Writing is entirely too dependent on the reader. You can be the most talented, inspiring, grammatically perfect writer the world has ever produced, but the ability of your written words to convey what you intend to convey is completely subject to the limitations of the reader. The skills of reading, the gift of empathy, a technical or literary or subject matter-specific vocabulary, the chance that the reader reads the language in which the message has been composed, are all determining factors in whether or not the recipient of the message will fully grasp the words on the page (or the screen, or the slab, or whatever the medium may be) in the intended manner.
Have you ever wondered why Jesus apparently left no writing from his own hand to be handed down through the ages, so that all may know his words directly? Among the many possibilities:
- he could not write - ridiculous to even contemplate, but we'll do it anyway
- he did write, but none of his writings survived - also not worth consideration, in my opinion; anything he would have written down with his own hand for his disciples would have been protected, or at least copied, even if after the fact; instead, we are only left with "Jesus said..." or "Jesus did..." and nothing about "Jesus wrote"
- he could write, but knew of the limitless limitations of disseminating his word through writing, and chose instead to deliver the message via actions and the spoken word
Unlike writing, speaking is a two-way conduit. If anything needs clarification, it can be handled on the spot. And we all know of the importance of the way the words are spoken, the emphasis on certain phrases, the emotions involved, the facial and bodily expressions, and all of the other nuances that are lost when words are left to the hand-guided stylus alone.
Eventually, the teachings and witness of Jesus were written down to the best of certain people's abilities, for preservation as well as efficiency of delivery to as wide an audience as quickly as possible.
That, however, is not how he originally delivered his message to his disciples. Perhaps he charged them with orally delivering his teachings as he himself delivered them; perhaps not. And maybe each of them told others as they may have instructed to do, and those others told still others, which could have eventually resulted in a message every bit as confusing and unintended as the presently evolved written word and tradition can seem to be.
When God wants to communicate with us, he does it in a direct way, leaving out the middle man, leaving out the written word, speaking directly to our hearts and any other part of us that is capable of hearing, or showing us exactly what we need to see in order to be able to fully comprehend whatever it is that he needs us to understand. For many, perhaps the Bible and/or going to church is all that is necessary for sending and guiding us along a perfectly acceptable path, a "good enough" life, an earthly existence which needs no redirection from God as long as the basic rules and regs are observed (especially the one about embracing Jesus as the Way, the Truth, and the Life). For others, something more, or at least different, would be appreciated.
What might an example of that "something more or different" be? I have no idea. As always, I'm all ears.