Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 20:24
But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
24 29. The Manifestation to S. Thomas and others
Peculiar to S. John
24. Thomas ] See on Joh 11:16.
the twelve ] See on Joh 6:67.
was not with them ] His melancholy temperament might dispose him to solitude and to put no trust in the rumours of Christ’s Resurrection if they reached him on Easter Day. And afterwards his despondency is too great to be removed by the testimony even of eye-witnesses. The test which he selects has various points of contact with the surroundings. The wounds had been the cause of his despair; it is they that must reassure him. The print of them would prove beyond all doubt that it was indeed His Lord that had returned to him. Moreover, the Ten had no doubt told him of their own terror and hesitation, and how Jesus had invited them to ‘handle Him and see’ in order to convince themselves. This would suggest a similar mode of proof to S. Thomas.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Joh 20:24-29
But Thomas, called Didymus was not with them when Jesus came
St.
Thomas
Mark
I. HOW MUCH CHRISTIANS MAY LOSE BY NOT REGULARLY ATTENDING THE ASSEMBLIES OF GODS PEOPLE.
1. Thomas was absent when Jesus appeared, and consequently missed a blessing. He was kept in suspense and unbelief a whole week, while all around him were rejoicing in the thought of a risen Lord.
2. We shall all do well to remember the charge (Heb 10:25). Never to be absent from Gods house on Sundays, without good reason; never to let our place be empty when means of grace are going on–this is one way to be a prosperous Christian. The very sermon that we needlessly miss may contain a precious word in season for our souls. The assembly for prayer and praise from which we stay away may be the very gathering that would have cheered and stablished our hearts. We little know how dependent our spiritual health is on little, regular, habitual helps, and how much we suffer if we miss our medicine. The wretched argument that many attend means of grace and are no better for them should be no argument to a Christian. Such an one should remember the words of Solomon Pro 8:34), and the Masters promise (Mat 18:20).
II. HOW KIND AND MERCIFUL CHRIST IS TO DULL AND SLOW BELIEVERS.
1. It is hard to imagine anything more provoking than the conduct of Thomas, when even the testimony of ten faithful brethren had no effect on him. But it is impossible to imagine anything more patient and compassionate than our Lords treatment of him. He comes again at the end of a week, and apparently for the special benefit of Thomas, and deals with him according to his weakness, like a gentle nurse dealing with a froward child. If nothing but material evidence could satisfy him, even that evidence was supplied.
2. This, doubtless, was written for the comfort of believers. The Holy Ghost knew well that the dull, slow, stupid, and doubting are by far the commonest type of disciples in this evil world, and He has taken care to supply abundant evidence that Jesus bears with the infirmities of all His people. Let us take care that we copy our Lords example.
III. HOW CHRIST WAS ADDRESSED BY A DISCIPLE AS GOD, WITHOUT PROHIBITION OR REBUKE ON HIS PART. When Cornelius fell down at the feet of Peter and would have worshipped him, the Apostle refused such honour at once (Act 10:26). So did Paul and Barnabas (Act 14:14). The Divinity of Christ is one of the foundation truths of Christianity. Unless our Lord is very God of very God, there is an end of His mediation, His atonement, His advocacy, His priesthood, His whole work of redemption. These doctrines are useless blasphemies, unless Christ is Divine. Let us bless God that the divinity of our Lord stands on evidence that can never be overthrown. Above all, let us daily repose our sinful souls on Christ, with undoubting confidence, as one who is perfect God as well as perfect man. (Bp. Ryle.)
The man who missed the meeting:
After a great fire, or a flood like that which desolated Johnstown, a time always comes for a deliberate calculation of the loss. But it is seldom that we sit down and figure out how much we have lost by neglect of opportunity, or the waste of time. It is said that a great American lawyer once put down in black and white the loss of money and reputation which resulted from his stopping on the way to the trial of an important case, to have two minutes gossip with a friend. Such calculations are rare, because we no more like to think of what is irrecoverably gone than a soldier likes to visit a battlefield where he was ignominously beaten.
1. The personal presence of his Master was one element of the loss.
2. But Thomas also lost the help which he might have had in the Christian sympathy of his brethren. They were in a common trouble. That trouble ought to have bound them the more strongly to each other. In the Paris exposition Of 1889 was a wonderful picture, which told its own story. A peasants hut furnished the scene. The scanty household belongings told of poverty. The fire had gone out on the hearth. The rough table was destitute of food. In the corner, covered with a white sheet, lay something which spoke of death. But, huddled close together, as if fearing to be parted, the children are represented as clinging to each other. The whole picture seemed to say, When the mother is dead, what can the children do but keep together? That was the spirit in which Christs personal followers met on the first Sunday night after the Crucifixion. Their only comfort, when their Master was dead, was in keeping near to each other. What a help it would have been to Thomas, if, in the loneliness of his supposed orphanage, he could have had the strength which comes from personal contact with others in the same experience of sorrow! On our Illinois prairies, the farmers, in the harvest-time, never set a single sheaf of grain standing by itself. They put them so that half a dozen lean the one against the Other, and thus give mutual support. The old story tells us that Alexander the Great mourned over the loss of a day. But Thomas must have deplored the loss of a week. On an ocean steamship, there are no hours of greater discomfort than those in which the fog-whistle sounds its dismal note. The incertitude where the right way lies, and the consciousness of peril without the power to see how to avoid it, make every such hour an hour of misery. But such a fog is as nothing to that which envelops him who finds a distrust of his nearest friend creeping over his soul. It would all have been spared him, if he had been there when Jesus came. The evidence which Christ granted him a week later might have been given him when the other disciples knew it was the Lord. One of the first effects of doubt of the gospel in the heart of a Church-member is to keep him away from the meetings of his brethren. The very place in which Christ would meet him, and remove his puzzling difficulties, is the place he neglects. (Bp. Cheney.)
Thomas not there: a lost opportunity
The disciples had met; but there were three vacant places. Jesus Himself was absent: would He ever be present again? Judas, too, was no longer one of their number, and never would be. There was yet another vacant seat: Thomas, one of the twelve was not there. Why this absence? The weather had probably nothing to do with this absence; nor could it be attributed to some casual hindrance. Thomas had no heart to go. This would make his absence painfully significant to the other apostles. Most ministers know how the absence of friends from services depresses those present, even when it cannot be traced to such a reason as this. There is a chilling influence felt whenever the ministers eye rests upon timber instead of worshippers, and every empty pew opens its mouth wide in discouraging eloquence, which makes it necessary for the preacher to open his wider than usual, or the vacant seat will have it all its own way. Thomas, like Philip, Matthew, and Nathanael or Bartholomew, belonged to the meditative and doubting section of the apostles. Philips doubts came through his love of mathematics. To him everything had to be reduced, to a sum in proportion, or to be arranged in its proper form and sequence like a problem in Euclid. Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little, and Lord, show us the Father and it sufficeth us, are the two utterances which reveal the nature of Philips doubts. Thomass doubts, on the contrary, came through his despondency. One mans doubts arise from his brain, another mans from his liver. Depend upon it, God does not ignore the physical, any more than He does the mental, infirmities which sometimes becloud our faith. In harmony with this prominent characteristic of Thomas, as given in both instances by John, it would appear that his absence on this occasion was due to the depressing influence of sorrow and unbelief. Notice that here, and side by side, we find two operations of sorrow. First we find the combining power of mutual grief in bringing the disciples together; while, in the case Of Thomas, we find the isolating power of sorrow in keeping a man apart from his fellows. Unbelieving sorrow makes a man close the door upon himself. He does not want to be brought into contact with old companionships or associations, but becomes isolated from all, and in loneliness broods over his grief. Now, what was the result of all this in the experience of Thomas?
1. He, by his absence, missed a great opportunity, and in one sense missed it irreparably. He was not there when Jesus came. We know what it is to be unburdened, or at least to have our burdens lightened, by being brought into contact with others who are bearing similar burdens to our own. It is a spiritual fact, which has no counterpart in physics, that two men who bear their own burdens, when brought shoulder to shoulder, find that by that touch the burden of each is lessened. Thus Thomas would have missed much from forfeiting the communion of other sorrowful ones, even if Christ Himself had not come. But the loss seems to be multiplied n thousandfold when we read that Jesus came when Thomas was not there. Now, Thomas was the last man who could afford this loss. No one of the eleven–for Peter had already seen the Master–needed the consolation, which came with the Masters presence, as much as Thomas did, and yet he was the only one who was absent. I have often noticed that since then those who can least afford such a loss are those who are oftenest absent when Jesus comes to cheer and bless His own.
2. Thomas by his absence missed the sight, for the time being, of his risen Lord. Thus he was the last of the apostles to whom that was granted.
3. Thomas, too, by this absence missed the first discourse of the risen Christ. Turn to Luk 24:44-49. There we have a brief outline of the Masters sermon at that service from which Thomas was absent. What a loss was that! He forfeited his Lords exposition of the Old Testament in relation to Himself.
4. Again, Thomas by this absence missed all that is contained in the words preceding our text–Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you. And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, &c. (verses 21-23). This was the gift of the Risen Lord, as the gift of the Day of Pentecost was that of the Ascended Lord. This Thomas missed. Are there not lessons here for us? Observe, first of all, that it was easier for the inspired writer to record the names of those absent from, than those present at, this service. Would it were so in our day when meetings are held for prayer! Again, how much sooner some of us would solve our problems if we took them to the sanctuary, and not, like Thomas, nursed them in solitude! (David Davies.)
Our Lords interview with Thomas
I. AMONGST CHRISTS DISCIPLES ARE MEN OF MANY TEMPERAMENTS. Cautious Thomas, impetuous Peter, loving John. Let no man condemn his brethren because unlike himself. Christ knows how to sanctify all.
II. EVERY MAN SHOULD BE ON HIS GUARD AGAINST HIS WEAKNESSES: the cautious and hesitant against despondency and scepticism.
III. SINCERE DOUBT CALLS FORTH NOT THE CONDEMNATION, BUT THE PITY AND HELP OF CHRIST. Let us not by harshness drive the earnest doubter into disbelief. He may become the immovable, because intelligent, believer.
IV. BE IT OURS TO SEEK THE HIGHER BLESSEDNESS OF THOSE WHO THOUGH NOT SEEING BELIEVE. We shall not seek in vain. He will manifest Himself to us as He does not unto the world.
V. LET NOTHING DETER US FROM MAKING THOMASS CONFESSION OUR OWN. (Preachers Monthly.)
Thomas called Didymus
I. HIS HISTORY.
1. Parentage. Unknown, though from the circumstance that he is always conjoined with Matthew (Mat 10:1-42.; Mar 3:1-35.; Luk 5:1-39.), who was a son of Alphaeus (Mar 2:14), and the two are always followed by James, also the son of Alpheus, it has been supposed that he was Matthews twin brother.
2. Apostleship. Belonging originally to the circle of Johns disciples, he appears, like Andrew, Simon, James, and John, to have gone early over to Christ. In the second year of Christs ministry he was called to serve as an apostle.
3. Appearances.
(1) In Peraea (Joh 11:16).
(2) At the supper table (Joh 14:5).
(3) After the Resurrection (text).
4. Disappearance. After this he is only mentioned once (Act 1:13). According to the Fathers, he preached in Parthia, and was buried in Edessa. A later tradition says he carried the gospel into India, where afterwards an old colony of Syrian Christians on the coast of Malabar, calling themselves Thomas Christians, claimed him as their founder.
II. HIS CHARACTER. Of
1. A melancholy disposition. Constitutionally and habitually looking on the dark side of things, Thomas preferred to walk on the shady side of the street (Joh 11:16).
2. A slow judgment. Thomas never travelled faster than his understanding or reason would permit, and these were never hasty in forming decisions Joh 14:5).
3. A critical mind. Thomas liked to search things to the bottom, to see before he believed (Joh 14:25).
4. A courageous spirit. He was not afraid to encounter danger and death with and for His Master (Joh 11:16), although taken with a panic, like the rest, he forsook Christ and fled.
5. A true heart. His judgment once convinced, his heart never hesitated, as here. (T. Whitelaw, D. D.)
Two passages from the life of Thomas the Apostle
I. THE FIRST PASSAGE is in Joh 20:24-25.
1. His distinction. One of the twelve. Twelve rare stones once burned in the breast-plate of the High Priest; a glorious mass, the richest symbol of value, honour, and glory. The twelve apostles were like these gems. There was no duplicate stone, no duplicate apostle, and one could never be mistaken for another. Thomas was a man of pronounced individuality. His very unbelief was all his own. But with all their diversities these twelve live stones were all wrought into one symmetrical whole, the Priest carried them all on his heart.
2. The disapproving mark set against his name. Thomas was not with them. In this we recognize the spirit of rebuke. We are obliged to read it in connection with his title. He was not one of the seventy, but one of the twelve. What, after all, was the great wrong? That is a merely negative charge. Men generally think that simply not to do a thing is, at any rate, to be harmless. But in the sight of God few things are negative. Not to do right is to do wrong. Christ cries, He that is not for Me is against Me. The law reserves its loudest thunders for negations. Curse ye Meroz. Why? Because they came not up to the help of the Lord. And Christs most fearful formula of condemnation is, Inasmuch as ye did it not. Thomas might have said, I hinder no other man; if I do no good, I do no harm, for I simply do nothing. Nothing!
(1) The disciples were drawn together by love. If not orphans in fact, they were in feeling, and their hearts would say, We must be all in all to each other now; let us cling closer and closer. Did they cling? All were together that night but one.
(2) They would be drawn together in worship. Allow that their faith was weak, it was not yet quite a thing of the past. A child does not cease to be a child because it is suffering from fever; the instinct which makes it natural for life to seek its source, and for Gods child to fly to God in trouble, was working in them still. But Thomas was not with them.
(3) They met from the habit of meeting as Christs appointed witnesses. But Thomas was not with them.
3. There is no explanation of his absence.
(1) It seems fair, however, to ascribe it to his constitutional unbelief. To him doubtless it looked like stark lunacy to think that Christ could be alive again. I will not be taken in again; I will not love any more, said poor Southey when his child died; so in spirit said Thomas now.
(2) Connected with, and consequent on, his unbelief, there might be the most dismal apathy. He wanted no companion but his own forlorn thoughts, and therefore he would not go. It is like saying, Because I am hungry, I will take no food; because I am caught in a storm, I will seek no shelter, &c. Where was the melancholy man? Did he lie flung upon the floor all night; or had sorrow put on the mask of levity, and did he laugh? Did he try to walk off the agony of his grief, striking away to the hills of Bethlehem, or to the groves of Olivet, or to the ghostly wilderness, where once the scapegoat wandered, or to the haunted solitudes of the Dead Sea shore? Wherever he stumbled along, he would say, I did once think that He was the Redeemer of Israel! It is all over now!
4. Hear what he says after the meeting. Old Father Morris, says his American biographer, had noticed a falling off in his little village meeting for prayer. The first time he collected a tolerable audience, he took occasion to tell them something concerning the conference meeting of the disciples after the Resurrection. But Thomas was not with them. Thomas not with them! said the old man in a sorrowful voice; why, what could keep Thomas away? Perhaps. said he, glancing at some of his auditors, Thomas had got cold hearted, and was afraid that they would ask him to make the first prayer; or, perhaps, he continued, looking at some of the farmers, he was afraid the roads were bad; or, perhaps, he added, after a pause, he thought a shower was coming on. He went on significantly summing up common excuses, and then with great simplicity and emotion he added, But only think what Thomas lost, for in the middle of the meeting the Lord Jesus came and stood among them! After the meeting, the other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. While they told their tale with burning words and eager gestures, he stood unmoved. Mary Magdalene said that she had seen the Saviour. Ah, no doubt you are an excellent woman, but you have been deceived, you are so imaginative. Then Peter said, I have seen the Lord. I am sure you think so, but you must be in error. Then John said, But indeed I have seen the Lord. That is good evidence for yourself, but it does not convince me. Then Bartholomew and others would say, We have seen the Lord, and five or six others have told you so. Do you think we have conspired to tell a falsehood? No, my brethren, far from it; yet I have known such things in the world as for five or six persons to be mistaken. I feel that your witness deals with such improbabilities that I cannot receive it. At last he declared downright, Except I shall see, &c.
II. THE SECOND PASSAGE is in verses 26-29.
1. The meeting renewed. Like the first, it was on the first day of the week, a fact not easy to account for except on the theory of a special law of Christ. He gave the first and second Sunday the sanction of His presence, leaving the interval to pass in silence, looking as if He meant to make the day stand out with sharp relief, as the day which was to have Sabbatic benediction.
2. The absentee returned. Thomas, as a true man, could not remain an absentee. It is hard for like not to fly to like. Everything in grace, like everything in nature, will sooner or later go to its own company, and so did Thomas.
3. How the unbelief was dealt with: as the affliction of a true disciple. Unbelief has many varieties. There is the unbelief of
(1) The indifferent–that says, What is truth? That is, Who knows? Who cares? What does it matter?
(2) The vain–that which delights to air itself in public; which is thought to be the mark of the thoughtful, or of the original, or of the heroic.
(3) Of one who has indolently allowed unbelievers to think for him; who has caught it as a cold is caught, simply by standing about in draughts.
(4) Of temperament. Some persons must sift evidence before they commit themselves. The term sceptic is from a root that means cover, or shade, and would in old time have been applied to a man who shaded his eyes with his hand in order to look into a thing narrowly and intently, determined not to be mistaken about it. It may therefore be fitly applied to a man of doubting temperament; but while it points to this, it also includes the idea of a shadow over the mind, and a tendency to take dark, uncertain, unhappy views of things.
(5) The unbelief of Thomas was from the last-named cause. Christ called His disciples children. Here was the serious and critical illness of a child. Is a child less loved when ill than when well? He knew that the sceptical nature of this man went along with simple, noble, self-renouncing love.
4. Jesus, in dealing with it, revealed His forgiving love. Infirmity given way to and persisted in deepens into sin. It was a sin not to believe after he had heard the Master say, Let not your heart be troubled, &c., and after hearing His repeated foreshowings of His resurrection. It was sin to set up his own single decision against the evidence of his ten tried companions, and not to be satisfied with mental conviction and to demand in such a case as this the report of his fingers. With patient pity, Christ sought the poor wanderer, and with unspeakable tenderness brought him back.
5. The confession made. What was the immediate occasion of this cry? The offer was indeed made to the doubter, of the very tests he asked for. But Thomas did not accept this challenge; his had been a perilous venture to dare, and now he drew back from the edge of the precipice up to which he had come. The stubborn spirit melted in the flash of a moment, and the bold unbeliever became a little child. Touch was not thought of now. Christ was fully revealed. Love has sharp sight and quick responsiveness; in the new light, yet mingled with a sense of mystery, he recognized the Lord of his heart; with wonder, with tender and exquisite ecstasy, and with adoring prostration of soul, he cried, My Lord and my God. (C. Stanford, D. D.)
St. Thomass doubt:
Of all the apostles, St. Thomas affords the most striking parallel to the prevailing tendencies of our age. These words of his might have been spoken by a disciple of the modern school of sensational philosophy. The impatience of dictated belief and the dependence upon the evidence of the senses, which are the common habits of our day, are here both plainly expressed.
I. ST. THOMASS DOUBT VIEWED IN RELATION TO HIS OWN SPIRITUAL CONDITION.
1. It Is a decided doubt. We look upon doubt as something that wavers, falters, hesitates. But St. Thomas shows the opposite spirit. He is very positive. The dogmatism of unbelief is often observed; but here we may see the dogmatism of doubt. Though the expression appears paradoxical, it is verified by common observation. If a man lays down certain conditions on which he will believe, and regards these conditions as absolute and final, he is as dogmatic in his decision not to decide the question before him till those conditions are fulfilled as if he were determining the question itself. Now, is there not a certain pride and assumption in the position thus taken up? Can we be so sure that our criteria are perfectly sound? Is it not possible that our doubt may arise from no deficiency of grounds for reasonable belief, but from artificial requirements which we have set up without any warrant for them?
2. This doubt must be distinguished from distrust. The apostle does not waver in his allegiance to Christ; he merely questions the astounding rumour of the resurrection. The really important matter for all of us is an active loyal trust in Christ. It is far better to have this, and yet to hesitate in regard to facts in the history of Christ, than to accept all those facts in a bare intellectual conviction, but to have no living faith in Him. There are men like the doubting disciple who cling to their trust in their Lord though they are sadly tried with questions about the facts and doctrines of the gospel. Of course the haze that obscures these truths must make the act of earnest, practical faith more difficult than it would be with a clear assurance in regard to them.
3. St. Thomass doubt resulted in part from his despondent and gloomy disposition. It is not charitable for persons of a cheerful disposition to be harsh in rebuking the painful doubts of gloomy minds.
II. ST. THOMASS DOUBT AS ILLUSTRATIVE OF A COMMON PHASE OF THOUGHT. There was a method in his doubt. He had a very clear idea of what he required to satisfy his mind.
1. The first requisite was personal experience. St. Thomas had not been with the disciples when Christ appeared. He must see for Himself. A similar disposition is apparent in the claims for individual conviction advocated so strenuously in the present day. This is the great Protestant principle of private judgment run wild. People refuse to accept a doctrine because the Church authorizes it. It must be proved to them on its own merits. Wholesome and sensible as this demand is when kept within reasonable limits, it lands us in absurdity when it is pushed to extremes. We cannot obtain direct evidence of every truth. Life is too short for the task, and our faculties are too limited. We accept facts of history on testimony. Is it not reasonable that we should accept the historical foundation of religion in the same way? No one mind can survey the whole realm of science. The most strict disciple of the school of inductive philosophy is compelled to rely largely on the researches of other men. Why should not the same principle apply to the acquisition of spiritual truth? No doubt personal experience of spiritual truth is the strongest ground for believing in it as well as the surest way of understanding it. Still, our creed will be very thin and meagre if it never transcends our life. The great use of the Bible is to bring us into contact with truths which are vastly above and beyond our present experience, that thereby our experience may be enlarged and elevated. He who confines himself to the light of experience cripples the growth of experience, and thus prevents that very light from becoming brighter.
2. The other requisite was the evidence of the senses. St. Thomas must see the very wounds of Christ with his own eyes, and touch the wound-prints with his fingers, before he will believe. Spiritual contact with the risen Lord is not enough. This evidence of the senses is set in the first place among our modern grounds of conviction. Yet the senses are being proved to be liable to great illusions, and at least they can show only objects of sense. The spiritual world is wholly dark to them. But no evidence of the senses will reveal these great truths. He who confines himself to that one avenue of knowledge shuts the door against the light of the highest revelation. His position is unreasonable. We have souls as well as bodies, and there are ideas which can never reach our souls through touch and sight. (W. F.Adeney, M. A.)
The scepticism of Thomas:
It is interesting and instructive to note
I. THE VARIETY OF TEMPERAMENT IN THE APOSTLES. St. Peter, e.g., is impulsive and demonstrative, and at times self-reliant (Mat 14:27-31; Mat 26:33; Mat 26:35; Mat 26:70; Mat 26:75). St. John is calm and undemonstrative, quietly leaning on Jesus bosom. St. Andrew would seem to have been self-retiring and contemplative; while Paul is all for action.
1. One of the advantages of keeping the Saints Days is that we thus have opportunity to study these different characters, their individual virtues and failings.
2. All the apostles may be called typical men: they find their counterpart in all ages. St. Thomas may be taken as the type of the sceptical mind.
3. There is a difference between scepticism and unbelief, although often confounded together. The sceptic doubts, and looks into the matter; the unbeliever rejects altogether, too often without inquiring (Act 17:32), and frequently on moral grounds (chap. 3:19). But scepticism may end in unbelief; therefore a dangerous spirit to indulge: useful as a safeguard against error and imposition, but needs to be sanctified by the Holy Spirit.
II. THE SUBJECT ON WHICH ST. THOMAS WAS SCEPTICAL, viz., the resurrection of Christ.
1. The idea of a resurrection at all scarcely found a place in the disciples minds. They were not expecting such an unheard-of event (chap. 20:9; Luk 24:18-25). This enables us to realize the position of Thomas the better.
2. With St. Thomass scepticism contrast the unbelief of the Athenians Act 17:32). They rejected the doctrine of the resurrection in intellectual scorn, or with a quasi-polite show of deference; while Thomas asked for further proof. The men of Athens put the light from them; Thomas asked for more.
3. The scepticism of St. Thomas accordingly contributes towards establishing the fact of the Redeemers resurrection, as we are reminded in the collect for the day. On the importance of this fact, see 1Co 15:1-20; Rom 1:3-4.
III. OUR LORDS TREATMENT OF THOMASS SCEPTICISM.
1. Thomas had nothing but hearsay evidence to trust in (chap. 20:24). Evidently a man who did not believe everything he heard, but at the same time ready to receive the truth on sufficient grounds (Act 17:11). The Saviour dealt with him accordingly, and as He had done with the Baptist Mat 11:2-6).
2. This was in accordance with our Lords usual method. To intellectual unbelief He vouchsafed the gracious answer and adduced an argument Mat 22:29-33). Where faith was weak and wavering, He came to the rescue (Mar 9:23; Mat 14:30-31). Only against the error of the heart He launched His fiercest invectives (Mat 23:13-15, &c.). In this world God cleanses our hearts, in the next He will cleanse our brains also. Application:
I. Our Lords sympathy with honest doubt. He knows what is in man, and has compassion accordingly (Isa 42:3). If we are honestly seekingafter Gods truth, His Spirit will guide us into it (Joh 16:13). Let us take all our spiritual difficulties to the Son of man. He knows them all, and has grace in store to meet them (Heb 4:14-16).
2. Observe the special blessing which the Redeemer pronounces upon a simple unquestioning faith (Mat 9:22; Mar 10:52; Mat 15:28).
(1) We are in the position of those who have not seen, and for our comfort these words (Joh 20:29) were spoken.
(2) While Thomas asked for more proof, let us ask for more faith Luk 17:5), that so the blessing of not seeing, and yet believing, may be ours. (F. J. Calthrop, M. A.)
The honest sceptic and how to treat him:
We have here
I. AN INTERESTING RELIGIOUS SCEPTIC. There are certain features in this scepticism of Thomas that mark it off from common scepticism.
1. It was negative, not positive. He did not echo the everlasting no of the infidel world; all he said was, I cannot believe it without more evidence. He did not manifest any affinity of feeling with that presumptuous herd who arrogantly proclaim gospel facts impossibilities, gospel doctrines absurdities, and gospel believers brainless fanatics or cunning knaves.
2. It was intellectual, not moral. The wish is often the father to the thought–the creed the offspring of the heart; but it was not so here.
3. It was frank, not underhanded. To whom did Thomas avow his unbelief? To the sordid worldlings who felt no interest in those things–to the sneering infidel who would readily nurse his doubts into atheism? Or to Scribes and Pharisees who would be only too delighted at the indications of his apostacy? No, like an honest man he expressed his disbelief in the face of the believers. Let modern sceptics imitate his example in this. Let them, instead of appealing to the thoughtless crowd, and seeking to work |heir infidel notions by jokes and tales into the minds of the unreflecting multitude, go at once to the Church, and say openly and respectfully, as did Thomas, We cannot believe in the doctrines you offer unless you give us more evidence. This might serve the common cause of truth and the common interest of our race.
4. It was convincible, not obstinate. There are some men so inveterate in their prejudices that no amount of evidence will modify their opinions. Such was not Thomas. After he first avowed his unbelief, did he seek every possible means to establish himself in his infidel view and avoid opportunities for obtaining evidence? The reverse of this is the fact. Eight days after he declared his scepticism, we find him with the disciples, no doubt in search of sufficient proof to convince him. Honest doubt is active, because it is a law of mind to seek certitude.
II. AN EXEMPLARY RELIGIOUS GUIDE. We have here detailed the method in which Jesus dealt with this poor sceptic. Does He denounce him as a heretic, expel Him from the circle of His disciples, or treat him even with cold indifference, which to sensitive natures would be worse than severity? No. How then? Let the ministers who fulminate against all who cannot subscribe to their tenets, the sectarians who consign to perdition all beyond the pale of their little Church, mark well the conduct of Christ.
1. The direct speciality of His merciful treatment. He did not address some general remarks bearing on the subject of doubt to the whole company, leaving Thomas to apply them if he would. He deals directly with Him. He saw that the man was on the margin of the cold, dark infidelity, and that he required prompt and special attention.
2. Its exquisite considerateness. The request of Thomas was objectionable on many grounds, yet Christ condescends to grant it. He might have reproved him, but He at once says, Reach hither, &c.
3. Its moral influence. Thomas said, My Lord and My God, I am more than convinced, I am won by the majesty of Thy love. Mark well, then, Christs method of treating scepticism, and take heed to the fact that in this respect He has left us an example.
III. A SUPER-EMINENT RELIGIOUS FAITH (verse 29). These words imply two facts.
1. That it is possible for those who have never seen Christ to believe in Him. Wherever His gospel goes, there goes evidence sufficient to produce faith without any visible manifestation. There is
(1) The testimony of competent witnesses. Had not the apostles every opportunity of thoroughly knowing those facts of Christs history which they propounded? Had they any motive to deceive?
(2) The testimony of our consciousness. There is such a congruity between the doctrines of the gospel and the intuitive beliefs of mankind, and between its provisions and our deep-felt wants, that it comes with a self-evidencing power.
(3) In ordinary matters we believe without seeing every day. Faith is the evidence of things not seen, as is shown in Heb 11:1-40. Ever since the departure of Christ the language of the Church has been, Whom having not seen we love, &c.
2. That those who believe in Him without seeing are peculiarly blessed. We are apt to think that the contemporaries of Christ were privileged above us. This is a delusion. Faith without sight
(1) Is more praiseworthy than faith by sight. There are two kinds of belief–the one voluntary, the other involuntary. The one comes by a properinquiry into evidence, and the other springs up irresistibly whenever a fact is visible to the senses, or a proposition truthful to the mind. The latter is without moral merit, and for it man is not responsible. But voluntary faith depends upon a mans agency. There is a universe of facts that lies beyond the realm of my senses and that transcends all my a priori ideas. Belief in those facts requires evidence, and the evidence requires honest investigation. This voluntary faith has a moral character. Why do men not believe in Christ? It cannot be said for the want of evidence, but because that evidence is either entirely neglected or examined improperly. Now the faith of Thomas sprang from the sense, and had in itself but little merit.
(2) Is frequently more accurate. The senses are deceptive. Things are not what they seem. Reason has evidences on which to build a faith of unquestionable truthfulness.
(3) More ennobling. It involves a higher exercise of mind. Whatever tends to stimulate and work the mental faculties is good. Faith founded on rational evidence implies and demands this mental action. Sensuous faith does not. The history of the apostles illustrates this. How morally weak, because mentally inactive, were they during their personal connection with Christi But after His ascension, when they are thrown upon rational evidence, how strong they become in a few days.
Conclusion: The subject suggests
1. An incidental argument in favour of Christianity. The fact that there was such a man as Thomas amongst the disciples shows that there was no collusion between them; and that they were not a body of superstitious and credulous men.
2. The superiority of our advantages over those of the contemporaries of Christ.
3. The duty of the Church in relation to doubters.
4. The relation to Christ which it is the supreme interest of humanity to seek–that which Thomas expressed, My Lord and my God. (D. Thomas, D. D.)
The folly of doubting:
Ask thy soul these questions: First, Whether there be any gain by doubting? Faith purities the heart; but doth doubting purify the heart? Secondly, Whether there is anything more pleasing to God than to trust him in and by Jesus Christ, when all comforts are out of view, and when you see nothing but what is contrary to the thing promised? Thirdly, Whether you must not venture upon Christ at the last? and if you must venture upon Christ at the last, why not now? When a man hath to go over a river, though he ride once and again into the water, and come out, saying, I fear it is too deep for me; yet considering that there is no other way for him, he resolves to venture, for, saith he, the longer I stay, the higher the water will rise, and there is no other way for me–I must go through at the last, why not at the first? and so he ventures through. Thus it is with you. You say, Oh, but my heart is not humbled; oh, but I am a great sinner; and how can I venture upon Jesus Christ? Will thy heart be more humbled by keeping from Jesus Christ, and wilt thou be less a sinner by keeping from Him? No, certainly; for the longer you stay from Christ, the harder it will be to venture on Him at the last. Wherefore, if there be ever a poor, drooping, doubting, fearing, trembling heart reading these words, know that I do here, in the name of the Lord, call out to you and say, Oh soul, man or woman, venture, venture, venture upon Christ now; for you must come to trusting in time at last; and if at last, why not now? (William Bridge.)
Thomas doubting:
Let us consider
I. THE LEGITIMACY OF DOUBTING.
1. It is an evil habit to always think of doubt as sinful. It may be, because it may be the sign of a captious and insincere mind; but what can and ought a man do but doubt, if the evidence is not sufficient? Christian faith, it is true, is more than an act of the reason, but it never contradicts, and is itself, so far, an exercise of reason.
2. Are we to believe because our ancestors believed, and so gave us the Christian faith as an inheritance? Partly so; but never chiefly. If we are right-minded, right-hearted, we cannot help some preferences in favour of what comes to us from our forefathers. But this never can justify us in accepting the Christian faith. We must put on it the stamp of our own intelligence, and hold it in the grip of our own conviction.
3. It were better for us to be satisfied with evidence when it is enough than to be so critical and exacting as to demand that it shall be irresistible; better to be satisfied with the testimony of two senses than to require the concurring testimony of a third. Still, there are always those who are not so easily satisfied as their brethren. And when Thomas asks for more evidence, there is nothing to be done but to furnish it.
4. We have the highest of all examples for this procedure–Jesus Himself, who made this distinct appearance to satisfy His doubting disciple, and all besides him who are of his temper and school.
II. DOUBT, IF IT IS TO CONTINUE TO BE LEGITIMATE AND WHOLESOME, MUST BE ALWAYS ACTING AS A FORCE, URGING MATTERS ON TO A PRACTICAL AND DECISIVE SETTLEMENT.
1. A merely speculative scepticism that entertains questions politely for a few hours simply for intellectual interest; that puts the Christian religion among the things, waiting a far-off day of settlement; is a most injurious habit. All deep earnestness is against it; and all high living; and all Holy Scripture; and the whole mind and heart of Christ.
2. That Christ did exist no sane man will deny. It will be granted, too, that some respect ought to be paid to His own wish and will in considering the matter of His claims. Here, then, is One who has filled the world with His name and influence; who never published a line, and yet has set all the world publishing books about Him; who never led an army, and yet has overrun the four quarters of the world; who never entered a palace, and yet exercises a sovereignty that kings might well envy. Now, has not He a right to say something as to the way His claims shall be treated? This is what he says, Reach hither thy finger, &c. Some one says, I acknowledge Jesus
Christ to be the chief of the sons of men. That will not do. Reach hither thy finger, and behold My hand. The hand that laboured, that healed, that blessed the little children, that rolled back the gates of Death. Another says, I see that Jesus Christ wields a vast influence over many hearts and over all the world, and with that influence I have no intention of interfering. That will not do. Reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into My side! into the love-wound; the fountain of this worlds purity; the only place where salvation can be found. Another says, I shall remain neutral for a while; there can be no harm in that. That will not do. Be not or literally Become not unbelieving, but believing. Every man is becoming something more and more each day. The matter will not remain in balance. Consciously or unconsciously, it will ever grow to firmer faith or deeper unbelief. Therefore press the matter to settlement.
III. HOW IS THIS SETTLEMENT TO BE REACHED?
1. It was easy for Thomas to do it. Or, rather, it was easy for him to reach satisfaction without doing it. Apparently, he never did reach thither his finger. He was surprised, most of all, to hear his own expressions of doubt reproduced, when no one could have told the Master of them. All doubting is over now, and all desire is gratified: My Lord and my God!
2. The same principle operates still. A man lays down certain conditions as indispensable; but as he goes on he finds he can believe without them. Doubts are solved by the heart as well as by the intellect. There must, of courser be apprehended truth, else faith is only a superstition. But where there is an earnest mind the way of life will be plain and open. Now let us think again how Thomas was satisfied, and what the kind of proof was that brought him into this happy condition. Not by touching, for he never touched Him; not by seeing., although he did see Him; not by hearing, although he did hear, and knew the voice. The proof taking rank above all proofs was that God was near, and that he felt the awful glorious presence.
3. But where is the analogy between Thomas and any living person now? Here it is common now for those who reject Christianity to say, Faith is not at our bidding. Show us the truth, and give us sure proof of it, and there will be no question left. And if we ask, What kind of proof, &c., the answer is, I can construct an argument in logic, so that no sane man will be able to resist the conclusion; or, I can demonstrate a mathematical problem, so that there can be no demur; or I can make a scientific experiment, so that a particular result shall lie before the eyes of every observer. Do you the same by religion, and then you may blot the word
unbeliever out of your vocabulary. Now what is all this but to say with Thomas, in his honest but lower mood, Except I shall see, &c. And yet he did believe with less than this, and so does many a one now who thinks for a while that he never can.
4. Let it be plainly told we have no certainty of a mathematical, logical, scientific kind. We use the means for rational conviction. In a sense we try the Lord and His great claims, as He says we may, by rational and outward tests. If we had not these to begin with, we could make no beginning. But as we begin to reach forth the finger of examination and the hand of verification, and thus approach the great central person Himself, we feel how true it is that spiritual things are spiritually discerned, and that no man can call Jesus Lord but by the Holy Ghost. (A. Raleigh, D. D.)
The doubt of Thomas
1. There are some men whose affections are stronger than their understandings: they feel more than they think. They are perhaps the happiest class of minds: for it is happy to be without misgivings about the love of God and our own eternal rest in Him. Blessed are they that have believed.
2. There is another class whose reflective powers are stronger than their susceptive: they think out truth–they do not feel it out. Such a man was Thomas. Happy such men cannot be. An anxious and inquiring mind dooms its possessor to unrest. But manly and affectionate they may be: Thomas was. Let us go up too, that we may die with Him. And men of mighty faith they may become: Thomas did. Now this question of a resurrection which made Thomas restless is the most anxious that can agitate the mind of man. So awful in its importance, and out of Christ so desperately dark in its uncertainty, who shall blame an earnest man severely if he crave the most indisputable proofs? Very clearly Christ did not. Thomas asked of Christ a sign. His Master gave him that sign, with a gentle and delicate reproof it is true–but He did give it. Note
I. THE NATURALNESS OF THE DOUBTS OF THOMAS, which partly excuses them.
1. Nature is silent respecting a future life. There is enough to show us that there may be a life to come; there is nothing to make it certain. You strain at something in the twilight, and just when you are beginning to make it out the light fails you. So when we strain into natures mysteries, to discern the secrets of the Great Hereafter. There are probabilities, nothing more.
2. Let us examine some of them.
(1) The wish for immortality is a kind of argument: it is not likely that God would have given man such a feeling, if He had not meant to gratify it. If we thirst, God has created liquids. If we are susceptible of attachments, there are beings to gratify love. If we thirst for life and love eternal, it is likely that there are an eternal life and love. But more we cannot say.
(2) The traditions of universal belief. How came it to be held by all, if only a delusion? And yet when you come to estimate this it is only a presumption. The universal voice of mankind is not infallible.
(3) We are met by many resemblances to a resurrection–that of the moth from the grave of the chrysalis. For many ages the sculptured butterfly was the type and emblem of immortality. Again, there is a kind of resurrection when the spring brings vigour and motion back to the frozen pulse of the winter world. And yet all this, valuable as it is in the way of suggestiveness, is worth nothing in the way of proof. They only look like resurrections. The chrysalis only seemed dead: the tree in winter only seemed to have lost its vitality. Six thousand years of human existence have passed away; countless armies of the dead have set sail from the shores of time. No traveller has returned from the still land beyond. Now look at all this without Christ, and tell us whether it be possible to escape such misgivings as these which rise out of such an aspect of things. I do not wonder that Thomas, with that honest, accurate mind of his, wishing that the news were true, yet dreading lest it should be false, and determined to guard against every possible illusion, said so strongly, Except I shall see, &c.
II. THE CHRISTIAN PROOFS OF A RESURRECTION. This text tells us of two kinds of proof:
1. The evidence of the senses–Because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed. This external evidence of Christs resurrection is twofold. The witness of Thomas, who was satisfied with the proofs, and of John, who records the circumstance.
(1) Try the witness by ordinary rules. John does not say that he had heard the story from Thomas, and that years afterwards he had penned it down when his memory might be failing. He was present the whole time. All the apostles were there: they all watched the result with eager interest. Now, a scene like that is one of those solemn ones in a mans life which cannot be forgotten. Estimate next the worth of the witness of Thomas. Evidence is worth little if it is the evidence of credulity. But here was a man who dreaded the possibility of delusion, however credulous the others might be. He resolved beforehand that only one proof should be decisive. The evidence of testimony which he did reject was very strong, but he held out against it. He would trust a thing so infinitely important to nothing but his own scrutinizing hand.
(2) Try the evidence next by character. Blemished character damages evidence. Now, the only charge that was ever heard against John was that he loved a world which hated him. The character of Thomas is that he was a man cautious in receiving evidence, and most rigorous in exacting proof, but ready to act upon his convictions when once made, even to the death. Who impeaches that testimony?
(3) Once more–any possibility of interested motives will discredit evidence. Ask we the motive of John or Thomas for this strange tale? Johns reward–a long and solitary banishment to the mines of Patmos. The gain and the bribe which tempted Thomas–a lonely pilgrimage to the far East, and death at the last in India;
(a) The evidence to which Thomas yielded was the evidence of the senses. Now, the feeling which arose from this Christ pronounced to be faith–Thou hast seen, thou hast believed. Observe then, it matters not how faith comes–whether through the intellect, as with Thomas–or through the heart, as with John; but faith is a state of soul in which the things of God become glorious certainties. It was not faith which assured Thomas that Christ stood before him: that was sight. But it was faith which from the visible enabled him to pierce up to the truth invisible: My Lord and my God; and which enabled him ever after to venture everything on that conviction, and live for One who had died for him.
(b) The faith of Thomas was not merely satisfaction about a fact: it was trust in a Person. The admission of a fact, however sublime, is not faith: we may believe that Christ is risen, yet not be nearer heaven. Thomas passed on from the fact of the resurrection to the Person of the risen–My Lord and my God. Trust in the risen Saviour–that was the belief which saved his soul. And that is our salvation too.
2. The evidence of the Spirit–Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. There are thousands of Christians who have never examined the evidences of the Resurrection: they are incapable of estimating it if they did examine; they have never seen–they know nothing of proofs and miracles–yet they believe and are blessed. How is this? I reply, there is an inward state of heart which makes truth credible the moment it is stated. Love is credible to a loving heart; purity to a pure mind. Of course that inward state could not reveal a fact like the Resurrection; but it can receive the fact the moment it is revealed without requiring evidence. The love of St. John himself never could discover a resurrection; but it made a resurrection easily believed, when the man of intellect, St. Thomas, found difficulties. Therefore with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and therefore he that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself. Now it is of such a state that Jesus speaks. There are men in whom the resurrection begun makes the resurrection credible. In them the Spirit of the risen Saviour works already. They have risen out of the darkness of doubt, above the narrowness of life, above fear, above self; being risen with Christ: and the man in whom all that is working has got something more blessed than external evidence to rest upon. The Resurrection in all its heavenliness has begun within his soul, and he knows as clearly as if he had demonstration, that it must be developed in an eternal life. Now this is the higher and nobler kind of faith. (F. W. Robertson, M. A.)
Thomas: the honest sceptic:
Renan, in the fiction which he calls The life of Jesus, when he treats of the resurrection of our Lord, breaks out into a rhapsody utterly unworthy of the critic and historian, Oh, Divine power of level sacred moments when the passion of a deluded woman gives to the world a God raised from the dead. The Church is prepared to prove that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is one of the best authenticated facts in the worlds history. The witnesses of the resurrection include every variety of temperament and intellect.
I. THE DOUBT OF THOMAS.
1. His was not the doubt of vanity. The superficial frivolous nature, proud of doubts as if they were signs of intellectual superiority, is too frequently to be met with.
2. His was not the doubt of hostility. Many who doubt dislike the truths which they doubt. But Thomas was heart-broken over the loss of Jesus. Some have nothing but sweeping denunciation for every kind of doubt or even of inquiry concerning truth. Christianity courts inquiry, commands it. The moral earnestness developed by Christianity necessitates it.
Elements that cannot be praised were, however, present in the doubt of Thomas.
1. It was self-willed. As if mentally dwelling upon revelations said to have been granted to others he lays down rigid requirements, and declares nothing else shall satisfy him.
2. It was irrational. What was the nature of the testimony he refused to accept? And yet whilst the testimony of ten tried apostles and several godly women goes for nothing, his own ten fingers are to be all-decisive. Was there no other way in which assurance of a risen Christ could take possession of his heart, no higher way of spiritual illumination? Are our senses our only medium of certainty? Gods highest revelations are by His Spirit to mans spirit.
II. THE LORDS TREATMENT OF THE DOUBTER.
1. Jesus let him for a while taste the bitterness of his doubts. Men are often permitted to drink deeply of the bitter cup which they have wilfully made their own. Thus God tests them. Nothing more perfectly reveals the moral character of a doubter than the instinctive tendencies of his mind during his mental conflicts. Christian and Pliable both fell into the Slough of Despond. Pliable struggled to the side nearest the City of Destruction, but Christian with infinite toil reached the side nearest the Celestial City. Though differing in opinion from his brother disciples, all his sympathies were with their sincerity and goodness.
2. Jesus was full of forbearance towards him.
3. Jesus deeply humbled him–Then said He to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, &c. Surely no severer rebuke can be given than amidst the joys of full conviction to be recalled to the lowborn doubts of His less noble self.
4. Jesus warned him of his danger–Become not faithless, but believing. There is danger to all who doubt that the finer sensibilities of their nature be injured, that their spirit grow harsh and cold, and out of harmony with moral truth.
5. Jesus declares that there is another, a higher way to certainty than that by which Thomas has reached it.
III. THE RESULT OF THE LORDS TREATMENT. See in Thomas the submission of a sincere soul.
1. Thomas instantly yielded. The moment of conviction became the moment of submission.
2. Thomas publicly yielded. Before all the disciples he had spoken his doubts; before all he retracted.
3. Thomas fully yielded. The honest inquirer convinced becomes the earnest and intelligent believer. As the corn that lies in the earth all through the winter months yields the most bountiful harvest, so the faith of Thomas slowly germinating amidst long, sorrowful musings becomes perfectly developed. The tardy believer becomes the foremost confessor. (W. J.Cooke.)
The unbelief of Thomas:
The resurrection of Christ is a fact of the utmost importance. If He had not risen, there would have been an end to His mission. Now, in reference to this fundamental article, we have everything that could be desired in the way of proof. There were five hundred such witnesses. It certainly was not to their interest to assert such a fact, but the reverse. But what adds still more weight to their testimony is the fact that, according to their own showing, they were all obstinately incredulous at first. They would not be satisfied until they were overwhelmed with proofs. At the time when this event took place, they were not at all in a state of mind to be deceived: they were not expecting any such occurrence, and, indeed, would not be convinced without repeated evidences. Now, for instance, we have in the text the case of a man who was determined not to believe.
I. Let us inquire into THE CAUSES OF HIS UNBELIEF. We may find a first cause in the character of the man; a second, in the state of his mind at that period; a third, in the superstitious opinion which was set up in opposition to the testimony.
1. With respect to the character of the man, a few slight notices appear to our minds very significant. They betray that he was a man of strong feeling and of ardent zeal, not altogether unmingled with presumption. In the context, nothing will do but that he must personally see Christ, nay, must touch His body; or else, because it is barely possible that they might be deceived by an apparition, he will not believe. Now, this turn of mind, though praised by men, is certainly a disadvantage in religion, and is treated with little favour in the Inspired Volume. What room is there for faith with persons who insist upon being able to explain everything; who must see, handle, and demonstrate, or else they will not believe? Where is that spirit of child-like simplicity, which is so proper to the disciples of Christ? It is a great evil to believe without evidence, and by the mere force of prejudice; but it is a greater evil still to set our own wisdom above the wisdom that cometh from above, and to lose ourselves in the perplexities of reason, whose highest glory it is to subject itself to God, the Infinite Reason of the universe.
2. A second cause is found in his state of mind at that period. What that state of mind was can be sufficiently made out by circumstances. Why he was absent, it would be useless to inquire; the question is, Ought he not to have been there? It is quite certain that he paid dearly for his absence; and it is scarcely possible to resist the conclusion, that it arose from his determined rejection of the idea of a resurrection. He had seen his Master die in the hands of His enemies, and had made up his mind that all was over; the object of their association was gone, and there was nothing more to hope for, or to hold them together. Had he been in the path of duty is it likely that he would have been abandoned to his disquietudes? To estimate that state of mind, we must yet further remark the ignorance and carnal prejudice which possessed him in common with the rest of the disciples. They none of them knew the spirituality of the Redeemers kingdom. A sullen withdrawment from the means of grace is the very best nurse that unbelief and desperation can have. It shuts itself out from all good tidings, and resolutely clings to the worst presentiments of evil.
3. A third cause may be found in the superstitious opinion which was then universally prevalent among the Jews. They believed that the souls of the departed could appear to surviving friends, clothed in a spiritual body, exactly resembling them when they were alive. You will remember that our Saviour found His disciples under the influence of that opinion when He came to them in the boat, walking on the sea in the fourth watch of the night, and would have passed by them. They were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. Now, all these marks are necessary, that we may not extenuate the sin of Thomas on the one hand, nor unduly magnify it on the other.
It has its aggravations, and it has also its alleviations; it may not be improper just to look at each.
1. The unreasonableness of his unbelief appears from considering the evidence which he rejected. He would allow no weight to that kind of evidence, on which chiefly, to the present hour, the fact of the Resurrection rests. All his brethren testified, not that they had heard that Christ was risen, but that they had seen Him, had conversed with Him, that He had invited them to touch Him, and had eaten and drunk before them. Now, Thomas ought to have admitted the truth of their testimony.
2. Again, the kind of evidence that he demanded aggravated his sin. He not only refused the ground of faith which God had provided for His Church in all ages, he set up an impious claim of his own–Except I put my finger in the print of the nails, I will not believe. He is determined to walk by sight, not by faith. He is not satisfied with mental conviction, his senses must be judges; nay, more, his senses must be satisfied in the most objectionable manner possible. But it is admitted that this Apostle was better than his word, and did not avail himself of the last proof.
3. His sin was aggravated by the obstinacy and openness that distinguish his unbelief. All that week he had ample opportunities of hearing from his brethren and from the women the same statements of what they had seen and heard related, with every circumstance of credibility, and with all the earnestness of conviction Here, then, is not only a sin, but a sin wilfully and pertinaciously indulged, at great hazard to himself, and to the scandal of all his brethren. But, on the other hand, we ought not to look at these exaggerations only; we must remember that the unbelief of Thomas was of a kind very different from that which arises out of a disaffection of heart to the truth; and that, therefore, it is not to be confounded with that of ungodly men. They wish the things themselves not to be true, and so do not believe them. The doctrine of the gospel is opposed to their lusts, and so they are determined not to admit it. Their sinful hearts are the principal agents in their unbelief. It is no wonder that men cannot see the force of truth when they do not want to see it. But the unbelief of Thomas was of another kind.
II. Let us glance briefly AT THE GRACIOUS MANNER IN WHICH HIS DOUBTS WERE REMOVED. Eight days after the disciples again assembled, and this time Thomas was with them. This circumstance speaks in his favour, as showing that the statements of his brethren had not been wholly ineffectual
1. The intimate knowledge of his heart that Christ displays. He proves himself perfectly acquainted with all that he had said, and with the whole state of the Apostles mind.
2. Observe the can-descending love which Christ exemplifies. He offers to grant him all that he had desired, as if He had said, Thou hast insisted upon touching Me. Come, then; lay thy finger upon these recent wounds; and be not faithless, but believing. Who does not perceive an ineffable tenderness breathing through these words?
3. Observe the quiet but effectual reproof which our Lord administers. Here are no severe reproaches, no looks of anger. Here he reproves by an affectionate concession which could not but melt a heart that really loved him. He reproves by a soft word of admonition, Be no longer faithless, implying that this had hitherto been his disciples sin; yet, with what a gentle hand does he touch the wound! Finally, he reproves by a benediction–a benediction implied, Thou hast seen and believed, and thou artblessed; for happy is he who at last attains to the exercise of faith, after long doubt and obstinate prejudices: a benediction expressed–more happy still are they who have not seen and yet have believed.
