Erhalten Sie Zugang zu diesem und mehr als 300000 Büchern ab EUR 5,99 monatlich.
- Herausgeber: Jazzybee Verlag
- Kategorie: Religion und Spiritualität
- Sprache: Englisch
Book I. The treatise opens with a short statement on the subject of the authority of the Evangelists, their number, their order, and the different plans of their narratives. Augustine then prepares for the discussion of the questions relating to their harmony, by joining issue in this book with those who raise a difficulty in the circumstance that Christ has left no writing of His own, or who falsely allege that certain books were composed by Him on the arts of magic. He also meets the objections of those who, in opposition to the evangelical teaching, assert that the disciples of Christ at once ascribe more to their Master than He really was, when they affirmed that He was God, and inculcated what they had not been instructed in by Him, when they interdicted the worship of the gods. Against these antagonists he vindicates the teaching of the Apostles, by appealing to the utterances of the Prophets, and by showing that the God of Israel was to be the sole object of worship, who also, although He was the only Deity to whom acceptance was denied in former times by the Romans, and that for the very reason that He prohibited them from worshipping other gods along with Himself, has now in the end made the Empire of Rome subject to His Name, and among all nations has broken their idols in pieces through the preaching of the Gospel, as He had promised by His prophets that the event should be. Book II. In this book Augustine undertakes an orderly examination of the Gospel according to Matthew, on to the narrative of the Supper, and institutes a comparison between it and the other Gospels by Mark, Luke, and John, with the view of demonstrating a complete harmony between the four Evangelists throughout all these sections. Book III.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 797
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2012
Das E-Book (TTS) können Sie hören im Abo „Legimi Premium” in Legimi-Apps auf:
Ähnliche
The Harmony Of The Gospels
St. Augustine of Hippo
Contents:
Saint Augustine – A Biography
Introductory Essay. St. Augustin as an Exegete.
The Harmony of the Gospels
Introductory Essay.
Translator’s Introductory Notice.
Book I.
Chapter I.—On the Authority of the Gospels.
Chapter II.—On the Order of the Evangelists, and the Principles on Which They Wrote.
Chapter III.—Of the Face that Matthew, Together with Mark, Had Specially in View the Kingly Character of Christ, Whereas Luke Dealt with the Priestly.
Chapter IV.—Of the Fact that John Undertook the Exposition of Christ’s Divinity.
Chapter V.—Concerning the Two Virtues, of Which John is Conversant with the Contemplative, the Other Evangelists with the Active.
Chapter VI.—Of the Four Living Creatures in the Apocalypse, Which Have Been Taken by Some in One Application, and by Others in Another, as Apt Figures of the Four Evangelists.
Chapter VII.—A Statement of Augustin’s Reason for Undertaking This Work on the Harmony of the Evangelists, and an Exampleof the Method in Which He Meets Those Who Allege that Christ Wrote Nothing Himself, and that His Disciples Made an Unwarranted Affirmation in Proclaiming Him to Be God.
Chapter VIII.—Of the Question Why, If Christ is Believed to Have Been the Wisest of Men on the Testimony of Common Narrative Report, He Should Not Be Believed to Be God on the Testimony of the Superior Report of Preaching.
Chapter IX.—Of Certain Persons Who Pretend that Christ Wrote Books on the Arts of Magic.
Chapter X.—Of Some Who are Man Enough to Suppose that the Books Were Inscribed with the Names of Peter and Paul.
Chapter XI.—In Opposition to Those Who Foolishly Imagine that Christ Converted the People to Himself by Magical Arts.
Chapter XII.—Of the Fact that the God of the Jews, After the Subjugation of that People, Was Still Not Accepted by the Romans, Because His Commandment Was that He Alone Should Be Worshipped, and Images Destroyed.
Chapter XIII.—Of the Question Why God Suffered the Jews to Be Reduced to Subjection.
Chapter XIV.—Of the Fact that the God of the Hebrews, Although the People Were Conquered, Proved Himself to Be Unconquered, by Overthrowing the Idols,and by Turning All the Gentiles to His Own Service.
Chapter XV.—Of the Fact that the Pagans, When Constrained to Laud Christ, Have Launched Their Insults Against His Disciples.
Chapter XVI.—Of the Fact That, on the Subject of the Destruction of Idols, the Apostles Taught Nothing Different from What Was Taught by Christ or by the Prophets.
Chapter XVII.—In Opposition to the Romans Who Rejected the God of Israel Alone.
Chapter XVIII.—Of the Fact that the God of the Hebrews is Not Received by the Romans, Because His Will is that He Alone Should Be Worshipped.
Chapter XIX.—The Proof that This God is the True God.
Chapter XX.—Of the Fact that Nothing is Discovered to Have Been Predicted by the Prophets of the Pagans in Opposition to the God of the Hebrews.
Chapter XXI.—An Argument for the Exclusive Worship of This God, Who, While He Prohibits Other Deities from Being Worshipped, is Not Himself Interdicted by Other Divinities from Being Worshipped.
Chapter XXII.—Of the Opinion Entertained by the Gentiles Regarding Our God.
Chapter XXIII.—Of the Follies Which the Pagans Have Indulged in Regarding Jupiter and Saturn.
Chapter XXIV.—Of the Fact that Those Persons Who Reject the God of Israel, in Consequence Fail to Worship All the Gods; And, on the Other Hand, that Those Who Worship Other Gods, Fail to Worship Him.
Chapter XXV.—Of the Fact that the False Gods Do Not Forbid Others to Be Worshipped Along with Themselves. That the God of Israel is the True God, is Proved by His Works, Both in Prophecy and in Fulfilment.
Chapter XXVI.—Of the Fact that Idolatry Has Been Subverted by the Name of Christ, and by the Faith of Christians According to the Prophecies.
Chapter XXVII.—An Argument Urging It Upon the Remnant of Idolaters that They Should at Length Become Servants of This True God, Who Everywhere is Subverting Idols.
Chapter XXVIII.—Of the Predicted Rejection of Idols.
Chapter XXIX.—Of the Question Why the Heathen Should Refuse to Worship the God of Israel; Even Although They Deem Him to Be Only the Presiding Divinity of the Elements?
Chapter XXX.—Of the Fact That, as the Prophecies Have Been Fulfilled, the God of Israel Has Now Been Made Known Everywhere.
Chapter XXXI.—The Fulfilment of the Prophecies Concerning Christ.
Chapter XXXII.—A Statement in Vindication of the Doctrine of the Apostles as Opposed to Idolatry, in the Words of the Prophecies.
Chapter XXXIII.—A Statement in Opposition to Those Who Make the Complaint that the Bliss of Human Life Has Been Impaired by the Entrance of Christian Times.
Chapter XXXIV.—Epilogue to the Preceding.
Chapter XXXV.—Of the Fact that the Mystery of a Mediator Was Made Known to Those Who Lived in Ancient Times by the Agency of Prophecy, as It is Now Declared to Us in the Gospel.
Book II.
The Prologue.
