Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.2.12: Concerning the words ascribed to John the Baptist

 

Notes:

In this episode, we are looking at Book 2, chapter 12 where Augustine addresses issues related to the veracity of the Gospel records in reporting the recorded speech of John the Baptist.

2.12: Concerning the words ascribed to John by all four of the evangelists respectively.

Augustine here investigates how the reader might understand statements attributed to John the Baptist in each Gospel respectively, while harmonizing such statements overall as they appear throughout all four Gospels. How does one, in particular, understand statements attributed to John that seem to differ from one account to another? This discussion might be described as addressing the question of whether the evangelists reported the ipsissima verba (the very words), in this case of John the Baptist, or the ipsissima vox (the very voice, but not the exact words).

Augustine begins with a discussion of how one differentiates and recognizes direct quotation of speech. How does one distinguish between something Matthew says and something John says when the text does not use some clear grammatical indicator of direct quotations. He gives as an example the statement in Matthew 3:1-3, which begins, “1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea,  2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” The question is whether or not the next statement in v. 3 [ “For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.”] was also spoken by John or information added by Matthew. In other words, where does the quotation from John end? At v. 2 or at v. 3? Augustine notes that Matthew and John sometimes speak of themselves in the third person (citing Matthew 9:9 and John 21:24), so v. 3 might legitimately have been spoken by John the Baptist. If so, it harmonizes with John’s statement in John 1:23, “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness.”

Such questions, according to Augustine, should not “be deemed worth while in creating any difficulties” for the reader. He adds, “For although one writer may retain a certain order in the words, and another present a different one, there is really no contradiction in that.” He further affirms that word of God “abides eternal and unchangeable above all that is created.”

Another challenge comes with respect to the question as to whether the reported speech of persons like John are given “with the most literal accuracy.” Augustine suggests that the Christian reader does not have liberty to suppose that an evangelist has stated anything that is false either in the words or facts that he reports.

He offers an example Matthew’s record that John the Baptist said of Christ “whose shoes I am not worthy to bear” (Matthew 3:11) and Mark’s statement, “whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose” (Mark 1:7; cf. Luke 3:16). Augustine suggests that such apparent difficulties can be harmonized if one considers that perhaps each version gets the fact straight since “John did give utterance to both these sentences either on two different occasions or in one and the same connection.” Another possibility is that “one of the evangelists may have reproduced the one portion of the saying, and the rest of them the other.” In the end the most important matter is not the variety of words used by each evangelist but the truth of the facts.

Conclusion:

According to Augustine, when it comes to addressing “the concord of the evangelists” one finds “there is not divergence [to be supposed] from the truth.” Thus, he contends that any apparent discrepancies or contradictions can be reasonably explained. For Augustine variety of expression does not mean contradiction.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.2.9-11: Harmonizing the Infancy Narratives

 

Notes:

In this episode, we are looking at Book 2, chapter 9-11where Augustine addresses several points where some readers might see apparent contradictions in the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke.

2.9: 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 his going into Galilee was the fact that their city Nazareth was there.

This brief chapter continues the discussion concerning Archelaus which began in 2.8. Augustine harmonizes Matthew’s account of Joseph’s fear of going into Judea given the reign of Archelaus, the angelic warning, and the decision to go into Galilee (Matthew 2:22) with Luke’s account noting that Mary and Joseph were originally from Nazareth of Galilee.  He suggests that if there had not been fear of Archelaus, they might instead have settled in Jerusalem, where the temple was.

2.10: 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.

Augustine must have known of some critics who saw the mention of Archelaus in Matthew as somehow being at odds with Luke’s account on various levels including the mention of the family’s frequent trips to Jerusalem. Augustine notes that none of the Evangelists reveal how long Archelaus reigned. Thus, he  might have had only a short reign. If it was longer, the family might have gone up stealthily, without drawing notice to themselves. If this were the case, it only magnifies their piety and faithfulness, despite these threats. Objections to the harmony of Matthew and Luke are not insuperable.

2.11: 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.

Augustine here tackles another perceived difficulty. How did the family of Jesus go to the temple in Jerusalem for purification if Herod was threatening his life? Augustine offers several explanations. One is that Herod would have been too busy with other royal affairs to notice their visit. Another is that he might not yet have been aware of the escape of the wise men. Only after this purification rite was done and they escaped to Egypt did it enter Herod’s mind to slay the innocents. Augustine even suggests Herod might have been prompted to perform this evil act after hearing the publicity relating to the words spoken by Simeon and Anna at the infant Christ’s visit to Jerusalem.

Conclusion:

In these three short chapters Augustine suggests various reasonable explanations as to how the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke might be fit together into a unified and harmonious narrative. Armed with such explanations one need not worry about any apparent conflicts in the story but receive them as being in symphony with one another.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.2.6-8: John the Baptist & the Two Herods

 

Image: John the Baptist, Byzantine medallion from an icon frame, c. 1,100, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

In this episode, we are looking at Book 2, chapter 6-8 where Augustine discusses the appearance of John the Baptist in all four Gospels, explains the mention of two Herods (Herod the Great King of the Jews and his son Herod tetrarch of Galilee) in the Gospels, and Matthew’s mention of Archelaus.

2.6: On the position given to the preaching of John the Baptist in all the four evangelists.

Augustine calls attention to the fact that all four Gospels describe the ministry of John the Baptist. For Matthew and Luke, John’s public preaching ministry begins after their respective birth narratives. Mark does not have the birth narrative but starts in 1:1, “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God,” and then proceeds to John’s ministry. Luke makes mention of the political setting (Luke 3:1-2) before describing John’s ministry. John also appears early in the prologue to the Fourth Gospel: “There was a man sent from God, whose name was John” (John 1:6). The four Gospel accounts of John the Baptist, according to Augustine, “are not at variance with one another.” The differences in detail among the four Gospels do not demand the same detailed analysis as required with the genealogies. He encourages his readers to apply the same methodology he used to harmonize apparent differences in the genealogies to other such passages in the Gospels.

2.7: Of the two Herods.

Augustine here draws a distinction between Herod the Great, under whose reign Christ was born, and his son Herod the tetrarch of Galilee in the event someone might be confused about the mention of Herod’s death in Matthew 2:15, 19 (Herod the Great) and the mention of Herod the tetrarch ruling in Galilee in Luke 3:1. His response indicates that this was apparently an area where some critics of the Gospels had claimed a contradiction.

2.8: 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, yet was not afraid to go into Galilee, where Herod, that prince’s brother, was tetrarch.

Augustine here anticipates another point at which the Gospel readers might encounter confusion. Matthew 2:22 says that Joseph was fearful to go to Judea when he heard Archelaus ruled there, but then he went to Galilee where Herod ruled. Augustine explains, however, that Galilee was not ruled by Archelaus but by Herod the tetrarch. He notes a time difference between when Archelaus ruled (and was replaced by Pontius Pilate) and the time when the family of Jesus settled in Nazareth.

Conclusion:

Augustine offers a harmonious and unified account of John the Baptist across all four Gospels. He is attentive to any perceived misunderstandings that might arise as to the mention of historical figures like the two Herods and Archelaus. We also see again in this section some textual differences between Augustine’s Old Latin text and the traditional Greek text of the New Testament. For example, when citing Mark 1:2 Augustine reads, “As it is written in the prophet Isaiah”; whereas, the traditional text reads, “As it is written in the prophets.”

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.2.5: Harmonizing the Infancy Narratives of Matthew and Luke

 

Image: James Tissot, Les rois mages chez Hérode (The Magi in the House of Herod), c. 1886-1894, Brooklyn Museum.

In this episode we are looking at Book 2, chapter 5 where Augustine harmonizes the infancy narrative in Matthew 1—2 and that in Luke 1—2.

2.5: 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 of the boyhood of Christ, which are omitted by the one and recorded by the other.

Augustine argues that there is “no contradiction” between the two evangelist in their respective infancy narratives. Luke sets forth in detail what Matthew omitted. Both bear witness “that Mary conceived by the Holy Ghost.” There is “no want of concord between them.”

Matthew and Luke both affirm that Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

Each is also unique. Only Matthew has the visit of the magi. Only Luke has the manger, the angel announcing Jesus’ birth to the shepherds, the multitude of the heavenly host praising God, etc.

Augustine notes that a deserving inquiry can be raised as to the precise timing of the events in both Matthew and Luke, and how they can be harmonized with one another. He then provides a narrative in which he weaves Matthew chapters 1-2 and Luke 1-2 into one unified account, in this order:

Matthew 1:18: Introduction

Luke 1:5-36: The conception of John and Jesus

Matthew 1:18-25: Announcement to Joseph

Luke 1:57—2:21: Luke’s birth account (shepherds, angels)

Matthew 2:1-12: Matthew’s account of birth (wise men)

Luke 2:22-39: The visit to Jerusalem

Matthew 2:13-23: Flight to Egypt and return to Nazareth

Luke 2:40-52: Family Passover visit to Jerusalem when Jesus is twelve

Conclusion:

Augustine provides his own merging of the two infancy narratives, perhaps in the same way earlier writers like Tatian had attempted to blend the Gospels into one account in his Diatessaron. Augustine is likely drawing on Old Latin translations and his narrative provides several interesting textual variants. For example, the angelic announcement in Luke 2:14 reads “and on earth peace to men of good will [Hominibus bonae voluntatis],” diverging from the traditional text, which would be rendered, “and on earth peace, good will toward men.” So, this chapter is interesting not just for insights into harmonization but also textual issues via the Old Latin version(s) cited.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.2.3-4: Genealogies

 

Image: Saint Augustine Basilica overlooking the ruins of Hippo Regius.

This is a series of readings from and notes and commentary upon Augustine of Hippo’s Harmony of the Evangelists.

In this episode we are looking at Book 2, chapter 3-4 where Augustine addresses both supposed conflicts between and among the genealogies of Matthew 1 and Luke 3.

2.3: A statement of the reason why Matthew enumerates one succession of ancestors for Christ, and Luke another.

