|
The Appearance of
the Risen Christ to his Disciples
John is the only Evangelist who has preserved the story in which Thomas
is depicted as moving from unbelief to belief after his encounter with
the risen Lord (Jn. 20:24-29).[1] The episode took place one week after
Jesus had appeared to the disciples in the absence of Thomas (Jn.
20:19-23). In the above mentioned appearance of Jesus to his disciples,
he showed them his hands and his side, and the disciples were glad when
they saw the Lord (Jn. 20:20).[2] What we have here, despite the brevity
of the description, is the emphasis on the visible aspect of the
appearance, even to the very specific mentioning of the hands and of the
side. The two main verbs at the center of the narrative are verbs of
optical impression, of seeing: Jesus showed. The disciples saw. In the
scene that immediately follows, namely John 20:24-26, the disciples tell
Thomas, ”We have seen the Lord”(Jn. 20:25).[3] Here again a basic verb
of seeing (eorakamen) is employed by the Evangelist as an expression of
the experience of the disciples’ encounter with Christ and of their
faith in him.
Thomas’ response to the information and witness offered by the other
disciples, includes in an emphatic way the very same verb of sight:
“Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, I will not
believe”(Jn. 20:25). Thomas without explicitly dismissing out of hand
the other disciples’ confession,[4] refuses, nonetheless, to believe
that Jesus is risen, unless he sees him with his own eyes.[5] The
condition imposed by Thomas is clear and absolute: personal verification
by sight, direct access by eye contact and nothing less.[6] Thomas even
intensifies his terms by adding the need not only to see but also to
touch Jesus at the very marks of his crucifixion: “Unless I see in his
hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the
nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe”(Jn. 20:25)[7]
Thus, Thomas makes his own individual test, his personal direct seeing
of the visible marks of the crucifixion and even the touching of these
marks, the absolute condition and the non-negotiable term for believing.
Any other evidence is inadmissible. The disciples’ affirmation that they
have seen the Lord is treated with utter skepticism that borders on
rejection. An unyielding attitude is described here, a situation where
believing seems to be unthinkable without seeing, without direct
physical evidence and verification.[8] Having thus prepared the
ground, John continues now with the description of the main part of the
Thomas episode.
The Appearance of the Risen Christ to Thomas
The event occurred eight days after the appearance of Jesus to the other
disciples. As they were gathered in the house, behind closed doors, the
risen Christ came and stood among them (Jn. 20:27). This time Thomas was
with them. Jesus, after greeting them with the traditional, “Peace be
with you,” without any delay turns to Thomas and addresses him: “Put
your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand and place it
in my side, and do not be unbelieving but believing” (kai me ginou
apistos alla pistos)[9] (Jn. 20:27). Obviously, Jesus accepts the
challenge, if not the provocation, of Thomas and invites him to proceed
with the demanded test. The unbelieving disciple already sees Christ,
but he is now asked to complete the test by adding the touching of the
hands and
of the side.
He does not, however, complete the test.[10] With a giant step he moves
from the state of unbelieving to the state of believing. Suddenly he is
convinced that the one whom he sees, is the risen Lord, the very same
Jesus whom he knew, after having been with him for three years.
Unhesitatingly, without any other words, explanations or apologies, he
responds with an astonishing confession of faith: “Thomas answered him,
‘My Lord and my God’” (o Kyrios mou kai o Theos mou) (Jn. 20:28). This
declaration of faith is unique. No other disciple in the Gospel
narratives has used such an advanced creedal formula for expressing his
faith in Christ who is now called Lord and God.
It has been pointed out that Thomas’ confession of faith assigns to
Jesus the attributes of Lord and God used in the Old Testament for
Yahweh, for the one and only God. Thus now Jesus is addressed in the way
Yahweh has been addressed by Israel.[11] The change is radical. It is
interesting to note that Thomas, the skeptical, unbelieving and tough
disciple, utters at the very end of the Gospel of John a superb
declaration of faith which reflects in a variation the majestic opening
lines of the same Gospel: “In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos
was with God, and the Logos was God” (Jn. 1:1).[12] This Logos became
flesh and dwelt among us (Jn. 1:14), was crucified and risen, and now in
John 20:28 is acknowledged Lord and God. With the confession of Thomas
we have a supreme christological pronouncement, a tremendously advanced
expression of faith which, despite its utter brevity, constitutes the
ultimate statement in high Christology.[13]
Thomas’ exclamatory statement is followed by a very important response
from Jesus. Upon hearing his believing words, Christ addresses him with
a remark and a beatitude: Thomas, “Because you have seen me, you have
believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and (yet) have
believed”(Jn. 20:29). The first part of the statement, taken either as a
question or as a recognition of a fact,[14] speaks of believing in the
risen Lord as a result of seeing him. There is no doubt that Jesus
clearly speaks here of an undeniable phenomenon of faith, a faith which
is the consequence of a visual, a sight experience. As several
exegetes[15] have pointed out, there is no need to discern in this
instance an implied diminished value of such a way of arriving at the
state of believing.