Chapter I.—A Statement of the Reason Why the Enumeration of the Ancestors of Christ is Carried Down to Joseph, While Christ Was Not Born of that Man’s Seed, But of the Virgin Mary.
Chapter II.—An Explanation of the Sense in Which Christ is the Son of David, Although He Was Not Begotten in the Way of Ordinary Generation by Joseph the Son of David.
Chapter III.—A Statement of the Reason Why Matthew Enumerates One Succession of Ancestors for Christ, and Luke Another.
Chapter IV.—Of the Reason Why Forty Generations (Not Including Christ Himself) are Found in Matthew, Although He Divides Them into Three Successions of Fourteen Each.
Chapter V.—A Statement of the Manner in Which Luke’s Procedure is Proved to Be in Harmony with Matthew’s in Those Matters Concerning the Conception and the Infancy or Boyhood of Christ, Which are Omitted by the One and Recorded by the Other.
Chapter VI.—On the Position Given to the Preaching of John the Baptist in All the Four Evangelists.
Chapter VII.—Of the Two Herods.
Chapter VIII.—An Explanation of the Statement Made by Matthew, to the Effect that Joseph Was Afraid to Go with the Infant Christ into Jerusalem on Account of Archelaus, and Yet Was Not Afraid to Go into Galilee, Where Herod, that Prince’s Brother, Was Tetrarch.
Chapter IX.—An Explanation of the Circumstance that Matthew States that Joseph’s Reason for Going into Galilee with the Child Christ Was His Fear of Archelaus, Who Was Reigning at that Time in Jerusalem in Place of His Father, While Luke Tells Us that the Reason for Going into Galilee Was the Fact that Their City Nazareth Was There.
Chapter X.—A Statement of the Reason Why Luke Tells Us that “His Parents Went to Jerusalem Every Year at the Feast of the Passover” Along with the Boy; While Matthew Intimates that Their Dread of Archelaus Made Them Afraid to Go There on Their Return from Egypt.
Chapter XI.—An Examination of the Question as to How It Was Possible for Them to Go Up, According to Luke’s Statement, with Him to Jerusalem to the Temple, When the Days of the Purification of the Mother of Christ Were Accomplished, in Order to Perform the Usual Rites, If It is Correctly Recorded by Matthew, that Herod Had Already Learned from the Wise Men that the Child Was Born in Whose Stead, When He Sought for Him, He Slew So Many Children.
Chapter XII.—Concerning the Words Ascribed to John by All the Four Evangelists Respectively.
Chapter XIII.—Of the Baptism of Jesus.
Chapter XIV.—Of the Words or the Voice that Came from Heaven Upon Him When He Had Been Baptized.
Chapter XV.—An Explanation of the Circumstance That, According to the Evangelist John, John the Baptist Says, “I Knew Him Not;” While. According to the Others, It is Found that He Did Already Know Him.
Chapter XVI.—Of the Temptation of Jesus.
Chapter XVII.—Of the Calling of the Apostles as They Were Fishing.
Chapter XVIII.—Of the Date of His Departure into Galilee.
Chapter XIX.—Of the Lengthened Sermon Which, According to Matthew, He Delivered on the Mount.
Chapter XX.—An Explanation of the Circumstance that Matthew Tells Us How the Centurion Came to Jesus on Behalf of His Servant, While Luke’s Statement is that the Centurion Despatched Friends to Him.
Chapter XXI.—Of the Order in Which the Narrative Concerning Peter’s Mother-In-Law is Introduced.
Chapter XXII.—Of the Order of the Incidents Which are Recorded After This Section and of the Question Whether Matthew Mark, and Luke are Consistent with Each Other in These.
Chapter XXIII.—Of the Person Who Said to the Lord, “I Will Follow Thee Whithersoever Thou Goest;” And of the Other Things Connected Therewith, and of the Order in Which They are Recorded by Matthew and Luke.
Chapter XXIV.—Of the Lord’s Crossing the Lake on that Occasion on Which He Slept in the Vessel, and of the Casting Out of Those Devils Whom He Suffered to Go into the Swine; And of the Consistency of the Accounts Given by Matthew, Mark, and Luke of All that Was Done and Said on These Occasions.
Chapter XXV.—Of the Man Sick of the Palsy to Whom the Lord Said, “Thy Sins are Forgiven Thee,” And “Take Up Try Bed;” And in Especial, of the Question Whether Matthew and Mark are Consistent with Each Other in Their Notice of the Place Where This Incident Took Place, in So Far as Matthew Says It Happened “In His Own City,” While Mark Says It Was in Capharnaum.
Chapter XXVI.—Of the Calling of Matthew, and of the Question Whether Matthew’s Own Account is in Harmony with Those of Mark and Luke When They Speak of Levi the Son of Alphaeus.
Chapter XXVII.—Of the Feast at Which It Was Objected at Once that Christ Ate with Sinners, and that His Disciples Did Not Fast; Of the Circumstance that the Evangelists Seem to Give Different Accounts of the Parties by Whom These Objections Were Alleged; And of the Question Whether Matthew and Mark and Luke are Also in Harmony with Each Other in the Reports Given of the Words of These Persons, and of the Replies Returned by the Lord.
Chapter XXVIII.—Of the Raising of the Daughter of the Ruler of the Synagogue, and of the Woman Who Touched the Hem of His Garment; Of the Question, Also, as to Whether the Order in Which These Incidents are Narrated Exhibits Any Contradiction in Any of the Writers by Whom They are Reported; And in Particular, of the Words in Which the Ruler of the Synagogue Addressed His Request to the Lord.
Chapter XXIX.—Of the Two Blind Men and the Dumb Demoniac Whose Stories are Related Only by Matthew.
Chapter XXX.—Of the Section Where It is Recorded, that Being Moved with Compassion for the Multitudes, He Sent His Disciples, Giving Them Power to Work Cures, and Charged Them with Many Instructions, Directing Them How to Live; And of the Question Concerning the Proof of Matthew’s Harmony Here with Mark and Luke, Especially on the Subject of the Staff, Which Matthew Says the Lord Told Them They Were Not to Carry, While According to Mark It is the Only Thing They Were to Carry; And Also of the Wearing of the Shoes and Coats.
Chapter XXXI.—Of the Account Given by Matthew and Luke of the Occasion When John the Baptist Was in Prison, and Despatched His Disciples on a Mission to the Lord.
Chapter XXXII.—Of the Occasion on Which He Upbraided the Cities Because They Repented Not, Which Incident is Recorded by Luke as Well as by Matthew; And of the Question Regarding Matthew’s Harmony with Luke in the Matter of the Order.
Chapter XXXIII.—Of the Occasion on Which He Calls Them to Take His Yoke and Burden Upon Them, and of the Question as to the Absence of Any Discrepancy Between Matthew and Luke in the Order of Narration.
Chapter XXXIV.—Of the Passage in Which It is Said that the Disciples Plucked the Ears of Corn and Ate Them; And of the Question as to How Matthew, Mark, and Luke are in Harmony with Each Other with Respect to the Order of Narration There.
