The Hexameron: With Extended Notes

by Basil the Great

The Hexameron of St. Basil the Great on the cosmogony of the opening chapters of Genesis. This is broken up into nine separate Homily's. Now with extended notes, and an active table of contents. Enjoy this classic work!

Genres: Theology, Christianity, Religion, Christian, Nonfiction, Spirituality, Classics

192 pages, Paperback

Published April 2, 2014

About the author

After 370, Christian leader Saint Basil, known as "the Great," Greek bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, vigorously opposed Arianism.

Arabic: باسيليوس الكبير
Greek: Μέγας Βασίλειος

People also call him of Mazaca in Asia Minor. He influenced as a 4th century theologian and monastic.

Theologically, Basil supported the Nicene faction of the church, not the followers of Apollinaris of Laodicea on the other side. Ability to balance theological convictions with political connections made Basil a powerful advocate for the Nicene position.

In addition to work as a theologian, Basil cared for the poor and underprivileged. Basil established guidelines, which focus on community, liturgical prayer, and manual labor for monastic life. People remember him, together with Pachomius, as a father of communal monasticism in east. The traditions of east and west consider him.

People refer collectively to Basil, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Gregory of Nyssa as the fathers. The Eastern Orthodox Church and Catholics gave the title of hierarch to Basil, together with Gregory of Nazianzus and John Chrysostom. The Catholic Church recognizes him as a doctor. The epithet "revealer of heavenly mysteries," sometimes refers to Basil.

Reviews

[Mikhael Hayes · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very fun, very real. Literally just a guy who loves God and marveling at nature, rambling about it to his congregants. Regarding his early scientific musings, it’s like a silly dartboard game. Some misses (‘can’t tame a wolf’) and some hits (‘birds and fish are related’)

[Richard Lawrence · Rating 2 out of 5]

A record of Basil the Great's sermons on the 6 days of creation.

In substance these sermons involve:
1. Brief affirmation of the factual content of the text, Basil sees it as clear that God created the physical universe out of nothing in 6 days.
2. Attempts to explain the makeup of the physical universe with appeals to the science of Basil's day (though at times critiquing that science)
3. Attempts to use the beauty and design of creation to show the majesty of God
4. Attempts to learn moral lessons from the makeup of creation - this material seems to be based more on the book of Proverbs than Genesis (he alludes to proverbs repeatedly though doesn't explicitly reference it)

Why I don't highly reccomend these sermons:
A very high proportion of these sermons is spent presenting and interacting with "scientific" descriptions of the universe based on the science of Basil's today; to modern ears it just sounds bizarre.

We can agree with most of the actual exegesis of the text (with a few minor quibbles) and most of the moral lessons Basil draws out but there are far more accessible and more helpful places to find that.

I think these messages can serve as an object lesson in the danger of relying too much on popular science to teach us about God - it can be floored/go out of date fast, if it were just a handful of illustrations that could be fine but here I think it's more half of the content.

[DúviAurvandil Ericsson e Pereira · Rating 5 out of 5]

Homily 1

This half-hour long sermon covers the first verse of Genesis and emphasizes the reasons why we should believe God created. He obvious and primary concern was combating then-contemporary scientific/philosophical ideas of Creation. He discusses the theories of matter at the time and urges his hearers to search, not for the next competing theory, but for the ground and basis for the truth of Creation and how we should therefore act. The vastness, glory, and splendor of the heavens is not there to descend into endless frivolous debates about physical minutiae, but rather to help understand the exceedingly greater and more glorious grandeur of God, and to thank Him for His goodness and holiness. It's also to bring to our mind that, there being a beginning, there will also be an end, so do not waste our lives in vain pursuits, but strive to meet the God by whom all this wonder was made and who, for us, made everything to bring us to Him in an everlasting relationship.

I particularly liked his discussion about the foundation of the Earth is. On what does the Earth rest? Some argued at the time that it floated on the water, some that it rested on some larger body, and some that it was somehow suspended in the air. How can something lighter than earth hold up something that is all earth together, namely Earth? Of course there's something more powerful which cradles the Earth. We understand that to be gravity, but of course similar questions can be made about that force. How is it that the weakest of all the physical forces is one of the primary ways we expereince the world and see heavenly structures held in place? Of course it's because the vastness of the amount of matter on which that scale is applicable, but a deeper question is -- what holds the force of gravity in its place? Why does gravity not behave one way today and a different way tomorrow? Why ae the radii of the strong and weak nuclear forces what they are? why don't nucleii of all matter suddenly burst apart one moment and destroy all existence? Because there's something stronger upholding it all -- or rather someOne.

