{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_70693/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_70693","id":"gutenberg_70693","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/70693","summary":null,"tags":["Apologetics -- History -- Early church, ca. 30-600","Category: History - Religious","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Celsus (Platonic philosopher), active 180","Theology -- History -- Early Church, ca. 30-600"],"text":"The writings of Origen, Vol. 2 of 2\n\n\n\n\n ANTE-NICENE\n\n CHRISTIAN LIBRARY:\n\n\n TRANSLATIONS OF\n THE WRITINGS OF THE FATHERS\n DOWN TO A.D. 325.\n\n\n EDITED BY THE\n REV. ALEXANDER ROBERTS, D.D.,\n AND\n JAMES DONALDSON, LL.D.\n\n\n VOL. XXIII.\n\n ORIGEN CONTRA CELSUM.\n\n\n EDINBURGH:\n T. & T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.\n MDCCCLXXII.\n\n\n\n\n PRINTED BY MURRAY AND GIBB,\n\n FOR\n\n T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.\n\n LONDON, HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO.\n DUBLIN, JOHN ROBERTSON AND CO.\n NEW YORK, C. SCRIBNER AND CO.\n\n\n\n\n THE WRITINGS OF ORIGEN.\n\n\n TRANSLATED BY THE\n REV. FREDERICK CROMBIE, D.D.,\n PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM, ST. MARY\u2019S COLLEGE, ST. ANDREWS.\n\n\n VOLUME II.\n\n ORIGEN CONTRA CELSUM,\n BOOKS II.-VIII.\n\n\n EDINBURGH:\n T. & T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.\n MDCCCLXXII.\n\n\n\n\nBooks VII. and VIII. have been translated by the late W. H. CAIRNS,\nM.A., Rector of the Dumfries Academy, and the rest by PROFESSOR CROMBIE.\n\n\n\n\n ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS.\n\n\nVOLUME I.\n\nBOOK I., 393-478\n\nPREFACE.\u2014Origen undertakes this treatise at the desire of Ambrose, but\nthinks it unnecessary, as the facts and doctrines of Christianity form\nits best defence\u2014work begun on one plan and carried on on another.\n\nFirst objection of Celsus is, that Christians enter into secret\nassociations, some of which are illegal,\u2014his object being to discredit\nthe \u201clove-feasts\u201d of the Christians: Answer of Origen\u2014chap. i. Second\nobjection of Celsus, that Judaism, on which Christianity depends, had a\nbarbarous origin: Answer\u2014chap. ii. Celsus objects that Christians\npractise their doctrines in secret to avoid the penalty of death:\nAnswer\u2014chap. iii. Morality of Christianity neither venerable nor new:\nAnswer\u2014chap. iv. Celsus approves of the views of Christians respecting\nidolatry, but asserts that these views are prior to Christianity:\nAnswer\u2014chap. v. Asserts that the miracles of Christianity were performed\nby means of the invocation of demons: Answer\u2014chap. vi. That Christianity\nis a secret system of belief: Answer\u2014chap. vii. Maintains that a man\nshould die for his belief; inconsistency of this with his profession as\nan Epicurean\u2014chap. viii. Maintains that reason ought to be the guide of\nmen in adopting opinions, and charges Christians with inculcating a\nblind belief: Answer\u2014chaps. ix.-xi. Boast of Celsus, that he is\nacquainted with all the opinions of the Christians, shown to be\nunfounded\u2014chap. xii. Misrepresentation by Celsus of the statement in 1\nCor. iii. 18, 19: Correction and explanation\u2014chap. xiii. Inconsistency\nof Celsus in accepting the accounts of Greeks and barbarians as to their\nantiquity, while rejecting the histories of the Jews\u2014chaps. xiv.-xvi.\nCelsus objects to giving an allegorical signification to the Jewish\nhistory; inconsistency of this\u2014chap. xvii. Challenges a comparison\nbetween the writings of Linus, Mus\u00e6us, etc., and the laws of Moses:\nAnswer\u2014chap. xviii. Celsus holds that the world was uncreated, and yet\nis led to admit that it is comparatively modern\u2014chaps. xix., xx. Celsus\nasserts that Moses borrowed his doctrines from wise nations and eloquent\nmen, and thus obtained the reputation of divinity: Answer\u2014chap. xxi.\nCircumcision, according to Celsus, first practised by the Egyptians:\nAnswer\u2014chap. xxii. The followers of Moses, shepherds and herdsmen, were\nled to believe in the unity of God through delusion and vulgar conceit:\nAnswer\u2014chap. xxiii. Various names given to the one God by the followers\nof Moses, all evincing their ignorance of His nature: Discussion\nregarding the significance of the divine names in various\nlanguages\u2014chaps. xxiv., xxv. Celsus charges the Jews with worshipping\nangels and practising sorcery: Answer\u2014chaps. xxvi., xxvii. Inconsistency\nof Celsus in introducing a Jew, as an opponent of Jesus, who does not\nmaintain the character of a Jew throughout the discussion: This Jew\nrepresented as accusing Jesus of having \u201cinvented his birth from a\nvirgin,\u201d and upbraiding Him with \u201cbeing born in a certain Jewish village\nof a poor woman of the country who gained her subsistence by spinning,\nand who was turned out of doors by her husband, a carpenter by trade,\nbecause she was convicted of adultery; and after being driven away by\nher husband and wandering about for a time, she disgracefully gave birth\nto Jesus, an illegitimate child, who, having hired himself out as a\nservant in Egypt on account of his poverty, and having there acquired\nsome miraculous powers, on which the Egyptians greatly pride themselves,\nreturned to his own country, highly elated on account of them, and by\nhelp of them proclaimed himself a god\u201d\u2014chap. xxviii. Preliminary remarks\nto a full answer to these charges\u2014chaps. xxix.-xxxii. Proof that the\nbirth of Christ from a virgin was predicted by the prophets\u2014chaps.\nxxxiii.-xxxv. Proof that prophets existed among the Jews\u2014chap. xxxvi.\nPossibility of the miraculous birth of Christ\u2014chap. xxxvii. Answer to\nthe assertion that Jesus wrought His miracles by magic, and not by\ndivine power\u2014chap. xxxviii. Scoffs of Celsus regarding the mother of\nJesus not deserving of answer\u2014chap. xxxix. Celsus charges the narrative\nin Matthew regarding the dove which alighted upon the Saviour at His\nbaptism with being fictitious; shows great want of method and order in\nthe manner in which he brings his charges\u2014chap. xl. Answer\u2014chaps.\nxli.-xlviii. Celsus sets aside the fact that the coming of Jesus was\npredicted by the Jewish prophets, perhaps because he was not acquainted\nwith the prophecies relating to Christ: Inconsistency of representing\nthe Jew as saying, \u201cMy prophet once declared in Jerusalem that the Son\nof God will come as the judge of the righteous and the punisher of the\nwicked\u201d\u2014chaps. xlix., l. Detailed evidence from prophecy respecting the\nbirth of Christ\u2014chaps. li.-liii. Answer to objection of Celsus regarding\nthe sufferings of Christ\u2014chaps. liv.-lvi. Celsus asserts that every man,\nborn according to the decree of divine Providence, is a son of God:\nAnswer\u2014chap. lvii. The Jew of Celsus goes on to misrepresent the Gospel\naccount of the visit of the Magi, and of the slaughter of the innocents\nby Herod: Answer\u2014chaps. lviii.-lxi. Calumnies of Celsus regarding the\nnumber and character and conduct of the disciples of Jesus:\nAnswer\u2014chaps. lxii.-lxv. The absurdity of the story of our Lord\u2019s\nremoval when an infant, is, according to Celsus, a proof that He was not\ndivine: Answer\u2014chap. lxvi. Celsus denies that the works of Jesus were at\nall remarkable as compared with those attributed to Perseus and Amphion,\nand other mythological personages, but admits afterwards that some of\nthem were remarkable,\u2014such as His cures, and His resurrection, and the\nfeeding of the multitude,\u2014although he immediately afterwards compares\nthem to the tricks of jugglers, and denies that they can furnish any\nproof of His being \u201cSon of God:\u201d Answer\u2014chaps. lxvii., lxviii. Objection\nof Celsus that the body of Jesus could not have been that of a god, nor\ncould be nourished with such food as Jesus partook of: Answer\u2014chaps.\nlxix., lxx. Declares that opinions of Jesus were those of a wicked and\nGod-hated sorcerer: Answer\u2014chap. lxxi.\n\nVOLUME II.\n\nBOOK II., 1 -84\n\nThis book contains Origen\u2019s answers to the charges which Celsus, in the\nperson of a Jew, brings against the converts from Judaism to\nChristianity. Main charge is, that \u201cthey have forsaken the law of their\nfathers, in consequence of their minds being led captive by Jesus; that\nthey have been most ridiculously deceived; and that they have become\ndeserters to another name and to another mode of life.\u201d Answer to these\ncharges\u2014chap. i. Digression upon certain declarations of Jesus in the\nGospels\u2014chap. ii. Ignorance of Celsus evinced by the manner in which he\nrepresents the Jew as addressing the Israelitish converts\u2014chap. iii.\nObjection of Jew, that Christianity takes its origin from Judaism, and\nthat after a certain point it discards Judaism: Answer\u2014chap. iv.\nAssertion of Celsus, that Jesus was punished by the Jews for His crimes,\nalready answered\u2014chap. v. Observance by Jesus of Jewish usages and\nsacrificial observances, no argument against His recognition as the Son\nof God\u2014chap. vi. Language of Jesus furnishes not the slightest evidence,\nbut the reverse, of arrogance: Quotations\u2014chap. vii. Allegation, that\nwhen men are willing to be deceived, many persons like Jesus would find\na friendly reception; inconsistency of this; various other charges\ndisposed of\u2014chap. viii. Assertion of Celsus, that Jesus could not be\ndeemed a god because he was currently reported to have performed none of\nhis promises, and, after conviction and sentence, was found attempting\nto conceal himself and endeavouring to escape, and was then betrayed by\nhis disciples; impossibility of such things, according to Celsus,\nhappening to a god: Answer to these calumnies and objections\u2014chaps.\nix.-xi. Assertion of Celsus, that Jesus was inferior to a brigand chief,\nbecause He was betrayed by His disciples: Answer\u2014chap. xii. Celsus\nasserts that he omits mention of many things in the life of Christ which\nhe could state to His disadvantage; challenged to produce such: Several\npredictions of Jesus quoted and commented on\u2014chap. xiii. Celsus makes\nlight of the admission that future events were predicted by Jesus:\nRemarks of Origen in answer\u2014chap. xiv. Assertion of Celsus, that the\ndisciples of Jesus devised the fiction that He foreknew everything\nbefore it happened: Answer\u2014chap. xv. Asserts that the disciples wrote\nthe accounts they have given by way of extenuating the charges against\nHim: Answer\u2014chap. xvi. Celsus alleges that a prudent man\u2014much more a god\nor spirit\u2014would have tried to escape dangers that were foreseen, whereas\nJesus did the reverse: Answer\u2014chap. xvii. Objection of Celsus, that the\nannouncements which Jesus made regarding those disciples who were to\nbetray and deny Him had not the effect of deterring them from their\ntreason and perjury, shown to be self-contradictory\u2014chap. xviii. Further\nstatement of Celsus, that in such cases intending criminals abandon\ntheir intentions, shown to be untrue\u2014chap. xix. Objection, that if Jesus\nhad been a God, His predictions must infallibly have come to pass; and\nassertion, that He plotted against the members of His own table:\nRefuted\u2014chaps. xx.-xxii. Assertion, that the things which He suffered\ncould have been neither painful nor distressing, because He submitted to\nthem voluntarily and as a God\u2014chap. xxiii. Misrepresentation of Celsus\nas to the language employed by Jesus during His sufferings\u2014chaps. xxiv.,\nxxv. Celsus charges the disciples with having invented statements:\nAnswer\u2014chap. xxvi. Alleges that Christian believers have corrupted the\ngospel in order to be able to reply to objections: Answer\u2014chap. xxvii.\nThe Jew of Celsus reproaches Christians with making use of the prophets:\nAnswer\u2014chap. xxviii. Assertion of Celsus, that from such signs and\nmisinterpretations, and from proofs so mean, no one could prove Jesus to\nbe God and the Son of God: Answer\u2014chap. xxx. Charges Christians with\nsophistical reasoning in saying that the Son of God is the Logos\nHimself: Refutation\u2014chap. xxxi. Objection of Celsus to our Lord\u2019s\ngenealogy: Refutation\u2014chap. xxxii. Celsus ridicules the actions of Jesus\nas unworthy of a God: Refutation\u2014chap. xxxiii. Inconsistency of Celsus\nin representing the Jew as conversant with Greek literature; various\nremarks of Celsus answered\u2014chap. xxxiv. Question of Celsus, why Jesus\ndoes not give some manifestation of His divinity by taking vengeance\nupon those who insult Him and His Father: Answered\u2014chap. xxxv. Celsus\nscoffingly inquires, What was the nature of the ichor in the body of\nJesus? and asserts that Jesus rushed with open mouth to drink of the\nvinegar and gall: Answer\u2014chaps. xxxvi., xxxvii. Sneer of the Jew, that\nChristians find fault with Jews for not recognising Jesus as God:\nAnswer\u2014chap. xxxviii. Falsehood of the assertion of this Jew of Celsus,\nthat Jesus gained over to His cause no one during His life, not even His\nown disciples\u2014chap. xxxix. Jew goes on to assert that Jesus did not show\nHimself to be pure from all evil: Answer\u2014chaps. xli., xlii. Falsity of\nthe statement, that Jesus, after failing to gain over those who were in\nthis world, went to Hades to gain over those who were there\u2014chap. xliii.\nCelsus asserts further, that other individuals who have been condemned\nand died miserable deaths ought to be regarded as greater and more\ndivine messengers of heaven than Jesus: Answer\u2014chap. xliv. Argument of\nCelsus against the truth of Christianity, from the different behaviour\nof the actual followers of Jesus during His life and that of Christians\nat the present day: Answer\u2014chap. xlv. Falsehood of the assertion, that\nJesus when on earth gained over to Himself only sailors and\ntax-gatherers of the most worthless character\u2014chap. xlvi. Answer to the\nquestion, By what train of argument were Christians led to regard Jesus\nas the Son of God?\u2014chap. xlvii. Assertion of Celsus, that Jesus is\ndeemed by Christians to be the Son of God because He healed the lame and\nthe blind and is asserted to have raised the dead: Answer\u2014chap. xlviii.\nStatement of Celsus, that Jesus convicted Himself of being a sorcerer:\nRefuted by His predictions regarding false prophets, etc.\u2014chaps. xlix.,\nl. No resemblance between the works of Jesus and those of a\nsorcerer\u2014chap. li. Inconsistency of the Jew in raising the objections\nwhich he does, seeing that the same objections might be raised against\nthe divinity of Mosaism\u2014chaps. lii.-liv. Jew objects further, that the\npredictions, although actually uttered, prove nothing, because many have\nbeen deceived by juggling tricks; asserts also, that there is no\nsatisfactory evidence of the resurrection of Jesus, the report of which\ncan be explained in other ways: Answer\u2014chaps. lv.-lxii. Celsus proceeds\nto bring, as a serious charge against Jesus, that He did not appear\nafter His resurrection to those who had ill-treated Him and condemned\nHim, and to men in general: Answer\u2014chaps. lxiii.-lxvii. Celsus asserts,\nthat it would have helped to manifest His divinity if He had at once\ndisappeared from the cross: Answer\u2014chaps. lxviii., lxix. Inconsistency\nof Celsus\u2019 statement (that Jesus concealed Himself) with the facts of\nthe case, pointed out\u2014chap. lxx. Certain declarations of Jesus regarding\nHimself, noticed\u2014chap. lxxi. Celsus asks why, if Jesus wished to remain\nhid, a voice was heard from heaven proclaiming Him to be the Son of God?\nor, if He did not seek concealment, why was He punished? or, why did He\ndie? Answer\u2014chap. lxxii. Celsus asserts, that no witness is needed to\nrefute the statements of the Christians, because these are taken from\ntheir own books, which are self-contradictory: Answer\u2014chap. lxxiv.