Doubting Thomas

[GerhardEbersoehn]

This is a textbook example of Protestantism at work . . .

Correction, Roman Catholicism at work on <add-on's>. e.g., <<prepare His body for long-term burial. That's what the women went to do on Easter morning.>>

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Secondly - I never stated that the Mother of Jesus was at His burial. That was @FHII who made this claim - NOT me.
Get your facts straight.

I apologise, I did not notice that I addressed the wrong poster. I am very sorry.

 

[BreadOfLife]

It takes someone a little more like Einstein to understand or just see the proof of Thomas' interest, much deeper, wider, higher than relativity; but it all boils down to relativity.

Shameless Roman Catholic. Typical!

Correction, Roman Catholicism at work on <add-on's>. e.g., <<prepare His body for long-term burial. That's what the women went to do on Easter morning.>>

Once again - you've turned this topic into just another idiotic anti-Catholic rant with ZERO Biblical proof for your claims about Tomas.
He screwed up and was exposed by Jesus - THEN he saw the light.

It could happen to anybody . . .

 

[FHII]

Once again - you missed every single point.

If you take step back every time you say to anybody, "you missed the point" you may come to realize they (including myself) didn't miss the point; they simply don't agree with your point.

First of all - comparing Peter and Thomas is apples and oranges because Peter didn't refuse to believe. Thomas DID.
Tey BOTH screwed up and they BOTH made amends - but for different things.

Let's see... They were both Apostles. They both screwed up. And finally, they were both rebuked and yet it's apples and oranges? Yea... Sure.

And again, in your words, Peter "simply" denied Christ.,.. as if it's not really any big deal!

Did Thomas really "refuse" to believe?

John 20:25 KJV
The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

He placed conditions on his belief (which was wrong), but he didn't say he would never believe. And again, he didn't even live up to his conditions! He believed without touching him.

As for Mary, mother of Jesus - your charge that Jesus "rebuked" her in Matt. 12:48-50 is a LIE. He never ONCE addressed

Yea, that's right! He never talked to her! She wanted to, but Jesus was not going to interrupt his sermon just because mamma wanted his attention!

Anyway I have heard that spin before from other sources. It's still rediculous, unfounded and not true.

Finally - YOUR feeble attempts at trying to "prove" that Mary doubted her Son because Scripture is silent on the matter is not only an exercise in futility - it simply shows your desperation . . .

I'd ask you for scripture to address her silence (I can actually give you scripture for it, but I am not feeling too charitable to you at this time), but you have detailed this thread with your mamma issues long enough... Yea... You did! I am guilty of the same by obliguing you, but only because I was in error, and I for one, look to correct such.

NOWHERE does the Bible tell us that the mother of Jesus was at His burial.
My point was that even IF she was there - this doesn't indicated a "lack of faith" as @FHII falsely charged.

Only 3 people were noted (in Matthew) as being at his burial:. Mary M, the other Mary and Joseph.

I stand by what I said. No one stepped forth and stated or expected him to rise.

 

[BreadOfLife]

If you take step back every time you say to anybody, "you missed the point" you may come to realize they (including myself) didn't miss the point; they simply don't agree with your point.
Let's see... They were both Apostles. They both screwed up. And finally, they were both rebuked and yet it's apples and oranges? Yea... Sure.

And again, in your words, Peter "simply" denied Christ.,.. as if it's not really any big deal!

Did Thomas really "refuse" to believe?

John 20:25 KJV
The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

He placed conditions on his belief (which was wrong), but he didn't say he would never believe. And again, he didn't even live up to his conditions! He believed without touching him.

Yea, that's right! He never talked to her! She wanted to, but Jesus was not going to interrupt his sermon just because mamma wanted his attention!

Anyway I have heard that spin before from other sources. It's still rediculous, unfounded and not true.

I'd ask you for scripture to address her silence (I can actually give you scripture for it, but I am not feeling too charitable to you at this time), but you have detailed this thread with your mamma issues long enough... Yea... You did! I am guilty of the same by obliguing you, but only because I was in error, and I for one, look to correct such.

Only 3 people were noted (in Matthew) as being at his burial:. Mary M, the other Mary and Joseph.

I stand by what I said. No one stepped forth and stated or expected him to rise.

Yes, Peter and Thomas were both Apostles - and that's where the similarities end.

- Peter denied that he knew Christ - in his cowardice.
- Thomas refused to believe unless he got to stick his fingers in His wounds - in his obstinacy.

- Jesus never rebuked Peter for what he did. He actually gave him authority over His flock (John 21:15-19).
- Jesus DID rebuke Thomas and compared him to those of us who believe without seeing (John 20:27, 29).

