The Writings of Athenagoras: Lighthouse Church Fathers

by Athēnagoras

We know with certainty regarding Athenagoras that he was an Athenian philosopher who had embraced Christianity and that his apology, or as he styles it, “Embassy”, was presented to the Emperors Aurelius and Commodus at about AD 177.

He is supposed to have written a considerable number of works, but the only other production of his extant works is his treatise on the Resurrection. It is probable that this work was composed somewhat later than the apology, though its exact date cannot be determined.

Philip of Side also states that he preceded Pantaenus as head of the catechetical school at Alexandria; but this is probably incorrect and is contradicted by Eusebius. A more interesting and perhaps well-rounded statement is made by the same writer respecting Athenagoras, to the effect that he was won over to Christianity while reading the Scriptures in order to controvert them.

Both his apology and his treatise on the Resurrection display a practiced pen and a richly cultured mind. He is by far the most elegant and certainly at the same time one of the ablest of the early Christian apologists.

Audible Audio

First published June 9, 2014

Reviews

[Christian Barrett · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is easy to see why Athenagoras is deemed one of the most brilliant early thinkers. The depth of his engagement with Greek paganism, Old Testament theology, and Christian philosophy sets him apart from many of his contemporaries. His arguments differ from Justin, as he develops a more thoughtful doctrine of Christ and the Spirit. In other ways, he resembles Justin as a defender of the faith, by pointing to the folly of paganism and the truth of the historic faith.

[Truls Ljungström · Rating 3 out of 5]

Texten är tydlig och logik, men knappast inspirerande.

[Adam Carnehl · Rating 4 out of 5]

Athenagoras (c. 133 - 190 A.D.) is a fascinating writer from the ancient Church. A trained philosopher who was well-versed in Greek poetry and history, Athenagoras wrote numerous works that offered a defense of the newly established Christianity in the Roman world. Only two of his works are extant: "Embassy for the Christians" and "On the Resurrection of the Dead." Both are immensely valuable in revealing what the populace thought about Christians at the time, and in revealing how a well-trained contemporary philosopher would argue for the truth and value of Christianity.

In "Embassy for the Christians," which was written for the philosopher-emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son, Athenagoras of Athens begins his defense by flattering his intended readers, and by beseeching them to look past the name "Christian." It would seem that, in the 2nd century, the very name "Christian" was detestable and immediately connected with superstition. Further on, the Athenian relates three accusations that Romans would hurl at Christians: that they were atheists, that they were cannibals, and that they were sexual deviants. Athenagoras seeks to dismantle each fallacious accusation, proving from reason and the absurdity of Greco-Roman religion, that Christianity is rational and true, and that Christians are moral exemplars with a peculiarly rigorous way of life.

In his treatise on the resurrection, Athenagoras makes some very different moves that moderns would probably not expect. He begins with pointing out that the purpose of the treatise is to remove false opinions, and then to explain and defend the true ones. In removing false opinions, the first he tackles is that people who are eaten by other people can't rise from the dead, as they have become a part of the very substance of the other people's bodies. It's a strange and unexpected beginning for a theological work! Athenagoras also points out that resurrection can be proven to be true based on the nature and telos of man: he is created by God to live and to further human life. Death, which would seemingly contradict this telos, therefore cannot be the final end of man, but only an interlude. The other major argument he makes is that, since the body and soul participate in good and evil decisions in life, the punishment or bliss in the life to come therefore cannot involve the soul only. For both body and soul participate in every action, whether for God or against God.

[John Cairns]

Athenagoras does the Xian strawman thing, even in a plea for them to the emperor, Marcus Aurelius, that the idols are the gods though he elsewhere addresses their being possessed by the gods they image to answer requests. His basic premiss is an immortal deity - only beheld by reason! because man is the only rational animal. God is also the creator of matter he is needed to move. None of this is as such unexceptionable to a pagan believing in a fabricated world. He doesn't explain why god who has no need to has created the world. Nor does he give a reason why the idols he calls demons, infuriating the pagans, have a taste for the blood of sacrifices. I had to laugh at the kiss of salutation having to be given with the greatest care because the least defilement of thought excludes the Xians from eternal life (despite god's not making man like sheep as a mere by-work for annihilation on death). By the fifth century the Xians were as wanton as the pagans. The crux is having hope of eternal life Xians despised the things of this life, not something an emperor would take kindly to as proof of moral rectitude. Sex is only good in marriage for procreation and a second marriage is adultery. Xian self-righteousness certainly comes across as does the philosophic presumption he can make this plea to the emperors, one of whom was Commodus. Nonetheless he goes on to decry gladiatorial killing, though the games were a mark of Roman civilisation, and abortion as murder. No wonder this book was published by American evangelicals. He begins with the Athenians laughing at Paul's foolish belief in resurrection and ends his plea that the belief that what is dissolved can be reconstituted is also that of philosophers.

His treatise on resurrection is more engrossing. I had to laugh at the heading it's not impossible. Since his premiss is god can do anything he regards atheism as the worst but he does raise the alternative, the ascribing of the origin of man to no cause and even skirts with wishful-thinking as faint hope. This is an excellent book.