5:7 was evidently spoken on a mountain, Luke 6:17 says that a body of teaching of exactly the same character was

spoken `in the plain'. `There', says the critic, `the narrative is contradictory; one says a mountain, the other a plain'.

Others, to avoid the difficulty, say (and with truth), that the Lord could have repeated His teaching again elsewhere.

The whole controversy is dispelled by looking at the original, and using just simple common sense. First as to the

mountain, Matthew 5:1 says:

`And seeing the multitudes, He went up into a mountain: and when He was set, His disciples came unto Him'.

Luke 6:12 says:

`And it came to pass in those days, that He went out into a mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to

God. And when it was day, He called unto Him His disciples: and of them He chose twelve, whom also He

named apostles'.

This passage supplements Matthew's record. Matthew evidently had no reason to say why the Lord went up the

mountain, except that it was because of the multitude. The multitudes which followed Him were from Galilee,

Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judaea, and beyond Jordan, according to Matthew; they were from all Judaea, Jerusalem, the

sea coast of Tyre and Sidon, according to Luke. Both records are true, each gives his own account which does not

contradict, but complements the other.

Now as to the plain. The actual words are este epi topou pedinou, which rendered literally are, `He on a level

place'. These words are only another way of saying, `and when He was set'; no one could address a company of

people upon the oblique slopes of a mountain side, but coming down a little way until He reached `a level place'

such as is often to be found at any height, He could then address them comfortably. The contradiction therefore

vanishes, as does the need for two separate occasions when the actual facts are considered. Both Matthew and Luke

record the entrance of the Lord, after this `Sermon on the Mount', into Capernaum. Matthew adds the miracle of the

leper, and both record the miracle of the centurion's servant. What Matthew speaks of as being simply the words of

the centurion without mediators, Luke explains in fuller detail. The reason why the centurion spoke of his

unworthiness appears in Luke's account, because there it is recorded that the elders of the Jews had said that he was

worthy for whom He should do this.

In verse 3 of Luke 7 the word `sent' is apostello, sent away, the sender remaining behind. In verse 6 it is pempo,

to send with. The word `saying' [legon] indicates that the centurion is personally present and speaking to the Lord.

It seems more reasonable that we should have the variations of one event, than that on two separate occasions the

Lord should utter a similar lengthy address, then enter Capernaum, then be asked to heal the centurion's servant, be

answered in exactly the same way, and marvel for the second time at the great faith evidenced. Then as to the

calling of the twelve, Luke 6:13-16 positively states that after that night of prayer the Lord chose the twelve,

whereas Matthew 10:1 says that He called unto Him the twelve disciples, without stating when He had chosen them.

The only reason why these two passages should have been confounded is the fact that the names of the twelve are

given at length.

The healing of Peter's wife's mother could easily be misunderstood in the same way. In reading Matthew's

account we should naturally assume that the miracle took place after the healing of the centurion's servant, but both

Mark and Luke place it considerably earlier (cf., Mark 1:29 and Luke 4:38). The fact that Peter's house was in

Capernaum (Luke 4:31-38) links this miracle with the others that were associated with Capernaum, and Matthew,

without pretending to keep to historical order, has grouped them together. The Lord again touched the object of His

compassion, and this time the restored one arose and ministered unto Him.

So will Israel in the day of her healing, and so may we since He put forth His grace to us.

Matthew 8 to 12

Twelve separate miracles are recorded by Matthew. Eight separate signs are recorded by John. Evidently

therefore the writers of these `Gospels' made a choice of the event to suit the purpose of their respective narratives.