\nImpossibility, according to Celsus, that a god, who was expected to\nappear among men, should be received with incredulity on his coming, or\nshould fail to be recognised by those who have been looking for him:\nAnswer\u2014chap. lxxv. All objections brought by the Jew against\nChristianity might be retorted on himself: Illustrations\u2014chap. lxxvi.\nJew professes his belief in a bodily resurrection and in eternal\nlife\u2014chap. lxxvii. Asks if Jesus came into the world to produce unbelief\nin the minds of men: Answer\u2014chap. lxxviii. Conclusion of the Jew is that\neverything proves Jesus to have been a man: General refutation.\n\nBOOK III., 85-160\n\nObject of Book Third to refute the charges which Celsus makes against\nChristianity in his own person. Assertion of Celsus that the controversy\nbetween Jews and Christians is most foolish; that there is nothing of\nimportance in the investigations of Jews and Christians; because,\nalthough both believe that a Saviour was predicted, yet they do not\nagree on the point whether He has actually come or not. Refutation of\nthese statements generally\u2014chaps. i.-iv. Celsus alleges that both\nJudaism and Christianity originated in rebellion against the State;\nimpossibility of this\u2014chaps. v.-vii. Jews shown from their language not\nto be Egyptians\u2014chap. viii. Falsehood of the assertion that Christians\ndo not desire to convert all men, even if they could\u2014chap. ix. Proof of\nCelsus in support of his assertion: Answer\u2014chaps. x.-xiii. Union of\nChristians alleged to rest upon no substantial reason, save on rebellion\nand fear of external enemies: Answer\u2014chaps. xiv., xv. Falsity of the\ncharge that Christians invent terrors\u2014chap. xvi. Comparison of the\narticles of the Christian faith to Egyptian temples, where, after\npassing through imposing avenues, nothing is found as an object of\nworship save a cat, or an ape, or a crocodile, or a goat, or a dog:\nRefutation of this\u2014chaps. xvii.-xxi. Celsus asserts that the Dioscuri,\nand Hercules, and \u00c6sculapius, and Dionysus, are believed by the Greeks\nto have become gods after being men; but that we refuse to recognise\nthem as such, although they manifested many noble qualities, displayed\nfor the benefit of mankind: General answer\u2014chap. xxii. Comparison of our\nLord\u2019s character with that of individuals referred to\u2014chap. xxiii.\nUnfairness of Celsus in requiring Christians to believe the stories\nregarding such beings, and yet refusing his assent to the credibility of\nthe Gospel narratives regarding Jesus\u2014chap. xxiv. Examination of the\ncase of \u00c6sculapius\u2014chaps. xxv., xxvi.; of Aristeas of Proconnesus\u2014chaps.\nxxvi.-xxix. Superiority of the churches of God over the public\nassemblies\u2014chaps. xxix., xxx. Comparison of the cases of Abaris the\nHyperborean and of the Clazomenian with Jesus\u2014chaps. xxxi., xxxii.\nExamination of the story of Cleomedes of Astypalea\u2014chap. xxxiii. Celsus\nalleges that there are many other similar instances: This statement,\neven if true, shown to be inapplicable\u2014chap. xxxiv. Celsus challenged to\nsay whether he believes such beings really to be demons, or heroes, or\ngods: Consequences which will follow\u2014chap. xxxv. Comparison of case of\nAntinous, the favourite of Hadrian, shown to be absurd\u2014chaps.\nxxxvi.-xxxviii. Allegation of Celsus that faith alone leads Christians\nto give their assent to the doctrines of Jesus: Examination of this\nstatement\u2014chaps. xxxix.-xli. Comparison of mortal flesh of Jesus to\ngold, silver, or stone, shown to be inept\u2014chap. xlii. Celsus asserts,\nthat in ridiculing the worshippers of Jupiter, who was buried in Crete,\nwhile worshipping Jesus, who rose from the grave, we are guilty of\ninconsistency: Answer\u2014chap. xliii. Various objections against\nChristianity, gathered from the more unintelligent Christians, adduced\nby Celsus; enumeration of these: Answers\u2014chaps. xliv., xlv. Christians\ndo desire that there should be wise men among them\u2014chaps. xlv.-xlviii.\nAllegation that only the low, and the vile, and the ignorant, with women\nand children, are desired as converts, shown to be false in the sense in\nwhich it is advanced by Celsus\u2014chaps. xlix.-liv. Charge brought against\nteachers of Christianity of surreptitiously inculcating their doctrines\nupon children without the knowledge of their parents\u2014chap. lv.\nExamination of this charge\u2014chaps. lvi.-lviii. Answer to charge of\nCelsus, that Christians invite the wicked alone to participation in\ntheir sacred rites\u2014chaps. lix.-lxii. Refutation of the charge that God\ndoes not decide in accordance with truth, but with flattery\u2014chap. lxiii.\nAnswer to question of Celsus, why sinners are preferred over\nothers\u2014chap. lxiv. Falsehood of the assertion that Christians are able\nto gain over none but sinners\u2014chap. lxv. Error of Celsus in denying the\npossibility of a complete transformation of character\u2014chap. lxvi. His\nmeaning probably was, that such transformation could not be effected by\npunishment; this shown to be false\u2014chap. lxvii. Transformation of\ncharacter, in certain cases, by means of philosophical discourses, not a\nmatter to excite surprise: character of Christian preaching\u2014chap.\nlxviii. Examination of Celsus\u2019 statement, that to change a nature\nentirely is exceedingly difficult\u2014chap. lxix. God can do all that it is\npossible for Him to do without ceasing to be God\u2014chap. lxx. Falsity of\nstatement that God alleviates the sufferings of the wicked through pity\nfor their wailings, but casts off the good\u2014chap. lxxi. No truly wise man\ncould be misled by any statements of an unintelligent Christian\u2014chap.\nlxxii. Falsity of statements, that the ambassador of Christianity\nrelates only ridiculous things\u2014chap. lxxiii. That he seeks after the\nunintelligent alone\u2014chap. lxxiv. That he acts like a person who promises\nto restore patients to bodily health, but who prevents them from\nconsulting skilled physicians, who would expose his ignorance\u2014chap.\nlxxv. That the Christian teacher acts like a drunken man, who should\nenter a company of drunkards, and accuse those who were sober of being\ndrunk\u2014chap. lxxvi. That he is like one suffering from ophthalmia, who\nshould accuse the clear-sighted of blindness. Assertion of Celsus that\nChristians lead on men by empty hopes: Answer\u2014chap. lxxvii. Character of\nthose who become converts\u2014chap. lxxviii. Christianity the best system\nwhich men were capable of receiving\u2014chaps. lxxix.-lxxxi.\n\nBOOK IV., 161-267\n\nSubject of Fourth Book mainly to show that the prophecies regarding\nChrist are true predictions\u2014chap. i. The position maintained by certain\nChristians, that there has already descended upon the earth a certain\nGod, or Son of a God, who will make the inhabitants of the earth\nrighteous, and by the Jews, that the advent of this being is still\nfuture, asserted by Celsus to be false: Answer\u2014chap. ii. Question of\nCelsus as to the meaning of such a descent: Answered\u2014chap. iii. Argument\nof Celsus turned against himself\u2014chap. iv. Celsus misrepresents\nChristians as saying that God Himself will come down to men, and that it\nfollows that He has left His own abode\u2014chap. v. Celsus represents the\nobject of God\u2019s descent to be a desire to make Himself known, and to\nmake trial of men; and this, he alleges, testifies to an excessive and\nmortal ambition on the part of God: Answer\u2014chaps. vi.-ix. Celsus\nasserts, that Christians talk of God in a way that is neither holy nor\nreverential, and likens them to those who in the Bacchic mysteries\nintroduce phantoms and objects of terror: Answer\u2014chap. x. Celsus\nendeavours to prove that the statements in the Christian records\nregarding floods and conflagrations are neither new nor wonderful, but\nmay be paralleled and explained from the accounts of the Greeks:\nAnswer\u2014chaps. xi.-xiii. Celsus returns to the subject of the descent of\nGod, alleging that if He came down among men, He must have undergone a\nchange from better to worse, which is impossible in the case of an\nimmortal being: Answer\u2014chaps. xiv.-xvi. Superiority of the scriptural\naccounts of these matters over those of the Greek mythology\u2014chap. xvii.\nCelsus repeats his objections: Answer\u2014chaps. xviii., xix. Celsus\u2019\nrepresentation of the manner in which the Jews maintain that the advent\nof Jesus is still future\u2014chap. xx. Absurdity of the statement of Celsus\nthat the overturning of the tower of Babel had the same object as the\nDeluge, viz. the purification of the earth\u2014chap. xxi. Proof that Jews\nbrought on themselves the divine wrath, because of their treatment of\nJesus\u2014chap. xxii. Celsus insolently compares Jews and Christians to\nbats, and ants, and frogs, and worms, etc.\u2014chap. xxiii. Answer\u2014chaps.\nxxiv., xxv. Superiority of Christians in their opinions and practice to\nidolaters\u2014chaps. xxvi., xxvii. Celsus misrepresents the language of\nChristians as to God\u2019s descent among men, and His intercourse with\nthem\u2014chaps. xxviii., xxix. Celsus, not understanding the words, \u201cLet us\nmake man in our image and likeness,\u201d has represented Christians as\nsaying that they _resemble_ God because created by Him: Answer\u2014chap.\nxxx. Celsus again asserts that the Jews were fugitives from Egypt, who\nnever performed anything of note, and were never held in any account:\nAnswer\u2014chaps. xxxi., xxxii. Celsus, in very ambiguous language, asserts\nthat the Jews endeavoured to derive their origin from the first race of\njugglers and deceivers, and appealed to the testimony of dark and\nambiguous words: Answer\u2014chaps. xxxiii.-xxxv. Celsus adduces instances of\nalleged great antiquity put forth by other nations, and asserts that the\nJews wove together some most incredible and stupid stories, regarding\nthe creation of man, the formation of the woman, the issuing of certain\ncommands by God, the opposition of the serpent, and the defeat of God,\nwho is thus shown to have been weak at the very beginning of things, and\nunable to persuade a single individual to obey His will: Detailed\nanswers to these misrepresentations\u2014chaps. xxxvi.-xl. Celsus next\nridicules the accounts of the Deluge and the Ark: Answers\u2014chaps. xli.,\nxlii. Goes on to carp at the histories of Abraham and Sarah, of Cain and\nAbel, of Esau and Jacob, of Laban and Jacob\u2014chap. xliii. Explanation of\nthe statement that \u201cGod gave wells to the righteous;\u201d other matters,\nalso, to be allegorically understood\u2014chap. xliv. Celsus does not\nrecognise the love of truth which characterizes the writers of\nScripture; figurative signification of Sodom, and of Lot and his\ndaughters; discussion on the nature of actions\u2014chap. xlv. Spirit of\nhostility which characterizes Celsus, in selecting from the narratives\nof Scripture whatever may serve as ground of accusation against\nChristians, while passing without notice whatever may redound to their\ncredit: Instances\u2014chap. xlvi. Celsus refers vaguely to the dreams of the\nbutler and baker in the history of Joseph, and endeavours to find ground\nof objection in the history of Joseph\u2019s conduct towards his\nbrethren\u2014chap. xlvii. Asserts that the more modest among Jews and\nChristians endeavour to give these things an allegorical meaning,\nbecause they are ashamed of them: Answer\u2014chap. xlviii. Falsity of his\nassertion that the scriptural writings are incapable of receiving an\nallegorical meaning\u2014chaps. xlix., l. The treatises which give\nallegorical explanations of the law of Moses evidently unknown to\nCelsus, otherwise he could not have said that these allegorical\nexplanations were more shameful than the fables themselves:\nIllustrations\u2014chap. li. Celsus refers to the work entitled \u201cControversy\nbetween Papiscus and Jason,\u201d in support of his assertions\u2014chaps. lii.,\nliii. Celsus conceals his real opinions, although he ought to have\navowed them, when quoting from the _Tim\u00e6us_ of Plato, to the effect that\nGod made immortal things alone, while mortal things are the work of\nothers; that the soul is the work of God, while the body is different;\nthat there is no difference between the body of a man, and that of a\nbat: Examination of these statements\u2014chaps. liv.-lix. Asserts that a\ncommon nature pervades all bodies, and that no product of matter is\nimmortal: Answers\u2014chaps. lx., lxi. Maintains that the amount of evil is\na fixed quantity, which has never varied: Answers\u2014chaps. lxii.-lxiv.\nThat it is difficult for any but a philosopher to ascertain the origin\nof evils, but that it is sufficient for the multitude to say that they\ndo not proceed from God, but cleave to matter; and that, as the cause of\nmortal events never varies, the same things must always return,\naccording to the appointed cycles: Answers\u2014chaps. lxv.-lxix. Assertion\nof Celsus that a thing which seems to be evil may not necessarily be so:\nExamined\u2014chap. lxx. Celsus misunderstands the anthropopathic language of\nScripture: Explanation\u2014chaps. lxxi.-lxxiii. Celsus finds fault with\nChristians for asserting that God made all things for the sake of man,\nwhereas they were made as much for the sake of the irrational animals:\nAnswer\u2014chap. lxxiv. Celsus holds that thunders, and lightnings, and\nrains are not the works of God; that even if they were, they were\nbrought into existence as much for the sake of plants, and trees, and\nherbs, as for that of human beings: Answer\u2014chaps. lxxv., lxxvi. Celsus\nmaintains that the verse of Euripides, viz. \u201cThe sun and night are to\nmortals slaves,\u201d is untrue, as these luminaries may be said to be\ncreated for the use of ants and flies as much as of man: Answer\u2014chap.\nlxxvii. Asserts that we may be said to be created as much on account of\nirrational animals as they on our account: Answer\u2014chaps. lxxviii.-lxxx.\nCelsus maintains that the superiority of man over irrational animals in\nbuilding cities and founding political communities is only apparent:\nExamination of this assertion\u2014chaps. lxxxi.-lxxxiv. No great difference,\naccording to Celsus, between the actions of men, and those of ants and\nbees\u2014chap. lxxxv. Certain irrational animals, according to Celsus,\npossess the power of sorcery; instances: Examination of these\u2014chaps.\nlxxxvi., lxxxvii. Assertion that the thoughts entertained of God by\nirrational animals are not inferior to those of men; illustrations:\nAnswer\u2014chaps. lxxxviii., lxxxix. Degrading views of Celsus\u2014chaps.\nxc.-xcix.\n\nBOOK V., 268-335\n\nContinuation of the subject\u2014chap. i. Celsus repeats his denial that no\nGod, or son of God, has either come, or will come, to earth; that if\ncertain angels did come, by what name are they to be called? whether by\nthat of gods or some other race of beings? in all probability such\nangels were demons: Refutation\u2014chaps. ii.-v. Celsus proceeds to express\nsurprise that the Jews should worship heaven and angels, and yet pass by\nthe heavenly bodies, as the sun and moon; which procedure is, according\nto his view, most unreasonable: Refutation\u2014chaps. vi.-x. Defence of\nChristians against the same charge\u2014chaps. x.-xiii. Celsus declares the\nChristian belief in the future conflagration of the world, in the\nsalvation of the righteous, in the resurrection of the body, most\nfoolish and irrational, alleging that this belief is not held by some of\nthe Christian believers, and adducing certain considerations regarding\nthe character of God and the nature of bodies which render such things\nimpossible\u2014chap. xiv. Refutation in detail of these objections\u2014chaps.