Augustine begins by noting in particular a difference between Matthew and Luke in the line between David and Joseph in the two genealogies. They follow different directions with Matthew offering a series “beginning with David and traveling downwards to Joseph,” and Luke, on the other hand, having “a different succession, ”tracing it from Joseph upwards….” The main source of the difference, however, is in the order between Joseph and David and the fact that Joseph is listed as having two different fathers. Augustine explains that one of these was Joseph’s natural father by whom he was physically begotten (Jacob, in Matthew), and the other was his adopted father (Heli, in Luke). Both of these lines led to David.

Augustine further notes that adoption was an ancient custom. Though terms like “to beget” generally indicate natural fatherhood, Augustine notes that natural terms can also be used metaphorically, so Christians can speak of being begotten by God (e.g., cf. John 1:12-13: “to them he gave power to become the sons of God”). Augustine thus concludes, “It would be no departure from the truth, therefore, even had Luke said that Joseph was begotten by the person by whom he was really adopted.” Nevertheless, he sees significance in the fact that Matthew says “Jacob begat Joseph” (Matthew 1:16; indicating he was the natural father) and Luke says, “Joseph, which was the son of Heli” (Luke 3:23; indicating he was the adopted father of Joseph). Those unwilling to seek harmonizing explanations of such texts “prefer contention to consideration.”

2.4: Of the reason why forty generations (not including Christ Himself) are found in Matthew, although he divides them into three successions of fourteen each.

Augustine begins by noting that consideration of this matter requires a reader “of the greatest attention and carefulness.” Matthew who stresses the kingly character of Christ lists forty names in his genealogy. The number forty is of obvious spiritual significance in the Bible. Moses and Elijah each fasted for forty days, as did Christ himself in his temptation. After his resurrection, Christ also appeared to his disciples for forty days. He sees numerological significance in the fact that forty is four time ten. There are four directions (North, South, East, and West) and ten is the sum of the first four numbers.

Matthew intentionally desires to list forty generations, but he also suggests three successive eras (Abraham to David; David to Babylonian exile; Babylonian exile to Christ). This would be fourteen generations each for a total of forty-two, but Matthew, Augustine suggests, offers a double enumeration of Jechonias, making it “a kind of corner” and excluding it from the overall count, resulting then in the more spiritually significant number forty.

Augustine suggests that Matthew’s genealogy stresses Christ taking our sins upon himself, while Luke, who focuses on Christ as a Priest, stresses “the abolition of our sins.” He sees significance in Matthew’s line from David through Solomon by Bathsheba, acknowledging David’s sin, while Luke’s line flows from David through Nathan, whom Augustine erroneously ties to the prophet Nathan, by whose confrontation with David, God took away sin.

He also sees numerological significance in the fact that Luke’s genealogy includes seventy-seven persons (counting Christ and God himself). He sees the number seventy-seven as referring to “the purging of all sin.” Eleven breaks the perfect number ten, and it was the number of curtains of haircloth in the temple (Exodus 26:7). Seven is the number of days in the week. Seventy-seven is the product of eleven times seven, and so it is “the sign of sin in its totality.”

Conclusion:

The harmonization of the genealogies has been a perennial issue in Gospel studies from the earliest days of Christianity (see Eusebius’ citation of Africanus in his EH). Augustine maintains the continuity and unity of both Gospel genealogies while also noting the uniqueness of each individual Gospel account. In both genealogies Augustine offers pre-critical insight into the intentional use of spiritually significant numbers (forty in Matthew; seventy-seven in Luke) to heighten what he sees as the theological perspectives and intentions of the Evangelists.

JTR

Addendum:

Here's a chart showing Augustine's breakdown of the genealogy in Matt 1:1-17 which yields 40 names according to his calculation. He excludes in his scheme Jechonias as "a kind of corner" and Jesus Christ as "the kingly president" over the whole.

Augustine of Hippo, Harmony of the Evangelists.2.1-2: The Son (as was supposed) of Joseph

Image: Close-up, Jacopo Sansovino, Madonna and Child, c. 1550, painted and gilded papier mache and stucco, National Gallery, Washington, DC.

Greetings, this is Jeff Riddle, Pastor of CRBC, Louisa, Virginia and this is a series of readings from and notes and commentary upon Augustine of Hippo’s Harmony of the Evangelists.

Note: We are resuming this series after a one-year break (from March 2022).

We are in book 2 of 4. This second book is the longest in this work with some 80 chapters. It covers the events recorded in the Gospel of Matthew, with comparison to the other three Gospels, up to the Last Supper. These episodes will only be posted in audio (not video) format.

The Prologue:

Augustine begins by noting he intends to look into the four accounts of Christ in the Gospels and show how they are consistent with one another.

2.1: A statement of the reason why the enumeration of the ancestors of Christ was carried down to Joseph, while Christ was not born of this man’s seed, but of the Virgin Mary.

This book begins with an analysis of the genealogy of the Lord Jesus. Jesus is the Son of Man with respect to his true humanity. Augustine notes also “the heavenly and eternal generation” of Christ as “the only begotten Son of God. Matthew begins by tracing out the “human generation” in the genealogy from Abraham to Joseph, husband of Mary.

