13 November 2008

Happy Birthday, St. Augustine of Hippo

St. Augustine of Hippo

Today we mark the birthday of one of the greatest Christian theologians of all time, St. Augustine of Hippo (A.D. 13 November 354 to 28 August 430). He was of Berber descent and was born in present-day Algeria.

St. Augustine developed the concept of original sin. However, more importantly, he outlined the idea of just war, a concept I use today to judge the use of military force. When I call the Iraq war an illegal, immoral and unjust war, much of my analysis rests on the concepts put forth by St. Augustine.

The other reason I admire Augustine was that he believed the Bible should not be taken literally when it contradicts what we know from science and what our God-given ability to reason tells us. He wrote against a literal interpretation of Genesis and said such a dogmatic belief in the literalism of the Bible would be dangerous to the faith.

As he wrote in A.D. 408:

It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation.

- The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 1:19-20, Chapter 19

It is unfortunate that such a simple truism was easily grasped by one of the greatest Christian theologians 1,600 years ago, but it completely escapes some 21st century minds.

St. Augustine was not much appreciated while he was alive in the fourth and fifth centuries, partly because he did not write in Greek. While he was a witness to the fall of Rome, his town of Hippo was truly a backwater town of the empire.

Still, his writings, which surprisingly survived the turmoil of the times, heavily influenced medieval thought and my other favorite theologian, St. Thomas Aquinas.

St. Augustine is proof that theology and reason are not necessarily antithetical to each other.

Here is to the 1,654th anniversary of the birth of a great human thinker.

category | Religion
author | Lucente

Trackback

There are currently no trackbacks for this item.

Use this TrackBack url to ping this item (right-click, copy link target). If your blog does not support Trackbacks you can manually add your trackback by using this form.

danimal wrote:

Tom,
Interesting, for sure. And as a theologian this MAN is interesting. A great thinker, agreed. But I question the title SAINT for anyone because it is a title made up by men and is based on unprovable criteria.
But yes, celebate the birthday/anniversary of a great thinker. And as a good Catholic I assume you will slamming a few brewskies today. (lol...just had to throw that in)

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
14 November 2008 03:18:10

wrote:

That is quite fascinating, Tom. I recently watched a DVD from the Creation Museum explaining that man once walked with dinosaurs, despite the scientific (and even common-sense) evidence otherwise. Too literal an interpretation of Genesis is indeed dangerous.

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
14 November 2008 15:08:57

Lucente wrote:

AverageGuy,

Don't get me started on the Creation Museum!!

I am really amused by their claim that Noah had dinosaurs on the ark! That must have been one big ark.

~tjl~

Using

Mozilla Firefox 3.0.4 on

Windows Vista
14 November 2008 15:13:55

danimal wrote:

BIG ARK? 300 cubits x 50 cubits x 30 cubits. Thats 450 ft x 75 ft x 45 ft.
or 140 meters x 23 meters x 13.5 meters. Nope...no dinosaurs in there.

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
14 November 2008 21:20:43

danimal wrote:

And have you noticed that Christians always speak of how Noah brought two of every animal, male and female, onto the ark? The Bible says he was to bring 7 of every 'clean' animal and 2 of the unclean, that were mates.

God created the heavens and the earth and rested. He created all living things, then rested. He created MAN and rested. He created WOMAN, and since then neither God nor Man has rested!

You know why men die before their wives?
Because they want to!

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
15 November 2008 07:44:24

wrote:

They were baby dinosaurs.

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
15 November 2008 09:39:19

Susan wrote:

Har har, danimal.

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows Vista
15 November 2008 13:28:23

danimal wrote:

Tom, A little off trck form this article, or maybe not, but I finaly looked up the little symbol you put at the bottom of you'r intro to this blog. ( you know..house >funny arrow thingy)

In this important code is found the first written reference to the concept of liberty (amagi or amargi, literally, "return to the mother" wink

, used in reference to the process of reform. The exact nature of this term is not clear, but the idea that the reforms were to be a return to the original social order decreed by the gods fits well with the translation.

