奧古斯丁《懺悔錄》第十一章討論關於時間的定義，其中涵蓋奧古斯丁行作《懺悔錄》的基本理論，從對時間的定義當中顯出本書的主旨，一方面是他在神面前的告白，但同時他建立了認
識論的架構。在奧古斯丁的思想中，受新柏拉圖主義影響的痕跡昭然可見，但是，更明確的是他以回轉歸向基督之後的世界觀作為他理論的根基而形成基督教認識論。本文主要以《懺悔錄》第
十一章為基礎，討論奧古斯丁的時間觀以及其中所涉及的關於認識和詮釋的問題，《三一論》中與之相關的論述也在本文的應用當中。奧古斯丁的時間觀反思時間與永恆以及時間與人的存在的
關係，而將時間的意義和定義置於人的靈∕意識中。「過去的現在是記憶，現在的現在是觀看，未來的現在是期待」，而記憶、觀看、期待也與此刻意識所專注的相關，也就是說，時間是在人當下的意向當中向著過去以及向著未來延展。在此架構之下，歷史的問題就非歷時性的而更顯得是同時性的。記憶∕回憶成為人解釋現在與期盼未來的基礎，而它所包含的並非只有人對外界的經歷，更根本的是，神永恆的創造的道與人的存在同在，是他心靈裡的「內在的話語」，成為他的意識能詮釋由外界所得的圖像∕象徵的基礎。奧古斯丁在時間觀的討論中所形成的認識論關聯
對神創造的道以及基督道成肉身所形成的神的話語的詮釋，這也是本文所關心的重點。

In this essay I will discuss Augustine’s concept of time and
it’s relation to the issues of realization and interpretation. I mainly
use the materials from Confessions Book XI, but I will also apply the
corresponding arguments in On the Trinity. In setting out his concept of
time, Augustine reflected upon the concern between “time and eternity,”
“time and existence of the human being.” In doing so, he settled the
significance and definition of time in the spirit/consciousness of human
being. “The time present of things past is memory; the time present of
things present is direct experience; the time present of things future is
expectation” (bk. XI, chap. XX). Accordingly memory, direct experience
and expectation relate to the attention of consciousness here and now.
In other words, time extends itself in the intension of the individual
as he/she relates to the past and the future. In this temporal structure
and its display of the meaning of history, it is the synchronic, not the
diachronic, that is more determinative. Memory (memoria) is the basis
for the individual to interpret present, past and future, which includes
not only human experiences, but also and more fundamental, the eternal
creating Word of God in human existence. The eternal creating Word
is the inner word of the human being, the human memoria, which is the
ground for human consciousness from which interpretaton of outside
experiences is made. Augustine’s epistemology—constructed from his
conception of time, in relation to the creating Word and the interpreting
of Word of Incarnation—is the kernel of this essay.