The objection
At the sight of the risen Jesus, Thomas could merely be addressing a surprised exclamation to God. Or he calls Jesus “God” because God's authorized representative stands before him.
1. The narrator names the addressee
John writes that Thomas answered Jesus and spoke to him. Both forms of address follow: his Lord and his God. The explanation that Thomas first addresses Jesus and then suddenly another, invisible addressee must insert a change of speaker that the text does not signal. It arises against the narrative flow rather than from it.
Nor does the Greek form with the article prevent direct address. A nominative can perform this function; no escape can be constructed here from the case form.[1]
2. Jesus confirms faith, not an unthinking exclamation
Jesus replies by stating that Thomas has believed because he has seen, then speaks of those who believe without this seeing. The scene thus concerns recognizing Jesus and believing in him. It is no episode about a verbal slip that Jesus silently overlooks.
Immediately afterward John explains his Gospel's purpose: His readers are to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. Thomas's confession belongs to this purpose. The title Son of God therefore cannot meaningfully be played off against the preceding address as God.
3. A representative does not yet explain this address
A messenger can act with his sender's authority. But it does not automatically follow that a Jewish disciple confesses him as his God and that this statement belongs to the Gospel's exemplary faith. The representative interpretation needs additional justification here.
John has already called the Logos God in the prologue and had everything that came into being arise through him. Thomas's words express personal acknowledgment of what the reader has known from the beginning. The Gospel's concluding movement thus carries more weight than a general metaphor of an envoy.
4. The risen Son remains distinct from the Father
Only a few verses earlier, Jesus calls the Father his God. John places both in the same chapter. He does not seem to see the contradiction that an exclusively human interpretation presupposes. The incarnate Son stands before the Father as a human and is simultaneously himself recognized as God.
The explanation must therefore sustain both statements: Jesus' deity and his real relationship to the Father. Thomas does not identify Jesus as the Father. He confesses the Son as his Lord and God.
Biblical texts in context
Sources and further study
- Robert L. Reymond, A New Systematic Theology of the Christian FaithJohn 20,28, pp. 297–298: addressee, address and connection to the Gospel's purpose.