Episode 97: Interview with Gavin Ortlund

Today we talk about the doctrine of creation in St. Augustine with Dr. Ortlund. Dr. Ortlund writes about theological retrieval for evangelicals and this work is a work of retrieval for the doctrine of creation. Our conversation sticks mostly to Augustine, his method of interpretation and understanding of humility. For more on how he can help us think about evolution, see https://www.ivpress.com/retrieving-augustine-s-doctrine-of-creation

Timestamps:

3:46- Evangelicals and Creation

13:08- Augustine and the Physical World

17:18- Augustine and Platonism

25:58- Motion

34:08- The Doctrine of Creation

Episode Transcription

Charles Kim 0:01

Hello and welcome to a history of Christian theology. My name is Chad Kim. This week I will be interviewing Dr. Gavin ortlund. And he just recently wrote a new book called retrieving Agustin, his doctrine of creation, ancient wisdom for current controversy. So I'd recommend anyone to go out and buy that book from InterVarsity press. Dr. ortlund is a very careful reader of Augustine and his many works on creation, including works that he wrote that are just that have stuff in it about his understanding of creation, like city of God and confessions. But in addition to all of his what, three different commentaries that he wrote on the book, so in this conversation, I mostly ask him questions that are related to the book, and related to Augustine is doctrine of creation. But it is not specifically a recap of the book itself. So I say that only to say you should definitely listen to this podcast, that's kind of a supplement to the book, but I don't want it to be in place of someone actually engaging with Dr. Orleans words and the book itself, or even Augustine himself. So hopefully, all of those will be an encouragement to go back and reread the Church Fathers, because I learned from, from my conversation with Dr. ortlund, that he really does have a passion for, for retrieval, and for modern Protestants and evangelicals to go back, read the Church Fathers and recognize in them their own heritage and see ways in which they can help us think through questions that we have. And this book is really his kind of retrieval for the doctrine of creation. So the book goes into more depth about questions of seventh day creationism and evolution and those sorts of things. That actually never comes up in this conversation. So if you're looking for those kinds of questions, go to the book, this is mostly about how the broader picture, the bigger picture and of creation. And so I hope that that that will be helpful, and that this can kind of all work in tandem. So thank you for listening. And please check us out on Facebook, on Twitter, leave us a review on iTunes that will help other people find the podcast. And we've had some great comments. Ross. Tweel on Facebook has given us some great comments. So we we've appreciated, engaging with our listeners there. So please do let us know what kind of questions you have. If there's anybody you'd like to have us interview or that sort of thing. We'd love to hear from you. Thanks for listening. Yeah, well, I'll go ahead and give you sort of an introduction. And then we'll just sort of launch right into the, into the content of the book, some of the questions, I know, we won't be able to get to all of them. But I do I want to respect your time as well. So today, in the on the podcast, we have Dr. Gavin ortlund, or Reverend Dr. Gavin ortlund, I guess. So Dr. ortlund, is both a pastor and the author has written several books, we were just talking about one of them. It's on retrieval for evangelicals. So theological retrieval for evangelicals. So how to read some of the church fathers and mothers and take them into sort of a Protestant, contemporary Protestant theology. And that's also what he does in this book that we're here to talk about more, which is on Augustine and his doctrine of creation, and how that can sort of help evangelicals think through their doctrine of creation. So Dr. ortlund, studied at Fuller, I think you did your PhD under Oliver crisp, or at least with his, some of his guidance. Is that correct?

Gavin Ortlund 3:42

That's right. Yeah, he was my supervisor.

Charles Kim 3:46

Okay, very good. Well, um, so let's just start off, you know, what, what is sort of your main thesis and your main hope for this, this book? Like what were you trying to offer for for evangelicals, as they think about creation, and Augustine as a kind of guide?

Gavin Ortlund 4:06

Well, my observation and my feeling has been that evangelicalism really don't do all that well, at the doctrine of creation. To put it kind of bluntly, you know, on the one hand, it's an incredibly controversial doctrine. And and it's very divisive. But at the same time, it seems as though we don't necessarily have a very deep doctrine of creation. And we tend to focus just on the controversial issues about how old is the world? What do we do with questions of evolution and things like that. And so just in general, I'm very interested in the doctrine of creation, very interested in how we can deepen in our thinking on that doctrine. And I found Augustine to be such a helpful dialogue partner, you know, he's facing things from a different context in the late fourth century, early fifth century. There's different questions on the table for him. And so this book is just a retrieval of Augustine and it's diving in, there's some chapters that are basically about how Augustine can introduce some new questions for us. And then there's other chapters where I use Augustine as a conversation partner for some of the topics that are controversial. And so the hope is that Augustine can just help us be a good dialogue partner to help us deepen in certain ways, and then also maybe find some ways forward and make some progress on some of the contested issues.

