But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.John 20: 24
The Gospels do not
represent an official recording of minutes of incidents. They were mostly
written as after thoughts, when the writers came to realize that the Lord may
not return in their lifetimes and when wrong teachings began to creep in
regarding the teachings of the Lord. Yet, as they are inspired by the
Holy Spirit, they provide great glimpses of the truth. So we have to be
careful when we make inferences using only certain sections of the
Scriptures. We need to consider the entire context, consider the intent the
authors may have wished to convey, consider the human limitations of the
authors, the limitations of language,limitations of translations; and weigh
in the facts by looking through the lenses of the prevailing traditions at
the time. We can only attempt to stitch together a vague image of the entire
truth using these in our study (and pray that we do not fall, as many great
have). Taking any verse out of context, is dangerous as seen in the errors of
the various groups we see around us today, (unfortunately as also seen from
some very respectable quarters recently)
Regarding Thomas's position among the apostles too, we need to study the Scriptures, the responses to the situation from Thomas himself and the others around him; all together. Did Thomas's position fall as a prominent apostle after that first Sunday of Resurrection because he was absent? Did anything he or those around him said or did after this incident even remotely suggest that Thomas was now in a secondary level? Far from it, we see Thomas rising to a new level of respect and awe among the Apostles soon after this incident (as we will look into shortly).
But let us spend a moment to further study this curious absence that is being spoken about so much.
v 19 does not tell us how many of the 'apostles' were present together on the first Sunday of resurrection. It just mentions "the disciples". So who all were present on that first Sunday? Luke 6:13 suggests a larger company as "disciples", and among them twelve as "apostles". So why do we restrict "the disciples" to the 'eleven' (or as some mischievously suggest - 'ten')???
The identity of all the actors involved are not always very clear - yet the big picture is what is important and that should be the take away for us. (In this context, see Luke 24:13 - the walk to Emmaus - "two of them" suggests the ones involved might have been two of the eleven, but v33 shows they were different from the eleven, but possibly very close to them.)
St. Luke 24:9 suggest that the small company of people to
whom the women told the first news of resurrection was more than the
apostles. "eleven, and the rest". Isn't it possible that these others also
stayed on for prayer with the rest and were present when Jesus appeared on
that first Sunday? Also see Luke 24:33
As per the Lord's instruction, Mary Magdalene would have come to the disciples and told them that she had seen the Lord, the same day. Did Mary go away after that or was she present? Were other women present? Luke 24: 9,10 suggest that there were other women too and that they conveyed this news to the "eleven" (so including Thomas). Did they go away after conveying the news or did they stay with them in prayer for the evening and in fear of the Jews?
From Acts 1:22 we know that the criteria for selection of Matthais as an apostle in place of the traitor was that, he was together with the rest and a 'witness' to the Lord's resurrection. This suggests that Matthais was present in several meetings of the apostles with the Risen Lord . So isn't it possible that
Matthais was present on that first Sunday? It was the day when the news about the disappearance of the body of Jesus was fast spreading among the Jews and the chief priests and all of Jerusalem and beyond, and confusion and fear was in the air everywhere. Would it not be natural for all those who had followed Christ to be close together in each other's company?
Now also consider - was Peter present on that first Sunday? We honestly do not know. Not from what the Gospel writer St.John has told us. Were any of the lesser known names like Bartholomew or Philip present? We can only assume they were. Also since it can be assumed as per tradition, that they may have gathered in the (Upper) Room belonging to Mark, was Gospel writer Mark (or his family?) present there? We do not know.
The plain truth is - in 20:24 John brought up the absence of Thomas, not to associate any secondary status to Thomas or to even suggest that the rest of the eleven were present (maybe they were, maybe they were not, John does not worry about making that explicit), but the author's intention probably was to unfold the brilliant image of the interaction of the Lord with Thomas as seen in the later verses where Thomas's amazing character is further revealed. Sadly, as many other Scriptural passages, this verse has also been hijacked by those with vested interests to suit their own agenda. But truth does not stay hidden beneath propoganda for ever.
So as we see, the Gospel writer does not specify who were present on that first Sunday. He did not have any doubt about any of the apostles being "less" or "more" ordained that Sunday. As I suggested earlier(*), the entire company of apostles were blessed, given gifts, together. Even if more than the eleven were present on that Sunday, or even if any of the eleven were absent - the tradition
of the Early Church reveals their status as the apostles and the first Fathers of the Church (with all the requisite gifts needed - like ordination, authority to forgive, baptize, teach etc), and that witness of the Holy Tradition is a great witness indeed. This status of the eleven is amply displayed in Acts 1:20
by Peter just before choosing Matthais (only Judas Iscariot's seat needed replacement, not Thomas's or anyone else's). Also as seen later Paul was a blessed Apostle with the same status as the twelve, and he came into the scene much much later.
