Thomas the Apostle in India?

According to this article, it was Thomas the Merchant in 345 A.D., not Thomas the Apostle in 52 A.D., that founded the Christian faith in India. Is it possible that a legend developed that confused what originally happened?

Click to expand...

While it is perfectly possible that details were confused at some point in history, I don't think it is likely that the Thomas went to India in 345 AD. The reason why I say this is that there are written accounts of the apostle Thomas going to India that were written before 345 AD.

Eusebius, who died in the year 339 & wrote a very famous account of Church History. He writes about how the apostle Thomas was assigned "Parthia" (which contained part of India).

CHURCH FATHERS: Church History, Book III (Eusebius)
Eusebius - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, you must remember that it was not common for history to be recorded in India until the arrival of Islam. There is little, if any, historical documentation from the period - and much of the early writings of india are still undecipherable & thus the information has been lost.

Also, Thomas of Cana has never been understood to be the same as the apostle.

From your link:

Thomas of Cana led a group of 72 families, as well as clergymen, to the Malabar coast. There they met and supplemented the Saint Thomas Christians, who had been evangelized by Thomas the Apostle in the 1st century.

Click to expand...

Interesting..

I mat someone from India once who is supposedly descended from the Apostle Thomas, all-be-it a few generations ago.

Yoder777 said:

According to this article, it was Thomas the Merchant in 345 A.D., not Thomas the Apostle in 52 A.D., that founded the Christian faith in India. Is it possible that a legend developed that confused what originally happened?

St. Thomas In India: Myth or Truth? – Folks Magazine

Thomas of Cana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I do not mean to offend anyone in bringing up this question and I am sorry if I have done so. I am just curious about this as a historical question. What is the best evidence that St. Thomas preached and died in India?

Click to expand...

No offense taken, but the tradition of the Church in India goes back before Thomas the Merchant was even born...IMO the real underlying motive of these apostate critical scholars (not all are) is that this would mean a Hebrew/Aramaic version of Matthew existed at this time (which would mean the early church fathers were not liars and the tradition of their witness is as it was handed down from the Apostles and is in fact true) which they CANNOT/WILLNOT tolerate in their attempt to make the word of God of none effect. For them the church has to always have been wrong or perpetuating a made up embellished mythos (for its supernatural implications are not philosophically tolerated in their preconceived assumption based conclusions). According to the only history we actually have (excluding modernist unsubstantiated opinion) Matthew was written first (and this would support the Thomas tradition) and they simply cannot have that.

In His name

Paul

The church of the east also bears witness to Thomas the apostle passing through Iraq and India, i agree with the above post also that modern scholars are critical of an Aramaic gospel simply because it would push the dates back to a very uncomfortable time where atheist scholars would be forced to believe church accounts of history and of Christ!

Daughter of Ararat said:

I mat someone from India once who is supposedly descended from the Apostle Thomas, all-be-it a few generations ago.

Click to expand...

Wow.

Were you able to check out their geneology?