He notes that Joseph and Mary were married, though she was a virgin. They were an “illustrious recommendation” to “husbands and wives that they may share affections of the mind, with “no connection between the sexes of the body.” Augustine thus promotes his view that “carnal intercourse” is “to be practiced with the purpose of the procreation of children only.” Joseph was not the father of Jesus but had adopted him from another.

Augustine notes the statement from Luke 3:23 that Christ began his public ministry at “about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph.” Joseph could be called his “father” only if he was “truly the husband of Mary, without the intercourse of the flesh, indeed, but in virtue of the real union of marriage.”

2.2: 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.

He begins by saying that even if Mary did not descend from David by blood, we could say he descended from David by virtue of his adoption by Joseph. Given, however, that Paul said, Christ was “of the seed of David according to the flesh” (Rom 1:3), we know that Mary also descended directly from David. Given her connection to Elisabeth, she also came from the priestly line. Thus, Christ came “from the line of the kings, and from that of the priests.”

Conclusion:

The Gospel story of Jesus begins with his human genealogy and his virginal conception.

JTR

Augustine: The Four Gospels Are United, Because They Were All Written By Christ

 

Image: St. Augustine, writing in his cell, by Sandro Botticelli, 1480.

Here are some notes from Augustine’s Harmony of the Evangelists 1.35, which I shared on twitter (@Riddle1689). As he concluded Book 1, Augustine returned to his purpose for this book, namely, to defend the unity and harmony of the Four Gospels against the pagan critics. One of their arguments was that Jesus left behind no writings and that his disciples had distorted the account of his life and teachings.

 

Why does Augustine say the four Gospels have essential unity and can be harmonized?

Harmony 1.35: It is because Christ "stands to all his disciples in the relation of the Head to the members of his body."

Harmony 1.35: "Therefore when those disciples [the evangelists] have written matters which he declared and spake to them, it ought not by any means to be said he [Jesus] has written nothing of himself; since the truth is, that his members have accomplished only what they became acquainted with by the repeated statements of the Head."

Harmony 1.35: "For all that he [Jesus] was minded to give... he commanded to be written by those disciples whom he used as if they were his own hands."

Harmony 1.35: When one reads any of the four Gospels "he might look upon the actual hand of the Lord himself... to see it engaged in the act of writing."

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.33-35: "As if they were his own hands"

 

Notes:

1.33: 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.

Augustine defends Christianity against critics who charge that its rise has impaired “the bliss of human life.” He makes reference to the fact that the triumph of Christianity has indeed resulted in the decline of theaters, the closing of dens of vices, and the celebrations of some sports. Only those of low character, however, would protest the diminishment of such things. Christianity has not brought about the failure of “true prosperity” but rescued society from sinking “into all that is base and hurtful.”

1.34: Epilogue to the preceding.

Nearing the end of Book 1, Augustine returns to his purpose for writing this book. He wants to show that the Gospels can be harmonized. He adds that the Gospels are sufficient, without there being any extant writings from Jesus himself. The disciples did not give a false account of his life, and Jesus was not a mere man albeit with exalted wisdom. The prophecies of the Old Testament predicted that Jesus would forbid the worship of the pagan gods. His disciples did not depart from his teaching.

1.35: Of the fact that the mystery of the 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.

Augustine begins by noting that Christ himself is the wisdom of God of which the prophets spoke. Drawing on Plato’s Timaeus, he notes a distinction between things above (eternity and truth) and things below (things made and faith). Christ is the Mediator between these two realms, and between God and man. Christ is the center of faith (things made) and truth (things eternal). This mystery was spoken about by the prophets. Christ now stands as head of the body. There is no need to have anything written by Jesus, for when his disciples wrote it was as though he himself was “engaged in the act of writing.” He used the evangelists, "as if they were his own hands."

Conclusion:

Book 1 is brought to a conclusion. Augustine responds with a final apologetic thrust against pagan critics, defending Christianity against charges of being “puritanical.” He reinforces the fact that his goal in this work is to demonstrate that the Gospels can be harmonized and that they accurately reflect the teaching of Jesus. Though we have no writings from Jesus himself, the Gospels are sufficient to convey what Jesus taught.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.31-32: "The God of the whole earth" (Isaiah 54:5)

 

Image: Isaiah, 1838, Jean Louis Ernest Meissonier (1815-1891)

Notes:

1.31: The fulfillment of prophecies concerning Christ.

Augustine continues to stress the prophecies concerning Christ from the Old Testament. He is critical of pagans who might outwardly applaud Christ but deny that he taught that the pagan gods should be abandoned and the images destroyed.

Much attention is given to the reading and exposition of the servant song in Isaiah 52:13—54:5, including the statement in Isaiah 54:5 that the Biblical God is “the God of the whole earth.” This servant song, sometimes known as the Fifth Gospel, provided a classic prophetic passion prediction in the eyes of early Christians. Augustine points out, of course, that the pagans did not typically deny the passion of Christ, so much as his resurrection. He sees in the flowering and triumph of the Christian movement in the Roman world, the fulfillment of these prophesies, since the Christian God is, indeed, the God of the whole world.

