City of God and City of Heaven

  • Thread starter Thread starter lemondiesel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

lemondiesel

Guest
I am going along with Augustines writings, but I would like to get some thoughts on this issue. Now, I may not agree with Augustine’s religious choices, but I definitely agree he has something with the two cities he develops in his writing. (City of God)

City of God (what I understood it as) is the perfect city. Since Augustine was a Neo-Platonian, its not unreasonable to see why. There are certain aspects of this city that make it idealistic, well perhaps all the aspects, but it is a place in the afterlife. Understandable if you are a believer, but the other city really answers the flaws of God’s city.

The City of Heaven is completely different. It is a place here on Earth. Now, I have personally come to agree with this idea and here is why. Augustine says that all humans should be under one city, which makes up the City of Heaven. Earth is one large state, and the more populated it becomes, the more it should be ruled as one state. Different ideologies and political agendias corrupt the City of Heaven, because it creates states within states. If you need to image this, picture the mayor of you city having the same authority as the federal government, or even ruling as his own ‘state.’ It is an independent rule within another rule.

The city of Heaven is Earth as one government, which I believe should be the only true form of government. Each ruling nation should rule like United States’ states do, having individual rules but still being subordinate to the federal government. The problem arises when asked, “who are nations really subordinate to?” Excellent point and question, because there really is no ultimate authority. (maybe besides the UN) The only way to achieve this higher authority is too either a) conquer the entire known world, like the Romans tried, the Persians, and even later Hitler. or b) we create a City of God, where the perfect laws are placed. We strive to become part of God’s city, ruling for the preservation of existence, of all life.

This leaves me with the conclusion that Religion and the State are actually quite connected. Religion provides the proper ways to live, in the eyes of a perfect city, an idealistic (something that may be obtainable with hard work) and the State provides the enforcement of laws, the protection of all its citizens (the global population), the preservation of natural life and resources, and also provides morality codes that present themselves in civilizations. (voting rights, banking, etc).

Perhaps Augustine was onto something, and perhaps Heaven is the living conditions that all citizens of Earth have the potential to belong to. We are in fact very alone in this universe, and sometimes we forget that. We have creation divisions where divisions can not be supported without corruption and ‘evils.’

Perhaps the City of God is nature, without any free thinking observer to manipulate it, and since we are free thinking beings, we must manipulate the already manipulated, to bring it back to the time before it was manipulated (haha, too many manipulateds )
 
Hi, lemondiesel,

I have an English translation to St. Augustine’s City of God. I’ve started reading it, but haven’t got that far along in it. I remember getting the impression that when he first mentions a City of God, he meant Rome. I haven’t read any further, but in Revelations chapter 21, John writes of seeing the New Jerusalem coming down from Heaven. At this portion of my pilgrimage, I then understand the New Jerusalem as the City of Heaven.

Frankly, I deem all of history and human events as leading to the second coming of Jesus Christ in glory with all the Hosts of Heaven, down from Heaven to save the besieged city of Jerusalem in Israel. And, Our Lord Jesus Christ’s theocracy when He instills His reign is the only global government that will ever have my approval.

In the meanwhile, I think our planet is better off with an assembly of individual sovereign nations at the UN; than to use the UN as a framework for a global government which abridges the sovereignty of each nation. Just my two cent’s worth.

God loves you,
Don
 
I have an English translation to St. Augustine’s City of God. I’ve started reading it, but haven’t got that far along in it. I remember getting the impression that when he first mentions a City of God, he meant Rome. I haven’t read any further, but in Revelations chapter 21, John writes of seeing the New Jerusalem coming down from Heaven. At this portion of my pilgrimage, I then understand the New Jerusalem as the City of Heaven.
First, thanks for at least providing some sort of response. This is actually a really important issue to discuss and it is very relevant in modern times.

Your impression of the City of God being Rome is on the right track. Augustine uses this description because Rome was tried to conquer the world. This would have meant that if it were achieved, all of man would come under one society. Since you haven’t got that far along, I will not spoil anything further. This description comes in chapters XVIII and XIX, which are my personal favorites…hence the thread 🙂

The problem I have with Jesus’ Second coming, is why Jerusalem? I see your point though, so once again, thanks for discussing your thoughts. Hopefully you get that Augustine book read soon, it is quite good. I just started Aquinas’ political writings now, much more of my style, more Aristotelian influence 🙂
 
First, thanks for at least providing some sort of response. This is actually a really important issue to discuss and it is very relevant in modern times.

Your impression of the City of God being Rome is on the right track. Augustine uses this description because Rome was tried to conquer the world. This would have meant that if it were achieved, all of man would come under one society. Since you haven’t got that far along, I will not spoil anything further. This description comes in chapters XVIII and XIX, which are my personal favorites…hence the thread 🙂

The problem I have with Jesus’ Second coming, is why Jerusalem? I see your point though, so once again, thanks for discussing your thoughts. Hopefully you get that Augustine book read soon, it is quite good. I just started Aquinas’ political writings now, much more of my style, more Aristotelian influence 🙂
Hi, lemondiesel,

Yes, I see that this is relevant to our times.

I’ll resume reading the City of God, after I’ve finished reading some other works.

Why Jerusalem?
As far as I know, because either of spiritual tenure or spiritual seniority as a holy city in that region. In Genesis, we read that Abram paid tithes to Melchizedek at Jerusalem. As far as I can determine, Abram lived from 2274BC to 2099BC and was 53 years old when the Tower of Babel fell. I haven’t determined how old he was when he was at Jerusalem, but his life span puts Jerusalem as extant for 4,000 years as a holy city, because circa 1,000BC King Solomon built the first Temple there. That’s just my layman’s opinion.
I hope it helped.

God loves you,
Don
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top