The second part of Jesus’ statement is a beatitude which presents a
different type of faith, namely a faith not depending on visual
experiences: “Blessed are those who have not seen and (yet) have
believed” (Makarioi oi me idontes kai pisteusantes).[16] Who are the
recipients of such a blessing? Probably a number of the larger circle of
the disciples who have not seen the risen Lord with their own eyes but
relied on the eyewitness of the other disciples. But most certainly,
they are the Christians living around the end of the first century AD
for whom John the Evangelist writes his Gospel. The majority of these
people were born years after the resurrection and the ascension of
Christ, therefore they could not have seen him. They are proclaimed
blessed because they have arrived at the state of believing in the risen
Lord without the assistance or proof of immediate, direct and personal
ocular experience.
Having run quickly through the pericope John 20:24-29, we can now
proceed with the discussion of the most important points related to the
question of seeing and believing which constitutes the essence of
Thomas’ episode.
Seeing as a Cause for Believing
There is no doubt that seeing the risen Christ as a basic way of
believing in him, is not rejected or downgraded in the whole chapter 20
of John and more specifically in John 20:24-29. Not only is it not
rejected, it is, on the contrary, presupposed and considered
indispensable as a way leading to faith.[17]
In John 20:1-10, for instance, in the case of Peter and John, the two
disciples enter the empty tomb of Jesus and see his burial cloths and
his face napkin neatly folded. This sight then becomes instrumental in
generating faith as it is reported by the Evangelist: “Then the other
disciple (i.e. John) who reached the tomb first, also went in, and he
saw and believed” (kai eiden kai episteusen) (Jn. 20:8). Here the
connection between seeing and believing is not only direct but also
etiologic. In this case believing is based on seeing or, to put it
differently, seeing becomes a cause for believing.
There is an intriguing note attached by the Evangelist to the
description of the above mentioned episode: For as yet they (i.e. John
and Peter) did not know the Scripture that he (i.e. Jesus) must rise
from the dead (Jn. 20:9). The note possibly suggests that the disciples,
because of their ignorance or lack of understanding of the Scriptures,
did not actually expect the resurrection of Jesus. Under the
circumstances, they obviously needed strong, unambiguous evidence in
order to understand what really happened, namely, in order to believe
that Jesus was truly risen. They needed visible, sense verifiable
data.[18] Seeing then the risen Jesus appeared to be indispensable as a
way leading to believing in him.
In the incident with Mary Magdalene (Jn. 20:11-18), seeing seems not to
be an adequate condition: Mary in the garden next to the burial place of
Jesus, turned round and saw Jesus standing, but she did not know that it
was Jesus (Jn. 20:14).[19] Only when Christ called her by her name she
recognized him (Jn. 20:16). Hearing, not simply the voice, which
happened before (Jn. 20:15), but the special tone in pronouncing her
name, was necessary in this case, which may be a subtle hint that seeing
and even hearing, as such, cannot be sufficient all the time. At the
very end of the pericope, however, when Mary Magdalene comes to the
disciples, she announces (or proclaims, apaggelousa), “I have seen the
Lord” (eoraka ton Kyrion) (Jn. 20:18). The verb to see is the core of
the announcement, and this verb is indicative of a visual experience.
It is also characteristic, as we explained before, that in the episode
of the appearance of the risen Lord to the disciples inside the house (Jn.
20:19-23), the factor of seeing is prominent. After greeting them, Jesus
showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when
they saw the Lord (idontes ton Kyrion) (Jn. 20:20). Afterwards, when the
disciples met Thomas who was not present[20] when the risen Jesus came,
they told him, “We have seen the Lord” (eorakamen ton Kyrion) (Jn.
20:25). The verbs to show and to see, that is verbs related to direct
optical contact and visual experience, are key words and concepts in the
new condition of post-resurrection faith engendered in the hearts of the
disciples.
Thus, when we come to the Thomas event described in John 20:24-29, we
are already aware of the decisive significance of seeing related to
believing.[21] The risen Lord does not discard the seemingly
inappropriate request of Thomas. He appears when Thomas is present among
the disciples, and directly invites him to put his finger into the
prints of the nails and of the spear and to see his hands (ide tas
cheiras mou) (Jn. 20:27).[22] Seeing is again absolutely important here,
and this time is directly proposed by Jesus as a means proving the
veracity of his resurrection and as a way of passing from unbelieving to
believing.
