I see it as after the fact, edifying the believing heart. Where in the parables is this fact checking ? I see a scribe instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like a man which brings forth out of his treasure both new and old. I see disciples on the road to Emmaus who have a blessed encounter with Messiah who taught them everything about Himself from the scriptures. Halleluyah ! I want to be a hiker to Emmaus more than a Berean. I don't doubt the facts in Scripture, though sometimes I have to work to understand them. It's the johnny come lately's who want to sell me all manner of extra materials to help me "understand" Scripture I want to fact-check. Book of Mormon. Watchtower magazine. Scofield's Notes. Lists of popes that never were. That sort of thing.
As for the Berean response, the language was clear that this was not mere edification. There was conditional acceptance of Paul's teaching, hence "readiness of mind." The condition was verifying whether it was compatible with Scripture. Look at the language:
Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
The phrase "ei echoi tauta houtōs" ("whether those things were so") is optative, i.e., in building out from "ei" ("if") it conveys a sense of
conditionality, indeterminacy. It was
not a foregone conclusion in their minds that Paul was correct. See AT Robertson on Acts 17:11. In other words, yes, they liked what Paul was saying, but they suspended judgment until they could test Paul's words against Scripture. That's the condition. This is not speaking of edification
after acceptance. This is speaking of meeting some condition
before acceptance.
Now I realize no Catholic can be too fond of that answer. It implies private judgment, and even views it as a good thing. Which of course it is. It's even a necessity. It's how people come to believe new things. The Emmaus hiker has already crossed that Rubicon. But he did cross it. At some earlier point, he already committed an act of private judgment. It's how he became a believer in the first place.
Thomas on the other hand admits up front he's not there yet. Like the Bereans, he sets a reasonable condition, corroborating evidence. Does Jesus reprimand him for desiring evidence? Or does Jesus offer him the evidence he seeks?
In my experience as an attorney, people with a good case make the case. People with nothing try to blow smoke. Neither Jesus nor the apostles ever tried to blow smoke. Jesus made an excellent case that He was Messiah, and that He had risen from the dead. Paul had a good case that Jesus fulfilled the OT prophecies concerning Messiah. His case was good because the facts were with him, not because he was "somebody." The Thessalonicans wouldn't even give him a fair hearing. We don't know the details. But the Bereans were ready to hear it. But they still had to judge whether it was true. As do we all. I guarantee you, if some random person had walked up to their synagogue and started asserting universal authority based on contradictory lists of names that could not be backed up with evidence, they would want to check that story out very carefully, and they'd be right to do so.
Peace,
SR
I don’t doubt the facts in Scripture, though sometimes I have to work to understand them.
Well said, the truth will cost...............
Now I realize no Catholic can be too fond of that answer. It implies private judgment, and even views it as a good thing. Which of course it is. It's even a necessity. It's how people come to believe new things. The Emmaus hiker has already crossed that Rubicon. But he did cross it. At some earlier point, he already committed an act of private judgment. It's how he became a believer in the first place. The view you present is the opposite of the tradition of Fundamentalist and Evangelical born again experiences and much closer to the Catholic persuasion model, so to speak. You must have noticed that.
Thomas on the other hand admits up front he's not there yet. Like the Bereans, he sets a reasonable condition, corroborating evidence. Does Jesus reprimand him for desiring evidence? Or does Jesus offer him the evidence he seeks?
I think it erroneous to project that view to the Apostles as they were living in real time. They were already believers, already sheep, save Judas who was lost. The Resurrection had just happened. The Holy Spirit had not, for lack of a better phrase, traded places with Messiah yet. The Apostle Thomas is a wonderful lesson to those that believe, but not to an unbeliever looking for an excuse to insist on evidence rather than faith.