Bingham

ZAC 2016; 20(2): 211242
D. Jeffrey Bingham*
We Have the Prophets:
Inspiration and the Prophets in Athenagoras
of Athens
DOI 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
Abstract: In contrast to those who argue simply that Athenagorass discussion

of the prophets and inspiration is Hellenic, sourced in Philo as well as in Plato
and Plutarch, this paper claims that there are other sources to consider that are
equally informative. Athenagoras manifests alliance and dependence upon the
Septuagint, other Jewish sources, the New Testament and second-century Chris-
tian sources, especially Ignatius and Justin. Athenagoras is a Christian philoso-
pher. We would expect to see such a broad-based platform of resources for his
theological construction. A simple classification of Greek, Hellenistic or Philonic
for his notion of the inspired prophets is incomplete, unreflective of his own inge-
nuity, and fails to adequately account for his Judaeo-Christian heritage. It also
minimizes the elegance of this early Christian attempt to theologize about the
Jewish prophets in a gentile world. In Athenagoras we have an explanation of the
prophets and inspiration that (1) clearly positions them preeminently as rational,
doctrinal Christian authorities above the poets, philosophers, and human opin-
ions; (2) constructs his communitys theology with an artistic flair that selec-
tively and critically weaves together both pagan and Judaeo-Christian sources;
so that (3) he might win a hearing from both his imperial and ecclesiastical
audience.
Keywords: Athenagoras, Prophets, Inspiration, Philo, Plato, Ecstasy, Justin Martyr,

Spirit
In 1928, Arthur D. Nock penned his classic essay, Early Gentile Christianity and
Its Hellenistic Background. There, in his opening pages, he oriented his reader
to the challenges faced by Christianity as it moved from Palestine into the rest of
the world.
*Corresponding author: D. Jeffrey Bingham, Southwestern Theological Seminary, 2001 West

Seminary Drive, Fort Worth, TX 76115, United States, e-mail: jbingham@swbts.edu
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
Downloaded from De Gruyter Online at 09/19/2016 09:21:26AM
via Cornell University Library
212 D. Jeffrey Bingham
In spreading from this well-prepared ground [of Judaism] the Christian movement encoun-
tered new tasks. It faced a world which did not know Judaism or which hated and despised
it, a world which was unacquainted with the prophets and familiar with cults not pretend-
ing to exclusiveness, with mysteries not always requiring a moral standard of their devo-
tees, with an unchangeable and unmoral order of destiny determined, or at least indicated,
by the stars, with magic of various kinds.1
Early Christians certainly had to make their way into a world that was not familiar
with the Jewish prophets. They did not move, however, into a culture that was
a tabula rasa in regard to the question of prophets. The world into which they
migrated was well acquainted with prophets and prophecy.2 This meant that their
missionary efforts and their defensive posture would need to establish grounds
for their particular view of prophecy, a task that would involve both apologetic
and polemic.
My interest here is to study how early Christians went about the task of intro-
ducing their concept of the Old Testament prophets to an audience that embraced
different perspectives on prophecy. This will, of course, include the related idea
of inspiration. Within the New Testament and the second century before Irenaeus
and Theophilus, several texts relating the two concerns come to mind. We will
interact with some of these below.3 Our focus here is Athenagoras of Athens.4 Two
passages from his Legatio pro Christianis, 7,3 and 9,1, are central to our interest:
We, however, have prophets () as witnesses of what we think and believe. They
have spoken by the inspiration () of a divine Spirit () about God and the things
of God. And you, who excel others in wisdom and in piety toward the true Divinity, would
1Arthur D. Nock, Early Gentile Christianity and Its Hellenistic Background (Harper torch-
books111; New York: Harper and Row, 1964), 3. The essay first appeared in Essays on the Trinity
and the Incarnation (ed. Alfred E.J. Rawlinson; London: Longmans, Green, 1928), 51156.
2Cf. Nock, Early Gentile Christianity and Its Hellenistic Background (see note1), 88.
3Cf. 2Tim3:16; 1Pet1:1012; 2Pet1:2021; Rev22:6; Ignatius, Epistula ad Magnesios8,2; 9,2
(ed. and trans. Andreas Lindemann and Henning Paulsen, Die Apostolischen Vter: Griechisch-
deutsche Parallelausgabe [Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992], 194,26196,2; 196,810); Epistula ad
Philadelphios 5,2 (ed. and trans. Lindemann and Henning, Die Apostolischen Vter [see above],
220,1520); Justin, 1Apologia31,1; 33,2.9; 36; 37,9; 53,6 (PTS38, 76,16; 80,47; 81,3133; 84,112;
85,1718; 107,2326 Marcovich); Dialogus cum Tryphone Judaeo7,12; 32,23; 48,4; 115,3 (PTS47,
82,383,14; 122,1423; 149,2225; 268,1822 Marcovich).
4The critical editions consulted include Bernard Pouderon, ed., annot. and trans., Athnagore:
Supplique au sujet des chrtiens et sur la rsurrection des morts: Introduction, texte et traduction
(SC379; Paris: Cerf, 1992); Miroslav Marcovich, ed., Athenagoras: Legatio pro Christianis (PTS31;
Berlin: De Gruyter, 1990); William R. Schoedel, ed. and trans., Athenagoras: Legatio and De
resurrectione (OECT; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972).
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
We Have the Prophets 213
admit that it would be absurd for us to abandon our belief in the Spirit () of God,
which moved () the mouths of the prophets () like instruments (),
and to pay attention to human opinions.5
If we were content with such considerations, one could imagine that our doctrine was
human. But the voices of the prophets () confirm our arguments (). And I
suppose that you, who are so curious and so learned, are not without knowledge of Moses,
Isaiah, Jeremiah, and the other prophets (). Who, in accordance with the ecstasy
() of their reason (), as the divine Spirit () moved () them,
proclaimed the things that they were inspired () to say, the Spirit () using
them just as a piper () blows () into a pipe ().6
Previous scholarship on these two passages has largely taken two paths. First,
it has either noted Athenagorass contrast between the philosophers and proph-
ets on the basis of the means of their inspiration or described the commonality
between them. The philosophers, Abraham Malherbe noted, were moved only by
the divine breath (), while the prophets were informed by the divine Spirit
().7 David Rankin, on the other hand, argues that by breath, Athenago-
ras obviously means the Spirit.8 The philosophers and prophets, in different
measure, both receive knowledge of God from the same Spirit. Second, scholar-
ship has been quick to assert the classical and Hellenistic background for Athena-
gorass concept of inspiration and the prophets. The favored sources are Plato,
Philo, and Plutarch. Malherbe, for instance, claims that the apologist described
the prophets in general hellenistic terms and in terms customary among
philosophers.9 Leslie W. Barnard locates the original source for Athenagorass
5Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,3 (SC379, 92,1794,23 Pouderon):

,
.

, .
6Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis9,1 (98,110 P.):
,
<>

, ,
, , ,
.
7Abraham J. Malherbe, Athenagoras on the Poets and Philosophers, in Kyriakon: Festschrift
Johannes Quasten1 (ed. Patrick Granfield and Josef A. Jungman; Mnster: Aschendorff, 1970),
(214225) 222.
8David I. Rankin, Athenagoras: Philosopher and Theologian (Farnham: Ashgate, 2009), 29, 79, 137.
9Malherbe, Athenagoras on the Poets and Philosophers (see note7), 222.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
musical image concerning the prophets in a different Platonic metaphor concern-

ing the philosophers.10 Joseph Crehan argues for indebtedness to Philo to some
extent,11 but also allows for independence. Johannes Geffcken, citing Plato, had
already set forth the thesis that for Athenagoras, the prophets (), in ecstasy
under inspiration, were merely Gods passive, ignorant instruments. Here he
saw a thoroughgoing Hellenism.12 Readers have appealed to three specific sets
of similarities that Athenagoras had with classical Greek and Hellenistic mate-
rial. Malherbe showed a Philonic similarity with Athenagorass language that
differentiates philosophers from prophets on their association with divine breath
() or Spirit ().13 Many argue that his language and thought concerning
spiritual inspiration and ecstasy has parallels with Plato, Philo, and Plutarch.14
10Cf. Leslie W. Barnard, The Philosophical and Biblical Background of Athenagoras, in

