Did you know that John's gospel is the only gospel in the New Testament where the disciple Thomas is an actual character who speaks and interacts with Jesus? Matthew, Mark, and Luke all mention Thomas in their list of disciples, but he's never given a role like Peter, John, James, or Judas. The other three gospels treat Thomas much like the disciples Thaddeus or Bartholomew--he's mentioned but he's never developed as a character.
This should pique our curiosity a bit. Why does John's gospel draw our attention to the disciple Thomas when the other three gospels do not? Did the author of John's gospel know more about Thomas than the authors of Matthew, Mark, and Luke? Is John's gospel trying to tell us something about Thomas? It's not quite the Da Vinci Code, but it's worth taking a closer look.
We encounter Thomas several times in John's gospel before we get to the point where the risen Jesus appears to him. Our first encounter occurs when Jesus leaves Jerusalem after people threaten to kill him for saying, "I and the Father are one." Jesus quickly decides to return to Judea after receiving news that his friend Lazarus has died.
The disciples object: "They just tried to stone you to death and now you're going back?"
Jesus reassures them they neither he nor they will be stoned to death. When he sets out Thomas plays the role of the pessimist and grumbles: "Let's go so we can all die with him."
As it turns out neither Jesus nor his disciples are killed and Jesus performs his greatest miracle by raising Lazarus from the dead.
Our next encounter with Thomas occurs before Jesus dies. Jesus comforts his disciples with the words: "Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so would I have told I am going there to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me, that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going."
Thomas replies: "Lord, we do not know where you are going, so how can we know the way?"
Jesus answers Thomas: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him." We'll have more to say about this in a bit.
After these two somewhat critical portrayals of Thomas, we encounter him again when the risen Jesus appears to him. The interaction between Thomas and the risen Jesus is a defining moment in John's gospel. It's high drama and the author provides us with a few tantalizing details to heighten it.
The risen Jesus appears to the disciples in the locked room and shows them the wounds on his hands and side. The disciples are overjoyed to see Jesus in the flesh. Jesus offers them peace and then commissions them--he sends them into the world as God had sent him. He breathes on them and gives them the Holy Spirit. But Thomas (called Didymus), one of the twelve, is not with the disciples when the risen Jesus appeared.
Tantalizing little details.
Thomas. One of the twelve. Why does the author of John's gospel call Thomas "one of the twelve?" We already know Thomas is a disciple. Why do we need that little detail?
Throughout all four Gospels only one other disciple is ever identified as "one of the twelve." Guess which one. Judas Iscariot. Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, is the only disciple ever referred to as "one of the twelve." And now Thomas. At the very least this raises the question: Is the author of John's gospel attempting to link Judas and Thomas in some way?
Let's press this a bit further. The author of John's gospel wants to make sure we know the name Thomas is a nickname. Thomas was not the disciple's real name. Thomas is the Aramaic word for twin. Didymus is the Greek word for twin. The disciple's nickname was The Twin. What was The Twin's real name? Judas. Judas Thomas. Judas Didymus. Judas the Twin.
So what do we have here? According to John's gospel two disciples are not present when the risen Jesus appears before the assembled body of disciples. Two disciples are not commissioned by Jesus--are not sent into the world as God sent Jesus into the world. Two disciples do not receive the Holy Spirit from Jesus. Those two disciples are Judas the Betrayer and Judas the Denier.
Here's another interesting tidbit of information. In all three of the other gospels fear, doubt, and denial are prominent themes in the resurrection stories. In Mark's gospel the women flee from the tomb trembling and speechless. The disciples refuse to believe the women and Jesus reproaches them for their doubt. In Matthew's gospel the women are told to stop being afraid of the risen Jesus and some of the disciples express doubt when they hear the news. In Luke's gospel the women fall to the ground in fear when they see the angels and once again the disciples do not believe them.
In John's gospel no one is afraid, no one doubts, and no one denies. Except for Thomas. In John's gospel the beloved disciple believes Jesus is raised from the dead even before he sees Jesus. Mary calls the risen Jesus raboni and wants to give him a big hug. In other words, the author of John's gospel transfers all of the fear, doubt, and denial expressed by all of the women and disciples in the other three gospels onto one lone individual: Thomas.
This brings us back to our original question--why? Why is Thomas singled out here? Why does the author of John's gospel portray Thomas in such a critical light when the other gospels barely mention him? Why does the author of John's gospel deny Thomas the gift of the Holy Spirit? Why does the author of John's gospel deny Thomas Jesus Christ's commission to go into the world as a Christian apostle to spread the good news? It's as if the author of John's gospel is out to get Thomas.
Let's start by asking: What else do we know about Thomas that may shed some light on the way John's gospel portrays him?
According to church tradition the disciple Thomas did become a rather successful Christian apostle after Jesus was raised from the dead. He went east and became the spiritual leader of Christian communities in Syria and India. He preached a rather distinct message about Jesus Christ and what it meant to be a Christian. The communities associated with Thomas produced and disseminated a whole body of literature: The Gospel According to Thomas, The Book of Thomas, and The Acts of Thomas. These writings communicated Thomas' understanding of Jesus, and a particular theological and spiritual orientation. To this day there are Christians in the east that call themselves Thomas Christians.
Besides the Christian communities associated with Thomas, there were other Christian communities associated with other well-known figures. Pauline Christian communities identified with the teachings of Paul. Johannine Christian communities identified with the teachings of John. Each had their own body of literature: Paul's Letters, the Gospel According to John, John's Letters. Each had their own interpretation of Jesus and their own theological orientation.
Historians of Christianity now know there were serious theological disputes between some of these communities. Apparently there was a rather serious theological dispute between John's community and Thomas' community. One of the sticking points centered on the way each community understood Jesus' resurrection. John's community insisted that Jesus was raised in the flesh. Thomas' community believed Jesus' soul or spiritual body was raised but not his flesh. This turned into a rather bitter fight. Some scholars now believe that John's portrayal of Thomas stems from this theological dispute between these two early Christian communities.
It's important to know that Thomas' community did not doubt that Jesus had risen. They simply did not believe Jesus rose in the flesh. Their belief was more in line with popular beliefs at that time in the Greco-Roman world. Many people at that time made a sharp distinction between the soul and the body. Many viewed the soul as the real person. The soul was a person's true identity and essence. The flesh was a perishable covering over the more substantial soul. The flesh was a hindrance the soul happily discarded at death. It was rather widely believed that souls continued to live after the body perished, and that souls could return and communicate with the living. Some believed souls could eat and drink with the living, and that souls bore the marks of whatever killed the body. For Thomas' community, "Christ is risen" meant the living soul of Jesus had returned to be with his followers.
Not so for the members of John's community. They insisted the actual flesh of Jesus' body was resurrected from the dead. They claimed that believing otherwise was flat-out wrong.
There were other issues that divided these two communities. John's community insisted that believing in Jesus was the one and only way to a relationship with God. Believing in Jesus is the core message of John's gospel. The only path to God is through belief in Jesus.
Thomas' community held a different view. They taught that one should seek to discover within oneself the spirit that animated Jesus Christ. Once a person discovered the spiritual light within oneself one could become like Jesus Christ. More radically, and befitting the name of the community, one could become Jesus Christ's twin.
This was anathema to John's community. So in John's gospel, Jesus addresses these words to Thomas: "no one comes to the Father except through me."
According to John's community, Thomas was a false teacher bearing false witness about Jesus Christ. So in John's Gospel, Thomas is de-legitimized as an apostle. Jesus does not send Thomas into the world to teach. Thomas does not receive the Holy Spirit.
Finally, in a very clever move, John's gospel has Thomas encounter the risen Jesus in the flesh and acknowledge Jesus as God. In other words, the author of John's gospel has Thomas--the leader of the opposing community--affirm the teaching of John's community. Very clever.
We know now that the life of the early Christian church was filled with theological disputes like this one. In this case, the views held by John's community eventually won the day. Jesus risen in the flesh became orthodox Christian teaching. The writings of John's community made it into the New Testament. The writings of Thomas' community were considered heretical. They didn't make the cut.
But today, some people are asking the question: Were the writings of Thomas' community really heretical? Were they the false teaching of a false witness? Were they un-Christian?
Today a number of people are taking a newfound interest in not only the writings of Thomas' community but in a number of other writings that originated in the era of the early Christian church. There's a real interest in the theological disputes that occurred at that time, and how some beliefs and writings were eventually accepted while others were rejected.
Some people are asking whether Christians today should continue to reject everything the early church rejected. Is it possible that Christians today may find something of theological or spiritual value in some of the early Christian writings that the church rejected long ago in the heat of a bitter argument?
It's a good question. It's one we'll take up in our next adult education series.
We recently tackled Nikos Kazantzakis and the whole issue of God's incarnation. Next, we'll start with Elaine Pagels' book, Beyond Belief, and perhaps a few other sample writings, and we'll take a closer look at this dispute between John and Thomas. We'll ask ourselves: Does Thomas have anything of theological or spiritual value to offer us today? Can Thomas contribute something positive to our relationship with Jesus Christ?
