- Jun 24, 2003
- 1,031
- 131
- 53
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Republican
4th Century St.Augustine Exposes Ape-To-Man Hoax
Ever since I was a kid in school I was taught that Darwin was the first man who discovered our alleged ape to man origin. This is something that is drilled into our minds since our youth. But what would happen if it were historically presented that Darwin's philosophy which teaches that monkeys, apes and humans belong to the same pedigree existed long before Darwin? Would that not prove that evolution is ancient pantheist religion?
Today people think Darwin was some great scientist who proved man evolved from apes. But this careless thinking avoids the reality that what came down to us from Darwinian assumptions had been an ancient mystical belief long before Augustine's time. Here, 4th century Augustine is speaking about the origin and diversity of humans and some myths which have come about since ancient times.
City of God: Book XVI, chapter 8, p.663 (Penguin Classics translation),
"Some years ago, but certainly in my time, a man was born in the East with a double set of upper parts, but a single set of the lower limbs. That is, he had two heads, two chests, and four arms, but only one belly and two feet, as if he were one man. And he lived long enough for the news of his case to attract many sightseers.
In fact, it would be impossible to list all the human infants very unlike those who, without any doubt, were their parents. Now it cannot be denied that these derive ultimately from that one man; and therefore the same is true of all those races which are reported to have deviated as it were, by their divergences in bodily structure, from the normal course of nature followed by the majority, or practically the whole of mankind. If these races are included in the definition of 'human', that is, if they are rational and mortal animals, it must be admitted that they trace their lineage from that same one man, the first father of all mankind. This assumes, of course, the truth of the stories about the divergent features of those races, and their great differences from one another and from us. The definition is important; for if we did not know monkeys, long tailed apes and chimpanzees are not men but animals, those natural historians who plume themselves on their collection of curiosities might pass them off on us as races of men, and get away with such nonsense."
City of God, Marcus Dods translation:
"Some years ago, quite within my own memory, a man was born in the East, double his upper, but single his lower half--having two heads, two chests, four hands, but one body and two feet like a ordinary man ; and he lived so long that many had an opportunity of seeing him. But who could enumerate all the human births that have differed widely from their ascertained parents? As, therefore, no one will deny that these are all descended from from that one man, so all the races which are reported to have diverged in bodily appearance from the usual course which nature generally or almost universally preserves, if they are embraced in that definition of man as rational and mortal animals, unquestionably trace their pedigree to that one first father of all. We are supposing these stories about various races who differ from one another and from us to be true ; but possibly they are not ; for if we were not aware that apes, and monkeys, and sphinxes are not men, but beasts, those historians would possibly describe them as races of men, and flaunt with impunity their false and vainglorious discoveries."
Charles Darwin would be the natural historian who would entertain the false theory which placed man in the same pedigree as the moneys and apes.
Also interesting is how there is a Hindu legend of the vanara who are said to be ape men. So we do find an ape man myth in ancient history.
Ever since I was a kid in school I was taught that Darwin was the first man who discovered our alleged ape to man origin. This is something that is drilled into our minds since our youth. But what would happen if it were historically presented that Darwin's philosophy which teaches that monkeys, apes and humans belong to the same pedigree existed long before Darwin? Would that not prove that evolution is ancient pantheist religion?
Today people think Darwin was some great scientist who proved man evolved from apes. But this careless thinking avoids the reality that what came down to us from Darwinian assumptions had been an ancient mystical belief long before Augustine's time. Here, 4th century Augustine is speaking about the origin and diversity of humans and some myths which have come about since ancient times.
City of God: Book XVI, chapter 8, p.663 (Penguin Classics translation),
"Some years ago, but certainly in my time, a man was born in the East with a double set of upper parts, but a single set of the lower limbs. That is, he had two heads, two chests, and four arms, but only one belly and two feet, as if he were one man. And he lived long enough for the news of his case to attract many sightseers.
In fact, it would be impossible to list all the human infants very unlike those who, without any doubt, were their parents. Now it cannot be denied that these derive ultimately from that one man; and therefore the same is true of all those races which are reported to have deviated as it were, by their divergences in bodily structure, from the normal course of nature followed by the majority, or practically the whole of mankind. If these races are included in the definition of 'human', that is, if they are rational and mortal animals, it must be admitted that they trace their lineage from that same one man, the first father of all mankind. This assumes, of course, the truth of the stories about the divergent features of those races, and their great differences from one another and from us. The definition is important; for if we did not know monkeys, long tailed apes and chimpanzees are not men but animals, those natural historians who plume themselves on their collection of curiosities might pass them off on us as races of men, and get away with such nonsense."
City of God, Marcus Dods translation:
"Some years ago, quite within my own memory, a man was born in the East, double his upper, but single his lower half--having two heads, two chests, four hands, but one body and two feet like a ordinary man ; and he lived so long that many had an opportunity of seeing him. But who could enumerate all the human births that have differed widely from their ascertained parents? As, therefore, no one will deny that these are all descended from from that one man, so all the races which are reported to have diverged in bodily appearance from the usual course which nature generally or almost universally preserves, if they are embraced in that definition of man as rational and mortal animals, unquestionably trace their pedigree to that one first father of all. We are supposing these stories about various races who differ from one another and from us to be true ; but possibly they are not ; for if we were not aware that apes, and monkeys, and sphinxes are not men, but beasts, those historians would possibly describe them as races of men, and flaunt with impunity their false and vainglorious discoveries."
Charles Darwin would be the natural historian who would entertain the false theory which placed man in the same pedigree as the moneys and apes.
Also interesting is how there is a Hindu legend of the vanara who are said to be ape men. So we do find an ape man myth in ancient history.