Charles Kim 5:34

Very good. Well, you did your dissertation on Anselm, if I have looked that up correctly. So you move backwards in time a little bit to go to Augustine. So what why the move backwards for Augustine for this specific project? And I guess, you know, I know and Sal more from the pro slogan and I guess the motorogi on and, and courteous homo, but are you know why God became man, I guess he doesn't really have as much on the creation. So that might be one reason. But what why, why Augustine and why this move back earlier in time?

Gavin Ortlund 6:08

Well, I'm fascinated in the church fathers. I'm especially fascinated in Augustine. I just think of him as such a deep thinker and a deep feeler, and someone who's thought has so much to offer today. But especially when it comes to creation, I've just found him a fascinating dialogue partner. Part of that is his own testimony. You know, he became a mannequin for about 10 years. Part of what helped him come back to the faith was hearing Ambrose preach on Genesis one and preaching in a more symbolical way more allegorical way on Genesis one. And he realized, Oh, the interpretation of Genesis one that the mannequins kind of derided as unsophisticated, isn't the only way that the Christians read this text. And that was a helpful piece of what drew him back to Orthodoxy. And then all the rest of his life. You know, he writes about five different commentaries on Genesis, the early chapters in Genesis if you include the sections of confessions and City of God, and so he's, he's wrestling with these chapters all the rest of his life. He's very sensitive to the Manichaean criticisms. So his approach to creation, his approach to Genesis has a kind of philosophical sensitivity. And even today, we might call it an apologetics sensitivity. He's trying to defend the Scripture. So that's a very important doctrine to him. And he has a lot to say about it. And I've just, again found that some of the particular answers he provides are relevant today. I mean, just the very struggle that he went through in rejecting the Christian faith, because he felt that Genesis one was not intellectually credible. I actually think that's an extremely common scenario today. And so, you know, the challenges today, of course, would not be from Manichaean Manichaean criticism. But nonetheless, he's he's very relevant to the discussions that are happening today in creation. So I think we've got a lot to learn from him.

Charles Kim 8:30

Yeah, and one of the things that I found most helpful, and maybe sort of surprising, when I got to your book was your emphasis on the sort of, I guess we could say, the more global or broader sense in which the doctrine of creation is important. That is to say, you sort of push off even the questions not only directly of evolution, but even the question of original sin, you do discuss those in the book, but you you put those more towards the end. And you're what you're trying to recover is the sort of sense of awe that Augustine has before creation. At one point at the in the conclusion, you talk about the emotional doctrine of creation, which I think is a it was an interesting and helpful way to frame it. So I think maybe, could you talk a little bit about like how Augustine has so much that he wants to learn from creation and how that too can be helpful for evangelicals who, like you say, want to rush to evolution, or even to trying to explain original sin. And Augustine might say, Whoa, pump the brakes. There's a lot more to learn here. Before we even get to those questions, which might do some people see more pertinent. But in fact, like, kind of maybe cloud our views a little bit?

Gavin Ortlund 9:45

Yeah, I think that that was certainly one of the main things that I have gotten from Augustine is, you know, we tend to think of creation as just sort of setting the table for other aspects of theology but for Augustine creation may Some a huge contribution to theology just across the board. So and I've often thought that in the church, sometimes we think more about being a sinner, or being redeemed, and we do about just being a creature and what it means that we are creatures and we are human beings. And Agustin, to me, this comes out most in the confessions, where a lot of people look at the confessions. And they say, you know, here's this intensely personal and emotional Autobiography of sorts. And yet, in the final three chapters, he goes to Genesis one and it becomes much more abstract, and theoretical. And some people have even criticized Agustin for that, in fact, there's a long tradition of criticism saying, basically, he doesn't know how to write a book. And he just, you know, makes this random turn at the end of confessions. But I actually think there's a method to the confessions. And the whole vision that Agustin has for creation is that it's imbued with a sense of unrest. And although creation is good, it is not yet perfect. It's not yet arrived in its destination. He talks about creation, kind of clinging to God and longing to share and God's immutability, which means is, God does not change in the way that the angels share in that. And so creation is emotional for Agustin because you know that that longing that you see at the beginning of the confessions, you've made us for yourself, and our hearts are restless until they find their rest in you, that really is is one part of his whole vision of all of physical reality. He thinks the whole universe is imbued with that restlessness. And he's constantly going back to this motif of the Sabbath rest as a motif of heaven. Which is why the confessions ends as it does, he's applying his own journey up to the entire creation and saying, All of creation is longing to find its rest, which it has not yet found. And so, I just find that fascinating. And certainly, it enlarges the doctrine of creation in some ways, because Agustin would say that even apart from the entrance of sin and evil, created, reality has this kind of lack, you know, it's it's, it's leaning towards God longing to share in his immutability. And so then that plays out for how sin and how redemption are understood and his thought. So it's to me just a helpful widening angle to consider some of the greater implications of of creation, not that I would necessarily say, we have to agree with Augustine and all the particulars of how he cashes that out. But it's certainly a fascinating vision of creation to consider. And certainly deeper than a lot of times Christians think about creation today.

