 Welcome to the naked Bible podcast episode 251 the church father's edginess is one with Craig Allert the layman Trey Strickland and he's the scholar dr. Michael heizer. Hey Mike. How you doing pretty good? It's chilly up here in the Northwest chillier than normal. Yeah, well, it is getting close to Christmas time So yeah, how chilly is it in Abilene? Not not too bad actually. It's raining right now. So, you know, it's probably in the in the 40s Oh, well, I didn't think it got that cold. Oh, yeah. No, no, no, it'll get into the freezing We'll have sleep and freezing rain. But the problem is, you know, when the rain Freezes the roads get bad. So oh, yeah to equipped To clear all the roads guy lives in Dallas for a couple years when that happened and nobody knows how to drive and there's You know, there's nothing they can do What's it doing up there? Do y'all don't get snow? Do you we don't call we we've gotten we've gotten three serious snow Since I've been here in 14 years, but it's mostly just cold It feels a little colder than usual. So I just don't ever want to ever want to remember the Midwest We moved from Wisconsin, I had 12 years in the Midwest with brutal cold and Anything that makes that thought pop into my head again. I just don't like yeah, I would like to get a taste of that No, you know shoveling the snow no you wouldn't It's not the snow man. It's like it's like physically feeling the hairs in your nostrils freeze and break off that that's that's what you got So that's a little weird. Yeah, it sounds it still sounds fun for some reason But Mike I want to remind everybody that our voting Further our next topic is going to start this Monday December 17th So be on the lookout for that poll so you can get your vote in and it's going to run through December 31st So we got two weeks here to let us know what you want us to cover. We got three topics coming your way I'm really I'm really going to be interested to see where this one goes. So yeah Well, what are we gonna be talking about this week? Well this week we have a Craig Allard with us Who's actually geographically pretty close to me? I didn't I didn't know that until I looked him up because I I saw a recent book of his come out And I thought this would be a great topic Sort of an in-between topic and interview for the podcast But we're gonna talk about the church fathers and how they looked at Genesis 1 and how they interpreted, you know you know some really fundamental Creation texts in that first chapter of the Bible and it's a it's just an interesting discussion They had a lot of different ideas and some of the same but Craig's focus is not only going to be that but sort of how people today Use the fathers either well or use them poorly In the way they talk about Genesis 1. So I think it's going to be interesting Well, I'm really thrilled to have Craig Allard with us. What drew my attention to your work was a recent book that we want to focus on the content of this book Today and I think our listeners I don't think I know our listeners are gonna be really interested in this but we're gonna talk about Craig's book early Christian readings of Genesis 1 and the subtitle is patristic exegesis and literal Interpretation as you well know Craig this this is hot button stuff You know, how do we look at the opening chapters of Genesis before we get into the book? I'd like you to introduce yourself to our audience again short bio where you went to school, you know areas of expertise You know where you're teaching that sort of thing. Sure. No problem. So I teach at Trinity Western University in Langley, British Columbia. It's just outside of Vancouver, British Columbia My education is from Multnomah University in Portland, Oregon is my BA My MA is from Trinity Western and then my PhD is from University of Nottingham in in the UK So I live in Abathford, which is about 20 minutes away from where I work. So total about an hour away from Vancouver I have a wife of over 25 years and I have two Teenage sons actually one just turned 20. So he's not the teenager anymore My Areas of interest and expertise They they range but I'm a specialist in early Christian theology Particularly development of doctrine historical theology, but I also have a great interest to Communicate that and understand it in some way as prescriptive for Contemporary evangelicalism, so I'm a bit of a I don't know if I'm an expert, but I like to dabble in Evangelicalism as a movement in in Canada and the United States Well, so what do you what do you teach? I mean just give us a few examples of classes that you teach sure So I teach a couple of sections of introduction to Christian theology to freshmen every year and then I teach a number of Upper-level classes I teach a class on formation of the New Testament canon and The implications for theology of that I teach a class on church fathers I teach history of Christianity And I I actually also and director of our MA and biblical studies here at Trinity Western University So I have contact with graduate students as well. Oh, wow Yeah, that's good. That is that that does range a little bit wider than some professors some professors just sort of Have a really small box You know, you're a little wider than that which is nice Well, let's get into your book because again This is this is hot button stuff and it when I saw this come out It was it was before you know a little bit before ETS and SPL and it was a book catalog and I thought man This this is going to be a great read Good reference material as well, but I thought you know, we have to get you on the podcast So it's been a while trying to get you on so I'm really like I said, I'm really happy that we were able to get you But I think that the easiest approach for our audience will certainly put a link up on the episode page to your book and hopefully This will help people see the value in it and you'll sell some but what I want to do is It's always important because if you do all this work, and it's like please someone read my work You know, you know the drill yeah But I think for what what we'll do here is the books divided into two parts and part one is devoted to understanding the context So I'm gonna just take the first three chapters one by one and ask you to sort of explain What the chapter is about and I think that will actually as part one suggests getting a context That will give us a context to sort of drill down in a few things as we as we proceed So yeah, the first chapter is who are the church fathers and why should I care? So answer that question for us. Yeah, I mean this really really was actually the first three chapters The whole part one understanding the context is is so foundational to what I'm trying to do here in the entire book But you know, I write Unabashedly really for an evangelical audience and I really I really am passionate for evangelicals to understand who the fathers are and why they they are important and Too many times, you know, you you you hear them just written off or You know thinking they belong people saying that they belong to a dark age or an age that we've rejected as protest And that sort of thing But there needs to be a recognition that the church fathers actually are really seminal for for Christian orthodox theology I like to call a historical Christian orthodoxy and that our heritage as Protestant evangelicals does not Begin and end really at the Protestant Reformation But that we have deep deep connections and deep roots Back to the age of the church fathers the first five centuries of Christianity so really that first chapter is an apologetic. I introduce who the church fathers are And then why should I care? And I talk about those sorts of things. I talk about they help us remember who who we are as Christians they They established kind of the the the firm essentials of Christianity they dealt with a lot of these really Hot button issues like, you know, who was who was Jesus in relation to? God the father and in relation to the son or in relation to the spirit So the doctrine of the Trinity is really foundational The New Testament that we hold as authoritative was formed in that age It didn't drop out of the sky. It was formed There were limitations made to to documents that were used in that day and age and the church fathers were Central in that and I think well, I know for myself when I began to understand that I started to Wonder why I have been ignoring these really seminal Figures in my own heritage and I started to recognize that they actually were part of my heritage Which was a bit contrary to what I was brought up to think Yeah, I'm I'm kind of in the same boat there Yeah, you know without getting too specific there. There is an impulse in certain Streams of evangelicalism when they hear church father, they think Catholic dudes, you know Yeah, no, that's exactly right and I think it gets to a Misunderstanding of what the Reformation was about to and there's this thinking that you know at the Protestant Reformation You know, we rejected those Catholic dudes, but in fact Luther Calvin I actually wanted to maintain those really close connections to our own heritage So that we can actually claim them as part of our own heritage Well that I mean that that's good when when you were talking just a few moments ago You know about about cannon and then the church fathers for me. I mean, I do I'm a semitist You know I'm a Hebrew Semitic sky But I I do a lot with second temple stuff and then one one of the discussions I get drawn into a lot is you know Should should be considered, you know first e not canonical, right? And and I really I read Vander cams Pretty lengthy and detailed essay on this and one in his book on apocalyptic Christianity was co-edited with I can't remember who the other guy was the Adler, but one of the more interesting things to me was Reading I believe it was Turtullian. It was either Turtullian or Irenaeus Basically saying look, you know, you all know that I fought for this book out there and I'm getting kind of old You know, I've kind of noticed that I'm a lone voice Out here and he was willing that the part that that struck me The first time I saw the these excerpts was he was he assumed That the spirit of God Had moved and created it was behind the consensus against his own wishes And he was fine with it. Yeah, you know, I mean that it was really instructive To me and and so I I know the church fathers go beyond, you know, just just being an example of my own suspicion Is that as our culture moves through this through its post Christian milieu Into in some cases even an anti-Christian milieu that that that we're actually moving sort of Forward into the past, you know, we're seeing a paganization Of the culture and and that's exactly what the church fathers. A lot of them just had to deal with Yeah, I think so I think I think they're going to become even more important For the kinds of debates that they had to have that they'll become points of reference But again, that's just my guess. It's not my field But it's just sort of hunch that I have. Well, that's really interesting because Years ago, uh, Robert Weber