VERS. I.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
Into the Country of the Gadarens.
SO also Luke. But Matthew, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Into the Country of the Gerge∣sens. And which ought not to be passed over without observation, Mark and Luke, who call it the Country of the Gadarens, make mention only of one possessed person, but Matthew, who calls it the Country of the Gergesens, speaks of two. We know what is here said by Commentators to reconcile the Evangelists. We fetch their reconcili∣ation from the very distinction of the words, which the Evangelists use, and that from those conclusions.
- I. We say, the Region of the Gergasens was of broader extent and signification, than the Region of the Gadarens was, and that the Region of the Gadarens was included within it. For whether it were called so, from the old Gergasite family of the Canaanites, or from the muddy and clayey nature of the soil, which was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gergishta, by the Jews, which we rather believe; it was of wider extension than the Country of the Gadarens; which denoted only one City, and the smaller Country about it, and that be∣longed to Gadara. But this Country comprehended within it the Country of Gadara, of Hippo, and of Magdala, if not others also.
- II. We say, Gadara was a City of Heathens (hence it is less marvail, if there were Swine among them.) Which we prove also elsewhere, when we treat of the Region of Decapolis.
- III. We say, there were two possessed persons, according to Matthew, one a Gadaren, another coming from some other place than the Country of Gadara, namely, from some place in the Country of the Gergasens.
- IV. We believe, that that Gadarene was a Heathen; and that Mark and Luke mention∣ed only him on set purpose, that so they might make the story the more famous. Any one skilled in the Chorography of the land of Israel, might understand, that the Coun∣try of the Gadarens was of Heathen possession: they therefore mark him with that name, that it might presently be perceived, that Christ now had to do with a Heathen Possessed person; which was somewhat rare, and except the daughter of the Syrophenissi∣an woman, without any example. Matthew would describe the greatness of the miracle; he therefore mentions two most miserably possessed persons; but Mark and Luke chuse out only one, and him more remarkable for this very thing, that he was a Gadarene, and by consequence, an Heathen. These things well weighed, do not only confirm the concord between the Evangelists, but render the story far clearer. For,
- First, It is to be marked, that the Devil adjures Christ not to torment him, vers. 7. which is not elsewhere done by him. As though he were without Christs jurisdiction, not being among his people the Jews, but among the Heathens. And,
- Secondly, Christ does not elsewhere ask any about their name, besides this alone, as being of more singular example and story.
- Thirdly, The Heathen name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Legion, argues him an Heathen, concerning whom the story is.
- Fourthly, The Devils besought him much, that he would not send them out of the Country, for being among Heathens, they thought they were among their own.
Our Saviour therefore healed those two in Matthew together, the one a Gadarene, and Heathen, and the other from some other place, a Gergesen, and a Jew; and that not with∣out a mystery; namely, that there should be comfort in Christ both to Jews and Gentiles, against the Power and Tyranny of Satan. Of those two, Mark and Luke mention the more remarkable.