\nxv.-xxiv. Examination of Celsus\u2019 statement that the various quarters of\nthe earth were from the beginning allotted to different superintending\nspirits, and that in this way the administration of the world is carried\non\u2014chaps. xxv.-xxviii. Considerations of a profounder kind may be stated\nregarding the original distribution of the various quarters of the earth\namong different superintending spirits, which considerations may be\nshown to be free from the absurd consequences which would follow from\nthe views of Celsus; enumeration of these\u2014chaps. xxix.-xxxiii. Statement\nof Celsus regarding the request of the people of Marea and Apis to the\noracle of Ammon, as related by Herodotus, and the inference which he\nseems to draw from it and other similar instances adduced by him,\nexamined and refuted\u2014chaps. xxxiv.-xxxix. Examination of Celsus\u2019\nquotation from Pindar, that \u201cLaw is king of all things\u201d\u2014chap. xl. Celsus\ngoes on to state objections which apply to Jews much more than to\nChristians, viz. that the Jewish doctrine regarding heaven is not\npeculiar to them, but has long ago been received by the Persians; and\nproceeds to observe that it makes no difference by what name the Supreme\nBeing is called; nor are the Jews to be deemed holier than other nations\nbecause abstaining from swine\u2019s flesh, etc. Detailed examination and\nrefutation of these statements\u2014chaps. xli.-xlix. Celsus denies that the\nJews were regarded by God with greater favour than other nations:\nAnswer\u2014chap. l. Statement of Celsus that, admitting Jesus to have been\nan angel, He was not the first who came to visit men, for the histories\nrelate that there have been many instances, several of which he\nenumerates\u2014chap. lii. Refutation\u2014chaps. liii.-lviii. Conclusion of\nCelsus that Jews and Christians have the same God, and that the latter\nadopt the Jewish accounts regarding the six days; other points of\nagreement mentioned: examination of these statements, as well as of his\nadmission that certain Christians will admit the identity, while others\nwill deny it\u2014chaps. lix.-lxii. Argument of Celsus against Christianity,\nfounded upon the existence of those who have worshipped demons as their\nteacher, and of sects that have hated each other, examined and\nrefuted\u2014chap. lxiii. Celsus has misunderstood the prediction of the\napostle that deceivers will come in the last times\u2014chap. lxiv. Falsity\nof Celsus\u2019 statement that all who differ so widely may be heard saying,\n\u201cThe world is crucified to me, and I unto the world\u201d\u2014chap. lxv.\n\nBOOK VI., 336-424\n\nObject of Sixth Book specially to refute those objections which _Celsus_\nbrings against Christians, and not those derived from writers on\nphilosophy\u2014chap. i. Explanation of the reasons which led the writers of\nScripture to adopt a simple style of address\u2014chap. ii. Quotation from\nPlato regarding the \u201cchief good,\u201d and remarks upon it\u2014chap. iii.\nInconsistent conduct of those who can so express themselves pointed\nout\u2014chap. iv. Comparison of the Platonic phraseology, regarding the\nkindling of a light in the soul, with the language of Scripture\u2014chap. v.\nExamination of the question whether Plato was acquainted with doctrines\nmore profound than those which are contained in his writings, and\ndemonstration of the fact that the prophets did know of greater things\nthan any in Scripture, but did not commit them to writing\u2014chaps. vi.-x.\nCelsus inquires whether, amid the perplexity arising from the existence\nof different Christs, men are to cast the dice to divine which of them\nthey ought to follow? Answer\u2014chap. xi. Perversion of the language of\nPaul regarding wisdom corrected\u2014chaps. xii., xiii. Examination of\nCelsus\u2019 charge that Christians are uninstructed, servile, and\nignorant\u2014chap. xiv. Sneer of Celsus at the humility of Christians\nanswered\u2014chap. xv. Celsus charges Jesus with having perverted the\nlanguage of Plato in His saying regarding the impossibility of a rich\nman\u2019s entering the kingdom of heaven: Answer\u2014chap. xvi. Comparison of\nsome points of Scripture doctrine with statements of Plato\u2014chaps. xvii.,\nxviii. Charge of Celsus that Christians have misunderstood language of\nPlato, in boasting of a \u201csuper-celestial\u201d God: Answer\u2014chap. xix.\nExplanation of certain terms referring to heaven\u2014chaps. xx., xxi.\nAssertion of Celsus, that the Persian mysteries of Mithras contain many\nobscure allusions to those heavenly things mentioned in the Christian\nwritings; absurdity of his statements\u2014chaps. xxii., xxiii. Celsus refers\nto a certain diagram, the statements regarding which he appears to have\nborrowed from the sect of the Ophites; which statements, however, are of\nno credibility\u2014chap. xxiv. Description of said diagram, and explanation\nof the names inscribed in it\u2014chaps. xxv., xxvi. Certain statements of\nCelsus regarding the \u201cseal\u201d examined\u2014chap. xxvii. Celsus asserts that\nChristians term the Creator an \u201caccursed\u201d divinity, and asks what could\nbe more foolish or insane than such senseless wisdom? Examination of\nthese statements\u2014chaps. xxviii., xxix. Celsus returns to the subject of\nthe seven ruling demons, and makes reference to the diagram\u2014chap. xxx.\nQuotations illustrating the manner of invoking said demons\u2014chap. xxxi.\nRemarks on the procedure of Celsus\u2014chap. xxxii. Further statements of\nCelsus\u2014chap. xxxiii. Continuation of statements of Celsus, to the effect\nthat Christians heap together one thing after another,\u2014discourses of\nprophets, circles upon circles, effluents from an earthly church, and\nfrom circumcision; and a power flowing from one Prunicos, a virgin and\nliving soul; and a heaven slain in order to live, etc. etc.\u2014chap. xxxiv.\nDetailed examination and answer to these statements\u2014chaps. xxxv.-xxxvii.\nCelsus introduces other charges, stating that there are inscriptions in\nthe diagram containing two words, \u201ca greater and a less,\u201d which are\nreferred to Father and Son: Answer\u2014chap. xxxviii. Statement of Celsus,\nthat names of demons among the Greeks are different from what they are\namong the Scythians; gives illustrations: Answer\u2014chap. xxxix. Statement\nof Celsus, on the authority of Dionysius, an Egyptian magician, that\nmagic arts have no power over philosophers, but only over uneducated men\nand persons of corrupt morals: Falsity of this shown\u2014chap. xli.\nAllegation of Celsus, that Christians have invented the fiction of the\ndevil or Satan, as an adversary to God, who counterworks His plans and\ndefeats them; that the Son of God, even, has been vanquished by the\ndevil; and that the devil will exhibit great and marvellous works, and\nclaim for himself the glory of God: Examination and refutation of these\nstatements\u2014chaps. xlii.-xliv. Celsus has misunderstood the statements of\nScripture regarding Antichrist: Explanation of these\u2014chaps. xlv., xlvi.\nCelsus perverts the language of Christians regarding the \u201cSon of God:\u201d\nAnswer\u2014chap. xlvii. Mystical meaning of \u201cSon of God\u201d explained\u2014chap.\nxlviii. Celsus characterizes the Mosaic cosmogony as extremely silly,\nand alleges that Moses and the prophets, from ignorance, have woven\ntogether a web of sheer nonsense: Answers\u2014chaps. xlix.-li. Celsus will\nnot decide whether the world was uncreated and indestructible, or\ncreated but not destructible\u2014chap. lii. Brings forward objections that\nwere raised against Marcion, and after several disparaging observations\non the manner of the divine procedure towards men, asks how it is that\nGod created evil, etc.\u2014chap. liii. Answer to the foregoing\u2014chaps.\nliv.-lix. Celsus repeats charges formerly made regarding the days of\ncreation\u2014chaps. lx., lxi. Comments on the expression, \u201cThe mouth of the\nLord hath spoken it:\u201d Answer\u2014chap. lxii. Asserts that \u201cthe first-born of\nevery creature\u201d is the image of God, and that God did not make man in\nHis image, because he is unlike to any other species of being;\nexplanation of the expression, \u201cMan is made after the image of\nGod\u201d\u2014chap. lxiii. God partakes neither of form nor colour, nor can\nmotion be predicated of Him; explanation of passages that seem to imply\nthe reverse\u2014chap. lxiv. Inconsistency of Celsus with his declared\nopinions, in saying that God is the source of all things; asserts that\nHe cannot be reached by word: Explanation and distinction\u2014chap. lxv.\nCelsus asks, in the person of another, how it is possible to know God,\nor to learn the way that leads to Him, because darkness is thrown before\nthe eyes, and nothing distinctly seen: Answer to this query, and remark\nof Celsus retorted upon himself\u2014chaps. lxvi.-lxviii. Celsus represents\nour answer as being this: \u201cSince God is great and difficult to see, He\nput His own Spirit into a body that resembled ours, and sent it down to\nus, that we might be enabled to hear Him, and become acquainted with\nHim:\u201d Examination of this statement\u2014chaps. lxix., lxx. According to\nCelsus, our doctrine regarding the spirit is the same as that of the\nStoics, who maintain that \u201cGod is a spirit, diffused through all things,\nand containing all things within Himself:\u201d Answer\u2014chap. lxxi. Assertion\nthat the Son of God would not be immortal, because He was a spirit\nexisting in a human body: Answer\u2014chap. lxxii. Criticises, in scoffing\nlanguage, the incarnation; exposure of his errors\u2014chap. lxxiii. Returns\nto the subject of Marcion\u2019s opinions; introduces \u201ctwo sons of God,\u201d and\nspeaks scoffingly of the supposed controversies between them\u2014chap.\nlxxiv. Maintains that the body of Jesus must have been different from\nthat of other beings, in virtue of His divine qualities. Consideration\nof the prophecies regarding Jesus: Answers to his statements\u2014chaps.\nlxxv.-lxxvii. Celsus ridicules the sending of God\u2019s Spirit into _one_\ncorner of the world alone, and compares God to Jupiter in the comedy,\nwho sent Mercury to the Athenians and Lacedemonians: Answer\u2014chaps.\nlxxviii., lxxix. Celsus terms the Chaldeans a divinely-inspired nation;\nspeaks of the Egyptian people as also inspired, although he condemned\nthem formerly, and refuses this title to the Jews; inconsistency of all\nthis\u2014chap. lxxx. Pretends not to understand how God could send His Son\namongst wicked men, who were to inflict punishment upon Him:\nAnswer\u2014chap. lxxxi.\n\nBOOK VII., 425-491\n\nCelsus denies that the Jewish prophets predicted any of the events which\noccurred in the life of Christ, and asserts that those who believe in\nthe existence of another God, besides that of the Jews, cannot refute\nhis objections; while Christians, who recognise the God of the Jews,\nrely for their defence on the alleged predictions regarding Christ:\nRemarks\u2014chap. ii. Celsus declares Christians inconsistent in rejecting\nthe ancient Grecian oracles of Delphi, Dodona, Clarus, Branchid\u00e6,\nJupiter Ammon, etc., which nevertheless were of high importance, while\ninsisting that the sayings uttered in Judea are marvellous and\nunchangeably true: Detailed answer to this objection\u2014chaps. iii.-viii.\nAsserts that many individuals assume the attitude of inspiration, and\nclaim to be God, or the Son of God, or the divine Spirit, and to have\ncome down to save a perishing world, and promise rewards to those who do\nthem homage, and threaten vengeance upon others; and, moreover, to these\npromises add strange and unintelligible words, which may be applied by\nany impostor to his own purposes\u2014chap. ix. Answer to these\ncharges\u2014chaps. x.-xii. Falsity of Celsus\u2019 statement that God favours the\ncommission of evil\u2014chap. xiii. Celsus objects, that even if the prophets\nforetold that the great God would become a slave, or die, there was no\nnecessity that He should do so simply because such things had been\npredicted: Answers\u2014chaps. xiv.-xvii. Celsus objects further, that if the\nprophets of the God of the Jews foretold that Jesus was to be the Son of\nthe same God, how could commands have been given through Moses that the\nJews should accumulate wealth, extend their dominion, fill the earth,\nput their enemies to the sword, under threat of being treated by God as\nHis enemies; whilst the man of Nazareth, His Son, delivered commands of\na totally opposite kind? Errors of Celsus pointed out in detail, and the\nnature of the two dispensations explained\u2014chaps. xviii.-xxvi. Falsity of\nassertion that Christians believe the Divine Being to be corporeal in\nHis nature, and to possess a body like a man\u2014chap. xxvii. Celsus alleges\nthat the idea of a better land than this, to which Christians hope to go\nafter death, has been borrowed from the divine men of a former age, and\nquotes from Homer and Plato in support of his assertion: Answers\u2014chaps.\nxxviii.-xxxi. Celsus next assails the doctrine of the resurrection, and\nasserts that we uphold this doctrine in order that we may see and know\nGod: Answer\u2014chaps. xxxii.-xxxiv. The oracles of Trophonius, etc., to\nwhich Celsus would direct Christians, assuring them that there they\nwould see God distinctly, shown to be demons\u2014chap. xxxv. Language of\nChristians as to the manner in which they see God misrepresented by\nCelsus\u2014chaps. xxxvi.-xxxix. Language of Celsus quite inappropriate as\naddressed to Christians, and applicable only to those whose doctrines\ndiffer widely from theirs\u2014chap. xl. Celsus recommends Christians to\nfollow the guidance of divinely inspired poets, wise men, and\nphilosophers, without mentioning their names: Remarks on this\u2014chap. xli.\nProceeds to name Plato as an effective teacher of theological truth,\nquoting from the _Tim\u00e6us_ to the effect that it is a hard matter to find\nout the Maker and Father of the universe, and an impossibility to make\nHim known to all after having found Him; and remarking that Christians\ncannot follow the example of Plato and others, who proceed by analysis\nand synthesis, because they are wedded to the flesh: Answers\u2014chaps.\nxlii.-xlv. General remarks upon the tone in which Christians carry on\ncontroversy with their opponents\u2014chap. xlvi. Actions of those who,\nalthough seeming to be wise, did not yield themselves to the divine\nteaching\u2014chap. xlvii. Purity of life exhibited by Christians\u2014chap.\nxlviii. Even by those who are unable to investigate the deeper questions\nof theology\u2014chap. xlix. Explanation of certain scriptural expressions\nregarding \u201cbirth\u201d or \u201cgeneration\u201d\u2014chap. l. Difference between Christians\nand those who received a portion of the divine Spirit before the\ndispensation of Christianity\u2014chap. li. Celsus proceeds to say to\nChristians that they would have done better to have selected as the\nobject of their homage some one who had died a glorious death, whose\ndivinity might have received the support of some myth to perpetuate his\nmemory, and names Hercules, \u00c6sculapius, Anaxarchus, and Epictetus, as\ninstances, alleging that Jesus never uttered under suffering any words\nthat could be compared to their utterances\u2014chap. liii. Answers\u2014chaps.\nliv.-lv. Sneering remark of Celsus that we might better have given the\nname of Son of God to the Sibyl than to Jesus\u2014chap. lvi. Scoffing advice\nof Celsus, that we had better choose Jonah than Jesus for our God:\nAnswer\u2014chap. lvii. Celsus asserts that the Christian precept, \u201cWhosoever\nshall strike thee on the one cheek, turn to him the other also,\u201d is an\nancient saying, admirably expressed long ago, and reported by Christians\nin a coarser way, and quotes from Plato in support of his statement:\nAnswer\u2014chaps. lviii.