Doubting Thomas

tigger 2 said:

What did Thomas mean at John 20:28? - Part 1

Thomas had said (verse :25) that unless something happened he would “not believe.” What was it that Thomas refused to believe? Was it that he refused to believe that Jesus was equally God with the Father? There is certainly no hint of this before or after Thomas’ statement at John 20:28.

If the disciples had learned, upon seeing the resurrected Jesus, that he was God, certainly they would have indicated this! But notice, neither before nor after receiving Holy Spirit v.22) did they kneel or do any act of worship such as one would certainly do upon becoming aware of being in the presence of God!

Notice that the disciples who had seen Jesus earlier did not tell Thomas that Jesus was God v.25)! This is an incredible oversight if they had really believed they had seen God! Certainly, if they had discovered that Jesus was really God when they saw him resurrected, they would have talked of nothing else!

If, on the other hand, they had already known that Jesus was God even before seeing his resurrected form, then Thomas, too, would have already known about it and certainly would not have meant: “Unless I see ... the print of nails [etc.] ... I will not believe [Jesus is God].”

No, the context of John 20:24, 25, and 29 shows that Thomas refused to believe that Jesus had been resurrected from the dead. (See footnote for John 20:8 in The NIV Study Bible, Zondervan, 1985: “John did not say what [the disciple who saw the empty tomb of Jesus] believed, but it must have been that Jesus was resurrected.” - Also see Barclay’s The Daily Study Bible Series: The Gospel of John, Revised Edition, Vol. 2, p. 267, and pp. 275, 276.)

Furthermore, Jesus’ statements before and after Thomas’ exclamation (“my Lord and my God!”) show not only that Jesus wanted Thomas to believe that he had been resurrected to life but that he could not possibly be God!!

Jesus’ command to Thomas to literally touch his wounds and actually see his hands proves that he meant, “See, I am the same man you saw die, but now I am alive ... be believing that I have been resurrected to life” (not, “see, these wounds prove I am God ... be believing that I am God”).

Notice that the reason given for Thomas to “be believing” is that he can see Jesus’ hands and their wounds. Likewise, after Thomas says “My Lord and my God,” Jesus reaffirms that Thomas now believes (as did the other disciples after seeing - Jn. 20:20) that Jesus has been resurrected (not that he is God) “because you have seen me” v.29).

Certainly Jesus wouldn’t mean, “you believe I am God because you can see me.” Instead, this is proof that Jesus, Thomas, John, and the other disciples did not believe Jesus was equally God with the Father! How? Because John himself has made it manifestly clear that “no one [no human] has ever seen God” - 1 John 4:12, RSV. (See the SF study; also OMN 3-5.)

“For the NT God is utterly invisible (Jn. 6:46; 1 Tim. 1:17; 6:16; Col. 1:15). ‘God does not become visible; He is revealed,’ ... yet the resurrection narratives especially stress that the risen Christ is visible.” - The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, p. 518, Vol. 3, Zondervan, 1986.

Therefore, since no man has ever directly seen God (who is the Father only - John 5:37, 6:46; 17:1, 3) but men have only indirectly “seen” God through representations such as visions, dreams, etc., Jesus is saying: “Believe I have been resurrected and that I am obviously not God because you see me directly (and even touch me so you can be sure I’m not a vision or an indirect representation).”

Click to expand...

GerhardEbersoehn said:

It cannot get more tragic when sound facts are abused to 'prove' CERTAIN ABOMINABLE GROUNDLESS PATHETIC UNTRUTH AND HERESY. <<Furthermore, Jesus’ statements before and after Thomas’ exclamation (“my Lord and my God!”) show not only that Jesus wanted Thomas to believe that he had been resurrected to life but that he could not possibly be God!!>>

Another despicable troll on the prowl after innocent unawares victims!

Click to expand...

GerhardEbersoehn said:

But there came to my mind last night, early this morning, while I could not sleep, another way whereby Thomas also could have received confirmation for having BELIEVED the Christ by the "folds through my hands" and the "opening in my side".