Charles Kim 13:08

One thing that you bring out, I think it's in Chapter Four is you talk about the notion of animal death. And then you bring out some of the ways in which Augustine describes what the place of created things created beings, and that sort of thing. What are all those four, and some might be surprised that Augustine spends that much time on bugs and beasts and these sort of things of the natural world. And as it reminded me, as I was reading of Jonathan Edwards, who was also very fascinated by the physical and natural world. So you know, maybe talk a little bit about that, that importance for Augustine, and maybe even in my mind, like, you might be surprised that Augustine cares that much about the physical world.

Gavin Ortlund 13:56

Yeah, it was fascinating to read through his various commentaries on Genesis, and then I looked a lot at various letters and sermons and some of his other theological works as well. And I had chapter four and the book is just full of these quotes, so many of which are just funny. Because he's, he's going on and on about insects and about other animals that you wouldn't expect would inspire praise. But you know, when passage in the confessions, he'll be talking, kind of be parading himself, that he's not more quick to praise God for watching the lizards eat the spiders outside of his home. And he said, you know, why are you not quicker to praise God for these things, you know, you should be immediately you know, lifting your heart up and worship that you see these spiders getting eaten by lizards. And there's so many passages like that. He talks about beetles, he talks about maggots. He talks about all these insects that we would find. And you know, part of the reason is that It mannequins were, of course, criticizing insects, as well as carnivorous animals like tigers or crocodiles. And they were saying that these are imperfections in God's creation, that they show that God's creation is not good as Genesis one teaches, and Augustine is very sensitive to that. And his response to that is not to blame predatory behavior in the animal kingdom to on the on the Human Fall, he says God created these animals to give us spiritual lessons. And we should learn things from them. So he doesn't think animal death is a bad thing. He thinks it's a good thing that we can learn from. And he's very strong in trying to humble and kind of denounce the the criticism of animal death. He uses the metaphor of a mechanic's workshop. And he says, you know, imagine a lay person walks into the workshop. And there's all these instruments and machines, and they cut their arm on one of the machines as they walk by because they're being careless. And he says, It would be foolish and arrogant for this person to say that the machine is a bad machine, or is evil simply because it hurt him? Because he doesn't know all that it does. And it's reason for existing. And Agustin says in the same way, we shouldn't sit in judgment on the fact that crocodiles and tigers can eat us. That's not evil. We don't see the larger purpose that God has in creating these animals. And so he's, he's trying to rebuke a kind of self referential judgment about those animals. And again, that's relevant to the current current questions of theodicy, current understandings of creation. And it's also just fascinating the way he then kind of goes from there to cash out his own theodicy and his own vision of why God made the world and as he did, so, but it is funny, just how fascinated you can tell he's, he's genuinely interested in all these little creatures that God has made. And, you know, not just spiders and lizards, but all kinds of different insects. So it's kind of fascinating that such a deep theologian would spend so much time thinking about particular animals like that.

Charles Kim 17:18

Yeah, and I, when I was reading it, I was thinking, as I have been a lot lately, there's a, you know, a revived interest in sort of Christian Platonism, and classical theism, and a kind of recovery of that tradition, especially among evangelicals. But but it also always raises these concerns, like where, you know, sometimes Augustine is faulted for being too Platanus. That is, he may be too concerned with the soul. And so I sort of also see your book not only as helpful for the conversations about evolution and in relationship to science in general, but even as a corrective for people who study Augustine, because you show that that that's not a fair criticism of Augustine, maybe, you know, so how would you respond, though, to someone who says, Yeah, I mean, Augustine, he's a Platanus. So he prefers the soul to the body. So you know, therefore, he's not really helpful for someone who's in the biblical tradition, who knows that the body is good. You know, how do you how do you balance sort of, I mean, of course, Augustine has Platanus influences. But But how does he balance those? And how do you balance those, as we try to figure out what we can keep from Augustine? And maybe what we can't?

