On the evening of that day, the first day of
the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews,
Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When he
had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were
glad when they saw the Lord. … Now Thomas, one of the Twelve, called the Twin,
was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, “We have
seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the
nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into
his side, I will never believe.” Eight days later, his disciples were inside
again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and
stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” Then he said to Thomas, “Put
your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my
side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my
God!” (John 20:19-20, 24-28 ESV)
The church,
the bride of Christ, is a unique blending of personalities, which was part of God’s
design from the beginning. Since the time of the Lord’s earliest disciples, it
has taken many types of people to make the church function.
Think about
the original disciples. What a great arsenal of giftings. The New Testament portrays a few of them in the following way: James, the methodical; John, the loyal; Peter the impetuous; Judas, the deceiver;
and Thomas, the doubter. These are the descriptive words most
readily given to these members of the Twelve
I have
heard many evangelist and pastors state that they best identify with
Peter. In other words, they see
themselves as people who act first, think
second and regret forever. Peter had
hoof in mouth disease, a chronic
condition involving open mouth, insert
foot, and clap down firmly.
Imagine a
church full of Peters as seen in the Garden of Gethsemane. Everyone going
around inflicting wounds yet no one there to administer healing. God gave the Jameses
to salvage the blunderings of the Peters. God gave the Johns to show the
compassion behind the decisions of the Jameses. I do not fully appreciate the
role of the Judases but they have a place in the church as well.
The church
is also comprised of faithful doubters, people like Thomas. I understand them
most of all. He did not doubt the existence of God and His ability to perform
miracles, healings, or the supernatural. Rather, he questioned what some call a
miracle, what some attribute as a healing, and what some portray as supernatural.
A Peter
more eagerly declares something as extraordinary, while a Thomas initiates an
investigation. A Peter quickly claims an occurrence as a miracle, while a
Thomas analyzes the evidence. A Peter estimates the size of a gathering, while a
Thomas takes an actual head count.
How does a
doubting Thomas fit into a faith community?
A Thomas clarifies truth
They are
the demanders, not satisfied with anything less than genuine and real. They are
the investigators who search for and validate truth. Think about it, because of
Thomas the disciples received another encounter with the resurrected Lord.
In the
Pentecostal church people often call marginal events miraculous. What is the
pit-fall of such behavior? They become immunized from and quit looking for pure
manifestations of the supernatural.
Are
Spirit-filled believers guilty of calling common occurrences wondrous? In these
situations, a Thomas demands higher expectations. Under these circumstances, a
Thomas would call for clear and undeniable proof.
A Thomas makes others reach out for more
A Thomas
investigates more thoroughly, demands to see the authentic, and desires greater
accuracy through their gift of
skepticism. In their hesitation they do not deny faith but look for genuine
workings of faith. They may doubt a certain event but not the ability for an
event to occur. They may question a particular healing but not divine healing.
When these
kinds of people ask the church to look for a clear witness of divine intervention,
they take the risk of being misunderstood by fellow believers. They are willing
to hazard ridicule for the benefit of the church. They want the actions of the Lord
to be validated and broadly proclaimed.
Thank God for a Thomas personality
When
overseeing a church, I appreciated the actions of the Peters and the compassion
of the Johns. Yet the Thomases caused the greatest improvements.
Thomases
demand better and drive the church to excellence in areas still containing
mediocrity. Their gift chastens and refines the church. They bring out the best
by reflecting on the worse. The Johns fortunately encourage believers while a
Thomas keeps up the pressure for more perfect outcomes.
I do
struggle liking the Judases. They are the ones who put faithful and dedicated
followers of Jesus on the cross, a humbling and purifying action that is occasionally
needed.
Everyone has a function
All kinds
of personalities make-up the kingdom of God.
Everyone has a place, everyone has a role in God’s overall scheme, and
no gifting is excluded. The church would be in terrible shape if full of just
one kind of disposition.
No one
should expect all believers to be the same and always in agreement. God, in His
genius, knew what was required for the church to function perfectly. The call
to everyone who loves the Lord is to appreciate and love one another.
God is not
offended when the church looks for genuine manifestations of His supernatural
power. A Thomas challenges believers to raise their expectation, to raise the
bar of excellence.
As you can
probably guess, I best identify with Thomas. I have been accused of being a
pessimistic-optimist, which is another way of calling me a realist. I quickly
assess the worst-case scenario before determining the best course of action,
similar to the gospel. People must recognize their sin, know they are heading the
wrong direction, see Jesus, turn around, and aim for the celestial city, in
that order.