Epektasis: Mlanges patristiques offerts au Cardinal Jean Danilou (ed. Jacques Fontaine and
Charles Kannengiesser; Paris: Beauchesne, 1972), (316) 15 (note48); eadem, Athenagoras: A
Study in Second Century Christian Apologetic (Thologie historique18; Paris: Beauchesne, 1972),
77 (note16); eadem, Athenagoras and the Biblical Tradition, in Studia Evangelica6: Papers
presented to the Fourth International Congress on New Testament Studies held at Oxford 1969 (ed.
Elizabeth A. Livingstone; TU112; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1973), (17) 5 (note4).
11Joseph H. Crehan, trans. and annot., Athenagoras: Embassy for the Christians and The Resur-
rection of the Dead (Ancient Christian Writers23; New York: Paulist, 1956), 132 (note53).
12Cf. Johannes Geffcken, Zwei griechische Apologeten (Leipzig: Teubner, 1907), 180.
13Malherbe, Athenagoras on the Poets and Philosophers (see note7), 222. Cf.
and (Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,2.3 [92,11.18 P.]) with and
(Philo, Legum allegoriae1,13,42 [ed. Leopold Cohn and Paul Wendland, Philonis Alexan-
drini opera quae supersunt1 (Berlin: Reimer, 1896), 71,1011] where Philo uses the terms not in
relation to the difference between philosophers and prophets, but in regard to Mosess account
of the creation of humanity).
14Cf. Geffcken, Zwei griechische Apologeten (see note12), 177; Malherbe, Athenagoras on the
Poets and Philosophers (see note7), 222; Marcovich, Athenagoras: Legatio (see note4), 34;
Rankin, Athenagoras: Philosopher and Theologian (see note8), 96. Geffcken specifically points
to Plato, Menon99c, as the parallel for Athenagorass Hellenistic concept of the inspired, igno-
rant, passive prophet (). I treat Menon99c below. Cf. ... (Athe
nagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,3 [92,18 P.]) with ... (Philo, De
decalogo175 [ed. Leopold Cohn and Paul Wendland, Philonis Alexandrini opera quae supersunt4
(Berlin: Reimer, 1902), 307,23]) where Philo uses the phrase in relation to the prophets and par-
ticularly Moses who was inspired to deliver the laws by mouth. Cf. also ...
... (Philo, De decalogo3335 [276,8.14.18 C./W.; cf. 276,319 C./W.]). Here,
Gods breath or Spirit empowers Moses to speak and inspires his hearers. See, too, ...
... ... ... ... ...
(Philo, De specialibus legibus4,4849 [ed. Leopold Cohn and Paul Wendland, Phil-
onis Alexandrini opera5 (Berlin: Reimer, 1906), 219,21220,3]). This Philonic parallel has several
significant features: the inspiration of the prophet by the divine Spirit, the Spirits prompting
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
And, finally, scholars point to parallels with Philo and Plutarch concerning his
metaphor of the prophets as musical instruments and even identify a different
Platonic metaphor as the source of Athenagorass image.15
Scholarship on the background of Athenagorass idea of prophets and inspi-
ration has not moved beyond these earlier studies. While scholars have written
several treatments on prophets and prophecy in early Christian contexts over the
last forty years and have offered advanced reexamination of prophecy in the clas-
sical and Hellenistic periods, they have not readdressed the question of prophets
in Athenagoras.16 Specifically, there has been no attempt to reassess the conclu-
of all the prophets words as his own, the inspired prophets loss of reason, and the metaphor
of the prophet as an instrument made to be played by the Spirit. Cf. ...
(Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis9,1 [98,7 P.]) with (Philo, De vita contem-
plativa5,40 [ed. Leopold Cohn and Friedrich Reiter, Philonis Alexandrini opera6 (Berlin: Reimer,
1915), 56,1657,1]). This parallelism, however, does not have Philo using the language in positive
description of the Jewish prophets, but rather of pagan banquets. Cf. ...
(Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis9,1 [98,7 P.]) with (Plutarch,
Solon8,1 [ed. Konrat Ziegler and Hans Grtner, Plutarchi vitae parallelae1,1 [5thed; Stuttgart:
Teubner, 1957], 90,8). Plutarch uses the phrase not to describe the prophets, but the feint of
Solon who pretends to be out of his mind.
15Cf. Schoedel, Athenagoras (see note4), 21 (note9.1); Crehan, Athenagoras (see note11), 132
(note53); Barnard, The Philosophical and Biblical Background of Athenagoras (see note10),
15 (note48); eadem, Athenagoras: A Study in Second Century Christian Apologetic (see note10), 77
(note16); eadem, Athenagoras and the Biblical Tradition (see note10), 5 (note4); Marcovich,
Athenagoras: Legatio (see note4), 35; Malherbe, Athenagoras on the Poets and Philosophers
(see note7), 222; Geffcken, Zwei griechische Apologeten (see note12), 177, 180 (note1); Rankin,
Athenagoras: Philosopher and Theologian (see note8), 96. Cf. in both Athenagoras,
Legatio pro Christianis7,3 (94,22 P.) and Philo, Quis rerum divinarum heres sit259; 264266 (ed.
Paul Wendland, Philonis Alexandrini opera3 [Berlin: Reimer, 1898], 59,1116; 60,1161,6). In
Philo, God plays the prophet as a stringed instrument, not as the pipe of Athenagoras (Legatio
pro Christianis9,1 [98,9 P.]). Philo also uses to refer to the vocal organs of the prophets
that God uses to speak his message forth (De specialibus legibus1,65 [16,19 C.]; Quis rerum div-
inarum heres sit264266 [61,3 W.; cf. 60,1161,6 W.]). Finally, Philo writes of how God purifies
the sages soul, an instrument (), by perfectly playing it as a lyre (Quod deus sit immuta-
bilis2425 [ed. Paul Wendland, Philonis Alexandrini opera2 (Berlin: Reimer, 1897), 61,918]). In
this case, the issue is not prophetic inspiration, and the instrument, again, is stringed. In regard
to the musical metaphor, Plutarch (De defectu oraculorum436f [ed. Wilhelm Sieveking, Plutarchi
Moralia3 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1929; new print 2010), 118,24119,1]), like Philo, describes the proph-
ets soul as an instrument that the spirit of inspiration plucks with a plectrum or plays with
another implement (). Neither Philo nor Plutarch describes the prophet as a flute/pipe.
16Cf., e.g., Ben Witherington III, Jesus the Seer: The Progress of Prophecy (Minneapolis: For-
tress, 2014); Joseph Verheyden, Korinna Zamfir, and Tobias Nicklas, ed., Prophets and Prophecy
in Jewish and Early Christian Literature: International Conference on Prophets and Prophecy in
the Old and the New Testament Held in October 2006 and Organized by the Centre for Biblical
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
sions of Geffcken, Malherbe, and Barnard as well as those who simply repeat the
parallels in the Greek literature and go no further. Even Rankin, in the most recent
monograph on Athenagoras (2009), notes the Philonic parallels, but without new
commentary.17 Such a reassessment is warranted on three grounds. First, Greek
thought on poets, prophets and inspiration was more varied than is sometimes
acknowledged. Second, recent scholarship on prophecy in early Christianity has
opened new doors to our understanding of prophecy in the setting of Athenago-
ras. Third, in Athenagoras we have an example of the early Christian attempt to
form and present a Christian concept of the Old Testament prophet in a Gentile
world.
The language and concepts in these two passages are carefully thought
out, reflective of received tradition, and polemically contrived. Athenagoras has
crafted his words conscious of both his own religious convention and the Greco-
Roman context. At one and the same time he demonstrates lexical and concep-
tual difference with his pagan milieu, appreciation for elements of its metaphors,
Studies of the Babe-Bolyai University Cluj (WUNTII286; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010); William
Tabbernee, False Prophecy and Polluted Sacraments: Ecclesiastical and Imperial Reactions to
Montanism (VCS84; Leiden: Brill, 2007); David E. Aune, Apocalypticism, Prophecy and Magic in
Early Christianity: Collected Essays (WUNT199; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006); idem, Prophecy
in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983); Rex D.
Butler, The New Prophecy and New Visions: Evidence of Montanism in the Passion of Perpetua and
Felicitas (Patristic Monograph Series18; Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press,
2006); Laura S. Nasrallah, An Ecstasy of Folly: Prophecy and Authority in Early Christianity (Har-
vard Theological Studies52; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2004); Alistair Stew-
art-Sykes, From Prophecy to Preaching: A Search for the Origins of the Christian Homily (VCS59;
Leiden: Brill, 2001); Christine Tevett, Montanism: Gender, Authority and the New Prophecy (Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); Christopher Forbes, Prophecy and Inspired Speech in
Early Christianity and its Hellenistic Environment (WUNTII75; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995);
Jan Fekkes, Isaiah and Prophetic Traditions in the Book of Revelation: Visionary Antecedents and
Their Development (Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Supplement Series93; Sheffield:
JSOT, 1994); Helmut Merklein, Der Theologe als Prophet: Zur Funktion prophetischen Redens im
theologischen Diskurs des Paulus, New Testament Studies38 (1992): 402429; Terrance Callan,
Prophecy and Ecstasy in Greco-Roman Religion and in 1 Corinthians, Novum Testamentum27
(1985): 125140; M. Eugene Boring, Sayings of the Risen Jesus: Christian Prophecy in the Synop-
tic Tradition (Society for New Testament Studies, Monograph Series46; Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1982); Pier C. Bori, Lestasi del profeta: Ascensio Isaiae 6 e lantico profetismo
cristiano, Cristianesimo della Storia1 (1980): 367389; E. Earle Ellis, Prophecy and Hermeneutic
in Early Christianity: New Testament Essays (WUNT18; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1978); Johannes
T. Panagopoulos, ed., Prophetic Vocation in the New Testament and Today (Novum Testamentum,
Supplements45; Leiden: Brill, 1977); James L. Ash, The Decline of Ecstatic Prophecy in the Early
Church, Theological Studies37 (1976): 227252.
17Cf. Rankin, Athenagoras: Philosopher and Theologian (see note8).
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
and faithfulness to his Judaeo-Christian heritage. Before we can appreciate his

genius fully, we need to examine the perspectives of his pagan context on proph-
ets and inspiration.
1Poets, Prophets, and Inspiration in Plato
Poets and prophets in Greece, though largely revered, did not receive universal
approval. Poetry, as one of the arts (alongside dance and music) presided over by
the Muses, was central to communal life.18 Education, aimed toward being a good
citizen, included learning good poetry, especially Homer, by heart in school for
it provided exemplary models for ethical instruction. Cultural values were also
passed on as citizens participated in poetry through choral singing and rhap-
sodic recitation at festivals and as interpretation of poetry was taught in sophistic
methods. Nevertheless, Plato finds some fault.19 Poetry, Socrates says, feeds and
waters (... )20 the passions instead of leaving them to whither,
deceives by substituting appearance for reality, and cripples rational thought.
This leads to the implantation of an evil constitution ( )21 in the
soul and the destruction of its civilized aspect. It is imitative or tragic poetry that
he has in mind here in the tenth book of The Republic. Such poetry threatens
not only those predisposed to corruption, but also the good. Unlike other poetry
that might eulogize the virtues of exemplary figures or sing to the gods, imitative
poetry incites the emotions and passions, the irrational, senseless aspect of the
soul, rather than the best, thoughtful, rational part of the soul.22
18Cf. Plato, Protagoras325e-326b; 338e7339a3; Leges658d; 764d-e; 810e-811a; Ion535e46;

Aristophanes, Ranae727729 (SCBO Aristophanis Fabulae2, 167 Wilson). Cf. Penelope Murray,
Plato on Poetry: Ion, Res publica376e-398b9, 595608b10 (Cambridge Greek and Latin Classics;
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 1519.
19His critique, however, leaves room for the value of the well-educated poet in his Republic
(Susan B. Levin, The Ancient Quarrel between Philosophy and Poetry Revisited: Plato and the
Greek Literary Tradition [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001], 126).
20Plato, Res publica606d. See Jessica Mosss thorough analysis of the negative aspect of imi-
tative poetry in Plato, Republic, book10: What Is Imitative Poetry and Why Is It Bad?, in The
Cambridge Companion to Platos Republic (ed. Giovanni R.F. Ferrari; Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, 2007), 415444. Cf. Nickolas Pappas, Plato on Poetry: Imitation or Inspiration?,
Philosophy Compass7 (2012): 669678.
21Plato, Res publica605b.
22Cf. Plato, Res publica603b-608b. Murray, Plato on Poetry (see note18), 1924.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
In another place, Plato extends his critique of the poet introducing the con-
nection between inspiration and imitative poetry.23 In short, the problem is that
poetry reproduces the Muses words in a flawed manner.24 The inspired poet is like
a fountain that allows water to rush upwards and spray forth in an uncontrolled
way. The problem is not with the inspiration, not with the words that come to him
from the gods. Instead, the problem is with the poets art. Composing imitative
poetry involves presenting characters opposed to each other with contradictory
opinions. The poet receives truth from the gods, but in composition he presents
their revelation without discretion, in a mindless manner, spraying it forth so that
his material is full of inconsistencies and propositions that are incompatible with
each other. He ends up contradicting himself. Although the revelation is trust-
worthy, for the gods are infallible and do not lie, the poetic discourse contains
error.25 The poet is a flawed medium for the transmission of divine words. Inspi-
ration, in later Greek thought, did not guarantee truth. The gods participation
was not such that it superintended the process so that the poets translation and
transmission of the divine words would be without contradiction.
Inspiration was no guardian of a poets wisdom or technical skill for Plato
either. In the Apology, Socrates disparages poets.26 They compose their poems by
means of nature () and inspiration (), like the prophets, rather
than by wisdom (), or, we might supply, craft, expert knowledge ().27
The opposition of nature, or instinct, and inspiration to wisdom indicates that
poets have no rational explanation or grounds for their poetry.28 It is not pro-
duced by cognitive or intellectual means. This lacuna results in the absence of
hermeneutical skill and they are unable to provide a rational, coherent expla-
nation of the meaning of their compositions. The poet cannot be both inspired
and an interpreter.29 Although the divine touches them, they fall short of being
23Cf. Plato, Leges719c-d.