Click to expand...

tigger 2 said:

What did Thomas Mean? - Part 2

What about the rest of the context? (1) As noted before, Thomas did not bow down, worship, etc. upon learning that it was really Jesus and saying 'my lord and my god.' He could not have just discovered that he was in the presence of God and acted the way he did! (2) It’s also obvious that Jesus did not understand Thomas to be calling him equally God with the Father in heaven. But did John, in spite of the incredible contradiction of a previous statement (like 1 John 4:12 above) at John 1:18 that “no man hath seen God at any time,” somehow think that Thomas understood Jesus to be God?

Well, no other disciple of Jesus ever made a statement to him which could honestly be construed as meaning Jesus is God! So, (3) if John had, somehow, understood Thomas’ statement that way, he certainly would have provided some follow-up clarification and emphasis in his own comments.

Surely John would have shown Thomas prostrating himself before “God” and worshiping him (but he doesn’t!). So how does John summarize this incident? - “But these were written that you may believe [Believe what? That Jesus is God? Here, then, is where it should have been written if John really believed such a thing:] that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.” - John 20:31, RSV. (Be sure to compare 1 John 5:5)

Or, as the trinitarian The NIV Study Bible, Zondervan, 1985, states in a footnote for this scripture:

“This whole Gospel [John] is written to show the truth of Jesus’ Messiahship and to present him as the Son of God, so that the readers may believe in him.”

Obviously, neither Jesus’ response, nor Thomas’ responses (before and after his statement at John 20:28), nor John’s summation of the event at 20:31 recognizes Thomas’ statement to mean that Jesus is the only true God!

So it is clear from context that neither Jesus, nor John, (nor Thomas) considered the statement at John 20:28 to mean that Jesus is equally God with the Father. (Remember this is the same Gospel account that also records Jesus’ last prayer to the Father at John 17:1, 3: “Father,.... This is eternal life: to know thee who alone art truly God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” - NEB. It is obvious from this scripture alone that Jesus and the writer of the Gospel of John do not believe Jesus is equally God with the Father!)

This may be, then, one of those places where the idioms of an ancient language are not completely understood by modern translators.

As the Encyclopaedia Britannica, 14th ed., vol. 13, p. 25, puts it:

"And it is not certain that even the words Thomas addressed to Jesus (Jn. 20:28) meant what they suggest in the English Version." - (Britannica article by Rev. Charles Anderson Scott, M.A., D.D. Dunn Professor of New Testament, Theological College of the Presbyterian Church of England, Cambridge.)

And John M. Creed, as Professor of Divinity at the University of Cambridge, wrote:

“‘my Lord and my God’ (Joh.xx.28) is still not quite the same as an address to Christ as being without qualification God, and it must be balanced by the words of the risen Christ himself ... (v.17): ... ‘I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.’” - The Divinity of Jesus Christ, J. M. Creed, p. 123.

Yes, think about that very carefully: After Jesus was resurrected, he continued to call the Father in heaven “my God”! (Even after he was fully restored to heaven and seated at the right hand of God - Rev. 3:2; 3:12.) So if we must insist, as many trinitarians do, that the single instance of Thomas’ saying “My God” in Jesus’ presence, with all its uncertainties, means that Jesus is superior in every way to Thomas (in essence, eternity, authority, etc.), what do Jesus’ even clearer statements that the Father is his God actually mean? -

“He who conquers, ... I will write on him the name of MY God, and the name of the city of MY God, ... and my own name.” - Rev. 3:12, RSV (Compare Rev. 14:1).

You can’t have it both ways. If Thomas’ statement (“my God”) can only mean that Jesus is ultimately superior to Thomas in all respects (as God), then Jesus’ repeated and even clearer statements that the Father is his God can only mean that the Father is ultimately superior to Jesus in all respects. If Thomas really understood that Jesus was equally God with the Father, it is certainly blasphemous for John and other inspired Bible writers to turn around and call the Father the God of the Christ! - Micah 5:4; 1 Cor. 11:3; 2 Cor. 11:31; Eph. 1:3, 17; 1 Peter 1:3.

……………

It is well-known by even trinitarian grammarians that common statements (as in English also) are frequently abbreviated, leaving out necessary words. This holds true for doxologies (praises) of God.