As for Mary, mother of Jesus - you STILL haven't shown that she was at His burial, as you claimed.
Anyway, as I have stated THREE times already - it doesn't matter if she was there. His burial didn't show a "lack of faith" by those who entombed Him because they HADN'T prepared His body for long-term entombment.

THIS is why I told you that you missed every point . . .

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Did Thomas really "refuse" to believe?

John 20:25 KJV
The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

He placed conditions on his belief (which was wrong), but he didn't say he would never believe. And again, he didn't even live up to his conditions! He believed without touching him.

AMEN!
My question / assertion is, Thomas could not have done so without the Holy Spirit "convincing" him, and the Holy Spirit did not convince Thomas (to use an idea given birth in this thread), <ego>-tistically, but according to JESUS' personal declaration the Holy Spirit would have convinced Thomas THROUGH SCRIPTURE ONLY, because, said Jesus, the "Written Word -- the Scriptures testify of ME". Thomas must have heard Jesus say this virtual command to study the Scriptures, and heeded it-- obeyed through the working of the Holy Spirit in his heart, whereas the other disciples paid no attention and couldn't care less for the profound truth proclaimed for and as the ULTIMATE TEST of his Anointing and authenticity as Saviour. Also, Jesus made the same challenge more than once and at different stages during his ministry which OF COURSE would be ignored and downplayed by RC mentality.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

- Jesus DID rebuke Thomas and compared him to those of us who believe without seeing (John 20:27, 29).

Denied! Post #92 ...
The fact Jesus said to Thomas and all those within hearing-distance, "Be not without faith, but believe"? These words of Jesus are an encouragement, saying, 'You had it right, Thomas, the Scriptures informed you well-- therefore don't be without faith, but believe, Thomas, you can trust everything the Scriptures showed you so clearly!'
Just so are Jesus' words in verse 20, no stern 'admonition', but an assurance and solace and again an encouragement, not only to Thomas, but to everyone within hearing distance like you and me, "Because thou hast seen Me (by the hearing of the testimony of the Spirit of Christ in your hearts "OF ME HE SHALL TESTIFY") thou hast believed, therefore, blessed are they that have (like Thomas) not seen (physically) YET (like Thomas did) HAVE BELIEVED (spiritually)."

The Roman Catholics have it all screwed up!

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Once again - NONE of them believed until they saw Jesus risen.

Thomas, however, raised the ante when he made his statement that he wouldn't believe until he actually placed his fingers in the nail holes and hand in His side. NONE of the others were this obstinate - and that's why they weren't rebuked by Jesus when He appeared to them.

What Thomas did was a BAD thing - not "heroic".
Just as Peter did a BAD thing by doubting Christ 3 times and was redeemed by telling Christ 3 times that he loved Him - Thomas also did a BAD thing by refusing to believe, but was redeemed by his eventual statement of faith.

I'll close ...
Once again - NONE of the crammed-in disciples <believed> unto salvation because they saw Jesus risen merely for ulterior reason as a leader.

Thomas, however, <raised no ante> when he made his statement that he wouldn't believe until he actually placed his fingers in the nail holes and hand in His side. He expressed his acceptance of Jesus' challenge to find HIM in the Scriptures because "they testify of ME". Which makes me think right now why Thomas mentioned these two marks of the Christ's authenticity? And my mind tells me it must be because Thomas as all the other disciples had forsaken Jesus before He was crucified, and saw nothing of the proceedings but must have thought very hard about it afterwards! They all would have asked for as much information as they could get from anyone, and they heard 1) THAT Jesus' hands were nailed to the cross for to be crucified in a manner the Romans never crucified; and they heard 2) THAT while Jesus hang on the cross after He had died still, a soldier pierced his side, also in a manner crucified were never treated. Crucified were left to rot and fall off the poles they were hanged to; or under very rare circumstances the bones in their legs were broken in order they would suffocate and die quick so that their bodies could be taken away to the rubbish hole. But piercing the side of any crucified individual hanging dead or alive was UNPRECEDENTED, JUST LIKE THE USE OF NAILS WAS UNPRECEDENTED AND ACTUALLY AGAINST ROMAN LAW.

