The error of those who think that Mark and Luke relate a different miracle from this, has been already refuted. It is the same country which was opposite, as Luke expressly states, to Galilee, that is described by the three Evangelists, and all the circumstances agree. Who then will believe that the same things, so fully coincident at all points, happened at different times?
Matthew 8:28Two demoniacs met him Commentators have been led into the error of separating Matthew’s narrative from that of the others by this single difference, that he mentions two, while the others mention but one. There is probability in the conjecture of Augustine, who thinks that there were two, but accounts for not more than one being mentioned here by saying, that this one was more generally known, and that the aggravation of his disease made the miracle performed on him the more remarkable. And, indeed, we see that Luke and Mark employ many words in describing the extraordinary rage of the devil, so as to make it evident that the wretched man, of whom they speak, was grievously fomented. The circumstance of their holding up to commendation one singular instance of Christ’s divine power is not inconsistent with the narrative of Matthew, in which another, though less known man, (547) is also mentioned.
(547) “ Combien qu'il ne lust pas rant eognu que le premier;” — “though he was not so well known as the former.”