III. Let us endeavour TO TRACE THE EMOTIONS WHICH THIS REVELATION PRODUCED IN THE APOSTLES MIND. My Lord and my God.
1. This is the language of humble confession. Confession of his fault. How could he have looked upon that scarred body, after having stood out against the testimony of so many witnesses, without acknowledging how much he had been in the wrong.
2. But, though we cannot allow that this sentence is nothing beyond a sudden note of surprise, we perceive clearly enough it is the language of adoring wonder. The unbelief of Thomas arose from the very fact that he looked upon a resurrection as so great a miracle that it could not be reasonably entertained. It is the very grandeur of the effect that provokes his incredulity.
3. We can penetrate a little further into the sentiments embodied in his confession. We find it impossible not to include some of a more tender, exquisite, and even ecstatic character. This moment of discovery must have been almost like a glimpse of heaven falling upon a man in whom a sense of shame was mingled with overwhelming gratitude. This is the joy unspeakable and full of glory, which every true convert realizes, when he is enabled by faith to embrace the Atonement, while his heart is yet broken on account of sin.
The subject which has thus far engaged our attention may be properly concluded by two or three observations.
1. We have before us an unanswerable argument for the truth of Christianity; for, if the resurrection of Christ be a fact, then Christianity is true.
2. The subject leads us plainly to infer the sinfulness of unbelief. We grant that it has its degrees of turpitude, like all other sins; but in all its degrees it is opposed to the fundamental requirement of the gospel. Unless we will impeach the clearness and sufficiency of the revelation, the fault must be laid, after all, upon the unbelief of man. It is not questioned that there are many things in Scripture beyond our comprehension; but the fact that such things are revealed is quite distinct from their explication. Is the only way of redemption clearly made known? Can any sincere and earnest inquirer ask the way to heaven, and fail to obtain an answer from any want of distinctness upon essential truths? We answer, no. They are all plain to him that understandeth. The wayfaring man, though a fool, shall not err therein.
3. Lastly, we may observe, that the proper objects of faith are things invisible. Herein it is a higher faculty than sense or reason. It does not supersede them, but it embraces what they cannot reach. That which is palpable to the senses, or demonstrable to the mind, is not properly the object of faith but of knowledge. Faith does not behold, nor touch, nor prove; it receives upon testimony. If we receive the witness of men the witness of God is greater. (D. Katterns.)
The doubting disciple:
Observe
I. THE WEAKENING OF ONES RELIGIOUS CONFIDENCE IS THE FIRST AND FATALEST OF SATANS WILES.
II. BUT IN INDIVIDUAL CASES IT DOES NOT ALWAYS FOLLOW THAT ONE WHO DOUBTS HAS FALLEN INTO A MORTAL SIN. Thomas raises a question concerning the most vital of all the evidences of Christianity. Yet Jesus deigns to reason with him, grants the proof he seems so superciliously to demand. Martin Luther used to say that no man was wicked because the unclean birds sometimes lit upon his head; he was bad only when he tamely suffered them to build their nests in his hair.
III. THE PRESENCE AND COMPANIONSHIP OF PRAYING MEN IS A GOOD HELP TO FAITH, AND THE ABSENCE OF IT FREQUENTLY GIVES THE REASON OF ONES DOUBTING. It has been a quaint but familiar use of this incident, which has made it the basis of many an exhortation concerning neglect of prayer-meetings. Thomass name of the missing disciple is almost as well known as that of the doubting disciple. There is always strength in the countenance of an earnest assembly of praying men; Thomas lost that at all events.
IV. CHRISTIANITY DOES NOT DISDAIN THE USE OF ARGUMENTS ADDRESSED TO HUMAN REASON IN ITS LOGIC. Come now, let us reason together, saith the Lord. Our religion is a reasonable religion. There was nothing in Thomass demand that was unauthorized; he only wanted what the rest of the disciples had had from the Lord Himself while he was away.
V. THE SYSTEM OF OUR FAITH GOES ALTOGETHER, THE MOMENT ANY ONE DOCTRINE OF IT IS CLEARLY ESTABLISHED. Really, the only thing Thomas had doubted was the resurrection of Jesus. And yet, when this was settled, he gave up everything in a grand confession of fresh acknowledgement.
VI. A BELIEF FOUNDED IN RELIGIOUS TRUST IS BETTER THAN A BELIEF CONSTRAINED BY ARGUMENT. There is no real conflict between reason and faith; and yet reason is so proud that it refuses to accept what faith craves. So sometimes it keeps needed truth off at arms length–as a crazy man might be conceived to toss a loaf of bread from hand to hand, testing it for its weight, while he was literally starving for food. But faith longs only to receive it, and live upon it. (C. S. Robinson, D. D.)
The Church in its treatment of doubt
I. TEMPERAMENT WAS THOMASS ONE TEMPTATION, AND HE DID NOT KNOW IT.
1. Perhaps he accounted as a virtue that critical temper which was his greatest defect and danger. When a man thinks far more of the touch of his ten-fingers than of the testimony of ten apostles, self-reliance becomes conceit. When a man talks much about liberty for his tongue, he seldom thinks about liberty for other peoples ears. Whilst Thomas insisted on his right to be convinced in his own way, he never seems to have felt the indignity he put upon the honesty of his friends.
2. A mans fault is not so much that he is not fit, but that he refuses to believe that he is unfit. Trust is far more natural to some than others. To question with wrinkles in the forehead, and the grey eyes half-closed in meditative wonder, is as natural to some children as the uncontrolled, sunny, upturned gaze of the other childs most trustful and reverent love. The little Thomas as naturally cuts his drum open to see where the noise comes from as the little Mary believes without a suspicion every fairy story. Light will take its colour from the glass through which it passes, and truth will take its shape from the quality of the mind it passes through. We do not so much blame Thomas for being Thomas, only for not knowing that he was Thomas.
3. A man like Thomas ought to well know if at any time he should hesitate to judge, he should specially do so just when he had lost a dear friend. For Thomas, then, life had but one sense–touch. Sorrow, and morbid meditation had, for the time, robbed Thomas of all other faculties. There is a love born of mere touch, and there is a love that loss and death can never touch. There is a love dependent on circumstances, and there is a love that defies storm, and cloud, and death. If Thomas have the one and John the other, all we ask is that Thomas knows his condition, and not so readily assert his superior judgment. If a man of ordinary prudence gets to know that his weak heart says to him, Never hurry, or that another organ says, Never eat certain things; so let us know if our condition disqualifies us for judgment, and let us trust others, and act with them, rather than argue and oppose. Most of the sceptics I have met in life were like Thomas–all disqualified for their work before they began it.
II. THOMAS WAS ABSENT FROM THE MEETING.
1. He was alone, who of all the eleven could least afford to be alone. Loneliness was health to Peter at times–it was always poison to Thomas. Whenever we get the list of the apostles, which is presumably in Christs order, you always get Thomas bracketed with Matthew. Matthew was a man to celebrate his conversion with a great feast. If, now, Thomas had taken his Masters hint in always associating him with Matthew, he had reasoned now, I must avoid loneliness, and keep close to the brightest of our company.
2. Why was Thomas absent? The fact that John gives no reason, and calls him Didymus, thus associating him with the previous references–all of a despondent character–shows that the cause was in Thomas, and not due to circumstances. Matthew is the type of the sociable nature, and Thomas of the unsociable. Such a man to-day would declare no one spoke to him in church; that the service was not what it ought to be. Gloomy imaginations are never at a loss for reasons for being dissatisfied. But love not only attends, but enjoys all the meetings; profits where discontent starves; and sees beauties where mere criticism can only snarl and pull to pieces.
III. CHRIST COMES TO MEETINGS WHEN HE DOES NOT GRANT PRIVATE INTERVIEWS. When Thomas does not want to go to church he often concludes that Christ is not confined to churches, you can find Him in the fields, in the quiet of the home, in Bible study. True. But Christ has put special honour on the meetings of His people. How often have I known people begin to set a low value on religious services; and, as a result, the whole tenor, tendency, and aspect of their life has become changed.
IV. THE WAY TO GET ABSENT THOMAS BACK.
1. His absence was noted. The Greek indicates that the others sought out the absentee. Everybody likes to feel he is missed. Mother ought not to rest when the weakest and most short-sighted, too, hasnt come home. Would that the whole Church felt like the Shepherd, and went after every wandering sheep! I have been a member of the Church nearly forty years, said one, and now I have been absent a month and no one has called to see me. Excuse me, said a shrewd observer of human nature, during your forty years membership how many have you gone to see? Not one, was the reply which truth insisted on. There Thomas received what he gave.
2. But far, far more turns on what they said to Thomas. They did not blame him or argue with him. They just went with positive testimony, We have seen the Lord and are glad. To show a man that you are well and equal to any task is better than a dispute about medicine. Would that all of us were more ready to tell out what Christ has done for us, and less and less concerned to analyse texts!
3. They did not exclude him from their fellowship because he was faithless. Thomas knew that he had doubted about Lazarus, and yet Lazarus was raised. Christ had promised that He would rise again. He had here the abundant testimony of ten friends; yet, spite of all, he says, I will not believe. Dont make little of the state of Thomas, and say: Oh, but he was anxious to believe. Nothing of the sort. He does not say, If I see I will believe, but Unless. His mental attitude is negative and obstinate.
4. Thomas would surely have been lost to the Church if any harsh measures had been adopted towards him. A very slight hint that he was unfit for their fellowship because he cherished such doubts, and he would have told them how wanting they were in intellect. Words would have followed words, and that fellowship had been dissolved with bitterness. The Church should so treat doubt as not to intensify it. Doubt lives and thrives in isolation; opposition doubles its force. The Church must be as patient with Thomas as Christ was. Christ waited eight days for his slow faith to ripen. The Christian may not like the smell of smoking flax. To blow it out is easy; to blow it into a flame needs patience; but which is better and more Christlike?
V. IN CHRISTS TREATMENT OF THOMAS NOTE THAT ONE LOOK WAS ENOUGH. If we can bring men closer to Christ, then Christ Himself will and can do all the rest. Conclusion:
1. Doubting is a very easy process, requiring little capital. Once indulged it is of rapid growth, and feeds on its own unrest and misery.
2. Notice in the speech of Thomas that objectionable I and my. Pride and self-will are never lovely; but to find doubt indulged, and not find these two features prominent, is a very, very rare occurrence. Thomas was willing and glad to lose his doubts; but many doubters seem to be proud of theirs. (R. H. Lovell.)
Unbelief convinced: or Thomas with his Lord
I. THOMASS MISTAKE (Joh 20:24).
1. Perhaps justifiable. He may have been
(1) Unwell and confined to his own abode, the intensity of his sorrow having preyed so heavily on his mind as to endanger his health.
(2) Uninvited to the meeting, which, however, if advised concerning it, he ought to have attended without an invitation.
(3) Unaware of the startling intelligence which had brought them together–hardly a likely supposition.
(4) Unsatisfied with the grounds on which that intelligence was based, and employed at the moment in sifting out the truth.
(5) Unwilling to be idle when there was good news to spread abroad–which is putting the best construction on his behaviour, as the next hypothesis is the worst.
(6) That Thomas had been present at the begining, and had listened to the idle tales of the women, Peter, &c., but had retired unable to accept the testimony even of so many.
(7) The likeliest assumption is that he was away because his morose and melancholy disposition felt unequal to accepting the amazing rumour.
2. Decidedly wrong.
(1) If away through grief it was wrong to be selfish in his sorrow and forget his brethren, who needed comfort.
(2) If absent because waiting for further evidence, he ought to have gone to the best place to get it–the company of the disciples. If I go, I will come again.
(3) Had he been where he should have been, in that upper room, he would have found what he sought, and so saved himself much misery.
II. THOMASS DECLARATION (Joh 20:25).
1. The occasion of it. The communication of the ten–a testimony
(1) Clear and unambiguous. They had seen the Lord, not an apparition; they had seen Him, not dreamt about Him.
(2) Unanimous and decided–not the unsupported assertion of Peter who was always enthusiastic, but backed up by James and John, our Lords two other confidential associates; of Matthew the publican, a man accustomed to look into matters; of Andrew and Philip, both persons of sagacity, &c.
(3) Ample as to the number of witnesses and details of evidence; sufficient for the requirements of historic credibility.
2. The good in it. Thomas did not
(1) Assume that a resurrection was impossible.
(2) Deny it in Christs case.
(3) Assert that no amount of evidence would satisfy him.
(4) Allege that no weight of evidence would render it credible.
(5) Bargain for conditions of believing which were impossible.
3. The evil in it
(1) Unreason, in rejecting this overwhelming testimony.
(2) Presumption, in dictating the amount of evidence in which he would believe.
(3) Pride, in demanding more satisfaction than was offered to or desired by the rest.
(4) Folly, in calling for demonstration which, as the event showed, was not required.
III. THOMASS INVITATION (verse 27).
1. Gracious. Certainly he did not deserve it.
2. Startling. How had Christ come to know he had used these words? The higher knowledge of his Master would flash upon him (Joh 1:47-48; Joh 2:25; Joh 4:17-18).
3. Admonitory: that Thomas was on dangerous ground, Become not faithless: Not yet definitely committed to unbelief, he was at the parting of the ways.
4. Urgent. In earnest about him, Christ condescended to accept him on his own terms.
IV. THOMASS CONFESSION (verse 28).
1. A declaration of faith in Christs resurrection.
2. A recognition of Christs supreme divinity.
3. An appropriation of Christ as Lord and God.
V. THOMASS REBUKE (verse 29).
1. Graciously prefaced–Thou hast believed.
2. Tenderly expressed.
3. Really conveyed. Learn
1. How much a Christian may lose by absence from the house of God.
2. How foolish to lay down conditions on which one will believe.
3. How faithfully Christ keeps His promise.
4. How tenderly Christ deals with the errors of His own.
5. How dangerous to cherish doubt.
6. How graciously Christ accepts the homage of penitent and believing souls.
7. How high the felicity of those who now believe in the risen Lord. (T. Whitelaw, D. D.)
Doubts
I. Now, I wish you to observe in the first place what Thomas had done. HE HAD DOUBTED. He had not disbelieved; he had only refused to believe. It is impossible, in reading this narrative, to identify the doubt of St. Thomas with the disbelief of those Jews who demanded a sign from heaven. He evidently wished to believe if he could; they evidently did not. He was a warm-hearted generous man, ready, as he had shown once before, to die, if need were, for his Masters service. But though St. Thomas was not wanting in devotion, his faith was slow. He could not believe without very clear proof. Once before he had shown this. When our Lord had said, Whither I go ye know, and the way ye know: St. Thomas had replied, Lord, we know not whither Thou goest, and how can we know the way? In fact, he would have everything made quite distinct and unmistakable. And so on this occasion he was not satisfied with the evidence of the ten other apostles and of the women; he was not sure that he could rely on their inability to be misled; he must have overwhelming evidence or he would not believe. It was not the wilfulness of one hardened in his own theory which he would not quit; nor yet of one who could not bear to accept a truth which would unsettle his life. It was honest doubt; such doubt as naturally grew out of his state of mind.
II. AND HOW THEN WAS IT TREATED? Our Lord does not treat it as a sin. There is not the slightest trace of fault-finding in what our Lord says to him. He only tells him that his is not the most blessed state. The most blessed state is that of those who can believe without such proof as this. There are such minds. There are minds to whom the inward proof is everything. They believe not on the evidence of their senses or of their mere reason, but on that of their consciences and hearts. Their spirits within them are so attuned to the truth that the moment it is presented to them they accept it at once. And this is certainly far the higher state–the more blessed–the more heavenly. St. Thomas most assuredly had not attained the blessedness of those whose souls were ready to accept the resurrection at once. But still his doubt was not a sinful doubt, or it would have been met, as the disbelief of the Jewish rulers was met: An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign, and there shall no sign be given to it but the sign of the prophet Jonas. This was not the way in which our Lord dealt with His loving but honest disciple. The proof that he asked for was given him. He asked to have his senses convinced, and his senses were convinced. He had not asked anything presumptuous; he had not asked for any miracle. He asked for the same evidence that had already been given to others, and which he might fairly suppose was within his reach. And he got it. Christ came in and directly addressed Himself to him. He reminded him of the very words that he had used. He offered him the very proof that he had wanted. And St. Thomass words express, if anything could express, the fulness of the deepest conviction; the fulness of a faith that could never again be shaken, because it had reached down to the very central truth of the fact before his eyes. He saw our Lord and he knew that not only was He that Jesus, the Son of Man, with whom he had lived, and to whose teaching he had listened for some years past, but that He was indeed his Lord and his God–the Lord of life and the Conqueror of death. St. Thomass doubt is a type and his character an example of what is common among Christians. There are some indeed who are never troubled with doubts at all. They live so heavenly a life that doubts and perplexities fall off their minds without fastening. They find enough in their faith to feed their spiritual life. They do not need to inquire into the foundations of their belief. They are inspired by a power within their hearts. The heavenly side of all truths is so clear to them that any doubts about the human form of it are either unintelligible, or else at once rejected, or else disregarded as unimportant. But that is not always the case. There are very many who are startled at times by strange perplexities. What shall we do with these difficulties when they arise?
1. In the first place let us not permit them to shake our hold on God and of conscience. However far our doubts may go, they cannot root up from within us, without our own consent, the power which claims to guide our lives with supreme authority. They cannot obliterate from within us the sense of right and wrong, and of the everlasting difference between them. By this a man may yet live if he have nothing else to live by, and God will assuredly give him more in His own good time.