Chapter XXXV.—Of the Man with the Withered Hand, Who Was Restored on the Sabbath-Day; And of the Question as to How Matthew’s Narrative of This Incident Can Be Harmonized with Those of Mark and Luke, Either in the Matter of the Order of Events, or in the Report of the Words Spoken by the Lord and by the Jews.
Chapter XXXVI.—Of Another Question Which Demands Our Consideration, Namely, Whether, in Passing from the Account of the Man Whose Withered Hand Was Restored, These Three Evangelists Proceed to Their Next Subjects in Such a Way as to Create No Contradictions in Regard to the Order of Their Narrations.
Chapter XXXVII.—Of the Consistency of the Accounts Given by Matthew and Luke Regarding the Dumb and Blind Man Who Was Possessed with a Devil.
Chapter XXXVIII.—Of the Occasion on Which It Was Said to Him that He Cast Out Devils in the Power of Beelzebub, and of the Declarations Drawn Forth from Him by that Circumstance in Regard to the Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit, and with Respect to the Two Trees; And of the Question Whether There is Not Some Discrepancy in These Sections Between Matthew and the Other Two Evangelists, and Particularly Between Matthew and Luke.
Chapter XXXIX.—Of the Question as to the Manner of Matthew’s Agreement with Luke in the Accounts Which are Given of the Lord’s Reply to Certain Persons Who Sought a Sign, When He Spoke of Jonas the Prophet, and of the Ninevites, and of the Queen of the South, and of the Unclean Spirit Which, When It Has Gone Out of the Man, Returns and Finds the House Garnished.
Chapter XL.—Of the Question as to Whether There is Any Discrepancy Between Matthew on the One Hand, and Mark and Luke on the Other, in Regard to the Order in Which the Notice is Given of the Occasion on Which His Mother and His Brethren Were Announced to Him.
Chapter XLI.—Of the Words Which Were Spoken Out of the Ship on the Subject of the Sower, Whose Seed, as He Sowed It, Fell Partly on the Wayside, Etc.; And Concerning the Man Who Had Tares Sowed Over and Above His Wheat; And Concerning the Grain of Mustard Seed and the Leaven; As Also of What He Said in the House Regarding the Treasure Hid in the Field, and the Pearl, and the Net Cast into the Sea, and the Man that Brings Out of His Treasure Things New and Old; And of the Method in Which Matthew’s Harmony with Mark and Luke is Proved Both with Respect to the Things Which They Have Reported in Common with Him, and in the Matter of the Order of Narration.
Chapter XLII.—Of His Coming into His Own Country, and of the Astonishment of the People at His Doctrine, as They Looked with Contempt Upon His Lineage; Of Matthew’s Harmony with Mark and Luke in This Section; And in Particular, of the Question Whether the Order of Narration Which is Presented by the First of These Evangelists Does Not Exhibit Some Want of Consistency with that of the Other Two.
Chapter XLIII.—Of the Mutual Consistency of the Accounts Which are Given by Matthew, Mark, and Luke of What Was Said by Herod on Hearing About the Wonderful Works of the Lord, and of Their Concord in Regard to the Order of Narration.
Chapter XLIV.—Of the Order in Which the Accounts of John’s Imprisonment and Death are Given by These Three Evangelists.
Chapter XLV.—Of the Order and the Method in Which All the Four Evangelists Come to the Narration of the Miracle of the Five Loaves.
Chapter XLVI.—Of the Question as to How the Four Evangelists Harmonize with Each Other on This Same Subject of the Miracle of the Five Loaves.
Chapter XLVII.—Of His Walking Upon the Water, and of the Questions Regarding the Harmony of the Evangelists Who Have Narrated that Scene, and Regarding the Manner in Which They Pass Off from the Section Recording the Occasion on Which He Fed the Multitudes with the Five Loaves,
Chapter XLVIII.—Of the Absence of Any Discrepancy Between Matthew and Mark on the One Hand, and John on the Other, in the Accounts Which the Three Give Together of What Took Place After the Other Side of the Lake Was Reached.
Chapter XLIX.—Of the Woman of Canaan Who Said, “Yet the Dogs Eat of the Crumbs Which Fall from Their Masters’ Tables,” And of the Harmony Between the Account Given by Matthew and that by Luke.
Chapter L.—Of the Occasion on Which He Fed the Multitudes with the Seven Loaves, and of the Question as to the Harmony Between Matthew and Mark in Their Accounts of that Miracle.
Chapter LI.—Of Matthew’s Declaration That, on Leaving These Parts, He Came into the Coasts of Magedan; And of the Question as to His Agreement with Mark in that Intimation, as Well as in the Notice of the Saying About Jonah, Which Was Returned Again as an Answer to Those Who Sought a Sign.
Chapter LII.—Of Matthew’s Agreement with Mark in the Statement About the Leaven of the Pharisees, as Regards Both the Subject Itself and the Order of Narrative.
Chapter LIII.—Of the Occasion on Which He Asked the Disciples Whom Men Said that He Was; And of the Question Whether, with Regard Either to the Subject-Matter or the Order, There are Any Discrepancies Between Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
Chapter LIV.—Of the Occasion on Which He Announced His Coming Passion to the Disciples, and of the Measure of Concord Between Matthew, Mark, and Luke in the Accounts Which They Give of the Same.
Chapter LV.—Of the Harmony Between the Three Evangelists in the Notices Which They Subjoin of the Manner in Which the Lord Charged the Man to Follow Him Who Wished to Come After Him.
Chapter LVI.—Of the Manifestation Which the Lord Made of Himself, in Company with Moses and Elias, to His Disciples on the Mountain; And of the Question Concerning the Harmony Between the First Three Evangelists with Regard to the Order and the Circumstances of that Event; And in Especial, the Number of the Days, in So Far as Matthew and Mark State that It Took Place After Six Days, While Luke Says that It Was After Eight Days.
Chapter LVII.—Of the Harmony Between Matthew and Mark in the Accounts Given of the Occasion on Which He Spoke to the Disciples Concerning the Coming of Elias.
Chapter LVIII.—Of the Man Who Brought Before Him His Son, Whom the Disciples Were Unable to Heal; And of the Question Concerning the Agreement Between These Three Evangelists Also in the Matter of the Order of Narration Here.
Chapter LIX.—Of the Occasion on Which the Disciples Were Exceeding Sorry When He Spoke to Them of His Passion, as It is Related in the Same Order by the Three Evangelists.
Chapter LX.—Of His Paying the Tribute Money Out of the Mouth of the Fish, an Incident Which Matthew Alone Mentions.
Chapter LXI.—Of the Little Child Whom He Set Before Them for Their Imitation, and of the Offences of the World; Of the Members of the Body Causing Offences; Of the Angels of the Little Ones, Who Behold the Face of the Father; Of the One Sheep Out of the Hundred Sheep; Of the Reproving of a Brother in Private; Of the Loosing and the Binding of Sins; Of The, Agreement of Two, and the Gathering Together of Three; Of the Forgiving of Sins Even Unto Seventy Times Seven; Of the Servant Who Had His Own Large Debt Remitted, and Yet Refused to Remit the Small Debt Which His Fellow-Servant Owed to Him; And of the Question as to Matthew’s Harmony with the Other Evangelists on All These Subjects.
Chapter LXII.—Of the Harmony Subsisting Between Matthew and Mark in the Accounts Which They Offer of the Time When He Was Asked Whether It Was Lawful to Put Away One’s Wife, and Especially in Regard to the Specific Questions and Replies Which Passed Between the Lord and the Jews, and in Which the Evangelists Seem to Be, to Some Small Extent, at Variance.
Chapter LXIII.—Of the Little Children on Whom He Laid His Hands; Of the Rich Man to Whom He Said, “Sell All that Thou Hast;” Of the Vineyard in Which the Labourers Were Hired at Different Hours; And of the Question as to the Absence of Any Discrepancy Between Matthew and the Other Two Evangelists on These Subjects.
Chapter LXIV.—Of the Occasions on Which He Foretold His Passion in Private to His Disciples; And of the Time When the Mother of Zebedee’s Children Came with Her Sons, Requesting that One of Them Should Sit on His Right Hand, and the Other on His Left Hand; And of the Absence of Any Discrepancy Between Matthew and the Other Two Evangelists on These Subjects.
Chapter LXV.—Of the Absence of Any Antagonism Between Matthew and Mark, or Between Matthew and Luke, in the Account Offered of the Giving of Sight to the Blind Men of Jericho.
Chapter LXVI.—Of the Colt of the Ass Which is Mentioned by Matthew, and of the Consistency of His Account with that of the Other Evangelists, Who Speak Only of the Ass.
Chapter LXVII.—Of the Expulsion of the Sellers and Buyers from the Temple, and of the Question as to the Harmony Between the First Three Evangelists and John, Who Relates the Same Incident in a Widely Different Connection.
Chapter LXVIII.—Of the Withering of the Fig-Tree, and of the Question as to the Absence of Any Contradiction Between Matthew and the Other Evangelists in the Accounts Given of that Incident, as Well as the Other Matters Related in Connection with It; And Very Specially as to the Consistency Between Matthew and Mark in the Matter of the Order of Narration.
Chapter LXIX.—Of the Harmony Between the First Three Evangelists in Their Accounts of the Occasion on Which the Jews Asked the Lord by What Authority He Did These Things.
Chapter LXX.—Of the Two Sons Who Were Commanded by Their Father to Go into His Vineyard, and of the Vineyard Which Was Let Out to Other Husbandmen; Of the Question Concerning the Consistency of Matthew’s Version of These Passages with Those Given by the Other Two Evangelists, with Whom He Retains the Same Order; As Also, in Particular, Concerning the Harmony of His Version of the Parable, Which is Recorded by All the Three, Regarding the Vineyard that Was Let Out; And in Reference Specially to the Reply Made by the Persons to Whom that Parable Was Spoken, in Relating Which Matthew Seems to Differ Somewhat from the Others.
Chapter LXXI.—Of the Marriage of the King’s Son, to Which the Multitudes Were Invited; And of the Order in Which Matthew Introduces that Section as Compared with Luke, Who Gives Us a Somewhat Similar Narrative in Another Connection.
Chapter LXXII.—Of the Harmony Characterizing the Narratives Given by These Three Evangelists Regarding the Duty of Rendering to Caesar the Coin Bearing His Image, and Regarding the Woman Who Had Been Married to the Seven Brothers.
Chapter LXXIII.—Of the Person to Whom the Two Precepts Concerning the Love of God and the Love of Our Neighbour Were Commended; And of the Question as to the Order of Narration Which is Observed by Matthew and Mark, and the Absence of Any Discrepancy Between Them and Luke.
Chapter LXXIV.—Of the Passage in Which the Jews are Asked to Say Whose Son They Suppose Christ to Be; And of the Question Whether There is Not a Discrepancy Between Matthew and the Other Two Evangelists, in So Far as He States the Inquiry to Have Been, “What Think Ye of Christ? Whose Son is He?” And Tells Us that to This They Replied, “The Son of David;”Whereas the Others Put It Thus, “How Say the Scribes that Christ is David’s Son?”
Chapter LXXV.—Of the Pharisees Who Sit in the Seat of Moses, and Enjoin Things Which They Do Not, and of the Other Words Spoken by the Lord Against These Same Pharisees; Of the Question Whether Matthew’s Narrative Agrees Here with Those Which are Given by the Other Two Evangelists, and in Particular with that of Luke, Who Introduces a Passage Resembling This One, Although It is Brought in Not in This Order, But in Another Connection.
Chapter LXXVI.—Of the Harmony in Respect of the Order of Narration Subsisting Between Matthew and the Other Two Evangelists in the Accounts Given of the Occasion on Which He Foretold the Destruction of the Temple.
Chapter LXXVII.—Of the Harmony Subsisting Between the Three Evangelists in Their Narratives of the Discourse Which He Delivered on the Mount of Olives, When the Disciples Asked When the Consummation Should Happen.
Chapter LXXVIII.—Of the Question Whether There is Any Contradiction Between Matthew and Mark on the One Hand, and John on the Other, in So Far as the Former State that After Two Days Was to Be the Feast of the Passover, and Afterwards Tells Us that He Was in Bethany, While the Latter Gives a Parallel Narrative of What Took Place at Bethany, But Mentions that It Was Six Days Before the Passover.
Chapter LXXIX.—Of the Concord Between Matthew, Mark, and John in Their Notices of the Supper at Bethany, at Which the Woman Poured the Precious Ointment on the Lord, and of the Method in Which These Accounts are to Be Harmonized with that of Luke, When He Records an Incident of a Similar Nature at a Different Period.
Chapter LXXX.—Of the Harmony Characterizing the Accounts Which are Given by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, of the Occasion on Which He Sent His Disciples to Make Preparations for His Eating the Passover.
Book III
Prologue.
Chapter I.—Of the Method in Which the Four Evangelists are Shown to Be at One in the Accounts Given of the Lord’s Supper and the Indication of His Betrayer.
Chapter II.—Of the Proof of Their Freedom from Any Discrepancies in the Notices Given of the Predictions of Peter’s Denials.
Chapter III.—Of the Manner in Which It Can Be Shown that No Discrepancies Exist Between Them in the Accounts Which They Give of the Words Which Were Spoken by the Lord, on to the Time of His Leaving the House in Which They Had Supped.
Chapter IV.—Of What Took Place in the Piece of Ground or Garden to Which They Came on Leaving the House After the Supper; And of the Method in Which, in John’s Silence on the Subject, a Real Harmony Can Be Demonstrated Between the Other Three Evangelists—Namely, Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
Chapter V.—Of the Accounts Which are Given by All the Four Evangelists in Regard to What Was Done and Said on the Occasion of His Apprehension; And of the Proof that These Different Narratives Exhibit No Real Discrepancies.
