Why Did Thomas Call Jesus Both Lord and God?
(John 20:19-29)
Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
The Only Reason!
Though there exists hundreds of (false) reasons as to why Thomas declared Jesus his Lord and his God", there only exists one that is scriptural. Let us imagine for the sake of argument that Jesus would had never appeared to his disciples after he resurrected. Suppose they had found the stone rolled away at his grave and knew he was gone but no appearance? Would that had negated the fact that Jesus truly died and resurrected? No. So then what was the purpose of his appearing to his disciples, asking them for food and showing them the imprints of his hands and his side? Was it not to prove to them that he actually was who he had proclaimed to be all along? For ONLY God can bring back the dead, so indeed God was with him. But let us ask ourselves would God had been with him if he had claimed to be someone he wasn't? Well of course not. So then his death and resurrection authenticated him as being who he actually claimed to be. But who did he claim to be? In John 5:18 he said that God was his father, making Himself equal with God. So was Jesus equal with God? The scripture clearly states YES! But those on the other side argue that this statement isn't to be taken literally. They say it was the Pharisees who made this statement, and they argue that they made it in error. But even if it was the Pharisees who (supposedly) made this statement, scripture reaffirms that it is not in error. In Philippians 2:6 Paul makes the following statement in regards to Jesus, (he says Christ Jesus) "Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God." Indeed if God was his Father (which he was (is)), then it would follow that he was of the same (invisible) substance and nature of his Father. For which child doesn't bear the attributes of both his Father and his Mother. So he took on the earthly form of his Mother and the heavenly form of his Father. But considering earthly and heavenly attributes cannot be mixed (as to become some new thing) they rather co-existed (dwelt together) and this is the reason he is called both the Son of man and the Son of God. As he said, I am in the Father and the Father is in me, likewise Paul bears the same, saying, God was in Christ reconciling the world. So not only was he the Son of God, but he was Emmanuel, [interpreted as] "God with us." As John most plainly states when he writes "In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God." And the word was made flesh and goes by the name of Jesus Christ. Now there are those on the other side that argue that John 1:1 should be translated as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was "a" God. [Incorrect Translation]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And so in their effort in maintaining God's oneness they right away skip over the idea that the Father and the Son are "one", and instead maintain that they are both Gods (i.e. making two Gods). And so we must ask (these so-called Greek philosophers) if the word was "a God" (as they suppose) and God is God, does that Not then make two Gods? Well they say, the word was "a" God but not the almighty God. Well we agree the Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Father, but if the two are one, just as Jesus said "My Father and I are one", what is it that they do not understand? Nevertheless they have been deceived by the craftiness of the serpent, and having eyes they see not and having ears they hear not! For is it not obvious who Jesus claimed to be? For Jesus said, "If you do not believe that "I AM" you will die in your sins." Likewise he said before Abraham was..."I AM." And when they came to arrest him, he said, "who do ye seek", and they said, "Jesus of Nazareth" and he said "I AM" (John 8:24, 58). And at these two little words the officers are said to have fallen back and to the ground (John 18:1-8). And so we must ask what in these words that drove these soldiers to fall back and to the ground? For when Moses talked to God from the burning bush, he asked for his name that he might be able to reference it to the children of Israel (in Egypt). And in response God said to Moses, "I AM THAT I AM, thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, "I AM" hath sent me unto you. So indeed these words spiritually had much greater meaning then their common use, for in so many words Jesus was bearing that same testimony that Thomas declared when he appeared to him after his resurrection. For Thomas said, "My Lord and My God." And so this is what Jesus (in parable) was really saying, in other words,I am Lord and I am God and if you do not believe that "I AM" (the same one who appeared to Moses in the burning bush) you will die in your sins!
And this was the reason they stoned him and accused him of blasphemy saying, "For a Good work we stone thee not but for blasphemy, because you being a man makest thyself God." (John 10:33)Likewise when he said to the paralytic, "Son thy sins be forgiven, they responded saying, Why does this man speak blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God only? (Mark 2:7, Luke 5:21)
"I and My Father are one."
"I am in the Father and the Father is in me"(John 14:11)
"He that has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9).
All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made."
"My Lord and My God"