2. But yet, again, let us not treat such doubts as sins, which they are not, but as perplexities, which they are. As we must not quit our hold on God, so do not let us fancy that God has quitted His hold on us. To fancy that every doubt is of itself a sin, is altogether to mistake Gods love and mercy. Rather let us endeavour to see why such doubts are sent. Doubts are, in many cases, the birth-pangs of clearer light. They are the means by which we grow in knowledge, even in knowledge of heavenly things. Better far, no doubt, to grow in knowledge by quiet steady increase of light, without these intervals of darkness and difficulty. But that is not granted to all. These doubts are often the fiery trial which burns up any wood, hay, or stubble, which we may have erected in our souls, and leaves space for us to build gold, silver, precious stones. They may distress us, but they cannot destroy us, for we are in the hands of God.
3. Yet once more in all such cases remember St. Thomas, and feel sure that what is wanting Christ will give. He does not require you to say that you believe what you do not believe; for that would be dishonest. He does not require you to force yourself to believe by an act of your will; for that would be only self-deception, and nothing could justify that. You are not called on to believe till you are fully able to do so; but you are called on to trust. To trust is in your power. To resign yourself lovingly to God in the full confidence that His love will do all that you can need, and that out of darkness He will be sure to bring light; to walk to the uttermost of your power by the light that you already have; to hold fast by Gods hand, and to trust the promises that he whispers in your conscience; that you can do, and that you ought to do. But are there no other doubts but these? Are there no such things as sinful doubts which cannot expect enlightenment? Assuredly there are. Doubts may come from mere levity of mind which will not see the deep truths revealed within the soul; doubts may come from conceit, delighting to find something new and different from the rest of the world; doubts may come from a hard heart which has been warned by conscience of its sinful state, and cannot bear to admit the reality of a truth which imperatively demands a change of life; doubts may be like those of the Pharisees who were resolute not to believe, and only asked for proofs that they might have something to attack. Such doubts are fearful sins, and as we indulge them we know that they are sins. (Bishop Temple.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 24. Thomas – called Didymus] See this name explained, Joh 11:16.
Was not with them] And, by absenting himself from the company of the disciples, he lost this precious opportunity of seeing and hearing Christ; and of receiving (at this time) the inestimable blessing of the Holy Ghost. Where two or three are assembled in the name of Christ, he is in the midst of them. Christ had said this before: Thomas should have remembered it, and not have forsaken the company of the disciples. What is the consequence? –
His unbelief becomes
1st. Utterly unreasonable. Ten of his brethren witnessed that they had seen Christ, Joh 20:25; but he rejected their testimony.
2dly. His unbelief became obstinate: he was determined not to believe on any evidence that it might please God to give him: he would believe according to his own prejudices, or not at all.
3dly. His unbelief became presumptuous and insolent: a view of the person of Christ will not suffice: he will not believe that it is he, unless he can put his finger into the holes made by the nails in his Lord’s hand, and thrust has hand into the wound made by the spear in his side.
Thomas had lost much good, and gained much evil, and yet was insensible of his state. Behold the consequences of forsaking the assemblies of God’s people! Jesus comes to the meeting-a disciple is found out of his place, who might have been there; and he is not only not blessed, but his heart becomes hardened and darkened through the deceitfulness of sin. It was through God’s mere mercy that ever Thomas had another opportunity of being convinced of his error. Reader! take warning.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Whether Thomas had ever, since they all forsook our Saviour in the garden and fled, returned again to a communion with the rest, or was absent through some occasion, is not said; but upon this some have started a question, Whether Thomas, being absent, received the Holy Ghost at this time as the rest did? Some think he did not, because of his unbelief. Some of the ancients think he did; for, Num 11:26,27, when God gave out the Spirit to the seventy elders, Eldad and Medad, though absent, had their share of it, Num 11:27. The matter is not much.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
24, 25. But Thomas(See on Joh11:16).
was not with them when Jesuscamewhy, we know not, though we are loath to think (withSTIER, ALFORDand LUTHARDT) it wasintentional, from sullen despondency. The fact merely is herestated, as a loving apology for his slowness of belief.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus,…. The person here spoken of, is described by his Hebrew name Thomas, and his Greek one Didymus, which both signify a twin; and perhaps he was one. It was common with the Jews to have two names, a Jewish and a Gentile one; by the one they went in the land of Israel, and by the other when without the land q; nay, they often went by one name in Judea, and by another in Galilee r; where Thomas might go by the name of Didymus with the Greeks, that might live with the Jews in some of those parts: he is also said to be “one of the twelve” apostles, which was their number at first, though Judas now was gone off from them, and therefore are sometimes only called the “eleven”; but this having been their complement, it is still retained; but what is observed of him to his disadvantage and discredit is, that he
was not with them when Jesus came: Beza’s ancient copy reads, “he was not there with them”; and so read the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions; he either had not returned to the rest after their scattering one from another upon the apprehending of Christ; or did not choose to assemble with the rest, for fear of the Jews; or was taken up with some business and affair of life; however, he was not with the rest of the disciples, when they were assembled together, and Jesus appeared among them: as it is of good consequence to attend the assemblies of Christ’s disciples and followers, so it is of bad consequence to neglect or forsake them: it is frequently to good purpose that persons attend them; here God comes and blesses his people, Jesus grants his presence, the graces of the Spirit are increased, and drawn forth into exercise; souls that have lost sight of Christ find him, disconsolate ones are comforted, weak ones strengthened, and hungry ones fed: on the other hand, not to attend is of bad consequence; neglect of assembling together exposes to many snares and temptations; brings on a spiritual leanness; leads to an indifference and lukewarmness: issues in a low degree of grace, and a non-exercise of it, and in a loss of Christ’s presence.
q T. Hieros. Gittin, fol. 43. 2. r T. Hieros. Gittin, fol. 45. 3.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Didymus (). The same expression applied to Thomas in John 11:16; John 21:2, but nowhere else in N.T. Old word for twin (double), “the pessimist of the apostolic band” (Bernard). The term twelve is still applied to the group, though Judas, the traitor, is dead.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “But Thomas, one of the twelve,” (Thomas de eis ek ton dodeka) “Then Thomas, one out of the twelve,” of the apostles, who had companied with Jesus through all His ministry, from the baptism of John, Mat 10:2-3; Act 1:21-22.
2) “Called Didymus,” (ho legomenos Didymos) “The one who was and is called Didymus,” meaning a twin, once willing to follow Jesus in death, Joh 11:16; Rev 2:10.
3) “Was not with them when Jesus came.” (ouk hen met’ auton hote ‘ elthen lesous) “Was not with- them (the church assembly of disciples) when Jesus came,” Why? No one knows why, that early sabbath evening or day, the first day of His resurrection, Joh 20:19. Where had he been? Why was he absent? Did he know that the other church disciples were meeting?
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
24. But Thomas, one of the twelve. The unbelief of Thomas is here related, that by means of it the faith of the godly may be more fully confirmed. He was not only slow and reluctant to believe, but even obstinate. His dulness of apprehension was the reason why Christ again permitted them both to see and to feel him, in the same manner as before. In this manner, a new addition to the proof of Christ’s resurrection was given, not only to Thomas, but, also to us. Besides, the obstinacy of Thomas is an example to show, that this wickedness is almost natural to all men, to retard themselves of their own accord, when the entrance to faith is opened to them.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(24) But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus . . .Comp. Notes on Joh. 11:16; Joh. 14:5. It is in harmony with the desponding character that looks upon the visit to Jerusalem as necessarily leading to death, that he now is as one who has given up the common hope of the band of disciples, and is not present with them. It has happened as he had thought; the death he had foretold has come to pass. Is this the end of all the Messianic hopes which he had cherished? Is the grave the whither, and the cross the way, which they knew not?
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
152. JESUS APPEARS TO THE APOSTLES, vv. THOMAS BEING PRESENT, Joh 20:24-29 .
See note on Mat 10:3.
24. Was not with them To be absent on such an occasion justifies the suspicion that all was not right with Thomas; a suspicion that is confirmed by his scepticism. We can scarce indeed believe that our Lord would have made a visit of such importance when one of the twelve was unavoidably absent. The apparent reason seems to be, that Thomas was in a frame of mind to believe that all of Christ and Christianity was over.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said to him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe”.’
Thomas had missed out on that first appearance of Jesus and when he arrived back and was told about it he was understandably sceptical. They ‘went on telling him’ (imperfect tense) how they had seen the nail prints and the wound in His side (Joh 20:20) and he had retorted in exaggerated fashion that unless he could actually prove it, by himself touching them, he would not believe. Awkward people sometimes take up awkward stances, and the more people try to persuade them the more they react.
The incident is the more emphatic because John has not previously dwelt on the unbelief of the disciples in response to the resurrection although the other Gospels had made quite clear that news of Jesus resurrection was constantly responded to by doubt and unbelief (Luk 24:11; Luk 24:37; Luk 24:41; Mar 16:14), as indeed we would expect.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Jesus Appears To The Disciples Including Thomas ( Joh 20:24-29 ).
Thomas had been absent at Jesus’ first appearance to the Apostles, but he too was now to see the risen Lord.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The unbelief of Thomas and the second appearance to the Eleven:
v. 24. But Thomas, one of the Twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
v. 25. 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.
v. 26. And after eight days again His disciples were within and Thomas with them; then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
v. 27. Then saith He to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold My hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into My side; and be not faithless, but believing.
v. 28. And Thomas answered and said unto Him, My Lord and my God.
v. 29. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed; blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. Thomas, called Didymus, the Twin, loved his Lord with true devotion, as his words on the occasion of the death of Lazarus had shown, Joh 11:16. But he seems to have been of a rather sanguine temperament, with some leanings toward melancholy. He must be either in the highest realms of bliss or in a state of lowest dejection. For some reason he had not been present with the other disciples on Easter evening, and therefore had not seen the Lord. The other disciples were eager with their news: We have seen the Lord. They were convinced of His resurrection, they knew that their Master was living, they had received His commission. But Thomas shook his head in unbelief and voiced his doubt in most emphatic words. The proof which he demanded for the resurrection of the Lord was of a most inclusive and conclusive nature. He not only wanted to see the risen Master, he was not satisfied with merely looking at the impressions or prints in His hands where the nails had been driven through the flesh; he also wanted to back up the evidence of the one sense by that of another, he wanted to feel the wound, lest he be led astray by an illusion. And he wanted to place his hand into the gaping wound of His side where the lance-head of the soldier had entered. Those were the conditions under which he proposed to believe the fact of the resurrection, and they certainly show the extent and depth of his doubt. Jesus, of course, in His omniscience, was fully aware of this attitude of Thomas, and He arranged a second appearance before the apostles, apparently for the express purpose of convincing Thomas and making him a proper witness of the resurrection. It was eight days afterward, on the following Sunday evening, that the disciples were again assembled, Thomas in this case being in their midst. And Jesus repeated the methods of the previous occasion, stepping into the circle of the apostles while they were sitting behind locked doors, and giving them the greeting of peace. And now the Lord, turning directly to Thomas, complied with, all the conditions as the doubting disciple had made them, inviting him to extend his finger and investigate both His hands, and to reach forth his hand and put it into His side. But Jesus adds, in the form of an impressive warning: Be not unbelieving, but believing. His faith, which was wavering badly and was having a hard battle with doubt, should not succumb altogether. The Lord was willing enough to have the test made if there were but chances of upholding a disciple in his trust in Him. Thomas, however, had no need of a test now that he saw his Master before him and heard His loving voice. His wavering faith returned to its full strength with one joyful strengthening by the word of the Lord, giving utterance to a wonderful confession concerning Jesus. In the tone of the firmest conviction Thomas exclaimed: My Lord and my God. His faith not only knows that his Lord and Master is alive, is risen from the dead, but he knows this Man to be the true God. By His resurrection from the dead, Jesus was declared to be the Son of God with power. His resurrection is a seal of the completed redemption and reconciliation of the world, by which also His deity is established beyond a doubt. It is a miracle which only God can perform, to take His own life out of death. Jesus Christ is not only divine, but He is God Himself, true God with the Father and the Spirit. If this man, our Brother according to the flesh, were not true God, there would be no comfort for us in His death. But now there can be no doubt as to the complete and perfect redemption; for God in Christ, Christ as true God, was able to conquer all enemies, and to rise from the dead, and will live and reign through all eternity. But to gain the blessings of the resurrection of Jesus, it is necessary that every believer learn to say with Thomas: My Lord and my God. That is the nature of saving faith, that it clings to Jesus, the Savior, and appropriates all His redemption with a certain, joyful trust. Jesus now gently reproves Thomas for his foolish and dangerous doubt. Since he had seen his risen Lord, he believed and thus was satisfied and happy. But it is true at all times that the bliss and happiness of perfect faith does not rest upon the evidences of the senses nor upon feelings and reason, but upon the Word of the Gospel. The apostles, the witnesses of the resurrection of Christ, 1Jn 1:1-3, have recorded the facts concerning Jesus, His person and His work, and the salvation which we have in His name. Through this Word we have communion with our Lord; in the Word He comes to us and lives in us. Thus we have His full blessing. “He that wishes to know what we should believe, let him hear what Thomas believes, namely, that Jesus is the Son of God and the Lord of life, who will help us out of sins and death unto life and righteousness. Such trust and hope is the true faith, not only to know it, but also to accept it and to comfort one’s self over against death and sin. Where there is such faith and trust, there is salvation, and our sins should not hinder us; for by faith they are forgiven.”
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Joh 20:24. Thomas, one of the twelve, It is said, Luk 24:33 that the disciples from Emmaus gave the eleven, and those who were with them, an account of their meeting with Christ, and of the other circumstances accompanying that event. The eleven was the name by which the apostles went after the death of Judas, whether they were precisely that number, or fewer; as we have observed in the note on the abovementioned passage in St. Luke: wherefore we are under no necessity, from this expression, of supposing that Thomas was present when the disciples came in. We are sure that he wasnot present at this meeting, when Jesus shewed himself; yet, if St. Luke’s expression is thought to imply that Thomas waswith his brethren at the arrival of the disciples, we may suppose that he was one of those who would not believe, and that he went away before they had finished their relation. See Mar 16:1
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Joh 20:24-25 . ] See on Joh 11:16 .
, , , Euth. Zigabenus. There may also have been another reason, and conjectures (Luthardt: melancholy led him to be solitary, similarly Lange) are fruitless.
Thomas shows himself, Joh 20:25 (comp. on Joh 14:5 ), in a critical tendency of mind , in which he does not recognise the statement of eye-witnesses as a sufficient ground of faith. From this, however, we perceive how completely remote from his mind lay the expectation of the resurrection. In the fact that he wished to feel only the wounds of the hands and of the side , some have found a reason against the nailing of the feet to the cross (so still Lcke and De Wette). Erroneously; the above demand was sufficient for him; in feeling the wounds on the feet, he would have required something which would have been too much, and not consistent with decorum. Comp. on Mat 27:35 .
is then interchanged with (see critical notes), as correlative to seeing and feeling . Comp. Grotius: “ videtur , impletur ”.
, . . .] is regarded as a proof of the peculiar greatness of the wounds. But he would lay his hand in truth not in the wounds , but in the side , in order, that is, there to touch with his fingers the wound on the mere skin, which, at the same time, must also have been in so far considerable enough.
Note, further, the circumstantiality in the words of Thomas, on which an almost defiant reliance in his unbelief, not melancholy dejection (Ebrard), is stamped.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. (25) 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. (26) And after eight days again, his disciples were within, and Thomas with them. Then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. (27) Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. (28) And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. (29) Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. (30) And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book. (31) But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through his name.
We are not told the cause for which Thomas was absent at the first interview of Jesus with his Apostles, after he arose from the dead. But whatever cause it was, had not Christ’s grace been greater than Thomas’s deservings, never could he have been recovered from the daring unbelief, into which through temptation he had fallen. How rash his declaration in determining not to believe, except he had such evidences, as, humanly speaking, there seemed no probability to obtain! How gracious an act in Jesus to grant it! But how came Thomas to know that there were nails driven into the hands of Jesus, or that his side had been pierced? He was not present at the crucifixion; for he, in common with the rest, forsook Jesus and fled. And sometimes bodies were fastened with cords instead of nails, on the cross. But the truth was, that Thomas was for the time given up to unbelief, that the Church might thereby receive the more ample testimony, in his otherwise unaccountable obstinacy to the conviction of the truth of the resurrection of Jesus. Reader! do not overlook the precious instruction which this view of Thomas’s incredulity gives to the whole Church of Christ. Thomas had been present at the resurrection of Lazarus. And such a demonstration of the power of Christ might have taught the Apostle that Christ was able to raise himself. But here Thomas lost all confidence. And what is any man unless supported by the power of God! Oh! what cause have we every day to cry out with the Apostles, Lord! increase our faith! Luk 17:5 . But what a glorious confession did Thomas give, when Jesus in his boundless compassion had granted him his demand? Reader! do you not pray for grace to have the same, and not only to know Christ, both Lord and God, but to know him, and say as Thomas did, My Lord, and my God! Act 2:36 .
It doth not appear that Jesus manifested himself to any but his disciples after he arose from the dead. Neither to them, but now and then, during the forty days in which he remained on earth. But what a gracious account the Evangelist gives, when he saith, that both his appearing, and the record of those appearances, were purposely for the confirmation of the faithful, that, in believing, his whole Church might have life through his name.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
Ver. 24. But Thomas, one of the twelve ] A man cannot be wilfully absent from the public assemblies but once, without great danger and damage. Thomas was absent perhaps about some weighty cause. It may be he lurked and lay close for fear of the Jews; or it may be he was providing, and settling his own private affairs, now his Master was slain; but whatever the cause was, the effect was grievous; he was woefully hardened.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
24 29. ] He proves Himself to His own to be Lord and God, to be believed on by them, though not seen. Thomas’s doubt, and its removal. Peculiar to John .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
24. ] for what reason does not appear. Euthym [257] says, , . I incline, with Stier (vii. 117, edn. 2), to think that it could not have been accidentally (Lcke), nor “negotio aliquo occupatus” (Grot.). On such a day, and in such a man, such an absence must have been designed . Perhaps he had abandoned hope; the strong evidence of his senses having finally convinced him that the pierced side and wounded hands betokened such a death that revivification was impossible.