Chapter VI.—Of the Harmony Characterizing the Accounts Which These Evangelists Give of What Happened When the Lord Was Led Away to the House of the High Priest, as Also of the Occurrences Which Took Place Within the Said House After He Was Conducted There in the Nighttime, and in Particular of the Incident of Peter’s Denial.
Chapter VII.—Of the Thorough Harmony of the Evangelists in the Different Accounts of What Took Place in the Early Morning, Previous to the Delivery of Jesus to Pilate; And of the Question Touching the Passage Which is Quoted on the Subject of the Price Set Upon the Lord, and Which is Ascribed to Jeremiah by Matthew, Although No Such Paragraph is Found in the Writings of that Prophet.
Chapter VIII.—Of the Absence of Any Discrepancies in the Accounts Which the Evangelists Give of What Took Place in Pilate’s Presence.
Chapter IX.—Of the Mockery Which He Sustained at the Hands of Pilate’s Cohort, and of the Harmony Subsisting Among the Three Evangelists Who Report that Scene, Namely, Matthew, Mark, and John.
Chapter X.—Of the Method in Which We Can Reconcile the Statement Which is Made by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, to the Effect that Another Person Was Pressed into the Service of Carrying the Cross of Jesus, with that Given by John, Who Says that Jesus Bore It Himself.
Chapter XI.—Of the Consistency of Matthew’s Version with that of Mark in the Account of the Potion Offered Him to Drink, Which is Introduced Before the Narrative of His Crucifixion.
Chapter XII.—Of the Concord Preserved Among All the Four Evangelists on the Subject of the Parting of His Raiment.
Chapter XIII.—Of the Hour of the Lord’s Passion, and of the Question Concerning the Absence of Any Discrepancy Between Mark and John in the Article of the “Third” Hour and the “Sixth.”
Chapter XIV.—Of the Harmony Preserved Among All the Evangelists on the Subject of the Two Robbers Who Were Crucified Along with Him.
Chapter XV.—Of the Consistency of the Accounts Given by Matthew, Mark, and Luke on the Subject of the Parties Who Insulted the Lord.
Chapter XVI.—Of the Derision Ascribed to the Robbers, and of the Question Regarding the Absence of Any Discrepancy Between Matthew and Mark on the One Hand, and Luke on the Other, When the Last-Named Evangelist States that One of the Two Mocked Him, and that the Other Believed on Him.
Chapter XVII.—Of the Harmony of the Four Evangelists in Their Notices of the Draught of Vinegar.
Chapter XVIII.—Of the Lord’s Successive Utterances When He Was About to Die; And of the Question Whether Matthew and Mark are in Harmony with Luke in Their Reports of These Sayings, and Also Whether These Three Evangelists are in Harmony with John.
Chapter XIX.—Of the Rending of the Veil of the Temple, and of the Question Whether Matthew and Mark Really Harmonize with Luke with Respect to the Order in Which that Incident Took Place.
Chapter XX.—Of the Question as to the Consistency of the Several Notices Given by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, on the Subject of the Astonishment Felt by the Centurion and Those Who Were with Him.
Chapter XXI.—Of the Women Who Were Standing There, and of the Question Whether Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Who Have Stated that They Stood Afar Off, are in Antagonism with John, Who Has Mentioned that One of Them Stood by the Cross.
Chapter XXII.—Of the Question Whether the Evangelists are All at One on the Subject of the Narrative Regarding Joseph, Who Begged the Lord’s Body from Pilate, and Whether John’s Version Contains Any Statements at Variance with Each Other.
Chapter XXIII.—Of the Question Whether the First Three Evangelists are Quite in Harmony with John in the Accounts Given of His Burial.
Chapter XXIV.—Of the Absence of All Discrepancies in the Narratives Constructed by the Four Evangelists on the Subject of the Events Which Took Place About the Time of the Lord’s Resurrection.
Chapter XXV.—Of Christ’s Subsequent Manifestations of Himself to the Disciples, and of the Question Whether a Thorough Harmony Can Be Established Between the Different Narratives When the Notices Given by the Four Several Evangelists, as Well as Those Presented by the Apostle Paul and in the Acts of the Apostles, are Compared Together.
Book IV.
Prologue.
Chapter 1.—Of the Question Regarding the Proof that Mark’s Gospel is in Harmony with the Rest in What is Narrated (Those Passages Which He Has in Common with Matthew Being Left Out of Account), from Its Beginning Down to the Section Where It is Said, “And They Go into Capharnaum, and Straightway on the Sabbath-Day He Taught Them:” Which Incident is Reported Also by Luke.
Chapter II.—Of the Man Out of Whom the Unclean Spirit that Was Tormenting Him Was Cast, and of the Question Whether Mark’s Version is Quite Consistent with that of Luke, Who is at One with Him in Reporting the Incident.
Chapter III.—Of the Question Whether Mark’s Reports of the Repeated Occasions on Which the Name of Peter Was Brought into Prominence are Not at Variance with the Statement Which John Has Given Us of the Particular Time at Which the Apostle Received that Name.
Chapter IV.—Of the Words, “The More He Charged Them to Tell No One, So Much the More a Great Deal They Published It;” And of the Question Whether that Statement is Not Inconsistent with His Prescience, Which is Commended to Our Notice in the Gospel.
Chapter V.—Of the Statement Which John Made Concerning the Man Who Cast Out Devils Although He Did Not Belong to the Circle of the Disciples; And of the Lord’s Reply, “Forbid Them Not, for He that is Not Against You is on Your Part;” And of the Question Whether that Response Does Not Contradict the Other Sentence, in Which He Said, “He that is Not with Me is Against Me.”
Chapter VI.—Of the Circumstance that Mark Has Recorded More Than Luke as Spoken by the Lord in Connection with the Case of This Man Who Was Casting Out Devils in the Name of Christ, Although He Was Not Following with the Disciples; And of the Question How These Additional Words Can Be Shown to Have a Real Bearing Upon What Christ Had in View in Forbidding the Individual to Be Interdicted Who Was Performing Miracles in His Name.
Chapter VII.—Of the Fact that from This Point on to the Lord’s Supper, with Which Act the Discussion of All the Narratives of the Four Evangelists Conjointly Commenced, No Question Calling for Special Examination is Raised by Mark’s Gospel.
Chapter VIII.—Of Luke’s Gospel, and Specially of the Harmony Between Its Commencement and the Beginning of the Book of the Acts of the Apostles.
Chapter IX.—Of the Question How It Can Be Shown that the Narrative of the Haul of Fishes Which Luke Has Given Us is Not to Be Identified with the Record of an Apparently Similar Incident Which John Has Reported Subsequently to the Lord’s Resurrection; And of the Fact that from This Point on to the Lord’s Supper, from Which Event Onwards to the End the Combined Accounts of All the Evangelists Have Been Examined, No Difficulty Calling for Special Consideration Emerges in the Gospel of Luke Any More Than in that of Mark.
Chapter X.—Of the Evangelist John, and the Distinction Between Him and the Other Three.