Uh, I think it was 1999 wrote that book called ancient future faith and then it spurred it spurred on a whole Kind of ancient future series um, and what he argues in that ancient future faith book Is that the shift from? A modernity to a postmodernity or modernism to a postmodernism Is basically opening the door for us to to appreciate the church fathers much more because The culture today The postmodern culture would be much more receptive to To the way they thought and also exactly what you said They kind of are examples to us of how to work in that kind of context Yeah, a lot a lot of what floats my boat is is trying to get people to Trying to get modern believers To take more seriously the the supernatural world view of the biblical writers and and these guys that we're talking about now Are are the closest we think we have Yeah to to the biblical period and they you know, they imbibe, you know heavily You know in that so yeah, I again, I I've just I haven't read that book Ancient future faith, but as we're sitting here. I've made a note to myself to get it But that that sounds like a lot of the things I've been sort of pondering But I I mean I could get lost in that subject. So I'm gonna try to steer myself back here That's a genesis, but that I mean that's important because You know when they do comment on genesis, it's not just sort of hey, we don't have anything better to do Let's talk about genesis. I mean they are responding to things they need to respond to And they're and they're handling the text And they they felt free to handle the text in such a way that that they could respond Yeah, you know to certain things so chapter two You know after you you talk about why we should care about the church fathers and yep, we should chapter two is How not to read the fathers And the subtitle there is a survey of creation science appropriation Of the fathers. Okay, so this that just has loaded I had that's a loaded chapter So what do you mean by appropriation? Tell us what you mean by the appropriation and then give us some examples sure so I need to give you a little bit of background on on how this book came to be So a number of years ago. I applied for a grant from biologos Templeton called the evolution and christian faith program I received the grant which allowed me thankfully to buy out some admin administrative duties and some courses Which of course as you know Uh gives you much more time to study and write. Yep So what I proposed in that uh grant application Was to do a book You know and we have the the product of that now, but um I looked at how organizations like answers in genesis uh creation ministries international Institute for creation research Those predominantly those three But I I I looked at how they were using the church fathers And they you know as you can well imagine There's not a huge body of literature of them doing that But there are some some pretty key chapters in books and articles that appear on their website And I was I was struck and in the book I even say I was sometimes even appalled at the way The church fathers were being hijacked to speak for creation science So that's that's really the foundation of this chapter So what I do is I take many of of the examples of these These articles and these Chapters and how they use the fathers and I Kind of uncover and show why that's not the way the fathers should be read or used So how not to how not to read the fathers? Well, here's some examples and here's why you shouldn't read them that way So was it an issue of taking the fathers out of context or or imposing A context or forcing them taking their words to answer questions that they weren't asking I mean, how how do you characterize that? Yeah, I would say all of the above actually I think you can kind of start from a big picture where they They paint the the context of biblical interpretation in the age of the fathers Rather simplistically In a kind and and this gets to the the third chapter as well But they paint it rather simplistically as a kind of the literalists against the allegorists And that is that that is Much too simplistic You know, they assume that when Literal or according to the letter or expressions like that are used in the church fathers That they mean exactly the same things as we do today So literal literal to us means in accord with history, right? That you know behind the text. There's an actual history that happened But that's not the way the fathers understood it So, um, there's that big kind of context, but then there are examples where There's selectivity So you pick and choose and your proof text Where where context is completely ignored And it you know, all you really have to do is look at look closer at the context of any given text that they're citing and you can quite clearly see that they're being used in a way that they probably should well Not probably they shouldn't be used There is examples of a flat out misunderstanding what they're doing So there I take examples of all those kinds of things and I took, you know Uh Most of the ones I saw there are a few that I I didn't cover But I think there there's a pretty good representation of what's happening out there In those appropriations of the fathers and I conclude that You know, you you really can't appropriate the fathers for the creation science creation science way of interpreting genesis one Yeah, we'll get we'll get we'll drill down into a few specifics in a few minutes, but Before I before we move on to chapter three were you Is this a problem only with young earth creationist groups or Our old earth creationist groups. Are they doing the same thing with the fathers? I know that the organizations you mentioned. I think Are all in the young earth camp. So I I don't know if If you looked at old earth or not or maybe one of them was old earth Yeah, I didn't I didn't really look at at old earth. They were all I think you're right young earth I I talk very briefly about the Intelligent design kind of camp Especially Oh, I can't remember Hugh Ross And he seems a little bit more aware of Pardon me old earth. He'd be old, you know Yeah I didn't deal specifically with him. He seems to know a little bit more of the subtleties Um, but as I said, I I did not dig very deep into old earth. It was it was predominantly the three that I mentioned Right. The third chapter is what does literal mean? And then the subtitle is patristic exegesis in context. So If you walked up to a church father, maybe you could Zero in on one in particular and asked him the question. Hey, do you interpret the bible literally? What kind of answer would you get and and what would they mean by it? They would say yes, or he would say yes, I do And I hope That would spur on a conversation of well, what do you mean by literal? So you cannot draw a straight line From what we mean by literal today kind of in our post enlightenment sensibilities, I guess You can't draw a straight line from what we mean when we say literal to what the father's meant by literal So what I try to do there is Is go from that that big misunderstanding of I call it a false A false misunderstanding a false paradigm, right where there's In the early church, there's a group of literalists and a group of allegorists and they were constantly battling each other for what the proper way to interpret the bible was and that's Really not the way it was um, you may have heard of a group called the Antiochians and a group called the Alexandrians And and often what what happens in these creation science? Appropriations is that the antiochians are labeled as literalists and the Alexandrians are labeled as allegorists sure Antiochians are said to kind of be the forbearers of our own way of interpreting What they would call grammatical historical or something like that And the out and the allegorists Resorted to all these wild interpretations and made the text say whatever they wanted it to say And that's a that's a false false paradigm that that's not the way it was Yeah on both sides of it Right exactly exactly I mean the fact is that both the Antiochians and the Alexandrians looked for figural readings They were concerned with a higher reading of the text The difference was really in how they thought they could get that higher reading And that was the real difference. So what I tried to do Is show some of those subtleties. I show how the antiochians were anchored in The rhetorical tradition While the Alexandrians were anchored more in the philosophical tradition And And how those come together even in a father like Basil of Caesarea who I discuss Quite significantly actually in the book And that context is is really really foundation. I consider actually chapter three really The most important chapter in the book It's it's it's based in that that idea that In if you want to understand what the fathers are trying to do With genesis one or any other biblical texts for that matter you need to understand What they think the bible is doing and how they read it And if we assume that they're reading the bible the same way we are We are off on the right wrong foot right from the get go and we will not understand what the fathers are trying to do So the the two sides Were what what did how did you put it again textual versus philosophical like like how to get there how to get uh for The rhetorical tradition And philosophical tradition Okay So and that's that That's where actually a lot of the terms arose so when you see terms like according to the letter or the common understanding or history a history um Or according to the words things like that those are all anchored in the rhetorical tradition and The anti-okines cared about what the text said The alexandrians also cared about what the text said their concern was not With what was behind the text not the events behind the text But the text itself was revelation And that's where they they that's where the if you want to say battleground was i'm not sure that's the best word But that's what the issue was How would they in terms of i'm gonna ask you a two-sided question here And and i i'm a i mean i'm a text guy, but don't assume that i'm not laying in trap here Because i i think the way we teach exegesis now ought to be different i'll just i'll put it in the most general terms i can but Procedurally what would an anti-okine do with the text? What is what is he looking for? and anti-okine is looking for indications in the text To draw him to a higher reading But that higher reading Needs to be anchored in the text Okay, and the problem That they had with the alexandrians who was also looking for a higher reading in the text Was that the alexandrian readings the higher readings ceased to be connected to the text so the anti-okines wanted to Say things that were in some way in their mind tethered to the text somewhere Right, but the other you know the the alexandrians more or less viewed the text as a launching point You know a launching pad or something like that Yeah, yeah as a as a um a code to be cracked Is the way um i think it's uh R. R. Reno puts it and and oh keef and renal put it in their book A code to be cracked so