[257] Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Joh 20:24 . . [ or a twin, from to be double; of which from is the Greek equivalent]. “one of the twelve,” the familiar designation still used of the eleven, “was not with them when Jesus came,” why, we do not know.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Joh 20:24-25
24But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. 25So the other disciples were saying to him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.”
Joh 20:24 “But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus was not with them when Jesus came” Didymus in Greek means “twin” (cf. Joh 11:16). Often people have used this passage to call Thomas a doubter, but remember Joh 11:16. Thomas appears more often in John’s Gospel than any other Gospel (cf. Joh 11:16; Joh 14:5; Joh 20:24; Joh 20:26-29; Joh 21:2).
Joh 20:25 “Unless. . .I will not believe” “Unless” is a third class conditional sentence with a strong Double negative, “I will never, no never, believe it” without sight and touch. Jesus honored this request. Jesus worked with the faith of the disciples through (1) His miracles and (2) His predictions. Jesus’ message was so radically new, He allowed them time to understand and assimilate the gospel assertions and implications.
“imprint” See Special Topic below.
SPECIAL TOPIC: FORM (TUPOS)
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Thomas. The third mention of him in John. See Joh 11:16; Joh 14:5.
of = out of. Greek ek. App-104.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
24-29.] He proves Himself to His own to be Lord and God, to be believed on by them, though not seen. Thomass doubt, and its removal.-Peculiar to John.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Joh 20:24. , who is called) A formula of explaining or translating, similar to that in Joh 20:16, which is to say. Among the Greeks Thomas was better known by his Greek name [, a twin, answering to the Heb. Thomas].- , had not been with them) because perhaps he had his dwelling at a greater distance, and had been late in hearing of the resurrection. Afterwards however he became partaker of the gift which is mentioned, Joh 20:21-23. For neither time, nor place, excludes the Spirits operation. Num 11:29 [Eldad and Medad in the camp, the Spirit rested upon them, but they went not out unto the tabernacle, where the rest of the seventy elders received the Spirit.]
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Joh 20:24
Joh 20:24
But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.-Thomas always appears incredulous and slow to believe, given to looking on the dark side. He was not present when Jesus appeared to the disciples at night, nor any of the appearances of Jesus on the day of his resurrection. When told that they had seen Jesus, he firmly protested that he would not believe.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Thomas: Joh 11:16, Joh 14:5, Joh 21:2, Mat 10:3
was: Joh 6:66, Joh 6:67, Mat 18:20, Heb 10:25
Reciprocal: Mar 3:18 – Thomas Luk 6:15 – Thomas Joh 20:26 – Thomas
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THE ABSENCE OF THOMAS
But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
Joh 20:24
There is a very pathetic ring about this verse; Thomas lost an opportunity and missed a blessing. The world seems to be full of lost opportunities, and people never seem to learn by the experience of others. The reason that so many people do not improve is because they lose opportunity.
I. Temperament and religion.Temperament plays a very important part in religion, and so does our physical being. Have you not sometimes found yourself very despondent, and after a long day, when things seem to have gone wrong, you are weary and troubles are very heavy and very hard to bear? They are not any harder to bear than they were in the morning, the difference is in the individual; fatigue affects very materially our spiritual life. Thomas was a man who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, and had expected great things of Him, but his hopes were dashed to the ground; and when somebody told him that Jesus is risen he would not believe it. It was too good to be true, and therefore he asked for very special evidence.
II. The evidence of the senses.He wanted to see, or he would not believe; then he asked to feelif he could feel he would not doubt. What he asked for was evidence to satisfy his senses. That is just the sort of evidence required by ordinary peopleevidence to satisfy their senses; yet they live every day believing in things they cannot understand. There are things you never see, and yet you believe in them! There are many things we have never seen and never shall see, yet we believe in them. There are lots of things we do not understand, and yet we believe!
III. The evidence of experience.There is another question of evidencethe evidence of experience. So many people say, If I do not experience how can I know? But how is it possible for any one to make known his experience to others who have not had it? We older people teaching the younger generation were once children ourselves. We tell them that they have to act with judgment, and must be wary and watchful, and we say we have been through it all ourselves; but they do not heed our warning. The child as he grows up says, I will see for myself; and that is the only way in which a man can really know the Lord Jesus Christby his own personal experience. There are thousands of people who accept the fact that the Lord Jesus Christ rose from the dead, and yet they get no satisfaction from the past because they have never experienced what the Apostle calls the power of His resurrection. Love can only be experienced by the heart that loves, and therefore it is necessary for us all to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and to accept the fact of His resurrection. And then starts a new life, the old life is left behind, and we walk henceforth with Jesus. There are a number of people who do not require the evidence of the senses, because they have found by experience the power of the risen Lord in their hearts. They walk by His power and in His strength.
Rev. G. Robinson Lees.
Illustration
St. Thomas was certainly wrong in separating himself from the other disciples, and see what he missed (Joh 20:24). The angels are present when we assemble for worship, said the venerable Bede. What will they say if they find me not there? Will they not ask, Where is Bede? Why comes he not to prayers with his brethren? Yes, but some One infinitely greater than the greatest of the angels is present where two or three gather together in His Name.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
4
See the notes at Joh 11:16 on the fact of Thomas’ being a twin, also with regard to the popular phrase, “doubting Thomas,” applied to him because of the present circumstance. He was not in the group when Jesus showed his hands and side.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
[But Thomas, called Didymus, was not with them.] I. The evangelist does not here, as the writers of lexicons, render the signification of a Hebrew name into Greek, when he tells us, “Thomas is also called Didymus”; but only lets us know that as he was called Thomas among the Hebrews, so was he called Didymus among the Greeks. There is not another amongst the twelve apostles of whom this is said. Simon indeed is called Peter; but these are really two distinct names: so was Nathanael called Bartholomew: but Thomas and Didymus both one name, of one signification in different languages. Perhaps Thomas was born in some place where the Jews and the Greeks promiscuously inhabited: such a place was the region of Decapolis; and so by the Hebrews he might be called by his Hebrew name, and the Greek by the Greeks.
II. The disciples had all fled and were dispersed when Christ was apprehended, Mar 14:50; except Peter and John. Whence it is said in verse 2 of this chapter Joh 20:2, that Mary Magdalene came to Peter, and “to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved”; for she knew where she might find them; and so she could not for the rest. And thus scattered, as it should seem, they passed over the sabbath day; but when they heard that their Lord was risen, then they begin to associate again. But as yet Thomas had not got amongst them; and indeed Peter himself had been absent too, but that having seen the Lord he returned from Emmaus.
III. Thomas therefore not being present when our Saviour breathed on the rest and gave them the Holy Ghost, are we to suppose that he, by his absence, was deprived of this gift and privilege? No surely, for it was a privilege common to the whole apostolate, and peculiar to them as Apostles: so that however by his absence he might have missed of it, yet by reason of his apostolacy he could not. St. Paul, distant with a witness while these things happened, both from the apostleship and religion too, yet when made an apostle, was withal adorned with this privilege.
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
The story of the unbelief of Thomas, related in these verses, is a narrative peculiar to the Gospel of John. For wise and good reasons it is passed over in silence by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and was probably not given to the world till Thomas was dead. It is precisely one of those passages of Scripture which supply strong internal evidence of the honesty of the inspired writers. If impostors and deceivers had compiled the Bible for their own private advantage, they would never have told mankind that one of the first founders of a new religion behaved as Thomas here did.
We should mark, for one thing, in these verses, how much Christians may lose by not regularly attending the assemblies of God’s people. Thomas was absent the first time that Jesus appeared to the disciples after His resurrection, and consequently Thomas missed a blessing. Of course we have no certain proof that the absence of the Apostle could not admit of explanation. Yet, at such a crisis in the lives of the eleven, it seems highly improbable that he had any good reason for not being with his brethren, and it is far more likely that in some way he was to blame. One thing, at any rate, is clear and plain. By being absent he was kept in suspense and unbelief a whole week, while all around him were rejoicing in the thought of a risen Lord. It is difficult to suppose that this would have been the case, if there had not been a fault somewhere. It is hard to avoid the suspicion that Thomas was absent when he might have been present.
We shall all do well to remember the charge of the Apostle Paul: “Forsake not the assembling of yourselves together, as the manner of some is.” (Heb 10:25.) Never to be absent from God’s house on Sundays, without good reason,-never to miss the Lord’s Supper when administered in our own congregation,-never to let our place be empty when means of grace are going on, this is one way to be a growing and prosperous Christian. The very sermon that we needlessly miss, may contain a precious word in season for our souls. The very assembly for prayer and praise from which we stay away, may be the very gathering that would have cheered, and stablished, and quickened our hearts. We little know how dependent our spiritual health is on little, regular, habitual helps, and how much we suffer if we miss our medicine. The wretched argument that many attend means of grace and are no better for them, should be no argument to a Christian. It may satisfy those who are blind to their own state, and destitute of grace, but it should never satisfy a real servant of Christ. Such an one should remember the words of Solomon: “Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors.” (Pro 8:34.) Above all he should bind around his heart the Master’s promise: “Wheresoever two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” (Mat 18:20.) Such a man will rarely be left like Thomas, shut out in the cold chill of unbelief, while others are warmed and filled.
We should mark for another thing in this verse, how kind and merciful Christ is to dull and slow believers. Nowhere, perhaps, in all the four Gospels, do we find this part of our Lord’s character so beautifully illustrated as in the story before our eyes. It is hard to imagine anything more tiresome and provoking than the conduct of Thomas, when even the testimony of ten faithful brethren had no effect on him, and he doggedly declared, “Except I see with my own eyes and touch with my own hands, I will not believe.” But it is impossible to imagine anything more patient and compassionate, than our Lord’s treatment of this weak disciple. He does not reject him, or dismiss him, or excommunicate him. He comes again at the end of a week, and apparently for the special benefit of Thomas. He deals with him according to his weakness, like a gentle nurse dealing with a froward child:-“Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side.” If nothing but the grossest, coarsest, most material evidence could satisfy him, even that evidence was supplied. Surely this was a love that passeth knowledge, and a patience that passeth understanding.
A passage of Scripture like this, we need not doubt, was written for the special comfort of all true believers. The Holy Ghost knew well that the dull, and the slow, and the stupid, and the doubting, are by far the commonest type of disciples in this evil world. The Holy Ghost has taken care to supply abundant evidence that Jesus is rich in patience as well as compassion, and that He bears with the infirmities of all His people. Let us take care that we drink into our Lord’s spirit, and copy His example. Let us never set down men in a low place, as graceless and godless, because their faith is feeble and their love is cold. Let us remember the case of Thomas, and be very pitiful and of tender mercy. Our Lord has many weak children in His family, many dull pupils in His school, many raw soldiers in His army, many lame sheep in His flock. Yet He bears with them all, and casts none away. Happy is that Christian who has learned to deal likewise with his brethren. There are many in the Church, who, like Thomas, are dull and slow, but for all that, like Thomas, are real and true believers.
We should mark, lastly, in these verses, how Christ was addressed by a disciple as “God,” without prohibition or rebuke on His part. The noble exclamation which burst from the lips of Thomas, when convinced that his Lord had risen indeed,- the noble exclamation, “My Lord and my God,”-admits of only one meaning. It was a distinct testimony to our blessed Lord’s divinity. It was a clear, unmistakable declaration that Thomas believed Him, whom he saw and touched that day, to be not only man, but God. Above all, it was a testimony which our Lord received and did not prohibit, and a declaration which He did not say one word to rebuke. When Cornelius fell down at the feet of Peter and would have worshiped him, the Apostle refused such honor at once: “Stand up; I myself also am a man.” (Act 10:26.) When the people of Lystra would have done sacrifice to Paul and Barnabas, “they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you.” (Act 14:14-15.) But when Thomas says to Jesus, “My Lord and my God,” the words do not elicit a syllable of reproof from our holy and truth-loving Master. Can we doubt that these things were written for our learning?
Let us settle it firmly in our minds that the divinity of Christ is one of the grand foundation truths of Christianity, and let us be willing to go to the stake rather than let it go. Unless our Lord Jesus is very God of very God, there is an end of His mediation, His atonement, His advocacy, His priesthood, His whole work of redemption. These glorious doctrines are useless blasphemies, unless Christ is divine. Forever let us bless God that the divinity of our Lord is taught everywhere in the Scriptures, and stands on evidence that can never be overthrown. Above all, let us daily repose our sinful souls on Christ with undoubting confidence, as one who is perfect God as well as perfect man. He is man, and therefore can be touched with the feeling of our infirmities. He is God, and therefore is “able to save to the uttermost all who come unto God by Him.” That Christian has no cause to fear, who can look to Jesus by faith, and say with Thomas, “My Lord and my God.” With such a Savior we need not be afraid to begin the life of real religion, and with such a Savior we may boldly go on.
==================
Notes-
v24.-[But Thomas one…twelve…Didymus.] The story of the second appearance of Christ to the whole company of the Apostles, for the special benefit of Thomas, is one of those narratives which are only found in John’s Gospel. We ought to feel thankful that it has been recorded. It is precisely one of those stories, which supply strong indirect evidence of the divine inspiration of the Scriptures and the genuine honesty of the Gospel writers. An uninspired man, much less a dishonest impostor, would not have told us of the unbelief of a chosen Apostle. Moreover it is one of those stories which throw most useful light on a very interesting subject. That subject is the great variety of temperament which may be found among true Christians.
Chrysostom remarks, “Observe the truthfulness of the disciples. They hide no faults, either their own or others; but record them with great veracity.”
Cardinal Bellarmine, according to Gerhard, goes so far as to say that the history of Thomas, like that of Noah’s drunkenness, David’s adultery, and Peter’s denial, is a reason why the laity ought not to read the Bible, lest forsooth they should get harm! The worthy Cardinal forgets that we need beacons to warn us against danger, and examples of Christ’s mercy to sinful and dull people in order to encourage us to repent.
Concerning the Apostle Thomas we know little. Twice in the Gospel of John we find him saying something, and on each occasion he appears in the same character. When our Lord declared his intention of going to Bethany, and says plainly that Lazarus is dead, Thomas says to his fellow-disciples, “Let us also go, that we may die with Him.” (Joh 11:16.) When our Lord in His parting address to His disciples said, “Whither I go ye know, and the way ye know. Thomas saith unto Him, Lord, we know not whither Thou goest; and how can we know the way?” (Joh 14:4-5.) He always seems to be one of those desponding, fearful, gloomy-minded Christians, who look at the dark side of every subject and condition, and can never see a bit of blue sky,-who go on their way to heaven with real faith and true grace, but are so full of doubts and fears that they are unable to enjoy religion, and are a trouble to themselves and all around them. This I believe to be the true account of his character. The modern theory that he was a man of free thought and wide range of intellect, who wisely required reasonable evidence of everything in religion, and properly dreaded taking anything on trust, is a theory which I believe to be utterly without foundation, and I cannot receive it for a moment. He was simply a good man with a very doubting and gloomy turn of mind;-a man that really loved Jesus and was willing to die with Him, but a man who saw little but the dangers attending everything that a disciple had to do, and the difficulties belonging to everything which a disciple had to believe. There are many like him. It is a very useful picture. John Bunyan’s “Fearing,” “Despondency,” and “Much afraid,” in Pilgrim’s Progress, are types of a large class of Christians, who are successors of the Apostle Thomas.
[Was not with them…Jesus came.] The reasons why Thomas was not with the other ten Apostles on the Sunday night when Jesus appeared to them are not given, and we have no clue whatever to them. Most commentators consider that he was to blame; and that by his absence he missed a blessing, and was kept in suspense a week. I admit that this may be true, and I think his example teaches indirectly that it is unwise to be ever absent from the assembly of God’s people without good cause. But I believe we must not press this point too far, and must not lay too much blame on the Apostle, in the absence of direct evidence that he was in fault. For anything we know, he may have lodged at a greater distance from the place of meeting than any of the eleven, and thus been unable to reach the place at an earlier hour; or he may have been detained by necessary business. One thing is very certain: the disciples found no fault with Thomas for his absence when they said, “We have seen the Lord.” Moreover, our Lord Himself, when He appears, does not blame Thomas for having been absent on a former occasion, but only chides his unbelief. The simplest view of the subject appears to me to be, that Thomas’s absence was a part of his character. He was slow and dull in action as well as in perception,-the sort of man who would always have been last in Church, and last in a meeting. In the present instance I venture to conjecture that he meant no harm, and intended to have been present when the ten Apostles met; but that he probably started late, walked slow, and was so absorbed in doubts, and fears, and anxious meditations about the prospects of Christ’s disciples, that he never reached the place of meeting till Christ had withdrawn Himself.