24Cf. Catherine Collobert, Poetry as Flawed Reproduction: Possession and Mimesis, in Plato
and the Poets (ed. Pierre Destre and Fritz-Gregor Herrmann; Mnemosyne, Supplements328; Lei-
den: Brill, 2011), (4162) 4749.
25Cf. Plato, Leges669c; Res publica382e.
26Cf. Plato, Apologia22c.
27Charles H. Kahn, Platos Ion and the Problem of Techne, in Nomodeiktes: Greek Studies
in Honor of Martin Ostwald (ed. Ralph M. Rosen and Joseph Farrell; Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan Press, 1993), (369378) 370. The current context doesnt have , but the parallel
with Plato, Ion533e, is noteworthy. There, inspiration and craft are mutually exclusive (Collob-
ert, Poetry as Flawed Reproduction [see note24], 45).
28Paul A. Miller and Charles Platter, Platos Apology of Socrates: A Commentary (Mnemosyne,
Supplements137; Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2010), 51.
29Collobert, Poetry as Flawed Reproduction (see note24), 45.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
wise, skilled in their art, or adept in craft. They should not be numbered among
.30
Others also suffered from similar criticism at the hands of Plato. He character-
ized both politicians and prophets (; ) as inspired (;
), divine () and possessed by god.31 However, due to such inspira-
tion their words did not originate from their own wisdom (), they did not
speak well or true because they were wise () and they had no knowledge
of what they said. Divine possession results in prophetic passivity and mind-
lessness.32 Again, Socrates teaches the ignorance of inspired people.33 The
passage discussed above from the Apology similarly places poet and prophet side
by side. Both prophets () and poets were inspired (). But
although the prophets speak beautiful words, they have no knowledge of what
they say.34 Like the poets of the Laws, prophets too are flawed though the revela-
tion is trustworthy. The association of poet, prophet () and the prophetess
() at Delphi along these lines is also found in Ion and Phaedrus.35 As
inspired (), as those who have a divine , they are enabled to speak
lovely, beneficial things, not by art (), but only by divine providence and
empowerment. Divine act renders them mindless and passive while god alone,
through them, serves as composer and speaker of blessed, beneficial words. With
the poet or prophet left without skill under inspiration, one finds it easy to under-
stand, as Eric R. Dodds puts it, that the divine mania was viewed as a real intru-
sion of the supernatural into human life.36 Socrates minces no words. The poet
or prophet who aspires to compose virtuous material by expert skill () fails.
Poetry composed without divine mania, by those of sound mind, is transitory
when compared to the compositions of the inspired ones. Unable to give account
of their compositions or proclamations prophets and poets simply channel and
manipulate the words of the deity.37 The final portrayal is not overly flattering,
30Miller and Platter, Platos Apology of Socrates: A Commentary (see note28), 51; Kahn, Platos
Ion and the Problem of Techne (see note27), 371373; Murray, Plato on Poetry (see note18), 10.
Cf. in Plato, Menon99c.
31Cf. Plato, Menon99c-d.
32Cf. Plato, Ion534a-b.
33Murray, Plato on Poetry (see note18), 236. Note, however, the irony in this passage (Richard S.
Bluck, ed., Platos Meno [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961], 3839).
34Cf. Plato, Apologia22c.
35Cf. Plato, Ion534b-d; Phaedrus244a-245b.
36Eric R. Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational (Sather Classical Lectures25; Berkeley: Univer-
sity of California Press, 1951), 217.
37Cf. Murray, Plato on Poetry (see note18), 12.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
and in light of Platos vision for reason itself as divine, grows even less appealing.
In one sense, he might even perceive the divinely inspired as godless. For while
Plato
accepted (with whatever ironical reservations) the poet, the prophet, and the Corybantic
as being in some sense channels of divine or daemonic grace, he nevertheless rated their
activities far below those of the rational self, and held that they must be subject to the
control and criticism of reason, since reason was for him no passive plaything of hidden
forces, but an active manifestation of deity in man, a daemon in its own right.38
In the texts reviewed, Plato does not provide us with his doctrines of poets,
prophets or inspiration.39 We are, nevertheless, able to construct a perspec-
tive regarding the connections between these three that was known to the sec-
ond-century contexts addressed by Athenagoras. Concerning the poet and the
prophet, we are able to say that at best, under inspiration, they function as agents
of virtuous, enduring, divine discourse.40 At worst, they are artless, mindless,
ignorant, flawed, composers of contradictions. Such a perspective could generate
skepticism regarding the trustworthiness of prophetic compositions, while at the
same time foster confidence in the divine origin of a prophecy. Platos theory of
inspiration, seen from the texts discussed here, does not provide for an infallible
bridge between the prophets reception of the divine discourse and the prophets
pronouncement or publication.
2Poets and Inspiration in Early Greece
However, some in early Greece viewed the relationship of poets and prophets to
inspiration a bit differently. For them, inspiration did not leave the poet uncon-
scious, a passive instrument of the deity.41 Rather, the relationship involved both
dependence and intellect. Poets received revelation and mindfully participated
in composition; under inspiration they did not lose their standpoint, but made a
rational contribution.42 They served as messengers of the deity, both interpreting
38Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational (see note36), 218.

39Cf. Rosemary M. Harriott, Poetry and Criticism before Plato (London: Methuen, 1969), 82.
40Plato does portray the poet in a positive light at times. For a brief discussion of such images
see, Harriott, Poetry and Criticism before Plato (see note39), 8485.
41Contra Georges M.A. Grube, The Greek and Roman Critics (London: Methuen, 1965), 2: Homer
speaks as if the poet were but a passive instrument.
42Cf. Eike Barmeyer, Die Musen: ein Beitrag zur Inspirationstheorie (Humanistische Biblio-
thek1,2; Mnchen: Fink, 1968), 102.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
and proclaiming the revealed message.43 The poet received a revelation, poetry
was certainly first born and bred in heaven, but then with skill, technique, and
craft, he created a poem.44 Poetry was both a divine and sober human enterprise.45
In early Greece, divine gift and human invention coincide.46 On this note we hear
Alcinous speak of the poet, the divine minstrel ( ),47 Demoducos,
in this way: for to him above all others has the god granted skill in song, to
give delight in whatever way his spirit prompts him to sing.48 Here, the poets
spirit () engenders his song. Elsewhere, it is the movement of his mind
or heart ().49 Pindar, likewise, bears witness to the relationship between
deity and poet. The Muse stood beside me, he sings, as I found () a
newly shining way to join to Dorian measure a voice of splendid celebration.50
The Muse is an inspiring presence, but apparently only in an auxiliary capac-
ity, one that promotes almost an autonomous poetic spirit. It is the poet himself
43See the texts from Homer and Pindar, as well as discussion, in Penelope Murray, Poetic In-
spiration in Early Greece, The Journal of Hellenic Studies101 (1981): (87100) 9698 and Eugne
N. Tigerstedt, Furor Poeticus: Poetic Inspiration in Greek Literature before Democritus and
Plato, Journal of the History of Ideas31 (1970): 163178.
44On poetry as a craft cf. Murray, Poetic Inspiration in Early Greece (see note43), 9899;
Alice Sperduti, The Divine Nature of Poetry in Antiquity, Transactions and Proceedings of the
American Philological Association81 (1950): (209240) 213.
45Contra Manfred Fuhrmann, Einfhrung in die antike Dichtungstheorie (Darmstadt: Wissen-
schaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1973), 7374: Verzckung, Wahnsinn, Entrckung oder Rausch,
als ein Heraustreten des Dichters aus sich selbst (Ekstase), als ein Erflltsein durch den Gott
(Enthusiasmus).
46Cf. Willem J. Verdenius, Commentaries on Pindar1: Olympian Odes3, 7, 12, 14 (Mnemosyne,
Supplements97; Leiden: Brill, 1987), 11.
47Homer, Odyssea8,43.
48Homer, Odyssea8,4445: ,
. (trans. August T. Murray, rev. George E. Dimock, Homer Odyssey1: Books112 [Loeb Clas-
sical Library104; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998], 274275).
49Homer, Odyssea1,346347.
50Pindar, Olympia Oda 3,46 (BSGRT Pindari Carmina cum Fragmentis 1, 12,69 Snell/Maehler;
trans. William H. Race, Pindar1: Pindar, Olympian Odes, Pythian Odes [Loeb Classical Library56;
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997], 7879):
. Cf. Lucia Prauscello, Epinician
Sounds: Pindar and Musical Innovation, in Reading the Victory Ode (ed. Peter Agcs, Chris
Carey, and Richard Rawles; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), (5882) 7779; Wil-
lem J. Verdenius, The Principles of Literary Criticism, Mnemosyne36 (1983): (1459) 5455
(note187); idem, Commentaries on Pindar (see note46), 12; Charles A.M. Fennell, ed. and annot.,
Pindar: The Olympian and Pythian Odes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1879), 28; Basil
L. Gildersleeve, Introductory Essay, in idem, ed. and annot., Pindar: The Olympian and Pythian
Odes (New York: Harper, 1892), (vii-cxv) lxxiv-lxxvi.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
who through his own skill produces a poem by an original coupling of lyric and
Doric meter and/or melody. Simonides conveys the same weakened notion of the
deitys role in inspired poetic composition. In fragment11,21 (W), he calls upon
the Muse as simply his helper, ally or auxiliary ().51 Contrary to what
Plato would express, the implication is that the poet is self-sufficient in poetic
composition.52
Plato also wished to make clear that inspiration and composition provided
multiple opportunities for error. Earlier Greeks, on the other hand, understood
inspiration to guard a poems truth.53 Hesiod writes, for instance, of the sweet-
ness of the poetry that he sings by virtue of the Muses blessing of inspiration:
that man is blessed, whomever the Muses love, for the speech flows sweet from
his mouth.54 The gift they give to the poet is transformative. It takes away his
sorrow and anguish and leaves him with a lovely song that glorifies the gods.55
This resonates with Hesiods proem.56 There, the Muses have just announced that
they know to speak true () things. Then, Hesiod tells us, they breathed
() a divine () voice into me, so that I might glorify what will be and
what was before.57 In this way, by linking the true revelation of the goddesses
with his glorifying speech, he introduces the infallibility of his whole poem.58
51Simonides, Fragmentum11,21 (ed. Martin L. West, Iambi et Elegi Graeci ante Alexandrum can-
tati 2 [2d ed.; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992], 119).
52Cf. Eva Stehle, A Bard of the Iron Age and His Auxiliary Muse, in The New Simonides: Con-
texts of Praise and Desire (ed. Deborah D. Boedeker and David Sider; New York: Oxford Univer-
sity Press, 2001), (106119) 107; Prauscello, Epinician Sounds: Pindar and Musical Innovation
(see note50), 78; Benjamin Acosta-Hughes, Arions Lyre: Archaic Lyric into Hellenistic Poetry
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010), 194195; Deborah Boedeker, Simonides on Pla-
taea: Narrative Elegy, Mythodic History, Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 107 (1995):
(217229) 221; Eva Stehle, Help Me to Sing, Muse, of Plataea, Arethusa 29 (1996): (205222)
207210.
53See the texts from Homer, Hesiod, and Pindar on truth in inspired poetry, as well as discus-
sion, in Murray, Poetic Inspiration in Early Greece (see note43), 9092.
54Hesiod, Theogonia9697 (SCBO Hesiodi Theogonia, Opera et dies, Scutum, 9 Solmsen/Merkel-
bach; trans. Glenn W. Most, Hesiod1: Hesiod: Theogony, Works and Days, Testimonia [Loeb Clas-
sical Library57; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006], 1011): ,
.
55Cf. Hesiod, Theogonia98103 (9 S./M.).
56Cf. Hesiod, Theogonia2234 (6 S./M.).
57Hesiod, Theogonia3132 (6 S./M.; trans. 5 M.): ,
.
58Cf. Murray, Poetic Inspiration in Early Greece (see note43), 91.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
Pindar, on the same theme, declared that he would not soil his poem with a lie.59
Instead, with the aid of the Muse, he would bear true witness.60
Early Greek conceptions of inspiration differed, then, from those that Plato
would later set forth. Inspiration was not understood, in the main, to place the
poet into a state of unconscious passivity. Instead, by his own spirit and mind,
he composed his song with the aid of the deity in such a way that the song con-
veyed truth. Plato shared with his predecessors the belief that the revelation
given by the gods was true. The earlier poets expressed a confidence, however,
in the capacity of their poems to relate the truth revealed. And, it is the gods, by
their blessing and gift that help them compose their sweet, glorifying, infallible
verse.
We have taken effort to review the question of inspiration in Greek poetry
for three reasons: First, much Greek reflection on the question of the gods and
inspiration takes place in contexts concerning the poet. Second, as has been seen
above, the accounts, at times, treat the topic of inspiration in light of both poet
and prophet together. Third, as Alice Sperduti shows, the belief in the divine
origin of poetry emerges for the historical period under the more refined concept
of divine inspiration, whose annals properly begin in the sphere of prophecy.61
To this point, when our texts have addressed the inspired prophet in conjunction
with the poet, the Greek term has been . It is necessary that we also gain
some insight into how the Greeks understood prophet as . What dif-
ferences and similarities did the two terms communicate? Such clarity will aid
our interpretation of Athenagoras as we reassess his relationship to Hellenism.
We will see that in the classical and Hellenistic periods, in the main,
carried a different meaning than it did for Athenagoras. Whatever the apologist
does, he does not simply adopt the predominant meaning the term had for his
Greek setting.
3 and in Greek Thought
Christopher Forbes, against the theses of Eugene Boring and Terrance Callan,
claims that was not employed widely to refer to inspired persons in
59Cf. Pindar, Olympia Oda 4,1718 (15,2930 S./M.).