The Harmony Of The Gospels, St. Augustine
Jazzybee Verlag Jürgen Beck
86450 Altenmünster, Germany
ISBN: 9783849621063
www.jazzybee-verlag.de
Saint Augustine – A Biography
Augustine(Aurelius Augustinus) was a Saint, a doctor of the Latin church, born at Tagaste, a small town of Numidia in Africa, not far from Carthage, Nov. 13, 354, died Aug. 28, 430. His father, Patricius, was a pagan nobleman of moderate 'fortune, while his mother, Monica, who has been canonized by the church, was an earnest Christian. Augustine was sent to the best schools of Madaura and Carthage. His own "Confessions" tell us that his conduct at this period of his life was far from exemplary. His studies, chiefly in the heathen poets, were more favorable to the development of his fancy and his style than to his Christian growth. The death of his father, which threw him upon his own resources, and the influence of some philosophical works, especially the Hortensius of Cicero, roused him to a diligent search after truth. Unable to find this in the writings of the Greek and Roman sages, and dissatisfied with what seemed to him the crude and fragmentary teachings of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, he adopted the dualism of the Manichgeans. At the age of 29 he went to Rome. There his reputation as a teacher of eloquence soon rivaled that of Symmachus, then at the height of his renown. On the recommendation of that orator, he was called to Milan as a teacher of rhetoric.
Ambrose was then bishop of Milan, and Augustine's first care was to know so famous a preacher. After repeated interviews with Ambrose, the conversion of his own illegitimate son, and the entreaties of his mother, he resolved to embrace Christianity. The history of his conversion forms the most striking chapter in his "Confessions." After eight months of seclusion, which he spent with his mother and brother and son, preparing for his confirmation in the church, and maturing his plans for the future, Augustine in the Easter week of 387 was baptized, together with his son and brother, by the hand of Ambrose. He at once set out on his return to Africa. On the way his mother died, and a small chapel among the ruins of Ostia marks the traditional spot of her burial. The death of his son, which took place soon after his return, confirmed his inclination to the monastic life. He retired to Tagaste, and passed nearly three years in studious seclusion, varied only by occasional visits to the neighboring towns. On one of these visits, when he was present at the church in Hippo, a sermon which the bishop Valerius delivered, asking for a priest to assist him in his church, turned all eyes toward this famous scholar. No refusals were allowed, and Augustine was ordained.
Preaching was soon added to his duties, an exception being made in his case to the usual rule, and the periods of the African orator, in harsh Latin or the harsher Punic tongue, were received with vehement applause. He was soon called to be assistant bishop, and then, on the death of the elder prelate, the whole charge of the church of Hippo was entrusted to his care. He retained the office until his death, a period of 35 years. The details of his episcopal life are minutely related by his friend Possidius. He preached every day and sometimes twice in the day; was frugal in his domestic arrangements, being a strict ascetic, and requiring of his attendant priests and deacons an equal simplicity of diet and dress; given to hospitality, yet without display; warmly interested in every kind of charity; courteous in his bearing, welcoming even infidels to his table; bold against all wickedness and wrong, whatever the rank of the transgressor; and untiring in his visits to widows and orphans, to the sick and the afflicted. He disputed with Manichajans, Arians, the followers of Priscillian, of Origen, and Tertullian, the Donatists, and the Pelagians, and allowed no doubtful utterance of doctrine to pass without his questioning.
To his industry in controversy must be added his vast correspondence with emperors, nobles, doctors, missionaries, bishops, in every quarter of the globe, on questions of dogma, of discipline, and of policy his solid works of commentary, criticism, morality, philosophy, and theology, and even his poetry, for to him are attributed several of the sweetest hymns of the Catholic anthology. The titles alone of the works of Augustine make a long catalogue. The single volume of "Sermons" contains nearly 700 pieces, shorter indeed and less ornate than the celebrated sermons of Basil and Chrysostom, but justifying Augustine's reputation for sacred oratory. The volume of "Commentaries on the Psalms" is more rich in practical remarks than in accurate learning. His remarks upon the "Four Gospels" are more valuable. His work on the "Care that should be taken for the Dead" contains some striking views concerning the relation of the living to disembodied souls. The volume of his "Epistles" is remarkable, as illustrating his best style and the finest traits in his character.
The name of Augustine, in the dogmatic history of the church, is best known in connection with the heresy of Pelagius; but his works which are most widely known are the "Confessions" and "The City of God." In the former, written just after his conversion, he gives a history of his life up to that time, not so much in its outward circumstance as in its inward experience and change. It has been translated into every Christian tongue, and is classed with the choicest memorials of devotion, both in Catholic and Protestant oratories. His treatise on "The City of God" (De Civitate Dei) is the monument of highest genius in the ancient church, and in its kind has never been surpassed. Its immediate purpose was to vindicate the faith of the gospel against the pagans, who had just devastated Rome. The first five books confute the heathen thesis that the worship of the ancient gods is essential to human prosperity, and that miseries have only come since the decline of this worship. The five following books refute those who maintain that the worship of pagan deities is useful for the spiritual life.
The remaining twelve books are employed in setting forth the doctrines of the Christian religion, under the somewhat fanciful form of "two cities," the city of the world and the city of God. The influence of Augustine upon his own age, and upon all succeeding ages of Christian history, cannot be exaggerated. It is believed that he was at once one of the purest, the wisest, and the holiest of men; he was equally mild and firm, prudent and fearless; at once a philosopher and a mystic, a student and a ruler. Of his singular humility manifold instances are recorded. His severe self-discipline matches the strictest instances of the hermit life. In his " Retractations," begun after the close of his 70th year, he reviews his writings, taking back whatever is doubtful or extravagant, and harmonizing discordant opinions. The aid of a coadjutor relieved Augustine in his latter years of a portion of his responsibility; yet questions of conscience were constantly presented to him. When Genseric and his Vandals showed themselves on the coasts of Africa, the question was put to him if it were lawful for a bishop at such a season to fly and leave his flock. The answer which he made was illustrated by his own course.
He calmly waited for the threatened approach, and when the fleet of the foe was in the bay of Hippo, and the army was encamped before the walls, exerted himself only to quiet the fears and sustain the faith of his brethren. He died of fever before the catastrophe. The bishop Possidius, who watched at his bedside, gives an edifying account of his last days, and of the grief of the people at his loss. His relics were transported to Italy, and mostly rest at present in the cathedral of Pavia. Within the present century the bone of his right arm has, with solemn pomp, been returned to the church of Bona in Algeria, which occupies the site of ancient Hippo. The best edition of Augustine's works is that of the Benedictines, published at Paris and at Antwerp' at the close of the 17th century, in 11 vols, folio. An edition in 11 volumes was also published in Paris in 1836-'9. An additional volume of sermons, before unpublished, found at Monte Casino and Florence, was published at Paris in 1842. An English translation by various hands has been undertaken at Edinburgh, under the editorship of the Rev. Marcus Dods, the 3rd and 4th volumes of which appeared in 1872.
Introductory Essay. St. Augustin as an Exegete.
By the Rev. David Schley Schaff.
