Thomas the Apostle

I have shared before the experience of reading actual dialogue from real people engaged in real conversations. The first thing you notice is people rarely speak in complete sentences. They tend to combine phrases, drop off words, pause and sputter. It is not uncommon for them to include a number of 'space fillers' ("um" or "like" or "um, like"). Conversations also tend to speed out of control in different directions. Lastly, people rarely have thirty second conversations consisting of a few words each, back and forth. When we talk, we tend to say much more than a sentence.

When you read a novel, by comparison, people speak in sentences. There tends to be a flow which is easy to follow (transcripts are often times very hard to follow). The conversations tend to carry the story along to a point.

This makes me think that the Bible does not contain actual transcripts. For example, typically we preach 12-18 minutes here on a Sunday. Sometimes it can be twenty or more. In classes we teach for forty-five minutes to an hour. I have heard that years ago the preachers went on much, much longer. So the little snippets we find in the Gospel are certainly only a very small part of what took place. They also reflect a writer's hand. People speak clearly and concisely. There is little doubt that the author is doing a great deal of summarizing (and focusing) for the benefit of a clear communication to the reader/hearer (most people listened because they could not read in Ancient times).

Therefore, the narrative of Thomas is more than a remembrance of one 'doubter.' It would seem safe to assume that Thomas is used as a foil for all of us who later hear the story. The disciples' doubts I wrote about in Matthew's Gospel a few days ago occur here, only they are localized now in a single man. The main concern of the author is not to share some inside info on Thomas, it is to confront the hearer. So all of the events which occurred over the period of time that Jesus appeared to the disciples finds voice in a few stories. What does it mean?

1. Thomas demands proof. He wants to touch the wounds and probe them. He wants concrete evidence. So, ancient people are alot like us. They do not want to be duped. The early church is not a group of incredulous simpletons. They are people with minds and expectations.
2. Remarkable things (like resurrection) are hard to believe. Now, on the other hand, Thomas is also making a value judgment about the others who told them what he saw. His refusal is, in a sense, an insult to them. The witness matters.
3. The proof Thomas got, Jesus in the (risen) flesh, is not going to be available to everyone. Sadly, this includes you and I. We have to trust in the words of others.
4. Jesus is less impressed by those who cling to physical proof. So you and I have a special place in His heart.

For all his reputation as "Doubting Thomas" in the end he articulates the mst radical affirmation of Jesus' identity: "My Lord and my God." We, too, can say the same thing (and do). We will see Jesus some day. Until then, the mission of the church is to be about the task of forgiving sins (at least in this story in John 20:19-31). There is no shame in wishing for concrete evidence or struggling with doubts. There is shame in failing to do the work He calls us to. Thomas' proof must serve us as well. Jesus says, "Believe. Trust." He also says, "Forvie sins..." Our task is before us and in the Easter season we need to witness to His death and resurrection. We need to preach and declare forgiveness. We need to unbind sinners. We need to act like people who have seen and touched the risen Lord Jesus (even if we haven't).