The Basis of Early Christian Theism — Reading Notes

The Patristic Silence on Cosmological Proofs

Cole observes a striking gap: despite the early Christian writers’ deep familiarity with Stoic philosophy—which heavily influenced their ethical terminology and moral reasoning—they rarely deployed the Cosmological argument. He counts “not more than a dozen instances, at most” among the Ante-Nicene Fathers, and more than half are merely passing references. Tertullian, for example, states that “Nature herself is the teacher” that God is the Maker, but Cole doubts whether this appeals to order or design. Origen uses cosmic order to prove God’s unity, not existence. The most elaborate example comes from Athenagoras, who likens the relation of God to matter as that of an artist to clay: “as clay cannot become vessels of itself without art, so neither did matter … receive apart from God the Framer, distinction and shape and order.” Cole finds this scarcity significant, given how often these writers encountered the argument in Stoic sources.

The Teleological Argument: Fewer Still

If the Cosmological argument appears rarely, the Teleological—or “Socratic proof”—is even scarcer. Cole notes that while the instances are generally more explicit, “the appeals to design in nature are fewer even than those to order.” The earliest example he identifies is from Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, in his work against the idolater Autolycus. Cole does not quote the passage directly but implies it is one of the few developed uses. He suggests that the early Christian preference for concrete, accessible reasoning over abstract speculation explains this pattern. The Church’s mission to convert “common people” made elaborate philosophical arguments impractical. Yet Cole also points to a tension: the Old Testament emphasis on God as Creator and Law-Giver would seem to invite cosmological reasoning, making its absence all the more noteworthy.

The Practical Spirit of Early Christianity

Cole argues that the early Christian writers’ avoidance of abstract theistic proofs reflects both the general intellectual tendencies of their age and the “practical spirit of Christianity.” He observes that the later Greek and Latin schools already inclined toward more concrete arguments, and Christianity reinforced this by its “eminently simple and common-sense attitude.” The Fathers had a unique task: to present theism to a broad audience, including those unaccustomed to metaphysical reasoning. Cole’s analysis suggests that the patristic writers were not ignorant of philosophical tradition but made deliberate choices about which arguments to employ. Their selective use of theistic proofs reveals a pragmatic adaptation of classical thought to Christian proclamation.

Cole’s Method and Scope

Cole frames his study as an attempt to account for “even one of the details of thought” during the neglected centuries between Cicero and Anselm. He quotes Professor Stirling to underscore that the Fathers and their followers “connect thinker with thinker, philosopher with philosopher, pagan with Christian.” Cole’s own method is to examine specific instances of theistic argument in patristic texts, weighing their frequency and development. He does not claim to survey all early Christian literature but focuses on the Ante-Nicene period. His tone is measured, his conclusions cautious: he notes what is absent as carefully as what is present. The dissertation thus serves as a corrective to the historical record, restoring attention to a period he believes has been unjustly overlooked.

Cole’s study invites readers to reconsider the intellectual seriousness of early Christian writers, who engaged with philosophical traditions on their own terms. Rather than simply repeating Greek arguments, they adapted them to a new audience and purpose. Readers interested in the history of philosophy, theology, or the intersection of faith and reason will find here a focused, evidence-driven account of a pivotal but often skipped chapter in Western thought.

There’s a strange comfort in how the old apologists reached for the stars to prove a steady hand behind things. I kept thinking of that while revisiting The Destinies of the Stars — Reading Notes, how the same heavens that offered them arguments also held their quiet anxieties about what comes next. Both books feel like whispers from a very late night.