e
statement is reversed_; the disciples gave the fish to Jesus, _and he
ate_. The "_John_" narrator has taken out of the story that which was
absurd, but he leaves us to infer that the "_Luke_" narrator was
_careless_ in stating the account of what took place. If we leave out of
the "_Luke_" narrator's account the part that relates to the fish and
honeycomb, he fails to prove what it really was which appeared to the
disciples, as it seems from this that the disciples could not be
convinced that Jesus was not a spirit until he had actually eaten
something.

Now, if the _eating_ part is struck out--which the "_John_" narrator
does, and which, no doubt, the ridicule cast upon it drove him to
do--the "_Luke_" narrator leaves the question _just where he found it_.
It was the business of the "_John_" narrator to attempt to leave it
clean, and put an end to all cavil.

Jesus appeared to the disciples when they assembled at Jerusalem. "And
when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side."[230:1]
They were satisfied, and no doubts were expressed. But Thomas was not
present, and when he was told by the brethren that Jesus had appeared to
them, he refused to believe; nor would he, "Except I shall see in his
hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the
nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe."[230:2]
Now, if Thomas could be convinced, with all _his_ doubts, it would be
foolish after _that_ to deny that Jesus was not in the _body_ when he
appeared to his disciples.

After eight days Jesus again appears, for no other purpose--as it would
seem--but to convince the doubting disciple Thomas. Then said he to
Thomas: "Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither
thy hand, and thrust it into my side; and be not faithless, but
believing."[230:3] This convinced Thomas, and he exclaimed: "My Lord and
my God." After _this evidence_, if there were still unbelievers, they
were even more skeptical than Thomas himself. We should be at a loss to
understand _why the writers of the first three Gospels entirely omitted
the story of Thomas_, if we were not aware that when the "_John_"
narrator wrote the state of the public mind was such that proof of the
most unquestionable character was demanded that Christ Jesus had risen
in the body. The "_John_" narrator selected a person who claimed he was
hard to convince, and if the evidence was such as to satisfy _him_, it
ought