Peter and Thomas
I was
privileged to work with a nationally known evangelist for a few years. He was a
wonderful brother in the Lord. We had been acquainted with each other for quite
a long time. My wife had earlier babysat his children, and eventually we all
became friends by my serving as chairman for a couple of his citywide crusades. Both
events had been highly successful.
He was a
creative, gifted, and witty communicator, able to clearly give the message of
grace and hope to the average person on the street. He possessed a natural
charm and magnetism, and was passionate to tell everyone about Jesus. He wanted
to personally bring a million people to the Lord in his lifetime. I feel
strongly he probably achieved his goal. Yet there were many pressures caused by
his varied interests and demanding schedule that required special and unique
assistance.
I was a
member of one of his oversight boards when an unexpected phone call came. He
said, “Bob, I want you to come work with me.” I was a Thomas; he was a Peter. We
were both risk takers, yet I was very meticulous and thorough, while he could be
a bit reckless and occasionally brazen. I immediately saw a train wreck in the
making and replied, “Even though we’re good friends, trust me, you really don’t
want me working with you.” I saw the potential of a highly frustrating work
environment.
He was not
the kind of individual who liked being told something could not work. My “no”
response fanned a flame inside him. He was determined to prove we could make it
amiable.
The phone
calls came fast and furious, coming at all times of day and night, even at
inopportune moments. In the middle of a church service a deacon answered the office
phone and was shocked by who was on the other end of the line. He quickly came to
me in the service and simply said I had an urgent phone call. When I said hello
and heard his voice I immediately told him I was busy and hung up. Did that end
the phone calls? Not at all!
Our
personal habits were part of the challenge in obtaining a working relationship.
I, on the one hand, am a morning person while he was a nocturnal animal. By
late afternoon I quit making decisions, register information in the back of my
mind, and consider them in the morning. He, on the other hand, came up with
some of his most creative ideas well after dark and enjoyed late night
conversations.
Weary of
the constant phone calls, I decided to be perfectly candid about all the reasons
why a joint-labor relationship was not feasible. Not surprisingly, he had a
response for every argument. Eventually he asked, “Would you at least pray
about it?” I did, and came away from prayer realizing this was a divine
appointment. I agreed to take the assignment on one condition: If he would not
call me after 10:00 PM, I would not call him before 8:00 AM.
Not long
after linking up, a phone call came around 1:00 AM. As I laid quietly in bed
listening, he excitedly told me his latest idea. When he was done I said, “Let
me think on it and get back to you.” I called him back at 5:00 AM and said to a
very drowsy guy, “I’ve had a chance to think about it and here is my take on
the proposal ….” He never called after 10:00 PM ever again.
He placed
me second-in-command and we experienced many fun and happy moments. We also had
several private, drawn out, and strenuous discussions, typical of two type “A”
personalities. Between the two of us the volume and tone would sometimes
intensify, but he knew I loved him and wanted him to be highly successful. He
understood I was always cheering for him, was a big fan, and had his best
interest at heart. If I was going to help him, I had to go toe-to-toe with him
from time to time. I often went home totally exhausted after these moments. Yet
my job was to hang in there, no matter what, and help him avoid needless
disasters.
One day we
were sitting and relaxing, enjoying light conversation. He was sharing a couple
of funny situations that recently happened during a crusade and a few of his
hilarious jokes. We were both utterly amused and enjoying our time.
During this
lighthearted moment, after we were physically weak from laughing so hard, he
unguardedly said, “Do you know what I don’t like? You never let me dream. As
soon as I tell you my idea, you list the problems and shoot it to pieces. I
know you’re right, but I just wish you’d let me dream for a while before you give
me the full picture.”
He was
right. My strength was also a weakness. Having an ability to make quick and
accurate assessments was hurting our relationship. From that moment on,
whenever he told me a dream I simply listened and affirmed him, not necessarily the concept. Eventually, when he was ready, he
would come back and ask my thoughts on the idea. The waiting proved beneficial.
I was able to more accurately consider the proposal, come up with possible alternatives,
and prepare a kinder reply.
After I
transitioned to another assignment, we casually kept in touch and briefly
talked at various events. About twenty years later he was being recognized for
his years of service and honored during a special celebration. I drove a couple
hundred miles to attend. While sitting in the auditorium before the ceremony, I
saw him standing by himself in a side hallway. I went over to say hello. As I
was approaching a big smile came across his face. We started talking and
laughing, like in the old days. Neither of us wanted to stop reminiscing. It
was a great moment.
Since then,
he was gone home to be with the Lord, and I miss my friend.
Thankful
My memories
of our time together make me thank God for the Peters, and the Thomases that
help them refine their efforts. A doubting Thomas keeps the church aiming for
higher expectations, both in the natural and supernatural realm, and are very
much needed. Welcome them!
No comments:
Post a Comment