1.32: A statement in vindication of the doctrine of the apostles as opposed to idolatry, in the words of the prophecies.

Augustine challenges pagans who deny the prophecies by saying Christ used magical arts or that the disciples invented them. He notes how the Christian movement has extended among all the Gentile nations, surpassing the synagogue, and enlarging its tent. It has even extended beyond the bounds of the Roman Empire to the “barbarous nations” (the Persians and Indians). The church has overcome the age of persecution when she was covered with the blood of the martyrs “like one clad in purple array.”

It is plain to even “the slowest and dullest minds” that the Christian God is now “the God of the whole earth.” He challenges the pagans to bring forward any of their prophecies or divinations that prove otherwise. He notes that many pagans say their gods have deserted them, because they have offended these gods. They fail to see the failure of their religion is due instead to Christ’s triumph in fulfillment of prophecy.

Conclusion:

Augustine continues his apologetic against the pagan religions. Though this is a work on the Gospels, he wants to make plain that the life of Christ, including his passion, was a fulfillment of the Old Testament writings, especially Isaiah. He sees the triumph of Christianity in the Roman Empire and even beyond as a providential evidence of the truth of the Christian faith.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.28-30: Isaiah 2 & Psalm 19 & Christ's Triumph

 

Image: Sunrise, Pantheon, Rome

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.26-27: Idolatry & Prophecy

 

Image: Head of Aphrodite, from the Agora in Athens, defaced with crosses on forehead and chin.

Notes:

1.26: Of the fact that idolatry has been subverted by the name of Christ, and by the faith of Christians, according to the prophets.

Augustine argues that the Christian stance against pagan idolatry was not a new teaching but one that is found in the Old Testament prophets. This Old Testament teaching has been preserved by the Jews, even though they reject Christianity. “Thus,” says Augustine, “the enemy of our faith has been made a witness to our truth.”

The “demolition” of the polytheistic pagan system has come from the God of Israel himself. To prove his point Augustine cites the Shema of Deuteronomy 6:4 and the second commandment against graven images (Exodus 20:4). He further notes that the Christian movement fulfills the promise to Abraham in Genesis 12, that through him and his seed the nations would be blessed. Christ’s virgin birth also fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14. The God of the Bible has ordained the overthrow of pagan “superstitions” through Christ.

1.27: 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.

Augustine notes again that the teaching against idolatry is found not only in the books of Christians (the NT) but also in those of the Jews (the OT). He further asks those pagan who have suggested that the Christian God is really Saturn, why, then, they do not worship him. Why also do they not accept his teaching that no other gods are to be worshipped? Augustine also chides the pagans for worshipping their gods in secret for fear that the Christians will take their idols and break them to pieces. He closes by suggesting that the triumph of Christianity over paganism is a fulfillment of Psalm 72:14 that all nations would serve the God of Scripture.

Conclusion:

Augustine continues his relentless attack on paganism. Christian teachings on this topic are not new, but they are found in the Old Testament prophets. Augustine presumes that Christianity has, in fact, already triumphed over pagan idolatry.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.24-25: Pagan Toleration & The Works of God

 

Image: Temple of Bacchus, Baalbek, Lebanon

Notes:

1.24: 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.

Having discussed the fact that the pagans have confused the God of the Bible with Saturn and Jupiter, Augustine returns to his primary apologetic point, namely, that pagan continuation of the worship of the gods and rejection of the worship of Christ is both inconsistent with the tolerant theology of paganism (in which all gods are worshipped) and with Christian theology (which dictates that only Christ should be worshipped). He also stresses that the exclusive worship of Christ was “announced beforehand” through the OT prophets in their denunciation of idolatry.

1.25: Of the fact that 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 fulfillment.

Augustine continues his apologetic against paganism by noting that none of gods, even if mightier and more virtuous than another god, ever interdicts the worship of that other god. Jupiter, therefore, does not interdict the worship of Saturn, and chaste Dianna does not interdict the worship of the crude Priapus. The God of Israel, however, forbids the worship of any other gods by images and rites. Thus, the Biblical God shows that the pagan gods are “false and lying deities,” and he is “the one true and truthful God.”

The pagans have no right to reject the one true God, because God’s works prove him to be true. Augustine surveys various events from the Bible to illustrate these works. Rather than point to primordial history (the translation of Enoch, the flood and Noah’s ark), he begins in Genesis 12 with the call of Abraham and the promise to bless the nations through his seed (fulfilled in the birth of Jesus to the virgin Mary). He traces the patriarchs Isaac and Jacob, and deliverance under Moses. He notes that from Abraham eventually came Judah (the son of Jacob), and from him the Seed (Jesus) to bless the nations. The works of God are demonstrated in that now there was a generation of Christians willing to break apart the idols of their fathers.

Conclusion:

Augustine uses the quality of toleration in the practice of pagan religion as a tool against that religion. He points to its logical inconsistencies, arguing that the Biblical concept of one true God is proven by that God’s actions in history.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists, 1.22-23: Saturn & Jupiter

 

Image: Depiction of Saturn (Greek: Chronos), the Roman god of time, often depicted as partially shrouded and carrying a reaping hook. He was also the father of Jupiter or Jove (Greek: Zeus) who dethroned him as king of the gods. Ancient pagans tried to associate the Christian God with Saturn or Jupiter.