(27 “Then Jesus said to Thomas .... ‘Believe!’

(28 “Thomas answered, ‘My Lord and my God (be witness) [that I do believe now]!’ {Or,

following the NIV example of 1 Sam. 20:12, ‘(I swear by) my Lord and God [that I do believe]!’ or following the Septuagint example of 1 Sam 20:12. “My Lord and my God (knows that I believe)}.”

(29 “Then Jesus told him, ‘You believe because you have seen me.’” - Based on the Living

Bible translation of John 20:27-29

This may be similar to the abbreviated doxology at Ro. 9:5 which some trinitarians also take advantage of (see the AO study). That doxology is also without a critical verb and is abruptly joined to a description of Jesus. Literally, in Greek it reads: “the being over all god blessed into the ages amen.”

Even some trinitarian translators add the necessary words and punctuation to make this a clearly separated doxology to the Father: “[Jesus was born a Jew]. May God, who rules over all, be praised for ever” - GNB. (CEV: ‘I pray that God, who rules over all, will be praised forever! Amen.’ RSV: ‘God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen.’ TLB: 'Praise God forever!' NABRE: 'God who is over all be blessed forever. Amen.' NIVSB, fn.: 'God be forever praised forever' or, 'God who is over all be forever praised!' NLV: 'May God be honored and thanked forever. Let it be so.' RSV: 'God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen.' NEB: 'May God, supreme above all, be blessed forever!')

If so many trinitarian translators can admit this possibility for Ro. 9:5, it is not unreasonable to apply a similar interpretation of John 20:28.

................

Furthermore, in the writings of John, when using the term “Lord” in address to another person, a different form of the NT Greek word is always used instead of the form found at John 20:28 (ho kurios mou).

“The vocative is the case used in addressing a person .... κύριε [kurie] (O Lord), Θee (O God) ... are almost the only forms found in the N.T.” - pp. 14, 15, The New Testament Greek Primer, Rev. Alfred Marshall, Zondervan, 1978 printing.

This is especially true of “Lord” and “my Lord” in both the Septuagint and the New Testament. Kurie (κύριε), not kurios (κύριός), is the form used when addressing someone as “Lord” or “My Lord.” - See the KURIE study. (“God,” Θεε, however, is not so certain. In fact it is very rare in the NT which normally uses the nominative Θεὸς in address.).

We can see a good example of this vocative form, which is used in addressing a person as “Lord,” at 3 Kings 1:20, 21 (1 Kings 1:20, 21 in modern English Bibles) in the ancient Greek of the Septuagint: “And you, my Lord [κύριε μου], O King ...” - 3 Kings 1:20, Septuagint. Then at 3 Kings 1:21 we see the same person (King David) being spoken about (but not addressed) in the same terms as Jn 20:28: “And it shall come to pass, when my Lord [Ὁ κύριός μου] the king shall sleep with his fathers .... - 3 Kings 1:21, Septuagint.

We also find Thomas himself, at Jn 14:5, addressing Jesus as “Lord” by using κύριε.

And, when addressing the angel at Rev. 7:14, John himself says kurie mou (“My Lord”)![6]

There are 33 uses of kurie in the Gospel of John alone. Here are a few of them: John 9:38; 11:3, 12, 21, 27, 32, 34, 39; 13:6, 9, 25, 36, 37; 14:5. (Compare these with an actual identification of the lord: “it is the lord [kurios],” John 21:7.

Therefore, it is safe to say that when John wrote down the incident with Thomas at Jn 20:28 and used the nominative form for “My Lord” [Kurios] he was not saying that Thomas was addressing Jesus as “My Lord and my God!”

Click to expand...

theophilus said:

This is not the response of a doubter; instead it shows that Thomas loved Jesus and was even willing to sacrifice his life for him. Thomas never doubted before the crucifixion. The Bible says nothing about his life afterward but tradition tells us he carried the gospel to India and died there as a martyr. He demonstrated strong faith both before and after this incident but we have allowed his doubts to color our perception of him. Here is a summary of his life taken from the site What Christians Want To Know — Bible Verses, Quotes, Christian Answers, Songs and More .