Can I ask a question? Just what was the original social order in 3650 BC? I can not begin to imagine that you conceve it as civilized. Lots of nasty weapons and tribal clashes, clan mentality, ruleing classes....
Wait a minute. That sounds eerilly familiar. Never mind. I guess you picked the correct symbol after all.
rolleyes

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
15 November 2008 18:03:46

Scant wrote:

Hey Danimal.
You know how to fix a womans watch????.......Answer!.....You don't, theres one on the kicthen stove lol

.

Susan don't get mad, just messing around. confused

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
16 November 2008 17:03:47

danimal wrote:

HEY SCANT...
How many men does it take to open a beer?
None...it should be open when SHE brings it!!!

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
16 November 2008 17:15:27

danimal wrote:

Oh Yeah,
What's worse than a male chauvinist pig?
A woman that won't do what she's told!

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
16 November 2008 17:17:26

Scant wrote:

I HEAR YOU BROTHER, WHEN WILL WOMEN KNOW THEIR PLACE. wink

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
16 November 2008 17:22:34

HappyG wrote:

Funny, guys! As an aside, I wish we could go back to the good old days. I wouldn't mind opening a beer or two, if I didn't have to work the prior 8 hours. I'm too tired to much more than complain. smile

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
16 November 2008 17:31:42

Scant wrote:

Happy,
I am with you, would like to go back to the good ole days. Tired of opening my own beer! Just kidding, unless I am in a group of guys then it is different. confused

.......Take it easy gals, I love women. surprised

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
16 November 2008 17:55:37

Susan wrote:

Scant, you sound SO much like my husband, it's scary. wink

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows Vista
16 November 2008 22:17:37

Susan wrote:

OK, danimal, YOU sound like my husband too. Are you sure you all don't know each other????

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows Vista
16 November 2008 22:18:42

Susan wrote:

My husband keeps saying he wants a pet monkey that he can name "b*tch", so that when he says, "Fetch me a beer b*tch", it will actually deliver. (He knows better than to say that to me.) lol

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows Vista
16 November 2008 22:21:19

wrote:

You are all too quick to lump Christians into one category.

Even a "literal" interpretation of Genesis can have very different conclusions. Yet Tom continues to misinterpret and misrepresent people of varying beliefs.

Kind of ironic for the guy who got so offended at McCain's comments on libertarians.

But what's even more of a concern is that Tom knows so little about "science". Yet he speaks as if he's some sort of SME.

Here's a tip, despite what your 9th grade biology teachers said, there are as many errors in their textbooks as you'll find in the Creation Museum.

I agree w/ you Tom, use critical thinking in interpreting the Bible. No Christian has anything to fear from this approach. But, you could stand a few more lessons on what critical thinking really is.

Using

Internet Explorer 6.0 on

Windows XP
18 November 2008 10:51:03

Lucente wrote:

MrTorch,

You are too quick to try to claim how only your interpretation of everything is right and everyone else is stupid. Well, my friend, it is you who is confused and you who continues to misrepresent others.

If you want to try to prove me stupid or uninformed, good luck. However, try to stick with what I actually write, not what you assume (erroneously) I believe. The only thing I have said here is that St. Augustine warned against a literal interpretation of Genesis. I made no mention of evolution. Yet, you continually try to pin some unwavering and unquestioning belief in evolution on me that is not warranted by anything I have written.

You are so quick to point out the errors in the theory of evolution when in reality, your logic is the one with more errors than the Creation Museum (and that is a lot of errors). Moreover, for the record, I never took biology in 9th grade nor was I offended by McCain’s comments on libertarians (amazed at his lack of knowledge).

Perhaps, MrTorch, you have some unresolved issues with your faith or your understanding of science. Whatever it is, perhaps you should try to work those out before launching ad hominem arguments against me.

~tjl~

Using

Mozilla Firefox 3.0.4 on

Windows Vista
19 November 2008 01:19:14

danimal wrote:

OH MAN,
Another word of the day!!! Where do you guys get this stuff!
An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man" wink

consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.
Or do you mean the fallicy defonition?
Either way, Wasn't Pope Paul the 2nd that said torture was OK when dealing with witch's
I guess even Catholics evolve!!!

