If you didn't like the Sermon on the Mount presented in the gospel of Matthew, perhaps you will like the second volume, the Sermon on the Plain. The Sermon on the Mount is one of the best-known stories of Matthews' gospel and contains essentially the gist of Jesus' earthly ministry and more. Jesus demonstrated perfectly what it means to be poor in Spirit, to cry, to be meek, to hunger and thirst for justice, to be merciful, pure of heart, a peacemaker and to be persecuted for justice. The only way we can live the life Jesus talks about in this sermon is to join Him through the Spirit so that we participate in the divine nature and share in the life of God. Because Jesus lives in us and we participate in that life, the Beatitudes will begin to shine and we will be "the blessed". Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Turning to Luke we find what appears to be a parallel story to the Sermon on the Mount, but this time set on a plain rather than a mountain. The Sermon on the Plain contains many of the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount, but also includes many key disparities. These disparities include a different setting and an extremely shortened version of the Sermon on the Mount that excludes key aspects of Matthew's version such as prophecy and Jewish law. These differences provide great evidence for ideas such as the timeline in which the gospels are believed to have been written, as well as the redaction and criticism of the sources. We can attribute these differences largely to the different audiences for which the respective authors wrote their gospels. Before addressing the distinctions between Matthew's and Luke's versions of this story, it is important to take a look at the similarities as well. First, the crowd is more or less the same in both versions. Jesus just healed many people from unclean spirits, illnesses, etc. And now these people who have just seen his supernatural power are about to be taught by Jesus. Furthermore, although they are very different in length, almost everything found in Luke's Sermon on the Plain is also presented in Matthew's Sermon on the Mount, but not the other way around. Luke's includes the beatitudes, loving your enemies, judging others, a tree and its fruit, and building your house on the rock. I find these similarities to be important when it comes to source criticism. It appears that Matthew and Luke are in complete agreement, in terms of language and content, on the things that Luke presents in his version of this story, which gives validity to the idea that they shared some source other than Mark. However, it is in the differences between sermons that we can gain even greater evidence of New Testament ideas such as source criticism and redaction. The first distinction that immediately catches your eye is the difference in settings. In Matthew, Jesus leaves the crowd and climbs a mountain before teaching. However, in Luke it says that Jesus stood on a flat surface in front of the crowd and then began to teach. What seems like a minor detail is actually a significant distinction. In the gospel of Matthew we see a figure of Jesus who looks much more like a king than a servant. This is a common theme throughout the gospel, as opposed to Luke's portrayal of Jesus which is a little more modest and appealing to a wider audience. This difference in setting is a great example of this distinction between Jesus in Matthew and Jesus in Luke. In Matthew Jesus goes up a mountain, signifying his Lordship and authority, while in Luke Jesus remains at the same level as?