All the episodes with the risen Lord in John 20, the episode with Thomas
included, project in a crystal clear manner the notion that the
post-resurrection experiences with Christ were real, visible, and
accessible through the bodily senses. Not only Thomas, but the other
disciples as well, have believed because they have seen the risen Jesus.
This is a fundamental truth which makes the resurrection a firm reality,
established on pragmatic and verifiable data, on plenty of eyewitnesses
who were people difficult and slow of heart to believe (Lk. 24:25). A
few decades before John, Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, had already presented
in a masterful way the same idea, i.e. the veracity and facticity of
Christ’s bodily resurrection based on a large number of eyewitnesses.
There, Paul repetitively uses for the risen Lord the verb (he was seen),
namely the basic verb for seeing. The important thing is that Paul in 1
Corinthians 15, considers the visual direct evidence an indispensable
component of the Gospel, an essential article of the real Christian
faith. At the same time, the insistence on the visual experience as an
undeniable evidence for the veracity and facticity of the resurrection,
emphasizes the fact that the risen Lord is not a bodiless spirit but a
complete human being. Perhaps this is the reason why John proceeds in
chapter 21 of his Gospel with the narration of the lengthy story of the
meeting between the risen Christ and his disciples by the Sea of
Tiberias (Jn. 21:1-22), a meeting involving talking, fishing, eating and
walking. Here at the very end of his Gospel, John is eager to maintain
what he has declared at its very beginning: The Logos became flesh and
dwelt among us, full of grace and truth (Jn. 1:14). Christ being a full
and whole human being, being in the flesh even after his resurrection,
is for John a fundamental christological truth.[23] This truth reveals
the necessity for visual contact, optical evidence, direct seeing. Thus
the inseparable connection between seeing and believing proclaims the
reality of Jesus’ resurrection and, at the same time, his true, full,
undeniable humanity.
An echo of the idea of seeing and being in sense-contact with Christ as
a firm basis for truly believing in him, we encounter in the inspiring
opening lines of the First Epistle of John:
“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have
seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands
concerning the word of life the life was made manifest and we saw it,
and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with
the Father and was made manifest to us - that which we have seen and
heard we proclaim also to
you ...”(1 Jn. 1:1-3).
In just three lines we encounter six verbs of seeing (eorakamen,
etheasametha, efanerothe, eorakamen) and another three verbs of sense
contact (akekoamen, epselafesan, akekoamen ).
Of course, the above cited passage from 1 John refers basically to the
reality of Christ’s incarnation and does not mention the risen Lord.
Nonetheless, the significant aspect here is the tremendous emphasis on
sense experience and direct eye witness as a basis for the proclamation
of faith.
A few years after the writing of the Gospel of John, Ignatios of Antioch
in his Epistle to the Smyrnaeans (3:1-3), returned to the idea expressed
in chapters 20 and 21 of the Gospel of John with an overt reference to
the resurrection:
“For I know and I believe that he (i.e. Jesus) was in the flesh even
after his resurrection. And when he came to those about Peter, he said
to them: ‘Take, handle me and see that I am not a bodiless demon.’ And
immediately they touched him and believed ... And after the resurrection
he ate and drank with them as a being of flesh, although spiritually
united with the Father.”
Ignatios’ reason for his statement is his anti-docetic polemic as it
becomes obvious from Smyrnaeans 2.[24] Nonetheless, the passage is
indicative of the paramount importance of understanding the resurrection
of Christ as an event verifiable through sight, hearing or touching.
Sense perception and direct optical access were decisive factors for
believing in the risen Lord. At the same time, this type of believing
after seeing the risen Christ, became a solid basis and unbeatable
evidence for projecting the truth and the facticity of his resurrection.
Believing without Having Seen the Lord
Seeing as leading to believing is central in John 20:24-29 within the
larger unit of John 20-21, and is accompanied by joy, an indispensable
component of blessedness. But then we also have the crystal clear
declaration/ beatitude, “Blessed are those who have not seen and (yet)
have believed.” This beatitude introduces in a drastic manner the great
importance of believing in the risen Jesus without having seen him.[25]
In fact this declaration places the believers involved in this case in a
special position and makes them "blessed" (makarioi), worthy of a
special beatitude.[26] But what are the reasons for the inclusion of
such a declaration in the pericope John 20:24-29 and what is its
meaning? a) The Gospel of John, as it is generally assumed, has been
written during the last decade of the first century AD. By that time, as
we already pointed out, more than fifty years had elapsed since the
events described in the Gospel, and as a consequence, very few of the
original eyewitnesses of Jesus’ resurrection were still alive. The big
majority, if not all, of John’s readers were born after the time of the
resurrection. Technically speaking, therefore, these people were
excluded from the possibility of seeing the risen Lord. They had to rely
on the testimony of the preceding generation, of the apostolic witnesses
who have seen the risen Jesus. Personal eye witnessing for the readers
of John’s Gospel was simply impossible, and was replaced by the very
alive apostolic tradition preserved in the Church and by the Church.
Paul has saved for posterity a magnificent text in which we see exactly
the description of the phenomenon we are talking about. It comes from
chapter 15 of 1 Corinthians, which we already have quoted:
“Now I would remind you, brethren, in what terms I preached to you the
gospel, which you received, in which you stand, by which you are saved,
if you hold fast - unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you
as of first importance what I also received (paredoka hymin en protois,
o kai parelabon), that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the
Scriptures and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he
appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time then he appeared
to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all he appeared also to me”
(1 Cor. 15:1-8).
What we see here is the fact that the long list of the original
eyewitnesses of Christ’s resurrection has become an indispensable and an
inseparable part of the basic tradition of the Gospel and of the
essential proclamation of the Christian faith.[27] Paul the Apostle
himself has received this tradition and transmitted it to the new
believers, who have to accept the resurrection as a fact on the basis of
the apostolic eyewitness and tradition, and not on their own eye
witnessing. And if this is so for Paul, it is even more so for John, who
writes
almost forty years later to an even younger generation.
The people then of the time of John’s Gospel, if they decide to join the
Church and believe in Christ as Lord and God, have to rely on and fully
accept the apostolic eyewitness and tradition about him. They have to
follow a way very different from the way of Thomas as presented in John
20:24-29. Thomas, because he saw the risen Jesus, believed. The
Christians of the time of John’s Gospel, and of the years and centuries
to follow, are those who have not seen and (yet) believed (Jn. 20:29).
The Evangelist has included the Thomas incident, with its concluding
beatitude, in his Gospel, obviously in order to encourage all those
people of the present and of the future who had to believe in the Lord
without seeing him.[28] And what would be more encouraging than a
beatitude coming from the mouth of the risen Lord?
The beatitude[29] encountered in John 20:29, however, is not there just
for reasons of encouragement. It certainly has a much deeper meaning.
What is this meaning? Why are the believers involved in this case called
blessed (makarioi)? The answer seems to be twofold.
First, moving from the state of unbelieving to the state of believing,
not through seeing but through relying on the apostolic eyewitness,
seems to imply an increased amount of faith.[30] Seeing produces a
degree of compulsion,[31] somehow diminishes the risk and makes
believing easier. Not seeing yet believing, on the other hand, involves
more willingness, more decisiveness, more readiness for exposure to all
kinds of probable dangers. In this case, believing seems to acquire a
high quality indeed,[32] and to engage more profoundly the whole human
being. The people of this category are called blessed, because they have
reached an enhanced spiritual level, simply by following a very
demanding path on their way towards faith.
Secondly, the beatitude in this case might be understood with the
assistance of another passage from the Gospel of John, namely, John
1:50.[33] This passage reads:
"Jesus answered and said to him (i.e. to Nathanael), 'Because I said to
you, I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You shall see greater
things than these.'"
This text, in terms of formation and syntax, presents strong
similarities to the passage John 20:29: (Thomas) “because you have seen
me, you believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and (yet)
believe.” Both passages have a first part dealing with believing after
sense related evidence. The second part of John 20:29 is a beatitude,
and the second part of John 1:50 is a promise of astonishing things to
come.[34] An aspect then, of the blessedness of the believers in John
20:29 could be the experience of the greater things promised in 1:50.
These greater things were fully manifested in the post-resurrection
time, more specifically in the time after Pentecost, when the Holy
Spirit came to the Church and endowed her and the believers with
extraordinary gifts and amazing experiences.[35] The Christians who at
the time of John’s Gospel have believed without, of course, having seen
the risen Christ, were truly blessed, because through their faith, they
enjoyed in full all the promised experiences of greater things.
c) There might be another significant reason which explains why John
mentioned the Thomas incident and concluded it with the beatitude,
“Blessed are those who have not seen and (yet) believed.” This
additional reason could be the liturgical orientation and content of the
Gospel of John.
Because of its liturgical orientation the Gospel of John offers a very
important presentation of the Eucharist. The magnificent chapter 6,
stands out as a tremendously impressive text on the Eucharist. Just a
few verses of that chapter will help us to see the connection with the
beatitude of John 20:29:
“So Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the
flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he
who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise
him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is
drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and
I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the
Father, so he who eats me will live because of me'" (Jn. 6:53-57).
When John writes the Gospel, he is well aware that he is addressing
Christians, members of the Church, members of an alive liturgical
community, participants in the eucharistic celebration, people who have
experienced a union with Christ through the communion of his blood and
his body. For those people, seeing the Lord the way Thomas did, is no
longer needed. They have believed, and as a result they have been given
a tremendous experience of the presence of Christ. In a sense, such an
experience contains elements of a visual nature, but is much more rich
and multifaceted.[36] The senses are included in the said experience,
and ineffable joy is its predominant characteristic. Communion of the
body and the blood of the risen Christ which occurs after believing, has
become now the amazing alternative to seeing him before believing.
“Blessed are those who have not seen and (yet) believed,” because they
have an immediate, palpable, all-encompassing experience. The new
experience of believing and being united with Christ, which constitutes
the main characteristic of the post-apostolic Christian generations, is
an event of heavenly bliss, of utter and ineffable joy.
This truth has been handsomely formulated in 1 Peter 1:8:
“Without having seen him (i.e. Christ), you love him; though you do not
now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with joy unutterable and
full of glory.”
The passage by the repetition of the verb to see in a negative
grammatical construction (ouk idontes, me orontes) underlines the fact
that there is no seeing involved here. On the other hand, the
predominant feeling in terms of post-believing experience, is real
jubilation, chara aneklaletos, which could certainly be considered a
manifestation of true blessedness. d) John might have one more reason,
not strictly referring to the relation between seeing and believing, for
including the Thomas incident in his Gospel. This reason is perhaps the
person of Thomas himself. Let me briefly explain this assumption.
John is the only Evangelist among the four who speaks about Thomas. He
mentioned him in John 11:16 in conjunction with the resurrection of
Lazaros, and again in John 14:5-6. In both instances Thomas appears as a
person loyal to Jesus and ready to die with him, but, at the same time,
skeptical, stubborn, and realist in a somehow negative way. The same
picture, intensified to be sure, is sketched in John 20:24-29. Thomas is
depicted here as a stubborn realist, as an unbelieving and skeptical
individual who needs crude evidence in order to believe that Jesus is
risen. However, when he believes, he offers a terrific confession of
faith, a really unique, “My Lord and my God.”
John presents this picture of Thomas, having perhaps in mind the place
of Thomas in the Christian communities of Syria and the neighboring
areas.[37] Especially in Syria, as we know at least from the Gospel of
Thomas, Thomas appears as an extremely important person, a confidant of
Jesus, receiving from him advanced esoteric and mystical knowledge which
no other disciple shared. John, with the story in John 20:24-27, might
well be offering a corrective. Certainly Thomas produced an
extraordinary confession of faith. At the same time, however, he showed
a pronounced skepticism and a crude realism which were not at all
compatible with all the esoteric and mystical experiences, sometimes
Gnosticizing, ascribed to him by the so-called Thomas tradition. The
Evangelist in John 20:24-29 shows what the real Thomas was like, and
without diminishing his importance and stature, aptly closes the door to
all sorts of Gnosticizing and esoteric speculations wrongly associated
with him. Thus the Thomas event in John 20:24-29, beyond contributing to
the very significant topic of seeing and believing, seems to be
functioning as a critique to the possible speculation about Thomas,
which was in circulation mainly in Syria but also in the neighboring
areas, a speculation particularly dangerous as it was later shown in the
course of the developing Gnosticism.
Concluding Notes
There is no doubt that John’s central theme in the Thomas incident (Jn.
20:24-29), is the relation between seeing and believing. This theme
seems to run through the two final chapters of the Fourth Gospel (Jn. 20
and 21). It is, however, in the splendid narrative of Christ’s
appearance to Thomas that the question of the relation between seeing
and believing receives its definitive answer.
Believing after seeing the risen Christ was, according to John, the way
of the disciples and apostles who have been with Jesus throughout his
ministry. This truth has been convincingly demonstrated in John 20 (also
in John 21). The Thomas episode eloquently attests to that truth. Thomas
was not denied his request to see the risen Lord in order to believe. In
his case, even touching and handling were added to seeing. And after the
meeting with him and Thomas’ astonishing confession of faith, Jesus
unequivocally states that the previously unbelieving disciple has seen
him and, as a consequence, has now believed. Both in his case and in the
case of the other apostles, seeing was instrumental in leading to the
faith that the crucified and buried Lord has risen indeed.
