It is also frequently asked what our belief must be about the form and shape of heaven according to Sacred Scripture. Many scholars engage in lengthy discussions on these matters, but the sacred writers with their deeper wisdom have omitted them. Such subjects are of no profit for those who seek beatitude, and, what is worse, they take up very precious time that ought to be given to what is spiritually beneficial.
What concern is it of mine whether heaven is like a sphere and the earth is enclosed by it and suspended in the middle of the universe, or whether heaven like a disk above the earth covers it over on one side?
But the credibility of Scripture is at stake, and as I have indicated more than once, there is danger that a man uninstructed in divine revelation, discovering something in Scripture or hearing from it something that seems to be at variance with the knowledge he has acquired, may resolutely withhold his assent in other matters where Scripture presents useful admonitions, narratives, or declarations. Hence, I must say briefly that in the matter of the shape of heaven the sacred writers knew the truth, but that the Spirit of God, who spoke through them, did not wish to teach men these facts that would be of no avail for their salvation.
But someone may ask: "Is not Scripture opposed to those who hold that heaven is spherical, when it says, 'who stretches out heaven like a skin?' " Let it be opposed indeed if their statement is false. The truth is rather in what God reveals than in what groping men surmise. But if they are able to establish their doctrine with proofs that cannot be denied, we must show that this statement of Scripture about the skin is not opposed to the truth of their conclusions. If it were, it would be opposed also to Sacred Scripture itself in another passage where it says that heaven is suspended like a vault.
For what can be so different and contradictory as a skin stretched out flat and the curved shape of a vault? But if it is necessary, as it surely is, to interpret these two passages so that they are shown not to be contradictory but to be reconcilable, it is also necessary that both of these passages should not contradict the theories that may be supported by true evidence, by which heaven is said to be curved on all sides in the shape of a sphere, provided only that this is proved.
Our picture of heaven as a vault, even when taken in a literal sense, does not contradict the theory that heaven is a sphere. We may well believe that in speaking of the shape of heaven Scripture wished to describe that part which is over our heads. If, therefore, it is not a sphere, it is a vault on that side on which it covers the earth; but if it is a sphere, it is a vault all around.
But the image of the skin presents a more serious difficulty: we must show that it is reconcilable not with the sphere (for that may be only a man-made theory) but with the vault of Holy Scripture.
My allegorical interpretation of this passage can be found in the thirteenth book of my Confessions. Whether the description of heaven stretched out like a skin is to be taken as I have interpreted it there or in some other way, here I must take into account the doggedly literal-minded interpreters and say what I think is obvious to everyone from the testimony of the senses.
Both the skin and the vault perhaps can be taken as figurative expressions; but how they are to be understood in a literal sense must be explained. If a vault can be not only curved but also flat, a skin surely can be stretched out not only on a flat plane but also in a spherical shape. Thus, for instance, a leather bottle and an inflated ball are both made of skin.
Here is how they used it:
From the way Augustine responds to various questions which have been put forward, there is a clear implication that many people in his day (around AD 400) thought that not only the earth but also the heavens were flat.
What the guys at "No Answers in Genesis" fail to grasp is the distinction between thinking something is literally in the Bible and knowing for sure it is.
When St Augustine argues the heavens are a sphere (which as for fix stars modern cosmologists are basically denying, based on taking so called parallax as really parallactic and therefore as a real trigonometric distance measure, thereby making the heavens of the fixed stars very much less like the inside of a spheric tent), he takes very good care to at the same time carefully show he is not contradicting the literal meaning of the Bible. The word "flat" is not there in the text when God stretches out the Heavens as "a skin" (or a tent). And it is not implied by the stretching out either:
If a vault can be not only curved but also flat, a skin surely can be stretched out not only on a flat plane but also in a spherical shape. Thus, for instance, a leather bottle and an inflated ball are both made of skin.
Why does he say this? Because he really thinks it is literally true that Heaven is like a vault and like a skin stretched out.
Our picture of heaven as a vault, even when taken in a literal sense, does not contradict the theory that heaven is a sphere. We may well believe that in speaking of the shape of heaven Scripture wished to describe that part which is over our heads. If, therefore, it is not a sphere, it is a vault on that side on which it covers the earth; but if it is a sphere, it is a vault all around.
But the image of the skin presents a more serious difficulty: we must show that it is reconcilable not with the sphere (for that may be only a man-made theory) but with the vault of Holy Scripture.
My allegorical interpretation of this passage can be found in the thirteenth book of my Confessions. Whether the description of heaven stretched out like a skin is to be taken as I have interpreted it there or in some other way, here I must take into account the doggedly literal-minded interpreters and say what I think is obvious to everyone from the testimony of the senses.
He does not discard the doggedly literal-minded interpreters as totally mistaken about Scripture. He thinks he has to take them into account. And if he corrects them, it is not by contradicting the literal sense of the Bible, but by correcting their "literal" interpretation. And he does not do it from "man made theories" but from "what is obvious to everyone from the testimony of the senses."
We do not have an obvious testimony of the senses that such a T Rex head in a museum is 65 million years old and more. We have an obvious testimony of the senses it is there and it is dead, if ever it was alive. And a somewhat less obvious testimony it was in fact alive. We do not have an obvious testimony of the senses that Earth is moving around itself or through space. We have an obvious testimony from sight and inner ears Earth is still and from sight that Sun and Moon and Stars are moving. Both these modern theories are - like the spheric heavens St Augustine was considering - "man made theories" and interpretations of the obvious testimonies of the senses.
But the obvious testimony of the senses he was putting in is that a skin stretched out need not be stretched out flat on a flat surface. Meaning that God stretching out Heavens like a skin need not mean that Heavens are flat.
Now, is Adam and Eve literally in the Bible? And literally on day six rather than after millions or billions of years of other creatures? Yes. Is this confirmed by God? Yes, in the very words of Our Lord, those that have become so very reactualised by the debate in US and French legislation about the nature of Marriage. Marc 10:6. And similarily Earth standing still and Sun getting around it is literally in the words of one whom St Robert Bellarmine considered too wise to state anything that could be refuted. King Solomon.
Hans-Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St Jude
28-X-2013
PS, for those eager to read the very famous StAugustine quote they also cite in context, here is Book one of De Genesi ad Litteram:
Book I, the Work of the First Day (excerpt from translation by John Hammond Taylor S. J.)
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire