Creation, Cosmogony, and Cappadocian Cosmology

Abstract

Even today, creation is a topic where the forces of science and religion appear to be destined to come into conflict. The situation was no different during the age of the Cappadocian Fathers. The great “scientific account” of world generation in antiquity was Plato’s Timaeus, an account firmly rooted in the latest philosophical, scientific, mathematical, and astronomical thought of the day, whose impact could be felt on Aristotelian and Stoic conceptions concerning world generation. The Cappadocians certainly do not provide the most systematic attempt to use Platonism, or Greek philosophy in general, to expound biblical thought: that feat had already been accomplished by the Jewish exegete, Philo of Alexandria, as well as the Christian Origen (although Origen’s Peri Archon is not specifically devoted to explaining the Mosaic account and is much more wide-ranging).² What the Cappadocians do offer is an example of the use of a philosophical framework to interpret the biblical narrative in a way that is not directed at the intellectual elite but aimed at a more general audience. This corresponds to the general picture of the average Cappadocian in antiquity, who was regarded as more deadly than a snake and “as little likely to speak intelligently as a tortoise might be to fly,”³ although to some extent this perception was due to the limited Hellenization of the region.⁴ This has also affected how the Cappadocian attempts to engage with Greek philosophy have been perceived, leading to them often facing the accusation that their learning was superficial and essentially derivative, although one must remember that during their own lifetimes, the Cappadocians themselves faced the possibility of being charged with intellectual elitism.

1. I am deeply grateful for fellowships from both the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation in Bonn and the Fritz Thyssen Foundation in Cologne, which supported the research for this paper. My heartfelt thanks go to Prof. John M. Dillon (Trinity College Dublin) for suggesting numerous improvements to the original draft and Prof. Dominic J. O’Meara (University of Fribourg, Switzerland) for originally drawing my attention to this fertile line of inquiry. I am also indebted to my academic advisor at Heidelberg, Prof. Jens Halfwassen, for all of his assistance and encouragement.