Thus while we know Thomas was absent on that first Sunday of Resurrection, we do not really know who were present on that day. Nevertheless, it does not really matter. Praise the Lord.
Character of Thomas : Authority doubted
(*) Read the earlier parts for a context to these.
Source : ICON
Regarding Thomas's position among the apostles too, we need to study the Scriptures, the responses to the situation from Thomas himself and the others around him; all together. Did Thomas's position fall as a prominent apostle after that first Sunday of Resurrection because he was absent? Did anything he or those around him said or did after this incident even remotely suggest that Thomas was now in a secondary level? Far from it, we see Thomas rising to a new level of respect and awe among the Apostles soon after this incident (as we will look into shortly).
But let us spend a moment to further study this curious absence that is being spoken about so much.
v 19 does not tell us how many of the 'apostles' were present together on the first Sunday of resurrection. It just mentions "the disciples". So who all were present on that first Sunday? Luke 6:13 suggests a larger company as "disciples", and among them twelve as "apostles". So why do we restrict "the disciples" to the 'eleven' (or as some mischievously suggest - 'ten')???
The identity of all the actors involved are not always very clear - yet the big picture is what is important and that should be the take away for us. (In this context, see Luke 24:13 - the walk to Emmaus - "two of them" suggests the ones involved might have been two of the eleven, but v33 shows they were different from the eleven, but possibly very close to them.)
As per the Lord's instruction, Mary Magdalene would have come to the disciples and told them that she had seen the Lord, the same day. Did Mary go away after that or was she present? Were other women present? Luke 24: 9,10 suggest that there were other women too and that they conveyed this news to the "eleven" (so including Thomas). Did they go away after conveying the news or did they stay with them in prayer for the evening and in fear of the Jews?
From Acts 1:22 we know that the criteria for selection of Matthais as an apostle in place of the traitor was that, he was together with the rest and a 'witness' to the Lord's resurrection. This suggests that Matthais was present in several meetings of the apostles with the Risen Lord . So isn't it possible that
Matthais was present on that first Sunday? It was the day when the news about the disappearance of the body of Jesus was fast spreading among the Jews and the chief priests and all of Jerusalem and beyond, and confusion and fear was in the air everywhere. Would it not be natural for all those who had followed Christ to be close together in each other's company?
Now also consider - was Peter present on that first Sunday? We honestly do not know. Not from what the Gospel writer St.John has told us. Were any of the lesser known names like Bartholomew or Philip present? We can only assume they were. Also since it can be assumed as per tradition, that they may have gathered in the (Upper) Room belonging to Mark, was Gospel writer Mark (or his family?) present there? We do not know.
The plain truth is - in 20:24 John brought up the absence of Thomas, not to associate any secondary status to Thomas or to even suggest that the rest of the eleven were present (maybe they were, maybe they were not, John does not worry about making that explicit), but the author's intention probably was to unfold the brilliant image of the interaction of the Lord with Thomas as seen in the later verses where Thomas's amazing character is further revealed. Sadly, as many other Scriptural passages, this verse has also been hijacked by those with vested interests to suit their own agenda. But truth does not stay hidden beneath propoganda for ever.
So as we see, the Gospel writer does not specify who were present on that first Sunday. He did not have any doubt about any of the apostles being "less" or "more" ordained that Sunday. As I suggested earlier(*), the entire company of apostles were blessed, given gifts, together. Even if more than the eleven were present on that Sunday, or even if any of the eleven were absent - the tradition
of the Early Church reveals their status as the apostles and the first Fathers of the Church (with all the requisite gifts needed - like ordination, authority to forgive, baptize, teach etc), and that witness of the Holy Tradition is a great witness indeed. This status of the eleven is amply displayed in Acts 1:20
by Peter just before choosing Matthais (only Judas Iscariot's seat needed replacement, not Thomas's or anyone else's). Also as seen later Paul was a blessed Apostle with the same status as the twelve, and he came into the scene much much later.
Thus while we know Thomas was absent on that first Sunday of Resurrection, we do not really know who were present on that day. Nevertheless, it does not really matter. Praise the Lord.
Character of Thomas : Authority doubted
(*) Read the earlier parts for a context to these.
Source : ICON
No comments:
Post a Comment