# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1902_S42
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

42 Proceedings of the nineteenth convention

[agreed with one another.] Now one evangelist, however, reports like the other that Jesus had in the night before threatened wind and sea and made them quite still, and that he then, immediately after the miracle was accomplished, departed from the border of the Gadarenes at their request, stepped into the ship again and went to Capernaum. Twice, however, Jesus would certainly not have exposed himself to such a wish of the Gadarenes. It may indeed be startling that the one evangelist names two possessed men, the two other reporters only one; but it is not a contradiction on that account. The matter resolves itself simply. Matthew was concerned solely to report the magnitude of the miracle in few words; Mark's account is three times, that of Luke twice as long as that of Matthew. Therefore Matthew tells us that the miracle happened to two, but does not tell us what happened afterward with the two healed men, and is also much briefer in the conversation of Jesus with the evil spirits. Mark and Luke, however, are concerned to bring out the effect which the healing produced in the conduct of the one healed man. It is quite possible that of the two it was only one who remained with Jesus, sat clothed and in his right mind at his feet, and wished to follow him out of gratitude, while the other simply went away after his healing.

If I — to cite an example — make a visit with a friend to an insane asylum, and we see there in the garden two insane men coming along, who both tear their clothes from their bodies, and of whom one at last holds out his hand to my friend with a friendly grin, and we both afterward come home, I tell my wife: "Today I saw two insane men who were tearing their clothes from their bodies"; my friend, however, tells his wife: "Listen, today I saw an insane man who tore the clothes from his body and went on in a wild way, and at last he gave me his hand as if nothing had happened" — can a reasonable person then say: Here there is a contradiction, one of the two must have said what is untrue? I think not. Or can anyone say: Those must have been two quite different occurrences? Certainly not.

That the devil, who is otherwise called and is a father of lies, here for once speaks the truth, that too is no contradiction; for Scripture does not say: He speaks only and always lies. Mich. Walther therefore remarks in his "Harmonia Biblica": "When the cunning and crafty spirit here speaks the truth, it has another purpose than to praise and glorify God with it. The men who hear Christ, the Son of God, named from his (the devil's) mouth are to believe, according to the devil's intention, rather: Precisely because the devil says it, therefore it will not be true. He therefore does not want to lead men into the truth, even if once he says the truth." Similarly Luther: "The