Gavin Ortlund 18:32

Well, I'll give a brief thought on this. And I'd be fascinated to hear your thoughts on it too, at some point, but I in general, I think the the criticism of Augustine is Platanus is such an easy one to make in the in the abstract in a general way. And yet, it often I think, will lead to caricature unless it's followed up with specifics, you know, specific passages, claims, it's hard to prove influence in some cases, and even where that influence is there. Sometimes what is what what is meant by Platonism by people today is a little different from how it actually plays out for Augustine. Now, I do, as you say, there's a huge Platanus influence on Augustine. I tend to think, and I have my own worries about Augustine theology on many points. I mean, I do think Augustine is theology of sexuality. He is very much kind of anti sexuality in some ways. But I don't think he's anti the body. And I don't see that I think when when Augustine is, or just anti physical matter, you know, as much I think when Augustine is defending the goodness of creation, you see a different strand of his thought where he wouldn't fit the kind of neat and easy caricature of what Platonism is. Fun connotes for people. So I think with a matter like this, it often needs to get into the details. But in general, I'd say Augustine has a surprisingly high view of physical creation. And it all again plays into his his larger vision of work, and then rest and creation being made with this longing for rest. And one day it will be caught up into that rest. And that that act will not involve the removal of physicality. It will be physical creation that is perfected and brought into that sort of union with God's immutability. So I don't think Agustin fits easy caricatures and it's much easier sometimes to make those claims than it is to kind of bear them out with specifics.

Charles Kim 20:53

Yeah, that's very, I think that's very helpful. And it might have been one way that we could go sort of into the specifics is one of the difficult things that a lot of people have. When reading Agustin it was actually one that John Calvin had. So in John Calvin's commentary on John, he says that Augustine is obsessively concerned with Plato. And you know, this is sort of funny way that he has the to chastise Augustine. And he is very cautious about when he deploys Augustine favorably, when he's, you know, trying to execute scripture, because he Augustine uses a more allegorical Times interpretation. And so that's one of the things that that comes up in your book is this different difference between literal and allegorical? And even in our conversation, you mentioned that first time that that Augustine hears from Ambrose and confessions book six, he says that Ambrose taught him that the letter kills but the Spirit gets life gives life and this sounds a little a little bit like origin. Maybe that may have been where Ambrose got it, but but it's also Paul of course. So, so, how does Agustin understand the allegorical versus the literal and, you know, what, what, how can we maybe read him favorably? But also, is there a need for caution and that kind of thing?

Gavin Ortlund 22:25

Okay, so the brief picture that especially for those listening to this who may not be too familiar with Agustin yet that maybe it'd be helpful as Augustine does start with an allegorical commentary on Genesis, the early chapters of Genesis, he doesn't actually. And then he's and then he moves to a literal that he doesn't finish, and then he's got a final literal commentary. And so of those three commentaries, you see some changes there. And some people have construed that so that Augustine is kind of finally rejecting allegorical interpretation when he moves to his literal commentary. The problem is, and there's a great book about this called Agustin is changing interpretations of Genesis one through three, published in 2006, where it's basically showing how complicated this is, because when Agustin advocates for a literal reading of Genesis, he still is using allegorical interpretation as well. So his conception of a literal meaning can incorporate or can involve allegorical interpretations in which is, you know, and he basically says, you know, for example, at one point, he says, Go, interpret the text literally when you can, but if you can't allegorically Now, part of what's so tricky about Augustine is, you know, he didn't have a good editor, so he'll say something like that, and a few pages later, he'll say something different, and he won't go back and fix that. So but basically, by literal, Augustine doesn't mean literalistic He's not referring to a particular literary manner of expression, what he means is having historical reference, so he is he is distinguishing literal and allegorical in that sense. He so a literal commentary is not one that for example, tries to read all the, you know, tries to take out symbolical meanings or metaphorical language or something like that. So in his literal commentary, it's actually he still has a lot of hermeneutical flexibility to appreciate, you know, pictures, word pictures and figures of speech, and so forth. Figurative language, for example. So for example, in Genesis one, he doesn't think that it's a literal account, in the sense of its actual 24 hour days sequential, he thinks it's an instantaneous creation. He'd be kind of in a framework view camp. where he thinks it's portraying God's work of creation in terms of a human workweek. But he doesn't think it's literal in that sense. By literal, he just means it happened in history. It's it's what actually occurred as opposed to drawing a spiritual connection between the details of the text and a spiritual reality. So that's what he means by literal. I do think he favors that interpretation. That's kind of his final approach. But again, that doesn't mean that he excludes figurative language or or allegorical interpretation in the process of his so of his of his commentary. So his views are very complicated on this, it's it's easy to misconstrue. And in fact, a lot of the secondary literature I think, does misunderstand him on this point, as though he's sort of rejecting allegorical when he gets to the literal.

Charles Kim 25:58

Yeah, that's very helpful. And some of my background in what I did when I was like, reading, Augustine was looking at his rhetorical context. And so even thinking about like, the way that he was trained, and the way that even origin and some of the other church fathers were trained, was to look at literally the letter right, so literal comes from the letter. And part of what you had to do before, while you were interpreting a text was you had to figure out what each letter meant. And so how that specifically told a story and the scope and you know, so the literal could just mean what is going on at the level of the story, what is going on at the level of even the letter, so like what each word means. And so allegorical was sort of the highest kind of interpretation. So for for origin, that's where he ultimately wants to get to, because the literal is only so interesting and so helpful for so long. And some I you know, some people have said that this is the difference between the Alexandria so called Alexandrian school and the so called anti Kean school, and really, they're they're less antagonistic and more just different sort of stages in the kind of interpretation that's going on. Anyway, I think that could be you know, one thing to think about with with these as well, and what I love about Augustine is Augusta doesn't easily fit either one of these. So, in some sense, Agustin can look like a more literal reader and he tries to be in and other times he can be as allegorical in a way as as even Origen can. So it's one of those fun things and difficult things about Augustine is where exactly does he fit? In my mind, but yeah, yeah. Very good. So let's see, there's a few, you know, few different things that I wanted to talk about. One of them is you brought, you brought this up earlier, that creation was made with an end in mind. And then the Latin word, it is, like, imperfect and perfect, have the sense of movement in completion and completion. And it seems I sort of take this a little bit from a guy called Owen Barfield. But he really emphasizes the difference between moderns tend to look at creation, and look at the world like modern scientists, and for the modern scientist, everything has to be at rest, you have to stop and you have to upset yourself from the thing. And then you look at it from a from a fixed point of view. But he would say that the ancients see everything in there even themselves in the process of moving along with things. So one of the questions that I had is very asked was a very broad one, about this notion of movement for Augustine, and, and you already touched on it a little bit, but but how important, you know, can you speak to how important this idea is that that things are never really at rest until they are at in God? And this sort of like idea that his ontology is way of seeing the world and the things that are, is that they are always kind of in motion, actually.

Gavin Ortlund 29:14

Yeah, I, you know, the big picture is just as you've put it, explained it. So well is creation is at rest in the sense of it hasn't reached its final Terminus or goal. One of the metaphors I just came up with trying to help my own mind wrap around. This is thinking of a piece of pottery that's been constructed, but it hasn't gone through the glazing and firing stages that make it actually sort of permanent and usable. So it's not yet completed. And in one sense, it's been completed, it's been shaped but it hasn't gone through the final stages of completion where it's actually reached the goal that it has, and Agustin does think of the world So far as I understand him, even apart from the entrance of evil like that, it's it's not yet at rest. So he so for Augustine, God is sort of the infinite reference point for everything else. So God's immutability is the goal. We want to get to share in his immutability in some way like the angels do in his mind. It's a derivative kind of immutability for us. But nonetheless, he thinks we can kind of share in that in some way. So one, just read a little quote here from his literal commentary, where he kind of flushes this out. He says, the whole universe of creation has one terminus in its own nature, another in the goal which it has in God, it can come to no stable and properly established rest, except in the quiet rest of the one who does not have to make anything to get beyond himself to find rest in it. And for this reason, while God abides in himself, he swings everything, whatever that comes from him back to himself like a boomerang, so that every creature might find it in him the final Terminus and goal for its nature. And he ultimately, the, by the way, the translator there, Edmund Hill, added that boomerang imagery. I remember when I first read that I thought, wow, I didn't know they had boomerangs. And Augustine say, but he's, but it's a helpful image, because he's saying God creates things. But he then, you know, one commentator uses the imagery of creation having a conversion torque, meaning it's sort of got this built in tendency toward being needing to be converted back to God. So, again, it's a fascinating way to look at the world. And it, it does have implications then for how Augustine thinks of sin, and what that changes to our creaturely status, and then redemption and what redemption consists of as well.

Charles Kim 32:01

Yeah, that's helpful. The, well, sometimes Edmund Hill is really good. And man, I don't know that anyone is translated as much of the Church Fathers is Edmund Hill. That guy is tireless. But yeah, sometimes he does add a little bit of his own on there. But I was thinking, you know, you use the word there, which is also helpful, but even for Gustin conversion, you know, comes from the Latin for to turn. And then sometimes there's this word that will come up in in the New Testament Converse fazzio and throw Fe in the Greek but is it for Agustin like are like even conversion, that idea of like converting towards God is a turning towards? So like what what is it to become a Christian? Well, it's to turn towards God. And that is like, again, this idea of like, always in movement and at rest. And for Augustine, you're either moving towards God or moving away from God. And the creation is kind of doing the same thing. Creation is either moving back towards its source or moving away in the opposite direction. There kind of is no in between for Augustine.

