Mass today - Doubting Thomas

[LifeIn]

On the Sunday after Easter the Gospel reading is about the Apostle Thomas and how he got the label of "doubting Thomas". But viewing the life of Thomas through that one moniker is unfair to the man. His first appearance in the bible is when Jesus is preparing to go to Lazarus on the news that he is near death. The disciples warn Jesus that such a trip is dangerous because "the Jews in Jerusalem are trying to kill you." (The town where Lazarus, Martha, and Mary lived was just outside of Jerusalem.) It is at this point that Thomas speaks up and says "Then let us go an die with him!" These are bold worlds coming from the one who would be labelled a skeptic. It shows that Thomas knew that the most important thing in the world was to follow Jesus, and it was worth any personal risk. In this Thomas is worthy of our emulation. Turning to today's Gospel reading, after Jesus appears to Thomas, his response is to declare "My Lord and my God!" Thomas recognizes that Jesus is not only someone whom he wants to follow with all his heart. He also acknowledges that Jesus is God. Finally, we should not see Thomas as somehow failing at something the other apostles all got right. Thomas was the only one absent at the first appearance in the upper room. The other apostles all got the benefit of seeing Jesus and were not tested like Thomas was. We can easily imagine that any of the other apostles might have responded just as Thomas did and said "Unless I see...". After all, the first announcement of Jesus being raised from the dead was when Mary Magdalene came to them and told them what she saw. None of them believed her either.

This appearance of Jesus in the upper room tells us something about who God is. If someone did not know any better, they might assume that Jesus would, upon his return, remind his disciples about how they all fled and how Peter denied him and so on. But no. His first words are "Peace be with you." They are words of blessing and mercy. This is especially relevant today which also called "Divine Mercy Sunday", a day when we remember how God is infinitely merciful and desirous of all people coming to him for that forgiveness and mercy that is there for the asking. Plenty of reasons to give thanks today as we join with Thomas in saying "My Lord and my God!"

 

[PeanutGallery]

Is this when you put down Bible and pick up rosaries to pray to the other 'sinless mediator and advocate' then immolate the Lord Jesus Christ?
.........................

 

[Nondenom40]

On the Sunday after Easter the Gospel reading is about the Apostle Thomas and how he got the label of "doubting Thomas". But viewing the life of Thomas through that one moniker is unfair to the man. His first appearance in the bible is when Jesus is preparing to go to Lazarus on the news that he is near death. The disciples warn Jesus that such a trip is dangerous because "the Jews in Jerusalem are trying to kill you." (The town where Lazarus, Martha, and Mary lived was just outside of Jerusalem.) It is at this point that Thomas speaks up and says "Then let us go an die with him!" These are bold worlds coming from the one who would be labelled a skeptic. It shows that Thomas knew that the most important thing in the world was to follow Jesus, and it was worth any personal risk. In this Thomas is worthy of our emulation. Turning to today's Gospel reading, after Jesus appears to Thomas, his response is to declare "My Lord and my God!" Thomas recognizes that Jesus is not only someone whom he wants to follow with all his heart. He also acknowledges that Jesus is God. Finally, we should not see Thomas

as somehow failing at something the other apostles all got right. Thomas was the only one absent at the first appearance in the upper room. The other apostles all got the benefit of seeing Jesus and were not tested like Thomas was. We can easily imagine that any of the other apostles might have responded just as Thomas did and said "Unless I see...". After all, the first announcement of Jesus being raised from the dead was when Mary Magdalene came to them and told them what she saw. None of them believed her either.

This appearance of Jesus in the upper room tells us something about who God is. If someone did not know any better, they might assume that Jesus would, upon his return, remind his disciples about how they all fled and how Peter denied him and so on. But no. His first words are "Peace be with you." They are words of blessing and mercy. This is especially relevant today which also called "Divine Mercy Sunday", a day when we remember how God is infinitely merciful and desirous of all people coming to him for that forgiveness and mercy that is there for the asking. Plenty of reasons to give thanks today as we join with Thomas in saying "My Lord and my God!"

But viewing the life of Thomas through that one moniker is unfair to the man.

Great advice. Now apply that to Luther et al to show us your consistency. We hear all the time;

Luther and the epistle of straw
Luther removed books from his bible
Luthers mariology....

The fact is, he changed too. But all catholics want to look at is the Luther of 1522 or somewhere in there. Its not fair to him either.

 

[1Thess521]

. Finally, we should not see Thomas as somehow failing at something the other apostles all got right. Thomas was the only one absent at the first appearance in the upper room. The other apostles all got the benefit of seeing Jesus and were not tested like Thomas was. We can easily imagine that any of the other apostles might have responded just as Thomas did and said "Unless I see...". After all, the first announcement of Jesus being raised from the dead was when Mary Magdalene came to them and told them what she saw. None of them believed her either.

Earlier the day; and earlier that chapter of Luke 24: we have Jesus interacting with the two travelers on the road Emmaus:

We see Jesus rebuking them. Why?
Because they don't believe all of Scripture.
25 He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe ALL that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, He explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

After the eyes were opened of the two travels: what do they say caused hearts to burn?
32 They asked each other, “Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?”

2 Peter 1:19
Peter is describing that he is an eyewitness to the Transfiguration:
But what did Peter consider more reliable than his own eyes?
"And we have the more certain prophetic word, to which you do well taking heed, "

Peter (yes, Peter) considered Scripture more reliable than his own eyes.