60Cf. Pindar, Olympia Oda 6,2021 (18,3537 S./M.). Cf. Olympiae Odae7,2021; 13,5052 (24,36
40; 45,7072 S./M.). Pindars metaphors of weapons that hit their mark may also communicate
this point. Cf. Murray, Poetic Inspiration in Early Greece (see note43), 92 (note31).
61Sperduti, The Divine Nature of Poetry in Antiquity (see note44), 213.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
the Hellenistic period.62 He argues, instead, that classical Greece understood the
term prophet () in three ways. It referred to: (1) a class of officials, not
necessarily inspired, who mediated the oracles of others; (2) inspired persons,
who received divine oracles and, who, the texts emphasize, proclaimed these
oracles; and (3) official spokespersons. In the Hellenistic period, he shows, these
three meanings endured, yet with two developments: (1) the application of the
term to Egyptian priests of high rank; and (2) the usage of the term by the LXX to
translate the Hebrew term nabi ().
In his analysis of the classical period, Forbes argues that the emphasis of the
texts is upon the prophet as one who announces the oracle. Although the texts
do witness at times to the prophet as an inspired person, the emphasis is upon
the prophet as proclaimer. and are not synonymous. He cites
Erich Fascher to explain the difference. The two terms complement each other.
A mantis is a seer. If he tells the people these secrets, he is prophet.63 Forbess
conclusion concerning the term in the Hellenistic period echoes his
summary regarding the classical period: Nothing requires us to believe that
inspiration was believed to be a defining quality of .64
Forbes disagrees with Boring and Callan on another point related to our inves-
tigation.65 Since they saw in Hellenistic times little difference between the
and , they also argued that the manic state, the enthusiasm and frenzy
that was sometimes linked with the former was also a characteristic of the latter.
Forbess summary softens the sharpness of his argument a bit, but still insists on
the validity of his basic claim. Even if, he writes, some of the arguments brought
forward here are not decisive, it must be clear that the overwhelming majority of
usages of the term [] have to do with persons who were not inspired
or frenzied in any sense.66 Forbess conclusion concerning the Greco-Roman
62Cf. Forbes, Prophecy and Inspired Speech in Early Christianity and its Hellenistic Environment
(see note16), 192217.
63Erich Fascher, Prophts: eine sprach- und religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung (Giessen:
Tpelmann, 1927), 13. Cited by Forbes, Prophecy and Inspired Speech in Early Christianity and its
Hellenistic Environment (see note16), 196.
64Forbes, Prophecy and Inspired Speech in Early Christianity and its Hellenistic Environment (see
note16), 199.
65Cf. Forbes, Prophecy and Inspired Speech in Early Christianity and its Hellenistic Environment
(see note16), 208214. Boring, Sayings of the Risen Jesus: Christian Prophecy in the Synoptic
Tradition (see note16); Callan, Prophecy and Ecstasy in Greco-Roman Religion and in 1 Corin-
thians (see note16).
66Forbes, Prophecy and Inspired Speech in Early Christianity and its Hellenistic Environment (see
note16), 214.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
world is similar. Divination in a variety of forms, from astrology to the analysis of

entrails, was prophecys dominant form, he argues, not inspiration manticism.67
One passage in Plato demonstrates that, at least in his mind, the and
were distinguished from each other on the basis of frenzy or mania.68
Prophecy did not necessitate frenzy. Timaeus says that prophets (),
those of sound mind, should judge inspired () divinations (), for
it is not the business of those who are in frenzy (). However, it should
be noted, that in the same passage Timaeus says that some name the prophets
diviners (). Now, granted, he believes these people to be ignorant. Never-
theless, in one passage we have witness to two views held simultaneously by two
different groups: (1) the prophets () are not associated with a state of
frenzy, rather they are of sound mind (); and (2) prophets () are
diviners (). Forbess thesis, I think, is largely correct. The two terms, in both
the classical and Hellenistic periods, were not synonymous; prophets proclaimed
with soundness of mind, they were not inspired nor frenzied.69 However, some
held to the understanding that the two were the same. The lines did cross. There
existed fluidity in how the culture viewed prophets.
Forbess interest is in early Christian prophets and how the Hellenistic
environment enlightens our understanding of that phenomenon. My interest is
different. I am attempting to decipher how the classical and Hellenistic back-
ground may enlighten our understanding of an early Christians (Athenagoras)
understanding of inspiration and the Jewish prophets. Our reading of Forbes has
helped us in two key ways. First, by demonstrating the predominant meaning of
in the classical and Hellenistic periods he has provided a backdrop
against which Athenagorass perspective more clearly shows its difference. In
most Greek thought refers primarily to spokespersons, not to inspired
or frenzied persons. In Athenagoras, however, we will see that it refers to an
inspired, even ecstatic, but non-frenzied spokesperson of sound mind. Second,
although clearly not the main thrust of his argument, he has noted the diver-
sity within Greek thought concerning the prophet. This emphasizes the need for
nuance in analysis of the relationship between Greek, Jewish, and early Christian
notions of prophets and inspiration.
67Forbes, Prophecy and Inspired Speech in Early Christianity and its Hellenistic Environment
(see note16), 288302.
68See Plato, Timaeus 72a-b. Cf. Callan, Prophecy and Ecstasy in Greco-Roman Religion and in
1 Corinthians (see note16), 131.
69See Forbes on Timaeus72 in Prophecy and Inspired Speech in Early Christianity and its Hellen-
istic Environment (see note16), 198199, 208210.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
4Prophets and Inspiration in Athenagoras of Athens
Having set forth in brief the parameters on the Greek ideas of prophets and inspi-
ration, we can now turn our attention to Athenagorass own idea. His term for
prophet is , not . He names three, Moses, Isaiah, and Jere-
miah, yet knows of the rest (), and reports their writings as accessible in
books ().70 In the Legatio pro Christianis he cites Isaiah four times.71 Three
of those citations occur in Legatio pro Christianis9,2 immediately following one
of the passages analyzed here. They provide prophetic witness to the one Gods
uniqueness and greatness. Also, probably attributing the words to Jeremiah,
Athenagoras cites Baruch in the same catena of prophetic testimony.72 Finally,
he seems to allude to Moses four times.73 Significant is the early apologists dec-
laration that these prophets are the prophets of the Athenian Christian commu-
nity.74 We, however he says, have prophets.75 He manifests no interest in the
Jewishness of the prophets and this reflects some difference with Justin.76 To
him they are Christian prophets.77 Such understanding is ultimately in line with
70Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis9,1.3 (98,56.19 P.). Cf. Justin, 1Apologia31 (76,5 M.).
71Isa43:1011; 44:6; 66:1 (Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis9,2 [98,1218 P.]); Isa22:13
(Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis12,3 [108,1415 P.]).
72Bar3:36 (Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis9,2 [98,1112 P.]). Cf. Cyprian, Testimonia ad
Quirinium2,6 (CChr.SL3,1, 35,1736,20 Weber); Lactantius, Divinae institutiones4,13,8 (SC377,
114,3034Monat); Bernard Pouderon, Les citations scripturaires dans luvre dAthnagore:
leurs sources et leur statut, Vetera Christianorum31 (1994): (111153) 112; Sean A. Adams, Baruch
and the Epistle of Jeremiah: A Commentary on the Greek Texts of Codex Vaticanus (Septuagint
Commentary Series; Leiden: Brill, 2014), 17.
73Gen1:1327 (Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis13,2 [112,1416 P.]); Gen6:14 (Athenagoras,
Legatio pro Christianis24,56 [164,4247 P.]); Ex20:12 (Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis32,5
[196,2526 P.]); Gen1:27 (Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis33,6 [198,2122 P.]). Cf. Pouderon,
Les citations scripturaires dans luvre dAthnagore (see note72), 118.
74Cf. Geffcken, Zwei griechische Apologeten (see note12), 176177.
75Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,3 (92,1718 P.): ... . Cf. Ta-
tian, Oratio ad Graecos36,3 (PTS43, 67 Marcovich): our prophets.
76Cf. Justin, 1Apologia31,1 (76,1 M.); Dialogus cum Tryphone Judaeo32,2 (122,15 M.). Cf. Aristides,
Apologia2,14 (SC470, 186190; 232234 Pouderon/Pierre/Outtier/Guiorgadz); Stephen G. Wil-
son, Related Strangers: Jews and Christians 70170 C.E. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995), 3132.
77Wilson (Related Strangers [see note76], 30) writes that Athenagoras simply ignores the Jews.
For him they seem to be an irrelevance, and they appear in the argument only in the most resid-
ual fashion (e.g., via use of their scriptures, though these are now thoroughly christianized). Cf.
Adolf Harnack History of Dogma2 (trans. Neil Buchanan; London: Williams and Norgate, 1910),
189: Moreover, it is not to be denied that Athenagoras views the revelation in the prophets and
in Christ as completely identical.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
the manner in which early Christians read the prophets. Their lives were under-
stood to be in harmony with Jesus Christ as they foresaw him and waited for him
by means of the Spirit.78 They were to be loved for they proclaimed the Gospel
as they believed in Christ, hoped in him, waited for him, announced him and
partook in the same Spirit as the Apostles.79 In their hermeneutic, these writings
predicted Christ and his fulfillment of these promises validated the Christian
faith. Demonstrating the coherence between prophet and Jesus was central to
early evangelistic technique.80 The faith of Athenagorass community, like that of
Justin, was grounded in an argument from prophecy. He writes that the prophets
are witnesses () to Christian thought and faith and that they confirm the
Christian arguments ().81 Such witness and argumentation had begun
within a Judaeo-Christian mission.82 The Jewish component of the missions iden-
tity, however, is not reflected in our apologists characterization of the prophets.
Athenagorass strong appeal to the prophets is in continuity with earlier
Christian tradition that emphasized a Christology rooted in the prophets and that
was exhibited clearly, for instance, in Justin and Luke.83 But such appeal to the
prophets resonates also with his pagan context. The emperor also found it useful
to appeal to prophets in order to craft public policy. William Klingshirn and Mark
Vessey, informed by David Potter, explain that Christian intellectuals shared with
the Greco-Roman milieu a set of assumptions about universal histories. Nations,
it was commonly held, had histories that were divinely ordered and orchestrated.
Peoples and empires could understand their place in the world, their place in
history, by means of divine revelation, in particular the information provided
by prophets.84 Because of this commonplace belief that nations were part of a
78Cf. Ignatius, Epistula ad Magnesios89 (194,24196,10 L./H.); Justin, 1Apologia31,78 (77,24