-lxi. Celsus goes on to say that Christians cannot\ntolerate temples, altars, or images, and that in this peculiarity they\nresemble Scythians and other barbarous nations, adducing quotations from\nHerodotus and Heraclitus in support of his opinion that none, save those\nwho are utterly childish, can take these things for gods\u2014chap. lxii.\nDetailed answer\u2014chaps. lxiii.-lxvi. Celsus remarks that Christians will\nnot admit that these images are erected in honour of certain beings who\nare gods, but maintain that these are demons, and ought not to be\nworshipped: Remarks in answer\u2014chap. lxvii. Asks why demons are not to be\nworshipped, and asserts that everything, whether the work of angels,\ndemons, or heroes, is part of the providential government of the Most\nHigh God: Answers\u2014chaps. lxviii.-lxx.\n\nBOOK VIII., 492-559\n\nCelsus, after his question regarding the worship of demons, proceeds to\nrepresent us as saying that it is impossible to serve many masters, and\nremarks that this is the language of sedition, and used only by those\nwho stand aloof from all human society, etc. Consideration of the true\nlanguage of Scripture upon this and kindred points, in answer to this\nstatement\u2014chaps. ii.-viii. Reckless language of Celsus, who would have\nus believe that we are led by our worship of God to that of other things\nwhich belong to God, without injury to ourselves, and who yet adds, \u201cWe\nmay honour none except those to whom that right has been given by God:\u201d\nRemarks\u2014chap. ix. Nature of the honour which Christians pay to the Son\nof God\u2014chap. x. Celsus asserts that those who uphold the unity of God\nare guilty of impiety: Answer\u2014chap. xi. That if Christians worshipped\none God alone, they would have valid arguments against the worship of\nothers, but they pay excessive reverence to one who is the servant of\nGod: Refutation\u2014chaps. xii.-xiv. Celsus quotes from the opinions of some\nobscure heretical sect, contained in what is called a _Heavenly\nDialogue_, to the effect that we suppose another God, who is above the\nheavens, to be the father of Him whom we honour, in order that we may\nhonour the Son of Man alone; whom also we assert to be stronger than\nGod, who rules the world and who rules over them: Answers\u2014chaps.\nxv.-xvi. Celsus goes on to say, that our shrinking from raising altars,\nstatues, and temples, has been agreed upon among us as the badge of a\nsecret society: Answer\u2014chaps. xvii.-xx. Assertion of Celsus, that those\ndevoted to the service of God may take part in public feasts or idol\nofferings: Answer\u2014chap. xxi. Answer to objection that Christians\nthemselves observe certain days, as the Preparation, the Passover, and\nPentecost\u2014chaps. xxii., xxiii. Reasons urged by Celsus why Christians\nmay make use of idol offerings and public sacrifices at public feasts;\nexamination of these\u2014chaps. xxiv.-xxvii. Celsus proceeds to state that\nif Christians abstain from idol offerings, they ought, in consistency,\nto abstain from all animal food, like the Pythagoreans: Answer\u2014chaps.\nxxviii.-xxxii. Celsus alleges that if we come into the world at all, we\nmust give thanks, and first-fruits, and prayers to demons, that they may\nprove good and kind: Answer\u2014chaps. xxxiii., xxxiv. Celsus remarks that\nthe satraps of a Persian or Roman monarch could do great injury to those\nwho despised them, and asks, will the satraps and ministers of air and\nearth be insulted with impunity? Answer\u2014chaps. xxxv., xxxvi. Asserts\nthat if Christians invoke those whom they address by barbarous names\nthey will have power, but not if invoked in Latin and Greek; falsity and\nabsurdity of this statement\u2014chap. xxxvii. Misrepresents the language\naddressed by Christians to the Grecian statues\u2014chap. xxxviii. Scoffing\nlanguage of Celsus to the Christians on the rejection of Jesus, whom he\nterms a demon, and on his inability to save His followers from being put\nto death\u2014chap. xxxix. Contrast between the Christian and heathen\ndoctrine of punishment\u2014chap. xl. Railing address of Celsus, to the\neffect that although Christians may revile the statues of the gods, they\nwould not have reviled the gods themselves with impunity; that nothing\nhappened to those who crucified Jesus; that no father was ever so\ninhuman as was the father of Jesus, etc. etc.: Answers\u2014chaps. xli.-xliv.\nCelsus asserts that it is of no use to collect all the oracular\nresponses that have been delivered, for the world is full of them, and\nmany remarkable events have happened in consequence of them, which\nestablish their reality and divinity; general remark in answer\u2014chap.\nxlv. Contrast between conduct of Pythian priestess, who frequently\nallowed herself to be bribed, and that of the prophets, who were admired\nfor their downright truthfulness\u2014chap. xlvi. Assertion of Greeks, that\nthe Jewish history contains fabulous accounts, refuted\u2014chap. xlvii.\nEndeavour of Celsus to show that the doctrines delivered at the\ncelebration of the pagan mysteries are the same as those of the\nChristians; absurdity of this\u2014chap. xlviii. Celsus reproaches Christians\nwith inconsistency in their treatment of the body: Answer\u2014chaps. xlix.,\nl. Celsus approves the Christian doctrine that the righteous shall enjoy\neverlasting life, and the wicked shall suffer everlasting punishment;\ninconsistency of this on the part of Celsus\u2014chap. li. Anxiety of Origen\nto bring all men to receive the whole system of Christian truth\u2014chap.\nlii. Doubtful manner in which Celsus speaks of certain weighty matters,\nand reluctance on his part to set down any of them as false;\ninconsistency of this with the manner in which he treats the doctrines\nof Christianity, which he regards with a hostile spirit\u2014chaps. liii.,\nliv. Celsus asserts that Christians must make their choice between two\nalternatives; nature of these: Answer\u2014chaps. lv.-lvii. Seeks to degrade\nthe souls of men to the worship of demons, by referring to certain\npractices and beliefs prevalent among the Egyptians: Answer\u2014chaps.\nlviii.-lix. Admits that there is a dangerous tendency in demon-worship:\nRemarks\u2014chaps. lx.-lxii. Yet adds that the more just opinion is that\ndemons desire and need nothing, but that they take pleasure in those who\ndischarge towards them offices of piety: Answer\u2014chaps. lxiii.-lxv.\nCelsus admits that no worshipper of God should submit to anything base,\nbut should encounter any torments or death, rather than do anything\nunworthy of God; and yet to celebrate the sun, or the praises of\nMinerva, is only to render higher praise to God; inconsistency of\nthis\u2014chaps. lxvi., lxvii. Maintains that the Homeric saying must be\nobserved, \u201cLet one be king, whom the son of crafty Saturn appointed;\u201d\nsense in which this must be understood by Christians\u2014chap. lxviii.\nInconsistency on the part of Celsus, after what he has said, in asking\nwhether God would fight for the Romans, if they were to become converts\nto the worship of the Most High\u2014chaps. lxix., lxx. Further\nmisrepresentations of Celsus pointed out\u2014chap. lxxi. Time will come when\nthe Word will change every soul into His own perfections\u2014chap. lxxii.\nCelsus enjoins us to help the king with all our might, and, if required,\nto fight under him, or lead an army along with him: Answer\u2014chap. lxxiii.\nAlso to take office in the government of the country, if necessary for\nthe maintenance of the laws and the support of religion: Answer\u2014chap.\nlxxv. Conclusion, in which Origen mentions that Celsus had announced his\nintention of writing a second treatise, which Origen requests Ambrose to\nsend him if he should have carried his intentions into execution.\n\n\n\n\n LIFE OF ORIGEN.\n\n\nOrigen was born in all probability at Alexandria, about the year 185\nA.D.[1] Notwithstanding that his name is derived from that of an\nEgyptian deity (Horus or Or[2]), there seems no reason to doubt that his\nparents were Christian at the time of his birth. His father Leonides was\nprobably, as has been conjectured,[3] one of the many teachers of\nrhetoric or grammar who abounded in that city of Grecian culture, and\nappears to have been a man of decided piety. Under his superintendence,\nthe youthful Origen was not only educated in the various branches of\nGrecian learning, but was also required daily to commit to memory and to\nrepeat portions of Scripture prescribed him by his father; and while\nunder this training, the spirit of inquiry into the meaning of\nScripture, which afterwards formed so striking a feature in the literary\ncharacter of the great Alexandrine, began to display itself. Eusebius[4]\nrelates that he was not satisfied with the plain and obvious meaning of\nthe text, but sought to penetrate into its deeper signification, and\ncaused his father trouble by the questions which he put to him regarding\nthe sense of particular passages of Holy Writ. Leonides, like many\nparents, assumed the appearance of rebuking the curiosity of the boy for\ninquiring into things which were beyond his youthful capacity, and\nrecommended him to be satisfied with the simple and apparent meaning of\nScripture, while he is described as inwardly rejoicing at the signs of\ntalent exhibited by his son, and as giving thanks to God for having made\nhim the parent of such a child.[5] But this state of things was not to\nlast; for in the year 202, when Origen was about seventeen years of age,\nthe great persecution of the Christians under Septimius Severus broke\nout, and among the victims was his father Leonides, who was apprehended\nand put in prison. Origen wished to share the fate of his father, but\nwas prevented from quitting his home by the artifice of his mother, who\nwas obliged to conceal his clothes to prevent him from carrying out his\npurpose! He wrote to his father, however, a letter, exhorting him to\nconstancy under his trials, and entreating him not to change his\nconvictions for the sake of his family.[6] By the death of his father,\nwhose property was confiscated to the imperial treasury, Origen was\nleft, with his mother and six younger brothers dependent upon him for\nsupport. At this juncture, a wealthy and benevolent lady of Alexandria\nopened to him her house, of which he became an inmate for a short time.\nThe society, however, which he found there was far from agreeable to the\nfeelings of the youth. The lady had adopted as her son one Paul of\nAntioch, whom Eusebius terms an \u201cadvocate of the heretics then existing\nat Alexandria.\u201d The eloquence of the man drew crowds to hear him,\nalthough Origen could never be induced to regard him with any favour,\nnor even to join with him in any act of worship, giving then, as\nEusebius remarks, \u201cunmistakeable specimens of the orthodoxy of his\nfaith.\u201d[7]\n\nFinding his position in this household so uncomfortable, he resolved to\nenter upon the career of a teacher of grammar, and to support himself by\nhis own exertions. As he had been carefully instructed by his father in\nGrecian literature, and had devoted himself to study after his death, he\nwas enabled successfully to carry out his intention. And now begins the\nsecond stadium of his career.\n\nThe diligence and ability with which Origen prosecuted his profession\nspeedily attracted attention and brought him many pupils. Among others\nwho sought to avail themselves of his instructions in the principles of\nthe Christian religion, were two young men, who afterwards became\ndistinguished in the history of the Church,\u2014Plutarch, who died the death\nof martyrdom, and Heraclas, who afterwards became bishop of Alexandria.\nIt was not, however, merely by his success as a teacher that Origen\ngained a reputation. The brotherly kindness and unwearied affection\nwhich he displayed to all the victims of the persecution, which at that\ntime was raging with peculiar severity at Alexandria under the prefect\nAquila, and in which many of his old pupils and friends were martyred,\nare described as being so marked and conspicuous, as to draw down upon\nhim the fury of the mob, so that he was obliged on several occasions to\nflee from house to house to escape instant death. It is easy to\nunderstand that services of this kind could not fail to attract the\nattention of the heads of the Christian community at Alexandria; and\npartly, no doubt, because of these, but chiefly on account of his high\nliterary reputation, Bishop Demetrius appointed him to the office of\nmaster in the Catechetical School, which was at that time vacant (by the\ndeparture of Clement, who had quitted the city on the outbreak of the\npersecution), although he was still a layman, and had not passed his\neighteenth year. The choice of Demetrius was amply justified by the\nresult. Origen discontinued his instructions in literature, in order to\ndevote himself exclusively to the work of teaching in the Catechetical\nSchool. For his labours he refused all remuneration. He sold the books\nwhich he possessed,\u2014many of them manuscripts which he himself had\ncopied,\u2014on condition of receiving from the purchaser four obols[8] a\nday; and on this scanty pittance he subsisted, leading for many years a\nlife of the greatest asceticism and devotion to study. After a day of\nlabour in the school, he used to devote the greater part of the night to\nthe investigation of Scripture, sleeping on the bare ground, and keeping\nfrequent fasts. He carried out literally the command of the Saviour, not\nto possess two coats, or to wear shoes, and consummated his work of\nmortification of the flesh by an act of self-mutilation, springing from\na perverted interpretation of our Lord\u2019s words in Matt. xix. 12, and\nundertaken from a desire to place himself beyond the reach of temptation\nin the intercourse which he necessarily had to hold with his youthful\nfemale catechumens.[9] This act was destined to exercise a baneful\ninfluence upon his future fortunes in the Church.\n\nDuring the episcopate of Zephyrinus (201-218) Origen visited Rome, and\non his return again resumed his duties in the Catechetical School,\ntransferring the care of the younger catechumens to his friend and\nformer pupil Heraclas, that he might devote himself with less\ndistraction to the instruction of the more advanced, and to the more\nthorough investigation and exposition of Scripture. With a view to\naccomplish this more successfully, it is probable that about this time\nhe set himself to acquire a knowledge of the Hebrew language, the fruit\nof which may be seen in the fragments which remain to us of his _magnum\nopus_, the _Hexapla_; and as many among the more cultured heathens,\nattracted by his reputation, seem to have attended his lectures, he felt\nit necessary to make himself more extensively acquainted with the\ndoctrines of the Grecian schools, that he might meet his opponents upon\ntheir own ground, and for this purpose he attended the prelections of\nAmmonius Saccas, at that time in high repute at Alexandria as an\nexpounder of the Neo-Platonic philosophy, of which school he has\ngenerally been considered the founder. The influence which the study of\nphilosophical speculations exerted upon the mind of Origen may be traced\nin the whole course of his after development, and proved the fruitful\nsource of many of those errors which were afterwards laid to his charge,\nand the controversies arising out of which disturbed the peace of the\nChurch during the two following centuries. As was to be expected, the\nfame of the great Alexandrine teacher was not confined to his native\ncity, but spread far and wide; and an evidence of this was the request\nmade by the Roman governor of the province of Arabia to Demetrius and to\nthe prefect of Egypt, that they would send Origen to him that he might\nhold an interview with one whose reputation was so great. We have no\ndetails of this visit, for all that Eusebius relates is that, \u201chaving\naccomplished the objects of his journey, he again returned to\nAlexandria.