Didymus

“Yesterday, a Friend of Mine, 

a very brave, good woman, 

collapsed in terrible pain.

One minute, she was fit and well,

the next minute, 

she was in agony.

She is now in hospital, 

and this morning 

I was told she's

suffering from cancer.

Why?

See, if you love someone,

you don't want them to suffer — 

You can't bear it.

You want to take 

their suffering 

onto yourself.

If even I feel like that —

Why Doesn't God?”

— C.S. Lewis

This Time, there’s 

Two of Us.

The Batman :

Your insane.

Owlman :

It doesn’t matter — there are other versions of Me that You would find quite charming.

24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.


25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, 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.


26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.


27 Then saith 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.


28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.


29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Commentators have noted that John avoids saying whether Thomas actually did “thrust” his hand in. Before the Protestant Reformation the usual belief, reflected in artistic depictions, was that he had done so, which most Catholic writers continued to believe, while Protestant writers often thought that he had not.

Regardless of the question of whether Thomas had felt as well as “seen” the physical evidence of the Resurrection of Jesus, the Catholic interpretation was that, although Jesus asserts the superiority of those who have faith without physical evidence, he was nonetheless willing to show Thomas his wound, and let him feel it. This was used by theologians as biblical encouragement for the use of physical experiences such as pilgrimages, veneration of relics and ritual in reinforcing Christian beliefs.

Protestant theologians emphasized Jesus’ statement of the superiority of “faith alone” (see sola fide), although the evangelical-leaning Anglican Thomas Hartwell Horne, in his widely read Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures (first published in 1818) treated Thomas’s incredulity, which he extended somewhat to the other apostles, approvingly, as evidence both of the veracity of the gospels, as a “forger” would be unlikely to have invented it, and of their proper suspicion of the seemingly impossible, demonstrating their reliability as witnesses.6 In the early church, Gnostic authors were very insistent that Thomas did not actually examine Jesus, and elaborated on this in apocryphal accounts, perhaps tending to push their non-Gnostic opponents in the other direction.

The theological interpretation of the episode has concentrated on it as a demonstration of the reality of the resurrection, but as early as the writings of the 4th- and 5th-century saints John Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria it had been given a eucharistic interpretation, seen as an allegory of the sacrament of the Eucharist, what remained a recurring theme in commentary.