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
19 November 2008 02:59:19

HappyG wrote:

I found this article at reason.com. It's an interview with Ronald Reagan in July, 1975, where Reagan compares conservatism with Libertarianism. Very good read.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/29318.html

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
23 November 2008 10:00:55

wrote:

Lucente wrote:
AverageGuy,

Don't get me started on the Creation Museum!!

Yes, average, DO get him started on the Creation Museum. It really is quite humorous to see how bent out of shape Lucente becomes when he sees that others have the actual (not merely philisophical) right to disagree with him and even to (gasp!) teach their own children whatever they please.

Lucente's libertarianism flies out the window when he encounters anyone who dares proffer the idea that scientists and anyone deemed a saint by "THE" church might actually be the ones who are fallible.

Using

Internet Explorer 6.0 on

Windows 2000
25 November 2008 17:34:10

Lucente wrote:

GRACE,

Actually, I find that patently unfair. I in no way advocate using the force of law to prevent things such as the Creation Museum despite how wrong they are. Libertarianism doesn't mean not expressing an opinion about something. If people want to waste their money building or visiting a fairy tale museum, they are more than welcome to do so. Likewise, it is well within my right to denounce such things as folly (as is the claim by the Creation Museum that dinosaurs were all on a boat floating around the Earth for 40 days).

That's part of the problem in America today. If one advocates for drug legalization, one must support drug use. If one advocates to legalize prostitution, then that person must support prostitution. There is a big difference in allowing something to legally occur and condoning that activity.

It is more than appropriate to debate things like origins. However, I would fight strenuously against any law that would ban things such as the Creation Museum, just as I argue for the KKK's right to march in Lima or anywhere else. There is a big difference between allowing an idea and supporting an idea. Mayor Berger actually went on the radio and called me a racist a few years ago because I supported the KKK's right to march in Lima (they never came). Even he fails to understand that difference.

~tjl~

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
25 November 2008 17:52:28

wrote:

You would have no problem with the teaching of creationism in public schools then?
just curious..

Using

Internet Explorer 6.0 on

Windows XP
25 November 2008 18:51:02

Lucente wrote:

SgtGideonsDad,

I am opposed to teaching any subject in a government school. In fact, issues such as creationism, sex education and other controversial subjects are part of the reason the government should not be in the education business.

However, I have no problem (at least legally) with the teaching of creationism in a private school, though I would still criticize it as a disservice to the pupils if it were being taught as science rather than in a religion, myth or philosophy class.

~tjl~

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
25 November 2008 19:07:28

wrote:

If Intelligent Design were allowed to be taught in public school would you consider it
a myth or a science. I myself believe in Intelligent Design..

Using

Internet Explorer 6.0 on

Windows XP
25 November 2008 19:25:15

Lucente wrote:

Again, I am opposed to any subject being taught in a government school. Such schools should not exist. That is the only issue when talking about government schools.

As far as intelligent design, would not evolution be intelligent design? I see no incongruity in believing in a creator of the universe and in the evolutionary model of life on this planet. That is intelligent design. There is nothing in evolution that says the process was not created by an intelligent being. In fact, science is ill-equipped to even address the subject of God.

However, I would never oppose anything being taught as science provided it is subject to observation, experimentation and follows the scientific method. Intelligent design, at least as most adherents explain it, would fail that test.

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
25 November 2008 19:46:39

wrote:

Government schools shouldn't exist eh?
Susan, will be around shortly to leave a
comment about public schools..maybe?

Using

Internet Explorer 6.0 on

Windows XP
25 November 2008 21:33:59

danimal wrote:

TOM,
Public schools do and should exist. They are STATE education systems, allowed by the 10th amendment. Jimmy Carter got it all screwed up...go figure... when he created the US DOE. Its kind of an oversight for state schools...thats not in the 10th amendment. But You always are going on about the Constitution....so live with it, accept it.
And you never answered me about your Pope, the which hunter.....or why you are not out bombing the white house.

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows XP
25 November 2008 21:48:22

Susan wrote:

SgtD'sDad, is that a request... or a prediction? If it's a request, I don't think I have it in me to do it up properly at the moment. Just as well, Tom is all too aware of my opinion of his opinion of public schools anyway. It is never pleasant when we "discuss" education. rolleyes

Using

Internet Explorer 7.0 on

Windows Vista
25 November 2008 22:49:33