There are, then, some passages in Mt 5-7 and Lk 6°99 which did not historically form a part of the Sermon on the Mount, but which by a process of compilation (either in transmission or as the work of the Evangelists) have become associated with it. But one cannot be sure just how much ex- traneous matter is present in these reports, and the question is more difficult in Matthew than in Luke. There is much difference of opinion as to the amount of compilation, even among those who are best qualified to judge. It may be best to in- dicate three grades of the material: that which probably belonged to the original discourse, that about which there is uncertainty (accompanied by an interrogation-point in the table), and that which must be considered foreign addition (marked by enclosing brackets). The table that follows is in- tended to show the general opinion of scholars rather than any individual opinion.
Mt 53. 4.6. 11. 12 =Lk 620-238 Mt [ees 26)
? 5e. 7.8. 9.10 527. 28
oe [624-25] 9 529.
2 5ls-1 53. 32 5li-24 538-48 a Lk 627-80. 32-36
* Calvin, Baur, Strauss, Neander, Tholuck, Wieseler, Kuindl, Bleek, Keim, Weizsicker, Godet, Meyer, Bruce, H. Holtzmann, Nésgen, Achelis, Wendt, B. Weiss, Ibbeken, Wernle, Jiilicher, Heinrici, Sanday, Bartlet, Bacon, and many others.
+ The parallel passage in Luke is at 1618, but this verse and the preceding one are both unattached in this position, which indicates that they are dislocated ; 1617 belongs to the original Sermon, but this determines nothing for 1618, which stands in no logical relation to it.
Mt 67-6 Mt 272 =k 762 67-15] 2718-15 16-18 9 716-20 — 9 Gis: 44 9 G19-34 [6%] 71-5 — Tk 637. 38b. 41. 42 pl a 646 38a. 39. 40 7722. 28 [761] : ; Hea ak 647-49
In a problem so important as this of the theme and content of the Sermon on the Mount, attention must be given to the opinions of many scholars. A brief conspectus of these opinions follows, arranged in two groups: those who hold that the discourse of Mt 5-7 is a perfect and original whole, and those who regard as extraneous a smaller or larger portion of these chapters.
Morison thinks Mt 5-7 a complete unit, given by Jesus to ‘the constantly increasing multitude of such as took Him to be the long promised Messiah, and who wished to be instructed by Him as to what they should do in connection with the inauguration and establishment of His kingdom’ (Comm. on Matthew, new ed. 1884, p. 57).—Broadus maintains that the discourse was given exactly as in the First Gospel, and that in it Jesus ‘sets forth the characteristics of those who are to be subjects of this reign - [of heaven] and share the privileges connected with it, and urges upon them various duties. In particular He clearly exhibits the relation of His teachings to the moral law, in order to correct any notion that He proposed to set the law aside, or to relax its rigour, when, on the contrary, He came to inculcate not merely an external, but a deeply spiritual morality’ (Comm. on Matthew, 1886, pp. 83, 84).—Steinmeyer assumes that the Sermon as it appears in Matthew ‘came from Jesus in this order and in these words .. . Righteousness is the glittering thread which clearly runs through the whole discourse from the beginning to the end; this is the idea which constitutes its unity’ (Die Rede des Herrn auf dem Berge, 1885, pp. 10, 20). He makes a threefold division of the contents: the longing for righteousness, ch. 5; the striving for righteousness, ch. 6 ; the attainment of righteous- ness, ch. 7.*—Hugo Weiss also defends the integrity of Matthew's discourse, and considers it as ‘a necessary strand in the de- velopment of the Messianic movement. . .. [It contains] a characterization of the Messianic kingdom and of the duties of its members against a background of Jewish and Gentile conceptions of the world, teaching and practice’ (Die Bergpre- digt Christi, 1892, pp. 2, 8).—Ndésgen theoretically admits the possibility of the presence of some extraneous verses in Mt 5-7, but he does not as a matter of fact discover any. He thinks that in the discourse Jesus, as the fulfiller of the Law and the Prophets, aims to set forth the moral conditions of obtaining membership in the Messianic kingdom which is at hand (Das Evangelium nach Matthdéus2, 1897, p. 54).—Plummer holds that Luke’s Sermon is a different one from Matthew’s, though Luke has dropped out of his account the long section Mt 517-618 as inapplicable to his readers. And as to the theme, ‘the main point in Matthew is the contrast between the legal righteousness and the true righteousness ;+ in Luke the main point is that true righteousness is love’ (Comm. on Luke, 1896, p. 183).— Grawert is the latest defender of the complete unity of Mt 5-7 (Die Bergpredigt nach Matthdus, 1900). The proof of this in- tegrity is developed on a new line: the Beatitudes as given by Matthew constitute the key to the whole discourse, each Beati- tude corresponding to a particular section of these chapters and forming its epitome. He thinks that for this reason the Beati- tudes must have stood originally at the close of the Sermon instead of at the beginning, so that Mt 518-16 was the proper prologue to the Sermon (pp. 5-8). The eight Beatitudes as they now stand in Matthew are in inverse order as compared with the material of the discourse, thus: 510=511-16, 59—517-26, 58= 527-37, 57 = 538-48, 66-61-34, H5= 71.2, 54—'78-5(6), 5377-11 (p. 66). The purpose of the Sermon was ‘the consolidation of the disciple-group. By this we mean the inner and outer separation of the disciples from their former Jewish past, and the establish- ment of their new position on the basis of their relation to the Lord, and in their actual outer connexion with Him as His followers and future messengers of the Kingdom of Heaven’