\u201d[10] It was in the year 216 that the Emperor Caracalla\nvisited Alexandria, and directed a bloody persecution against its\ninhabitants, especially the literary members of the community, in\nrevenge for the sarcastic verses which had been composed against him for\nthe murder of his brother Geta, a crime which he had perpetrated under\ncircumstances of the basest treachery and cruelty.\n\nOrigen occupied too prominent a position in the literary society of the\ncity to be able to remain with safety, and therefore withdrew to\nPalestine to his friend Bishop Alexander of Jerusalem, and afterwards to\nC\u00e6sarea, where he received an honourable welcome from Bishop\nTheoctistus. This step proved the beginning of his after troubles. These\ntwo men, filled with becoming admiration for the most learned teacher in\nthe Church, requested him to expound the Scriptures in their presence in\na public assembly of the Christians. Origen, although still a layman,\nand without any sacerdotal dignity in the Church, complied with the\nrequest. When this proceeding reached the ears of Demetrius, he was\nfilled with the utmost indignation. \u201cSuch an act was never either heard\nor done before, that laymen should deliver discourses in the presence of\nthe bishops,\u201d[11] was his indignant remonstrance to the two offending\nbishops, and Origen received a command to return immediately to\nAlexandria. He obeyed, and for some years appears to have devoted\nhimself solely to his studies in his usual spirit of self-abnegation.\n\nIt was probably during this period that the commencement of his\nfriendship with Ambrosius is to be dated. Little is known of this\nindividual. Eusebius[12] states that he had formerly been an adherent of\nthe Valentinian heresy, but had been converted by the arguments and\neloquence of Origen to the orthodox faith of the Church. They became\nintimate friends; and as Ambrose seems to have been possessed of large\nmeans, and entertained an unbounded admiration of the learning and\nabilities of his friend, it was his delight to bear the expenses\nattending the transcription and publication of the many works which he\npersuaded him to give to the world. He furnished him \u201cwith more than\nseven amanuenses, who relieved each other at stated times, and with an\nequal number of transcribers, along with young girls who had been\npractised in caligraphy,\u201d[13] to make fair copies for publication of the\nworks dictated by Origen. The literary activity of these years must have\nbeen prodigious, and probably they were among the happiest which Origen\never enjoyed. Engaged in his favourite studies, surrounded by many\nfriends, adding yearly to his own stores of learning, and enriching the\nliterature of the Church with treatises of the highest value in the\ndepartment of sacred criticism and exegesis, it is difficult to conceive\na condition of things more congenial to the mind of a true scholar. Only\none incident of any importance seems to have taken place during these\npeaceful years,\u2014his visit to Julia Mamm\u00e6a, the pious mother of Alexander\nSeverus. This noble lady had heard of the fame of Origen, and invited\nhim to visit her at Antioch, sending a military escort to conduct him\nfrom Alexandria to the Syrian capital. He remained with her some time,\n\u201cexhibiting innumerable illustrations of the glory of the Lord, and of\nthe excellence of divine instruction, and then hastened back to his\naccustomed studies.\u201d[14]\n\nThese happy years, however, were soon to end. Origen was called to\nGreece, probably about the year 228,[15] upon what Eusebius vaguely\ncalls \u201cthe pressing need of ecclesiastical affairs,\u201d[16] but which has\ngenerally been understood[17] to refer to the prevalence of heretical\nviews in the Church there, for the eradication of which the assistance\nof Origen was invoked. Before entering on this journey, he obtained\nletters of recommendation from his bishop.[18] He passed through\nPalestine on his way to Greece, and at C\u00e6sarea received at the hands of\nhis friends Alexander and Theoctistus the consecration to the office of\npresbyter,\u2014an honour which proved to him afterwards the source of much\npersecution and annoyance. No doubt the motives of his friends were of\nthe highest kind, and among them may have been the desire to take away\nthe ground of objection formerly raised by Demetrius against the public\npreaching of a mere layman in the presence of a bishop. But they little\ndreamed of the storm which this act of theirs was to raise, and of the\nconsequences which it was to bring upon the head of him whom they had\nsought to honour. After completing his journey through Greece, Origen\nreturned to Alexandria about the year 230. He there found his bishop\ngreatly incensed against him for what had taken place at C\u00e6sarea. Nor\ndid his anger expend itself in mere objurgations and rebukes. In the\nyear 231 a synod was summoned by Demetrius, composed of Egyptian bishops\nand Alexandrian presbyters, who declared Origen unworthy to hold the\noffice of teacher, and excommunicated him from the fellowship of the\nchurch of Alexandria. Even this did not satisfy the vindictive feeling\nof Demetrius. He summoned a second synod, in which the bishops alone\nwere permitted to vote, and by their suffrages Origen was degraded from\nthe office of presbyter, and intimation of this sentence was ordered to\nbe made by encyclical letter to the various churches. The validity of\nthe sentence was recognised by all of them, with the exception of those\nin Palestine, Ph\u0153nicia, Arabia, and Achaia,\u2014a remarkable proof of the\nposition of influence which was at that time held by the church of\nAlexandria. Origen appears to have quitted the city before the bursting\nof the storm, and betook himself to C\u00e6sarea, which henceforth became his\nhome, and the seat of his future labours for a period of nearly a\nquarter of a century. The motives which impelled Demetrius to this\ntreatment of Origen have been variously stated and variously criticised.\nEusebius[19] refers his readers for a full account of all the matters\ninvolved to the treatise which he and Pamphilus composed in his defence;\nbut this work has not come down to us,[20] although we possess a brief\nnotice of it in the _Bibliotheca_ of Photius,[21] from which we derive\nour knowledge of the proceedings of the two synods. There seems little\nreason to doubt that jealousy of interference on the part of the bishops\nof another diocese was one main cause of the resentment displayed by\nDemetrius; while it is also possible that another alleged cause, the\nheterodox character of some of Origen\u2019s opinions, as made known in his\nalready published works, among which were his _Stromata_ and _De\nPrincipiis_,[22] may have produced some effect upon the minds of the\nhostile bishops. Hefele[23] asserts that the act of the Palestinian\nbishops was contrary to the Church law of the time, and that Demetrius\nwas justified on that ground for his procedure against him. But it may\nwell be doubted whether there was any generally understood law or\npractice existing at so early a period of the Church\u2019s history. If so,\nit is difficult to understand how it should have been unknown to the\nPalestinian bishops; or, on the supposition of any such existing law or\nusage, it is equally difficult to conceive that either they themselves\nor Origen should have agreed to disregard it, knowing as they did the\njealous temper of Demetrius, displayed on the occasion of Origen\u2019s\npreaching at C\u00e6sarea already referred to, and which had drawn from the\nAlexandrine bishop an indignant remonstrance, in which he had asserted\nthat such an act was \u201cquite unheard-of before.\u201d[24] To this statement\nthe C\u00e6sarean bishops had replied in a letter, in which they enumerated\nseveral instances of laymen who had addressed the congregation.[25] The\nprobabilities, therefore, are in favour of there being no generally\nunderstood law or practice on the subject, and that the procedure,\ntherefore, was dictated by hierarchical jealousy on the part of\nDemetrius. According to Eusebius,[26] indeed, the act of mutilation\nalready referred to was made a ground of accusation against Origen; and\nthere seems no doubt that there existed an old canon of the Church,[27]\nbased upon the words in Deut. xxiii. 1, which rendered one who had\ncommitted such an act ineligible for office in the Church. But there is\nno trace of this act, as disqualifying Origen for the office of\npresbyter, having been urged by Demetrius, so far as can be discovered\nfrom the notices of the two synods which have been preserved by Rufinus\nand Photius; and it seems extremely probable, as Redepenning\nremarks,[28] that if Demetrius were acquainted with this act of Origen,\nas Eusebius says he was,[29] he made no public mention of it, far less\nthat he made it a pretence for his deposition.\n\nDemetrius did not long survive the execution of his vengeance against\nhis unfortunate catechist. He died about a year afterwards, and was\nsucceeded by Heraclas, the friend and former pupil of Origen. It does\nnot, however, appear that Heraclas made any effort to have the sentence\nagainst Origen recalled, so that he might return to the early seat of\nhis labours. Origen devoted himself at C\u00e6sarea chiefly to exegetical\nstudies upon the books of Scripture, enjoying the countenance and\nfriendship of the two bishops Alexander and Theoctistus, who are said by\nEusebius \u201cto have attended him the whole time as pupils do their\nmaster.\u201d He speedily raised the theological school of that city to a\ndegree of reputation which attracted many pupils. Among those who placed\nthemselves under his instructions were two young Cappadocians, who had\ncome to C\u00e6sarea with other intentions, but who were so attracted by the\nwhole character and personality of Origen, that they immediately became\nhis pupils. The former of these, afterwards Gregory Thaumaturgus, Bishop\nof New C\u00e6sarea, has left us, in the panegyric which he wrote after a\ndiscipleship of five years, a full and admiring account of the method of\nhis great master.\n\nThe persecution under the Emperor Maximin obliged Origen to take refuge\nin C\u00e6sarea in Cappadocia, where he remained in concealment about two\nyears in the house of a Christian lady named Juliana, who was the\nheiress of Symmachus, the Ebionite translator of the Septuagint, and\nfrom whom he obtained several MSS. which had belonged to him. Here,\nalso, he composed his _Exhortation to Martyrdom_, which was expressly\nwritten for the sake of his friends Ambrosius and Protoctetus, who had\nbeen imprisoned on account of their Christian profession, but who\nrecovered their freedom after the death of Maximin,\u2014an event which\nallowed Origen to return to the Palestinian C\u00e6sarea and to the\nprosecution of his labours. A visit to Athens, where he seems to have\nremained some time, and to Bostra in Arabia, in order to bring back to\nthe true faith Bishop Beryllus, who had expressed heterodox opinions\nupon the subject of the divinity of Christ, and in which attempt he\nproved successful, were the chief events of his life during the next\nfive years. On the outbreak of the Decian persecution, however, in 249,\nhe was imprisoned at Tyre, to which city he had gone from C\u00e6sarea for\nsome unknown reason, and was made to suffer great cruelties by his\npersecutors. The effect of these upon a frame worn out by ascetic\nlabours may be easily conceived. Although he survived his imprisonment,\nhis body was so weakened by his sufferings, that he died at Tyre in 254,\nin the seventieth year of his age.\n\nThe character of Origen is singularly pure and noble; for his moral\nqualities are as remarkable as his intellectual gifts. The history of\nthe church records the names of few whose patience and meekness under\nunmerited suffering were more conspicuous than his. How very differently\nwould Jerome have acted under circumstances like those which led to\nOrigen\u2019s banishment from Alexandria! and what a favourable contrast is\npresented by the self-denying asceticism of his whole life, to the sins\nwhich stained the early years of Augustine prior to his conversion! The\nimpression which his whole personality made upon those who came within\nthe sphere of his influence is evidenced in a remarkable degree by the\nadmiring affection displayed towards him by his friend Ambrose and his\npupil Gregory. Nor was it friends alone that he so impressed. To him\nbelongs the rare honour of convincing heretics of their errors, and of\nleading them back to the church,\u2014a result which must have been due as\nmuch to the gentleness and earnestness of his Christian character, as to\nthe prodigious learning, marvellous acuteness, and logical power, which\nentitle him to be regarded as the greatest of the Fathers. It is\nsingular, indeed, that a charge of heresy should have been brought, not\nonly after his death, but even during his life, against one who rendered\nsuch eminent services to the cause of orthodox Christianity. But this\ncharge must be considered in reference to the times when he lived and\nwrote. No General Council had yet been held to settle authoritatively\nthe doctrine of the church upon any of those great questions, the\ndiscussion of which convulsed the Christian world during the two\nfollowing centuries; and in these circumstances greater latitude was\nnaturally permissible than would have been justifiable at a later\nperiod. Moreover, a mind so speculative as that of Origen, and so\nengrossed with the deepest and most difficult problems of human thought,\nmust sometimes have expressed itself in a way liable to be\nmisunderstood. But no doubt the chief cause of his being regarded as a\nheretic is to be found in the haste with which he allowed many of his\nwritings to be published. Had he considered more carefully what he\nintended to bring before the public eye, less occasion would have been\nfurnished to objectors, and the memory of one of the greatest scholars\nand most devoted Christians that the world has ever seen would have been\nfreed, to a great extent at least, from the reproach of heresy.\n\nOrigen was a very voluminous author. Jerome says that he wrote more than\nany individual could read; and Epiphanius (_H\u0153res._ lxiv. 63) relates\nthat his writings amounted to 6000 volumes, by which statement we are\nprobably to understand that every individual treatise, large or small,\nincluding each of the numerous homilies, was counted as a separate\nvolume. The admiration entertained for him by his friend Ambrosius, and\nthe readiness with which the latter bore all the expenses of\ntranscription and publication, led Origen to give to the world much\nwhich otherwise would never have seen the light.\n\nThe works of the great Adamantinus may be classed under the following\ndivisions:\u2014\n\n\n EXEGETICAL WORKS.\n\n\nThese comprise \u03a3\u03c7\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1, brief notes on Scripture, of which only fragments\nremain: \u03a4\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9, Commentaries, lengthened expositions, of which we possess\nconsiderable portions, including those on Matthew, John, and Epistle to\nthe Romans; and about 200 Homilies, upon the principal books of the Old\nand New Testaments, a full list of which may be seen in Migne\u2019s edition.