34 M.); Dialogus cum Tryphone Judaeo7 (82,184,22 M.).
79Cf. Ignatius, Epistula ad Philadelphios5,2 (220,1520 L./H.); e.g. Justin, Dialogus cum Try
phone Judaeo8,1; 32,36; 35,8; 36,12; 39,45; 43,18; 52,154,2 (84,24; 122,19123,50; 129,4143;
130,113; 135,1625; 140,1142,47; 155,1159,13 M.).
80Cf., e.g., Justin, 1Apologia23; 3153 (66,113; 76,1107,39 M.); Dialogus cum Tryphone Ju-
daeo14,8; 17,1 (94,4147; 97,698,7 M.).
81Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,3; 9,1 (92,18; 98,3.7 P.).
82Cf. Oskar Skarsaune, Proof from Prophecy: A Study in Justin Martyrs Proof-Text Tradition
(Novum Testamentum, Supplements52; Leiden: Brill, 1987), 429. There is insufficient data to say
if Athenagoras had disinherited this aspect of the pedigree.
83Skarsaune, Proof from Prophecy: A Study in Justin Martyrs Proof-Text Tradition (see note82),
428.
84Cf. William Klingshirn and Mark Vessey, Sacred Histories, in iidem, ed., The Limits of
Ancient Christianity: Essays on Late Antique Thought and Culture in Honor of R.A. Markus (Re-
centiores; Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1999), (35) 3. Emphasis is theirs. They cite
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
divine order in which prophets manifested the particulars of the arrangement,

Potter claims that emperors manipulated their subjects by selective appeal to
the prophets.85 They exploited the popular faith in prophets in order to concoct
a national history that was useful to the emperors agenda and trusted by the
general public. Therefore, when Athenagoras pivots from the partial reliability
of the poets and philosophers in Legatio pro Christianis7 with, We, however,
have prophets ( ... ), and characterizes their contri-
bution for the emperor as divine (), from the Spirit of God (
), and superior to human opinions ( )86 he is
employing a strategy all too familiar to both the imperial court and early Christian
apologetics. The emperor would have been sympathetic to the tactic of appealing
to prophetic authority and the second-century Christian would have recognized it
as part of the received tradition.
Athenagoras, then, in his introduction of prophets into his apology, displays
loyalty to his Christian tradition and shows himself an astute observer of the
Roman Imperial context. What can we discover about his concept of the inspired
prophet? Does it reveal a thoroughgoing debt to classical Greece and Hellenism,
as indicated by Geffcken, Malherbe and Barnard? Or will we find again associa-
tion with both his Christian and pagan worlds?
Athenagorass language for divine inspiration is diverse. He does use a term
() commonly translated inspired or possessed87 by God. Above, we
observed Platos use of the same word for both poetic and prophetic ()
inspiration.88 Philo also uses the term for prophetic inspiration, and like Athena-
goras, he identifies the means of inspiration as the Spirit (), the fruit as the
speech of the prophets (), and the prophet Moses, in particular.89
He also understands inspiration as a deliberate action of the Spirit whereby
he moves or impels () the prophets, particularly their mouths, to speak
David S. Potter, Prophets and Emperors: Human and Divine Authority from Augustus to Theodosius
(Revealing antiquity7; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1994).
85Cf. Potter, Prophets and Emperors (see note84), 146182.
86Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,3 (92,1718; 94,20.22.23 P.). Cf. Justin, Dialogus cum Try-
phone Judaeo48,4 (149,2225 M.): Christ taught Christians to have faith in the prophets not in
human opinion. Cf. also Justin, 1Apologia54 (108,1109,38 M.), where he contrasts the prophets
with the error and demonically inspired myths of the poets.
87Henry G. Liddell and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon (9thed.; revised by Henry S.
Jones; Oxford: Clarendon, 1940 [with a rev. supplement 1996]), col. 566b, s.v. .
88Cf. Plato, Ion534a; Phaedrus244b.
89Cf. Philo, De decalogo3335; 175 (276,8.18; 307,23 C./W.); De specialibus legibus4,4849
(219,2122; 220,2 C./W.).
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
divine opinions as inspired spokespersons. Using the verb twice, once in each
of our passages, it apparently serves as his favorite image.90 This conception is
not uncommon in early Christian treatments of prophetic inspiration. The same
language is used elsewhere in the second century for the ministry of the Word
who inspired both Christian and Jewish prophets.91 The New Testament has a
parallel term. 2Pet1:21, while denying that prophecy arose out of the prophets
themselves, affirms that they were carried or moved () by the Holy Spirit.92
In his lexical repertoire we find another verb commonly used to convey
generic action, but which can more specifically describe divine, supernatural
action. Athenagoras employs it in Legatio pro Christianis9,1 and 10,4 to describe
how the Spirit related to the prophets in order to effect their preaching. He influ-
enced, acted upon, inspired () them.93 Justin used the cognate, ,
90He uses the term in both Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,3 and 9,1 (94,22; 98,7 P.).
Cf. Geoffrey W.H. Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon (8th ed; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), s.v.
6: ref. inspiration of scripture... esp. to prophecy.
91Cf. Epistula ad Diognetum11,78 (ed. Lindemann and Paulsen, Die Apostolischen Vter [see
note3], 322,47); Justin, 1Apologia36,1 (84,3 M.).
92We should also note here a group of related terms for inspiration rooted in the notions of
being carried by the Spirit or bearing the Spirit (depending on accentuation) and bear-
ing God. They are not used by Athenagoras, but are present in classical Greek, the LXX, Philo
and Justin: o; (Hos9:7; Zeph3:4); (Aeschylus,
Agamemnon1140 [ed. Denys Page, Aeschyli Septem quae Supersunt Tragoedias (Oxford Classical
Texts; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972), 178,1140]; Strabo, Geographica12,2,3 [ed. Augustus
Meineke, Strabonis Geographica2 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1877), 752,10]; Philo, De specialibus legi-
bus1,65 [16,15 C./W.]); (Justin, 1Apologia33,9 [81,32 M.]). Cf. Richard J. Bauck-
ham, Jude, 2Peter (World biblical commentary50; Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983), 233. See also
in Plato, Ion534c.
93Cf. Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis9,1; 10,4 (98,110; 102,2428 P.). Lampe, A Patristic
Greek Lexicon (see note90), s.v. IB3c: of prophets inspired by the Holy Ghost. Pou-
derons translation of Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis10,4 (102,2425 P.), In truth, the Holy
Spirit who is manifested in the words of the prophets (En vrit, cet Esprit-Saint qui se mani-
feste dans les paroles des prophtes) (idem, Athnagore [see note4], 103), does not capture the
strong sense of the Spirits activity of inspiration with his translation of the present participle,
, with qui se manifeste. In this context of prophetic speech, the participle carries
the specific idea of inspiration in parallel with in Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,3
(94,22 P.). Schoedels translation is slightly better, for it at least sets forth the notion of the Spirits
activity, yet it leaves the particular type of activity undefined: Further, this same Holy Spirit,
which is active in those who speak prophetically (Schoedel, Athenagoras [see note4], 23). Cyril
C. Richardsons translation is best: Indeed we say that the Holy Spirit himself, who inspires
those who utter prophecies (idem, A Plea Regarding Christians by Athenagoras the Philoso-
pher, in idem, ed. and trans., Early Christian Fathers [The Library of Christian Classics1; Phila-
delphia: Westminster, 1953], [290340] 309).
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
along with a more common noun for inspiration, , to the same effect. It
helps him characterize Mosess inspired prophetic activity in the tabernacle.94 The
apostle Paul also finds use for a related term when discussing the Spirits involve-
ment in equipping the community. In 1Cor12:46, he puts forth three terms
for the manifestations of the Spirit: gifts, services, and workings ().95
Although he specifically mentions one such working, that of mighty deeds, he
is not too interested in distinguishing between the three terms. Each can refer
to all the Spirits manifestations. He is much more concerned with emphasizing
the worker as the one God. For our purposes it is important to note that one of
these divinely worked manifestations is prophecy. Early Christianity, from Paul to
Justin to Athenagoras, seems to have wanted to highlight that divine inspiration
of prophets, old and new, was the work, the result of the activity, of God. This may
be why in contrast, we find Athenagoras speaking in apparent irony of the activi-
ties () of the pagan idols.96 Only the one God is truly active.
The final pair of terms elaborate upon the earlier notion of the Spirits moving
the prophets. As part of Athenagorass musical, instrumental metaphor, they add
further insight to how the Spirit stirs the prophet. In Legatio pro Christianis7,3,
the Spirit, the apologist says, moved the mouths of the prophets like (musical)
instruments.97 The movement of the Spirit, metaphorically, is his playing of the
instrument. In Legatio pro Christianis7,1, we do not know whether the instrument
is a percussion instrument like a tympanon, a stringed instrument like a lyre or
harp, or one played by wind.98 In any case, we are not to understand the instru-
ment (), like Philo does in one place, as the prophets vocal organs.99 The
metaphor is meant to figure the Spirits movement of the prophets mouth. It
is only in Legatio pro Christianis9,3 where the reader learns that he has had a
pipe, , in mind. The prophets mouth is a pipe and the Spirit makes use
() of it by blowing () into it. These last two terms for inspi-
94Cf. Justin, 1Apologia60,3 (116,34 M.). Cf. also the different pairing,
inspired and possessed of god, in Plato, Menon99c.
95Cf. Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (2ded.; The new international com-
mentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2014), 587; Joseph A. Fitzmeyer, First
Corinthians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (The Anchor Yale Bible32;
New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), 465.
96Cf. Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis18,1; 23,1 (126,7; 154,2 P.).
97Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,3 (94,2223 P.):
.
98For music in ancient Greece see Martin L. West, Ancient Greek Music (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1992).
99Cf. Philo, De specialibus legibus1,65 (16,19 C.).
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
ration, make use and blow, lead us to appreciate distinctive features of his
thought.
The first () helps to differentiate his view from the idea that under
inspiration the prophet is a mindless, passive instrument. We saw this idea above
in Plato and Geffcken cites him on this feature in order to validate his claim con-
cerning Athenagorass thoroughgoing Hellenism.100 Polybius employs the term
when he recounts Hannibals strategic use of river and elephants.101 The Carthag-
inian availed himself of their aid, employing them as coadjuters.102 The apologist
seems to have more in common with the early Greek view of poets, prophets and
inspiration rather than the later. The early view, described above, emphasized
the poets participation in the composition of poetry.103 The prophet is not a mere
passive instrument.
The early view also stressed another feature of inspired poetry. While for
Plato, the poet under inspiration was mindless, without discretion, and com-
posed flawed poems full of contradictions, early Greek literature allowed for the
infallibility of a poem composed by an inspired poet.104 Plato, in effect, doomed
the poet with his chosen metaphor. The poet resembled a fountain that did not
govern the upward surging water. It sprayed freely without guidance. Athenago-
rass metaphor, whatever else it does, does not convey the idea of an unstruc-
tured tune and he does not entertain the possibility of contradiction between the
prophets. When they compose under inspiration they do so in such a way that
their own text coheres and there is harmony between them. We know this because
immediately following his metaphor he cites three prophetic texts in witness of
the same theological construct: the oneness and greatness of the true God.105 For
Athenagoras, the prophet is not frenzied. He is coadjutator with the Spirit, super-
intended by the Spirit, but clearly a participant in composition. Furthermore, this
100Cf. Plato, Menon99c; Ion534b-d; Geffcken, Zwei griechische Apologeten (see note12), 180.
101Cf. Polybius, Historiae3,14,5 (ed. Theodorus Bttner-Wobst, Polybii Historiae1 [Leipzig:
Teubner, 1905], 228,13).
102Cf. Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon (see note 87), s.v. .
103Homer, Odyssea8,4445; 1,346347; Pindar, Olympia Oda 3,46 (12,69 S./M.). Cf. Barnard,
Athenagoras and the Biblical Tradition (see note10), 5; eadem, Athenagoras (see note10), 77;
eadem, The Philosophical and Biblical Background of Athenagoras (see note10), 15; Crehan,
Athenagoras (see note11), 132 (note53). They point to as an indicator that for Athe
nagoras God works with as well as through the prophets.
104Plato, Leges719c-d; Hesiod Theogonia2234; 96103 (6; 9 S./M.); Pindar, Olympiae Odae
4,1718; 6,2021; 7,2021; 13,52 (15,2930; 18,3537; 24,3640; 45,7072 S./M.).
105Cf. Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis9,2 (98,1118 P.). Cf. Theophilus, Ad Autolycum2,35
(OECT, 8486 Grant).
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
movement of the Spirit, whereby he avails himself of the prophet, results in pro-
phetic harmony and truth. His view accords much more with the early Greek view
of inspired poetry than with Platos perspective.
Typically, Athenagorass metaphor is presented as that of a flautist blowing
into a flute. However, the instrument he has in mind was an , a pipe with a
reed mouthpiece, finger-holes, related to the oboe, and normally played in pairs.106
Thus, in his metaphor, the Spirit is a piper, an , who blows () into
the prophets mouth (or the mouths of the prophets) as into a pipe or pipes. How
might we understand his metaphor in such a way that the two features of the
prophets participation and the Spirits truth-yielding administration are pro-
tected? What might serve as the precedents for his image? Here, his last term for
inspiration, blow, draws our attention to the pipers breath.107 Familiar with the
pipe, the ancients wrote about the importance of the pipers breath for melody
and tone. Aristoxenus writes that successful melody depends upon agents exter-
nal to the pipe, like a change in the pipers breath that can alter pitch.108 Aristotle
speaks in a similar way about the temperature of the pipers breath. When the
piper exhales as in a sigh, the breath is warmer and a deeper note sounds. Skilled
pipers also practiced overblowing, producing a separate set of notes.109 For
Athenagoras, breath inspired, and these texts help us to grasp how the Spirits
blowing superintended the success of a prophets ministry. Without breath there
is no melody, no tone.
More pointedly, Athenagoras may have in mind here the notion that without
the Spirits breath there is no harmony, no continuity between the prophets,
and no coherence with reason. He speaks continuously of the prophets as the
group of Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah and the rest. In the plural they and their mouths
serve as objects of the Spirits influential movement, as witnesses to the churchs
thought and faith concerning God, and as messengers of divine, rather than,
human, opinions. Furthermore, by proclaiming the things they were inspired to
say they corroborate the churchs reasoning (). So, when he shares his
metaphor, the pipe does not represent a single prophet but the prophets.110 His
106Cf. West, Ancient Greek Music (see note98), 8189.

