It has seemed to me that the story of "doubting" Thomas is not about doubt in general, but about a specific kind of doubt in particular. Of course one can take from the story some general principles and ideas, and use it as a jumping off point for a discussion about the nature and place of a general kind of doubt. But I rather suspect that the doubt of Thomas is not exactly the same kind of doubt one might encounter everyday.
Thomas was, of course, a Jew. And as a Jewish disciple, I suspect that his doubts did not revolve around general questions of the existence of God. Thomas was not an early 20th century existentialist philosopher, nor a 1st century Dawkins. It was not a question of the existence of God - Yahweh - around which Thomas' doubts hovered. It was a much more specific kind of question. Thomas does not ask "Is there a God?". Rather, what he really asks is "Who is Jesus?".
Thomas' declaration is a result of this encounter, not the prelude to it. It is only after he has an encounter with the Risen Christ that he declares "my Lord and my God". And it is here in these two small words that we most often run into trouble. The Risen Christ is both Lord (the One to whom we owe allegiance, the One we are called to follow and obey) and God (the One whom we worship).
I find it fascinating that Jesus offers Thomas the sort of "proof" which he wanted. "Unless I put my hands in the nail holes, and my hand in his side, I will not believe". This strikes me as a very different sort of "proof" than we are accustomed to. Yet I am not certain from reading the text that Thomas takes advantage of that "proof". Perhaps an encounter with the Risen Christ changes Thomas' need for such proof. Thomas seeks neither an argument or apologetic for the existence of God; he seeks an encounter with the Person of the Risen Christ. And so, I gather, do we.
My own take on Thomas is that it wasn't so much doubt as fear. Like the rest, he was afraid. But unlike the rest, he had not experienced the Easter Day resurrection appearance. Perhaps he wasn't even there to here the testimony of Mary - the apostle to the apostles - when she first came to tell them that she had seen the Lord.
I think and have always thought that Thomas held within himself the kernel of belief. He wanted to believe. But he was afraid to believe - afraid of the disappointment if it turned out not to be so.
In the world, seeing is believing. But in the gospel accounts of the first resurrection appearances, it's the other way around. Mary doesn't recognize Jesus - until the penny drops. The two men on the road to Emmaus don't recognize him until he practically draws them a flowchart - oh, and breaks some bread.
Thomas, with false bravado, proclaims that he will not believe unless he sees - and touches. But when the proof is proffered, he ignores it. "My Lord and my God" is perhaps less about faith overcoming doubt than about hope overcoming fear.
Posted by: Malcolm+ | April 02, 2008 at 02:47 PM
Thanks Joe. In the place where I am right now, ressurection and its promise is a big thing. Hope is a big thing.
I particularly appreciated this.
Posted by: Cheryl | April 02, 2008 at 04:26 PM
Malcolm - I think it interesting that Thomas earlier enthusiasm ("let us also go there and die with him") is perhaps forgotten in our reading of the dynamics of this story. I also toy with the idea that Thomas (like the rest of us) experienced a variety of thoughts and feelings. It would seem to me that doubt and fear (and confusion and disillusionment) may all be interwoven, just as on the 'positive' side love, joy, hope etc all seem to be connected.
Cheryl - I am glad there is some measure of encouragement to you & yours.
In my prayers.
Posted by: joseph | April 04, 2008 at 08:37 AM