 

[mica]

Earlier the day; and earlier that chapter of Luke 24: we have Jesus interacting with the two travelers on the road Emmaus:

We see Jesus rebuking them. Why?
Because they don't believe all of Scripture.
25 He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe ALL that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, He explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

After the eyes were opened of the two travels: what do they say caused hearts to burn?
32 They asked each other, “Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?”

2 Peter 1:19
Peter is describing that he is an eyewitness to the Transfiguration:
But what did Peter consider more reliable than his own eyes?
"And we have the more certain prophetic word, to which you do well taking heed, "

Peter (yes, Peter) considered Scripture more reliable than his own eyes.

catholics claim Peter was their 1st pope and that they follow him. Their other popes were / are successors to Peter.

but in reality they don't even follow what Peter said and taught.

all they have are made up words of men, men who don't even teach what Peter taught or follow in his footsteps.

 

[balshan]

catholics claim Peter was their 1st pope and that they follow him. Their other popes were / are successors to Peter.

but in reality they don't even follow what Peter said and taught.

all they have are made up words of men, men who don't even teach what Peter taught or follow in his footsteps.

In fact, Peter warns against institutions like the RCC:

Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. 9 Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know that the family of believers throughout the world is undergoing the same kind of sufferings.

It is the enemy and has inflicted much suffering on true believers and others.

 

[RiJoRi]

Thank you, LifeIn.
A good message for ALL of us. Tom wanted proof, and God graciously gave it to him.
--Rich

 

[LifeIn]

Earlier the day; and earlier that chapter of Luke 24: we have Jesus interacting with the two travelers on the road Emmaus:

...

After the eyes were opened of the two travels: what do they say caused hearts to burn?
32 They asked each other, “Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?”

And what was it that opened their eyes so that they realized it was Jesus? It was not the opening of the scriptures. It was in the breaking of the bread. That is what made it possible for them to connect the scripture with the living Jesus who was speaking to them. Only then did they understand why their hearts were burning as Jesus explained the scriptures.

2 Peter 1:19
Peter is describing that he is an eyewitness to the Transfiguration:
But what did Peter consider more reliable than his own eyes?
"And we have the more certain prophetic word, to which you do well taking heed, "

Peter (yes, Peter) considered Scripture more reliable than his own eyes.

I don't think this is the message of this passage. The comparative "more reliable" is not comparing scripture with what Peter has seen with his own eyes. The comparative indicates that the reliability of the teachings of Peter do not rest solely on Peter's eyewitness testimony but is also confirmed by alignment with prophesy from scripture. That is why Peter mentions his eyewitness testimony first. Then mentions how prophesy corroborates this eyewitness testimony.

Also it is worth mentioning that Petrine authorship of 2 Peter is debatable, and it is possible the work was written by follower of his after 100 AD. The main reason for this argument is that chapter 3 discusses the parousia in a manner to meet the difficulty caused in many minds by the non-fulfillment of the expectation of Christ's second coming. ("Our forefathers have been laid to rest, but everything stays just as it was..."). This difficult would not have been a concern in the lifetime of Peter who died between 64 and 67 AD. Regardless of the authorship, the content of the letter is as Peter would have written it, which is why I only mention this as an aside.

 

[1Thess521]

And what was it that opened their eyes so that they realized it was Jesus? It was not the opening of the scriptures. It was in the breaking of the bread. That is what made it possible for them to connect the scripture with the living Jesus who was speaking to them. Only then did they understand why their hearts were burning as Jesus explained the scriptures.

FALSE
It was God that opened their eyes:
The verb tense is nicknamed the "Divine Passive" meaning it is something the God does to us

I don't think this is the message of this passage. The comparative "more reliable" is not comparing scripture with what Peter has seen with his own eyes. The comparative indicates that the reliability of the teachings of Peter do not rest solely on Peter's eyewitness testimony but is also confirmed by alignment with prophesy from scripture. That is why Peter mentions his eyewitness testimony first. Then mentions how prophesy corroborates this eyewitness testimony.

FALSE
Commentaries state

"This Greek word order supports the interpretation that Peter is ranking Scripture over experience.
The prophetic word (Scripture) in other words is more complete, more permanent, and more authoritative than the experiences of anyone, even the experience of the Transfiguration,

Vincent explains the 2 possible ways to interpret this verse "We may explain either (a) as Revised, we have the word of prophecy made more sure, i.e., we are better certified than before as to the prophetic word by reason of this voice; or (b) we have the word of prophecy as a surer confirmation of God’s truth than what we ourselves saw, i.e., Old-Testament testimony is more convincing than even the voice heard at the transfiguration. The latter seems to accord better with the words which follow"

Elliots
that in the prophetic word we have something more sure than the voice from heaven.

etc etc

2 Peter 1:19 Commentaries: So we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.

biblehub.com

 

[LifeIn]

FALSE
It was God that opened their eyes:

That's what I said. Jesus opened their eyes through the breaking of the bread, just as Jesus caused Thomas to believe through his personal appearance to him. Jesus is God.

 

[LifeIn]

Elliots
that in the prophetic word we have something more sure than the voice from heaven.

etc etc


2 Peter 1:19 Commentaries: So we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.

You picked the secondary explanation by Ellicot, but I prefer the primary one that you skipped over:

It may mean (i.) that the Transfiguration has made prophecies more sure, for we who were there have thus witnessed their fulfilment.

In any case, bible commentaries are written by fallible men and are not the inspired Word of God. I am always hearing how Catholics follow the teachings of mere men while "true" Christians follow only the scriptures. At least that's what I hear whenever I cite Catholic commentaries.