"Let us glorify the supreme Artificer for all that was wisely and skillfully made; by the beauty of visible things let us raise ourselves to Him who is above all beauty; by the grandeur of bodies, sensible and limited in their nature, let us conceive of the infinite Being whose immensity and omnipotence surpass all the efforts of the imagination. Because, although we ignore the nature of created things, the objects which on all sides attract our notice are so marvellous, that the most penetrating mind cannot attain to the knowledge of the least of the phenomena of the world, either to give a suitable explanation of it or to render due praise to the Creator, to Whom belong all glory, all honour and all power world without end. Amen."

2

He begins by countering some popular heresies of the day that had twisted "and the Earth was formless and void" and "darkness covered the face of the deep", namely that matter is eternal, or that Evil as a force, as a collection of evil beings, or as a dualistic equal combatant with God were likewise eternal. Neither is matter eternal, nor does darkness/evil have an essence or did it always exist. These are two important points even for our own day, as it helps to emphasize the poverty in materialism and in nihlism. Both these isms are some of the most pervasive underlying themes of nearly all media, all creativity, and all operations of the secular world, so much so that it's the base understanding of most religious people as well. Not only are we consumed by consumerism, but we even stuggle to see the materialistic underpinnings of our worldview that conflict with our call to charity, asceticism, and struggle against the passions of gluttony, drunkeness, and physical comfort. And the popularity of utterly nihlistic shows like Game of Thrones, the Walking Dead, The Boys, and Rick and Morty speaks for itself.

Evil is not eternal and is not equal with God. The good news actually happened -- Christ defeated death, the demons, and sin -- and you can be part of the winning team and participate in the vast spiritual reality that swirls all around you and sustains everything you take for granted. By grace you can become what God is by nature.

St Basil further describes the superiority of 'Day' to 'night/darkness' by parsing our little details in these few verses. Day and Night are subsequently called Day -- the greater swallowing up the lesser, and the first day is called 'one day' to signal the eventual end of all things, when all will be Day, and there will be no darkness, despair, sorrow, or sighing. God called the light good and separated the darkness from the light. In this we can see that God has absolute control over all darkness and only allows it temporarily so that we may look upon the light, see that it is good, and keep our faces fixed on the One who produces it.

He ends with a joke. Recall that this was originally a sermon, and evidently was given at an evening service, such that he says with a wink 'with all this talk of night and darkness, I have failed to notice that it has become dark all around us and night has descended.'

"May the Father of the true light, Who has adorned day with celestial light, Who has made the fire to shine which illuminates us during the night, Who reserves for us in the peace of a future age a spiritual and everlasting light, enlighten your hearts in the knowledge of truth, keep you from stumbling, and grant that you may walk honestly as in the day. Thus shall you shine as the sun in the midst of the glory of the saints, and I shall glory in you in the day of Christ, to Whom belong all glory and power for ever and ever. Amen."

3

point is to turn our attention to the One who speaks, not how the voice is articulated
there are multiple "heavens" -- not like pagan philosophy of only one, which must have it be undivided, uncreated, and eternal
The firmament was created, not exactly sure what it is, but we know it is something strong and unyielding to separate these two masses of “waters”. God created Heaven, both spiritual and the expanse of the stars and set a difference between these two realities.
Why was there so much water? For the purpose of balance, to support life and the natural order of harmony in the Creation. Water balances against Fire so that not everything is burned up. This of course refers to the ancient mindset that everything was made of the 4 elements – water, earth, fire, air, but it actually points to something similarly a cause for wonder at God’s Creation. Earth is the Blue Planet because of its water, we search for signs of life or the possibility of sustaining life by looking for water. Water is a foundation requirement for anything we experience on Earth to function properly. And also, the balance in Creation is not materialistically between Fire and Water, but between Entropy and Energy – the inevitable increase of disorder in any closed system can be counteracted by an input of energy into that system. The Earth receives constant energy from the Sun, thus the Earth is not a closed system and the possibility for Order, Complexity, and Life exists.
But, Scripture does say that all will eventually be put to the flame. And our current materialistic understanding says the same, eventually entropy, or at the very least the Sun’s nova, will destroy everything as we know it.
St Basil grasps the concept of the water-cycle and how important it is for the harmony of Life on Earth.
He argues against interpreting this allegorically, which is to say, that this passage isn’t really talking about water at all, but rather about “spiritual purity” or some other abstract concept. He finds it folly to psycho-babble the story here, but of course still sees meaning behind the physical Creation. So it’s not a contradiction for him to believe the separation of waters shows Harmony, because they did actually get separated, but that physical action points also to a spiritual reality as well.

