Augustine wrote De Doctrina Christiana (On Christian Doctrine) over an extended period, beginning around 396 AD and completing it in 426 AD. The specific discussion about manuscript variants and the integrity of doctrine—appears in Book II, which was likely written between 396 and 427 AD.
Key Timeline:
Books I–III: Likely drafted around 396–397 AD, shortly after Augustine became Bishop of Hippo (in 395 AD).
Book IV: Completed much later, around 426–427 AD, after a long interruption.
The entire work was finalized by 427 AD.
So, when Augustine discusses textual variants and preserving doctrinal truth (Book II, Chapters 12–15), he likely wrote those early in his bishopric, between 396 and 397 AD.
Clarifying the Source: De Doctrina Christiana
In De Doctrina Christiana (On Christian Doctrine), Augustine does discuss textual variants and the authority of Scripture, most notably in Book II, Chapter 14:
Augustine wrote: "...the great number of the translators proves a very great assistance, if they are examined and discussed with a careful comparison of their texts. Only all positive error must be removed. For those who are anxious to know, the Scriptures ought in the first place to use their skill in the correction of the texts, so that the uncorrected ones should give way to the corrected, at least when they are copies of the same translation." (II.14)
It is not to be doubted that the translators of the Scriptures sometimes differ from one another; and the variety of readings in the manuscripts is such that it is very difficult to find out which of them is correct.
In the same context, he advises careful comparison of manuscripts, and gives priority to the Hebrew and Greek originals, but recognizes the value of comparing Latin versions to discern the most faithful reading. His main concern is preserving the meaning and doctrine, even if words differ.
He further states: "...Now among translations themselves the Italian (Itala) is to be preferred to the others, for it keeps closer to the words without prejudice to clearness of expression. And to correct the Latin we must use the Greek versions, among which the authority of the Septuagint is pre-eminent as far as the Old Testament is concerned;..." (II.15.22)
Take note of what he said, "Among the translations themselves the Italian (Old Latin) is to be preferred, for it keeps closer to the words without losing clarity."
This shows Augustine was aware of textual discrepancies, valued textual criticism, and did not demand word-for-word uniformity—but held that the core doctrine remains intact despite variant readings.
Did Augustine Believe in a Perfect Bible?
No, not in the modern KJV-only or Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) sense. Here's why:
Augustine knew and accepted that the manuscripts of Scripture contain variations.
He held the view that the essential truth and teaching of Scripture is preserved, even if some copyist errors or minor variants exist.
He encouraged comparing different manuscripts and translations to arrive at the most accurate understanding, not relying on one perfect copy.
He said in "On the Christian Struggle" (Contra Faustum): "Accordingly, should there be a question about the text of some passage, as there are a few passages with various readings well known to students of the sacred Scriptures, we should first consult the manuscripts of the country where the religion was first taught; and if these still varied, we should take the text of the greater number, or of the more ancient. And if any uncertainty remained, we should consult the original text. This is the method employed by those who, in any question about the Scriptures, do not lose sight of the regard due to their authority, and inquire with the view of gaining information, not of raising disputes."
What is held with unanimity by the Church universal, and is found in the more reliable manuscripts, must be preferred." (Paraphrased; see Contra Faustum, Book 11, Chapter 2)
Augustine did not believe in a "perfect Bible" in the VPP or modern fundamentalist sense.
He affirmed that the doctrine of Scripture remains true, even amid textual variations.
His method was critical, reasoned, and theological, emphasizing the message over mechanical perfection.
Manuscripts Available to Early Councils
Council of Laodicea held on 363 - 364 AD
Council of Hippo Year: 393 AD
Council of Carthage
Relevant Sessions:
397 AD: Ratified the same 27-book NT canon as Hippo (393).
419 AD: Reaffirmed the canon lists of 397 and added clarifications.
Carthage (397) is often cited as the earliest surviving conciliar decree listing the full 27-book NT.
Its decisions spread widely, becoming foundational for the Western church.
These councils (Laodicea, Hippo, Carthage) did not have access to the later "Byzantine" text-type manuscripts familiar to us from the Middle Ages. Instead, they relied on earlier manuscript traditions circulating in the 2nd–4th centuries:
Councils sought to define which books were apostolic and authoritative for faith (e.g., "Is Revelation genuinely from John?").
They did not attempt to standardize every word of Scripture. Manuscript variations (spelling, minor phrases) were well-known but not seen as threatening core teachings.
Early Christians believed God inspired the authors (e.g., Paul, Luke)—not that every copyist was divinely guided.
As Augustine noted: "Variants in manuscripts are to be examined, but the truth of doctrine remains intact" (De Doctrina Christiana).
No single "perfect" manuscript existed. Councils worked with texts available regionally.
Example: The Council of Laodicea (AD 363) rejected Revelation—not due to textual flaws but because its apostolic origin was disputed in the East.
These Church Council Formalizing the canon (e.g., Hippo/Carthage affirming 27 books) declared which books were Scripture—not which version of those books was "perfect."
Key Context:
Manuscripts Used: These councils relied on early Greek/Latin copies (Alexandrian/Western text-types), not later Byzantine manuscripts.
Goal: They sought to define authoritative apostolic writings (canon), not perfect textual uniformity. Minor manuscript variations were known but not seen as invalidating the books' divine authority.
Why Not "Perfect"? Perfection was attributed to God's inspiration of the original authors, not later scribes. Councils focused on authenticity (apostolic origin) and doctinal consistency—not textual minutiae.
For reference: The Muratorian Fragment (c. 170 AD) and Athanasius’ Festal Letter (367 AD) were pivotal pre-council milestones, while Hippo/Carthage provided conciliar ratification of the emerging consensus.
Conclusion: The Quest for Authority, Not Perfection
The early Church’s formation of the biblical canon—formalized through councils like Laodicea (363–364), Hippo (393), and Carthage (397/419)—was driven by a pursuit of apostolic authority, not textual perfection. These councils relied on diverse manuscript traditions (Alexandrian, Western, Old Latin) circulating in the 2nd–4th centuries, acknowledging variations but prioritizing doctinal integrity over mechanical uniformity. Augustine’s contemporaneous work De Doctrina Christiana (396–397) explicitly affirmed this approach: textual variants existed, but the core truths of Scripture remained intact through careful comparison of manuscripts and translations.
Neither Augustine nor the councils operated under the illusion of a "perfect" physical Bible. Instead, they:
Distinguished inspiration from transmission: God’s inspiration resided in the original authors, not later scribes.
Valued critical discernment: Augustine advocated cross-referencing Greek/Hebrew texts and translations (like the Itala) to resolve uncertainties.
Focused on canonical authority: Councils declared which books carried apostolic authority—not which wording was divinely preserved.
The canon’s closure (e.g., the 27-book NT ratified at Hippo/Carthage) reflected a consensus that these texts were sufficient for salvation and faithful teaching, despite known textual variants. This historical reality dismantles modern claims of a "perfectly preserved" text (e.g., KJV-Onlyism). The early Church’s legacy is one of theological confidence amid textual diversity—trusting that God’s revelation endured through the Spirit-guided witness of the Church, not the ink of scribes.
"The Scriptures remain true in their essence, even where human hands differ." — Augustine’s enduring principle.
No comments:
Post a Comment