Theexegetical writings of Augustin are commentaries on Genesis (first three chapters), the Psalms, the Gospel and First Epistle of John, the Sermon on the Mount, the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, and a Harmony of the Gospels. Many of his commentaries, like those of Chrysostom, are expository homilies preached to his congregation at Hippo; all are practical rather than grammatical and critical. He only covered the first five verses of the first chapter of Romans, and found his comments so elaborate, that, from fear of the immense proportions a commentary on the whole Epistle would assume, he drew back from the task. Augustin’s other writings abound in quotations from Scripture, and pertinent expositions. His controversies with the Manichaeans and Donatists were particularly adapted to render him thorough in the knowledge of the Bible, and skilled in its use.
The opinions of Augustin’s ability as an exegete, and the worth of his labors in the department of connected Biblical exposition, have greatly differed. Some not only represent him at his weakest in this capacity, but disparage his exegesis as of inferior merit. Others have given him, and some at the present time still give him, a very high rank among the chief commentators of the early Church. Père Simon, as quoted by Archbishop Trench (Sermon on the Mount, p. 65), says, “One must needs read a vast deal in the exegetical writings of Augustin to light on any thing which is good.” Reuss expresses himself thus: “The fact is, that his exegesis was the weak side of the great man” (Gesch. d. heil. Schriften N. T. p. 263). Farrar, in his History of Interpretation (p. 24), declares his comments to be “sometimes painfully beside the mark,” and in general depreciates the value of Augustin’s expository writings.
On the other hand, the student is struck with the profound esteem in which Augustin was held as an interpreter of Scripture during the Middle Ages. His exposition was looked upon as the highest authority; and a saying was current, that, if one had Augustin on his side, it was sufficient (Si Augustinus. adest, sufficit ipse tibi). So powerful was his influence, that Rupert of Deutz, in the preface to his Commentary on St. John, deemed it necessary to state, in part in vindication of his own effort, that, though the eagle wings of the Bishop of Hippo overshadowed the Gospel, he did not exhaust the right of all Christians to handle the Gospel. The Reformers quote Augustin more frequently than any Father, and were greatly indebted to his writings, especially for their views on sin and grace. Among modern opinions according to him a high rank in this department may be mentioned two. The Rev. H. Browne, in the preface to the translation of Augustin’s Homilies on St. John, in the Oxford Library of the Fathers (I. vi.), is somewhat extravagant in his praise, when he says, that, “as an interpreter of the Word of God, St. Augustin is acknowledged to stand at an elevation which few have reached, none surpassed.” Archbishop Trench, in the essay on Augustin as an interpreter of Scripture, prefixed to his edition of the Sermon on the Mount, accords equal praise, and speaks specifically of the “tact and skill with which he unfolded to others the riches which the Word contains” (p. 133).
The truth certainly is not with those who minimize Augustin’s services in the department of exposition. Whether we compare him with ancient or modern commentators, he will fall behind the greatest in some particulars; but in profundity of insight into the meaning of the text, in comprehensive knowledge of the whole Scriptures, in simplicity of spiritual aim, he stands in the first rank. It is as a contributor to theological and religious thought that he asserts his eminence. Exposition is something more than bald textual and lexicographical comment: it aims also at a spiritual perception of the truth as it is in Christ, and requires a capacity to extract, for the spiritual nutriment of the reader, the vital forces of the Scriptures. In this sense Augustin is eminently worthy of study. Of textual details, he gives only the barest minimum of any value. His mistakes, arising out of his slender philological apparatus and his reverence for the LXX., are numerous and glaring. He often wanders far away from the plain meaning of the text, into allegorical and typical fancies, like the other Fathers, and many of the older Protestant commentators. He was not prepared for, nor did he aim at, grammatico-historical exegesis in the modern sense of the word; but be possessed extraordinary acumen and depth, spiritual insight, an uncommon knowledge of Scripture as a whole, and a pious intention to bring the truth to the convictions of men, and to extend the kingdom of Christ.
As to Augustin’s special equipment for the work of an exegete and on his exegetical principles, the following may be added:—Exegetical Equipment.
1. Augustin had no knowledge of Hebrew (Confessions, xi. 3; in this ed. vol. i. p. 164). His knowledge of Greek was only superficial, and far inferior to that of Jerome (vol. i. p. 9). He depended almost entirely on the imperfect old Latin version before its revision by Jerome, and was at first even prejudiced against this revision, the so-called Vulgate. But it should be remembered that only two of the great expositors of the ancient Church were familiar with Hebrew,—Origen and Jerome. Augustin knew only a few Hebrew words. In the treatise on Christian Doctrine (ii. 11, 16; this ed. vol. ii. p. 540) he adduces the words Amen and Hallelujah as being left untranslated on account of the sacredness of the original forms, and the words Racha and Hosanna as being untranslatable by any single Latin equivalents. In the Sermon on the Mount (i. 9, 23) he refers again to Racha, and defends its Hebrew origin as against those who derived it from the Greek termrJavko"(a rag).
Augustin’s linguistic attainments seem to have included familiarity with Punic (Sermon on the Mount, ii. 14, 47). The Phoenician origin of the North African people, the location of his birthplace and his episcopal diocese, furnish an explanation of this.
2. For the Old Testament, Augustin used, besides the Latin version, occasionally the Septuagint, and had at hand the versions of Symmachus, Theodotion, and Aquila (Quaest. in Num. 52). He had profound reverence for the LXX., and was inclined to give credit to the Jewish tradition that each of the translators was confined in a separate cell, and on comparing their work, which they had accomplished without communication with each other, found their several versions to agree, word for word. He held that the original was given through them in Greek by the special direction of the Holy Spirit, and in such a way as to be most suitable for the Gentiles (Christian Doctrine, ii. 15, 22; this ed. p. 542). He declared that the Latin copies were to be corrected from the LXX., which was as authoritative as the Hebrew. Such a claim for the authority of the Greek translation would make a knowledge of the Hebrew almost unnecessary.
This excessive reverence for the LXX. has led Augustin to uphold, in his exegesis of the Old Testament, all its errors of translation, which a different view, coupled with a knowledge of Hebrew, would in most cases have prevented him from accepting. Even at its plain and palpable mistakes he takes no offence. He accepts the translation, “Yet three days and Nineveh shall be overthrown,” as of equal authority with the “forty days” of the original, claiming a special symbolic meaning for both.
3. For the New Testament, Augustin used some Latin translation or translations older than the Vulgate. He declares the Latin translations to be without number (Christian Doctr. ii. 11, 16; this ed. vol. ii. p. 540). There was already in his day “an endless diversity” of readings in the Latin manuscripts. He vindicated for the Greek original the claim of final authority, to which the Latin copies were to yield. As there was likewise diversity of text among the Greek copies, he laid down the rule, that those manuscripts were to be chosen for comparison by the Latin student which were preserved in the churches of greater learning and research (Christian Doctr. ii. 15, 22; in this ed. ii. p. 543). Not infrequently does Augustin cite the readings of the Greek. In some cases he makes references to passages where there is a conflict of text in the Latin authorities. He differs quite largely from Jerome’s Vulgate, to which he offered opposition, on the ground that a new translation might unsettle the faith of some. In these variations of construction and language he was sometimes nearer the original than Jerome. Sometimes he does not approximate so closely. As a matter of interest, and for the convenience of the reader, the differences of Augustin’s text and the Vulgate will be found, in all important cases, noted down in this edition of the Sermon on the Mount.
