Before leaving this miracle it may be well to say something about the apparent discrepancy between the account given of it by St. Matdiew, and those given by St. Mark and St. Luke. St. Matthew speaks of two demoniacs. St. Mark and St. Luke speak of only one.
The explanations of the discrepancy are various. According to Augustme, Theophylact, and Grotius, the one mentioned by Mark and Luke was a more illustrious and well known person than the other. According to Chrysostom, Euthymius, and Maldouatus, he was the nercest of the two. According to lightfoot, one of the demoniacs was a Jew and the other a heathen, and the healing of the heathen one is the case which Mark and Luke dwell on.
I venture to suggest that the reason why Mark and Luke only mention one, is the fact that only one of the two asked to be allowed to remain with our Lord, after he was healed, and only one ultimately became a witness to the Lord in the country of the Gadarenes. The case of the other man presented no peculiar circumstances of interest, and therefore Mark and Luke pass it over.
It is hardly necessary to remark that there is no contradiction between the two accounts. Though Mark and Luke only des- cribe the cure of one demoniac, it would be absurd to say that they denied that two were cured. They only describe the case which was most remarkable.