“It is thus that Scripture depicts to us the Supreme Artist, praising each one of His works; soon, when His work is complete, He will accord well deserved praise to the whole together. [. . .] For the visible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, and His power and divinity are eternal. Thus earth, air, sky, water, day, night, all visible things, remind us of who is our Benefactor. We shall not therefore give occasion to sin, we shall not give place to the enemy within us, if by unbroken recollection we keep God ever dwelling in our hearts, to Whom be all glory and all adoration, now and for ever, world without end. Amen.”

4

There are some towns where everyone is always attending dances, plays, music, and otherwise constantly entertaining themselves – sounds a lot like today. Even some are so obsessed with the chariot races that they dream that they are cheering their team on – wow, sounds even more so like today, with sports fanatics. And of course, we have “fandoms” that are just as obsessed with heir little meaningless universes as those who are with sports – like Marvel comics for me. None of the recent Marvel shows have been good, but I still obsessively want to watch them to fill out my little world of things/characters/arcs I like. It’s called some form of happiness, but really it’s just distraction and the moment one of those entertainments ends, despair, sadness, and melancholy fill such a fan.

Instead let us retreat into the stillness of the wonder of God’s Creation. The vast beautiful expanse of marvels never ceases when we slow down and attune our hearts to the beat of the Creator.
“And shall we, whom the Lord, the great worker of marvels, calls to the contemplation of His own works, tire of looking at them, or be slow to hear the words of the Holy Spirit? Shall we not rather stand around the vast and varied workshop of divine creation and, carried back in mind to the times of old, shall we not view all the order of creation?”

St Basil then goes on to argue that God was giving to water its property of fluidity in the order to “gather together” in order to explain why water would not supposedly already be gathered together, since that’s what water does. He also goes on to describe, based on his then-current understanding of geography, how all the waters on the world are part of the same great basin. It’s not quite true in exactly the way he describes it, according to our knowledge (there is no connection between the Great Lakes and the Dead Sea, for example), but it is true is worded slightly differently. We know all the “oceans” are really just one big World Ocean, and beyond that all the water on Earth is connected through the Water Cycle, which St Basil also argues for, so apparently the science of his day was not fully supportive of.

Of course, it is the great quantity of water on the Earth and the amazing properties of water scientifically and the fact that the balance of distance from the Sun, amount of atmosphere, and tilt of the Earth that makes our Water Cycle work so well and provide the natural balance needed for Life to exist. If we ever find a planet similar to ours in this way, it will be interesting to see the small tweak it will inevitably have that makes life not able to survive there in the beautiful way it does here. Glory be to God for our Blue Planet.

“’And God saw that it was good.’ Scripture does not merely wish to say that a pleasing aspect of the sea presented itself to God. It is not with eyes that the Creator views the beauty of His works. He contemplates them in His ineffable wisdom. A fair sight is the sea all bright in a settled calm; fair too, when, ruffled by a light breeze of wind, its surface shows tints of purple and azure — when, instead of lashing with violence the neighbouring shores, it seems to kiss them with peaceful caresses. However, it is not in this that Scripture makes God find the goodness and charm of the sea. Here it is the purpose of the work which makes the goodness.”

I just had to quote him there, since it was so beautiful and perfectly stated. He continues with listing all the amazing things water provides for us: temperature regulation, vegetation, commerce, etc. Everything God had done and provided for us. And how are we to respond to so great a gift? Again, I can do no better than just quote him:
“If the Ocean is good and worthy of praise before God, how much more beautiful is the assembly of a Church like this, where the voices of men, of children, and of women, arise in our prayers to God mingling and resounding like the waves which beat upon the shore. This Church also enjoys a profound calm, and malicious spirits cannot trouble it with the breath of heresy. Deserve, then, the approbation of the Lord by remaining faithful to such good guidance, in our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and power for ever and ever. Amen.”