Examples of Augustin’s improvement upon the Vulgate are the omission of the clause, “and despitefully use you” (et calumniantibus vos, Matt. v. 44), the use of quotidianum panem (“daily bread”) instead of supersubstantialem, and of inferas (“bring”) instead of inducas (“lead”), in the fourth and sixth petitions of the.Lord’s Prayer (Matt. vi. 11, 12). In reference to the last passage, it must be said, however, that he notes a difference in the Latin Mss., some using infero, some induco; and while he adopts the former verb, he finds the terms equivalent in meaning (Serm. on the Mt. ii. 9, 30).
4. Augustin’s textual and grammatical comments are few in number, but they cannot be said to be wanting in all value. A few instances will suffice for a judgment of their merit:—
In the Harmony of the Gospels (ii. 29, 67), writing of the daughter of Jairus (Matt. ix. 29), he mentions that some codices contain the reading “woman” (mulier) for “damsel.” Commenting on Matt. v. 22, “Whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause,” he includes the expression “without a cause” (eijkh`) without even a hint of its spuriousness (Serm. on the Mt. i. 9, 25); but in his Retractations (i. 19. 4) he makes the correction, “The Greek manuscripts do not contain sine causa.” Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort, the Vulgate and the Revised English Version, in agreement with the oldest mss., omit the clause. He refers to a conflict of the Greek and Latin text of Matt. v. 39 (“Whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek”), and follows the authority of the Greek in omitting the adjective “right” (Serm. on the Mt. i. 19, 58). At Matt. vi. 4 he casts out, on the authority of the Greek, the adverb palam (“openly”), which was found in many Latin translations (as it is also found in the Textus Receptus, but not in the Vulgate, and the Sinaitic, B, D, and other mss.). Commenting on Matt. vii. 12, “Wherefore all things whatsoever ye would that men,” etc., he refers to the addition of “good” before “things” by the Latins, and insists upon its erasure on the basis of the Greek text (Serm. on the Mt. ii. 22, 74).
On occasion, though very rarely, he quotes the Greek, as in the Sermon on the Mount (nh; th;n kauvchsin, i. 17, 51;iJmavtion, i. 19, 60), in confirmation of his opinions of the text.
At other times he compares Greek and Latin terms of synonymous or kindred meanings. One of the most important of these is the passage (City of God,x. 1; this ed. vol. ii. p. 181) where he draws a clear distinction betweenlatreiva, qrhskeiva, ersevbeia, qeosevbeia. Other examples of the kind under review are given by Trench (p. 20 sqq.).
It is evident that Augustin’s equipment was defective from the stand-point of the modern critical exegete. It would be wrong, however, to say that he shows no concern about textual questions. But his exegetical power shows itself in other ways than minute textual investigation, —in comprehensive comparison of Scripture with Scripture, and penetrating spiritual vision. To these qualities he adds a purpose to be exhaustive, sparing no pains to develop the full meaning of the passage under review. More exhaustive discussions can hardly be found, to take a single example, than that on Matt. v. 25, “Agree with thine adversary quickly” (Serm. on the Mt. xi. 31, where, however, the view least reasonable is taken), or spiritually satisfactory ones than the discussion of the gradation of sin and its punishment (Matt. v. 21, 22; Serm. on the Mt. ix. 22), and “Judge not, that ye be not judged” (Matt. vii. i), or pungently suggestive than the handling of the words of our Lord at the marriage feast at Cana: “Woman, what have I to do with thee?” (John ii. 4; Homily VIII.), or more indicative of great principles underlying the vindication to the evangelists of a true historical character and of independence of each other (at least in minor details) than discussions like that about the differences in the details of the miracle of the five loaves and two fishes, alone common of the miracles to the fourfold Gospel (a sort of prelude to works like Blunt’s Undesigned Coincidences), and the relation of this miracle to the miracle of the seven loaves (Harmony, xlvi.). Exegetical Principles.
Augustin has laid down in a separate treatise a code of exegetical principles. His Christian Doctrine (vol. ii. of this series) is the earliest manual of Biblical hermeneutics. In spite of irrelevant and lengthy digressions, it contains many suggestions of value, which have not been improved upon in modern treatises on the subject.
1. He emphasizes Hebrew and Greek scholarship as an important aid to the expositor, and an essential condition of the interpretation of the figurative language of Scripture (ii. 11, 16; 16, 23, this ed., pp. 539, 543).
2. He will have his interpreter acquainted with sacred geography (ii. 29, 45, p. 549), natural history (ii. 16, 24, p. 543; 29, 45, p. 549), music (ii. 16, 26, p. 544), chronology (ii. 28, 42, p. 549) and the science of numbers (ii. 16, 25, p. 543), natural science generally (ii. 29, 45 sqq., p. 549 sqq.), history (ii. 28, 43, p. 549), dialectics (ii. 31, 48, p. 550), and the writings of the ancient philosophers (ii. 40, 60, p. 554). He was the first to suggest a work which has been realized in our dictionaries of the Bible. Pertinent to the subject he says, “What some men have done in regard to all words and names found in Scripture, in the Hebrew and Syriac and Egyptian and other tongues, taking up and interpreting separately such as were left in Scripture without interpretation; and what Eusebius has done in regard to the history of the past…I think might be done in regard to other matters.…For the advantage of his brethren a competent man might arrange in their several classes, and give an account of, the unknown places, and animals and plants, and trees and stones and metals, and other species of things mentioned in Scripture” (ii. 39, 59, p. 554). It is, in view of this sage suggestion, almost incomprehensible that Augustin pays no attention to these subjects in his commentaries. Jerome, on the other hand, is quite rich in these departments.
3. He presses the view that the Scripture is designed to have more interpretations than one (Christ. Doctr. iii. 27, 38 sq.; this ed. p. 567). Augustin constantly applies this canon (e.g., on the petition, “Thy will be done,” Sermon on the Mount, ii. 7, 21–23). He adopted the seven rules of the Donatist Tichonius as assisting to a deep understanding of the Word. These rules relate (1) to the Lord and His body, (2) to the twofold division of the Lord’s body, (3) to the promises and the Law, (4) to species and genus, (5) to times, (6) to recapitulation, (7) to the devil and his body (Christ. Doctr.iii. 30, 42, pp. 568–573). He explains and illustrates these laws at length, but denies that they exhaust the rules for discovering the hidden truth of Scripture.
4. He commends the method of interpreting obscure passages by the light of passages that are understood, and prefers it before the interpretation by reason (Christ. Doctr. iii. 29, 39, p. 567).