Gavin Ortlund 33:11

Yes, fascinating. And isn't it interesting that, you know, even today, when we think of conversion, we'd almost exclusively use that word in the sense of a spiritual or moral conversion, which of course, Augustine also believes in. But it seems as though to me he's talking about a broader conversion as well, almost an ontological conversion or something like that, where, you know, just by virtue of being a creature, because Agustin thinks God is the source of all being. So the only way that something can remain in existence is by abiding and God, and the only way it can have a kind of final permanent existence is kind of abiding in God's rest, in a sense. And so that that whole way of thinking, I think, is just a broad a broader approach to creation than sometimes Christians even even even consider today.

Charles Kim 34:08

Yeah, that's very helpful. And one thing that you bring out another thing that I found really helpful in this work was your sort of emphasis on humility and Augustine. So could you talk a little bit about like, how you saw humility, and Augustine, this doctrine of creation, and and how that could be sort of beneficial for readers today?

Gavin Ortlund 34:31

Yeah, okay. So this is something that really struck me, I didn't expect it. Because often Augustine is not thought of as a very humble person, by by everyone. But I really did sense humility in the sense of just this year, for example, in his biblical commentaries, how frequently, he will navigate in terms of probabilities and admit his uncertainty is rather than sort of stake out one view and say this is right, much more so than modern biblical commentaries to my mind. In addition to that, he'll often raise a point and not answer it, but simply raise it for the sole reason of discouraging rashness. That's a word he's constantly returning to throughout his commentaries. He's constantly saying, you know, it could be this, it could be that, but whatever you think, just don't be rash about it. And he says that about our interpretation of Scripture, but he also has that with regard to how we interface with what we would call an art context science. Obviously, Agustin predates the Scientific Revolution by about 1500 years. But he does deal with things that we would think of in the realm of science, things that we would call like geology, and astronomy and things like that. He's interested in those subjects, he studies them. And he shows a lot of humility. I think, for example, there's the famous passage and his literal commentary. That's towards the end of book one where he it's basically a rebuke for anti scientism, he's basically saying Christians should not just dismiss genuine knowledge from the realm of general revelation. And it's a famous passage, rightly so. And in my book, I tried to talk about how I think that's a structurally significant passage for his literal commentary. But it's central to the to the interests of the whole book. But he does have that that sensitivity, because he's seen the damage that it can do. And this is, again, is where I think he's so relevant today. He, I would say that, and I think this is fair to him that when Augustine thinks that a claim from general revelation, something we might call a scientific claim, has good evidence in support of it, he basically never says to disregard it, or to reject it. He is always wanting to try to harmonize that claim with what he believes theologically and biblically, that's not to say he'll never ever oppose a scientific claim. But again, when he thinks there's good reasons for it, he's he's very deferential to that. And I just think that's interesting, because he's such a heavy hitting theologian to see that willingness to be careful like that. And the sensitivity to that, I think, is, I think that's instructive to us today.

Charles Kim 37:36

Yeah, and that's also one of the things that can be difficult, again, for sort of least least the way that I was sort of raised to read scripture, sometimes as if there was only one way to read it. So part of what he's willing to do with the Genesis accounts is talk about, and I think this comes out a lot in confessions, and a little bit in data Katrina in on Christian teaching, but but where he's willing to countenance and allow for different interpretations of a passage, which may or may not necessarily accord with Moses, but there's a kind of humility in his reading of Scripture and his reading of the world and of science. So it's a sort of interesting way to think about that, that humility, even when coming to the scriptural text, that you don't necessarily know that your interpretation is the right one.

Gavin Ortlund 38:26

Exactly. Right. And you know, I think with that, Augustine is not saying that the scripture is fallible, he does have a very high doctrine of Scripture as authoritative and infallible. And but he he's I would see his his carefulness, more in the realm of how he functions as an interpreter, he puts a lot of emphasis upon interpreting scripture, in the, in the broader context of the church with with with charity towards other Christians to value their contributions, as opposed to a kind of private interpretation. He does think that if we simply reject the scripture, that that also is rashness, and is a kind of arrogance. But he's very careful to say he's very, he's very shrewd. He says, so often, when we defend our interpretation of Scripture, we're, we're defending us, not the scripture. And we're actually not showing humility before it because we're importing our ideas onto the text, rather than subordinating our interests to the interest of the text and saying, the Bible may not answer my question. He has a very robust sense of the limitations of Scripture in the sense that there are questions that it doesn't address and that we can bring to the texts that are outside of its purview of interest. And so that's very relevant today. I mean, I you know, I also kind of grew up thinking the Bible was the sort of encyclopedia, you just pick, open it up, and it'll tell you everything. And Augustine is very, he has a lot more hermeneutical care and restraint than that.