If John presents in such a masterful manner the various
post-resurrection meetings of Christ with his disciples and especially
with Thomas, he does so in order to establish once and for all Christ’s
resurrection as a fundamental and undeniable fact. The disciples,
including the unbelieving Thomas, saw and believed that Jesus was risen
indeed and that he truly is their Lord and God. Believing after seeing
the risen Christ, however, was a way limited only to the apostolic
generation. John was fully aware of this fact, thus subtly and
powerfully projected another way, namely the way of believing without
previously seeing, and more specifically of believing on the basis of
the testimony of the
apostolic eyewitnesses. For such a way of arriving at the state of faith
in Christ as Lord and God, John has preserved, as we have seen, the
masterpiece of narrative art and sophisticated theology which is the
story of Thomas: A story deeply human and divine, strategically placed
within a superbly articulated context, and culminating in the supreme
dominical proclamation/beatitude, “Blessed are those who have not seen
and (yet) believed.”
The Evangelist did not add anything beyond that. Probably he did not
have to. He knew extremely well that the people who have believed
without having seen the Lord, were already experiencing the blessedness
about which John 20:29 speaks. In a paradoxical reversal of terms, these
people probably were now enjoying a most unexpected state of faith and
existence: the state of seeing after having believed.
Notes:
[1] In fact John is the only Evangelist who in addition to John 20.24-29
has two more episodes with Thomas as the central person (Jn. 11:16 and
14:5-6). This might well be an indication of the significance ascribed
to Thomas by John.
[2] The phrase, The disciples were glad when they saw the Lord (Jn.
20:20), probably is an implicit reference to Jesus’ promise at the Last
Supper, “You have sorrow now, but I will see you again and your heart
will rejoice” (John 16:22).
[3] It should be noted that in John 20.24, Thomas is mentioned as one of
the twelve (eis ek ton dodeka). Rudolf Bultmann (Das Evangelium des
Johannes [Gottingen: Vandenhoeck, 171964] 537), sees here a possible
connection with Q. More significant, however, is the possibility that
the mentioning of the twelve aims at stressing the importance of Thomas
and of his witness that follows in John 20:24-29.
[4] See Stanley Marrow, The Gospel of John (New York: Paulist, 1995)
363. Cf. Chrysostom (Commentary on John, PG 59,473): “It was not so much
(on Thomas’ part) a refusal to believe the other apostles as it was more
a conviction that resurrection from the dead is an impossible thing.”
[5] Nicholaos Damalas (To Kata Ioannen Euaggelion [Athens: Myrtides,
1940] 720), thinks that Thomas’ request has to do with his claim to his
right to be granted a direct sight of the risen Jesus as it happened
with the other disciples. This is an interesting but rather untenable
idea, in view of the context. Raymond Brown (The Gospel according to
John [Garden City: Doubleday, 1970] 1045), correctly notes here that
“Thomas is asking more than was offered to the other disciples.”
[6] Origen in his Commentary on John (Exegetika eis to kata Ioannen)
(Fragments from Catenae, Fragm. 106), notes that Thomas, motivated by a
desire for precision and proof after scrutiny (akribes kai exetasmenon),
is not so much rejecting the evidence of the other apostles as he is
eager to make sure that what they have seen is not a ghost (fantasma) in
the sense of Mark 6:49-50 and Luke 24:37-38. Theophylact of Bulgaria on
the other hand, in his Commentary on John (Ermhneia eis to kata Ioannen
Euaggelion, PG 124,301), has a very different opinion and sees here not
a desire for precision but a crude unbelief.
[7] John Chrysostom in his Commentary on John (Hypomnema eis ton Agion
Ioannen ton Apostolon kai Euaggelisten, PG 59,473), observes that
Thomas’ inquisitive attitude here, goes beyond the limits (peran tou
metrou periergazesthai kai polypragmonein), and this shows a dull mind (pachytate
dianoian). Hence, continues Chrysostom, Thomas would not trust even his
own eyes and would look for evidence through the most crass of the
senses (pachytate aisthesis), namely, touching and handling. Similarly
Theophylact (Commentary on John, PG 124,300), and Euthymios Zigabenos
(Commentary on John, Ermeneia eis to kata Ioannen Euaggelion , PG
129,1488).
[8] For an insightful presentation of Thomas’ attitude see Panagiotis
Trembelas, Hypomnema eis tonkata Ioannen Euaggelion (Athens: Zoe, 1954)
708-709.
[9] As Rudolf Schnackenburg (Das Johannesevangelium, 3. Teil [Freiburg:
Herder, 1976] 391) notes, this is the only instance in his entire Gospel
where the Evangelist uses the two words apistos and pistos. The
uniqueness of the appearance of these two words and their connection
through the antithetical conjunction alla (but), emphasizes the
importance of believing and unbelieving in the Thomas incident.
