The Church Fathers refute Jay Dyer on Natural Theology

Natural theology deals with what man’s natural reason can know concerning God’s

existence and nature without the aid of supernatural theology, also called divine revelation or sacred scripture. Natural theology looks at the created order of reality, which can include philosophical principles that are only possible if God exists. For example, we may observe the design interladen in the world/ reality. We may notice that all things have a final end or object that they act toward, for example the final end of the heart is to pump blood. But objects in reality, especially inanimate ones, can only act for an end if they are given such an end from an omnipotent and intelligent agent, and this agent can only be what we know of as God.

The argument just presented comes from St Thomas Aquinas 13th century in his magnum opus the Summa Theologiae. In his Summa Theologiae, he presents five arguments for God’s existence using five different metaphysical principles. These being: motion/ change, efficient causality, contingency, degrees, and finality. Ultimately, St Thomas derives many aspects of these arguments from Aristotle who lived in the 4th century BC. 

It was not just Aristotle and St Thomas who argued in this manner. As the Scholastics uphold, St Paul himself employs natural theology in his letter to the Romans. For St Paul points out that God’s existence and power can be known through the created order or from principles of reason. He states: “Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them. For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they [Non-Jews or gentiles] are inexcusable.” (Romans 1:19-20). 

As will be argued today, many of the Church Fathers similarly followed down the same path, such that, as we shall see, even St Thomas uses their formulations of arguments that are based in the system of natural theology.

Many modernists like Hume and Kant completely rejected natural theology, but the reasoning of their conclusion was their faulty epistemology and metaphysics which deny such metaphysical principles. It seems though that this same modernism which rejects natural theology has corrupted many recent Eastern Orthodox apologists like Jay Dyer and Fr Deacon Ananias, for one of the reasons they reject natural theology is on the basis of it being a western “pagan” philosophical concept. Interestingly, they purport their own philosophical views of presuppositionalism, which has its basis in Protestant philosophy and is itself also a western concept (but I guess they get a pass in their view). 

Christian presuppositionalism is the view that one can presuppose their entire Christian worldview and argue against every other worldview as being impossible, such that their worldview is the only one left. And only their worldview can properly “ground” or "justify" transcendental categories that make up reality like logic, morality, and metaphysics.

Now both Catholics and Orthodox hold the Church Fathers with immense value and as having authority on matters of faith and morals. The real question becomes, do the Church Fathers reject natural theology as these modern Orthodox presuppositionalists do? As shall be made evident, the fathers of the Church clearly uphold natural theology as a valid form of argumentation, as they themselves utilize it. It should be noted as well that the Church Fathers that will be quoted are held with high esteem and authority in the Orthodox Church. Thus, the Orthodox must return back to Church tradition, and accept natural theology.

We shall begin by covering the Church Fathers in chronological order, beginning in the 2nd century and making our way to the 7th to 8th century with St John of Damascus. Now when it comes to these quotes, what we are looking for is that the Church Father begins with the created order of reality, for he may notice design interladen throughout the world, and that such a design is possible only if there is a designer who is God. Or he may notice that in the world we observe causality and change, and such casualty or change cannot causally go onto infinity, thus he must come to the conclusion of the existence of God as being the first cause or first mover as Aristotle himself came to the same conclusion. And all of this is done in this Church Fathers argument without any presupposition that the Bible is sacred scripture and that God exists.

Let us begin with Aristides the Philosopher, who is venerated both East and West and writes extremely early in the early 2nd century, not too long after St John the Apostle himself had died. In his address to the Roman emperor Hadrian, he reasons to God’s existence using the argument from motion that comes from Aristotle himself. And by doing so, he thus reasons to God using natural theology, and not simply presupposing his worldview.

Apology of Aristides - Paragraph 1

“I, O King, by the grace of God came into this world; and when I had considered the heaven and the earth and the seas, and had surveyed the sun and the rest of creation, I marvelled at the beauty of the world. And I perceived that the world and all that is therein are moved by the power of another; and I understood that he who moves them is God, who is hidden in them, and veiled by them. And it is manifest that that which causes motion is more powerful than that which is moved. But that I should make search concerning this same mover of all, as to what is his nature (for it seems to me, he is indeed unsearchable in his nature), and that I should argue as to the constancy of his government, so as to grasp it fully — this is a vain effort for me; for it is not possible that a man should fully comprehend it. I say, however, concerning this mover of the world, that he is God of all, who made all things for the sake of mankind.”

We next move onto St Clement of Alexandria in the late 2nd to early 3rd century. In the quote that we are to cover, he is dealing with the idea of whether or not other religions, specifically the Greeks, can come to knowledge of God’s existence by using arguments. St Clement responds in the affirmative, and actually refutes a common talking point that Jay Dyer espouses, such that other religions cannot come to the existence of God if it doesn’t include the Trinity.

St Clement of Alexandria - The Stromata (1:19)

“Or were one, on the other hand, to say that the Greeks possessed a natural conception of these things, we know the one Creator of nature… And by reflection and direct vision, those among the Greeks who have philosophized accurately, see God.”