Charles Kim 40:17

Yeah, that's, that seems right to me. And one of the things that you bring up occasionally and in the book, and then Augustine mentions, especially in, I guess it's book one probably have on Christian teaching, but it's the rule of faith. So, you know, the interesting thing about Augustine is as much as he can countenance some and sort of admit, for different readings of Scripture, he's very clear about some certain things. And you know, sometimes the rule of faith is defined in a few different ways. It's kind of sometimes it's not 100% clear exactly what Augustine is, after in that, but But usually, you know, it includes the sort of Nicene and apostles creed, and sort of the standard things of the faith that no one should get wrong, like, who Jesus is how Jesus was related to, or how Jesus is understood in the Trinity, and these sorts of things. So on the one hand, Augustine can say there are some bits that are kind of open for a little bit of discussion, but then there are others, that there's no discussion, you must love God, you must love neighbor, and you must sort of have these sort of guideposts to help you along in your reading.

Gavin Ortlund 41:27

Exactly. Right. And that's why I think Augustine is not saying that humility, is this kind of wishy washy meanness, you know, you just kind of are open on everything. And he he's is not vulnerable to that concern, I don't think because when we're inside the rule of faith, he thinks it is rashness and arrogance to question things, he thinks that that's out of bounds. And so it's not that he's just generally open to things. It's when we're navigating on more peripheral matters outside of the rule of faith. That's where he really emphasizes, be careful. Make sure you've done your homework, make sure you're listening to other views, and so forth. That's where he's most careful.

Charles Kim 42:18

Yeah, I think that's, that's exactly right. And that, like one of the questions I had was about other ways that Agustin talks about humility. But one thing that in my dissertation, I looked a lot at the virtue of humility, and Augustine is preaching. But one thing that gets hard when you start talking about Augustine and humility, as he, he gives a really precise definition of pride. But he's never as precise about humility. And so you kind of as you do in your chapter on humility, you have to kind of look for it in different ways. And one of the things that I feel like Agustin highlights well in confessions is this idea of sort of submission and dependence. And like, and maybe this brings in sort of all of Augustine is reading of Scripture, as we, as we've been talking about, is that Augustine is always trying to push his readers to their own engagement with God, like to me the end for Augustine always is, how do I see how do I learn more about the Trinity through this? How is this God speaking to me and me encountering Gods through these words, and so it's never like about trying to get the right interpretation, like you say, to sort of hold up your own views. But the goal is a person, the goal of reading is encounter. And so I think that that can sort of help in this humility, as you're, you're trying to submit yourself to God in, in your reading, even of Scripture, and you're dependent on God. So reading scripture is as much a spiritual exercise as it is sort of an intellectual one to come out with the sort of right thinking on every issue.

Gavin Ortlund 43:52

Yeah, isn't that fascinating that Augustine is interested in the process and not just the result. And I resonate with your thoughts about the difficulty of defining humility precisely. I don't even know if Humility is the exact right word for everything I'm after in this chapter on the topic in chapter two, with the way I define it is an eager pursuit of the truth through all the means God has provided and are ready willingness to admit what we do not yet know in the process. And that's kind of a practical or functional definition for just what I'm observing, especially in the interplay between science and faith. But I just find it so fascinating the way you know, a signature move of Augustine is name and issue Canvas for different interpretive options. Say, I don't think it's one. It definitely isn't too. It could be either three or four. So take your pick, but just don't be rash about it. And I love that, you know, he's he doesn't have to close every question. He doesn't have to to complete every thought he's happy to leave some things open ended again when it's outside the rule of faith. And I do find a kind of honesty there that that is refreshing.

Charles Kim 45:15

Yeah, that's very helpful. Well, I think we're kind of drawing to a close here. So one of the one of the things that I wanted to bring up and I don't know, this has become something of a running theme on the podcast, I guess, because of my own interest, because I did spend some time and in church work and is the the fact that like, and part of even my emphasis on what I was writing about what I've written about Augustine, is the fact that he's a pastor. And so something that I think often people forget about Augustine, they read him as the sort of philosopher theologian who writes the City of God and writes the confessions, and all these commentaries on Genesis, but he's a pastor, right, so he spends as much or more of his time with his, his his congregation, in hippo and sometimes in Carthage. But but his congregation is in hippo, but one of the things that comes out is Augustine will mention some of the things about creation in his in his sermons, but like his big works on in his preaching comment, oh, well, is big preaching works are on the psalms are on the Gospel of John. And then even in the collection, that's called the sermons of the people, he doesn't really spend as much time on the doctrine of creation, as you might think, given how much he writes about it and other contexts. So any thoughts about why that might be the case? And then as a kind of follow up? You know, how do you preach on the creation? And And how has your writing on the creation? From a customer's point of view? How has that impacted how you interact with your own congregation through preaching and other things?