[10] The Evangelist says nothing about Thomas proceeding with the
touching of the body of the risen Lord. Cf. Brown, Gospel of John, 1046.
Some ancient exegetes, like Origen (Commentary on John, Vol. 13,30) and
Cyril of Alexandria (Commentary on John, Hermeneia e Hypomnema eis
tonkata Ioannen Euaggelion, PG 74,728), thought that Thomas actually put
his hands on the marks of the nails and of the spear, whereas others
like Augustin (In Johannis Evangelium, Tract. CXXI,5), claim that Thomas
did not touch the risen Christ. Cf. Zigabenos, Commentary on John, PG
129,1489. Marrow (The Gospel of John, 363), appropriately notes that
Thomas’ confession of faith “is not a reaction to a conclusive and
successful scientific experiment.”
[11] See more in Brown, The Gospel of John, 1047. Cf. Bultmann, Das
Evangelium des Johannes, 538, Trembelas, Hypomnema eis tonkata
Ioannen,712.
[12] As C. H. Dodd (The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel [Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1963] 430-31) notes, Thomas’ confession
“links up with the opening of the Prologue. Thus the identity of Jesus
with the incarnate Logos is finally affirmed on the testimony of the
disciple who having seen Him after His resurrection became not faithless
but believing.” Cf. Bultmann, Das Evangelium des Johannes, 539.
[13] It should not pass unnoticed that the observation made by Cyril
(Commentary on John, PG 74,733), that Thomas’ confession of faith uses
the definitive article o (the) before the words Lord and God (o Kyrios
mou kai o Theos mou), which gives to the statement a characteristic of
absoluteness. Brown (The Gospel of John, 1047), considers Thomas’
confession “the supreme christological pronouncement of the Fourth
Gospel.” The addition of the personal pronoun my (My Lord and my God)
gives a strong personal tone without detracting anything from the
solemnity of the pronouncement.
[14] Some codices, and in addition Chrysostom, Cyril, Theophylact and
Zigabenos, read the statement as a fact; some other codices read it as a
question. Nestle-Aland (27th edition, 1993) prefer the question
variant. Among modern commentators there is no agreement on the subject.
Cf. Schnackenburg, Das Johannesevangelium, 398, Bultmann, Das Evengelium
des Johannes, 539.
[15] For instance Origen (Commentary on John, Vol. 10,43), Chrysostom
(Commentary on John, PG 59, 473-74), Brown (The Gospel of John, 1050).
On the other hand, Bultmann (Das Evangelium des Johannes, 539), argues
for the opposite by insisting on the “adversative relation” between
v.29a and 29b.
[16] In the English translation of the second part of v.29, I put the
word yet in parenthesis: (yet) they believed. The reason is that there
is no antithetical conjunction in the Greek original, hence even a
translation completely omitting the yet could be legitimate. I retained,
however, the yet in parenthesis, because there is a possibility that the
participle me idontes might be construed as being an antithetical
participle.
[17] Cf. Cyril, Commentary on John, PG 74,756. Cf. also Brown, The
Gospel of John, 1046.
[18] A characteristic text, indicative of the situation of the disciples
is the passage Luke 24:36-43: “As they (i.e. the disciples) were saying
this, Jesus himself stood among them. But they were startled and
frightened, and supposed that they saw a spirit. And he said to them,
‘Why are you troubled, and why do questionings rise in your hearts? See
my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see, for a
spirit has no flesh and bones as you see that I have.’ And while they
still disbelieved for joy, and wondered, he said to them, ‘Have you
anything here to eat?’ They gave him a piece of broiled fish and some
honeycomb. And he took it and ate in their presence.”
[19] Cf. Marrow (The Gospel of John, 359): “To recognize Jesus of
Nazareth as Lord, ocular vision alone is not enough. Divine revelation
is necessary.” An analogous case we encounter in the incident with the
disciples in John 21:4-5, and with the two disciples going to Emmaus (Lk.
24:13-35).
[20] There has been a number of suggestions related to the reasons of
Thomas’ absence from the scene described in John 20:19-23. Cf. Trembelas,
Hypomnema eis tonkata Ioannen, 708. We do not have, however, any data on
the subject.
[21] Attention should be drawn, however, to the fact that seeing as such
and by itself does not automatically lead to believing. John is emphatic
on this subject. In John 6.36, for instance, Jesus says to the Jews,
“But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe.” And in
John 14:8-11, in the episode with Philip, when he asks Jesus to show
them the Father, Christ responds, “I have I been with you so long, and
yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father.
