Ancient Cosmology: Many Heavens, Gods and the One [God]

[Leucius Charinus]

Gday,

The fleshy references point to what they thought about the "embodied spirit" and the birth-life-death cycle beneath the influence of the moon. The path beyond this is contrasted with the path to the sun and the heavenly realms where the higher spirits and the heroic ancestors etc dwell above the influence of the moon. The sublunar realm is what we today would call the Earth/Moon binary ecosystem: tides, cycles of life, cycles of war, the usual business as usual.

The realm in which the Doherty/Carrier mythical Jesus was crucified - in the highest part of the Air Beneath the Moon where the 'birth-life-death cycle ' operates and where it still 'fleshy'.

Earlier you stated the following ....

..... Paul's mention of the Third Heaven suggest he saw it perhaps like so :

There seems to be a problem with this 3rd diagram (and the 4th in the OP) in that the firmament is being placed in the second heaven between the first and the third which in the Ptolemaic system corresponds to the planet Venus or Mercury ruled by Venus and Hermes respectively. Additionally the firmament is generally viewed as the fixed background starts which are out beyond the furthest planets Jupiter (ruled by Zeus) and Saturn (ruled by Saturnus).

What could Paul have been thinking to make such a divergence from the cosmology of his time? Surely those who provided astronomical advice to the Roman Emperors and other rulers already recognised a substantial body of work in which the Ptolemaic heavens were essentially recognised by most.

[Leucius Charinus]

We should keep in mind that there was no "one" view of what "the" cosmology was.

There was the Ptolemaic model which was constructed after centuries of astronomical observation and represented - essentially - a proto scientific statement. Sure there may have been variations in this model, but the fact that Mercury and Venus passed in front of the sun and Mars and Jupiter and Saturn passed behind the sun can only be explained in a geocentric model with the logic that the outer planets were further from the sun and earth, etc.

Therefore it may be argued (IMHO) that there was a generally accepted view which had been constructed by the "experts" (ie: the astronomers) concerning the placement of the earth and the moon in a series of geocentric spheres or heavens.

But the writings in the centuries either side of the BCE/CE point demonstrate a general understanding that the sublunar realm included the moon and the whole space between that and earth. It was the realm of mutability. There was no empty space between the earth and moon. The entire region was filled with stuff and beings appropriate to their environment.

Yes agreed. It was also filled with the cosmic element aether. It was the place where all life took place and all death and all birth.

However it is clear that the ancients believed in "life spirits" which they called "daemons" and which inhabited this realm. It in one sense this scenario is similar to the eastern concept of reincarnation, except that in the western version the "spirit" which entered the flesh at the birth of the child was seen as a "guardian spirit" for that child. It would seem that the realm was filled with such spirits who had once lived, and who would be allocated to new births in accordance to some cosmic plan that may as well be unknown.

If humans couldn't see them that only meant those beings were invisible unless they chose to reveal themselves.

Some humans could see these beings as spirit and not as humans. Examples ... Jesus is supposed to have done this. Apollonius of Tyana is supposed to have done this.

[Leucius Charinus]

Fair enough. In that case, the best way forward would be to actually reproduce what the ancients express. Otherwise it would be too easy to propose they thought something different, in order to suit some modern belief. Now, it can be granted that they may have believed anything, but that is all the more reason to be cautious about what they did believe. So let's actually quote them!

Thanks for this stuff GDon. Allow me some time to peruse it all and think about a response.

[neilgodfrey]

[
There was the Ptolemaic model which was constructed after centuries of astronomical observation and represented - essentially - a proto scientific statement. Sure there may have been variations in this model, but the fact that Mercury and Venus passed in front of the sun and Mars and Jupiter and Saturn passed behind the sun can only be explained in a geocentric model with the logic that the outer planets were further from the sun and earth, etc.

Therefore it may be argued (IMHO) that there was a generally accepted view which had been constructed by the "experts" (ie: the astronomers) concerning the placement of the earth and the moon in a series of geocentric spheres or heavens.

My preference is to explore carefully the writings of sectarians and others neo-platonic writers -- 1 Enoch, Jubilees, the various Jewish Apocalypses, Varro, Seneca, Philo, Plutarch, Apuleius, Xenocrates, who perhaps expressed more popular understandings of what was what and who was in what or passing through what and how, etc. That's where the relevant data lies imho.