Thomas got a bum rap. He was no more doubting than the rest of the disciples and the only reason he doubted and the others didn’t was because they had seen the resurrected Christ. When the women came back from the empty tomb and after seeing the risen Christ, the disciples also doubted. To me, there is no doubt that Thomas was a strong believer and a powerful missionary used by God to the glory of God.

Click to expand...

theophilus said:

But I have never heard of John being called “doubting John.” Why do people respond so differently to Thomas and John?

Click to expand...

Illuminator said:

How could Thomas, who founded a church in India that still exists today, do so without one word of NT Scripture?

Click to expand...

GerhardEbersoehn said:

All Scripture is New Covenant Scripture; no Scripture is not New Covenant Scripture; because all Scripture is the Written WORD OF GOD; which was what Thomas searched.

Click to expand...

GerhardEbersoehn said:

Job 19:23 Compare John 20:25,26

τις γαρ αν δοίη γραφήναι τα ρήματά μου
That might be given to be written my words

τεθήναι δε αυτά εν βιβλίω εις τον αιώνα 24 εν γραφείω σιδηρώ
and be put them in a book forever 24 with a stylus of iron

και μολίβδω η εν πέτραις εγγλυφήναι.
and in lead or in rocks engraved.

25 οίδα ότι γαρ αένναος εστιν ο εκλύειν με μέλλων επί γης
25 For I know eternal is He who saves Me soon on earth.

26 αναστήσαι το δέρμα μου το αναντλούν ταύτα
26 Printed in my skin (are) the things I suffered

παρά γαρ κυρίου ταύτά μοι συνετελέσθη
for the Lord these things in Me fulfilled

27 α εγώ εμαυτώ συνεπίσταμαι α οφθαλμός μου εώρακε
27 What I am sure of, that my eye has seen
KJV What I shall see for myself and mine eyes shall behold

και ουκ άλλος πάντα, δε μοι συντετέλεσται εν κόλπω
and not another, and in me all was fulfilled to the bosom
KJV and not another, though my reins be consumed in Me.

Click to expand...

Illuminator said:

Sorry, GerhardEbersoehn, but your two verses have no comparison whatsoever. Job is not guilty of Bible worship the way you are.
First, Thomas didn't write Job, Job wrote Job.
Second, the Book of Job is not inscribed in rock, verse 23 foreshadows the 10 commandments that were inscribed in rock.
Third, The Word of God, the 10 commandments written in stone, not the entire Bible, was placed in the Ark of the Old Covenant, not the entire Bible. This foreshadowed Jesus, the living Word of God made flesh in the Ark of the New Covenant. This Biblical truth is denied by anti-Mary Christians.
Forth, Jesus had to directly purify Thomas of his rationalism.

Click to expand...

GerhardEbersoehn said:

Weightless nonsensical irrelevancies except for your direct reversal of Jesus' commendation for Thomas' <rationalism>.
Verse 29, "Thomas, Because thou hast seen Me..." but "Thomas was NOT with them when Jesus eight days before had come and the other disciples had seen Him. Nevertheless Jesus calls it a fact, "thou hast seen ME and because thou hast seen Me, thou HAST BELIEVED". "Blessed are they who (like you Thomas) have NEITHER seen NOR believed..." "NO OTHER WAY" than through and according to THE SCRIPTURES!

29λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς Ὅτι ἑώρακάς με, πεπίστευκας; μακάριοι οἱ μὴ ἰδόντες καὶ πιστεύσαντες.

καὶ is the usual and normal Continuative Conjunction which carries forward the application of
the Negation 'μὴ'— μὴ ... καὶ ... "blessed are those who have neither seen and-also-have-not believed".

καὶ is NOT an Adversative Conjunction, "blessed are they who have not seen and YET have believed. Mark that 'yet' has been added in the KJV.

καὶ is in fact used as Emphatic or Ascensive Conjunction that continues the negation μὴ to the ultimate, "who were not seeing verily were believing" ... and had to make sure from the Scriptures in matters of Faith!

Click to expand...

Illuminator said:

Absolute reliance on Greek grammar, lexicons and concordances without the spirit is just another form of works righteousness.

Click to expand...