We now move onto the Cappadocian Father, St Gregory of Nazianzus, who lived in the 4th century. He provides us with a type of causal argument, that even St Thomas employs to some degree in his work the De ente et essentia and the Summa Theologiae. As St Gregory of Nazianzus asks: what is it that supports the very earth at any moment, for him, this must be God who is the sustainer of its existence by his Divine will. By this argument he makes it evident that he is using natural theology.

St Gregory of Nazianzus - Orations (28:16)

“Thus reason that proceeds from God, that is implanted in all from the beginning and is the first law in us, and is bound up in all, leads us up to God through visible things. Let us begin again, and reason this out.”

(28.26)

“How is it that the earth stands solid and unswerving? On what is it supported? What is it that props it up, and on what does that rest? For indeed even reason has nothing to lean upon, but only the Will of God. And how is it that part of it is drawn up into mountain summits, and part laid down in plains, and this in various and differing ways? And because the variations are individually small, it both supplies our needs more liberally, and is more beautiful by its variety; part being distributed into habitations, and part left uninhabited, namely all the great height of Mountains, and the various clefts of its coast line cut off from it. Is not this the clearest proof of the majestic working of God?”

St Gregory of Nyssa is another great Church Father who is also one the Cappadocian Fathers in the 4th century. He appeals to natural theology as he makes an argument from design or the principle of finality or telos. As if creation is designed, then this design necessitates a designer. What you'll notice is that he's giving advice to those dealing with Atheists and so he's giving advice on how to demonstrate that God exists. Also notice that he doesn't say in order to defeat an Atheist in an argument you must presuppose the Orthodox worldview and refute their worldview by reductio ad absurdum. Instead, he appeals to the created order of reality and says that such a design necessitates a designer. As a quick note, he uses the word presuppose, but not the philosophical assumption of the word, but of on the assumption of or in agreement already.

St Gregory of Nyssa - The Great Catechism (Part 1, Prologue)

“When, then, a discussion is held with one of those who favour Greek ideas, it would be well to make the ascertaining of this the commencement of the reasoning, i.e. whether he presupposes [or is already in agreement with] the existence of a God, or concurs with the atheistic view. Should he say there is no God, then, from the consideration of the skilful and wise economy of the Universe he will be brought to acknowledge that there is a certain overmastering power manifested through these channels.”

St John Chrysostom was another fundamental Church Father in the 4th to 5th century that is venerated greatly both in the East and West. From him we have a multitude of Homilies/ commentaries on the New Testament that are of immense value in the interpretation of the New Testament texts. In this Homily, Chrysostom is commenting on a famous passage in the Letter to the Romans by St Paul. This passage from St Paul (Romans 1:20) is commonly quoted by Scholastics for it clearly teaches a system of natural theology, and St John Chrysostom agrees. For in his argument, he employs a similar argument that St Thomas and, as just cited, St Gregory of Nyssa use. This is the argument from design or finality for God's existence. And thus Chrysostom uses natural theology, for he appeals to the natural order of creation in order to get to God’s existence.

St John Chrysostom - Commentary on Romans (Homily 3, verse. 20)

“For what will the Greeks (i.e. Heathen) say in that day? That we were ignorant of You? Did ye then not hear the heaven sending forth a voice by the sight, while the well-ordered harmony of all things spoke out more clearly than a trumpet? Did ye not see the hours of night and day abiding unmoved continually, the goodly order of winter, spring, and the other seasons remaining both sure and unmoved, the tractableness of the sea amid all its turbulence and waves? All things abiding in order and by their beauty and their grandeur, preaching aloud of the Creator? For all these things and more than these does Paul sum up in saying, 'The invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things which are made, even His eternal Power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.'"

St Augustine of Hippo, who wrote in the 4th to 5th century also appeals to natural theology, for he argues that because creation is well ordered, it necessitates a designer or creator who is God.

St Augustine of Hippo - City of God (11.4)

“For, though the voices of the prophets were silent, the world itself, by its well-ordered changes and movements, and by the fair appearance of all visible things, bears a testimony of its own, both that it has been created, and also that it could not have been created save by God, whose greatness and beauty are unutterable and invisible.”

Pope St Gregory the Great was a profound Church Father in the West during the 6th to 7th century. In his Morals on the Book of Job, he leads the reader to consider how creation necessitates a creator or designer after one contemplates and reflects on it. Thus he utilizes natural theology for he begins with created order of reality and leads the reader to the divine being.

Pope St Gregory the Great - Morals on the Book of Job (5.52)

“Now in this present time, the Divine whispering has as many veins for our ears as the works of creation, which the Divine Being Himself is Lord of; for while we view all things that are created, we are lifted up in admiration of the Creator. For as water that flows in a slender stream is sought by being bored for through veins, with a view to increase it, and as it pours forth the more copiously, in proportion as it finds the veins more open, so we, whilst we heedfully gather the knowledge of the Divine Being from the contemplation of His creation, as it were open to ourselves the ‘veins of His whispering,’...”

