| Poster | Thread | Isaiah64
Member
Joined: 2006/9/27
Posts: 85
| | The Sins of Augustine | | [url=http://gospeltruth.net/aug/sinsofaug.htm]The Sins of Augustine[/url]
Any thoughts on this article? I haven't read much about church history during this time period so I am wondering about the reliability and truth of the article. |
|  2007/5/16 22:08 | Profile | swsojourner
Member
Joined: 2003/10/3
Posts: 167
| | Re: The Sins of Augustine | | this is a terrible article.. Pelagius is recognized as a heretic by both Protestant and Catholics. Pelagianism is a heresy. It's not a "biblical theology." There are some other terrible assumptions in the article. Augustine's Confessions is an awesome book, truly deserving of being called a classic. It's a prayer to God.
And lest we forget, Arianism -- that Jesus Christ was a created being -- also held sway at one time in Christianity...Maybe Athananius and the desert saints bribed that particulary noxious opionion also to be declared a heresy
I can't believe this stuff..incredible
_________________
Karsten Nordmo
|
| | 2007/5/16 22:56 | Profile | KingJimmy
Member
Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC
| | Re: The Sins of Augustine | | This article is ok at parts, but has a tendency to make horrible generalizations to favor what appears to be notions regarding "open theism" and denying the doctrine of original sin. It is a rather slanted article. I am far from being an expert on Augustine, but I have read enough of his actual works (e.g. Confessions, The Trinity, The City of God, Against the Manicheans) and have sat in under a couple lectures on him. So, I think I am able to make some comment...
To pick at a few things:
Quote:
First of all, believe it or not, Augustine couldn't read Greek!
This is not true. Augustine did study Greek, and probably had roughly the equivalent of a year of seminary knowledge of the language. However, he did note on more than one occasion how he loathed the language, and much preferred Latin.
Quote:
A second problem with Augustine is where he got much of his theology from. Before becoming a Christian, Augustine studied two different religions/philosophies, that he allowed to influence him, and brought their doctrines with him into the Church.
No doubt, there are traces of Neo-Platonism and some Manichean thought throughout Augustine's writings. However, it should be well noted that while Augustine found that there were common points of agreement with these various philosophical schools, that he at many times goes to bat with these philosophical schools. In fact, part of the reason he became a Christian is because he found that these philosophical systems were found wanting in many ways. You can see such heavily in his classic work, "The City of God," where he wrestles and argues with many of the philosophers of his day. You can also see such in his book, "Against the Manicheans." It seems the author of this paper seems to forget he wrote such a book. Quite the contrary, the author of this article seems to think he just accepts them almost outright.
The author of this article though, seems to mislead the reader so as to believe that Augustine simply baptized these philosophical systems into Christian doctrine. However, much of any carry over Augustine brings to the table, in my opinion, is really no more than you and I bring with us when we sit down and examine the Scriptures. Augustine was very committed to the Scriptures. His interpretation of them at times might fall short of always being sound, but in my opinion, when Augustine sat down to interpret the Scriptures, he tried his best to be faithful to the text before him.
Quote:
What is generally not known about Augustine is that he favored his philosophers more than the Old Testament revelation. Bishop Ambrose, who was instrumental in converting Augustine, had to help him overcome his problem with the Old Testament : it seems that Augustine felt that the God of the Old Testament was capricious and vindictive, and at odds with the God of the New testament.
I'm not so sure about this quote. Especially since Augustine devotes about 300+ pages of his "City of God" to summarizing the entire history of the Old Testament!!! But this is really a silly comment altogether. For many Christians have found the Old Testament to be a problem, and think the God of the Old Testament to be a mean bully.
Quote:
According to Augustine, the Old Testament was not a perfect revelation of God and his character, but contained bits and pieces about God that we had to figure out with allegorical interpretation. Augustine's influence was so great that, for a thousand years, his method of interpreting the Bible was the official method of interpretation used by the Church.
I would like to see an actual quote used to support this. No doubt, Augustine used allegorical methods of interpreting the Scriptures... even in the New Testament we see such.
