Blessed Augustine on the Age of the Earth

[Matthew777]

The following should hammer the nail into the coffin for anyone who attempts to use Blessed Augustine to support theistic evolution:

"They are deceived, too, by those highly mendacious documents which profess to give the history of many thousand years, though, reckoning by the sacred writings, we find that not 6000 years have yet passed."
Blessed Augustine, City of God, Book XII, CHAPTER 10 -- OF THE FALSENESS OF THE HISTORY WHICH ALLOTS MANY THOUSAND YEARS TO THE WORLD'S PAST
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/120112.htm


"As to those who are always asking why man was not created during these countless ages of the infinitely extended past, and came into being so lately that, according to Scripture, less than 6000 years have elapsed since He began to be, I would reply to them regarding the creation of man, just as I replied regarding the origin of the world to those who will not believe that it is not eternal, but had a beginning, which even Plato himself most plainly declares, though some think Iris statement was not consistent with his real opinion."
Blessed Augustine, City of God, Book XII, CHAPTER 12 -- HOW THESE PERSONS ARE TO BE ANSWERED, WHO FIND FAULT WITH THE CREATION OF MAN ON THE SCORE OF ITS RECENT DATE
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/120112.htm

May peace be upon thee and with thy spirit.

 

[Vance]

Well, sure, Augustine believed that the earth was young. But given his hermenuetical approach of allowing scientific evidence to influence his reading of Genesis, and his insistance in holding all conclusions about such things tenatively, I feel very confident that he would consider the evidence we have today and conclude that the earth is billions of years old.

 

[Matthew777]

But if you look at the quotes I provided in context, Blessed Augustine is warning that we should not allow the ideas of non-Christians to influence our interpretation of Scripture. The reason why he accepted a young earth instead of the secular views of history is the divine inspiration of Scripture.

May peace be upon thee and with thy spirit.

 

[Vance]

I don't see at all where he is saying that we should not let scientific evidence influence our reading of Scripture. He accepts a 6,000 year old earth, and argues against those who think the earth was eternal, without a beginning, which was based purely on philosophy, not science. Compare this with all the quotes and analysis I gave in the other Augustine thread.

 

[gluadys]

But if you look at the quotes I provided in context, Blessed Augustine is warning that we should not allow the ideas of non-Christians to influence our interpretation of Scripture. The reason why he accepted a young earth instead of the secular views of history is the divine inspiration of Scripture.

May peace be upon thee and with thy spirit.

But Matthew. Not all scientists are non-Christian. That includes scientists who believe the theory of evolution is one of the best scientific theories we have.

So your objection does not apply.

 

[Matthew777]

But Matthew. Not all scientists are non-Christian. That includes scientists who believe the theory of evolution is one of the best scientific theories we have.

So your objection does not apply.

Given that science cannot claim divine inspiration it should apply.

 

[Vance]

Yes, but neither can any human interpretation of Scripture, either. Only Scripture itself is inspired, and it is then up to fallible humans to seek to interpret it with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

When we talk about nature, we are talking about a divine and inspired creation of God.

When we talk about Scripture, we are talking about a divine and inspired creation of God.

When we talk about the meaning of nature (science), we are talking about fallible Man's attempt to understand God's inspired natural Creation.

When we talk about the meaning of Scripture (exegesis), we are talking about fallible Man's attempt to understand God's inspired written Creation.

 

[PaladinValer]

Note: Just for my fellow TEs to know, I know a lot of Tradition-following Christians who have no problem with evolution, from Anglicans to Eastern Orthodox.

Matthew777, I'll simply repeat again what I said in the other thread: Your assumption is based on the fact that he never heard of evolution. Giving what he has said before however, if he knew of the theory, it is doubtful he would have thought evolutionary theory are wrong.

You logic is flawed because he never knew of evolution. It was after him.