Athenagoras' and Tatian's Demonologies in the Context of the Second Century AD
Only Tatian and Athenagoras dedicated an entire part of their work to demonology. This does not mean that demonology was not important for other Christian authors of the second century AD, such as Justin Martyr, whose references to demons are of great importance for reconstructing Christian demonology.
Unlike Tatian and Athenagoras, Justin does not speak of demons in a dedicated section of his work—his references to this topic are not organised systematically. He prefers to focus on some aspects of demonology, for example how demons act in the world, but without explaining what power they have and why. Nevertheless, his references to demons in the Apologies help us to reconstruct the relationship between Christian and pagan demonologies. Furthermore, in the Dialogue with Tripho we find some references to biblicalone. According to Athenagoras, Christians are the only true philosophers, because their knowledge of God comes from God's will. See Athenagoras, Legatio, 6.2. demonology. It seems, therefore, that, unlike Athenagoras and Tatian, Justin did not feel the need to write a specific work on demonology. This prevents us from completely understanding Justin's demonology. But, by the seemingly haphazard references to demons in Justin's works, particularly in the Second Apology, we know that Christians were acquainted with many traditions: not only the ones influenced by the Gospels, but also those influenced by Hellenistic and Jewish apocalyptic traditions.[407]
The existence and actions of demons are also discussed in Erma's Shepard, a Christian text dated to the first part of the second century AD. Erma, the brother of the Roman Bishop Pius according to an ancient tradition, reported the teaching of an angel that appeared to him as a shepherd. This text, which is no longer considered canonical, greatly influenced the early Christian authors Irenaeus, Clemens of Alexandria and Origen, who believed it to be inspired.
In this text, the word δαίμων is not present, as the author prefers the form πόνερος πνεύμα, usually used in the Gospels: his demonology is quite important, because it reflects the hypothesis of a demonic presence inside the human mind. Demons, or spirits, can enter into humans and each of them represents an evil inclination of the human mind: their presence does not allow the Holy Spirit to stay inside humans anymore.nBarnabas' Letters, many of the Apostolic Acts of the second century, particularly the Acts of John, and the Ascension of Isaiah, contain references to demonology too, in many different ways, testifying that in this period Christian thought about evil spirits was open to various influences, not only of Hebrew origin, but also to Hellenistic and oriental knowledge?2 Authors of the later second century, such as Irenaeus and Clemens of Alexandria, treat the argument too.13 All of them speak of demons and particularly of their effects on
human life. But none of them present a complete theory of the origins and the actions of demons. They only show that demons were a common topic where these authors lived.
As a matter of fact, this interest in demonology is not at all strange for the Mediterranean world of the beginning of the Christian Era: the actions of demons in the world is not only a Christian question, since pagan literature analyzes the problem too, as demonstrated by Plutarch of Cheronea.[408] [409] [410] [411] [412] Greek tradition played an important part in Christian demonology even at this early point, as Athenagoras' work clearly demonstrates: he shows a little knowledge of platonic themes, particularly by quoting Timaeus and Epinomis.15 He evidently reads only abstracts or fragments of other platonic works, and consequently his knowledge of the complex platonic demonology is not wide?6 He tries to investigate more about this theme, searching for the origin of the Greek traditions concerning demons and finding it in a fragment that he, like Aetius, attributes to Thales of Miletus, a pre-Socratic philosopher of the sixth century BC: according to Athenagoras, Thales would have been the first to establish the difference between gods, demons and heroes.17 Athenagoras does not seem to be acquainted with demonology as theorised by Plato's second heir Xenocrates and, after him, by some of the most important philosophers of Middle Platonism such as, for example, the above mentioned Plutarch of Cheronea, but something in his thought comes from a Hellenistic source, maybe Philo or the Epmomis·™ for example, fallen angels belong to the place περί τον άέρα καί τήν γην. Yet, Athenagora's sources are really diverse: in the Embassy, beside Hellenistic references, there is an ample proof that the author knows well the Enochic tradition of the fallen angels: in chapter 24, he speaks about the angels' fall due to their desire for human women and their love of material things. He could have taken this information from Genesis 6:1-4, but immediately after he says that the sons of the angels and women are the Giants, a tradition that is found in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan and in the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36), which was sometimes considered at this time to be inspired.