But to the extent he did this, he was rather in keeping with the popular method of the day. He was far from being the father of this method. In fact, it had been around centuries before him. In fact, Origen is often considered the father of the allegorical method of interpreting Scripture. And even then, what he did was not too unlike with Phileo, the Hellenist-Jewish theologian did prior to him!!!
Quote:
A third problem with Augustine that is not discussed often is his tendency to develop doctrine based on his experience rather than scripture. I have heard it said, "A man's philosophy is dictated by his morals." The same is true for his theology. Augustine wrote an autobiography, considered to be a classic, Confessions, and in it, he discusses his problems with sin. He spends a great deal of time dealing with an incident (as a young teenager ) in which he stole pears from a neighbor's tree, and uses this event to develop and teach the doctrine of Original Sin.
This issue isn't really discussed because it's simply not true. In the Confessions, Augustine uses the example of the stolen pears not so much to prove the doctrine of original sin so much as simply to set forth a vivid example of it as demonstrated in his own life. It was his personal revelation of what he considered a Biblical truth. What he did in this is nothing more than any good preacher worth his salt would do.
Quote:
Did you get that? Augustine wrote justifying the legal "coercion" of Christians who disagreed with him. Since when do we resort to legal courts and edicts to decide Christian practice?
Well, this is simply the logical conclusions of Augustine's eschatology and ecclisiology. Augustine simply did not see a real distinction between church and state. In fact, he pretty much saw the church-state as in continuation with the Old Testament theocratic state of Israel. So, being that you could impose the death penalty upon blasphemers under the Old Testament, then it doesn't take much of a leap of thought to say such can be done during this age. And at the same time with Augustine having such a theology, then one can see he isn't really greatly in conflict with the Old Testament as this article alleges.
Quote:
Finally, Pelagius was a holiness preacher.
This is perhaps the most laughable statement in the entire article. Pelagius believed man was essentially good and basically believed man could achieve salvation by his own good works. Christ was simply an example to pattern one's life after, but was not necessary for salvation.
Quote:
we can see that Augustine, far from being a saint,
I agree with this though... Augustine was far from a saint. If you truly want a good study on Augustine, get Brown's book on him. His work on Augustine is considered pretty much the definitive interpretation and statement on Augustine. It's a tomb to work through, but is for the serious student.
_________________
Jimmy H
|
| | 2007/5/16 23:19 | Profile | PreachParsly
Member
Joined: 2005/1/14
Posts: 2164
Arkansas
| | Re: | | Thanks for the comments Jimmy.
_________________
Josh Parsley
|
| | 2007/5/17 10:09 | Profile | HomeFree89
Member
Joined: 2007/1/21
Posts: 797
Indiana
| | Re: | | I haven't read the article posted, but here is a partial list of Augustine's beliefs.
That Mary was born and lived her entire life without sin.
That unbaptized infants are eternally damned.
That sex within marriage is a inherently debased act.
That war can be holy.
That there will be no literal millenium.
That there is no forgiveness for sins outside of the Catholic Church.
That some practices and teachings of the apostles no longer apply to Christians because the apostles lived in a differant age.
That there is a purgatorial fire.
That the dead can benefit from the sacrifice of the Eucharist.
Jordan
_________________
Jordan
|
| | 2007/5/17 20:51 | Profile | swsojourner
Member
Joined: 2003/10/3
Posts: 167
| | Re: | | Jordan,
well, without question Augustine was Catholic. :)
someone has described the Reformation as Augustine's doctrines of grace triumphing over his doctrine of the Church.
Karsten
_________________
Karsten Nordmo
|
| | 2007/5/17 21:10 | Profile | Isaiah64
Member
Joined: 2006/9/27
Posts: 85
| | Re: | | I'm not a pelagian by any means, but it just seems so interesting that those of the Reformed persuasion are so quick to call Pelagius a heretic, (and even throw Finney in the same boat with him, labeling him a "wolf in sheep's clothing") but they seem to ignore the fact that the cherished "father" of their faith was a heretic himself. |
| | 2007/5/24 13:09 | Profile |
|