Notes:

This episode is a continuation of this series after a fairly significant break of c. four months (the last recorded episode was September 20, 2021). In his introduction to this work, S. F. D. Salmond described the Harmony as one of Augustine’s “most toilsome” works. After some preliminary information on the Gospels, much of Book 1 has to do with rather tedious Christian apologetics against pagan polytheistic religion. Nevertheless, we will continue to persevere in the series alongside the listener and trust we will be edified in the process. From this point I am going to do the episodes in an audio-only format on sermonaudio.com.

1.22: Of the opinion entertained by the Gentiles regarding our God:

Augustine surveys pagan misunderstandings of the Christian God. Some associate him with Saturn, and point to the worship of the Jews on the sabbath (Saturn’s day-Saturday).

The famed Roman scholar Varro, however, associated the God of the Jews with Jupiter (Greek: Zeus). In Roman mythology, Saturn was the father of Jupiter. Saturn had eaten all his children at their birth, lest they usurp him. Jupiter, however, was hidden by his mother and eventually attacked his father, conquered and expelled him, and freed his divine siblings from Saturn’s body. Jupiter then became the king of all gods.

Augustine argues that whether pagans think the God of the Bible is Saturn or Jupiter they have a problem. If they think he is Saturn, how can the reconcile the fact that Saturn never forbade the worship of other gods? If they think he is Jupiter, they should remember that, according to Roman mythology, even after Jupiter dethroned Saturn, he did not forbid worship of Saturn.

1.23: Of the follies which the pagans have indulged in regarding Jupiter and Saturn:

In this chapter Augustine pokes holes in the mythology and theology of paganism. He notes that though popular pagan religion relies on the stories of the gods as fables, the more sophisticated see deeper meaning. Their interpretations, however, are not consistent. Some follow a platonic view and see the Ether (God) as a spirit and not body. Others follow the Stoics and see its as body (pantheism?).

He cites writers of the past like the Greek Euhemerus and the Latin Cicero who suggested that the gods were originally men who moved from heaven to earth, as they did with Romulus and the Caesars.

Nevertheless, Augustine notes that the pagans assert they worship Jupiter (a vivifying spirit that fills the world) and not a dead man.

Saturn, they say, was also not a man but the equivalent of the Greek God Chronos (representing time). Augustine offers the jibe that by making this defense the pagans admit that one of their chief gods is literally temporal (time).

He notes that the Platonic philosophers have countered the Christians by arguing that Saturn comes from the names for fulness (satis) and mind or intellect (nous), so Saturn is “fullness of intellect.” Jupiter then comes from the “the supreme mind” and is the spirit that serves as “the soul of the world.”

If this is the case, Augustine retorts, they should tear down the images and capitol dedicated to Jupiter and erect them to Saturn. Instead, Saturn is a deity typically maligned as evil by the pagans.

Conclusion:

Augustine continues to deconstruct the mythology and theology of paganism, pointing to the rational inconsistencies of pagan intellectual interpretations of the myths of Saturn and Jupiter. His ultimate point will be to suggest that the God of Christianity is superior to the myths of paganism, however one might try to interpret them.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.19-21: God worshipped alone, or not at all

 

Notes:

1.19: The proof that God is the true God.

Augustine continues to ask why the pagan Romans refuse to offer worship to the Biblical God in the manner in which he desires to be worshipped. He adds: “For unless he is worshipped alone, He is really not worshipped at all.” He suggests that even the pagans will admit that their deities have show less power than the one true God.

1.20: 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.

Augustine here declares that the prophets of the pagan Gods, like those of Sibyl, never predicted that the God of the Hebrews would be worshipped by men of all nations. He makes reference to the devils confessing Christ during his performance of exorcisms, but notes, “their contention is that they were invented by our party.” In contrast to the pagan prophets, he calls attention to the Old Testament prophets who accurately predicted the coming of Christ.

1.21: 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.

Augustine poses a logical challenge to his pagan opponents, based on two contradictory opinions:

First, their religion claim that all gods are to be worshipped. Why then do they not worship the God of the Hebrews?

Second, the God of the Hebrews demands exclusive allegiance. If they worship him aright, why then do they not put away the other gods?

He closes with this question: “Who is this God, who thus harasses all the gods of the Gentiles, who thus betrays all their sacred rites, who thus renders them extinct?”

Conclusion:

Augustine continues to press the superiority of the God of the Bible to the pagan gods. He especially makes the point that whereas the pagan gods did not demand exclusive allegiance, the God of the Hebrews was intolerant and demanded the exclusive allegiance of his worshippers. He also contrasts the pagan prophets to the Biblical prophets. In this work on the Gospels, it is important for Augustine to note the religious clash between the intolerant God of the Bible and the supposedly tolerant gods of paganism.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.15-18: Faithful Apostles & Intolerant God

 

 

 JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.12-14: The Romans and the Jews

 

1.12: 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.