[Kapyong]

Gday,

There seems to be a problem with this 3rd diagram (and the 4th in the OP) in that the firmament is being placed in the second heaven between the first and the third which in the Ptolemaic system corresponds to the planet Venus or Mercury ruled by Venus and Hermes respectively. Additionally the firmament is generally viewed as the fixed background starts which are out beyond the furthest planets Jupiter (ruled by Zeus) and Saturn (ruled by Saturnus).

It's not clear that the Pauline heavens were exactly the same thing as the heavenly spheres. Around Paul's time there were various views on how many heavens existed from 2 to 10. I assumed Paul was a 3-heavener, as he mentioned the 3rd heaven in a way that made it sound of a high level. But he could just as easily have been a supporting of the 10 layer Ptolemaic system.

1. Luna
2. Mercury
3. Venus
4. Sun
5. Mars
6. Jupiter
7. Saturn
8. The Firmament
9. 9th Crystal Sphere
10. Primum Mobile

In which case Paul's vision was from the 3rd heaven meaning Venus.

What could Paul have been thinking to make such a divergence from the cosmology of his time? Surely those who provided astronomical advice to the Roman Emperors and other rulers already recognised a substantial body of work in which the Ptolemaic heavens were essentially recognised by most.

Well, in that period we had writers with such a varied number of heavens, 2,3,7, or 10 (not counting the Gnostic 365) so I conclude that heavens were not necessarily the same thing as the heavenly spheres. And I had Paul pegged as a 3-heaven man.


Kapyong

[Leucius Charinus]

Yes it was Bousset who developed the theory about the originality of the three heavens. I posted the relevant passages (in German) from his works in the other thread.

Willhelm Bousset:

Durch einzelne genauere Untersuchungen würden hier noch mannigfache und zahlreiche Berührungen, sowohl der eranischen und jüdisch-christlichen Eschatologie wie des beiderseitigen Dualismus, festgestellt werden können. Doch müssen wir auch hier auf weiteres verzichten. Wir wenden uns einem dritten Gebiete zu, dem der Eschatologie im engern Sinn. d. h. der Lehre von der Vergeltung nach dem Tode für den einzelnen. Auf diesem Gebiet sind die Berührungen zwischen eranischer und jüdischer Eschatologie lange nicht so stark und beweisend. Die eranische Eschatologie hat auch hier ein ganz bestimmtes und charakteristisches Dogma ausgebildet. Es ist das Dogma von der Himmelsreise resp. der Höllenreise der Seele.2) Nach diesem weilt die Seele des Menschen nach dessen Tode drei Tage bei dem Leibe, von guten Geistern getröstet oder von schlechten geplagt. Dann beginnt sie aufzusteigen, je nach ihrer Beschaffenheit von guten oder bösen Geistern geleitet. An der Tschinvat-Brücke findet das Totengericht statt. Hier trennen sich die Wege. Der guten Seele begegnet eine schöne Jungfrau, das Ebenbild seiner guten Werke, Worte und Gedanken. Dann steigt die Seele durch die drei Himmel aufwärts zum Thron des höchsten Gottes und wird dort von Gott und seinen Erzengeln freudig begrüsst. Das umgekehrte Geschick erleidet die Seele des Gottlosen. [Die religion des judentums im neutestamentlichen zeitalter p. 590]

Google translate .....


Through individual detailed studies would still manifold and numerous touches both the eranischen and Judeo-Christian eschatology as the mutual dualism can be found. But we have to do without further notice here. We turn to a third areas, the eschatology in the narrower sense. that is, the doctrine of retribution after death for the individual. In this area, the contact between eranischer and Jewish eschatology are not as strong and conclusive. The eranische eschatology has also formed here a very specific and characteristic dogma. It is the dogma of the heavenly journey, respectively. Hell journey of Seele.2) After this the soul of man dwells after his death three days at the body, comforted by good spirits or plagued by bad. Then she starts to rise, according to its composition of good or evil spirits passed. At the Tschinvat bridge the judgment of the dead takes place. Here the paths separate. The good soul meets a beautiful maiden, the image of his good deeds, words and thoughts. Then the soul rises through the three heavens up to the throne of the Most High God, where it is being embraced by God and his Archangels. The reverse fate suffered by the soul of the wicked. [The religion of judaism in the New Testament age p. 590]

Perhaps a better quote from Bousset:

