Why did Jesus not write his own gospel?

This text is from a letter written by David Gooding in 1991.

In order to answer your question, I really need to know from what point of view you are asking it.

Are you a believer in the Lord Jesus? If so:

You will, I think, accept what he said about the authority of his apostles in John 13:20; 16:26–27; Acts 1:8.

Moreover, in John 14:26, our Lord indicates that the coming of the Holy Spirit and the Spirit's inspiring of the apostles guarantees that they accurately remembered and correctly recorded what the Lord himself had said and done.

If Jesus himself had written a book and it had survived, people would have superstitiously worshipped the book itself, imagining that there was some special, miraculous power in the material of the book, just as they do with relics, icons, etc.

Or, are you an unbeliever? If so:

What makes you think you would be more inclined to believe what a book said just because Jesus himself wrote it? The majority of people who actually heard, saw and touched Jesus did not believe him: in fact, they were so enraged by what he said that they crucified him. Would you have been more inclined to believe him than they were? Even if he had personally written the Gospels, you would still have to decide whether you were going to believe what he wrote, not on the grounds that he wrote it, but on the grounds of whether what he wrote was true or not.

Your question is a very interesting one. In what respects do you think that a book written by Jesus himself would differ from what his apostles have recorded? Do you feel, for instance, that the apostles have claimed for him more than he would have claimed for himself? If so, in what particulars?

Very sincerely,