Would you use the word esoteric? Where were they part of esotericism? No, I think esoteric Is too loaded Okay, um and and esoteric to me um brings up this picture of really Not not being guided by anything like one common misunderstanding I think of the alexandrians is that they just went off on these wild speculations and these wild interpretations But they were guided by a narrative They were guided by what um one scholar calls The architecture of the text So they were reading the text through a certain lens and Allegory needed to be connected to that lens needed to be connected to that story in order to in order for Higher readings to function the way they're meant to function All right, so what well, I want to hold off till we actually get into some of the The specific issues, but I think that's that's probably sufficient You know that again that the points that you're making just you know to summarize for the audience is that both of these approaches Have a sensitivity to the text Okay, that one's one's not like leaving it behind and saying boy We finally got out of that straight jacket called the text Right like like we don't we don't even want to think about that now Thanks for what you did for me, but I'm out of here, you know, so That is typically the way You know an allegorist or allegorical method Is caricatured? um Just let me at what point and how fast can I get rid of the text to start saying stuff. I want to say Yeah And that that goes you know much too far So I think that's that's helpful And it's probably a value judgment to look at both sides and And say well this one cared, you know quote unquote cared more about the text That's that's probably an unfair way to to frame the question as well I mean they both care about it, but in different ways and you know for For different reasons maybe or something like that. I like the lens You know metaphor that you just used Or the filter. I mean that I think we'll come back to that as we proceed but Let's get into some some specifics Because in part two, you know, which you have labeled as reading the fathers I want to I want to focus. I mean we might go elsewhere, but I make want to make sure that I hit chapter five And that is the creation out of nothing Okay, the next knee hello discussion so Did any of the church fathers argue for creation x knee hello again out of nothing in genesis one because I can imagine that there's some of them said something that the You know creationist schools or groups That you you mentioned, you know your your work was about how they appropriate certain things that the fathers say There's got to be something that they latch on to and say look, you know, this guy Was talking about genesis creation just like we all so What's the useful father when it comes to the whole x knee hello thing or Do none of the church fathers Take that perspective. I mean, which is it? it's an interesting issue because um, the church fathers would agree Or let me let me correct that statement. There are some church fathers who would agree with the claim of some old testament scholars that Genesis one does not teach creation out of nothing So you've got um Men like justin martyr in the middle of the second century Who actually says quite explicitly that he agrees with plato That that creation was from already existing matter But there was a shift round about Uh theophilus of anteo so about 20 years after justin There was a shift and every church father after theophilus of anteo Would believe in creation x knee hello um, I Wow, what what caused that? Well, the shift was was caused by the need to to Assert that theologically Okay, so you've got I mean you've got an interesting really interesting situation here, right for For a christianity today evangelicalism that says, you know, we get our doctrine from the bible in the bible alone, right? And here's the church fathers basically showing us That you know, there may be theological necessities that warrant a certain doctrine that is not necessarily explicit in scripture Right. It's it's it's a possibility elevated to a place to land Based on specific a specific set of circumstances, right, right at which has since now become well pretty much Orthodoxy hasn't that creation that acts knee hello. Yeah, I mean you Certainly if you're in the uh in the young earth Even if you're in the old earth, but it's it's going to be It's going to be tethered to Big bang cosmology Yeah, but you know, it's it's still it's a different way the big bang the old earth You know view is a different way to have the same discussion essentially, right? Well, so what what was what were they taking a stand against? well, it's instructive to look at uh theophilus of of anteo um And so this is the first guy really that we have an explicit argument for creation out of nothing and uh, he he's finding that um, there are certain philosophies and cosmologies in those philosophies That are are making the claim that since matter exists and god exists that god is not above matter I mean put quite simply So the need comes The theological need arises that for for god to be Sovereign overall for god to be lord overall He has to be able to create the matter that he shapes You have to have a dualistic approach right, right So it is it is explicitly a um an issue with with the the uh philosophies the theologies if you want that they were dealing with and you can see this in theophilus of anteo You can see it in um, augustin and his his dealings with the mannequins, right? It's it's the same kind of thing where creation out of nothing becomes