I must admit, Thomas is my favorite amongst Jesus' disciples.
He asked for evidence when things contrary to his lifelong perception of the world were contradicted.
To put a knock on him for so doing is unreasonable. If the resurrection story really happened as told in the Most Recent Translation of the Bible We Have, he was completely within his intellectual rights to do so.
After all, if the resurrection was true, then it should have survived any and all attempts at skepticism.
@bigdoggproblem saidThe Bible doesn't "put a knock on" Thomas. Jesus didn't reprimand Thomas for doubting. The story is the same in any translation.
I must admit, Thomas is my favorite amongst Jesus' disciples.
He asked for evidence when things contrary to his lifelong perception of the world were contradicted.
To put a knock on him for so doing is unreasonable. If the resurrection story really happened as told in the Most Recent Translation of the Bible We Have, he was completely within his intellectual rig ...[text shortened]... all, if the resurrection was true, then it should have survived any and all attempts at skepticism.
Why do you think that if the resurrection of Jesus is true it should "survive" attempts at skepticism?
The only ones that believe it are believers. Everyone else is either skeptical, or outright disbelieve it.
@secondson saidSee, that is a good point. The Bible, in fact, does not put a knock on Thomas. It is only some of the readers of the Bible who do so.
The Bible doesn't "put a knock on" Thomas. Jesus didn't reprimand Thomas for doubting. The story is the same in any translation.
Why do you think that if the resurrection of Jesus is true it should "survive" attempts at skepticism?
The only ones that believe it are believers. Everyone else is either skeptical, or outright disbelieve it.
Call me a "romantic", but I happen to think, if a proposition is indeed true, it will withstand all attempts at skepticism.
After all, the presence of many believers in the "supernatural" resurrection of Jesus in this forum, is proof that even a false idea can captivate a large chunk of humanity, isn't it?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
The things that John included in his gospel are significant to his central purpose - that we would believe that Jesus is the Son of God, the Christ, and that we might have divine life in His name.
He says that the whole world wouldn't be able to contain all the books that COULD be written. He selected some things from the many things that happened surrounding Jesus to serve as helpful and representative accounts of all that they witnessed.
Thomans is there to represent most of us, wanting to be sure we are not following just a "feel good" myth. No matter how wonderful Jesus was, Thomas had to have empirical proof that He really did rise from the dead.
Ie. "Look, fellas. It was great. Jesus was great. We had a fantastic time. But face it. Its OVER! He's dead, executed by the Romans. The feel good ride is just OVER now. What can we do? And I won't go along any more with it unless I have verifiable empirical proof that Jesus is alive again."
Jesus gave Him a special appearance. And Thomas confessed that his God and Lord was Jesus.
Now, your point about the resurrection should have withstood all skepticism. There are not many, if any miracles in the Bible that withstand absolute will to reject.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
God came down on Mt. Sanai for well over 40 days. The people were scared to death with conviction. But it wore off. Soon the moral implications wore off. They made themselves a golden calf, said "Forget about Moses and this Yahweh of his!" And then they wanted follow some new leader back to Egypt the place of slavery - Which God called "the iron furnace" of their oppression.
What you say is interesting about skeptic proof miracles. But there is always a moral link to the things God does supernaturally. And the sinful side of man somehow causes some to disregard, disbelieve, or take for granted or otherwise neglect His miracle for their sinful nature to live without God.
Not everyone will believe. Not everyone will embrace the implications spiritually / morally of having to believe. And not everyone will see WHY it matters to let God be God.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Actually, I think believing in the Son of God is something of a personal miracle itself. I often say to myself in astonishment when I hear people marshal all their intellectual reasons against Christ - "It is amazing that I actually do believe these things."
I could go on as you probably know. But anyway so called "Doubting Thomas" is not really denigrated in John. He is submitted as representative of maybe a lot of people.
"No matter how wonderful it sounds, I have to keep a practical head about it all."
@sonship saidNo - not "will to reject" - evidence. Proof.
The things that John included in his gospel are significant to his central purpose - that we would believe that Jesus is the Son of God, the Christ, and that we might have divine life in His name.
He says that the whole world wouldn't be able to contain all the books that COULD be written. He selected some things from the many things that happened surrounding Jesus to ser ...[text shortened]... kepticism. There are not many, if any miracles in the Bible that withstand absolute will to reject.
@bigdoggproblem saidThat's not true. Jesus' words to Thomas:
See, that is a good point. The Bible, in fact, does not put a knock on Thomas.
“Because you have seen Me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
That's clearly a knock on Thomas for not believing.
@secondson saidThis begs the question: how do you, a Christian, not know Jesus' words knocking Thomas for his doubt?
The Bible doesn't "put a knock on" Thomas.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
That's not true. Jesus' words to Thomas:
“Because you have seen Me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
That's clearly a knock on Thomas for not believing.
It is a loving and gentle rebuke to Thomas I think.
He acknowledges that Thomas has believed.
It is always good that a man has come to believe.
He says blessed are those who have not seen and have believed.
In saying this I don't think Jesus was saying Thomas was not also blessed.
Ie. "You're not blessed Thomas. But others who have not seen and believed are blessed."
I think BOTH kinds of believers are blessed.
How you come to Jesus is secondary.
That you COME to Jesus - that is the most important thing.
It could be remembered that Mark says Jesus scolded all the disciples for their slowness to believe.
"And afterward He appeared to the eleven as they were reclining at table, and He reproached their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen." (Mark 16:14)
@bigdoggproblem saidI did wonder, however, after seeing Jesus raise people from the dead, walk on water, etc., damn.......how much more do you need Thomas?
I must admit, Thomas is my favorite amongst Jesus' disciples.
He asked for evidence when things contrary to his lifelong perception of the world were contradicted.
To put a knock on him for so doing is unreasonable. If the resurrection story really happened as told in the Most Recent Translation of the Bible We Have, he was completely within his intellectual rig ...[text shortened]... all, if the resurrection was true, then it should have survived any and all attempts at skepticism.
But alas, it would not be faith if 100% sure of everything.
@bigdoggproblem saidYou're a romantic. I'm afraid that propositions which are true can be frustratingly difficult to prove.
Call me a "romantic", but I happen to think, if a proposition is indeed true, it will withstand all attempts at skepticism.
@whodey saidI'm 100% sure, and I've never seen Jesus in the flesh.
I did wonder, however, after seeing Jesus raise people from the dead, walk on water, etc., damn.......how much more do you need Thomas?
But alas, it would not be faith if 100% sure of everything.
How about you?
Yes, it is called faith, even if 100% sure.
@whodey saidMaybe there weren't "raise people from the dead, walk on water" for Thomas to witness.
I did wonder, however, after seeing Jesus raise people from the dead, walk on water, etc., damn.......how much more do you need Thomas?
Maybe Thomas did not exist and was just a literary device created by the people who set up the Jesus cult of personality decades and decades later.