[413] [414] He probably reveals his source in chapter 25.1, while speaking about demons as the souls of the dead Giants who still wander on the earth, information that he could have taken from the Book of Enoch or from the Book of Jubilees, where the Giants survive in a non-corporeal form after the Flood.[415] Athenagoras does not explain why the Giants are dead or why their souls are on earth as demons. He thus appears to assume that his audience will know of the Jewish flood traditions, which is problematic particularly for his pagan readers who probably knew nothing about this tradition. Besides love for women, the second fault of demons is their love for materiality, which can be found in both Christian and Hellenistic sources.[416] [417] [418] [419] Philo is perhaps the main source because, in his works, demons, angels and souls can be so attracted to the world that they are unable to get away from it. Athenagoras presents this line of argument when he says that the angels fallen from the sky live around the air and earth, because they cannot return to the sky.22 But there is a difference between Athenagoras and Philo: angels, demons and humans are not the same, as they are in Philo's works. Even fallen angels are not the same as demons: the latter are only the heritage of the union between angels and women and their nature is different from both parents. Conversely, the demonic terminology in Tatian's Address to the Greeks does not explain clearly the author's sources. The leader of the fallen angels is here a δαίμων as happens in Justin?6 The only difference between him and his host is that the latter are also known as φαντάσματα δαιμόνων and they seem to have an inferior position. Nevertheless, this way of referring to the head of the demonic host is important. Not many other authors of the period confuse demons and the devil. In the Gospels too there seems to be a distinction: the devil is a leader, the demons are only his assistants?8 This difference seems to exist in Tatian too, because human followers of the first fallen being only call him their god: the inferior demons do not deserve such a title?9 Inferior demons can be fallen angels, but they are not the first angels to fall. The first to fall has the greatest fault, because his actions brought down some of the other demons. His responsibility is higher than that of the other angels, but he is not responsible for all evil. Angels can betray their nature at different times and, as a result, there can be more than one fall of the angels. This is not a common tradition.[425] The first apostate angel, therefore, is not responsible for all subsequent apostasy. According to Tatian, demons are the fallen angels and there was no real difference between angels and humans before the fall[426] At the moment of creation, there were angels and humans, the former created by the Logos before the latter. Both were immortal, possessing free will but with no knowledge of the nature of good[427] [428] After the fall, those who fell became demons or remained humans, depending on their fault.33 Humans lost their immortality, while demons gained an immortal life of torment without forgiveness, because they chose matter and not spirit[429] Both humans and demons fell, and both did not have the knowledge of good, but the difference between their faults is not really explained. It seems that Tatian proposes two explanations. First of all, demons were so attracted by materiality that they forgot their spiritual nature. This is the demons' fault according to Philo too. They show their proximity to materiality and evil: they chose matter even having no corrupted elements in them. But this may be humanity's fault too. The difference may be in life expectancy. Humans have, after the fall, only short lives, and so it is easy to understand why they err[430] Evil in humans is limited by their death. Demons, on the other hand, remain immortal and so their evil acts are not limited. It seems that the difference between the evil of humans and demons is not a qualitative one but a quantitative one—even if this does not explain the original difference between humans and demons. Tatian clearly refuses to confirm that demons are the souls of the giants. In doing so, he appears to be rejecting the Enochic tradition that Athenagoras accepts. Demons cannot be souls, but they are made of a superior kind of matter that is stronger than the inferior matter of humans. Thanks to their superior body, it is very difficult, but still possible, to kill them.[431] Very few people, on account of their spirituality, can see them.