Key Arguments

• He lists, without rejecting, a series of distinct readings of ‘heaven and earth’: as already formed visible works presented to a ‘rough and carnal’ people; as an anticipatory name for the formless chaotic matter from which the visible world is later formed; as a summary term for the entire invisible and visible creation made in wisdom ‘in the beginning’; as a still unformed beginning of things, ‘a matter capable of being formed and open to creativeness’.
• He does the same with the words ‘the earth was invisible and unorganized and darkness was above the abyss’, showing how they can be taken variously as formless corporeal matter, as formless totality later differentiated into physical heaven and earth, as the source of both the intelligible heaven and the whole corporeal world, or as a formlessness distinct from the ‘heaven and earth’ already named.
• He explicitly refuses to become contentious over which of these is right, provided only that they are true: ‘After hearing and considering all these interpretations, I do not wish to “quarrel about words, for that is good for nothing but the subversion of the hearers” (2 Tim. 2: 14). ... So what difficulty is it for me when these words [of Genesis] can be interpreted in various ways, provided only that the interpretations are true?’
• He argues that as long as each interpreter sincerely seeks the meaning of the inspired author and does not attribute to him what is known or thought to be false, there is no evil in arriving at a distinct yet true exegesis: ‘As long as each interpreter is endeavouring to find in the holy scriptures the meaning of the author who wrote it, what evil is it if an exegesis he gives is one shown to be true by you, light of all sincere souls, even if the author whom he is reading did not have that idea...?’

Source Quotes

world, so that thereafter under the successive days he could arrange one by one each category which it pleased the Holy Spirit to list in this way. The character of the people addressed was rough and carnal, and so he decided to present to them only the visible works of God.‘ They agree, however, that if one understands formless matter to be referred to as ‘the earth invisible and unorganized’ and a ‘dark abyss’, there is no incongruity.

(25) What is to be said? Another interpretation may propose that the phrase ‘heaven and earth’ is used by anticipation to mean this formless and chaotic matter, because out of that the visible world was created and perfected with all the natures which are clearly evident to us; and this world is by common custom often called ‘heaven and earth’. A yet further interpretation could be that ‘heaven and earth’ is a proper way to describe invisible and visible nature, and that by this phrase there is included in these two words the entire created order which God made in wisdom, that is, in the beginning.

Another interpretation may propose that the phrase ‘heaven and earth’ is used by anticipation to mean this formless and chaotic matter, because out of that the visible world was created and perfected with all the natures which are clearly evident to us; and this world is by common custom often called ‘heaven and earth’. A yet further interpretation could be that ‘heaven and earth’ is a proper way to describe invisible and visible nature, and that by this phrase there is included in these two words the entire created order which God made in wisdom, that is, in the beginning. Nevertheless, all things were made not of the very substance of God but out of nothing, because they are not being itself, as God is, and a certain mutability is inherent in all things, whether they are permanent like the eternal House of God or if they suffer change, like the human soul and body.

On this view this formless creation is intended by the words ‘the earth invisible and unorganized’ and ‘darkness above the abyss’, but with the difference that ‘the invisible and unorganized earth’ means physical matter before it was given the quality of form, whereas ‘darkness above the abyss’ means the spiritual realm before its uncontrolled fluidity was checked20 and before it was illuminated by wisdom. (26) There is a further interpretation that one can hold if one is so inclined, namely that in the text ‘In the beginning God made heaven and earth’, the words ‘heaven and earth’ do not mean already perfect and formed visible or invisible natures, but a still unformed beginning of things; what these words refer to is a matter capable of being formed and open to creativeness. In this inchoate state things were confused, not yet distinct in qualities and forms, which now are divided into their own orders and are called ‘heaven and earth’, the former meaning the spiritual creation, the latter the physical. xviii (27) After hearing and considering all these interpretations, I do not wish to ‘quarrel about words, for that is good for nothing but the subversion of the hearers’ (2 Tim.

22: 40).21 My God, light of my eyes in that which is obscure, I ardently affirm these things in my confession to you. So what difficulty is it for me when these words [of Genesis] can be interpreted in various ways, provided only that the interpretations are true? What difficulty is it for me, I say, if I understand the text in a way different from someone else, who understands the scriptural author in another sense?

Key Concepts

• The character of the people addressed was rough and carnal, and so he decided to present to them only the visible works of God.‘
• Another interpretation may propose that the phrase ‘heaven and earth’ is used by anticipation to mean this formless and chaotic matter, because out of that the visible world was created and perfected with all the natures which are clearly evident to us; and this world is by common custom often called ‘heaven and earth’.
• A yet further interpretation could be that ‘heaven and earth’ is a proper way to describe invisible and visible nature, and that by this phrase there is included in these two words the entire created order which God made in wisdom, that is, in the beginning.
• There is a further interpretation that one can hold if one is so inclined, namely that in the text ‘In the beginning God made heaven and earth’, the words ‘heaven and earth’ do not mean already perfect and formed visible or invisible natures, but a still unformed beginning of things; what these words refer to is a matter capable of being formed and open to creativeness.
• So what difficulty is it for me when these words [of Genesis] can be interpreted in various ways, provided only that the interpretations are true?

Context

Book XII, xvii–xxi (25–31): Augustine surveys and systematizes several different Christian interpretations of Genesis 1:1–2 (about ‘heaven and earth’ and ‘the earth invisible and unorganized and darkness above the abyss’), and concludes that multiple readings can be accepted as long as they are true and compatible with the scriptural author’s faith.