a really foundational doctrine to uh prove if you will The sovereignty of the christian god Would earlier church fathers though they wouldn't be or would they would would they be monists? In other words, would they make the same linkage between god and creation? That theophilus was trying to address or would they just do something different? Yeah, I think they had different concerns. Um You know if you compare theophilus about 170 with justin martyre about 150 They had different concerns and and justin martyre was really concerned with his very survival so he was he was concerned to make an apologetic for For um the benefit that that christianity had for the empire And those really weren't the concerns of a theophilus of anteoq 20 years later So I think I think you can just chalk that up to uh the different concerns they had you've got in in As as time moves on you've got a development of theology as well. You've got the development of the trinity Um in those first several several centuries You know, you even got you've got justin martyre not really knowing what to do with With the son with jesus christ calling him a second god But you know 20 years 30 years later in urinais you have a much Much clearer understanding of the relationship of the son to the father And that that's what we call the development of the doctor of the trinity that culminates really At nicaea and 325 and constantan opal in 381 Yeah, I mean this is important because we often We often forget that what they're struggling with the text Right. Okay. We got this thing sitting in front of us That makes certain statements. What do we do with that? Like how do we understand that? So we again again the caricature Among some I mean I I'm not going to make the sweeping generalization here But there's this caricature that that when the church fathers write stuff They're just like dispensing with scripture at some point and making stuff up, you know Okay, maybe some somebody did that at some point Typically what they're doing is they're struggling with the text and then they get as they live their lives they get confronted With problems with questions with issues And then they I mean they're they're the smart guys in the room So they're the ones that are supposed to answer these questions And the chances are they have greater access to you know more material or even a bible, you know Because not everybody has a bible. That's right, you know that that sort of thing So You know, they're they're not just freewheeling and freestyling. They're they're struggling with the data that emerged from the text Not only how to understand it, but even how to articulate it You know how to articulate the understandings that they're They're they're coming to and and to me the other thing we forget is that beyond Maybe a copy of the bible It's not like they can go to a bookstore or a library or you know a journal database and say well You know, let's see what scholarship is said about that, you know to help me think I mean they they don't have a lot of access to a lot of material And so it's entirely conceivable That they're locked on to one or two problems and they never even encounter Certain questions that 20 30 a hundred years later A lot of church fathers are thinking about they may they may never have addressed it at all It may never have come up. Yeah. Yeah, you know, but we forget that No, I think you're absolutely right. I think the way you put it struggled with the text I mean we we assume I I'll I'll just point the finger at me. I I will always remember Um, the realization I made that you know what? Not the church fathers Did not approach the text with the same history of theology that we have in our in the 20th and 21st century With with things that have been battled out with things that have been developed They were honestly trying to figure out who jesus was they were trying to figure out who he was Um in relation to jesus or pardon me in relation to the father So statements like uh, you know, I and the father are one You know, what does that mean? You know, what does it mean? What doesn't it mean? You know, what exactly? What are the gradations of that? Yeah That's right. And and many other verses like that You know in in the midst of that also Interpreting the old testament Christologically In in order to to in christianity Never rejected the jewish scriptures. They never rejected the old testament as we call it Um, there there was a group that wanted to but they were you know, marcian was was soundly Put in his place. I guess you could say But you know trying to read certain passages like proverbs eight Um, Christologically they read it as about christ But at the same time they're trying to figure out what the new testament is saying about this christ That they're actually worshiping in their churches Yeah, and for those those listening if you don't think this happens today Spend an hour on the internet And and google things like you know google some of these verses and these phrases You know what the meaning of and then fill you know fill in something like you know, I and the father are one and You know, you're gonna have A lot of people just say stuff that you know, you look at and you go Oh, well, that's worth thinking about and then you're gonna have a lot that boy. That's just crazy town You know and and so there That situation that we have again this this whole you know thing with you know with the internet and youtube and all that sort of stuff That's happening I mean in the church father's day that they're running into those kinds of