Augustine declares that the Jews were defeated by the Romans and expelled from Jerusalem because of “the most heinous sin” of putting Christ to death. He adds that the Romans did not embrace the God of the Hebrews, because he demanded that he alone be worshipped and that images would not be permitted. He further notes that the Romans could not claim any moral superiority as to why God gave them victory over the Jews.  They had no “piety and manners” to commend them, and, in fact, their early history reveals that Rome was originally an asylum for criminals and that Romulus committed fratricide in striking down his brother Remus. He closes by stressing the sovereignty of God, who acts as he pleases “according to the fore-ordained order of the ages.”

1.13: Of the question why God suffered the Jews to be reduced to subjection.

Why did God permit the Jews to be defeated by the Romans? For Augustine the answer is simple: It came about, because in their “impious fury” they put Christ to death.

1.14: Of the fact that the God of the Hebrews, although the people were conquered, proved Himself to be unconquered, by overthrowing their idols, and by turning all the Gentiles to His own service.

Augustine points out the fact that Christ is now being preached and worshipped across the Roman Empire. This fulfills the promise made to Abraham that all nations would be blessed through his seed (Gen 12). God took kingdom and priesthood from the Jews, because Christ is the true King and Priest. This was announced by the prophets (without the use of magical arts). Christ could not have written books promoting magical arts, because his doctrine is so vehemently opposed to it.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.8-11: Jesus was not a magician

 

Notes:

1.8: 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.

Augustine continues to respond to those who reject the authenticity and historical reliability of the Gospels in their presentation of Jesus. He notes that these skeptics hypocritically affirm that Christ was the wisest of men, based on various reports about his life, but then reject the Gospels, which are based on eyewitness reports from his closest followers. The Gospels present Jesus as the only begotten Son, as God himself, and as the creator of all things. He then counter-punches by asking why the pagan deities should be considered “proper objects of reverence” if they are ridiculed in popular theatrical productions. He challenges those who say they have books written by Jesus which support their view to produced them.

1.9: Of certain persons who pretend that Christ wrote books on the art of magic:

Here Augustine attacks those who make the false claims that they have books written by Jesus on magic, which he used to produce his miracles. If they have these books, he challenges such persons to use these books to do the miracles Jesus did.

1.10: Of some men who are mad enough to suppose that the books were inscribed with the names of Peter and Paul:

The attack continues, as Augustine points out that some of the spurious “magic” books have nonsensical dedications to Peter and Paul. These claims show their “deceitful audacity” and ignorance, making them a laughingstock. It would be total folly to suggest that Jesus wrote anything to Paul, who did not become a follower of Jesus during his earthly ministry but only after his resurrection. Augustine chides such men for getting their information about Christ and the apostles “not in the holy writings, but on painted walls.” He notes that such spurious views likely developed in Rome where Peter and Paul were martyred on the same day. These men had then misunderstood paintings which depicted Jesus with Peter and Paul.

1.11: In opposition to those who foolishly imagine that Christ converted the people to Himself by magical arts:

Augustine here offers another challenge to those who claim Jesus did his miracles by magic. If this is so, how do they explain the fact that the prophets wrote about him. If he used magic to influence them, then he was “a magician before He was born.”

Conclusion:

Augustine here continues his defense of the canonical Gospels, especially against popular pagan traditions, which suggested that Jesus had been a magician and used magic to manipulate circumstances and perform miracles. He shows that books presenting this view which claimed to be written by Jesus are spurious. He is especially critical of those who have received a distorted view of Jesus based on visual art (paintings) rather on the written Scriptures. His purpose, again, is to show the superiority of the canonical Gospels as sources for the life of Jesus.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.6-7: Why didn't Jesus write anything?

 

1.6: 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.

Augustine discusses here the so-called “tetramorph,” a development in early Christian literature and art, in which the four Evangelists are depicted as the four living creatures in Revelation 4:6-7 (cf. Ezekiel 1:10).

Most early interpreters suggested the winged man to represent Matthew, the winged lion to represent Mark, the winged ox to represent Luke, and the eagle to represent John.

Augustine, however, reverses the first two by suggesting that Matthew should be the winged lion, given his royal emphasis on Jesus as king, and Mark, as the winged man, since he specifically describes Christ neither as king or priest.

He also mentions that some associated the man to Matthew, the eagle to Mark, and the lion to John.

He suggests the ox is right for Luke given his emphasis on Jesus as priest, and the eagle for John, since “he soars like an eagle” in his high Christology.

1.7 A statement of Augustine’s reason for undertaking this work on the harmony of the evangelists, and an example of 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.

Augustine begins this chapter by describing the Gospels as “chariots” in which Christ is “borne throughout the earth and brings the peoples under His easy yoke, and his light burden.” Calvin will later borrow this image in his Harmony of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Augustine also notes the calumnious attacks on the Gospels by those who want to keep men from the faith. Thus, he sets out in particular to show that the Gospels “do  not stand in any antagonism to each other.”

He also addresses the criticism raised by some that Jesus himself wrote nothing, but that we learn of his life and teaching only through the writings of his disciples, who exaggerated their master. Such men say Jesus was the wisest of men, but they deny that he is to be worshipped as God.