These things the disciples knew about only because they heard about it. But it took someone of keen observation who would have thought of the EXTRAORDINARY in it all. In fact, it would have had to be someone with some knowledge of the Hebrews' Holy Scriptures! He had to be someone of SINGULAR (Hebrew) FAITH who only would have noticed the very strange and intriguing events and circumstances. No one could see and ASK about THESE things without the Holy Spirit which their Lord, Jesus, had been telling his disciples often, emphatically and unambiguously. Such an one was Thomas the Twin -- NONE other than the one who acknowledged, "We do not know", the one who implored, "How can we know?!" Yea, one who even may be called <<obstinate>> - for really he was <ante>, DIFFERENT from his mates, had the weirdest ideas! Was not the least interested in just another Lazarus, but obsessed with COULD THIS BE THE ANOINTED OF THE LORD ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES?!

And that's why Jesus did not <rebuke> Thomas when he first saw Him risen. What Thomas did was what the Holy Spirit must have prompted him to do and do so enthusiastically and predetermined. Thomas KNEW what he was doing, consciously, and with firm conviction of faith. Thomas <refused> not to believe. He believed with a faith that met any challenge of unbelief; he FOUGHT THE GOOD FIGHT as <eventually>, so initially.

I believe Thomas was a disciple as well as apostle of best reputation the Lord would commend.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Denied! Post #92 ...
The fact Jesus said to Thomas and all those within hearing-distance, "Be not without faith, but believe"? These words of Jesus are an encouragement, saying, 'You had it right, Thomas, the Scriptures informed you well-- therefore don't be without faith, but believe, Thomas, you can trust everything the Scriptures showed you so clearly!'
Just so are Jesus' words in verse 20, no stern 'admonition', but an assurance and solace and again an encouragement, not only to Thomas, but to everyone within hearing distance like you and me, "Because thou hast seen Me (by the hearing of the testimony of the Spirit of Christ in your hearts "OF ME HE SHALL TESTIFY") thou hast believed, therefore, blessed are they that have (like Thomas) not seen (physically) YET (like Thomas did) HAVE BELIEVED (spiritually)."

The Roman Catholics have it all screwed up!

I'll close ...
Once again - NONE of the crammed-in disciples <believed> unto salvation because they saw Jesus risen merely for ulterior reason as a leader.

Thomas, however, <raised no ante> when he made his statement that he wouldn't believe until he actually placed his fingers in the nail holes and hand in His side. He expressed his acceptance of Jesus' challenge to find HIM in the Scriptures because "they testify of ME". Which makes me think right now why Thomas mentioned these two marks of the Christ's authenticity? And my mind tells me it must be because Thomas as all the other disciples had forsaken Jesus before He was crucified, and saw nothing of the proceedings but must have thought very hard about it afterwards! They all would have asked for as much information as they could get from anyone, and they heard 1) THAT Jesus' hands were nailed to the cross for to be crucified in a manner the Romans never crucified; and they heard 2) THAT while Jesus hang on the cross after He had died still, a soldier pierced his side, also in a manner crucified were never treated. Crucified were left to rot and fall off the poles they were hanged to; or under very rare circumstances the bones in their legs were broken in order they would suffocate and die quick so that their bodies could be taken away to the rubbish hole. But piercing the side of any crucified individual hanging dead or alive was UNPRECEDENTED, JUST LIKE THE USE OF NAILS WAS UNPRECEDENTED AND ACTUALLY AGAINST ROMAN LAW.

These things the disciples knew about only because they heard about it. But it took someone of keen observation who would have thought of the EXTRAORDINARY in it all. In fact, it would have had to be someone with some knowledge of the Hebrews' Holy Scriptures! He had to be someone of SINGULAR (Hebrew) FAITH who only would have noticed the very strange and intriguing events and circumstances. No one could see and ASK about THESE things without the Holy Spirit which their Lord, Jesus, had been telling his disciples often, emphatically and unambiguously. Such an one was Thomas the Twin -- NONE other than the one who acknowledged, "We do not know", the one who implored, "How can we know?!" Yea, one who even may be called <<obstinate>> - for really he was <ante>, DIFFERENT from his mates, had the weirdest ideas! Was not the least interested in just another Lazarus, but obsessed with COULD THIS BE THE ANOINTED OF THE LORD ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES?!

And that's why Jesus did not <rebuke> Thomas when he first saw Him risen. What Thomas did was what the Holy Spirit must have prompted him to do and do so enthusiastically and predetermined. Thomas KNEW what he was doing, consciously, and with firm conviction of faith. Thomas <refused> not to believe. He believed with a faith that met any challenge of unbelief; he FOUGHT THE GOOD FIGHT as <eventually>, so initially.

I believe Thomas was a disciple as well as apostle of best reputation the Lord would commend.

THANK YOU for admitting that you are in denial.
That is precisely my point.

