It’s no surprise that the Gospels are full of Jesus’ sayings since they are dedicated to telling the account of what Jesus said and did. But it is surprising that Jesus’ followers don’t quote Him but a few times outside the Gospels. Considering the many theological and practical issues the apostles addressed in their epistles, why didn’t they invoke Jesus’ teachings to settle the matters? As strange as I find the phenomenon, it actually serves as a good argument against those who assert the disciples freely invented many sayings of Jesus. If the disciples were in the habit of inventing sayings of Jesus, why not do so when it would be most convenient: to settle theological arguments or moral quagmires not addressed by Jesus? The fact that the disciples did not appeal to a saying of Jesus to solve such matters argues for the historical veracity of Jesus’ sayings found in the Gospels. If the disciples would not put words into Jesus’ mouth in the epistles, they were not likely to do so in the Gospels either.
May 3, 2007
The Apostles Did Not Put Words Into Jesus’ Mouth
Posted by Jason Dulle under Apologetics, Bible, Theology[6] Comments
Thinking to Believe 
May 3, 2007 at 10:54 am
Another possibility: perhaps “Jesus said” or “the Bible says” wasn’t any more authoritative than their conclusions as rightful heads of the church?
If the words of Jesus were so important, but the apostles so unwilling to put words in his mouth, you’d expect to see the apostles quoting Jesus out of context and/or making very weak arguments from Jesus’ words. That’s what “Bible only” people do today with scripture. Looks like the early church didn’t look at the words of Jesus and the Bible in the same way as most do today.
LikeLike
May 3, 2007 at 7:27 pm
Arthur,
I’m not sure I understand your second paragraph. Can you state your point in a different way?
In regards to your first remark, I think that’s largely correct. After all, Jesus said in John 15 and 17 that if people listed to Him, they should listen to His apostles as well. But having said that, Jesus’ words were the basis for their beliefs and teachings. One need not quote Jesus to be teaching in His authority. I write all sorts of theological stuff. Many of the things I write are summaries of knowledge I gained from a reading of Scripture, not a bunch of quotations of Scripture. What would make my writings authoritative would be their truthfulness to the Biblical teaching, not the quoting of Biblical material per se.
Jason
LikeLike
May 4, 2007 at 11:50 pm
The second paragraph, my second try.
You appear to argue that:
1. Jesus’ words were power, even critical, to settle disputes on religion/morality.
2. In the epistles, the apostles generally refrained from citing to Jesus’ words to settle each dispute. Instead, they offered their own opinions and used their own reasoning.
3. Therefore, because the apostles clearly were unwilling to create false sayings of Jesus in the epistles, we can assume that the saying of Jesus in the Gospels are authentic.
I’m questioning the first premise.
Fundamentalists today believe in the authority of the Bible, much in the way you assume that the apostles believed in the authority of Jesus’ words. Fundamentalists today cannot change the Bible, much in the same way you assume the apostles wouldn’t dare to put words into Jesus’ mouth.
You argue that where a person (fundamentalist/apostle) is confronted with moral issues not directly addressed by the final authority (Bible/saying of Jesus), the person will not quote the source but argue from his own person authority or reasoning.
But that’s not what happens in real life. A fundamentalist will quote the Bible no matter what. If the issue isn’t directly covered in the Bible (eg, stem cell research), he will find the closest thing and argue that (eg, thou shalt not kill). They’ll stretch the Bible verses to make them fit. And if a Christian does not bring up the Bible when addressing stem cell research, and only argues from his own authority or human reasoning, he’s probably a liberal.
Thus, if the apostles looked at Jesus’ words the way Christians look at the Bible today (ie, highly authoritative but unchangeable), the epistles would be dripping with quotes from Jesus, stretching his words (taking them out of context) so as to apply them to whatever issues are at hand.
The fact that the epistles aren’t filled with quotes of the saying of Jesus suggests the apostles did not consider Jesus’ words to be particularly authoritative.
LikeLike
May 10, 2007 at 2:15 pm
Arthur,
I guess I don’t see what is controversial about the first premise. The teachings of the founder of a movement are generally considered authoritative by his followers. At the very least, they are generally given greater weight than the teachings of his immediate students, particularly when it comes to settling a dispute over some matter that you disagree with his student about.
As for your argument…. First, why think the apostles were anything like Fundamentalists (I would disagree you’re your maligning of fundamentalists as well, depending on how you are defining th term)?
Second, when a fundamentalist quotes “thou shalt not kill” to answer the question of embryonic stem cell research (ESCR), he is doing so because he thinks it directly applies to the question at hand. There’s no question that this command is not aimed against ESCR per se. The question is whether this moral principle applies to the issue of ESCR. Is ESCR an instance of murdering an innocent human being? If so, then ESCR is wrong, and covered by this passage. If not, then it is a misapplication (and as a side-note, I am absolutely convinced that the logic that causes us to reject abortion equally applies to ESCR).
You seem to be arguing that unless the author envisioned X when he said Y, it is impermissible to apply Y to X. No one, both apostle and modern believer, interpreted the Scripture that way, for theological or ethical issues. Indeed, if we followed this line of reasoning we would not be able to provide a Christian moral assessment of analysis of any modern issue not addressed directly in Scripture.
Third, but related to the second, the apostles were facing questions that were not even addressed in principle. For example, Jesus never addressed the situation of what to do when a spouse leaves you because of your faith, nor did He provide a principle that would answer the question.
Your conclusion is quite interesting. Why think that? Think about what I said in the first paragraph. Additionally, if the apostles were not interested in what Jesus believed/said/taught, why did they compose four gospels to accurately record it? Those endeavors show they were concerned.
Jason
LikeLike
September 22, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Greetings! in the name of the Lord Jesus who is God most High.
In all actuality Jesus Christ was the one speaking through the apostles such as Paul of Tarsus, Simon Peter, John and others. All of Paul’s epistles are actually Jesus Christ epistles unto the churches and as well as the others.
In fact the entire holy scripture is the words of Jesus Christ. So, I disagree that the apostles did not quote from Jesus Christ because they did when they wrote the epistles.
God bless you always! in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.
Marquest Burton
LikeLike
September 23, 2008 at 11:20 am
Marquet,
Your view of the inspiration of Scripture is not true to Scripture. To see why, read my article here: http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/inspiration.htm.
Jason
LikeLike