Thomas's Bum Rap

[Bernard Gui]

The apostle Thomas has been associated with doubt because he refused to believe the account of the resurrection given to him by the other disciples as they gathered in a room after they had visited the empty tomb unless he could see the resurrecfed Lord for himself. Sometimes people who struggle with their faith are called a "Doubting Thomas."

But when the women who first had the experience with the angel at the empty tomb reported this to Peter, he and the others did not believe fhem, but ran to the tomb to see for themselves. After seeing the evidence at the tomb they still did not accept what had happened, Even when the risen Lord appeared ro them in the room they were afraid and had to be given reassurance and the offer to touch his body and eat with them to affirm the reality of the resurrection.

Did Thomas get a bum rap to be forever associated with doubt when he did what all the other witnesses had done? Did Jesus have a different idea in mind when he commented on the greater blessing for thise who believe but do not see?

Edited October 4, 2015 by Bernard Gui

[rongo]

I agree. 

 

I'll tell you this. I heard Iraqi Christians, Armenians, Georgians on my mission all attribute Christianity's advent in their lands to the ministry of Thomas. There is a deep-seated tradition in those places that I think has a basis in historical fact. Tradition has him being martyred in India.

 

I think that Thomas showed by his works that he was a man of great character and active faith. That he wanted more physical verification than some others isn't a negative in my book.

[boblloyd91]

I have also heard churches in India can trace their founding back to him

[carbon dioxide]

The apostle Thomas has been associated with doubt because he refused to believe the account of the resurrection given to him by the other disciples as they gathered in a room after they had visited the empty tomb unless he could see the resurrecfed Lord for himself. Sometimes people who struggle with their faith are called a "Doubting Thomas."

But when the women who first had the experience with the angel at the empty tomb reported this to Peter, he and the others did not believe fhem, but ran to the tomb to see for themselves. After seeing the evidence at the tomb they still did not accept what had happened, Even when the risen Lord appeared ro them in the room they were afraid and had to be given reassurance and the offer to touch his body and eat with them to affirm the reality of the resurrection.

Did Thomas get a bum rap to be forever associated with doubt when he did what all the other witnesses had done? Did Jesus have a different idea in mind when he commented on the greater blessing for thise who believe but do not see?

Thomas does get a bum rap and I think Jesus was was not speaking of the other disciples when he made those comments about those who are blessed who believed but did not see.  I think he is speaking to people like us.  I don't fault any of the apostles of that time.  They did not fully understand the reality of the resurrection.  It had never happened before in human history.  We probably would have had the same reaction.  For us we come to believe the reality of the resurrection over a period of time without needing physical evidence.  For them it was just dumped on them and it probably was just too much for them to grasp all at once.

Edited October 4, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[Duncan]

In my haze of a memory I seem to recall someone in GC trying to resurrect the character of Thomas so to speak, saying he wasn't anymore doubting than anyone else

[rpn]

I think we have doubting thomas so that members can see that God calls as apostles, people who cannot just instantly act on faith, so He doesn't reject those wnose brain works that way.

[bluebell]

I wonder if Thomas's experience with doubt, seeing, and belief is what helped him become the stalwart missionary tradition says he was.

[halconero]

In my personally opinion, the Gospel of John is primarily engaged with the Gospel of Thomas on a number of issues. The Gospel of Thomas comes from a Philonic/Platonic background which conceives of matter and the mortal body as being a lesser image of the perfect immaterial form of God. One of the key themes and lessons of the Gospel of Thomas, which Jesus imparts to his disciples, is that they must come to the spiritual realization that the world is a dead carcass, that they were preexisting beings of light, and that they should ideally return to that state. Jesus is inferred to be the preexisting Logos of creation, or the Angel of the Lord (that's a specific title). There is no crucifixion, and there is especially no mention of resurrection (which would have been anathema to the Thomasine philosophy). Oh, and Jesus isn't the way in Thomas. He's a divine revealer, but that's the limitation of his role as a saviour. Everyone has to make and discover their own salvation from the flesh.

 

There are a number of indicators that John was written in response to the GoT or other Thomasine writings: John's exposition on the Logos (referred to as the Word in English), Jesus' role in creation, and his role as THE (only) way for mankind. Oh, and the materiality of his resurrection.

 

I don't know if the incident with Thomas happened or not (I like to think it did), but its interesting to note that his doubt does NOT preclude the possible doubt of the apostles or the other disciples. So why highlight him? Well, what better way to smack the Thomasine philosophy of the GoT in the face than to have their own purported author be confronted by Jesus' resurrection, make him feel his wounds and thrust his hand in his side? What better way to knock the anti-material attitude of the Platonic/Philonic Jesus followers on their butt than to have the resurrected Jesus eat and drink?

 

------

 

Oh, and you're absolutely right. Southwestern India is about 30-50% Christian, and while some were proselytized by the Portuguese, English and French, the great majority were already there and claim apostolic descent from Thomas. You can also find Christian art dating back to the 2nd-4th century in areas like China and Mongolia, where it's a syncretic mix with Buddhist and Taoist literature and imagery. These are also believed to be descended from Thomasine groups, given the Nestorian makeup of a number of Mongols under Genghis Khan.

[halconero]

Side note: The idea of the unified apostleship only really arose about the mid 2nd century-early 3rd century. Previous to that you'd find Jesus communities claiming only one or two of the apostles/disciples/writers as their spiritual head. Some of the most popular were James, the brother of Jesus (not James of the 12) in the Jerusalem/Galilee area. Paul was really big in Greece and Asia Minor. Mark the Evangelist was popular in Roman Egypt, while Thomas was popular in Syria eastward. It's actually one of the problems Paul tries to address in Corinthians, with the people there claiming certain disciples as their spiritual patrons. The writings coming from that era are as much expositions and instructions to members as they are refutations and arguments against other leader's writings.

 

James is quite obviously a moderation of or a commentary on Paul's epistles (or outright argument against him...though I don't hold to this). Hence my earlier argument about John highlighting Thomas' doubt to illustrate his doctrine on the literal resurrection in counter against those who claimed Thomas taught Platonic anti-materiality.