke 4 has Jesus read the Isaiah scroll.  It’s only in Luke and fits Luke’s agenda.  Ehrman doubts it is historical.  Jesus writes in the dirt in the story of the woman caught in adultery.  Ehrman notes this story was original to the gospel of John.  In Revelation Jesus dictates the letters but does not write. 

Analysis

Ehrman’s presentation on the possible literacy of Jesus includes a major assumption of Jesus and his band of peasants running around rural Galilee.  But, were his followers fishermen, or was this a literary invention of the general point of followers to become “Fishers of men?”  Were they even peasants or does this just fit in with the motif of the peasant disciples who will rule over the 12 tribes of Israel in the age to come: “The first will be last and the last first.”  Interestingly, we have another famous wise figure who refrained from writing: Socrates. Jesus may be being construed as the new and greater Socrates as he is portrayed as the new Moses and the new Joshua. Let’s consider the similarities to consider literary borrowing.

Socrates believed in the power of dialogue and oral discourse as the best method for philosophical inquiry. He saw spoken conversation as dynamic, allowing for immediate clarification, questioning, and adaptation to the interlocutor’s understanding. Writing, in contrast, was static and could not respond to challenges or questions. In Plato’s Phaedrus (274c–277a), Socrates critiques writing, arguing it weakens memory, fosters misunderstanding, and cannot defend itself against misinterpretation.  Socrates’ method (the Socratic Method) relied on live, interactive questioning to expose contradictions and stimulate critical thinking. Writing could not replicate this dialectical process, which required the presence of a questioner and respondent.  Socrates was wary of texts becoming authoritative without scrutiny. He valued the pursuit of truth through reason and dialogue over fixed doctrines that written texts might promote.  In Socrates’ time, oral tradition was still dominant in Greece, and writing was not yet the primary means of preserving knowledge. His choice aligned with the cultural norm of teaching through spoken word. Socrates often claimed ignorance (“I know that I know nothing”) and may have avoided writing to prevent his ideas from being fossilized as definitive truths, preferring his teachings to live through his students’ interpretations.

Like Socrates, Jesus operated in a predominantly oral culture. In 1st-century Judea, oral transmission of religious teachings was common, and rabbis often taught through spoken word. Jesus’ sermons, parables, and interactions with disciples and crowds (e.g., Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5–7) were delivered orally, emphasizing direct engagement with his audience. Writing was less common and often reserved for formal religious texts like the Torah.  Jesus, like Socrates, used questioning and dialogue to teach. For example, he often responded to questions with parables or counter-questions (e.g., Luke 10:25-37, the Good Samaritan parable, prompted by a lawyer’s question). This interactive style aligns with Socrates’ dialectical method, where live engagement fosters deeper understanding. Writing might have been seen as less effective for this purpose.  Both Socrates and Jesus critiqued rigid adherence to established norms. Socrates challenged the Sophists’ reliance on rhetoric, while Jesus critiqued the Pharisees’ legalistic interpretations of the Law (e.g., Matthew 23:13-36). By not writing, Jesus may have avoided creating a text that could be misused or overly venerated, similar to Socrates’ concerns about texts becoming dogmatic.  Both Socrates and Jesus operated in cultures where oral teaching was standard. Just as Socrates taught in the Athenian agora, Jesus taught in synagogues, hillsides, and homes. Writing was not essential for their immediate impact, and their followers were responsible for recording their words later.  Both figures exhibited humility. Socrates claimed ignorance, while Jesus emphasized servanthood (e.g., “The Son of Man came not to be served but to serve,” Mark 10:45). By not writing, Jesus may have prioritized his message and mission over personal legacy, trusting his disciples to spread his teachings, much like Socrates relied on Plato and others.

In Plato’s Phaedrus (274c–275e), Socrates recounts a myth about the Egyptian god Theuth, who invented writing and presented it to King Thamus. Thamus critiques writing, saying it will weaken memory because people will rely on external texts rather than internal recollection. Socrates agrees, stating that writing is a “recipe not for memory, but for reminder” (275a), suggesting it fosters forgetfulness by allowing people to depend on written records instead of cultivating their own memory and understanding. Jesus is the Word incarnate, able to resist the Devil’s citing of scripture with more essential scripture of Jesus’ own and teaching others to duel the Devil in the same way. Jesus wanted to get beyond the letter of the law to the spirit of the law: “You have heard it said …But I say to you:” e.g., beyond love of neighbor to love of enemy, a theme the whole of the New Testament expresses.