And why you are making this a "Roman Catholic" issue only shows your desperation. This isn't a "Catholic" issue at all but a plainly evident Scriptural truth. Jesus absolutely rebuked Thomas - and your admission that you are in denial speaks to this truth.

Anyway - "Roman" Catholic simply refers to one of over twenty Liturgical Rites.
It's NOT the name of the Church, Einstein.

PS - You STILL haven't shown how Thomas was a Scriptural scholar who "studied" the Scriptures while the others "didn't".
Chapter and Verse, Einstein . . .

 

[FHII]

As for Mary, mother of Jesus - you STILL haven't shown that she was at His burial, as you claimed.

Really? Where did I say that? Was it

My bad... Mary the mother of Jesus isn't apart of the events from the day of the crucifixion to the end of the Gospels (as far as I can see, and isn't mentioned again until Acts 1:4).

Or maybe here:

The last we see if her was when Jesus left her in the care of "the disciples Jesus loved" and she was in his home (John 19:27. I believe that disciple was John, but we really don't know for sure).

No? Ok, maybe here:

I admitted thAt she wasn't even in the picture

... Not there either. Let's try one more time:

Only 3 people were noted (in Matthew) as being at his burial:. Mary M, the other Mary and Joseph.

Breadoflife, I NEVER made that statement!

 

[FHII]

My question / assertion is, Thomas could not have done so without the Holy Spirit "convincing" him,

Gerhard, please excuse me for not attending to this sooner. I do believe that when Thomas saw Jesus the Holy Spirit was with him. The Holy Spirit is Jesus's pirit, and is the spirit of truth. So, I can see that. He didn't even need to place his fingers in the holes, even though Jesus invited him to do so.

but according to JESUS' personal declaration the Holy Spirit would have convinced Thomas THROUGH SCRIPTURE ONLY, because, said Jesus, the "Written Word -- the Scriptures testify of ME".

There is a problem with that. Yes, Jesus was big on his disciples learning the scriptures, but he was bigger on them listening to him right here and now. "Scriptures testify of me" was a great moment, and one we all should take to heart. But Jesus was not talking to his disciples at the time. He was talking to unbelieving Jews who were about to kill him. In other words, tying this scripture to Thomas isn't an ideal thing.

We don't know Thomas's profession. Thus, we have no knowledge of he could even read or write. I know there is a "gospel of Thomas" but it may not be authentic, and even so we don't know if he wrote or dictated it (Peter dictated some of his letters, as I have heard, so it is a reasonable question).

If he could read, I imagine he did spend some time reading. I believe he (along with everyone else) was a nervous wreck and looking for answers. It was the Sabbath. They couldn't go anywhere. They had no leader, so there was no where to go. I believe this was a full 72 hours wondering what to do, but I'd you believe in a lesser hour time frame, so be it... It's still a lot of time to feet, think and wonder what to do.

Again, this is all speculation, but I am applying a human element to it.

whereas the other disciples paid no attention and couldn't care less for the profound truth proclaimed for and as the ULTIMATE TEST of his Anointing and authenticity as Saviour

That's a bit harsh on the other Apostles. If they could read, and even if they couldn't, I suspect they were all searching for answers.

I have no problem with the notion that Thomas was searching the scriptures. He may have, and I suspect he was (whether by scroll or memory of what he was taught.). But no, I can't support a notion that Thomas never doubted, if that is what you are saying.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Really? Where did I say that? Was it
Or maybe here:
No? Ok, maybe here:
... Not there either. Let's try one more time:
Breadoflife, I NEVER made that statement!

MY mistake.

It was @Enoch111 who made this claim.
I was debating with several people at once and conflated your posts with his . . .

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Again, this is all speculation, but I am applying a human element to it.

I start erring when I have God's words in my lips and heart and mind but not in His Word.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

That's a bit harsh on the other Apostles. If they could read, and even if they couldn't, I suspect they were all searching for answers.

I have no problem with the notion that Thomas was searching the scriptures. He may have, and I suspect he was (whether by scroll or memory of what he was taught.). But no, I can't support a notion that Thomas never doubted, if that is what you are saying.

It is not the doubter who cries out to Christ, "I do not know, how shall I know?!" It is the doubter who enjoys his own comfort-zone, who, locked up in his smoggy room for an after-action satisfaction Lexican, says, "WE, have seen the Lord". Only Thomas was <<looking for answers>>. "But JESUS, said, Thomas, because YOU have seen ME -- your "Lord and God" -- YOU, BELIEVED, and blessed are they..." who through all ages, inclusive of you, Thomas, "...have not seen yet have believed." Nevertheless truly believed, NOT like these miserable Laodeceans in this room boast "we have seen" yet have neither seen nor believed!