Die ursprünglich rein eranische Anschauung nahm drei Himmel und über diesen das Paradies an. Sie lehrte, dafi die Seele, nachdem sie den Leib verlassen, durch diese drei Himmel zum Throne Gottes gelange. Vielleicht lehrte sie in späterer, aber noch immer vorchristlicher Zeit ihren Gläubigen, dass man auch schon bei Leibesleben in Ekstase jener himmlischen Seligkeit teilhaftig werden könne. Jedenfalls scheinen diese Anschauungen von Anfang an in den Kreisen der Mithrasreligion heimisch gewesen zu sein. Von dorther drang sie in diejenigen Kreise des Judentums, die fremden Einflüssen besonders zugänglich waren, und so auch in das christentum. Zahlreiche Apokalypsen und Himmelfahrten legen Zeugnis davon ab. Selbst führende Geister der Rabbinen widerstanden dem Zauber dieser Phantasien nicht, sie lernten auch „ins Paradies einzugehen“. Auch Paulus hat jene eigentümliche Form der Ekstase, die er II Kor 12 beschreibt, aus seiner rabbinischen Vergangenheit herübergenommen. Auf ihrer langen Reise nimmt die Lehre vom Aufstieg der Seele babylonische Elemente an. Zu diesem gehört vor allem die Annahme von sieben, -— den planetarischen Gestirngottheiten entsprechenden — Himmelssphären, daneben vielleicht auch die andere, sehr wesentliche, dass die Herrscher der Himmelsräume , welche die Seele durcheilt, sich ihr hindernd in den Weg stellen. So entsteht, aus eranischen und babylonischen Elementen zusammengewoben, jene eigentümliche „Centrallehre" der meisten gnostischen Systeme, auch der mandäischen Religion, die daneben Spuren der älteren und einfacheren Auffassung aufweist. Daneben erhalten sich die älteren Anschauungen, oder werden in den später vorgenommenen Uebermalungen doch nicht ganz beseitigt. [Bousset, Himmelsreise der Seele, Archiv für Religionswissenschaft, Volumes 4-6 p. 248 - 249]

Google translate .....




The originally pure intuition eranische adopted three heavens, and over this paradise. They taught Dafi the soul after leaving the body, through these three heavens get to the throne of God. Maybe they taught in later, but still pre-Christian times its believers that you already might be partakers of that heavenly bliss in ecstasy in his body. In any case, these views seem to have been at home in the circles of Mithras from the beginning. From thence they came in those circles of Judaism that foreign influences were particularly accessible, and so also in christianity. Many apocalypses and sky rides witness to the fact. Even leading spirits of the rabbis resisted the charm of these fantasies do not, they also learned "to enter Paradise." Paul, too, has taken over that peculiar form of ecstasy that he II Corinthians 12 describes from his rabbinical past. On their long journey, the doctrine of the ascent of the soul assumes Babylonian elements. To this belongs in particular the adoption of seven, - according to his planetary star gods - celestial spheres, besides perhaps others, very essential that represent the ruler of the sky spaces which hurries the soul, its a hindrance in the way. The result, woven together from eranischen and Babylonian elements that peculiar "Central Doctrine" of most Gnostic systems, and the Mandaean religion, which in addition has traces of the older and simpler conception. Besides the older views obtained or are in the OVERPAINTINGS later made ​​yet not completely eliminated [Bousset, heavenly journey of the soul, Archives of Religious Studies, volumes 4-6 p 248 -.. 249

Bousset thinks that Paul adopted the Iranian 'ecstatic' model for heavenly ascent from his alleged rabbinic past. I am not so sure.

Me either. Persian models may have been "Hellenised" after Alexander's conquest. They were certainly "De-Hellenised" following the Sassanid revolution and the rise of Manichaenism in the 3rd century CE. But Paul is believed to have written two centuries before Mani by the mainstream view, and a century before Mani according to some of the Dutch Radicals. The "Hymn of the Pearl" which seems to have been purposefully embedded in "The Acts of Thomas" is sometimes hypothesised to be Iranian and is related to this Iranian 'ecstatic' model for heavenly ascent.

Nevertheless it is interesting to note how the Christians and Jews adopted the Iranian model for heavenly ascent through ecstasy.

What was the Greek model for heavenly ascent through ecstasy?

Was this Greek model (unwritten secrecy???) not the "Mysteries and INitiations" etc (eg: as described later - when the "Greek Mysteries" were in serious decline - by Emperor Julian)


Also there is another problem as Philosopher Jay pointed out in your thread, namely ....

I think the first thing we have to do is disassociate Heaven from the concept of an after-life. They are quite different concepts mashed together in religious brains.
I think we have to start with heaven as a geographical location. Genesis 1:6 describes the coming about of this geographical situation: And God said, "Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water."

The cosmology is quite separate and distinct from the theology. The discovery of the heavens as geographical locations gives rise to cosmology.
This is where the Ptolemaic model seems to have been some sort of consensus among "experts".

That is the first step in this thread, although the theology obviously follows the cosmology.

The Hebrew cosmology seems to be simply "God created the heaven and earth ...."

[Leucius Charinus]

[
There was the Ptolemaic model which was constructed after centuries of astronomical observation and represented - essentially - a proto scientific statement. Sure there may have been variations in this model, but the fact that Mercury and Venus passed in front of the sun and Mars and Jupiter and Saturn passed behind the sun can only be explained in a geocentric model with the logic that the outer planets were further from the sun and earth, etc.

Therefore it may be argued (IMHO) that there was a generally accepted view which had been constructed by the "experts" (ie: the astronomers) concerning the placement of the earth and the moon in a series of geocentric spheres or heavens.

My preference is to explore carefully the writings of sectarians and others neo-platonic writers -- 1 Enoch, Jubilees, the various Jewish Apocalypses, Varro, Seneca, Philo, Plutarch, Apuleius, Xenocrates, who perhaps expressed more popular understandings of what was what and who was in what or passing through what and how, etc. That's where the relevant data lies imho.

I see that you have assembled an article here:
Ancient beliefs about heavenly realms, demons and the end of the world
http://vridar.org/2010/03/09/ancient-be ... the-world/

.... how alike the biblical passage is to the non biblical ideas of the day.

FWIW all references on this page to "demons" may need to be perceived in context of the Greek term "daemon" which IMHO was subverted by the Christian ideology.

Some quotes:


"It is man's duty to follow his daimon,
which reflects the cosmic will.
This requires us to love humanity in general
and to act altruistically"

~ Marcus Aurelius




"A daemon is assigned to every man
At birth, to be the leader of his life".

~ Menander, via Ammianus Marcellinus




"We should think of the most authoritative part of the Soul
as a Guardian given by God which lifts us to our heavenly home."

~ Plato



“Although it appears as if each person
has their own Daïmon or Higher Self,
the enlightened initiate discovers that
actually on the axial Pole of Being
there is one Daïmon shared by all,
a universal Self, which inhabits every being.
Each Soul is a part of the one Soul of God.
To know oneself therefore is to know God."

~ Valentinus





"Nevertheless he has placed by every man a guardian,
every man's Daimon, to whom he has committed the care of the man,
a guardian who never sleeps, is never deceived.

For to what better and more careful guardian could He have entrusted each of us?
When, then, you have shut the doors and made darkness within,
remember never to say that you are alone, for you are not;
but God is within, and your Daimon is within, and what need
have they of light to see what you are doing?

To this God you ought to swear an oath just as the soldiers do to Caesar. .....

~ Epictetus





"And yet, remember, Arjuna, that the Spirit (Purusha energy)
dwelling in the individual body as Atma is truly Brahman, the Godhead.
This Supreme Being is spoken of as the following:
the Observer who watches and referees the game of life,
the Approver who permits it all to happen,
the Supporter who helps it all to happen,
the Enjoyer who experiences it all with gusto but knows it is a game,
and most important,
the Master who holds complete dominion over all the events
though being unafected by all of them"

~ GITA, 13.22 (Jack Hawley) p.122




"God is near you, he is with you, he is within you.
This is what I mean, Lucilius:
a holy spirit indwells within us,
one who marks our good and bad deeds,
and is our guardian.

As we treat this spirit, so are we treated by it.
Indeed, no man can be good without the help of God.
Can one rise superior to fortune unless God helps him to rise? "

~ Seneca, Epistle 41.

[GakuseiDon]

FWIW all references on this page to "demons" may need to be perceived in context of the Greek term "daemon" which IMHO was subverted by the Christian ideology.