Gavin Ortlund 46:52

Well, for the first part of your question, I, I'm confident that you could give a better answer to that than then I could, based upon your research, and Augustine is preaching, the only I don't have enough of a sort of set of data to know how frequently he preaches on creation. But what's struck me that he does preach on it. And I was surprised that sometimes when in his sermons on creation, just the sheer exuberance of what he has to say he'll just goes on and on about the beauty, you know, the loveliness of the flowers, and the beauty of the clouds and the the hugeness of Wales. And it's kind of, again, it's fun to see him reveling in it in that way, in terms of why he didn't preach more frequently on creation, despite writing so much on it, I might, the only thing I can offer is a guess. And that is that there were certain theological challenges with creation that led to him writing so much about it. So it's coming up in confessions, it's coming up in City of God, he's writing these commentaries in other works as well. It comes up in a lot because of certain theological questions that he has that may not be as forceful in a pastoral context. You know, some of the things we've actually already mentioned, apologetic type concerns with regard to the Manichaean criticisms, the larger vision of creation that he has. And I think he never got over his own process with Genesis one and just the turn that he went through when hearing Ambrose preach at one point in the book, I say, I compare creation for Augustine, to justification for Luther, and divine transcendence for BART in that it's this kind of doctrine that is just deeply personal for a theologian because of their own particular narrative, and it constantly comes up for them. But for my own preaching, I think Augustine has helped me tremendously. One is by broadening me just the sheer scope of creation. I now would with Agustin see it as a more practically and emotionally relevant doctrine, to just everyday life. And then I would say Augustine has been a moderating voice and a calming voice for the anxieties that I've personally gone through, and that I want to help others go through as a minister. In terms of science, Faith type issues, I've just taught Augustine giving me breathing space here we have one of the more conservative and and significant influential theologians, perhaps the most influential theologian and author of church history, east or west, and yet on questions like some of the things I talked about, in the book, questions of evolution, Adam and Eve, animal death, the days of Genesis one, he's more open and his posture or attitude, and his views wouldn't fit in to the narrowest of those that are on the spectrum today. And I just find that kind of refreshing and I find it eases some of the anxiety in the process, even if we don't agree with him on everything. It gives us some breathing rooms?

Charles Kim 50:03

Well, I just have to add this as a little plug for, I'm not really sure when it'll air it might might be after might be before. But I interviewed Philip carry on his book The meaning of Protestant theology. And he deals a lot with the anxieties that Luther has. He sources, a lot of him in Augustine. So it's sort of funny to hear you talk about Augustine, sort of solving as it were some some anxieties that you had. Because apparently, in Karis reading of Luther, Augustine created some anxieties, and sort of Augustine is interpretation in the medieval world. So maybe not as much Augustine directly, but it was just sort of interesting. I don't I don't know if you've read Philip Kerry's book, but I highly recommend it.

Gavin Ortlund 50:46

I haven't read it. But I can, I can well imagine how Augustine can create anxieties as well.

Charles Kim 50:56

Yeah, and anyway, so it's a it is a good it's a really good read. And Philip Kerry's a really good commentator and Augustine, he wrote three large books that I had to sort of sift through for my for my some of my research and always find him a very good person to interact with, because he did philosophy, and has that kind of almost more analytic. Well, he doesn't call himself an analytic but but he has that that's, we have a philosopher for precision, and so he really gets you down to brass tacks.

Gavin Ortlund 51:29

I'm definitely gonna have to take a look at that. Thanks for mentioning that.

Charles Kim 51:33

Yeah, well, you know, this has been great. I guess I don't know if I don't really know you that well, I'll call you Doctor ortlund. Or Gavin. I don't know where what you prefer to go by. But either one is, but it's been great having you all. Okay, very good. Well, it's been a pleasure having you. Okay. Well, Gavin, it's been a pleasure having you on the podcast and talking through this with you. And I realized as, as I was finishing up here, we didn't talk about all the different things that your book covers. So hopefully, this will be a sort of supplementary conversation where, you know, it can encourage people to still go to the book to see sort of how you deal with some of the things like original sin, the days of creation, which we only, you know, you only briefly mentioned, really, so may I like to see this as a conversation, you know, that's launched by the book, but it's not just a recapitulation there, because you definitely should go read it. It I learned a lot from it, and I really appreciated your careful investigation.

Gavin Ortlund 52:38

Hey, thanks a lot. And yeah, I really appreciate that. It's been this has been a really great discussion because your questions are so thoughtful about it. So thanks for the chance to interact a little bit here.

Charles Kim 52:50

This has been our conversation with Dr. Gavin ortlund. We thank you for listening and please do rate us review us on iTunes. See and see in a couple of weeks.

Transcribed by https://otter.ai