I just scan-read that Homer essentially gave shape, a framework, to…what was already in existence…the Greek religion, setting up a story which encompasses all the various characters, and for the Romans to have literally taken on the religion of the Greeks, surely there must have been a belief-system in place dating back before the writer for there to have been an element of the unknowing that anyone with an intellect would have bothered taking any notice of what would even at the time otherwise been a known work of mere fiction.
And yet, we know that Homer would have orated his stories in poetry format for entertainment in courts and other associated places and word-of-mouth can like wild-fire give rise to folk-stories and myth and which eventually becomes an idea for people to grasp onto.
St. Paul said that the gods of the pagan religion and which the Romans believed in, are demons, but did St. Paul mean this literally in direct reference to supposed gods used as objects of idol-worship, or did he mean that the gods which were clearly the substance of superstition were demon-like in their behaviour (akin to demons).
I always took it that he meant that the pagan gods were demons in actuality, and historical knowledge could help to expand on this understanding, and yet surely the reality of the pagan gods being demons only makes sense if the religion came first, except maybe not…
St. Augustine of Hippo said that one must begin an argument accepting as a first premise that Scripture is true and so, therefore, knowing that St. Paul was correct and with no reason to doubt him, anyway, as he was directly appointed by Christ and was driven by the Holy Spirit and further backed-up by the (other) Apostles, his discipleship accounted for in Revelation:
Though we know all religions are fictitious in terms of the various elements which make up the whole, and the consequential manifestation of their ideas then formed into a god or plural, minus Christianity, while specifically honing in on the ancient pagan religion, could it be that the story devised by Homer soon became Eastern European folklore and myth then obtaining religious followers, only for the characters to be hailed as gods with followers then driven by demons, the initial idea itself behind the conception of these gods and which is hero-worship motivated by demons and so the religion then formed being based on demonic activity as spread through a false path.
One might say in response, as said above, that all religions are originally fictitious, and so why does it matter as to who devised it, the question of derivation still worth thinking about, however, because most religions begin with nature and a gradual development which consists of an entwined connection between people and their living environments / habitats, whereas the pagan religion if devised by Homer was constructed to be literary fiction; and, consequently, if the case, how then can literature be a demonic force and which gives rise to questions of possession through reading-material as a source.
I would personally sum up in direct reference to the context of St. Paul’s assertion by saying that he meant that the gods of the pagans were, on general terms, demons, and not that Aries is this particular demon and Artemis was that demon and Zeus that one over there…He is rather saying that the pagan religion consists of demonic activity, but to what origin remains in entirety open-ended.