5

The germination of the Earth occurs before the Sun in order to teach people who might worship the Sun that it is not the source of all life on Earth. St Basil makes reference to what must’ve been the scientific thought at the time, that the Sun causes a plant to attract its nourishment from the earth, instead of the Sun being the source through photosynthesis of the plant’s energy. So, I wonder if he thinks that this was written that way in order to teach Hebrews recently escaped from Egypt that the Sun-god is not the highest god, but rather just one power that the true High-God created for our benefit. Perhaps, he was not being a “literalist” here.
Similarly, he strays from “literalism” by explaining that not all plants have seeds, but this is not a contradiction to “let the earth bring forth grass yielding seed.” But he definitely believes that plants produce the same kind of plant as their offspring – no hint of Evolution here. He spends some time trying to de-emphasize a too-literal reading of ‘produce seed,’ as if he knew someone would ask him about plants that propagate by roots, shoots, or in some other way without visible seeds.
Again, the purpose of all this is to point to God, “I want creation to penetrate you with so much admiration that everywhere, wherever you may be, the least plant may bring to you the clear remembrance of the Creator.”
All the variety of plant-life is intended, not only for our material benefit, but for our spiritual benefit as well. Of course it’s clear to see that all the edible plants provide us with nourishment, but also plants inedible for us provide nourishment for all the animals on Earth, especially the animals which provide service to Man – oxen, horses, sheep, goats, etc. This is to fill us with thankfulness and wonder at the intricacy of God’s complex handiwork that it all is harmonized so well. “A single plant, a blade of grass is sufficient to occupy all your intelligence in the contemplation of the skill which produced it.” One must remember that St Basil was talking primarily to day-laborers, farmers, those who work with their hands, and depend daily on the Earth bringing forth its abundance for their survival. It’s much clearer to them how much in wonder one can be that God provides this to them – the Earth is not a apocalypse, not a wasteland, though from a materialist world-view there’s no reason it couldn’t be. Thanks be to God for the glory of his gift of creation!
And like I said, it’s not just material benefits that plant-life brings us, but spiritual as well. We can learn from the grape-vine to cling to what will bring us higher to heaven, that we branches must remain attached to the Vine, and that we are to bear fruit, lest we be burnt in the cleansing fire. We can learn from grass how fleeting this life can be if we are not sustained by the Water of Life, how quick the happinesses of earthly sustenance can fade away and disappear. We can learn from agricultural practices like grafting, cross-pollination, hand-pollination that we can take truths from myths, stories, and lessons not a part of our Tradition. The virtuous man can hear Wisdom whence-ever it cries out and incorporate it in his spiritual life to bring him closer to God the Trinity. I don’t know if St Basil gave these homilies before he wrote his Advice to Young Men, but the idea of taking from pagan myths the good things it can provide, but the idea is very much the same.
The same water, air, and soil which flows through a meadow produces flowers of every color under the sun. The same processes give us fruits of every flavor. The same Earth gives us a nearly infinite variety of beauty, food, materials, and sources of wonder. Let us therefore learn from this and, “full of fruit and of good works; and thus, planted in the house of the Lord we shall flourish in the court of our God, in our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and power for ever and ever. Amen.”

6

The Sun and Moon created after plants, which shows us that Life does not derive its origin from the Sun/Moon or a Sun/Moon god or goddess, but from the command of God, even if by God’s command, the Sun and the Moon thereafter became the physical locus of light, heat, plant sustenance, etc. God can grant an attribute to a physical body or a physical substance at His command – thus He can take the consumption of wood away from fire in the Burning Bush, can protect the Three Youths in the fire from burning or singing, can take away the heat of an unending light that the Saints will enjoy, and give to those in torment a fire which burns, does not consume, and still leaves them in utter darkness in the End of Days.

The Sun and Moon are for signs and seasons, but not in the astrological sense. They influence the weather, determine the months and years, and govern the tides (he goes into detail on this), but they do not determine Man’s destiny nor steal from him his free will. How could they? Sine by the astrologers’ argument, everyone born at the same time should have the same characteristics, which takes almost no effort to show is not true. Why would the characteristics of Man be determined by the attributes of an animal whose shape we see in the sky? Does the nature of a beast govern the character of a star (which then influences a human)? “This pretended science [astrology] is a true spider's web; if a gnat or a fly, or some insect equally feeble falls into it, it is held entangled; if a stronger animal approaches, it passes through without trouble, carrying the weak tissue away with it.”