How can you say, ‘Show us the Father?’.”
[22] Schnackenburg (Das Johannesevangelium, 394-95, 396), has pointed
out the interesting similarities between John 20:27 and John 1:47-50
(the episode with Nathanael), especially in terms of Christ’s
supernatural knowledge and its connection to significant christological
confessions. Cf. Trembelas, Hypomnema eis tonkata Ioannen, 711.
[23] Cyril (Commentary on John, PG 74,724 and 732), underlines the fact
that Thomas’ believing after seeing and touching is used by John for
posterity, as unshakable evidence that the risen Jesus had the very
flesh that suffered and died on the Cross.
[24] It should be noted, however, that as Schnackenburg (Das
Johannesevangelium, 391, 393) has argued, anti-docetism is not the main
concern of the Evangelist in the Thomas incident.
[25] Origen in his comments on this passage (Commentary on John, Vol.
10,43), insists that this beatitude should not be interpreted as meaning
that those who believed without having seen are more blessed than those
who believed after having seen the risen Lord. If this were the case,
then the apostles who have seen and believed, would have been less
blessed than the Christians of the succeeding generations, a thing
totally absurd (oper esti panton eliothitaton). Damalas on the other
hand (To kata Ioannen Euaggelion , 723), claims the opposite, namely,
that here a pronounced difference in blessedness is clearly projected.
[26] It is interesting to note that exegetes like Theophylact, were very
careful in applying this beatitude only to the believers who have not
seen the risen Lord. As Theophylact remarks (Commentary on John, PG
124,301), Christ issued the beatitude not in order to exclude Thomas
from it but in order to give comfort to those who have not seen Jesus.
Cf. Zigabenos, Commentary on John, PG 129,1489, Trembelas, Hypomnema eis
tonkata Ioannen, 713. Brown (The Gospel of John, 1049), justifiably
insists that in John 20:29 the contrast is “between two types of
blessedness, not between blessedness (v.29b) and an inferior state
(v.29a).” Cf. Marrow, The Gospel of John, 364.
[27] As C.K. Barrett (The Gospel According to St. John [London: SPCK,
1956] 477) put it, “but for the fact that Thomas and the other Apostles
saw the incarnate Christ there would have been no Christian faith at
all” (Cited by Brown, The Gospel of John, 1050).
[28] The Evangelist here, as Schnackenburg (Das Johannesevangelium, 391)
pointed
out, aims at addressing the question of believing without seeing related
to the believers of the later times who, in contradistinction to the
disciples, have no experience of any appearance of the risen Lord but
who have to share the same faith with them. Marrow (The Gospel of John,
364), notes characteristically that “it is for those who have not seen
and yet believe that the whole Gospel was written.”
[29] It should he underlined again that this is not a simple, somehow
limited beatitude, but a beatitude with a tremendous significance. Dodd
(The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, 443), is right when he says
that “this is the true climax of the Gospel, the rest, however true and
however moving is mere
postscript.”
[30] “This is really faith,” observes Chrysostom at this point
(Commentary on John, PG 59,473-74), “to accept and believe things that
are not visible” (Touto gar esti pisteos to ta me oromena dexasthai).
“For faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things
not seen”(Heb. 11:1).
[31] Cf. Cyril (Commentary on John, PG 74,721): “Sight . . . pulls to
consent, somehow through necessity and force (e thea ex anagkes kai bias
elkousa pros sunainesin).”
[32] Cyril (Commentary on John, PG 74,735-36), characterizes this kind
of believing as pistin axiologotaten , i.e. “a most remarkable faith.”
[33] Marrow (The Gospel of John, 25), offers an insightful note that
connects John 1:50 to John 20:29.
[34] Cf. Chrysostom, Commentary on John, PG 59,129.
[35] As Brown remarks (The Gospel of John, 1048), Jesus here “praises
the majority of the people of the new Covenant who, though they have not
seen him, through the Spirit proclaim him as Lord and God. He assures
these followers of all times and places that he foresees their situation
and counts them as sharing in the joy heralded by his resurrection.”
[36] Cyril (Commentary on John, PG 74,725) in his exegesis of John
20:29, offers an extensive passage, in which he handsomely connects the
participation in the Eucharist with the question of seeing and of not
seeing and believing.
[37] Cf. Schnackenburg, Das Johannesevangelium, 399.
Copyright: 1998, Holy Cross Orthodox Press, Brookline, MA Source: taken
from the book: Agape and Diakonia: Essays in Memory of Bishop Gerasimos
of Abydos
[Return to
Top]
|