The question has been needlessly raised by some, whether Thomas was not deprived of the gifts and privileges conferred on the other Apostles by his absence. Lightfoot sensibly replies, “Surely not: it was a privilege common to the whole Apostolate, and peculiar to them as Apostles. Paul was distant, while these things happened, both from apostleship and religion. Yet, when made an Apostle, he was at once adorned with this privilege.” Some think that his case is like Eldad and Medad, who had their share of the Spirit, though absent, like the rest of the seventy elders. (Num 11:27.)
v25.-[The other disciples…said…seen the Lord.] We are not told when and where the disciples said this. I incline to believe that they said it the very evening that our Lord first appeared to them, and that Thomas came into the assembly very shortly after the Lord disappeared. To my eyes it reads as if the ten Apostles all exclaimed together, full of joy and delight at what they had seen and heard, “Thomas, we have just seen our Lord and Master! If you had been here a little sooner, you also would have seen Him.” I think this for two reasons. (a) The words of the twenty-sixth verse, “after eight days,” seem to indicate that there were eight days between our Lord’s first appearance and his second, and also eight days between Thomas’s expression of unbelief and his being convinced. (b) It seems highly improbable that Thomas would allow a whole day and night to pass away, after the rumour of our Lord’s body having been removed from the sepulchre had spread through Jerusalem, without seeking out the other Apostles and inquiring what it meant. Slow and dull in faith as he was, he would hardly sleep without finding out something about it. These considerations incline me to believe, that before the ten Apostles had time to separate, after our Lord’s appearance to them, Thomas came in. Then they told him immediately, that they had just seen the Lord. And then came the remarkable declaration which the doubting Apostle made.
[But he said unto them, Except, etc.] The unbelief of Thomas, expressed in this famous sentence, was a sad fault in a good man, which cannot be explained away. He refused to believe the testimony of ten competent witnesses, who had seen Christ in the body with their own eyes. He refused to believe the testimony of ten true friends and brethren, who could have no object in deceiving him. He passionately declares that he will not believe, unless he himself sees and touches our Lord’s body. He presumes to prescribe certain conditions, which must be fulfilled before he can credit the report of his brethren. He uses singularly emphatic language to express his scepticism:-“Others may believe if they like; but I shall not and will not believe until I see and touch for myself.”-All this was very sad and very sinful. Thomas might have remembered that at this rate nothing could ever be proved by witnesses; and that he himself, as a teacher, could never expect men to believe him. His case shows us how foolishly and weakly a believer may speak sometimes, and how, under the influence of depression and doubt, he may say things of which afterwards he is heartily ashamed.
After all, the case of Thomas is not an uncommon one. Some people are so strangely constituted that they distrust everybody, regard all men as liars, and will believe nothing except they can see it all, and work it all out for themselves. They have a rooted dislike to receive anything on trust, or from the testimony of others, and must always go over the ground for themselves. In people of this kind, though they know it not, there is often a vast amount of latent pride and self-conceit; and it is almost ludicrous to observe how entirely they forget that the business of daily life could never go on, if we were always doubting everything which we could not see for ourselves. Nevertheless they exist in the Church, and always will exist; and the case of Thomas shows what trouble they bring on themselves.
Two things must, in fairness, be remembered, which form some slight extenuation of Thomas’s unbelief. For one thing it does not appear that any one of our Lord’s Apostles ever understood, up to the time of our Lord’s crucifixion, that He was really going to be crucified, buried, and rise again. Simple as these great facts appear to us now, it is perfectly certain that they formed no part of the creed of the Apostles, so long as our Lord was with them. This may seem astonishing, but it is true. They believed that Christ was the Messiah, but they did not realize a crucified Messiah. Of these Apostles, I would remind the reader, Thomas was one. Does not all this throw a little light on his extraordinary scepticism about the reality of the resurrection? For another thing we must remember, that Thomas, like all Jews, had a firm belief in the reality of spirits and ghosts, and the possibility of their appearing. Even after this, when Peter was delivered from prison, and came to the house of John surnamed Mark, the disciples said, “It is his angel.” (Act 12:15.) May we not therefore conceive it possible that Thomas, overwhelmed and confounded at the astounding news that Christ had been seen, would cling, with his characteristic incredulity, to the notion that the Apostles had only seen Christ’s spirit or ghost? That they had seen something he did not dispute, but that what they had seen was the real material body of his Lord, he could not bring himself to believe. These things are worth considering. I do not for a moment excuse or defend Thomas. I only remind those who condemn him wholesale, and can find no words strong enough to use about his unbelief, that it was not quite so easy for a pious Jew, brought up and trained as Thomas had been, to receive at once the resurrection of our Lord as a proved thing, as it may appear at first sight to an English mind.
Musculus remarks, how extraordinary the unbelief of Thomas seems, when we consider that he not only had heard our Lord frequently foretell His resurrection, but had actually within a few weeks seen Lazarus raised from the dead at Bethany!
Bengel remarks, “No doubt Thomas seemed to himself to be entertaining and expressing sentiments altogether judicious. But unbelief, while it attributes defects in judgment to others, often itself discovers and betrays hardness of heart, and in that hardness slowness of belief.”
v20.-[And after eight days again, etc.] This verse describes how Jesus was graciously pleased to appear again to the company of the Apostles, for the express purpose of convincing and satisfying the mind of Thomas.
He came “after eight days.” That means a week, according to the Jewish manner of expressing a space of time, by which the first and last days were always reckoned in, if any part of them was employed. Thus our Lord was buried on Friday afternoon and rose again on Sunday morning, and was actually only thirty-six hours in the grave. But a Jew would say that He was “three days” buried. It thus appears that, both on the first and second times when our Lord appeared to the Apostles, it was a Sunday. Poole remarks that we have here the beginning of keeping holy the first day of the week.
He came when the disciples were “within.” That means that they were assembled in a room, and probably in the same house where they had assembled before. The conviction and reproof of a weak disciple was a thing which was mercifully transacted in private, and among friends. We cannot doubt, moreover, that at this period the disciples would hardly dare to assemble in the open air anywhere about Jerusalem. The rumour that they stole the body of our Lord would still be rife in the city, and they might well feel the necessity of caution.
He came when “Thomas was with them.” That means that He timed His visit, so that not one of the Apostles were missing. He knew exactly who were assembled, and where they were assembled, and He ordered His appearance accordingly. It should be a great comfort to believers to remember that their Lord’s eye is always upon them, and that He knows exactly in what place and in what company they are.
He came “when the doors were shut.” That means that He appeared exactly under the same circumstances under which He appeared a week before, in an evening, when the doors were carefully closed for fear of the Jews. Thus, as on the previous Sunday, He suddenly, without a moment’s notice, stood in the midst of the assembled disciples.
He came with the same gracious salutation with which He had appeared before. Once more, the first word that fell from His lips is “Peace be unto you.” Thomas was there. The disciple who made his emphatic declaration of unbelief, might well expect to hear some word of rebuke. But our Lord makes no exception. He saw Thomas, and well knew all that Thomas had said; and yet to him, as well as to the other ten, He once more says “Peace.”
We should note carefully the amazing kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ to a weak disciple, and the trouble He was pleased to take, if I may use such a phrase with due reverence, about one single soul. The unbelief of Thomas was most provoking and inexcusable, and if he had been cast out of the company of disciples we could not have said his excommunication was undeserved. But our Lord cares tenderly for this weak member of His mystical body, and specially appears in order to heal and restore him. What a wonderful example He gives to all His people! How kind we ought to be to weak brethren, and how ready to take any pains and trouble if we can only do them good! The Christian of modern times, who is ready to excommunicate every one who cannot speak his shibboleth, and see every point of doctrine and ceremonial with his eyes,-the Christian who is ready to turn away from every brother who is overtaken in a fault, as graceless, godless, and unconverted,-such a Christian may flatter himself that he is very zealous and faithful. But he is a Christian who has not got the mind of Christ. What Christ did for Thomas, we ought to be ready to do for others.
Let us not forget that Thomas continued a whole week in unbelief and doubt, while his brethren around him were rejoicing. We may well believe that it was not a very happy week with him. He that sows a short period of scepticism often reaps a long period of trouble.
Rupertus, almost alone, maintains that the second appearance of our Lord, for the special benefit of Thomas, was in Galilee, in Nazareth, at the house of Mary. But the vast majority of commentators think that it was at Jerusalem.
Musculus observes how kind and brotherly was the dealing of the ten Apostles with Thomas. They did not excommunicate him, and cast him out of their society for his unbelief, but allowed him to assemble with them as before.
Rollock observes, “The loving dealing of the Lord with Thomas teaches us this comfortable lesson. The Lord marks not narrowly the infirmities and wants that are in His own. He looks not narrowly to the weakness of their faith, to the imperfections and wants of their prayers and requests, for their prayers are full of imperfections. But He passes by their imperfections, He oversees their infirmities, He misknows the corruption wherein their faith and prayers and desires are involved, and hath a regard to their faith, albeit they have it in small measure.”
v27.-[Then saith He to Thomas, etc.] The verse before us is a wonderful instance of Christ’s pitifulness and condescension. To come into the world at all, and take a body on Him,-to allow that body to be scourged, crowned with thorns, nailed to the cross, and laid in the grave,-all this, beyond doubt, was astonishing condescension. But when the victory over sin and death was won, and He had taken on Him His resurrection body, to come to a doubting, sceptical disciple, and bid him touch Him, put his finger into the nail-prints on His hands, and put his hand into the great wound in His side,-all this was a condescension which we can never sufficiently admire and adore.
The last sentence of the verse is a rebuke and an exhortation at the same time. It would have been more literally rendered, “Be not an unbeliever, but a believer.” It is not merely a reproof to Thomas for his scepticism on this particular occasion, but an urgent counsel to be of a more believing turn of mind for time to come.-“Shake off this habit of doubting, questioning, and discrediting every one. Give up thine unbelieving disposition. Become more willing to believe and trust, and give credit to testimony for time to come.”-No doubt the primary object of the sentence was to correct and chastise Thomas for his sceptical declaration on the preceding Sunday. But I believe our Lord had in view the further object of correcting Thomas’s whole character, and directing his attention to his besetting sin. How many there are among us who ought to take to themselves our Lord’s words! How faithless we often are, and how slow to believe!
Let us note here, as already remarked, that the wounds on our Lord’s body must have been still open, from the language He addresses to Thomas, and that the wound in His side must have been a very large wound, from His telling Thomas to thrust in his hand.
Let us not fail to observe our Lord’s perfect knowledge of all that passed on the previous Sunday, of all that the Apostles had said, and of the sceptical declaration which Thomas had made. Such knowledge showed clearly that He was God and not man. He hears every idle word we say, and notes all our conversation.
Let us observe our Lord’s thorough acquaintance with the special faults and besetting sins of every one of His people. He saw that Thomas’s defect was his unbelief, and so He says, “Be not faithless, but believing.”
v28.-[And Thomas…my Lord…my God.] The famous answer of Thomas, contained in this verse, is precisely the short interjectional exclamation of a man taken by surprise, convinced at once of his own grievous mistake, and so overwhelmed by a variety of feelings that he is unable for the moment to use many words. It is the language of amazement, delight, repentance, faith and adoration, all combined in one sentence.
Whether it is to be taken in the third person, as an exclamation, “It is my Lord and my God!” or in the second person, as an adoring, loving, believing address, “Thou art my Lord and my God,” is an open question which the original Greek does not settle. If I must give an opinion, I prefer the second person. But in either case the sense is good.
The text before us is one of those which are justly quoted, as an unanswerable proof of the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. He is called “God” in the presence of ten witnesses, and He accepts the language, and does not say one word to reprove the person who uses it. Unless a person is prepared to deny the inspiration of John’s Gospel generally, or the genuineness and correctness of this text in particular, it is hard to see how the force of the sentence in favour of Christ’s divinity can be evaded.-The suggestion of Theodoras of Mopsuestia, and some modern Socinians, that Thomas only used a kind of oath or exclamation, which he did not mean to apply to Christ Himself, is utterly untenable, and almost profane. It is unreasonable to suppose that a pious Jew, like Thomas, would take God’s name in vain and break the third commandment, however much he might be surprised. Moreover, there is no proof whatever, although a careless Greek, Roman, or Englishman, might say “My God,” when suddenly taken by surprise, that any such expression was in use among the Jews. In short there is, in my judgment, but one way of regarding the text, if we treat it honestly. It is an incontrovertible proof that Thomas looked on Christ as God, and addressed Him to His face as God, and that our Lord made no objection, and did not reprove him.
Bullinger remarks how emphatically Thomas says, “MY Lord and MY God,” showing the reality of his faith.
Rollock says, “If we compare Thomas with the other Apostles, we shall see that as he surpassed them all in unbelief, so he surpassed them far in believing and confessing the Lord.” But he adds, “Jesus praises not Thomas for his faith, because he tied his faith to his senses. He calls him not blessed for it, but pronounces them blessed who believe without seeing.”
Whether, after all, Thomas did actually touch our Lord’s wounds, as he was told to do, is an open question, which we have no means of deciding. There is certainly, as Augustine observes, no proof that he did, and his exclamation reads as if it was sudden and immediate, and not the result of examination and deliberation. May we not well believe that the discovery of our Lord’s perfect acquaintance with every word that he had said on the previous Sunday, combined with the evidence of his own eyes that he saw before him a material body, and not a spirit, would be enough to convince him? The question is an open one, and every reader must form his own opinion about it. We are neither told that Thomas did touch our Lord, nor yet that he did not. Certainly our Lord says in the next verse, “Because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed.”
v29.-[Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, etc.] This verse contains a grave and solemn rebuke to Thomas, and a warning to all who are disposed to demand an excessive amount of evidence before they believe. The first part of our Lord’s words would be translated more literally, “Because thou hast seen Me, Thomas, thou hast believed.” The whole sentence may be thus paraphrased and expounded. “Thomas, thou hast at last believed my resurrection, because thou hast seen Me with thine own eyes, and touched Me with thine own hands. It is well. But it would have been far better if thou hadst believed a week ago, on the testimony of thy ten brethren, and not waited to see Me. Remember from henceforth, that in my kingdom they are more blessed and honourable who believe on good testimony, without seeing, than those who insist first on seeing, before they believe.”
The sentence “Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed,” would be rendered literally, “Blessed are those persons not having seen and having believed,”-consisting, as it does, of two participles connected with “blessed.” The idea that our Lord had in view any particular person, such as Abraham, Moses, David, the prophets, and, generally, the Old Testament saints, appears to me utterly untenable. I believe our Lord had in view no individual case, but only laid down a great general principle which Thomas had forgotten, as a lesson to him and the whole Church in every age. The construction of the Greek language allows us to regard the past tense as a present, in such a sentence as this. (See Jelf’s Greek Grammar, 401, 403; and Farrar’s Greek Syntax, 130.)
Gregory well says, “The incredulity of Thomas has done us more good than the faith of Mary.” He means that if Thomas had never doubted, we should not have had such full proof that Christ rose from the dead.
The principle contained in the sentence before us, is one of vast importance in every age, and specially in our own. In a day of scepticism, free inquiry and rationalism, so-called, when hundreds are continually railing against creeds, and dogmatism, and priestcraft, the sentence deserves close attention and consideration. Nothing is more common now a days than to hear people say, that they “decline to believe things above their reason, that they cannot believe what they cannot entirely understand in religion, that they must see everything clearly before they can believe.” Such talk as this sounds very fine, and is very taking with young persons and superficially educated people, because it supplies a convenient reason for neglecting vital religion altogether. But it is a style of talking which shows a mind either proud, or foolish, or inconsistent.
In matters of science, what sensible man does not know that we must begin by believing much which we do not understand, taking many positions on trust, and accepting many things on the testimony of others? Even in the most exact science the scholar must begin with axioms and postulates. Faith and trust in our teachers is the very first condition of acquiring knowledge. He that begins his studies by saying “I shall not believe anything which I do not see clearly demonstrated from the very first,” will make very little progress.
In the daily business of life, what sensible man does not know that we take many important steps on no other ground than the testimony of others? Parents send sons to Australia, New Zealand, China, and India, without ever having seen these countries, in faith that the report about them is dependable and true. Probability, in fact, is the only guide of most parts of our life.
In the face of such facts as these, where is the common sense of saying, as many rationalists and sceptics now do, that in such a mysterious matter as the concern of our souls, we ought to believe nothing that we do not see, and ought to receive nothing as true which will not admit of mathematical demonstration?-Christianity does not at all refuse to appeal to our intellects, and does not require of us a blind, unreasoning faith. But Christianity does ask us to begin by believing many things that are above our reason, and promises that, so beginning, we shall have more light and see all things clearly.-The would-be wise man of modern times says, “I dislike a religion which contains any mystery, I must first see, and then I will believe.” Christianity replies, “You cannot avoid mystery, unless you go out of the world. You are only asked to do with religion what you are always doing with science. You must first believe and then you will see.”-The cry of the modern sceptic is, “If I could see I would believe.” The answer of the Christian ought to be, “If you would only believe, and humbly ask for Divine teaching, you would soon see.”
The plain truth is that modern freethinkers are like the Jews, who were always demanding some visible sign that our Lord was the Messiah, and pretended that they would believe if they only saw it. Just in the same way there are hundreds of people in this latter age of the world, who tell us they can believe nothing which is above their reason, and that they want stronger evidences of the truth of the doctrine and fact of Christianity than probability. Like Thomas they must first see before they believe.-But what an extraordinary fact it is that the very men who say all this, are continually acting all their lives on no better evidence than probability! They are continually doing things on no other ground than the report of others, and their own belief that this report is probably true. The very principle on which they are incessantly acting, in the affairs of their bodies, their families, and their money, is the principle on which they refuse to act in the affairs of their souls! In the things of this world they believe all sorts of things which they have not seen, and only know to be probable, and act on their belief. In the things of the eternal world they say they can believe nothing which they do not see, and refuse the argument of probability altogether. Never, in fact, was there anything so unreasonable and inconsistent as rationalism, so called! No wonder that our Lord laid down, for the benefit of Thomas and the whole Church, that mighty principle, “Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed.”
The remarks of Richard Cecil, on the subject before us, are so apposite that I make no apology for quoting them. They will be found in his “Original Thoughts.” (Vol. i., p. 440-442.)