\nIn these works his peculiar system of interpretation found ample scope\nfor exercise; and although he carried out his principle of allegorizing\nmany things, which in their historical and literal signification\noffended his exegetical sense, he nevertheless maintains that \u201cthe\npassages which hold good in their historical acceptation are much more\nnumerous than those which contain a purely spiritual meaning;\u201d[30] and\nthe student will find much that is striking and suggestive in his\nremarks upon the various passages which he brings under review. For an\naccount of his method of interpreting Scripture, and the grounds on\nwhich he based it, the reader may consult the fourth book of the\ntreatise _On the Principles_.\n\n\n CRITICAL WORKS.\n\n\nThe great critical work of Origen was the Hexapla or Six-columned\nBible,\u2014an attempt to provide a revised text of the Septuagint\ntranslation of Old Testament Scripture. On this undertaking he is said\nto have spent eight-and-twenty years of his life, and to have acquired a\nknowledge of Hebrew in order to qualify himself for the task. Each page\nof this work consisted, with the exception to be noticed immediately, of\nsix columns. In the first was placed the current Hebrew text; in the\nsecond, the same represented in _Greek_ letters; in the third, the\nversion of Aquila; in the fourth, that of Symmachus; in the fifth, the\ntext of the LXX., as it existed at the time; and in the sixth, the\nversion of Theodotion. Having come into possession also of certain other\nGreek translations of some of the books of Scripture, he added these in\ntheir appropriate place, so that the work presented in some parts the\nappearance of seven, eight, or nine columns, and was termed Heptapla,\nOctopla, or Enneapla, in consequence. He inserted critical marks in the\ntext of the LXX., an asterisk to denote what ought to be added, and an\nobelus to denote what ought to be omitted; taking the additions chiefly\nfrom the version of Theodotion. The work, with the omission of the\nHebrew column, and that representing the Hebrew in Greek letters, was\ntermed Tetrapla; and with regard to it, it is uncertain whether it is to\nbe considered a preliminary work on the part of Origen, undertaken by\nway of preparation for the larger, or merely as an excerpt from the\nlatter. The whole extended, it is said, to nearly fifty volumes, and\nwas, of course, far too bulky for common use, and too costly for\ntranscription. It was placed in some repository in the city of Tyre,\nfrom which it was removed after Origen\u2019s death to the library at\nC\u00e6sarea, founded by Pamphilus, the friend of Eusebius. It is supposed to\nhave been burnt at the capture of C\u00e6sarea by the Arabs in 653 A.D. The\ncolumn, however, containing the version of the LXX. had been copied by\nPamphilus and Eusebius, along with the critical marks of Origen,\nalthough, owing to carelessness on the part of subsequent transcribers,\nthe text was soon again corrupted. The remains of this work were\npublished by Montfaucon at Paris, 1713, 2 vols. folio; by Bahrdt at\nLeipsic in 1769; and is at present again in course of publication from\nthe Clarendon Press, Oxford, under the editorship of Mr. Field, who has\nmade use of the Syriac-Hexaplar version, and has added various fragments\nnot contained in prior editions. (For a full and critical account of\nthis work, the English reader is referred to Dr. Sam. Davidson\u2019s\n_Biblical Criticism_, vol. i. ch. xii., which has been made use of for\nthe above notice.)\n\n\n APOLOGETICAL WORKS.\n\n\nHis great apologetical work was the treatise undertaken at the special\nrequest of his friend Ambrosius, in answer to the attack of the heathen\nphilosopher Celsus on the Christian religion, in a work which he\nentitled \u039b\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03ae\u03c2, or _A True Discourse_. Origen states that he had\nheard that there were two individuals of this name, both of them\nEpicureans, the earlier of the two having lived in the time of Nero, and\nthe other in the time of Adrian, or later.[31] Redepenning is of opinion\nthat Celsus must have composed his work in the time of Marcus Aurelius\n(161-180 A.D.), on account of his supposed mention of the Marcionites\n(whose leader did not make his appearance at Rome before 142 A.D.), and\nof the Marcellians (followers of the Carpocratian Marcellina), a sect\nwhich was founded after the year 155 A.D. under Bishop Anicetus.[32]\nOrigen believed his opponent to be an Epicurean, but to have adopted\nother doctrines than those of Epicurus, because he thought that by so\ndoing he could assail Christianity to greater advantage.[33] The work\nwhich Origen composed in answer to the so-styled _True Discourse_\nconsists of eight books, and belongs to the latest years of his life. It\nhas always been regarded as the great apologetic work of antiquity; and\nno one can peruse it without being struck by the multifarious reading,\nwonderful acuteness, and rare subtlety of mind which it displays. But\nthe rule which Origen prescribed to himself, of not allowing a single\nobjection of his opponent to remain unanswered, leads him into a\nminuteness of detail, and into numerous repetitions, which fatigue the\nreader, and detract from the interest and unity of the work. He himself\nconfesses that he began it on one plan, and carried it out on\nanother.[34] No doubt, had he lived to re-write and condense it, it\nwould have been more worthy of his reputation. But with all its defects,\nit is a great work, and well deserves the notice of the students of\nApologetics. The table of contents prefixed to the translation will\nconvey a better idea of its nature than any description which our limits\nwould permit us to give.\n\n\n DOGMATIC WORKS.\n\n\nThese include the \u03a3\u03c4\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2, a work composed in imitation of the\ntreatise of Clement of the same name, and consisting originally of ten\nbooks, of which only three fragments exist in a Latin version by Jerome\n(Migne, vol. i. pp. 102-107); a treatise on the Resurrection, of which\nfour fragments remain (Migne, vol. i. pp. 91-100); and the treatise \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n\u1f08\u03c1\u03c7\u1ff6\u03bd, _De Principiis_, which contains Origen\u2019s views on the various\nquestions of systematic theology. The work has come down to us in the\nLatin translation of his admirer Rufinus; but, from a comparison of the\nfew fragments of the original Greek which have been preserved, we see\nthat Rufinus was justly chargeable with altering many of Origen\u2019s\nexpressions, in order to bring his doctrine on certain points more into\nharmony with the orthodox views of the time. The _De Principiis_\nconsists of four books, and is translated in the first volume of the\nworks of Origen in this series, to which we refer the reader.\n\n\n PRACTICAL WORKS.\n\n\nUnder this head we place the little treatise \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u0395\u1f50\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2, _On Prayer_,\nwritten at the instance of his friend Ambrose, and which contains an\nexposition of the Lord\u2019s Prayer; the \u039b\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd,\n_Exhortation to Martyrdom_, composed at the outbreak of the persecution\nby Maximian, when his friends Ambrose and Protoctetus were imprisoned.\nOf his numerous letters only two have come down entire, viz. that which\nwas addressed to Julius Africanus, who had questioned the genuineness of\nthe history of Susanna in the apocryphal additions to the book of\nDaniel, and that to Gregory Thaumaturgus on the use of Greek philosophy\nin the explanation of Scripture, although, from the brevity of the\nlatter, it is questionable whether it is more than a fragment of the\noriginal. (Both of these are translated in the first volume of Origen\u2019s\nworks in this series.) The \u03a6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1, _Philocalia_, was a compilation\nfrom the writings of Origen, intended to explain the difficult passages\nof Scripture, and executed by Basil the Great and Gregory of Nazianzus;\nlarge extracts of which have been preserved, especially of that part\nwhich was taken from the treatise against Celsus. The remains were first\nprinted at Paris in 1618, and again at Cambridge in 1676, in the reprint\nof Spencer\u2019s edition of the _Contra Celsum_. In the Benedictine edition,\nand in Migne\u2019s reprint, the various portions are quoted in footnotes\nunder the respective passages of Origen\u2019s writings.\n\n\n EDITIONS OF ORIGEN.\n\n\nThe first published works of Origen were his Homilies, which appeared in\n1475, although neither the name of the publisher nor the place of\npublication is given. These were followed by the treatise against Celsus\nin the translation of Christopher Persana, which appeared at Rome in\n1481; and this, again, by an edition of the Homilies at Venice in 1503,\ncontaining those on the four first books of Moses, Joshua, and Judges.\nThe first collective edition of the whole works was given to the world\nin a Latin translation by James Merlin, and was published in two folio\nvolumes, first at Paris in 1512 and 1519, and afterwards at Paris in\n1522 and 1530. A revision of Merlin\u2019s edition was begun by Erasmus, and\ncompleted, after his death, by Beatus Rhenanus. This appeared at Basle\nin 1536 in two folio volumes, and again in 1557 and 1571. A much better\nand more complete edition was undertaken by the Benedictine Gilbertus\nGenebrardus, which was published also in two volumes folio at Paris in\n1574, and again in 1604 and 1619. Hoeschel published the treatise\nagainst Celsus at Augsburg in 1605; Spencer, at Cambridge in 1658 and\n1677, to which was added the _Philocalia_, which had first appeared in a\nLatin translation by Genebrardus, and afterwards in Greek by Tarinus at\nParis in 1618 and 1624, in quarto. Huet, Bishop of Avranches, published\nthe exegetical writings in Greek, including the Commentaries on Matthew\nand John, in two volumes folio, of which the one appeared at Rouen in\n1668, and the other at Paris in 1679. The great edition by the two\nlearned Benedictines of St. Maur\u2014Charles de la Rue, and his nephew\nVincent de la Rue\u2014was published at Paris between the years 1733 and\n1759. This is a work of immense industry and labour, and remains the\nstandard to the present time. It has been reprinted by Migne in his\nseries of the Greek Fathers, in nine volumes, large 8vo. In Oberth\u00fcr\u2019s\nseries of the Greek Fathers, seven volumes contain the chief portion of\nOrigen\u2019s writings; while Lommatzsch has published the whole in\ntwenty-five small volumes, Berlin 1831-48, containing the Greek text\nalone.\u2014[Abridged from Redepenning.]\n\nFor further information upon the life and opinions of Origen, the reader\nmay consult Redepenning\u2019s _Origenes_, 2 vols., Bonn 1841, 1846; the\narticles in Herzog\u2019s _Encyclop\u00e4die_ and Wetzer\u2019s and Wette\u2019s\n_Kirchen-Lexikon_, by Kling and Hefele respectively; the brilliant\nsketch by Pressens\u00e9 in his _Martyrs and Apologists_ (Harwood\u2019s\ntranslation); and the learned compilation of Huet, entitled\n_Origeniana_, to be found in the ninth volume of Migne\u2019s edition.\n\nFootnote 1:\n\n Cf. Redepenning\u2019s _Origenes_, vol. i. pp. 417-420 (Erste Beilage: \u00fcber\n Origenes Geburtsjahr und den Ort, wo er geboren wurde).\n\nFootnote 2:\n\n Cf. _Ibid._ (Zweite Beilage: \u00fcber Namen und Beinamen der Origenes).\n\nFootnote 3:\n\n _Encyclopaedie der Katholischen Theologie_, _s.v._ Origenes.\n\nFootnote 4:\n\n _Hist. Eccles._ b. vi. c. ii. \u00a7 9.\n\nFootnote 5:\n\n _Hist. Eccles._ b. vi. c. ii. \u00a7\u00a7 10, 11.\n\nFootnote 6:\n\n Eusebius, _Hist. Eccles._ b. vi. c. ii.: \u1f1c\u03c0\u03b5\u03c7\u03b5, \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b4\u03b9\u2019 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf \u03c4\u1f76\n \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 7:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f40\u03c1\u03b8\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03b3\u1fc6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 8:\n\n The obol was about three-halfpence of our money.\n\nFootnote 9:\n\n For a full discussion of the doubts which have been thrown upon the\n credibility of Eusebius in this matter by Schnitzer and Baur, cf.\n Redepenning, _Origenes_, vol. i. pp. 444-458, and Hefele,\n _Encyclopaedie der Katholischen Theologie_, _s.v._ Origenes.\n\nFootnote 10:\n\n Euseb. _Hist. Eccles._ b. vi. c. 19, \u00a7 16.\n\nFootnote 11:\n\n _Ibid._ b. vi. c. 19.\n\nFootnote 12:\n\n _Ibid._ b. vi. c. 18.\n\nFootnote 13:\n\n Euseb. _Hist. Eccles._ b. vi. c. 23.\n\nFootnote 14:\n\n Euseb. _Hist. Eccles._ b. vi. c. 21: \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u2019 \u1f97 \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03c8\u03b1\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\n \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u039a\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03ac\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 15:\n\n Cf. Hefele, _Encyclopaedie_, etc., _s.v._ Origenes.\n\nFootnote 16:\n\n \u1f18\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f15\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 17:\n\n Cf. Redepenning, vol. i. p. 406, etc.\n\nFootnote 18:\n\n Cf. _ibid._\n\nFootnote 19:\n\n _Hist. Eccles._ b. vi. c. 22 and c. 33.\n\nFootnote 20:\n\n With the exception of the first book; cf. Migne, vol. ix. pp. 542-632.\n\nFootnote 21:\n\n Cf. Photii _Bibliotheca_, ed. Hoeschel, p. 298.\n\nFootnote 22:\n\n Eusebius expressly mentions that both these works, among others, were\n published before he left Alexandria.\u2014_Hist. Eccles._ b. vi. c. 24.\n\nFootnote 23:\n\n _s.v._ Origenes.\n\nFootnote 24:\n\n _Hist. Eccles._ b. vi. c. 19.\n\nFootnote 25:\n\n _Ibid._\n\nFootnote 26:\n\n _Ibid._ b. vi. c. 8.\n\nFootnote 27:\n\n \u1f41 \u1f00\u03ba\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03c9 \u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2. Cf. Redepenning, vol. i.\n pp. 208, 216, 218.\n\nFootnote 28:\n\n Cf. Redepenning, vol. i. p. 409, note 2.\n\nFootnote 29:\n\n _Hist. Eccles._ b. vi. c. 8.\n\nFootnote 30:\n\n Origen\u2019s Works, vol. i. pp. 323-4 (Ante-Nicene Library).\n\nFootnote 31:\n\n Cf. _Contra Celsum_, i. c. viii. _ad fin._\n\nFootnote 32:\n\n Cf. Redepenning, vol. ii. p. 131, note 2.\n\nFootnote 33:\n\n _Contra Celsum_, i. ch. viii.\n\nFootnote 34:\n\n Preface, \u00a7 6; cf. vol. i. p. 397.\n\n\n\n\n ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS.\n\n\n BOOK II.\n\n\n Chapter I.\n\n\nThe first book of our answer to the treatise of Celsus, entitled _A True\nDiscourse_, which concluded with the representation of the Jew\naddressing Jesus, having now extended to a sufficient length, we intend\nthe present part as a reply to the charges brought by him against those\nwho have been converted from Judaism to Christianity. And we call\nattention, in the first place, to this special question, viz. why\nCelsus, when he had once resolved upon the introduction of individuals\nupon the stage of his book, did not represent the Jew as addressing the\nconverts from heathenism rather than those from Judaism, seeing that his\ndiscourse, if directed to us, would have appeared more likely to produce\nan impression.[35] But probably this claimant to universal knowledge\ndoes not know what is appropriate in the matter of such representations;\nand therefore let us proceed to consider what he has to say to the\nconverts from Judaism. He asserts that \u201cthey have forsaken the law of\ntheir fathers, in consequence of their minds being led captive by Jesus;\nthat they have been most ridiculously deceived, and that they have\nbecome deserters to another name and to another mode of life.