107See for a discussion on the breath-stream in playing this instrument, Kathleen Schlesinger,
The Greek Aulos: A Study of Its Mechanism and of Its Relation to the Modal System of Ancient
Greek Music, Followed by a Survey of the Greek Harmoniai in Survival or Rebirth in Folk-Music
(London: Methuen, 1939), 4345.
108See Schlesinger, The Greek Aulos (see note107), 5765, for a discussion of the passage and
the role of breath.
109Cf. West, Ancient Greek Music (see note98), 101103.
110Cf. Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis9,1 (98,78 P.): ... .
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
choice of the might be driven by his desire to communicate that although

the different prophets utter words that are not identical and witness to different
aspects of the faith, their testimonies agree, in the end they are symphonic. They
speak both about God and the things of God. In the cento of prophetic words
cited, three testify to Gods oneness, but one testifies specifically to his greatness.
Since the was typically played in pairs the metaphor allows for a picture
of the Spirit who pipes as the whole score requires. If played simultaneously, one
pipe may have played melody while the other played sustained or varied notes
or each could have sounded a different pitch. If played alternatively, different
pitch seems the most likely explanation.111 The metaphor provides for diversity in
particular prophecies, while protecting the unity of the collective witness. Aris-
toxenus makes this point in regard to both instruments and poets. Each pipe is a
part of the whole, not an end in itself and the audience can always tell when the
pipes or singers are in harmony ().112
Although the metaphor of the Spirit playing a musical instrument is a
common one for the divine inspiration of prophets and the purification of sages,
Athenagoras is alone in selecting the pipe for his picture. Philo prefers to imagine
a stringed instrument, specified once as a lyre, as does Plutarch.113 Montanus
does the same.114 So, although the image of a musical instrument is common,
Athenagoras shows his own genius.115 His selection of a pipe is carefully thought
through. Immediately, a polemically motivated distinction between pagan deities
and the Christian God comes to mind. The lyre was the instrument of choice for
111Cf. West, Ancient Greek Music (see note98), 103105; Giovanni Comotti, Music in Greek
and Roman Culture (trans. Rosaria V. Munson; Ancient Society and History; Baltimore: Hopkins
University Press, 1989), 7071; John G. Landels, Music in Ancient Greece and Rome (London:
Routledge, 1999), 4246.
112Cf. Pseudo-Plutarch, De musica1144d (BSGRT Plutarchi Moralia6,3, 32,11 Ziegler/Pohlenz).
Cf. West, Ancient Greek Music (see note98), 104.
113Cf. Philo, Quis rerum divinarum heres sit259 (59,1116 W.); Quod deus sit immutabilis2425
(61,918 W.); Plutarch, De defectu oraculorum436f (118,24119,1 S.).
114Cf. Epiphanius, Panarion48,4,1 (GCS31, 224,2223 Dummer/Holl). See Paul Lejay, Un ora-
cle montaniste: Le plectra, la langue et lEsprit, Bulletin dancienne littrature et darchologie
chrtiennes2 (1912): 4345.
115Cf. Crehan, Athenagoras (see note11), 132 (note53); Barnard, Athenagoras and the Biblical
Tradition (see note10), 5; eadem, Athenagoras (see note10), 77; eadem, The Philosophical and
Biblical Background of Athenagoras (see note10), 15. Lejay sees the frequent appearance of the
musical analogy as indicative of a common intellectual milieu (idem, Un oracle montaniste
[see note114], 45). Certainly, there is intellectual sharing. But, Athenagoras also demonstrates
intellectual independence.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
Apollo.116 The apologist prefers to associate the Christian God with the .117
Also, the cannot sing or speak, therefore some Greeks viewed this limi-
tation as indicating that the instrument and its musician were inferior and lacked
nobility.118 Athenagoras, however, recognizes the analogys usefulness for his
theological idea. If the communicates by mouth only by means of the
, this highlights the role and active participation of the prophets. His analogy
conveys the idea that the Spirit breathes into the prophets, but it is the prophets
who speak the words. The music of the divine, Christian has lyrics, but
it is the inspired, human that sings the words. Furthermore, his analogy
of this wind instrument resonates with the way breath was already associated
with divine inspiration in pagan, Jewish and Christian contexts.119 This also may
explain why his metaphor highlights the pipers breath and not the musicians
skillful use of fingers as well as mouth and tongue in the playing of the pipe.120
Homer lets Penelope say that a god inspired her by breathing () a thought
into her heart while Longinus links inspiration by breath to possession by a god.
We note that Plutarch describes inspired, prophetic speech as breathing out
() and elsewhere relates prophetic inspiration to breath, but uses .121
Pseudo-Plutarch records Herophiluss theory of god-breathed ()
116E.g., Homer, Ilias1,603; 24,63. Cf. Fritz Graf, Apollo (Gods and Heroes of the Ancient World;
London: Routledge, 2009), 3132; Martha Maas and Jane McIntosh Snyder, Stringed Instruments
of Ancient Greece (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 5; West, Ancient Greek Music (see
note98), 50.
117Cf. the musical contest between Apollo who plays a lyre and Marsyas who plays the
and loses the match (Diodorus, Bibliotheca historica3,59 [ed. Friedrich Vogel, Diodori Bibliotheca
Historica1 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1888), 360,20363,12]).
118Cf. Plutarch, Alcibiades2,45 (ed. Konrad Ziegler and Hans Grtner, Plutarchi Vitae Paral-
lelae1,2 [Leipzig: Teubner, 1994], 228,822); Quaestiones convivales 713d (7,8) (BSGRT Plutarchi
Moralia4, 249,24250,9 Hubert).
119It is doubtful that he selects the because of the way Aristotle describes it as an
exciting () instrument (Aristotle, Politica1341a) or because of its association with
religious frenzy and ecstatic cults (cf. West, Ancient Greek Music [see note98], 105 [note103];
Gilbert Rouge, Music and Trance: A Theory of the Relations between Music and Possession [trans.
Brunhilde Biebuyck; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985], 7678). His emphasis is rather
on the rationality and harmony of the prophetic witness.
120See Landels, Music in Ancient Greece and Rome (see note111), 3435; West, Ancient Greek
Music (see note98), 9497; Schlesinger, The Greek Aulos (see note107), 113117.
121Cf. Plutarch, De defectu oraculorum421b; 432d (84,20; 109,10 S.). Cf. Strabo, Geographi-
ca9,3,5 (591,711 M.). The connection in the latter two is to the vapors of Delphi. Cf. in
Hesiod, Theogonia31 (6 S./M.), where the goddesses breath his poetry into him and spiro in Ovid,
Metamorphoses1,3 (SCBO, 1 Tarrant) where he prays that the gods would breath his song into
him.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
dreams, Pseudo-Phocylides extols the excellence of God-breathed ()