Perhaps not so much subverted as a word, but motivations reattributed. The Christians of the day believed the pagans when they talked about daemons, and believed that they were the same creatures, except that only the Christians knew the truth about such creatures: they were liars. As Justin Martyr wrote:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... ology.html

• For the truth shall be spoken; since of old these evil demons, effecting apparitions of themselves, both defiled women and corrupted boys, and showed such fearful sights to men, that those who did not use their reason in judging of the actions that were done, were struck with terror; and being carried away by fear, and not knowing that these were demons, they called them gods, and gave to each the name which each of the demons chose for himself. And when Socrates endeavoured, by true reason and examination, to bring these things to light, and deliver men from the demons, then the demons themselves, by means of men who rejoiced in iniquity, compassed his death, as an atheist and a profane person, on the charge that "he was introducing new divinities;" and in our case they display a similar activity. For not only among the Greeks did reason (Logos) prevail to condemn these things through Socrates, but also among the Barbarians were they condemned by Reason (or the Word, the Logos) Himself, who took shape, and became man, and was called Jesus Christ; and in obedience to Him, we not only deny that they who did such things as these are gods, but assert that they are wicked and impious demons

[Leucius Charinus]

Hi GDon,

I have had some time to read through these quotes and although some of them make reference to the idea of the Greek "daemon" (the Roman "genius"), most of them are related to ancient physics rather than cosmology. The ancient physics was about the 4 or 5 elements of nature (earth, water, air, fire, aether) which modern physics presently treats as the states of matter (solid, liquid, gas, plasma, universal ZPF). [NB: aether has a number of modern correlates). The ancient physics must be examined in its own right and is important in its own right but does not necessarily deal explicitly with the cosmology of the ancients: the heavens, the firmament, the moon, the sub-lunar realm and the terrestrial environment.

In this thread we have alluded to the cosmology of the ancients. As a starting point only, here is what WIKI has to say about "Cosmology"

Cosmology (from the Greek κόσμος, kosmos "world" and -λογία, -logia "study of"), is the study of the origin, evolution, and eventual fate of the universe.

Physical cosmology is the scholarly and scientific study of the origin, evolution, large-scale structures and dynamics, and ultimate fate of the universe, as well as the scientific laws that govern these realities.[1]

Religious cosmology (or mythological cosmology) is a body of beliefs based on the historical, mythological, religious, and esoteric literature and traditions of creation and eschatology.

[/quote]

So we see here a tendency towards two significant types of cosmology.

Physical cosmology
The physical cosmos was always thought to be related to the earth and sky, the earth and heaven, the terrestrial and the cosmic environments.
It consistent of a laborious study of the day and night sky (and its shadows): the sun, the moon, the planets and the background zodiac of "fixed" stars.
We may presume astronomical data was passed on from generation to generation via inscriptions, papyrus, but that the peer-reviewed model was the oral tradition between masters and students.
The Ptolemaic model and its geocentric model of the physical cosmology has been briefly discussed.
It was the proto-scientific map of the cosmos of the early centuries of the common era.
However relatively few people - the astronomers - knew of it.




Religious cosmology (or mythological cosmology)
The Greek literature refers to a belief that at least some of the ancients believed that the cosmos (or universe) was alive.
The Gods and the spirits "daemons" (if they were not one in the same) were allocated places within the physical cosmology.
The Ptolemaic model seems to have had the Graeco-Roman pantheon of gods inhabiting the geocentric seven or more heavens.


To conclude, I think we need to differentiate separate discussion of the physics (the elements of nature) from the cosmology (the universal nature).
The physics is very important as well, if not critical, in understanding how the ancient writers thought of their own (physical then religious/mythological) cosmology.

A note on the physics:

The light and heat of the sun and the light and phases of the moon came from the heavens above the earth and may be seen as some "cosmic fire". This intermingled with the highest air and all beneath (except possibly Hades). The cosmic element aether is also supposed to fill the celestial expanses above and below the moon.

A note on the cosmology:

Concentric heavens were believed to exist by the elite astronomers of many lands, including the Roman Empire of the early common era when the NT writings were supposed to have been authored. As summarised by Kapyong, setting aside for the moment the 365 heavens, the gnostics seem to have followed the Ptolemaic model of cosmology. What did Paul follow?

Fair enough. In that case, the best way forward would be to actually reproduce what the ancients express. Otherwise it would be too easy to propose they thought something different, in order to suit some modern belief. Now, it can be granted that they may have believed anything, but that is all the more reason to be cautious about what they did believe. So let's actually quote them!

From everything I've read, I don't think Kapyong proposal that there was a belief that everything "Beneath the Moon" was thought of as 'fleshly' is correct. The belief seems to me to be both explicit and implicit that 'fleshly' things were only on the earth. Could there have been such a belief? Sure! Many things are possible, but not everything has evidence. Again, the best thing to do is to actually quote the beliefs and work from that.

The Stoics and the Platonists are quite explicit in when they refer to as the "daemon" as one's own individual guardian spirit. Everything was thought to be composed of the 4 (or 5 if you examine the quintessential aether) elements of nature. The spirits who in habited the sublunar realm, where all is in a state of flux, are both within and without every living being.

Technically, "sublunar realm" also included the earth. Guardian spirits were also known as one's "genius", which can relate to a person or a location. From here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genius_%28mythology%29

The fleshy references point to what they thought about the "embodied spirit" and the birth-life-death cycle beneath the influence of the moon.

No, not that I can tell from their literature. The fleshly references refer to the substances that make up the body, and were inevitably related to earthly properties.

Living things were made of the four elements. Flesh, for example, contained some of each element. Empedokles (450 BCE) wrote that:

• Flesh is the product of equal parts of the four elements mixed together, and sinews of double portions of fire and earth mixed together, and the claws of animals are the product of sinews chilled by contact with the air, and bones of two equal parts of water and of earth and four parts of fire mingled together...

Plutarch gives the various theories of his day with regards to how those elements 'move'. Anything made of earth and water had a natural tendency to travel in a downwards direction. Anything made of air or fire are 'carried aloft'. According to Plutarch:

• Plato saith that it is neither heavy nor light in its own nature, when it exists in its own place; but being in the place where another should be, then it has an inclination by which it tends to gravity or levity.
  
  Aristotle saith that, if we simply consider things in their own nature, the earth only is to be judged heavy, and fire light; but air and water are on occasions heavy and at other times light.
  
  The Stoics think that of the four elements two are light, fire and air; two ponderous, earth and water; that which is naturally light doth by its own nature, not by any inclination, recede from its own centre; but that which is heavy doth by its own nature tend to its centre; for the centre is not a heavy thing in itself.
  
  Epicurus thinks that bodies are not limited; but the first bodies, which are simple bodies, and all those composed of them, all acknowledge gravity; that all atoms are moved, some perpendicularly, some obliquely; some are carried aloft either by immediate impulse or with vibrations.

Objects consisting of earth and water – including flesh – were naturally weighed down, and attracted to the earth. Things made of air and fire naturally floated. Ironically, early Greeks thought that the heavens were filled with fire, since fire naturally travelled upwards.

Spiritual beings -- including daemons and disembodied souls -- were made from air or fire, which is why they could fly. As Plutarch writes:

• He affirms that our soul is nothing but air; it is that which constitutes and preserves; the whole world is invested with spirit and air. For spirit and air are synonymous.

“Daemons” were beings made of fire and/or air who lived in the air as well as floating around locations on earth. They were regarded as an intermediate being between humans and the true gods above the firmament, and passed on messages from the gods to humans, and the prayers of humans to the gods. The pagan writer Apuleuis (Second Century CE) gives us this description (my emphasis):

• Moreover, there are certain divine middle powers, situatved in this interval of the air, between the highest ether and earth, which is in the lowest place, through whom our desires and our deserts pass to the Gods. These are called by a Greek name daemons, who, being placed between the terrestrial and celestial inhabitants, transmit prayers from the one, and gifts from the other. They likewise carry supplications from the one, and auxiliaries from the other, as certain interpreters and saluters of both. Through these same daemons, as Plato says in the Banquet, all denunciations, the various miracles of enchanters, and all the species of presages, are directed. Prefects, from among the number of these, providentially attend to every thing, according to the province assigned to each; either by the formation of dreams, or causing the fissures in entrails, or governing the flights of some birds, and instructing the songs of others, or by inspiring prophets, or hurling thunder, or producing the coruscations of lightning in the clouds; or causing other things zto take place, by which we obtain a knowledge of future events. And it is requisite to think that all these particulars are effected by the will, the power, and authority of the celestial Gods, but by the compliance, operations, and ministrant offices of daemons, for it was through the employment, the operations, and the providential attention of these, that dreams predicted to Hannibal the loss of one of his eyes; that the inspection of the viscera previously announced to Flaminius the danger of a great slaughter; and that auguries granted to Accius Navius the miracle of the whetstone. It is also through these that forerunning indications of future empire are imparted to certain persons; as that an eagle covered the head of Tarquinius Priscus, and that a flame illuminated the head of Servius Tullius. And lastly, to these are owing all the presages of diviners, the expiations of the Hetruscans, the enclosure of places struck by lightning, and the verses of the Sibyls; all which, as I have said, are effected by certain powers that are media between men and Gods.