\u201d Here he\nhas not observed that the Jewish converts have not deserted the law of\ntheir fathers, inasmuch as they live according to its prescriptions,\nreceiving their very name from the poverty of the law, according to the\nliteral acceptation of the word; for Ebion signifies \u201cpoor\u201d among the\nJews,[36] and those Jews who have received Jesus as Christ are called by\nthe name of Ebionites. Nay, Peter himself seems to have observed for a\nconsiderable time the Jewish observances enjoined by the law of Moses,\nnot having yet learned from Jesus to ascend from the law that is\nregulated according to the letter, to that which is interpreted\naccording to the spirit,\u2014a fact which we learn from the Acts of the\nApostles. For on the day after the angel of God appeared to Cornelius,\nsuggesting to him \u201cto send to Joppa, to Simon surnamed Peter,\u201d Peter\n\u201cwent up into the upper room to pray about the sixth hour. And he became\nvery hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready he fell\ninto a trance, and saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending\nunto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let\ndown to the earth; wherein were all manner of four-footed beasts, and\ncreeping things of the earth, and fowls of the air. And there came a\nvoice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. But Peter said, Not so, Lord;\nfor I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean. And the voice\nspake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call\nthou not common.\u201d[37] Now observe how, by this instance, Peter is\nrepresented as still observing the Jewish customs respecting clean and\nunclean animals. And from the narrative that follows, it is manifest\nthat he, as being yet a Jew, and living according to their traditions,\nand despising those who were beyond the pale of Judaism, stood in need\nof a vision to lead him to communicate to Cornelius (who was not an\nIsraelite according to the flesh), and to those who were with him, the\nword of faith. Moreover, in the Epistle to the Galatians, Paul states\nthat Peter, still from fear of the Jews, ceased upon the arrival of\nJames to eat with the Gentiles, and \u201cseparated himself from them,\nfearing them that were of the circumcision;\u201d[38] and the rest of the\nJews, and Barnabas also, followed the same course. And certainly it was\nquite consistent that those should not abstain from the observance of\nJewish usages who were sent to minister to the circumcision, when they\nwho \u201cseemed to be pillars\u201d gave the right hand of fellowship to Paul and\nBarnabas, in order that, while devoting themselves to the circumcision,\nthe latter might preach to the Gentiles. And why do I mention that they\nwho preached to the circumcision withdrew and separated themselves from\nthe heathen, when even Paul himself \u201cbecame as a Jew to the Jews, that\nhe might gain the Jews?\u201d Wherefore also in the Acts of the Apostles it\nis related that he even brought an offering to the altar, that he might\nsatisfy the Jews that he was no apostate from their law.[39] Now, if\nCelsus had been acquainted with all these circumstances, he would not\nhave represented the Jew holding such language as this to the converts\nfrom Judaism: \u201cWhat induced you, my fellow-citizens, to abandon the law\nof your fathers, and to allow your minds to be led captive by him with\nwhom we have just conversed, and thus be most ridiculously deluded, so\nas to become deserters from us to another name, and to the practices of\nanother life?\u201d\n\nFootnote 35:\n\n \u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ce\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 36:\n\n \u05d0\u05b6\u05d1\u05b0\u05d9\u05d5\u05b9\u05df.\n\nFootnote 37:\n\n Cf. Acts x. 9-15.\n\nFootnote 38:\n\n Cf. Gal. ii. 12.\n\nFootnote 39:\n\n Cf. Acts xxi. 26.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter II.\n\n\nNow, since we are upon the subject of Peter, and of the teachers of\nChristianity to the circumcision, I do not deem it out of place to quote\na certain declaration of Jesus taken from the Gospel according to John,\nand to give the explanation of the same. For it is there related that\nJesus said: \u201cI have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear\nthem now. Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide\nyou into all the truth: for He shall not speak of Himself; but\nwhatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak.\u201d[40] And when we inquire\nwhat were the \u201cmany things\u201d referred to in the passage which Jesus had\nto say to His disciples, but which they were not then able to bear, I\nhave to observe that, probably because the apostles were Jews, and had\nbeen trained up according to the letter of the Mosaic law, He was unable\nto tell them what was the true law, and how the Jewish worship consisted\nin the pattern and shadow of certain heavenly things, and how future\nblessings were foreshadowed by the injunctions regarding meats and\ndrinks, and festivals, and new moons, and sabbaths. These were many of\nthe subjects which He had to explain to them; but as He saw that it was\na work of exceeding difficulty to root out of the mind opinions that\nhave been almost born with a man, and amid which he has been brought up\ntill he reached the period of maturity, and which have produced in those\nwho have adopted them the belief that they are divine, and that it is an\nact of impiety to overthrow them; and to demonstrate by the superiority\nof Christian doctrine, that is, by the truth, in a manner to convince\nthe hearers, that such opinions were but \u201closs and dung,\u201d He postponed\nsuch a task to a future season\u2014to that, namely, which followed His\npassion and resurrection. For the bringing of aid unseasonably to those\nwho were not yet capable of receiving it, might have overturned the idea\nwhich they had already formed of Jesus, as the Christ, and the Son of\nthe living God. And see if there is not some well-grounded reason for\nsuch a statement as this, \u201cI have many things to say unto you, but ye\ncannot bear them now;\u201d seeing there are many points in the law which\nrequire to be explained and cleared up in a spiritual sense, and these\nthe disciples were in a manner unable to bear, having been born and\nbrought up amongst Jews. I am of opinion, moreover, that since these\nrites were typical, and the truth was that which was to be taught them\nby the Holy Spirit, these words were added, \u201cWhen He is come who is the\nSpirit of truth, He will lead you into all the truth;\u201d as if He had\nsaid, into all the truth about those things which, being to you but\ntypes, ye believed to constitute a true worship which ye rendered unto\nGod. And so, according to the promise of Jesus, the Spirit of truth came\nto Peter, saying to him, with regard to the four-footed beasts, and\ncreeping things of the earth, and fowls of the air: \u201cArise, Peter; kill,\nand eat.\u201d And the Spirit came to him while he was still in a state of\nsuperstitious ignorance; for he said, in answer to the divine command,\n\u201cNot so, Lord; for I have never yet eaten anything common or unclean.\u201d\nHe instructed him, however, in the true and spiritual meaning of meats,\nby saying, \u201cWhat God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.\u201d And so,\nafter that vision, the Spirit of truth, which conducted Peter into all\nthe truth, told him the many things which he was unable to bear when\nJesus was still with him in the flesh. But I shall have another\nopportunity of explaining those matters, which are connected with the\nliteral acceptation of the Mosaic law.\n\nFootnote 40:\n\n John xvi. 12, 13.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter III.\n\n\nOur present object, however, is to expose the ignorance of Celsus, who\nmakes this Jew of his address his fellow-citizen and the Israelitish\nconverts in the following manner: \u201cWhat induced you to abandon the law\nof your fathers?\u201d etc. Now, how should they have abandoned the law of\ntheir fathers, who are in the habit of rebuking those who do not listen\nto its commands, saying, \u201cTell me, ye who read the law, do ye not hear\nthe law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons;\u201d and so on, down\nto the place, \u201cwhich things are an allegory,\u201d[41] etc.? And how have\nthey abandoned the law of their fathers, who are ever speaking of the\nusages of their fathers in such words as these: \u201cOr does not the law say\nthese things also? For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not\nmuzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God care for\noxen? or saith He it altogether for our sakes? for for our sakes it was\nwritten,\u201d and so on?[42] Now, how confused is the reasoning of the Jew\nin regard to these matters (although he had it in his power to speak\nwith greater effect) when he says: \u201cCertain among you have abandoned the\nusages of our fathers under a pretence of explanations and allegories;\nand some of you, although, as ye pretend, interpreting them in a\nspiritual manner, nevertheless do observe the customs of our fathers;\nand some of you, without any such interpretation, are willing to accept\nJesus as the subject of prophecy, and to keep the law of Moses according\nto the customs of the fathers, as having in the words the whole mind of\nthe Spirit.\u201d Now how was Celsus able to see these things so clearly in\nthis place, when in the subsequent parts of his work he makes mention of\ncertain godless heresies altogether alien from the doctrine of Jesus,\nand even of others which leave the Creator out of account altogether,\nand does not appear to know that there are Israelites who are converts\nto Christianity, and who have not abandoned the law of their fathers? It\nwas not his object to investigate everything here in the spirit of\ntruth, and to accept whatever he might find to be useful; but he\ncomposed these statements in the spirit of an enemy, and with a desire\nto overthrow everything as soon as he heard it.\n\nFootnote 41:\n\n Gal. iv. 21, 22.\n\nFootnote 42:\n\n 1 Cor. ix. 8.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IV.\n\n\nThe Jew, then, continues his address to converts from his own nation\nthus: \u201cYesterday and the day before, when we visited with punishment the\nman who deluded you, ye became apostates from the law of your fathers;\u201d\nshowing by such statements (as we have just demonstrated) anything but\nan exact knowledge of the truth. But what he advances afterwards seems\nto have some force, when he says: \u201cHow is it that you take the beginning\nof your system from our worship, and when you have made some progress\nyou treat it with disrespect, although you have no other foundation to\nshow for your doctrines than our law?\u201d Now, certainly the introduction\nto Christianity is through the Mosaic worship and the prophetic\nwritings; and after the introduction, it is in the interpretation and\nexplanation of these that progress takes place, while those who are\nintroduced prosecute their investigations into \u201cthe mystery according to\nrevelation, which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made\nmanifest in the Scriptures of the prophets,\u201d[43] and by the appearance\nof our Lord Jesus Christ. But they who advance in the knowledge of\nChristianity do not, as ye allege, treat the things written in the law\nwith disrespect. On the contrary, they bestow upon them greater honour,\nshowing what a depth of wise and mysterious reasons is contained in\nthese writings, which are not fully comprehended by the Jews, who treat\nthem superficially, and as if they were in some degree even\nfabulous.[44] And what absurdity should there be in our system\u2014that is,\nthe gospel\u2014having the law for its foundation, when even the Lord Jesus\nHimself said to those who would not believe upon Him: \u201cIf ye had\nbelieved Moses, ye would have believed me, for he wrote of me. But if ye\ndo not believe his writings, how shall ye believe my words?\u201d[45] Nay,\neven one of the evangelists\u2014Mark\u2014says: \u201cThe beginning of the gospel of\nJesus Christ, as it is written in the prophet Isaiah, Behold, I send my\nmessenger before Thy face, who shall prepare Thy way before Thee,\u201d[46]\nwhich shows that the beginning of the gospel is connected with the\nJewish writings. What force, then, is there in the objection of the Jew\nof Celsus, that \u201cif any one predicted to us that the Son of God was to\nvisit mankind, he was one of our prophets, and the prophet of our God?\u201d\nOr how is it a charge against Christianity, that John, who baptized\nJesus, was a Jew? For although He was a Jew, it does not follow that\nevery believer, whether a convert from heathenism or from Judaism, must\nyield a literal obedience to the law of Moses.\n\nFootnote 43:\n\n Rom. xvi. 25.\n\nFootnote 44:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 45:\n\n John v. 46, 47.\n\nFootnote 46:\n\n Mark i. 1, 2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter V.\n\n\nAfter these matters, although Celsus becomes tautological in his\nstatements about Jesus, repeating for the second time that \u201che was\npunished by the Jews for his crimes,\u201d we shall not again take up the\ndefence, being satisfied with what we have already said. But, in the\nnext place, as this Jew of his disparages the doctrine regarding the\nresurrection of the dead, and the divine judgment, and of the rewards to\nbe bestowed upon the just, and of the fire which is to devour the\nwicked, as being stale[47] opinions, and thinks that he will overthrow\nChristianity by asserting that there is nothing new in its teaching upon\nthese points, we have to say to him, that our Lord, seeing the conduct\nof the Jews not to be at all in keeping with the teaching of the\nprophets, inculcated by a parable that the kingdom of God would be taken\nfrom them, and given to the converts from heathenism. For which reason,\nnow, we may also see of a truth that all the doctrines of the Jews of\nthe present day are mere trifles and fables,[48] since they have not the\nlight that proceeds from the knowledge of the Scriptures; whereas those\nof the Christians are the truth, having power to raise and elevate the\nsoul and understanding of man, and to persuade him to seek a\ncitizenship, not like the earthly[49] Jews here below, but in heaven.\nAnd this result shows itself among those who are able to see the\ngrandeur of the ideas contained in the law and the prophets, and who are\nable to commend them to others.\n\nFootnote 47:\n\n \u1f15\u03c9\u03bb\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 48:\n\n \u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03ae\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 49:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9 \u1f38\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VI.\n\n\nBut let it be granted that Jesus observed all the Jewish usages,\nincluding even their sacrificial observances, what does that avail to\nprevent our recognising Him as the Son of God? Jesus, then, is the Son\nof God, who gave the law and the prophets; and we, who belong to the\nchurch, do not transgress the law, but have escaped the\nmythologizings[50] of the Jews, and have our minds chastened and\neducated by the mystical contemplation of the law and the prophets. For\nthe prophets themselves, as not resting the sense of these words in the\nplain history which they relate, nor in the legal enactments taken\naccording to the word and letter, express themselves somewhere, when\nabout to relate histories, in words like this, \u201cI will open my mouth in\nparables, I will utter hard sayings of old;\u201d[51] and in another place,\nwhen offering up a prayer regarding the law as being obscure, and\nneeding divine help for its comprehension, they offer up this prayer,\n\u201cOpen Thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of Thy\nlaw.