wisdom, and Cicero writes of the poet as breathed into (inflo) by a divine spirit.122
The New Testament reflects this notion of inspiration as well. In 2Tim3:16 all
Scripture is God-breathed (). One must wonder if the apologist is
thinking of John20:22 and Gen2:7 in a fashion that connects original creation to
prophetic utterance as life-giving. Although he alludes to John1:3, gives evidence
of a Johannine Christology, and alludes to Gen1 and 6, there is, nevertheless, no
explicit connection.123 It is in Justin where we are now able to appreciate a signif-
icant similarity, however. We have already mentioned 1Apology36,1 above in our
discussion of early Christianitys concept of divine inspiration as an act of the Son
or Spirit whereby the prophet is moved or impelled () to speak.124 In this
same passage, Justin denies that the prophets inspired themselves by breathing
() into themselves. In his mind, as in Athenagorass, the inspiring move-
ment of God (Son or Spirit) is one of breathing into the prophet.
In addition to indicating that the Spirits breath plays the prophet in such a
way that harmony, continuity, and truth sound forth, Athenagorass metaphor
also communicates the prophets own contribution. The uniqueness among pipes
may be seen in the types of the pipes that differed mostly in the positions of the
finger holes, mouthpiece, and length.125 Each type produced a different pitch to
provide accompaniment in different performances.126 One might be low-pitched
for male choruses; another might be cut for a higher octave more suitable for
women or boys. Some were deemed appropriate for symposia; others for hymns;
still others for frenzied ceremonies. Each had its own character, made its own
122Cf. Placita philosophorum5,2,3 (=904f ) (CUFr Srie grecque356, 168,1 Lachenaud); Pseudo-
Phocylides, Sententiae129 (ed. Douglas Young, Pseudo-Phocylides, in Theognis: Pseudo-
Pythagoras, Pseudo-Phocylides, Chares, Anonymi Aulodia, Fragmentum Teliambicum [ed. Ernest
Diehl and Douglas Young; Leipzig: Teubner, 1971], 106); Cicero, De natura deorum2,66 (ed. Wil-
helm Ax, De natura Deorum2 [M. Tulli Ciceronis scripta quae manserunt omnia45b; Stuttgart:
Teubner, 1980], 116,14117,18). Cf. afflatus in De oratore2,194 (ed. Augustus S. Wilkins, M. Tullii
Ciceronis De Oratore ad Quintum Fratrem Libre Tres2 [Oxford: Clarendon, 1881], 293,3). Cf. Mi-
chael Ursell, Inspiration, in The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics (ed. Roland
Greene et al.; 4thed.; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012), 709.
123Cf. Pouderon, Les citations scripturaires dans luvre dAthnagore (see note72), 118. Cf.,
too, Ezek37:9; Wis15:11.
124Cf. Justin, 1Apologia36,1 (84,3 M.).
125See Schlesinger, The Greek Aulos (see note107), 8384, 8687, on length and pitch; 8896
on the mouthpiece.
126See Comotti, Music in Greek and Roman Culture (see note111), 7172; West, Ancient Greek
Music (see note98), 8994; Landels, Music in Ancient Greece and Rome (see note111), 4041.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
contribution, and suited particular settings. Each served along with the piper as
coadjutor contributing from its own nature.127
The final question to be addressed is what Athenagoras means when he
refers to the inspired prophets as being in the ecstasy () of their reason
() ( ) and what might have influ-
enced his thinking.128 Malherbe points to parallel phrases in Philo and Plutarch.129
The Philonic parallel does not describe the Jewish prophets, but pagan banquets
characterized by drunkenness. The occurrence in Plutarch describes Solon pre-
tending to be out of his mind. Neither provides a context shared with Athenago-
ras. Two other Philonic parallels might be mentioned. Following his statement
that prophetic ecstasy is the best of four types, he provides an interpretation
of Gen15:12 assisted by the metaphor of a stringed instrument. He reads it as
Abrahams prophetic, ecstatic experience.130 When in ecstasy (), the
Spirit arrives, the prophets mind is evicted, his reason () sets like the
sun, his vocal organs remain quiet and the Spirit plays by making use of them in
accordance with his will. In another passage, reason () withdraws and
the Spirit puts forth the prophetic message by playing the vocal organs.131 We
also know that Philos own experience of divine possession resulted in frenzy and
unconsciousness.132
The scholarly literature seems fixated upon the parallels with Philo and
Plutarch. However, the Old Testament relates remarkable conversions of those
127Cf. Crehan, Athenagoras (see note11), 132 (note53).

128Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis9,1 (98,7 P.). Barnard has discussed Athenagorass rela-
tionship to Montanism and dismissed the idea that his treatment of the prophets has Montanism
as a direct source (The Philosophical and Biblical Background of Athenagoras [see note10],
1416). For a discussion of ecstatic prophecy in early Christianity see, Ash, The Decline of Ec-
static Prophecy in the Early Church (see note16), 227252.
129Cf. Philo, De vita contemplativa5,40 (56,1357,5 C./R.); Plutarch, Solon8,1 (90,8 Z./G.).
See Malherbe, Athenagoras on the Poets and Philosophers (see note7), 222 (notes6465)
and notes13, 14 above. Note also Crehan, Athenagoras (see note11), 132 (note53), and Barnard
(The Philosophical and Biblical Background of Athenagoras [see note10], 15 [note48]) who
list Philo, De specialibus legibus4,4849 (216,19220,4 C./W.) and De decalogo35; 175 (276,1319;
306,24307,3 C./W.) as parallels for Athenagorass (Legatio pro Christianis7,3
[92,18 P.]) and his ... (Legatio pro Christianis9,1 [98,7 P.]). I am unable
to find the occurrence of in these Philonic texts (however, see Philo, De vita contem-
plativa5,40 [56,16 C./R.]). Rankin says the notion of the ecstasy of the prophets can be found
in Philo, De specialibus legibus4,49 (219,22220,4 C./W.) (Rankin, Athenagoras: Philosopher and
Theologian [see note8], 96).
130Cf. Philo, Quis rerum divinarum heres sit264266 (60,1161,6 W.).
131Cf. Philo, De specialibus legibus4,49 (219,22220,50 C.).
132Cf. Philo, De migratione Abrahami3435 (275,315 W.).
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
who prophesy by means of the Spirit and the New Testament, too, uses
to refer to revelatory, visionary trances experienced by Peter and Paul where they
see heavenly things and hear the divine voice.133 Furthermore, Justin clarifies
that Zechariahs prophecy (2:1013) came about not when he was in a normal
state, but in ecstasy ().134 Zechariah in ecstasy saw things not visible
to natural eyesight, but Justin provides no accompanying details of frenzy or
unconsciousness. Common to all these texts is the idea that the prophetic experi-
ence of ecstasy is a state of consciousness or vision different from a normal one.
Philo specifically introduces the factor of the divine Spirit and presents the state
as one in which human reason is evicted. How we are to understand Athenago-
rass language is unclear. He does not say that reason is evicted or withdrawn
and there is no indication of frenzy or unconsciousness. In the translations we
find several options. Scholars render Athenagorass in a variety of ways.
Some read it in parallel with a notion of frenzied unconsciousness, confusion or
loss of reason. Crehan and Pouderon are closest to Philo. For Crehan, the proph-
ets reasoning fell into abeyance while Pouderon has, dans le dlire de leur
raison.135 Richardsons translation suggests that prophetic ecstasy involves an
act of the Spirit whereby the prophets are given thoughts loftier than those that
are human, but he does not go so far as to suggest that they lose consciousness or
become hysterical or delirious. He puts it as raised above their own thoughts.136
Malherbes and William R. Schoedels renderings do not venture to interpret the
ecstatic state. Malherbe has in accordance with the movements of their reason-
ings.137 Schoedel simply reads, in the ecstasy of their thoughts.138
133Cf. 1Sam10:57. Note, especially, 10:6: Then the spirit of the Lord will come mightily upon
you, and you shall prophesy with them and be turned into another man. Cf. Acts10:10; 11:5;
22:17.
134Justin, Dialogus cum Tryphone Judaeo115,3 (268,22 M.).
135Crehan, Athenagoras (see note11), 39; Pouderon, Athnagore (see note4), 99. Note, too, the
translation of Spencer Mansel, Athenagoras, A Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature,
Sects and Doctrines1 (London: Murray, 1877): (204207) 206207: The prophets were rapt in
mind outside of themselves. He does attempt to explain: The prophet was carried beyond him-
self by the Holy Spirit... the words uttered were not his own. Conyers Middleton (The Miscel-
laneous Works of the Late Reverend and Learned Conyers Middleton1 [2d ed.; London: Manby,
1755], 237) puts it: They were transported out of their senses... [they were] mere organs of the
Holy Spirit.
136Richardson, A Plea Regarding Christians by Athenagoras the Philosopher (see note93),
308.
137Abraham J. Malherbe, Apologetic and Philosophy in the Second Century, Restoration
Quarterly7 (1963): (1932) 30 (note101).
138Schoedel, Athenagoras (see note4), 21.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
Athenagoras does not elaborate on the state of ecstasy. If the prophets reason
is being displaced139 he does not explicitly say so. This accounts for the vari-
ance in translations. He is much more interested in its result and in stating that
his communitys prophets experienced it. For apologetic reasons, it is important
that both his imperial and Christian readers know this. Two things are clear. First,
he emphasizes that the prophetic proclamations, facilitated by the divine Spirit
while in a state of ecstasy, have replaced human opinions and human doctrine
with divine ones.140 They teach about God from God ( ).141
Second, in two steps he clarifies that the ecstasy has not done away with reason:
(1) the prophets confirm the Christian arguments (); and (2) the writings
of the prophets provide the emperor with good reason ()142 to reject the
false charges against the Christians.
Among the translations reviewed above, Richardsons conveys Athenago-
rass meaning the best. His use of in this context does not seem to carry
the sense of distraction of mind, entrancement, astonishment or excitement.
Instead the sense points to a displacement or outward, upward movement of the
prophets mind and reason.143 In ecstasy the prophets thoughts are raised up
from the realm of the human to the realm of the divine so that he thinks heav-
enly thoughts. In light of our analysis concerning Athenagorass concept of the
prophet as coadjutor, his use of most probably indicates that in ecstasy
the Spirit complements human reason with divine thought and superintends the
process so that the prophet speaks words in guarded partnership with the proph-
ets milieu that accurately convey the revelation received. For a final parallel in
antiquity, in addition to those discussed above in early Greek thought, we might
offer the Pythias ecstasy. Recent scholarship, profiting greatly from Pierre Aman-
drys study of the Delphic oracle, has provided some corrective to earlier charac-
terizations of the Pythias ecstasy as hysterical, frenzied, delirious, irrational, and
139Albrecht Oepke, ekstasis, Theological dictionary of the New Testament2 (Grands Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1964): (449458) 449450.
140Cf. Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis11,1 (104,35 P.). This could indicate that in ecstasy
the Spirit replaces human, earthly reason with divine, heavenly reason. Cf. Rankin, Athenagoras:
Philosopher and Theologian (see note8), 96. Cf. Philo, Quis rerum divinarum heres sit264266
(60,1161,6 W.); Plato, Phaedrus249c-d; Barnard, The Philosophical and Biblical Background of
Athenagoras (see note 10), 15 (note 48).
141Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,2 (92,14 P.).
142Malherbe, Apologetic and Philosophy in the Second Century (see note7), 3031 (note101);
Rankin, Athenagoras: Philosopher and Theologian (see note8), 96.
143Cf. Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon (see note87), s.v. .
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
vocally passive.144 Some portrayals of the Pythia, Lucans, for instance, connect
some of these stereotypical traits with her experiences of inspiration as the god
possesses her.145 However, there are other portrayals suggesting some fluidity
in how the state of inspired ecstasy was understood.146 Plutarch, for example,
describing the Pythias state under inspiration, tells how she received visions and
divine illumination and how the god employed her body and soul to convey to
human ears divine thoughts. As the god inspires her she is serene and composed,
not frantic.147 As she speaks her voice and words are her own, not the gods.148
The god did not take possession of the Pythias body.149 Here, the deity, through
visions and the inner illumination of the Pythia, conveys divine thoughts. But
under inspiration the Pythia remains tranquil, rational, and articulate. She is a
coadjutor; she, with her personality, forms the oracle.150 Although we do not have
in Plutarch a systematic doctrine of inspiration, in these texts the god reveals;
the Pythia receives, composes and proclaims.151 Ecstasy and rationality, David
E. Aune points out, need not be understood as two mutually exclusive states of
consciousness.152 Neither is it necessary to conclude that ecstasy or inspiration
always indicate a prophets passivity. The apologist means for his metaphor of the
144Cf. Pierre Amandry, La mantique apollinienne Delphes: Essai sur le fonctionnement de lora
cle (Bibliothque des coles Franaises dAthnes et de Rome170; Paris: Bocard, 1950); Joseph
Fontenrose, The Delphic Oracle: Its Responses and Operations with a Catalogue of Responses
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), 204212; Aune, Prophecy in Early Christianity and
the Ancient Mediterranean World (see note16), 3334; Graf, Apollo (see note116), 5455.
145Lucan, Bellum civile5 (BSGRT, 110,165174; 111,190193 Shackleton). Cf. Amandry, La man-
tique apollinienne Delphes (see note144), 2021, 234235 and Fontenrose, The Delphic Oracle
(see note144), 208210 who dismiss the portrayal as atypical and spurious. It is descriptive of the
Sybil in Virgil, Aeneis6,9158 (BSGRT, 159165 Conte).
146I am grateful to Devin L. White for his suggestions regarding Plutarch on this issue.
147Plutarch, De Pythiae oraculis397c-d; 21,404e (ed. Stephan Schrder, Plutarchs Schrift De
Pythiae oraculis: Text, Einleitung und Kommentar [Beitrge zur Altertumskunde8; Stuttgart:
Teubner, 1990], 86,321; 98,1121). Cf. the Greek vase paintings of Pythia and Apollo (Amandry,
La mantique apollinienne Delphes [see note 144], 6677).
148Plutarch, De Pythiae oraculis397c-d (86,321 S.).
149Plutarch, De Pythiae oraculis397b-c; 404a-f (85,2286,9; 97,599,1 S.); De defectu oracu-
lorum414c (69,1022 S.). Cf. Fontenrose, The Delphic Oracle (see note144), 206207.
150Yvonne Vernire, La thorie de linspiration prophtique dans les dialogues pythiques de
Plutarque, Kernos3 (1990): (359366) 365.
151Stephan Schrder, Plutarch on Oracles and Divine Inspiration, in Plutarch, On the Daimo-
nion of Socrates: Human Liberation, Divine Guidance, and Philosophy (ed. Heinz-Gnther Nessel-
rath; trans. Donald Russell; Scripta antiquitatis posterioris ad ethicam religionemque pertinen-
tia16; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), (145168) 168.
152Aune, Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World (see note16), 33.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
pipe to communicate the divine source of the prophets words, but he does not
mean for it to convey the utter passivity of the inspired spokesperson.
Perhaps, at least, we can say that in their ecstatic state the prophets, by the
movement of the divine Spirit, had their minds lifted up so that they received
divine thoughts that they expressed in words. These words provided reasonable
warrant for the faith and were unattainable through human means. It is worth-
while to note that Athenagorass perspective of the inspiration of the prophets
does not only stand in contrast to aspects of the later Greek view of inspiration,
but also to that of the Montanists.153 Their prophets fell into ecstatic frenzy and
were portrayed by Montanus as lyres, passive instruments played by the Lord,
and as persons whose earthly faculties, under inspiration, were asleep.154
153Contra Louis-Sbastien Le Nain de Tillemont, Mmoires pour servir a lhistoire ecclsiastique