Next we come to St Maximus the Confessor in the 7th century. He utilizes a similar causal argument to that of Aristides and St John of Damascus as we will cover. This argument is the argument from motion or change which comes from Aristotle. St Thomas would also go on to use this exact same argument in his Summa Theologiae and Summa contra Gentiles. Evidently, this takes a principle of reality in the created order, and causally reasons its way to God who is the first cause and sustainer of all change or motion in the world. Thus St Maximus uses natural theology.

St Maximus the Confessor - First Oration on the Son (Ambigua, 23)

"Everything which is moved according to nature is necessarily moved in consequence of a cause, and everything moved in consequence of a cause necessarily also exists in consequence of a cause; and everything that exists and is moved in consequence of a cause necessarily has as the beginning of its being the cause in consequence of which it exists and from which it was initially brought into being; likewise, the end of its being moved is the same cause in consequence of which it is moved and toward which it hastens. Now everything which exists and is moved in consequence of a cause is necessarily also created, and if the end of whatever is moved is the cause in consequence of which it is in motion, this cause is necessarily the same cause in consequence of which it was created and exists. 

From this it follows that the cause of whatever exists and is moved, in any way at all according to nature, is one single cause encompassing both the beginning and the end, to which every thing that exists and is moved owes its existence and motion… Now if every being which is moved (which also means that it has been created) exists and is in motion and has been created in consequence of a cause, then whatever does not exist in consequence of a cause is obviously neither created nor moved. For that which does not have a cause of being is not moved at all. If, then, the uncaused is necessarily also unmoved, it follows that the Divine is unmoved, insofar as it does not owe its being to a cause, being itself the cause of all beings.”

'Exposition of the Orthodox faith’ is a fundamental text to the Eastern Orthodox and it was written by St John of Damascus in the 8th century. He is venerated by both East and the West, and is especially known for his defense of Icons, and as being the earliest Apologist to write against the heresy of Islam. In the 'Exposition of the Orthodox Faith', St John of Damascus argues for God's existence using metaphysical principles that have its stem from Aristotle's argument from motion/ change. He also uses Aristotle's principle of causality, and further relates how things that have order, design, or finality, must be ordered by an "artificer" or an orderer, i.e. what we know of as God.

St John of Damascus - An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith (1.3)

“All things, that exist, are either created or uncreated. If, then, things are created, it follows that they are also wholly mutable. For things, whose existence originated in change, must also be subject to change, whether it be that they perish or that they become other than they are by act of will. But if things are uncreated they must in all consistency be also wholly immutable. For things which are opposed in the nature of their existence must also be opposed in the mode of their existence, that is to say, must have opposite properties: who, then, will refuse to grant that all existing things, not only such as come within the province of the senses, but even the very angels, are subject to change and transformation and movement of various kinds? 

For the things appertaining to the rational world, I mean angels and spirits and demons, are subject to changes of will, whether it is a progression or a retrogression in goodness, whether a struggle or a surrender; while the others suffer changes of generation and destruction, of increase and decrease, of quality and of movement in space. Things then that are mutable are also wholly created. But things that are created must be the work of some maker, and the maker cannot have been created. For if he had been created, he also must surely have been created by some one, and so on till we arrive at something uncreated. The Creator, then, being uncreated, is also wholly immutable. And what could this be other than Deity?

And even the very continuity of the creation, and its preservation and government, teach us that there does exist a Deity, who supports and maintains and preserves and ever provides for this universe. For how could opposite natures, such as fire and water, air and earth, have combined with each other so as to form one complete world, and continue to abide in indissoluble union, were there not some omnipotent power which bound them together and always is preserving them from dissolution?

What is it that gave order to things of heaven and things of earth, and all those things that move in the air and in the water, or rather to what was in existence before these, viz., to heaven and earth and air and the elements of fire and water? What was it that mingled and distributed these? What was it that set these in motion and keeps them in their unceasing and unhindered course ? Was it not the Artificer of these things, and He Who has implanted in everything the law whereby the universe is carried on and directed? Who then is the Artificer of these things? Is it not He Who created them and brought them into existence. For we shall not attribute such a power to the spontaneous. For, supposing their coming into existence was due to the spontaneous; what of the power that put all in order? And let us grant this, if you please. What of that which has preserved and kept them in harmony with the original laws of their existence? Clearly it is something quite distinct from the spontaneous. And what could this be other than Deity?”

(1.4)

“Who then is it that moves it? For everything that is moved is moved by another thing. And who again is it that moves that? And so on to infinity till we at length arrive at something motionless. For the first mover is motionless, and that is the Deity.”

Thus, with these highly esteemed Church Fathers, that both Catholic and Orthodox submit to, we ought to follow their lead, and accept natural theology. For clearly natural theology was consistently held from the 2nd century, only a couple decades after the Apostles, and was upheld all the way till the end of the age of the Church fathers with St John of Damascus in the 8th century. 

Christian presuppositionalism, as held by men like Jay Dyer and Fr. Deacon Ananias, is a modernist notion that as we can see is repugnant to Fathers of the Church, since their presuppositionalism rejects natural theology. Let us therefore submit ourselves to the authority of the Church Fathers, as St Thomas and Scholastics so did, and not fall into the wretched errors of modernism.