1 regard the two discourses as distinct and different, and con- eider them as delivered at different times.
For one thing, the occasion of the discourse recorded hy St. Luke, is not the same as the occasion of that recorded hy St. Matthew. The discourse reported hy St. Matthew, was one deliyered on " a mountain," and previous to the appointment of the twelve apostles. The discourse reported hy St. Luke, was delivered '' in the plain," and after the twelve apostles had heen ordained. To me it seems impossible to get over this discrep- ancy.
For another thing, there is a wide difference between the persons called '' blessed " in the discourse in St. Matthew, and the persons called *' blessed " in the discourse in St. Luke. In St. Matthew the point brought forward in each case is the spiritual character of the person, in St. Luke his temporal circumstances and condition. There is a wide difference, for instance, between '' Blessed are the poor in spirit" and " Blessed be ye poor."
For another thing, the variance between the two discourses in length is very notable. St. Luke's report can in no sense be called an abridgment of St. Matthew. Many things that St. Matthew reports, he omits altogether. Some things that he inserts, on the other hand, are not to be found in St. Matthew at all.
In the last place, it seems unreasonable to suppose that our Lord never repeated the same lessons on different occasions. All public teachers find it necessary to do so. We cannot doubt that He did also. In the present instance He repeats to a different audience some of the truths which He had before preached at greater length in the Sermon on the Mount. And the repetition was meant to show their importance.
For the above reasons, I believe that St. Luke and St. Mat- thew are recording two different discourses. In saying tliis, I consider it only fair to myself to remark that the view 1 main- tain is held by Pool, Gartwright, Doddridge, Whitby, Scott, and Watson.
[Blessed be ye poor.] The poverty spoken of here, as well as the hunger, weeping, ana being hated, of the rest of the passage, must be taken in a literal sense, remembering only that it is poverty and sorrow for the Gospel's sake to which our Lord reten. The expressions, *'rich," and "full," and ''laugh," in the latter part of the passage, must evidently be taken in a literal sense. It seems unreasonable to interpret the one set of words spiritually and the other literally.
The promises, of course, in one case, as well as the threaten- ings in the other, admit of a much wider interpretation. " Ye shall be filled," and " ye ehall laugh," are promises which to
182