Once more St. Luke says that when Christ appeared to the Apostles in the evening, He was mistaken for a _spirit_; but he gives no reason for this, and it was apparently the only occasion on which it occurred. St. John however, though he does not mention the incident, fully explains it; for he says that _the doors were shut_ for fear of the Jews; and obviously if Christ suddenly appeared within closed doors, it would account for their thinking that He must be a spirit. On the other hand, St. John speaks of Christ's showing them His hands (and also His side) though without giving any reason for this. But St. Luke's statement that they at first took Him for a spirit, and that He did this to convince them of His identity, quite accounts for it; so each of the narratives helps to explain the other. But this is not all, for St. Luke then adds that as they still disbelieved, Christ asked if they had anything to eat (_i.e._, if they would give _Him_ something to eat) and they at once offered Him a piece of broiled fish. But he gives no hint as to why they happened to have any fish ready. St. Mark however, though he does not mention either the request, nor its response, fully explains both; for he says they were _sitting at meat_ at the time, probably just concluding their evening meal. And all this still further explains St. John's narrative, that Christ said to them _again_, the second time, _Peace be unto you_; which would be much more natural if something had occurred between, than if (as St. John implies) it was just after the first time. Again, St. Mark records Christ as saying, after His command to preach the Gospel to all the world, 'He that believeth _and is baptised_ shall be saved,' though without any previous reference to baptism. But St. Matthew says the command was not only to make disciples of all nations, but to _baptise_ them as well, and this of course explains the other passage, though curiously enough St. Matthew himself does not refer to it. And then as to the appearance to the five hundred recorded by St. Paul. None of the Evangelists mention this, but it explains a good deal that they do mention. Thus St. John alludes to the Apostles being in _Galilee_, (instead of staying in Jerusalem) after the Resurrection, but he gives no hint as to why they went there. Nor do St. Matthew and St. Mark, who say Christ told them to go there, give any hint as to why He told them; but this appearance to the five hundred, who had to be collected in Galilee, explains everything. It also accounts for St. Matthew's curious remark (before noticed) that when the Eleven saw Christ in Galilee, _they worshipped Him, but some doubted_. And it probably explains St. Luke's omission of Galilee among the places where the Apostles themselves had to preach the Resurrection; as there were so many witnesses there already.[306] [Footnote 306: Acts 1. 8.]