lll "The Sermon on the Mount" assembly

It is roughly divided into approximately eight parts

1 Introduction 4-23-5-2
2 fortunate event 5 1-12
3 salt of the earth, light of the world 5 13-6
4 The Old and the New, Righteousness 5 17-48

It is doubtful whether such a break can really be called classification.
However, it is true that "The Sermon on the Mount" was not spoken at the same time as one whole as seen from here. It is understood from the fact that although the same thing is written in the Gospel of Luke, it is not put together as in the case of Matthew. The author of Matthew gathered the words that the Lord Jesus was said to have spoken, put them together, classified them appropriately, and wrote their forms, etc., as appropriate. However, the author did not intend to make one thing called "The Sermon on the Mount" by putting the whole into one.

So no matter who looks at it, it's easy to see that the original collected the loose pieces of material and wrote them side by side.The Gospel of Luke uses almost the same material as Matthew. But the place is on the plains, not on the mountain (Luke 6-7).
So, even if "The Sermon on the Mount" is actually present, it can not be specifically imagined where and how it is spoken. Is it on a mountain, or on a flat? Was it twice on the mountain and on the plains? However, it is impossible to put together the same story on either a mountain or a flatland, is it twice a chapter 2 a real explanation? It seems like an excuse, like a sophistory.

The same thing can be considered for the poverty of being fortunate. Is mere "poor man" (ruka 6-20) happy? Or is "a poor person in mind" (Matthew 5-3) blessed? The problem is not something that can be solved by thinking about what Jesus said. Or did Jesus talk about poverty many times, and just various things about poverty and other times when it comes to poverty? But thinking this way is no longer the main source of gospel interpretation. The main point is that what did the original church, which was centered on the 12 apostles, wanted to use the materials to say one thing as the Lord's teaching or the church's teaching?

The whole thing called "The Sermon on the Mount" is rather collected for convenience. It is not possible to draw out the system of ideas in Plato's work and Buddhist scriptures behind the whole. "The Sermon on the Mount" is made up of roughly eight parts. But I cannot say anything about why I made it into eight parts or the meaning of the order in which they are arranged. They are just arranged for convenience. It is only a practical thing that you can find it quickly when preparing sermons. But then what is the content of what is said to be the Lord's words collected there?