ideas. Certainly not the proliferation of them Right, but but but they're running into things that they have to Think about well, is that a dumb idea? Is that a good idea? Is that is that within the realm of plausibility here? You know that they have to come up with some Some way to understand and articulate and either affirm or eliminate You know or or sort of just leave on the table some idea And they're expected to do that for the community Especially there's a lot of pressure there. You're right, especially when when certain interpretations are coming from within the church itself When they're when they're coming from a deacon or a priest or a presbyter or even a bishop When when the very Tradition of the church the very life of the church is at stake here. If you don't deal with the issue Yeah, yeah, it's you know, it's A little bit of the same, but you know that the stakes were higher And you're right. They they don't have any of the Framework, I mean a lot of these guys are saying stuff and they don't know that they've stepped in it Because they don't have any framework Exactly to tell them when they've stepped in it, you know, it It's not, you know, they just they don't have the body of of discussion. That's exactly right as as I tell A lot of my students Take for example areas the the fourth century priest who Essentially argued that Jesus was a created being created by the father When he offered that he did not think he was offering heresy And and he wasn't automatically Accused of heresy He offered it. There was some disagreements and ultimately a council was called So they could get together and say, you know, what do we think about what this guy areas is offering Is this what we believe the bible to be teaching or we to believe the bible to be teaching something else? Yeah, they're they're he didn't have a precursor that like I said stepped in it before That's right. Yeah, he was getting big Well, what about in another chapter you talk about the days of genesis So what they're they're had to be a variance of opinion on how to understand the days So give us some examples of what the the fathers were thinking and saying Yeah, well, there there certainly were some fathers who would have said, you know They're they're 24 hour days Um, but there are also fathers like basil and more I guess most famously agustin Who who like to talk about days in in terms of of a figure? So Basil for example would talk about the eighth day and he um He connected it to the liturgy of the church where the eighth day was celebrated And he used that to move into the eternity of god So the days You know anchoring it in in these historical literal 24 hour days Really faded in the distance in in basil's understanding And agustin even even made the famous statement, you know, I'm paraphrasing of course here, but You know anybody who believes their literal is kind of kind of crazy So so there was a variety of meanings which which tells me that That you know the the fathers that held to the 24 hour kind of literal day Um were functioning quite well along with the fathers who Disagreed, you don't you don't see a Body of literature where they're where they're disagreeing on that issue And it's because they they were reading the text for a different reason And the guys that did hold to a 24 hour view For example f f from the syrian The guys that didn't Agree with this 24 hour review. It was just kind of a Yeah, it's 24 hours now. Let's get on to something that matters kind of attitude So they they they weren't reading The text of genesis To find these you know as scientific clues to the way the world was created Or when it was created there was something deeper that they wanted and they hold that in common Well, that would be nice if we Approach that that way now I mean, there's yeah, there's no A couple years ago. There was sort of a big I don't know but mud slinging is pejorative, but there was a sort of a Showdown a planned showdown at ETS, you know were You had the old earthers the biologos people and the young earthers in the same room and everybody got to cast stones, you know And I talked to one of the guys Afterwards who was you know, sort of what was he was with the the biologos position And basically it turned out that well at some point everybody just threw stones at me It was a it was a common target there But yeah, I mean it This has and there are lots of reasons for this that this discussion has sort of been elevated to the to this perceived status of importance That you know, it gets today Yeah, in contrast, you know to what you just described Yeah, hey, you know, whatever. Let's just move on to something more significant here Yeah, and I I should say that you know in the book my Intent is not to prove that the genus the the church fathers Were evolutionists that that's not at all what i'm trying to do. I think that's that would be impossible Exactly, and they're not speaking the language of darwin who is exactly the 19th century And it's just as fuel tell to prove that they were creationists, you know in the sense that that you know answers in genesis or something Would intend that's not my intent My intent nor is my intent to say, you know what we need to get back To the way the fathers interpreted the bible I think I think the book Should lead to that very very important conversation But the intent of the book is not to argue that The intent of the book is is simply to stay look They approach the bible differently than we did Why did they do that? And perhaps We can in some way see that as prescriptive Perhaps we can