He goes to some effort in proving that these lights in the sky are “great,” that is, large in size, using mainly physical proofs. This is obvious to us now, but must’ve been some issue of that day for him to consid

[Yakobovsky · Rating 1 out of 5]

Crud arguments and just so stories

[w gall · Rating 3 out of 5]

While there are abundant exhortations to godliness in these sermons, there is a limited understanding of the various creations; there are insights, but also errors. It's not St. Basil's fault that he does not possess the knowledge gained by modern science. But he marvels at what he does understand of the designs of the Creator. But where is the typology that gets to deeper meanings? He states his opposition to them as the imaginations of interpreters seeking to inject their own views into the text. By his marveling he seems to be following the intent of the author of Psalms 104 (103 lxx). He does make clear that the greater endowments he has given to us calls us to rise above the mere earthly pursuits of animals. But I expected deeper insights which typology yields.

[Ryan Jankowski · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Hexaemeron is a series of 9 sermons that present a commentary on the 6 days of creation found in the book of Genesis (the etymology of the term hexaemeron comes from hex [6] and hemer [day]). This is a fourth century text written by one of the leading patristic authors in the development of trinitarian theology.

Though this text has very little to do with the doctrine of the trinity, there is still some value in his 9th homily where he (contra Calvin) addresses (briefly) the nature of the triune God and what 'let us make man in our image' entails.

[Liam · Rating 2 out of 5]

It’s interesting to read the Church Fathers on Scripture. However, I find I’m often disappointed with their (frequently) bizarre exegesis.

This was Basil the Great’s exposition on the 6 Genesis days of creation. I read several chapters and have just perused the rest. It was sometimes moderately ok, but much of it was bizarre. Just not good enough to justify finishing. However - probably an interesting read for those interested in the Fathers or early Bible interpretation.

[Marcos Zamith · Rating 3 out of 5]

Hexamerão de São Basílio Magno

Assim como Santo Agostinho escreveu sobre os dias da criação do mundo em Comentário ao Gênesis, São Basílio Magno o faz em nove homilias no Hexamerão, que quer dizer a história da obra da criação em seis dias. Como os textos são intitulados “homilias”, como leitor tive a expectativa de ler sobre doutrina moral, mas principalmente uma exploração de significados de “dia” como fez Santo Agostinho. No entanto, em grande parte dos textos encontramos, além de afirmações de doutrina com a tendência de interpretação literal, explicações científicas conforme a ciência da época e especulações filosóficas sobre a natureza dos quatro elementos, sobre a posição da terra, sobre o éter etc, que são interessantes para ilustrar o pensamento científico da época.

Para São Basílio Magno, a criação do mundo foi instantânea: “Assim então, se é dito ‘No início Deus criou’, é para nos ensinar que pela vontade de Deus [at the will of God] o mundo surgiu em menos de um instante, e é para transmitir esse significado mais claramente que outros intérpretes disseram ‘Deus fez imediatamente [summarily]’, quer dizer, tudo de uma vez e em um momento.” (Homilia I)

Ao nomear os dois extremos, o céu e a terra, no versículo 1, são sugeridos todos os seres intermediários inclusive os extremos. Em Gn 1,2, é comum a tradução de que a terra estava informe, sem forma. A tradução em inglês do Hexamerão traz “invisible”, talvez a partir do termo ἀόρατος na Septuaginta. A explicação dada é que a terra estava escondida embaixo das águas, por isso estava invisível. A ordem “Faça-se a luz” (Gn 1,3) não deve ser interpretada como um som dos órgãos da fala, mas como um sinal da vontade de Deus.

Filósofos evolucionistas não existem apenas desde o século XIX, mas São Basílio Magno faz uma recomendação sobre pensamentos seus: “evite o absurdo daqueles filósofos arrogantes que não se ruborizam por comparar sua alma à de um cachorro, que dizem que foram primeiramente mulheres, arbustos, peixes. Alguma vez eles foram peixes? Eu não sei, mas não temo afirmar que nos seus escritos eles mostram menos bom senso do que um peixe.”

