Introduction

John of Damascus was a Christian monk and theologian who was born and raised in Damascus. He was born either in 675 CE or in 676 CE. While according to tradition, he died on the 4th of December 749 CE at his monastery, Mar Saba near Jerusalem. He is venerated as a saint in both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christian churches. While the Catholic Church considers him a Doctor of the Church, he is considered the last of the Church Fathers in the Eastern Orthodoxy.¹

One of his works is the Dogmatic which is a mixture of pagan philosophy and Christian and Hebrew tradition. It is still being taught at various Orthodox theology faculties in my country of birth at this time. Prior to the time of writing of this essay by 1 or two years, had you questioned a priest on the errors of John of Damascus, in his Dogmatic, his responses would have ranged from shock at you questioning his sainthood to mockery that: "No one has ever doubted the Dogmatic"

As we shall see it takes a true feat of insanity and ignorance to believe that John of Damascus was inspired by God to write his Dogmatic.

Chapter 1

The opening chapter starts with three quotes from John 1:18, Mathew 11:27 and 1 Corinthians 2:11. Mathew 11:27 has been trimmed for reasons we shall see... The three quotes are:

"No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." "All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son" "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."

If we interpret logically the above passages we get the following axioms:

A1: No man can know God

A2: The Son knows God

A3: No man knows the Son

A4: Only the Son knows the Father

A5: Only the spirit of man knows man

A6: No man knows the things of God

A7: Only the spirit of God knows the things of God

This serves John of Damascus' conclusion that Godliness is ineffable and incomprehensible quite well. However if we add the rest of Mathew 11:27 : "All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him."

Notice the addendum: "to whomsoever the Son will reveal him". That is, Godliness is comprehensible in the measure the Son allows it. Therefore the contradiction, we can never know nor express anything about Godliness, but we may do so if the Son allows it... One interpretation that does make sense may be that Godliness is entirely incomprehensible and that Mathew does not claim that the Godly part of the Father will ever be revealed. However, this would imply that the existence of God himself would be incomprehensible as well. To a mortal, His existence would be permanently limited to human understanding and never extend to Godliness entirely.

Further he claims that God has not left us in complete darkness but He has given us knowledge of His existence and has embedded it into the very fabric of reality. However there is a question concerning this knowledge and its extent. As God can not be contained in a book, neither the Gospel of John as the author himself claims nor the entire Bible. Nor as many books as we may fill the world with(John 21:25), nor the entire universe in its entire raw substance of truth. How can one derive the existence of God from the finite?

Chapter 3

In the third chapter he gives the argument that given the changing nature of the universe, there must have been an initial state. And because of the harmony of the movements in the universe, at least according to human cognition, every state through which the universe has went must have been guided by an Author.

Indeed we see that harmony wherever we look and the more we gaze at its beauty the more we are left speechless. From the formation of the early galaxies, to the formation of early stars and planetary systems, up to our Solar System, Earth, its natural history, which has been remarkably favorable to the development and advancement of the human race. He postulates that this Author of the cosmic harmony is none other than the Author of the initial state and subsequent events, namely God.

However, the skeptic might add, it is humanity that embeds its intuition onto the universe, it is harmonious because we are biased to recognize things according to our understanding. However, this intuition seems to describe quite well phenomenon from the quantum scale to the intergalactic one. Which is rather odd, given that it evolved to hunt animals with spears.

Another skeptic might add that the cause of the universe is minimalist. That is, there is an effect, but no cause. Indeed, how would we tell if the universe is self determined or if it is determined by a metaphysical substrate? A less extreme version of minimalism follows the scientific consensus of today. Galaxies formed as condensation points of matter as it was dispersed by the big-bang. Stars were formed as the intergalactic dust condensed. The Solar System is one of many while evolution of life on Earth was facilitated by its chemical composition and proximity to the Sun. Furthermore, Earth's natural history facilitated the accumulation of oxygen in the atmosphere, soil formation, coal, oil and natural gas deposits. All which were crucial to the development of the human race. Indeed many coincidences have led to this day, but the question is how lucky have we been and was better possible?

Chapter 6

He begins by calling the sky a starless sphere. Moreover he quotes Gen 1:6 "Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.". Further he adds that some have considered that the sky surrounds the universe like a sphere and that the earth and waters form a disk in the middle. Concerning the movement of the celestial bodies, he claims that each area of the sky has a region with a planet and through its motion causes them to spin.

Sound familiar? It's the cosmology of the Enuma Elish.

Furthermore, one of his sources, Gen 1:6 is directly inspired by the Enuma Elish.

For more information on this epic poem, Bruce Gore has an excellent course here: 2. Genesis 1 and Enuma Elish