d life left to him--a life which already
during these few days had grown far too long, a weary, intolerable
burden. Is he in a moment and on their mere word to rise from his
misery? A man of Thomas' temperament hugs his wretchedness. You seem to
do him an injury if you open the shutters of his heart and let in the
sunshine.

Obviously, therefore, the first inference we naturally draw from this
state of mind is that it is weak and wrong to lay hold of one difficulty
and insist that except this be removed we will not believe. Let this
difficulty about the constitution of Christ's person, or this about the
impossibility of proving a miracle, or this about the inspiration of
Scripture be removed, and I will accept Christianity; let God grant me
_this_ petition, and I will believe that He is the hearer of prayer; let
me see this inconsistency or that explained, and I will believe He
governs the course of things in this world. The understanding begins to
take a pride in demanding evidence more absolute and strict than has
satisfied others, and seems to display acuteness and fairness in holding
to one difficulty. The test which Thomas proposed to himself seemed an
accurate and legitimate one; but that he should have proposed it shows
that he was neglecting the evidence already afforded him, the testimony
of a number of men whose truthfulness he had for years made proof of.
True, it was a miracle they required him to believe; but would his own
senses be better authentication of a miracle than the unanimous and
explicit declaration of a company of veracious men? He could have no
doubt that they believed they had seen the Lord. If they could be
deceived, ten of them, or many more, why should his senses prove more
infallible? Was he to reject their testimony on the ground that their
senses had deceived them, and accept the testimony of his own senses?
Was the ultimate test in his own case to be that very evidence which in
the case of others he maintained was insufficient?

But if this tells seriously against Thomas, we must not leave out of
account what tells in his favour. It is true he was obstinate and
unreasonable and a shade vain in his refusal to accept the testimony of
the disciples, but it is also true that he was with the little Christian
community on the second Lord's Day. This puts it beyond a doubt that he
was not so unbelieving as he seemed. That he did not now avoid the
society of those happy, hopeful men shows that