Athenagoras

Philosopher and Theologian

David Rankin

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• eBook ISBN: 9781317177548
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Religion

Athenagoras of Athens was a Christian thinker of the second century who engaged with contemporary philosophical thought in the matters of the divine, and the relationship of that divine to the material world. While clearly a Christian apologist, Athenagoras presents doctrines of God, of the Holy Trinity, and of other theological matters which clearly evidence an engagement with Greek philosophical thought which goes beyond the merely linguistic and embraces the notion of God as true being. Athenagoras is a Church Father who has not been given great attention in twentieth-century and early twenty-first-century scholarship. This book explores Athenagoras' undeniable place in the development of Christian thought on the divine, on the Trinity, on the human person, and on the resurrection. His work provides an important link between the mid-second-century and the work of Justin and that of the third-century Christian theologians of the East.

Chapter One
Athenagoras: philosopher and theologian

By way of preface it would be appropriate to set Athenagoras both in the context of Greek apologetics of the second and early third centuries of the Common Era and in that of a more specific Christian engagement with the Greco-Roman philosophical discourse of the same period.

Christian Greek Apologetics

Robert Grant declared that ‘[a]pologetic literature emerges from minority groups that are trying to come to terms with the larger culture in which they live’.1 Frances Young argues that the ‘primary motive’ of the Greek apologists of the second century

was justification, justification of their unpopular – indeed, potentially dangerous – decision to turn their backs on the classical literature inherited from anitiquity and the customs of their forefathers, thus abandoning the comfortable ethos of the Graeco-Roman synthesis into which they had been born, nurtured, and educated.2

‘What is increasingly clear’, she continues, ‘under the head of “apologetic” is that a group that regards itself as a people is fighting for social and political recognition’ and that ‘[i]t is this common self-justificatory content that links the second-century Greek apologists, rather than a sharply defined literary form’.3 Among the Greek apologists of the second century – many of whom wrote works more protreptic than apologetic in nature – a number of key themes emerge. In their various defenses of the faith (and these were the defenses of a minority religious culture in the midst of a dominant culture which was either hostile or indifferent towards it), the apologists see a need to address accusations of atheism made against Christians; to explain why they choose not to participate in the worship of the Greco-Roman gods; to refute accusations of the most heinous immorality – often of cannibalism, incest and other forms of sexual deviance; and to explain their failing to accord the emperor his religious due. Other apologetic pieces – for instance Irenaeus in the Adversus haereses and works such as the Epistle to Barnabas or Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, both belonging to the Adversus Judaeos genre of Christian writing – are not of particular concern here. Athenagoras, in the Legatio at least, writes neither of heretics nor of Jews.

Justin Martyr, in his Apology,4 appeals to the emperors against the prejudice (I.2) and rumour (I.3) which bedevil the Christian cause. He complains that Christians are unfairly targetted and condemned merely for the name they bear (I.4). He refutes the accusation of atheism levelled against them (I.5) – an accusation based on their refusal to worship the pagan deities; argues that Christians hold themselves to the highest standards of morality (I.7); and condemns the idolatry implicit in pagan worship (I.9). The Apology (or Apologies) was ‘an apologetic piece, or set of pieces, intended to explicate the Christian faith and thus secure for Christians fair treatment before the law as a genuine philosophy’.5 Justin’s pupil Tatian, whose approach is offensive more than defensive, attacks from the outset the immorality of pagan philosophers in his Oration to the Greeks (2f.), challenges (by implication) the accusation laid against Christians of atheism, affirms the Christian God as the Creator of all (5) and repudiates pagan worship as demonic (10f.). The author of the Epistle to Diognetus explains at the beginning of his treatise that he will address ‘the mode of worship prevalent among Christians … what God they trust in, and what form of religion they observe’ (1), making clear that they neither honour the gods reckoned as such by the Greeks nor hold to the ‘superstition’ of the Jews. He attacks pagan idolatry (2) and implies that, in their relationship to the world, Christians are like resident aliens.6 In his three-volume To Autolycus, Theophilus of Antioch rises to the challenge of his friend, who ‘boasts’ of his own gods of wood and stone (I.1) and demands of him, Theophilus, that he in turn may explain (or ‘show’) his own God (I.2). In response, Theophilus speaks at length of the nature of the Christian God (I.3–4), of that God’s invisibility (I.5) and of his role as Creator (I.6f.). He speaks of the Christian belief in resurrection (I.8), and condemns pagan idolatry (I.9 and II.2) and emperor worship (I.11). He declares Greek literature to be of little or no value (III.2), speaks of the inconsistency and immorality of Greek writers (III.3) and wonders how educated persons could possibly believe the accusations of atheism, sexual impropriety and cannibalism made against Christians (III.3f.). He, in response, accuses pagan philosophers of contravening to laws on sexual behaviour (III.6) and of contradicting themselves concerning the divine being (III.7ff.). He speaks of the Christian commitment to the Ten Commandments (III.9) and of the superior moral conduct of Christians (III.15). Good argues that the apologetic intent of the work is ‘to secure the credibility of the Christian religion’.7 Clement of Alexandria, in his Protrepticus (which is, of course, protrepticmore than it is apologetic), urges his would-be converts to abandon idolatry, speaks of the absurdity and impiety of the pagan mysteries (2.11.1f.), condemns sacrifices (3.43.1f.) and idolatry (4.49.1f.), but recognizes, however, that sometimes pagan philosophers and poets come near to the truth about God – although not quite (5.65.1ff.). He argues that true belief is found in the Prophets (8.77.1f.), and he responds to the criticism that Christians have abandoned the customs of their forebears, in particular the latter’s gods (10.89.1f.). They say (in his words) that ‘it is not to the credit of Christians to subvert the customs handed down to us from our fathers’ (10.89.1); but he argues that ‘custom, which has made you taste bondage and unreasonable care, is fostered by vain opinion’ (10.99.1).