Apuleius gives a description of the bodies of daemons:

• But if the clouds fly loftily, all of which originate from, and again flow downward to, the earth, what should you at length think of the bodies of daemons, which are much less dense, and therefore so much more attenuated than clouds? For they are not conglobed from a feculent nebula and a tumid darkness, as the clouds are, but they consist of that most pure, liquid, and serene element of air, and on this account are not easily visible to the human eye, unless they exhibit an image of themselves by divine command.
  
  For they are capable, in the same manner as we are, of suffering all the mitigations or incitements of souls; so as to be stimulated by anger, made to incline by pity, allured by gifts, appeased by prayers, exasperated by contumely, soothed by honours, and changed by all other things, in the same way that we are. Indeed, that I may comprehend the nature of them by a definition, daemons are in their genus animals, in their species rational, in mind passive, in body arial, and in time perpetual. Of these five characteristics which I have mentioned, the three first are the same as those which we possess, the fourth is peculiar to them, and the last is common to them with the immortal Gods, from whom they differ in being obnoxious to passion. Hence, as I think, daemons are not absurdly denominated passive, because they are subject to the same perturbations that we are.

Early Christians used the same Greek word (though nowadays we spell it “demon”), but for them the daemons were deceivers, actually fallen angels pretending to be the Greek and Roman gods and demanding sacrifices. Their purpose was to lead men away from God by confusing them with talk of myths and gods. Demons, they said, copied stories found in the Old Testament in creating the Greek myths, in order to deceive Christians later on.

Demons were evil 'spiritual' creatures – that is, made up of 'spiritual' elements of fire or air, weighed down by their own lusts. The Second Century Christian apologist Tatian writes:

• But none of the demons possess flesh; their structure is spiritual, like that of fire or air. And only by those whom the Spirit of God dwells in and fortifies are the bodies of the demons easily seen, not at all by others,--I mean those who possess only soul; for the inferior has not the ability to apprehend the superior. On this account the nature of the demons has no place for repentance; for they are the reflection of matter and of wickedness.

Another Second Century apologist, Minucius Felix, writes:

• The same man also declared that demons were earthly, wandering, hostile to humanity. What said Plato, who believed that it was a hard thing to find out God? Does not he also, without hesitation, tell of both angels and demons? And in his Symposium also, does not he endeavour to explain the nature of demons? For he will have it to be a substance between mortal and immortal--that is, mediate between body and spirit, compounded by mingling of earthly weight and heavenly lightness
  
  These impure spirits, therefore--the demons--as is shown by the Magi, by the philosophers, and by Plato, consecrated under statues and images, lurk there, and by their afflatus attain the authority as of a present deity; while in the meantime they are breathed into the prophets, while they dwell in the shrines, while sometimes they animate the fibres of the entrails, control the flights of birds, direct the lots, are the cause of oracles involved in many falsehoods.

Clement of Alexandria writes of impure spirits, weighed down by an earthly and watery nature, and condemned to flit about graves and tombs. He writes:

• How, then, can shades and demons be still reckoned gods, being in reality unclean and impure spirits, acknowledged by all to be of an earthly and watery nature, sinking downwards by their own weight, and flitting about graves and tombs, about which they appear dimly, being but shadowy phantasms?

[GakuseiDon]

Hi GDon,

I have had some time to read through these quotes and although some of them make reference to the idea of the Greek "daemon" (the Roman "genius"), most of them are related to ancient physics rather than cosmology. The ancient physics was about the 4 or 5 elements of nature (earth, water, air, fire, aether) which modern physics presently treats as the states of matter (solid, liquid, gas, plasma, universal ZPF). [NB: aether has a number of modern correlates). The ancient physics must be examined in its own right and is important in its own right but does not necessarily deal explicitly with the cosmology of the ancients: the heavens, the firmament, the moon, the sub-lunar realm and the terrestrial environment.

I agree, but you'll notice that the "physics" quotes I gave were descriptions about things in the sublunar realm (i.e. from under the Moon down to earth.) My point is that people back then had fairly standard views about what existed in that realm, whereas the views about what existed above the firmament in the true heavens varied widely.