Na Homilia 8, afirma-se que o pior homem no poder é colocado pelo povo, não pelo destino, além da exposição de vícios numa monarquia, a respeito dos quais um monarquista idealista precisa ter consciência. “Quanto a esse rei, não é a eleição que lhe dá essa autoridade; a ignorância por parte do povo frequentemente põe o pior homem no poder; não é o destino; as decisões cegas do destino frequentemente dão autoridade aos mais indignos. Não é a hereditariedade que o coloca no trono; é comum demais ver os filhos dos reis, corrompidos pela luxuosidade e pela bajulação, vivendo na ignorância de toda virtude.”

Enfim, esses são alguns pontos que considerei mais interessantes nas homilias, que li num tempo maior que o habitual porque as especulações filosóficas à luz da ciência antiga diminuíram minha motivação de leitura. Seguramente, a obra é interessante para efeito de estudo histórico e teológico.

[Chandler Collins · Rating 2 out of 5]

A more accurate rating for this book may be 2.5 stars. It wasn’t terrible, but I certainly didn’t like it that much. This book contains Basil’s homilies on the creation narrative in Genesis. I was excited to dig into this work for another patristic perspective on the doctrine of creation. The good in this treatise is found in Basil’s reflections on the goals and goodness of creation. Creation is good as it fulfills its goals for which God created, and God created nothing without purpose in the universe. Everything in the world, even the smallest substance, is a worthy subject of the Christian’s reflection that should lead the Christian into wonder and awe of the God who created all things. Some good insights in here pertaining to the natural theology conversation. Basil also finds a way to provide moral and applicable lessons to his hearers from the nature and function of creation even though he personally eschews allegorical interpretation of Scripture. There are also some similarities between this work and Augustine’s commentary on Genesis as both theologians paid special attention to creation and creatures to pair their personal observations with biblical interpretation of the creation account. This is where the good ends for me. The bad is that Basil has nowhere near the amount of humility in his approach to creation and scientific observation that Augustine has in his Genesis commentary. For Basil, it is clear or obvious that the earth is the center of the universe, and that the sun has to be moving lest it burn up nearby objects. Basil also appeals to many outdated scientific arguments of his day as if they are proven fact. Moreover, he draw some pretty poor moral lessons at times from nature as if that is how the way things ought to be. Maybe I’m more of a modernist here and believe an “is” does not entail an “ought,” but Basil thinks that the created order reveals that nature reveals that wives should remain in marriages with abusive husbands (in his defense, he also believes that nature reveals that husbands shouldn’t be harsh toward their wives), but uhhhh…Perplexingly, even though Basil appeals to scientific findings of his day, he believes investigations into things like the shape of the earth are inquiries into vain science since Moses and the biblical authors didn’t care about that. You honestly can’t help but read this work from our contemporary and scientific context and laugh at Basil’s overt dogmatism. This book wouldn’t be the best starting point for anyone interest in reading primary patristic sources, and it also kinda feels like a dead end for the faith/science conversation and research. Just my thoughts.

[Mina Sherif Soliman · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is very interesting how Basil the Great used his modern-day science in exegetically explaining the beauty of the scriptures, yet very ironically true, that when we try to use our modern-day science in explaining the beauty of the scriptures and how God could have used evolution as a way of creating us in addition to an infinite number of universes through the Big Bang; we get anathematized and attacked as if we are blaspheming.

من المثير للاهتمام جدًا كيف استخدم باسيليوس الكبير علمه الحديث في عصرة لشرح جمال الكتاب المقدس بطريقة تفسيرية، ولكن الحقيقة الساخرة جدًا هي أننا عندما نحاول استخدام العلم الحديث في عص��نا لشرح جمال الكتاب المقدس وكيف يمكن أن يكون الله قد استخدم التطور كوسيلة لخلقنا بالإضافة إلى عدد لا نهائي من الكواكب و المجرات؛ نتعرض للتنديد والهجوم كما لو كنا نسيئ الظن بالله.
-----------------------------------
#mg_books_reviews

[Matt]

St. Basil gave an interesting, and dated commentary on the six days of creation in Genesis 1. He clearly knew and understood the natural world, at least as much as he could know at his time. He also was a close and attentive reader to scripture, and I learned several insights about the creation account, especially about the first couple of days, from reading Basil's commentaries.

Because he is responding to so many out of date false teachings and because his science is also out of date, much of his writing will feel irrelevant (bats are birds for example). Other parts are still insightful, and I could only wish to have as much knowledge and passion for God's creation as St. Basil did.

[Ramona Fisher · Rating 4 out of 5]

Saint Basil's delivered these nine homilies to the common working man. His blessings at the end of each discourse show his care for the congregation. At the end of the 8th homily, he states, 'Filled with these thoughts may you, even in sleep, enjoy the pleasure of the day....meditating day and night upon the law of the Lord.' His understanding of the natural world in the 4th century is impressive. Since his sermons are on the creation story, he weaves theology with the sciences. 'In truth the most difficult of sciences is to know one's self.'

[Samuel Draper · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read this with Jamie over Facetime, and absolutely loved sharing our reflections each week. Basil's commentary on Genesis is vey interesting, as many Patristic texts are, because it tends to steer into matters that seem unrelated to moderns. However, the forms of argument that Basil takes to arrive at certain conclusions are a joy to follow. Solid reflections and some great takeaways, this text was a great excuse to keep in touch with a friend. Not the best work of Basil's that I have read, but definitely worth the time.

Light recommendation to the fan of Patristics.

[Valerie · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was... Kind of interesting. Unexpected. Exegesis and science seem to be on the same level of WTF. I understand, for example, thinking that bats are a strange kind of bird, but he considers flying insects birds, which made my head spin a little.

[Elsa Billgren · Rating 4 out of 5]

fint om skapelsen, lite sprängd tolkning att jorden i begynnelsen var formlös och osynlig för att den var täckt av vatten, och inte hade naturens fulla prakt än.. men kul throwback med grekisk elementlära. grovt att folk skulle sitta igenom nio homilier om detta på sin lediga tid.

[Dayla · Rating 2 out of 5]

Can't say I enjoyed this book.

[Mina · Rating 2 out of 5]

Translation was not that great, and therefore was not a smooth read. I was very fascinated however by St. Basil's extensive knowledge about nature.

[Scott Meadows · Rating 3 out of 5]

Basil's lectures on Genesis and creation invite you into the intriguing yet unfamiliar theological and scientific world of the Patristic era. His approach is reminiscent of John of Damascus, as both engage with outdated scientific theories and philosophies while striving to remain faithful to Scripture. While the content is valuable, there are moments that may feel a bit dull.

[Alan Fuller · Rating 3 out of 5]

The term Hexaemeron means “six days.” Here it refers to the Genesis creation account. This book is a good study but probably for the wrong reasons. This is from the Kindle version.

“It is this which those seem to me not to have understood, who, giving themselves up to the distorted meaning of allegory, have undertaken to give a majesty of their own invention to Scripture. It is to believe themselves wiser than the Holy Spirit, and to bring forth their own ideas under a pretext of exegesis. Let us hear Scripture as it has been written.” p.80

Basil doesn’t name any earlier interpretations. He totally relies on his own understanding of nature, and this was in the 4th century.

This is in contrast to the eighth century Hexaemeron of Anastasius Sinaita.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9...

"The things of the garden refer to the church of Christ. (Eph 5:31-32) This was the conclusion of the earliest exegetes of the Church, who considered these passages in a spiritual way. Specifically, I mean Philo the philosopher, who was a contemporary of the apostles; the great Papias of Hierapolis, a disciple of John the Evangelist; Irenaeus of Lyon; Justin the philosopher and Martyr; Pantaenus of Alexandria; Clement the author of "Stromata"; and their followers. And among these were also the two Gregorys of Cappadocia, who were very wise in many things." - Anastasius of Sinai, Hexaemeron

Anastasius refers to the allegorical interpretations in the apostolic tradition. His is not a “private interpretation” like that of Basil. He even mentions Basil.

Update 12/10/2024

It seems I was a bit too hard on Basil. He was actually an allegorist himself. His criticisms of allegory were directed at the allegories of the heretics. Irenaeus offered the same sort of criticisms. For a better understanding of Basil I recommend; Early Christian Readings of Genesis One: Patristic Exegesis and Literal Interpretation

[Mark Nenadov · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed working through these homilies, especially the astute and intricate observations on wildlife.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

marvelous!