“When a man doubts, after proper evidence, God calls it folly. When we complain and want more evidence, the fault is in us and not in God’s dispensations. A humble spirit will accept a glimmering light, and not refuse to walk because it has not the noon-day sun. Incredulity, as to divine truth, has its root in pride and self-sufficiency, and is accompanied by much rashness and ignorance. It presumes to understand and comprehend everything that is proposed to it. The incredulous man calls for demonstration. The feeble creature, who cannot explain the nature of his own formation, would have things made out as plain as that ‘two and two make four.’ The true believer receives the truths of the Bible as he receives the kingdom of heaven,-with the simplicity of a little child.”-
-“Let us beware of the danger of following our own imaginations. A man may make one demand after another, till, at last, nothing will satisfy him; and the next step is, that, when he will not be content with what God shows him, he shall be left in darkness and perplexity.-Consider the nature of believing: it is not like believing that two and two make four. Do not men believe on probability in other things? God has given all the evidence that man requires or needs; and if in a right mind, we shall thank God for the dispensation of light we have, willing to walk by faith and not by sight. If we do not get on in this way, we shall not get on at all. Divine justice punishes incredulity by credulity: by giving up the unbelieving to the dominion and bondage of strong delusions. When men get into a high mind and an unbelieving spirit, and reject the truth, God punishes them by letting them ‘believe a lie.’ Let us take heed how we say, like Thomas, we will not walk at all without such light as we think proper.”
The opinion expressed by Dean Stanley, following Dr. Arnold (in Smith’s “Bible Dictionary,” Article “Thomas”), that Thomas is a remarkable example of “free inquiry combined with fervent belief,” is one which I only mention in order to express my dissent from it.-I see nothing like “free inquiry” in this Apostle. I read of no question he asked of his brethren. I see no trace of any willingness to investigate, sift, weigh, and consider the testimony which they bore. I discover no readiness to go to the grave, to examine the linen clothes, to talk with Mary Magdalene, to question the two disciples who journeyed to Emmaus. All this would have been “free inquiry.” But I see nothing of the kind. I only see a dull, obstinate, desponding declaration that, whatever his ten friends may say, he will not believe till he sees. This cannot surely deserve the name of “free inquiry”!-As to the “fervent belief” of Thomas, no doubt, at last, when his most compassionate Saviour almost forced conviction on him, in pity for his dulness, and made unbelief quite impossible, he made a most beautiful confession of faith. But it was a confession, we must remember, that came out only at the last moment, and was extracted, as it were, by a miracle of kindness. Above all, beautiful as it was, it did not prevent his gracious Master speaking words of grave and solemn rebuke. Beyond doubt, Thomas lay down that night a pardoned and forgiven man,-a man raised from desperate faithlessness to strong faith. But we must not forget that he was not praised and commended, though raised, convinced, and pardoned. If words mean anything, he had received a reproof, and one that I doubt not he felt deeply. To me therefore it appears that, to represent him as an example of “free inquiry combined with fervent belief,” is an entire mistake, and a misapprehension both of his character and of the whole drift of the remarkable narrative of this passage.
If, as I believe, Mark’s remarkable words apply to this appearance of our Lord for the special benefit of Thomas, it is impossible to regard our Lord’s language to Thomas in any other sense than that of rebuke. Mark says, “He appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen Him after He was risen.” (Mar 16:14.) Most commentators certainly take this view. Chrysostom says that Thomas received “a sharp rebuke.”
v30, v31.-[And many other signs, etc.] The two last verses in this chapter contain one of those parenthetical comments, or glosses, which are so peculiar to the Gospel of John. It must be admitted that they seem to break the thread of the narrative, and come in with a rather startling effect. We need not, therefore, wonder that the right meaning of the two verses has long been a subject of dispute.
(a) Some think, as Calvin, Ecolampadius, Brentius, Poole, Rollock, Lampe, Hengstenberg, Pearce, and Alford, that John refers to the whole history of Christ’s ministry, and is comparing his own Gospel with the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. They would paraphrase the two verses in the following way:-“Jesus did many other miracles during His ministry, under the eyes of His disciples, which are not recorded in this Gospel of mine, though they are recorded in the other three. But those few which are recorded in this my Gospel, are recorded in order that you who read it may be convinced that Jesus is the Messiah, the Christ of God, and that believing on Him you may have eternal life through His name.”-It is a heavy objection to this interpretation, that the two verses, on this view, appear to come in rather abruptly, and without much connection with what goes either before or after. In short, it is not very easy to explain why they come in here at all.-Moreover, it is not very easy to see the drift of the expression, “signs in presence of His disciples,” considering that many of our Lord’s greatest miracles were worked before people who were not disciples at all.-Furthermore, it is not very clear what John can mean by saying “other” signs. That word “other” seems to point to miracles just performed, yet there was no special miracle performed at this particular, beyond, of course, our Lord’s miraculous appearances.
(b) Others, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, Rupertus, Beza, Bullinger, Calovius, Musculus, Gerhard, Ferus, Toletus, Maldonatus, Henry, Tholuck, Scott, Bloomfield, and Olshausen, think that John writes these two verses with a special reference to the wondrous signs and evidences which the Lord had just given to the disciples of His own resurrection from the dead. They would paraphrase the two verses in this way:-“Many other wondrous proofs did the Lord give to the Apostles of His own resurrection, which are not written down in this Gospel, though they are written in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. But the three appearances which I have narrated, are written down in order to convince you that Jesus is the true Messiah, the Christ of God, and that, believing this firmly, you may have eternal life through faith in His name.”-According to this view the two verses refer to nothing but this twentieth chapter, and are a parenthetical comment on it. It is as though John would say, “Do not suppose that these three appearances of Christ are the only wondrous signs and proofs of His resurrection. There are others which you will find recorded in the other three Gospels. But I have related these three in order to confirm your faith, and to show you that in believing on a risen Saviour you are resting on solid ground.”
Of the two views I prefer the second one, as involving the fewest difficulties. It is more probable, considering John’s peculiar style of writing, to suppose that he makes a short parenthetical remark about a single chapter, than to suppose that he makes it about the whole of his Gospel. Above all this second view gets over the heavy objection that, after bringing his whole Gospel to a conclusion by a general remark on the whole of it as compared to the other three Gospels, John seems to begin again in the twenty-first chapter, and to write a postscript or appendix.-In short the common theory, that these two verses apply to the whole Gospel, makes John finish his history, lay down his pen, complete his work, and then suddenly take up his pen again, and add the twenty-first chapter as a kind of after-thought. To say the least, this is an undignified, not to say rather irreverent, view of the composition of an inspired writer!-The other theory, or the theory which strictly confines the application of the two concluding verses of the twentieth chapter to the matter contained in that chapter, viz., the signs which our Lord gave of His resurrection, is entirely in keeping with John’s style of writing his Gospel. He simply remarks parenthetically that there are other proofs of Christ’s resurrection, which are to be found in the other Gospels, and that he has only written down such accounts as he was guided by the Spirit to consider most calculated to stablish the faith of his readers.
I frankly confess that the passage appears to come in abruptly under any view, and I cannot expect that all will adopt the explanation which I have advocated. If the Gospel of John had ended with this twentieth chapter, I might perhaps have acquiesced in the theory that the two verses were meant to form a brief concluding remark about the whole of the Evangelist’s work; and a brief admission of the fact that he passed over many miracles recorded by Matthew, Mark, and Luke. But I cannot acquiesce in the theory, when I see that John goes on to write the twenty-first chapter. The existence of that chapter alone satisfies me that, in the two verses before us, John is only speaking of the signs of Christ’s resurrection, which he has supplied, and is admitting that there are others in the other Gospels. As a rule, moreover, when I find a parenthetical comment or gloss in John’s Gospel, I prefer to apply it to the immediate subject of which he is speaking. It is the habit of this Evangelist to turn aside for a moment, and make a short explanatory remark; and then to take up the thread again, and go on with his history. Of this habit, I think the two verses before us are an example. When the Holy Ghost plenarily inspired the writer of any Book of Scripture, both as to His faith and His words, He did not prevent Him writing in his own peculiar style.
Whatever view we may take of the matter in dispute about these two verses, there are things in them which are abundantly clear and ought never to be forgotten. For one thing, John generously recognizes the existence of other books beside his own, and disclaims the idea of his own Gospel being the only one which Christians ought to read. Happy is that author who can humbly say, “My book does not contain everything about the subject it handles. There are other books about it. Read them.”-For another thing, we should note the grand end and object for which this and all the books of the New Testament were written. They were written to glorify Christ, to make us believe on Him as the only Saviour of sinners, and to lead us to eternal life through faith in His name.
It is interesting to remember that ecclesiastical historians assign to Thomas the honour of being the Apostle who first preached the Gospel in India; and they also say that he there suffered martyrdom. A society of Christians in Malabar is said to be still known by his name. Unhappily the truth of all this is very doubtful, and rests on a very sandy foundation.
Fuente: Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels
Joh 20:24. But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. On the object of thus interpreting the name Thomas, see on chap. Joh 11:16. It is impossible to think that the Evangelist translates the word for the mere purpose of mentioning that Thomas had a Greek as well as an Aramaic name. The man appears in the name.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Section 4. (Joh 20:24-31.)
A glance at the earthly company.
Here then we have the heavenly company: -not exactly the Church; at least, not as the Body of Christ, or the House of God; things which are not in the line of the apostle’s teaching. But the Spirit which they are to receive sufficiently marks them out as those who, in fact, belong to that which is the gathering together of the children of God, before scattered abroad (Joh 11:52). But we have seen also that John cannot forget (or the Spirit of God as speaking through him) that there are promises of blessing for the earth, and therefore to an earthly people, which He will fulfil in their entirety to them. We have had glances at this already, again and again, and now we have another. Thomas, called Didymus, (both names meaning “a twin,”) though one of the twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. We may easily believe that the unbelief which he so conspicuously exhibits, may have hindered his being with them at that memorable time. How many glorious opportunities do we not lose from such a cause? Not even the testimony of all the others is sufficient to make him credit so marvellous a tale. Like Israel, he must look upon the Pierced One, or he will not believe. The week passes, therefore, with Thomas unbelieving still; just as the present time with Israel. But on the eighth day, the first of the new week, the disciples are again together, and now Thomas is with them: Jesus comes once more, the doors again being shut, and stands in the midst, and says again, “Peace be unto you.” And now Thomas may satisfy himself; but he is broken down in adoring wonder: “My Lord and my God!” he exclaims, as, thank God, at last the nation will; but to find that he has lost, not time alone, but the higher blessing: “Thomas,” says the Lord, “because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.”
The apostle adds here that the object of his writing was to awaken and encourage faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God; that thus men might have life in His Name. For this purpose, he had not attempted an impossible relation of all the signs that Jesus had done. These were innumerable: nor is a faith founded merely upon miracles a sufficient faith (Joh 2:23-25). His aim had been that the divine glory of the Lord should appear; so that His Name -the display of Himself, might prove its power for this, as it alone could do. Acquaintance with the Son of God! Ah, is not this, indeed, the need we have, one and all? is it not here all need shall be supplied?
Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary
What the cause of Thomas’s absence was is not declared; it is evident that he was not with the rest of the disciples when Christ appeared to them; and his absence had like to have cost him dear, even the loss of his faith; and he might have had cause for ever to have bewailed his absence from that meeting of the disciples, had not Christ been more merciful.
Learn hence, that the letting slip of one holy opportunity, may prove exceedingly prejudicial to the soul’s advantage: it is wise and safe to lay hold upon every opportunity for enjoying communion with God, and fellowship with his saints. Thomas’s absence deprived him not only of the good news which Mary brought of Christ’s being risen, but also of the sight of him, which the other disciples got by assembling together: and for want thereof Thomas is left under many doubts and fears.
Verily, we know not what we lose, when we absent ourselves from the assembly of God’s people. Such views of a crucified raised Jesus may be communicated to others whilst we are absent, as would have confirmed our faith, and established our joy, had we been present.
Observe farther, what a strange declaration Thomas makes of his obstinate unbelief; Except I see the print of the nails, and put my finger into his side, I will not believe.
Where note, how strangely rooted unbelief is in the hearts of holy men, insomuch that they desire that the objects of faith should fall under the view of their senses. Thomas carries his faith at his fingers’ ends; he will believe no more than he can see or feel; whereas faith is the evidence of things not seen.
O! Thomas, how deplorable had been thy case, if Christ had never given thee that proof, which was very unreasonable for thee to expect! But Christ takes compassion on him, and appears to him, and cures his obstinate unbelief, which he might have justly punished, as appears by the following verses.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Joh 20:24-25. But Thomas, called Didymus That is, the twin; was not with them when Jesus came The cause of his absence is not mentioned. Possibly it might be affliction, or some other unavoidable hinderance. Through this, however, he missed the satisfaction and happiness of seeing his Master risen, and of sharing with the disciples in their joy upon that occasion. Here we may observe, those know not what they lose who unnecessarily and carelessly absent themselves from the stated, solemn assemblies of the people of God. The other disciples, therefore, said to him The next time they saw him, and that doubtless with great joy; We have seen the Lord Relating to him, probably, all that had passed at the time, and particularly the satisfaction Christ had given them, by showing them his hands and his side. But he said, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, &c. As if he had said, This is a matter of too great importance for me to believe on any report, even on yours; nay, more is necessary to convince me than merely a transient sight of mine own eyes: for unless I shall have the fullest evidence of my own feeling, as well as sight of him, I will not by any means, or any testimony whatsoever, believe that he is risen. Thus ended the transactions of the day on which our Lord arose from the dead; a day much to be remembered by men throughout all generations, because it brought fully into act the conceptions which had lodged in the breast of Infinite Wisdom from eternity, even those thoughts of love and mercy on which the salvation of the world depended. Christians, therefore, have the highest reason to solemnize this day with gladness each returning week, by ceasing from labour, and giving themselves up to holy meditations, and other exercises of devotion. The redemption of mankind, which they commemorate thereon in its finishing stroke, affords matter for eternal thought, being such a subject as no other, how great soever, can equal; and whose lustre, neither length of time nor frequent reviewing can ever diminish. For, as by often beholding the sun we do not find him less glorious or luminous than before, so this benefit, which we celebrate after so many ages, is as fresh and beautiful as ever, and will continue to be so, flourishing in the memories of all reasonable beings through the endless revolutions of eternity. Macknight.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
III. The Second Appearance to the Disciples (Thomas): Joh 20:24-29.
A last principle of unbelief still remained in the circle of the Twelve. It is extirpated, and the development of faith reaches its limit in all the future witnesses for Christ.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
THOMAS IS CONVINCED
Joh 20:24-29. And Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. Then the other disciples continued to say to him, We have seen the Lord. And he said to them, Unless I may see the print of the nails in His hands, and thrust my finger into the place of the nails, and thrust my hand into His side, I will not believe. Again, after eight days, His disciples were within, and Thomas was with them. Jesus comes, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you! Then He says to Thomas, Bring hither thy finger, and see My hands; and bring thy hand, and thrust it into My side, and be not faithless, but believing. Thomas responded and said to Him, My Lord and my God.
Jesus says to him, Because you hast seest Me, thou hast believed; happy are thou not seeing, and believing. This is the seventh appearing of our Lord after His resurrection, occurring eight days subsequently to His last manifestation on the night following the resurrection. Thomas was peculiar for looking on the dark side, he and Peter being at opposite poles of the battery. He was slow, but sure; moving cautiously, but holding every inch of ground with the tread of a conqueror. Historians contend that he proved the greatest apostle except Paul, most abundant in labor, traveling through Ethiopia, far up in Central Africa, and preaching extensively in Persia, a great country in Asia, and finally took vast and populous India for his field of labor, where God wonderfully blessed his ministry. At last, like his apostolical comrades in their respective fields of labor throughout the whole world, he sealed his faith with his blood, his body being interpenetrated by a cruel iron-bar thrust through him by the Brahmin priests, who saw that their religion was ruined if he continued to preach the Gospel in their country. Never did the world look down on more stalwart faith than that of Thomas after the fires of Pentecost consumed all his doubts.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
20:24 {7} But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
(7) Christ draws out of the unbelief of Thomas a certain and sure testimony of his resurrection.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
4. The transformed faith of Thomas 20:24-29
The last witness to Jesus’ resurrection in John’s Gospel is Thomas, and the record of it has two parts. The first part sets the scene for the second (cf. ch. 21). John is the only evangelist who recorded this post-resurrection appearance. Thomas’ confession is John’s climactic argument for belief in Jesus as the divine Messiah, the Christ.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Thomas’ initial unbelief 20:24-25
John gave his readers the Aramaic and Greek names of this member of the Twelve, now the Eleven: "Thomas" and "Didymus" respectively (cf. Joh 11:16; Joh 14:5). John’s previous pictures of this disciple present him as a loyal and courageous, though somewhat pessimistic, follower of Jesus. His more common identification as a doubter comes only from the present event.
Thomas had no doubts that Jesus had died. This is another evidence that Jesus really did die. However, he refused to believe the other disciples’ report that Jesus was alive without personal physical proof. He insisted on touching Jesus, and specifically His crucifixion wounds, not just seeing Him. No one else in the New Testament made demands like these before believing. [Note: Morris, p. 752.] The Greek text clarifies that the other disciples kept saying (Gr. elegon, imperfect tense) that Jesus was alive. In spite of this repeated verbal testimony by those who knew Him best, Thomas refused to believe (cf. Joh 4:48). He had become so thoroughly convinced that Jesus was dead, as evidenced by his references to Jesus’ wounds, that he could not see how Jesus’ crucifixion could be overcome.