des six premiers sicles2 (Paris: Charles Robustel, 1701), 350; idem, Histoire des empereurs et
autres princes qui ont rgn pendant les six premiers sicles de lglise2,2: Qui comprend depuis
Vespasien jusqu la mort de Trajan (Brussels: Fricx, 1693), 759 and Tabbernee, False Prophecy
and Polluted Sacraments (see note16), 94. Tillemont originated the view that Athenagoras was
a Montanist on the basis of his view of ecstatic prophecy and disapproval of second marriages
(Legatio pro Christianis9,1; 33,4 [98,110; 198,1315 P.]). It has never received much support. See,
e.g., The Dictionary Historical and Critical of Mr. Peter Bayle1 (2ded.; rev. Pierre Des Maizeaux;
London: Knapton, 1734): 533 and note 154 below. Nevertheless, see Vernon Bartlett, Harnacks
Texte und Untersuchungen, The Critical Review of Theological and Philosophical Literature2
(1892): (191194) 194 (note1). Tabbernee writes that the metaphor of the musical instrument in
Athenagoras illustrates the passive role of the prophet in the same way that Montanus employs
the analogy. Cf. Epiphanius, Panarion48,4,1 (224,22225,2 D./H.).
154Cf. Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica5,16,7 (GCS6,1, 462,915 Schwartz/Mommsen/Winkel-
mann); Epiphanius, Panarion48,4,1 (224,22225,2 D./H.). Cf. Lejay, Un oracle montaniste (see
note114), 4345; William G. Murdoch, A Study of Early Montanism and Its Relation to the Chris-
tian Church (Ph.D. diss.; Birmingham: University of Birmingham, 1946), 4144. Barnard notes
the differences between the musical analogy of Montanus (lyre) and Athenagoras (pipe) and
points out that in Athenagoras God works with as well as through the prophet. He concludes that
Athenagoras was not influenced by Montanist teaching (Barnard, Athenagoras and the Biblical
Tradition [see note10], 45; eadem, Athenagoras [see note10], 7577; eadem, The Philosoph-
ical and Biblical Background of Athenagoras [see note 10], 1415). Cf. Mansel, Athenagoras
(see note135), 206207; John Kaye, Some Account of the Writings and Opinions of Justin Martyr
(Cambridge: Smith for Deighton, 1829), 179180 (note68); Georges Bareille, Athnagore, Dic-
tionnaire de thologie catholique1,2 (Paris: Letouzey et An, 1923): (20102014) 2013. We do not
find in Athenagoras the notion of the inspired prophet being asleep as with Montanus, Plato,
Timaeus71e and Philo, Quis rerum divinarum heres sit264265 (60,1161,6 W.), who uses meta-
phors for the idea of sleep. Cf., too, the different types of ecstasy in Epiphanius of Constantia (Sa-
lamis) in Soterios A. Mousalimas, Ecstasy in Epiphanius of Constantia (Salamis) and Didymus
of Alexandria, Studia Patristica25 (1993): 434437.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
5Conclusion
This study is a response to one basic claim that has governed the reading of two
passages in Athenagorass Legatio pro Christianis. These passages concern the
early Christian understanding of the Old Testament prophets.155 The problem-
atic claim is that the apologists treatment of the prophets as Hellenistic, takes
place in general Hellenistic terms, and represents a thoroughly Greek percep-
tion.156 In detail, scholars claim that his view reflects the phenomenon seen in
Plato, Meno99c, originates from Plato, Phaedrus249d, and is especially similar
to Philos perspective in several passages.157 To support the claim, texts from
Philo and Plutarch are commonly cited.158 Even when studies or editions only cite
the Hellenistic parallels without commentary, they continue to give credence to
the claim.159
Our analysis demonstrates a broader background for Athenagorass treat-
ment of the prophets and inspiration and it indicates the need for more nuanced
characterizations. Certainly, there are significant parallels with Philo, both
lexical and conceptual. His discussions concerning the divine inspiration of
the prophets, the state of ecstasy, the role of the Spirit, the effect upon reason,
and the musical metaphor find some degree of resonance in our apologist. It is
almost unimaginable that Philo was not in his mind. Yet, we have noted signifi-
cant differences in their metaphors, the contexts in which the lexical similarities
occur, and their concepts of the participation or passivity of the inspired, ecstatic
prophet. Clearly, both independence and dependence on other sources is sug-
gested. Furthermore, this study shows that conclusions based on assumed par-
allels with Plato also require adjustment. Athenagoras does not share the notion
of an unconscious, passive, mindless prophet or poet who under inspiration
155Cf. Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,3; 9,1 (92,1794,23; 98,110 P.)

156Geffcken, Zwei griechische Apologeten (see note12), 177, 180; Malherbe, Athenagoras on the
Poets and Philosophers (see note7), 222.
157Cf. Geffcken, Zwei griechische Apologeten (see note12), 180; Barnard, The Philosophical
and Biblical Background of Athenagoras (see note10), 15 (note 48); Malherbe, Athenagoras on
the Poets and Philosophers (see note7), 222; Crehan, Athenagoras (see note11), 132 (note53).
See above, note140, for a brief comment on Plato, Phaedrus249cd.
158Cf. Philo, De decalogo35; 175 (276,1319; 306,24307,3 C./W.); De specialibus legibus1,65;
4,49 (16,1522; 219,22220,4 C./W.); De vita contemplativa5,40 (56,1357,5 C./R.); Quis rerum
divinarum heres sit259 (59,1116 W.); Quod deus sit immutabilis2425 (61,918 W.); Plutarch,
Solon8,1 (90,8 Z./G.); De defectu oraculorum436f (118,24119,1 S.).
159Cf. Schoedel, Athenagoras (see note4), 21 (note9); Marcovich, Athenagoras Legatio (see
note4), 5; Rankin, Athenagoras: Philosopher and Theologian (see note8), 96.
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031
composes flawed, contradictory material. Rather, there are important similarities

with early Greek thought on the activity and contribution of the inspired poet as
well as the infallibility of the composition. Also, in addition to the texts of Plato
and Plutarch commonly associated with the question of prophets, inspiration,
and ecstasy, important alternative portrayals exist in these authors. The inspired
prophets, in the mind of Athenagoras, are coadjutors with the Spirit who are not
frantic, but of sound mind, and their own speech, as well as their books, contains
harmonious, true teachings.
Finally, this investigation makes one additional claim. In addition to the
common Philonic parallels as well as those from Plato and Plutarch, there are
other sources to consider that are equally informative. Athenagorass discussion
of the prophets and inspiration manifests alliance and dependence upon the
Septuagint, other Jewish sources, the New Testament and second-century Chris-
tian sources, especially Ignatius and Justin. Athenagoras is a Christian philoso-
pher.160 We would expect to see such a broad-based platform of resources for his
theological construction. A simple classification of Greek, Hellenistic or Philonic
for his notion of the inspired prophets is incomplete, unreflective of his own inge-
nuity, and fails to adequately account for his Judaeo-Christian heritage. It also
minimizes the elegance of this early Christian attempt to theologize about the
Jewish prophets in a gentile world. In Athenagoras we have an explanation of the
prophets and inspiration that (1) clearly positions them preeminently as rational,
doctrinal Christian authorities above the poets, philosophers, and human opin-
ions; (2) constructs his communitys theology with an artistic flair that selectively
and critically weaves together both pagan and Judaeo-Christian sources; so that
(3) he might win a hearing from both his imperial and ecclesiastical audience.
160Bernard Pouderon, Athnagore dAthnes: philosophe chrtien (Thologie historique82;

Paris: Beauchesne, 1989).
- 10.1515/zac-2016-0031

Bingham

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Bingham

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

 ZAC 2016; 20(2): 211242

Abstract: In contrast to those who argue simply that Athenagorass discussion

Keywords: Athenagoras, Prophets, Inspiration, Philo, Plato, Ecstasy, Justin Martyr,

*Corresponding author: D. Jeffrey Bingham, Southwestern Theological Seminary, 2001 West

5Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,3 (SC379, 92,1794,23 Pouderon):

musical image concerning the prophets in a different Platonic metaphor concern-

10Cf. Leslie W. Barnard, The Philosophical and Biblical Background of Athenagoras, in

and faithfulness to his Judaeo-Christian heritage. Before we can appreciate his

1Poets, Prophets, and Inspiration in Plato

18Cf. Plato, Protagoras325e-326b; 338e7339a3; Leges658d; 764d-e; 810e-811a; Ion535e46;

23Cf. Plato, Leges719c-d.

2Poets and Inspiration in Early Greece

38Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational (see note36), 218.

3 and in Greek Thought

59Cf. Pindar, Olympia Oda 4,1718 (15,2930 S./M.).

world is similar. Divination in a variety of forms, from astrology to the analysis of

4Prophets and Inspiration in Athenagoras of Athens

78Cf. Ignatius, Epistula ad Magnesios89 (194,24196,10 L./H.); Justin, 1Apologia31,78 (77,24

divine order in which prophets manifested the particulars of the arrangement,

106Cf. West, Ancient Greek Music (see note98), 8189.

choice of the might be driven by his desire to communicate that although

dreams, Pseudo-Phocylides extols the excellence of God-breathed ()

127Cf. Crehan, Athenagoras (see note11), 132 (note53).

153Contra Louis-Sbastien Le Nain de Tillemont, Mmoires pour servir a lhistoire ecclsiastique

155Cf. Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis7,3; 9,1 (92,1794,23; 98,110 P.)

composes flawed, contradictory material. Rather, there are important similarities

160Bernard Pouderon, Athnagore dAthnes: philosophe chrtien (Thologie historique82;

Potrebbero piacerti anche

ZAC 2016; 20(2): 211242