Notice "have believed" - 'pisteusantes' is not a Verb but Participle Aorist - "they who were of Faith", "they who have believed", "they who came to believe / who came to Faith", THROUGH ALL TIME! Now that was not how the other disciples believed OR THEY LIKE THOMAS ALSO WOULD HAVE CONFESSED LIKE THOMAS DID. Let's compare apples with apples.

 

[Illuminator]

When Thomas saw Our Lord and exclaimed: My Lord and my God! (John 20:25)…these words were an act of faith and self-surrender. Thomas’s reply was not simply an exclamation of surprise, it wan an affirmation, a profound act of faith in Christ’s divinity.

St. Gregory the Great comments we are delighted by what follows: ‘Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.’ There is no doubt that we are included in this statement, for with our whole soul we confess him whom we have not seen in the flesh. It refers to us, so long as we live in accordance with faith; because only the one who practices what he believes really believes.
(St. Gregory the Great, Homilies on the Gospels, 26,9.)

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

"Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. .. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." Romans 8:9,14 "No man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost"-- how much more that Jesus is God-- how much more, Jesus, Thou art "my Lord and my God!"?

"How can ye believe", Jesus answered THOMAS, Well, Thomas, "Search the Scriptures .. they are they which testify of ME." "If ye believe not Moses' writings, how shall ye believe My Words? .. Had ye believed Moses (Zachariah et al.), ye would have believed Me." Psalm 22:16 Zechariah 12:10 "That ye might BELIEVE .. the SCRIPTURE should be fulfilled .. and again another SCRIPTURE .. They shall look on Him whom they pierced."John 19:31 and on.

Paul says "faith comes by hearing" which is the hearing of the Scriptures through apostolic preaching. One's coming to Faith and one's coming to the Scriptures for Faith are the single indissoluble and indispensable work of the Holy Spirit. One may have Jesus' words and faith in one's lips and mind and heart but found them not in the Scriptures, because the knowledge and understanding of God's Word in the Scriptures comes by the Holy Spirit in the Scriptures.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

When Thomas saw Our Lord and exclaimed: My Lord and my God! (John 20:25)…these words were an act of faith and self-surrender. Thomas’s reply was not simply an exclamation of surprise, it wan an affirmation, a profound act of faith in Christ’s divinity.

Amen and Amen

 

[tigger 2]

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).”

 

[tigger 2]

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.' 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!”

My study of all uses of kurie:

: Examining the Trinity: KURIE - All NT Uses of "Lord" in Address

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

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.

Thomas did not <refuse to believe>! There's infinite distance between <<refuse to believe>> and wanting / desiring / looking for reason for that which one in fact believes!--- which was what Thomas did when he said (in verse 25) that unless he had stuck his hand in Jesus' side he would not believe.
It is not the Text that is ambiguous; it is people's twisting of the words that creates ambiguity.

When did Thomas make this <statement>? (Good word for it!)
Must have been before that "evening after eight days". Verse 24 implies Thomas made it before the disciples were in that room together the first, time!
Remember the disciples deserted Jesus everyone into a different direction the morning before his crucifixion; and they were nowhere to be found the very night after, when Joseph showed up and began negotiating to obtain Jesus' body to be prepared to be buried. The disciples had to have started coming together again on the same day they forsook Jesus and He was crucified and they feared the Jews most.
So it must have been during the interim between afternoon of crucifixion-day and Jesus' first appearance to the disciples behind closed doors that Thomas made his statement in verse 25b.

That Thomas needed specific proof for his belief that Jesus was in truth the Messiah ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES explains WHY Thomas was not present eight days before.

Now this, I have all along maintained. But I made a mistake all along. I forgot, I did not think, Thomas could not go to the temple where the Scriptures were kept, to do his research because two earthquakes put an immediate stop to all temple rituals and undoubtedly prevented access to the Scrolls.
Thomas therefore had to rely on the knowledge he did have of the Scriptures to THINK about what was Written, as well as pray God for understanding the Scriptures and to "SEE" the 'marks' / 'signs' PROPHESIED, by FAITH. Mark 13:29,30 Matthew 24:34 Luke 21:32-34.

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".

Two earthquakes put an end to temple services and intercession. At the first earthquake when Jesus died, the earthquake opened the graves of many saints; at the second earthquake many saints rose from the dead and went out of their graves ... AND WENT INTO THE CITY AND APPEARED TO MANY". And I thought, it could happen with Thomas, that a resurrected saint conversed with him and TAUGHT him "all the things concerning the Christ .. WRITTEN for our instruction ....".