Augustine responds by pointing out that some of the most admired pagan philosophers left behind no writings, like Pythagoras and Socrates, but were written about by his disciples. If they accept their records of the philosophers, then why not accept the Gospel accounts of Jesus?

Conclusion:

In his discussion of the tetramorph, Augustine continues to discuss what makes each Gospel distinctive. He also engaged here in apologetics, defending the harmony of the Gospels and their historical reliability, even though they contain nothing written by Jesus himself.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.3-5: Gospels and Christology

Notes and commentary:

1.3: Of the fact that Matthew, together with Mark, had especially in view the kingly character of Christ, whereas Luke was dealing with the priestly.

Augustine continues the idea stated in the previous chapter that Matthew (and Mark, who closely follows him) presents Jesus as the true King, while Luke presents him as the true Priest.

With respect to Christ as King, he notes the title affixed to the cross: “The King of the Jews.”

With respect to Christ as priest he calls attention to the prophecy of Psalm 110:4: “Thou art a priest after the order of Melchizedek.”

He closes with an interesting argument for Matthew’s focus on Jesus as King, noting that just as Kings have attendants, so Matthew had Mark as an attendant.

On the same principle, just as priests enter alone into the Holy of Holies, Luke’s presentation of Jesus stands alone, without an “epitomizer.”

1.4: Of the fact that John understood the exposition of Christ’s divinity.

Augustine suggests here that whereas the Synoptic Gospels stressed the humanity of Jesus, John focuses on his divinity. In John it is made clear that Jesus is the Father’s equal. Christ is thus born to “loftier heights” in John, which “leaves the other three far behind him.” John has more richly drunk in the divinity of Jesus, as though he drew it “from the very bosom of his Lord” on whom he reclined. Clearly Augustine sees the author of John as the beloved disciple.

1.5: Concerning the two virtues, of which John is conversant with the contemplative, the other evangelists with the active.

Augustine now draws a distinction between the first three Gospels and John, based on his understanding of two distinct virtues: the active and the contemplative. The Synoptic Gospels represent the active by focusing on the deeds of Jesus. John gives more care to the details of Jesus’ words and so represents the contemplative. This same pattern is seen in the wives of Jacob, with Leah representing the active and Rachel the contemplative.

Conclusion:

Augustine draws a distinction among the Synoptic Gospels, with Matthew and Mark presenting Jesus as King and Luke presenting him as Priest. He also sees a Christological distinction to be made between the Synoptics and John with respect to Christ’s nature. The Synoptics focus on the true humanity of Jesus, while John stresses his true divinity. This also reflects the fact that the Synoptics demonstrate the active virtue, while John the contemplative.

JTR

Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists.1.1-2: Gospel Authority and Order

Notes:

1.1: On the authority of the Gospels:

Augustine begins by noting that the Gospels are preeminent among the sacred writings.

The first Christian preachers were the apostles who were eyewitnesses of Jesus’s ministry.

Two of the apostles, Matthew and John, wrote Gospels. Those who were not apostles, Mark and Luke, made use of reliable information to compose their trustworthy Gospels.

Beyond the four Evangelists, no others composed written accounts of the life of Jesus which had canonical authority as Holy Books. So, Augustine rejects the apocryphal gospels.

These non-canonical were those “which the catholic and apostolic rule of faith and sound doctrine condemned [quae catholica atque apostolica regula fidei et sana doctrina condemnat].” Thus, we see Augustine’s appeal to the “rule of faith.”

1.2: On the order of the evangelists, and the principles on which they wrote.

Augustine suggests that there are four “fixed” Gospels, since there are four divisions of the world (presumably, North, South, East, and West), as a “mystical sign” of how the Christian faith would spread worldwide.

He further suggests they were written in the chronological order: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John.

In this way the first and last evangelists were apostles (Matthew and John), who supported the evangelists who were not apostles (Mark and Luke) on either side “like sons who were to be embraced.”

Of the four Matthew was originally written in Hebrew and the others in Greek. Each evangelist received “the gift of inspiration [unicuique inspiratum].”

Each Evangelist kept “a certain order of narration proper to himself.”

Matthew stressed the “royal lineage” of the Lord.

Mark “follows him closely, and looks like his attendant and epitomizer [pedissequus et breviator eius].” Mark has “little to record” by himself that is not included in the other Gospels, especially Matthew.

Luke, on the other hand, present the Lord according to his “priestly lineage and character.” In his genealogy, he traces the Lord’s line not through Solomon (as Matthew does) but through David’s son Nathan, who was not a king.

Conclusion:

Augustine’s introduction stresses the apostolic authority of the canonical Gospels. The canonical Gospels are consistent with the regula fidei. With respect to their chronological order, he puts forward what will become knowns as the “Augustinian Hypothesis” that the Gospels were written in their canonical order: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. He sees a close connection between Matthew and Mark which present the Lord Jesus as King, alongside Luke, who present him as a Priest. We might note that he is seemingly among the first to group the first three Gospels (the so-called Synoptic Gospels) as distinct from John.

JTR