It was, then, in this context of second century Greek apologetics – a context of defending their co-religionists against charges of atheism, of immorality of all kinds, and of disloyalty to the state – that Athenagoras mounts his own defence and explication of the faith.

Christian Engagement with Philosophical Discourse

As I pointed out in the conclusion to my book From Clement from Origen,8 the pre-Nicene Fathers, particularly Athenagoras’ predecessors and contemporaries, differ considerably in their attitudes towards Greco-Roman philosophy and in the uses they made of it. Both Tatian and Theophilus of Antioch display a great deal of antipathy towards pagan learning, fearing that it might compromise Christian truth, while Tertullian, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria and Origen are ‘clearly immersed in philosophical enquiry’.9 Both Justin and Clement indeed begin to see philosophy even as a kind of preparation, for the Greeks, of the coming Gospel – much as the Law and the Prophets were for the Jews. Justin saw Christianity simply as a superior form of philosophy. Origen speaks of the ‘auxiliary’ value of the study of philosophy – auxiliary to that of the Scriptures. Irenaeus displays the marks of some philosophical enquiry but finds it difficult to see beyond the notion of philosophy as the source of heresy. Tertullian likewise seems to have regarded philosophy as the ‘fount’ of heresy and philosophers as the ‘patriarchs of heretics’, and to have repudiated speculative forms of philosophical enquiry; but his indebtedness to Stoicism and his obvious respect for Plato are too well documented to be ignored. In the West in particular – although eastern Christianity is not untouched by it – Stoicism influences the thought of Clement of Rome, Hermas, Minucius Felix and Cyprian, as well as that of Tertullian.

It is generally understood that the cosmology of 1 Clement is influenced by Stoicism,10 though some would suggest that a Jewish provenance is just as likely.11 The Stoic virtues of healthy living and self-reliance are evident in the Pastor of Hermas of Rome;12 and Minucius Felix, the North African advocate practising his craft in Rome, evidences both a Ciceronian Academic Scepticism and, like Clement above, a Stoic-like concern for an ordered universe and physical world.13 Minucius Felix also makes use of Plato’s famous words at Timaeus 28c3–4 – a passage on the difficulty of finding the creator and father of the Universe, and a favourite text among the Christian writers of the time – in order to support his own argument concerning the oneness of God.14

Although Justin is at times profoundly critical of Greek philosophy, its influence on his thought is undeniable. Apparently he wore the philosopher’s pallium (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 1) – even Tertullian eulogizes this garb in the De pallio – and he regarded Christianity as the perfect philosophy, as he himself had progressed from Stoicism to Aristotelianism, Pythagoreanism and then Platonism (Dialogue 2), then came finally to Christian teaching.. He had some regard for Plato, whom he believed to come near to the truth at times, though not near enough. His reflections on the Logos are clearly influenced by Stoic thought (1 Apology 46); his thinking on the matter of the soul shows some engagement (though ultimate disagreement) with Plato; he regards Socrates with approval (1 Apology 5); he alludes positively to Plato’s words at Timaeus 28c3–4 on the Creator and Father of the Universe (2 Apology 10.6; see above); his understanding of free will at 1 Apology 28.3–4 is consistent with that of Plato at Republic 617e; and he chooses to see a doctrine of the Trinity at Epistle 2.312e (1 Apology 60.6–7).

Tertullian, despite his infamous question at De praescriptionibus 7.9 – what has Athens to do with Jerusalem? – and despite his comparison at Adversus Marcionem 2.27.6 of the Marcionite God, ‘invisible and unapproachable and inactive’, with the God of the philosophers, makes extensive use of philosophy and is profoundly influenced by it. Like Justin, he can speak of Christianity as a sort of philosophy (De pallio 6.2). While at De anima 3.1 he speaks of philosophers as the ‘patriarchs of heretics’ and the treatise is in some ways anti-Platonist, its reflections on the soul and its corporeality, for example, are markedly Stoic in origin. His De patientia is Stoic in outlook, and his reflections on the relationship between nature and reason and on the ideal of living in accordance with nature at Adversus Praxean 5 and De spectaculis 2f. display the clear marks of that school. Theophilus of Antioch demonstrates a wide knowledge of philosophical thought and is profoundly critical of the Stoics. He believes that Plato and his followers – he alludes to Timaeus 28c3–4 – have got it right in claiming that God is both uncreated and the Father–Creator, but wrong in regarding matter as likewise uncreated. In this schema, he says, a God who is not, alone, the unique sovereign cannot be God.

The deep engagement of Clement of Alexandria with Greek philosophy is not to be doubted, and indeed too extensive to be dealt with adequately here. This is particularly so in...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Dedication
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• List of Abbreviations
• Chapter One Athenagoras: philosopher and theologian
• Chapter Two Athenagoras’ corpus: one lump or two?
• Chapter Three Athenagoras and contemporary theological and philosophical conversations
• Chapter Four How do we know about God? Epistemology
• Chapter Five What do we know about God? First principles
• Chapter Six Subordinate topics
• Chapter Seven Influences on Athenagoras
• Chapter Eight Conclusions
• Bibliography
• Index