208 LIEUT. -COL. G. MACKIXLAY, ON SOME LUCAX PROBLEMS. 



that a large number of fragments of St. Matthew's sermon are 

 foiuid scattered in other parts of St. Luke's Gospel ; e.g., Matthew v. 

 13, corressponds with Luke xiv, 3-4 : Matthew y, 15, with both Luke 

 viii, 16, and xi, 33. 



He considers it more likely that St. Matthew collected in one 

 discourse what he found scattered in different parts of Q. 



{h) He thinks that the references in Luke to journeying (which 

 he quotes) refer to a single account of one journey, but he admits 

 that parts of it are obviously in the reverse of chronological order. 

 For instance, he thinks that the passage, '*I must go on My wav, 

 to-day and to-morrow, and the day following (Luke xiii, 33), shows 

 that Christ was then only two days' journey of slow progress from 

 Jerusalem. 



He states that this chronological difficulty is met by the three 

 narrative theory, but he is himself unable to accept the explanation 

 which it gives because " there is not the least hint or suggestion in 

 Luke xiv, 25, that we are reading about the beginning of a journev, 

 the impression left on the reader's mind is that it is the same of 

 which St. Luke has been speaking throughout." 



He thinks a simpler explanation is "to suppose that St. Luke had 

 before him a collection of incidents connected with the journey, but 

 not arranged chronologically, that into these he inserted a portion 

 of Q, probably in the order in which he found it, and finally inserted 

 the whole bodily into his revised Marcan document." 



(c) He does not see any analogy between a supposed three-fold 

 narrative in Luke and the two thrice repeated narratives in the 

 Acts of the Conversion of St. Paul and of the visit to Cornelius by 

 St. Peter, " Neither of these cases are parallel, because in both cases 

 the first record is the writer's narrative, the other two are records 

 or references of speakers, and there is not the slightest literary 

 difficulty or obscurity involved." 



He concludes, while I feel that I have no right to argue 

 a priori, the exact degree of accuracy on such a point as chrono- 

 logical order that inspiration involves, I should personally be very 

 sorry to discover that it permitted the use of a method of composi- 

 tion which, if true of St. Luke, has deceived every reader and 

 commentator up to the present time." 



The Eev. H. Gaussex, M. A., writes : On reading this very inter- 

 esting paper the following points struck me, (a) On p. 190 mention 