learn something from them Well, that that's actually a good a good note, you know to wrap up on because If that's what you'd like to see as the takeaway again, that that's a good way to You know to sort of fade out here And that to me that that would be a good takeaway because you know, I think most of the people who You know have followed this podcast over the years, you know, they They're they're kind of with me on this but my my sort of facetious line is You know, I'm not gonna I'm not going to land anywhere specific on you know, the views of creation or you know views of eschatology I'll let other ministries fight each other about that Because there are ministries that essentially exist to fight with somebody else, you know, you're right And you know, I may learn something important, you know by sort of leaning in on that Debate that conversation at some point and that that's fine. But there's There's other people doing that and I would rather, you know, sort of gravitate toward You know, again, this is my own assessment, but more important things and Believe it or not, you know, that's not just the church fathers, but it's it's been all You know, christian thinkers and frankly just, you know, christians, you know, collectively over the ages They have made a distinction between things that they view as essential and other things that are just less essential or non essential Exactly, you know, it would be nice if we could sort of get our focus back to the things that basically There's very little disagreement on that are essential And then be thinking, you know, back to Weber's book, you know about how do we how do we detect those things and you know, sort of Build up strength on those things in a post-modern and a post-christian culture. I mean that that would be nice Yeah, it would be nice to start with what we agree on And understand that as you say some things matter more than others and some things matter less Let's be clear on what matters and what matters less Yeah if the church, you know shifts at some point into into the status of sort of being Monitored or persecuted in the west, you know The reality is you're going to be thrilled To bump into an evolutionary creationist someday if you're a young earther Because you're going to see that they're actually your ally Yeah, when you're in difficult circumstances. So if you can see it there, you know Why can't you see it now? Yeah, you know just things like that. So thanks for being with us and talking about your book and again This is recommended reading to my audience again It's it's just good to know that you know, there's a variance of opinion Even back, you know in the day back in the days of the church fathers really formative periods And we don't want again to you know on our podcast we focus on primary sources And if you're going to be quoting the church fathers to defend this or that view Okay, for them that becomes a primary source. So don't abuse it Right, you know, that's important to treat your sources. You know the way they need to be treated. Well said Thanks for thanks for being with us. Yeah, thanks very much. Appreciate it All right, Mike another good one that was interesting. Uh Just keeps getting better and better. I don't think we have one bad episode to be honest with you, Mike I might be a little biased There's another poll Let's not do that You know talking to these scholars These types of episodes really resonate with their listeners Yeah, I think it's a valuable lesson even if we disagree with somebody in this case, you know, the church fathers Just to appreciate Their effort, you know, because they're they're struggling to understand scripture like we are And they you know, they had different reasons different pressures on them, you know, it's just They had resources or not many of them didn't have resources a totally different framework But they you know, they they devoted their lives You know to this sort of thing. So at the very least, you know, we can sort of appreciate the struggle that they were having Yeah, absolutely. That's why I appreciate dr. Allard's work so much Because you know, I'm not going to take time to go back and study church history, you know Unless you go to college or something. It's just not going to happen. So yeah, that's why this podcast I think it's so valuable that we can aggregate some of those Yeah, do all that work ourselves, you know, I mean, I'm this I'm the same way I mean, I'm not going to go go out and do degree level, you know work and in church history But I mean there there are things that I sort of key on and it's nice to know Well, who's done work in that and if they'll come on the podcast and talk about that stuff, you know, that That's definitely worth doing. I do want to sprinkle in, you know, some some church historical stuff into the podcast When it relates to again helping us think about the text. So this is a good one for that All right, Mike. Well next week We're going to do day of the lord Yep, day of the lord. So You know, this is an important topic. It might sound sort of like a Boring run of the mill, you know, what what is there really to think about, you know, sort of topic, but trust me Uh, there's a lot to think about here. It has a lot of ramifications All right, Mike. Well, we appreciate dr. Allert coming on and uh, we want to thank everybody else For listening to the naked bible podcast Thanks for listening to the naked bible podcast to support this podcast Visit www.nakedbibleblog.com To learn more about dr. Heizer's other websites and blogs go to www.brmsh.com