Make a New Normal

Lack of Faith (Easter 2)

a photo of a person touching a glass window. Their reflection makes it look like two people touching fingers.
a photo of a person touching a glass window. Their reflection makes it look like two people touching fingers.
Photo by Nijwam Swargiary on Unsplash

This story has several striking elements. I usually find myself bouncing between them each year, trying to decide which one needs the focus.

Front and center is always Thomas.

His response to the others telling him what he missed makes him a far more sympathetic character in the postmodern world than it ever was in the premodern one. In the Enlightenment, we see the role of skepticism and empiricism as something other than doubt.

In a sense, Thomas is far more heroic to us today than the other “sheep”.

Which further makes the more “traditional” approach of attacking Thomas as doubting sound forced. It isn’t natural to us to believe hearsay and trust our neighbors aren’t blowing smoke. We expect some proof, after all. So when we’re told that this approach makes us into the bad guy, it creates a barrier between us and the text, too.

Fear and The Locked Door

Alongside the heroism of Thomas, there is the cowardly character of the disciples. Rather than proclaim the gospel or do any of the things Jesus commanded them to do, they’ve locked themselves in the upper room.

This is neither a long-term strategy nor an expression of faith and commitment.

I’m not a therapist, however, I can’t imagine being in church on Sunday and thinking anything but: Wow, this is an unhealthy case of avoidance.

In other words, our norms around this story feel backward to me. Thomas gets condemned for wanting something and the disciples aren’t condemned for doing the one thing Jesus tells them not to over and over: don’t be afraid.

More Anti-Semitism.

Of course, the text in John has the excruciating excuse that they are locked in the Upper Room “for fear of the Jews”. Which is at once clarifying and grotesque. As I pointed out on Good Friday, the phrase “the Jews” is anachronistic and untrue, let alone overly simple and bendable into hate speech.

I never defend John’s gospel. What I do, however, is clarify. That it is as anachronistic to apply anti-semitism to John as it is to use John to be anti-semitic. It’s a bit like attributing to John Calvin the beliefs his followers turned into Calvinism. It doesn’t fit. And buries the valuable parts.

I do suspect that the disciples’ fear in this story is a bit of bluster rather than defensiveness. Mostly because the disciples don’t actually look good here. They look like cowards. Especially in light of Mary’s brilliance in the first half of the same chapter.

In short, if there’s anything literal to their fear, it is that the disciples have made it up.

Creepy Jesus

You know how some people hear that Christmas song about Santa:

“He knows when you’ve been sleeping. He knows when you’re awake.”

and think: um…give me some privacy, Santa!

That’s the vibe we enter into with a Jesus who can appear, walking through locked doors. If the disciples weren’t afraid before, they are now!

A Confused Point

All of these parts of this story leave me wondering about the story. Particularly how we’re prone to tell it. That it’s a happy story of return, Thomas is a terrible person for doubting, and that Jesus needs to chastise him for not sufficiently believing.

This is even more strange when we take five seconds to consider that Thomas simply asked for what the other disciples received. He isn’t requesting special proof, but the same. And then, in the end, he doesn’t need it!

This, in a way, makes Jesus into a heartless man needing to “tell him so” even as he gives in.

Honestly, none of that makes sense.

The takeaway that many scholars suggest is quite the opposite, actually. That Jesus isn’t speaking to Thomas’s (lack of) belief, but of ours. That we are the ones blessed to believe without seeing.

This is scholarly turn is essential for any of this to make sense, actually. Because it summarizes this weird encounter, full of disciples not doing what Jesus wants them to do, with note of blessing.

That blessing is not dependent on sticking your finger in Jesus’s wounds.

A Physical Resurrection

Most who stick their necks deep into theology know how important a physical resurrection is to people. That’s not my personal sticking point, but for some, this is #1.

Luke’s resurrection story is written to dispel the question. It’s a physical resurrection. ‘Nuff said.

John gives us a more opaque take. It’s a physical resurrection. But it tempers that point greatly. Most notably (to me) in having Thomas demand to see and feel a resurrected Jesus. But when it comes time, Thomas doesn’t need to touch him. He sees and believes.

In other words, he believes without verifying the physicality of the resurrection.

This is a notable distinction. And one, I suppose others might say is overselling the point. But I see it totally differently. A preoccupation with the certainty of the physical in the postmodern world reads differently than in the premodern one. And the essential focus on the physical threatens to turn us into the caricature of Thomas that many condemn!

Here we are, demanding they saw so that we believe!

Blessed are those who believe without seeing.

Could we be any further from celebrating the resurrection?

Lastly, I just want to make a plea for the Easter spirit in the midst of a resurrection story that so often devolves into details (and arguments) about belief.

We just spent the last week responding to a story which shows the disciples abandon Jesus. Now we’re just going to talk about Thomas’s supposed unbelief? Or get into some discussion about belief that doesn’t reflect the mirror back at the disciples?

And yet, we also see a story of a Christ who promised to return and be with them. And here he is.

They lacked faith, but Jesus didn’t.

Here are some ways I approach this text:

Past Sermons: