the alleged occasion of it was a well-meant fiction of tradition or of the Evangelists.* According to this hypothesis, the material grouped under the title of a mountain discourse to His disciples came from various occasions in the ministry which were no longer remembered. The compilation was made for the practical use of the early Christians, to furnish them with a manual of Christian conduct. t But this is to press the theory of compilation to an extreme. It is not an impossible view, and would not entail serious consequences,-since it does not deny the authenticity of the sayings; butit must be counted less probable. The examina- tion of the great teaching masses in Matthew seems to show that the briefer sayings were gener- ally grouped with the historical remains of some great discourses, whose approximate position in the ministry and whose circumstances were not wholly forgotten. The main portion of the Sermon, contained in Mt 5*-6'8, is (with the exception of certain verses) so closely woven as theme and exposition that it cannot well be denied historical unity and occasion. Jesus must logically have given such teaching as the Sermon presents, in the earlier Galileean ministry to which the Gospels assign this teaching; and we know that He was accustomed to speak long and connectedly to His hearers. It is therefore probable enough that at least this much of a digest of one of Jesus’ most important and impressive discourses should have been preserved.
2, CIRCUMSTANCES OF ITS DELIVERY. —The occasion on which the Sermon was given appears to be clearly indicated by Lk 6%*°, which makes it follow closely upon the appointment of the twelve apostles.t The Gospel of Matthew agrees with that of Luke in locating the Sermon on the Mount in the first half of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee, although Matthew places it somewhat nearer to the beginning of that period. There is good
*So Calvin, Baur, Neander, Bleek, Pott, Semler, Strauss, Kuin6l, Wieseler, H. Holtzmann, Weizsacker, Julicher, Heinrici, Ibbeken, Hawkins, Schmiedel.
+ Weizsicker, Apost. Zeitalter2 (1892), p. 380f. [Eng. tr. ii. 46f.]: ‘The discourse, as Matthew has adopted it, was in fact a kind of code, but such as originated in and was designed for the Church. . . . The nucleus consists of a few long main sections, 21-48 61-18. 19-34, | ,, The commandments in these three sections together form a sort of primer, which was, however, first composed by the combination of these didactic pieces, whose original independence is at once apparent from the parallel sections of Luke’s Gospel. . . . The evangelist put on an intro- duction, 53-12. 13-16, and an appendix, 71-29, to fit the whole to the historical situation which he gave it.’ H. Holtzmann, Hand- Comm. ti. d. Synoptiker, p. 99: ‘Probably the discourse was constructed by the evangelist himself out of written and oral sources, with the primary purpose of furnishing an order of life for the new Church.’ Heinrici, Bergpredigt, i. 39: ‘The Sermon on the Mount of Matthew seems to be a free composition of a speech of Jesus from certain genuine sayings of His, which were in part already grouped together, in part in circulation as single sayings.’ Similarly Jiilicher, Hinleitung «. d. NT3 (1901), p. 232; Hawkins, Hore Synopticce (1899), pp. 181-135 ; Schmiedel, Encyc. Bibl. vol. ii. col. 1886.
t The corresponding passage in Mark is 313-19, but the Sermon is not found at that point nor elsewhere in the Second Gospel. There is no indication at Mk 319 that a discourse followed historically.
§ Too much has often been made of the difference between Matthew and Luke regarding the position to which the Sermon is assigned by each. Matthew pace after the Sermon, in chs. 8. 9. 121-21, some matter which Luke places before the Sermon in 481-611; but this section contains only incidents, miracles, and brief teachings, which, even if they are all in their proper places in Luke (and Mark, which corresponds), would not require more than a few weeks of time. Matthew does not record the appointment of the Twelve, but first mentions them as apostles in ch. 10 in connexion with their mission. Nor does Matthew represent the Sermon as Jesus’ jirst teaching, since he distinctly relates before the discourse (42%f) that ‘Jesus went about in all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of disease and all manner of sickness among the people. And the report of him went forth into all Syria’ (i.e. throughout Jewish territory). The earlier work and teaching are compressed rather than ignored, and the words are given more prominence than the deeds. A compilation of representative teaching by Jesus in chs, 5-7 is
followed by a compilation of representative deeds of Jesus in chs, 8. 9.
og
A
SERMON ON THE MOUNT
a eee
reason to think that they are sufliciently correct. The contents of the discourse, as clearly as its position in the Gospels, mark it as a part of His Galilean teaching,—not, indeed, the first instruc- tion Jesus gave, but of the kind fitted for recep- tive hearers who had gained some acquaintance with Him, and had by skilful preparation on His pp become ready for a general presentation of
is religio-ethical ideas. ‘To tind Jesus giving one of His most significant discourses in connexion with the appointment of the twelve apostles is altogether what one might expect. That appoint- ment was a great event in Hisministry. It marked the stage when His popular success required Him to choose and train some men to panie Hii in His work (Mk 3"); and it behoved Him also, since the storm of opposition was gathering on the horizon (Mk 21-35, ef. Mt 237°-*°), to prepare these men to carry forward His work after He should lay down His life at Jerusalem.