\u201d[52]\n\nFootnote 50:\n\n \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 51:\n\n Ps. lxxvii. 2.\n\nFootnote 52:\n\n Ps. cxix. 18.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VII.\n\n\nMoreover, let them show where there is to be found even the appearance\nof language dictated by arrogance,[53] and proceeding from Jesus. For\nhow could an arrogant man thus express himself, \u201cLearn of me, for I am\nmeek and lowly of heart, and you shall find rest for your souls?\u201d[54] or\nhow can He be styled arrogant, who after supper laid aside His garments\nin the presence of His disciples, and, after girding Himself with a\ntowel, and pouring water into a basin, proceeded to wash the feet of\neach disciple, and rebuked him who was unwilling to allow them to be\nwashed, with the words, \u201cExcept I wash thee, thou hast no part with\nme?\u201d[55] Or how could He be called such who said, \u201cI was amongst you,\nnot as he that sitteth at meat, but as he that serveth?\u201d[56] And let any\none show what were the falsehoods which He uttered, and let him point\nout what are great and what are small falsehoods, that he may prove\nJesus to have been guilty of the former. And there is yet another way in\nwhich we may confute him. For as one falsehood is not less or more false\nthan another, so one truth is not less or more true than another. And\nwhat charges of impiety he has to bring against Jesus, let the Jew of\nCelsus especially bring forward. Was it impious to abstain from\ncorporeal circumcision, and from a literal Sabbath, and literal\nfestivals, and literal new moons, and from clean and unclean meats, and\nto turn the mind to the good and true and spiritual law of God, while at\nthe same time he who was an ambassador for Christ knew how to become to\nthe Jews as a Jew, that he might gain the Jews, and to those who are\nunder the law, as under the law, that he might gain those who are under\nthe law?\n\nFootnote 53:\n\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 54:\n\n Matt. xi. 29.\n\nFootnote 55:\n\n John xvi. 4.\n\nFootnote 56:\n\n Luke xxii. 27.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VIII.\n\n\nHe says, further, that \u201cmany other persons would appear such as Jesus\nwas, to those who were willing to be deceived.\u201d Let this Jew of Celsus\nthen show us, not many persons, nor even a few, but a single individual,\nsuch as Jesus was, introducing among the human race, with the power that\nwas manifested in Him, a system of doctrine and opinions beneficial to\nhuman life, and which converts men from the practice of wickedness. He\nsays, moreover, that this charge is brought against the Jews by the\nChristian converts, that they have not believed in Jesus as in God. Now\non this point we have, in the preceding pages, offered a preliminary\ndefence, showing at the same time in what respects we understand Him to\nbe God, and in what we take Him to be man. \u201cHow should we,\u201d he\ncontinues, \u201cwho have made known to all men that there is to come from\nGod one who is to punish the wicked, treat him with disregard when he\ncame?\u201d And to this, as an exceedingly silly argument, it does not seem\nto me reasonable to offer any answer. It is as if some one were to say,\n\u201cHow could we, who teach temperance, commit any act of licentiousness?\nor we, who are ambassadors for righteousness, be guilty of any\nwickedness?\u201d For as these inconsistencies are found among men, so, to\nsay that they believed the prophets when speaking of the future advent\nof Christ, and yet refused their belief to Him when He came, agreeably\nto prophetic statement, was quite in keeping with human nature. And\nsince we must add another reason, we shall remark that this very result\nwas foretold by the prophets. Isaiah distinctly declares: \u201cHearing ye\nshall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall\nnot perceive: for the heart of this people has become fat,\u201d[57] etc. And\nlet them explain why it was predicted to the Jews, that although they\nboth heard and saw, they would not understand what was said, nor\nperceive what was seen as they ought. For it is indeed manifest, that\nwhen they beheld Jesus they did not see who He was; and when they heard\nHim, they did not understand from His words the divinity that was in\nHim, and which transferred God\u2019s providential care, hitherto exercised\nover the Jews, to His converts from the heathen. Therefore we may see,\nthat after the advent of Jesus the Jews were altogether abandoned, and\npossess now none of what were considered their ancient glories, so that\nthere is no indication of any Divinity abiding amongst them. For they\nhave no longer prophets nor miracles, traces of which to a considerable\nextent are still found among Christians, and some of them more\nremarkable than any that existed among the Jews; and these we ourselves\nhave witnessed, if our testimony may be received. But the Jew of Celsus\nexclaims: \u201cWhy did we treat him, whom we announced beforehand, with\ndishonour? Was it that we might be chastised more than others?\u201d To which\nwe have to answer, that on account of their unbelief, and the other\ninsults which they heaped upon Jesus, the Jews will not only suffer more\nthan others in that judgment which is believed to impend over the world,\nbut have even already endured such sufferings. For what nation is an\nexile from their own metropolis, and from the place sacred to the\nworship of their fathers, save the Jews alone? And these calamities they\nhave suffered, because they were a most wicked nation, which, although\nguilty of many other sins, yet has been punished so severely for none,\nas for those that were committed against our Jesus.\n\nFootnote 57:\n\n Isa. vi. 9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IX.\n\n\nThe Jew continues his discourse thus: \u201cHow should we deem him to be a\nGod, who not only in other respects, as was currently reported,\nperformed none of his promises, but who also, after we had convicted\nhim, and condemned him as deserving of punishment, was found attempting\nto conceal himself, and endeavouring to escape in a most disgraceful\nmanner, and who was betrayed by those whom he called disciples? And\nyet,\u201d he continues, \u201che who was a God could neither flee nor be led away\na prisoner; and least of all could he be deserted and delivered up by\nthose who had been his associates, and had shared all things in common,\nand had had him for their teacher, who was deemed to be a Saviour, and a\nSon of the greatest God, and an angel.\u201d To which we reply, that even we\ndo not suppose the body of Jesus, which was then an object of sight and\nperception, to have been God. And why do I say His body? Nay, not even\nHis soul, of which it is related, \u201cMy soul is exceeding sorrowful, even\nunto death.\u201d[58] But as, according to the Jewish manner of speaking, \u201cI\nam the Lord, the God of all flesh,\u201d and, \u201cBefore me there was no God\nformed, neither shall there be after me,\u201d God is believed to be He who\nemploys the soul and body of the prophet as an instrument; and as,\naccording to the Greeks, he who says,\n\n \u201cI know both the number of the sand, and the measures of the sea,\n And I understand a dumb man, and hear him who does not speak,\u201d[59]\n\nis considered to be a god when speaking, and making himself heard\nthrough the Pythian priestess; so, according to our view, it was the\nLogos God, and Son of the God of all things, who spake in Jesus these\nwords, \u201cI am the way, and the truth, and the life;\u201d and these, \u201cI am the\ndoor;\u201d and these, \u201cI am the living bread that came down from heaven;\u201d\nand other expressions similar to these. We therefore charge the Jews\nwith not acknowledging Him to be God, to whom testimony was borne in\nmany passages by the prophets, to the effect that He was a mighty power,\nand a God next to[60] the God and Father of all things. For we assert\nthat it was to Him the Father gave the command, when in the Mosaic\naccount of the creation He uttered the words, \u201cLet there be light,\u201d and\n\u201cLet there be a firmament,\u201d and gave the injunctions with regard to\nthose other creative acts which were performed; and that to Him also\nwere addressed the words, \u201cLet us make man in our own image and\nlikeness;\u201d and that the Logos, when commanded, obeyed all the Father\u2019s\nwill. And we make these statements not from our own conjectures, but\nbecause we believe the prophecies circulated among the Jews, in which it\nis said of God, and of the works of creation, in express words, as\nfollows: \u201cHe spake, and they were made; He commanded, and they were\ncreated.\u201d[61] Now if God gave the command, and the creatures were\nformed, who, according to the view of the spirit of prophecy, could he\nbe that was able to carry out such commands of the Father, save Him who,\nso to speak, is the living Logos and the Truth? And that the Gospels do\nnot consider him who in Jesus said these words, \u201cI am the way, and the\ntruth, and the life,\u201d to have been of so circumscribed a nature,[62] as\nto have an existence nowhere out of the soul and body of Jesus, is\nevident both from many considerations, and from a few instances of the\nfollowing kind which we shall quote. John the Baptist, when predicting\nthat the Son of God was to appear immediately, not in that body and\nsoul, but as manifesting Himself everywhere, says regarding Him: \u201cThere\nstands in the midst of you One whom ye know not, who cometh after\nme.\u201d[63] For if he had thought that the Son of God was only there, where\nwas the visible body of Jesus, how could he have said, \u201cThere stands in\nthe midst of you One whom ye know not?\u201d And Jesus Himself, in raising\nthe minds of His disciples to higher thoughts of the Son of God, says:\n\u201cWhere two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the\nmidst of you.\u201d[64] And of the same nature is His promise to His\ndisciples: \u201cLo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the world.\u201d[65]\nAnd we quote these passages, making no distinction between the Son of\nGod and Jesus. For the soul and body of Jesus formed, after the\n\u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1, one being with the Logos of God. Now if, according to Paul\u2019s\nteaching, \u201che that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit,\u201d[66] every one\nwho understands what being joined to the Lord is, and who has been\nactually joined to Him, is one spirit with the Lord; how should not that\nbeing be one in a far greater and more divine degree, which was once\nunited with the Logos of God?[67] He, indeed, manifested Himself among\nthe Jews as the power of God, by the miracles which He performed, which\nCelsus suspected were accomplished by sorcery, but which by the Jews of\nthat time were attributed, I know not why, to Beelzebub, in the words:\n\u201cHe casteth out devils through Beelzebub, the prince of the devils.\u201d[68]\nBut these our Saviour convicted of uttering the greatest absurdities,\nfrom the fact that the kingdom of evil was not yet come to an end. And\nthis will be evident to all intelligent readers of the Gospel narrative,\nwhich it is not now the time to explain.\n\nFootnote 58:\n\n Matt. xxvi. 38.\n\nFootnote 59:\n\n Herodot. b. i. 47.\n\nFootnote 60:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0398\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f45\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u0398\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1. \u201cEx mente Origenis, inquit\n Boherellus, vertendum \u2018Secundo post universi Deum atque parentem\n loco;\u2019 non cum interprete Gelenio, \u2018Ipsius rerum universarum Dei atque\n Parentis testimonio.\u2019 Nam si hic esset sensus, frustra post \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, adderetur \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03bd. Pr\u00e6terea, h\u00e6c epitheta, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n \u1f45\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u0398\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1, manifestam continent antithesin ad ista, \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\n \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03bd, ut Pater supra Filium evehatur, quemadmodum\n evehitur ab Origene infra libro octavo, num. 15. \u03a4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac, inferiorem\n ordinem denotantis exempla afferre supersedeo, cum obvia sint.\u201d\u2014RU\u00c6US.\n\nFootnote 61:\n\n Ps. cxlviii. 5.\n\nFootnote 62:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 63:\n\n John i. 26.\n\nFootnote 64:\n\n Matt. xviii. 20.\n\nFootnote 65:\n\n Matt. xxviii. 20.\n\nFootnote 66:\n\n 1 Cor. vi. 16.\n\nFootnote 67:\n\n \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03a0\u03b1\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u201c\u1f41 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u1ff3,\n \u1f13\u03bd \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u00b7\u201d \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03bd\u03bf\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03af \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u1ff3, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2\n \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7, \u1f15\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff7 \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f15\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6;\n\nFootnote 68:\n\n Matt. xii. 24.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter X.\n\n\nBut what promise did Jesus make which He did not perform? Let Celsus\nproduce any instance of such, and make good his charge. But he will be\nunable to do so, especially since it is from mistakes, arising either\nfrom misapprehension of the Gospel narratives, or from Jewish stories,\nthat he thinks to derive the charges which he brings against Jesus or\nagainst ourselves. Moreover, again, when the Jew says, \u201cWe both found\nhim guilty, and condemned him as deserving of death,\u201d let them show how\nthey who sought to concoct false witness against Him proved Him to be\nguilty. Was not the great charge against Jesus, which His accusers\nbrought forward, this, that He said, \u201cI am able to destroy the temple of\nGod, and after three days to raise it up again?\u201d[69] But in so saying,\nHe spake of the temple of His body; while they thought, not being able\nto understand the meaning of the speaker, that His reference was to the\ntemple of stone, which was treated by the Jews with greater respect than\nHe was who ought to have been honoured as the true Temple of God\u2014the\nWord, and the Wisdom, and the Truth. And who can say that \u201cJesus\nattempted to make His escape by disgracefully concealing Himself?\u201d Let\nany one point to an act deserving to be called disgraceful. And when he\nadds, \u201che was taken prisoner,\u201d I would say that, if to be taken prisoner\nimplies an act done against one\u2019s will, then Jesus was not taken\nprisoner; for at the fitting time He did not prevent Himself falling\ninto the hands of men, as the Lamb of God, that He might take away the\nsin of the world. For, knowing all things that were to come upon Him, He\nwent forth, and said to them, \u201cWhom seek ye?\u201d and they answered, \u201cJesus\nof Nazareth;\u201d and He said unto them, \u201cI am He.\u201d And Judas also, who\nbetrayed Him, was standing with them. When, therefore, He had said to\nthem, \u201cI am He,\u201d they went backwards and fell to the ground. Again He\nasked them, \u201cWhom seek ye?\u201d and they said again, \u201cJesus of Nazareth.\u201d\nJesus said to them, \u201cI told you I am He; if then ye seek me, let these\ngo away.\u201d[70] Nay, even to him who wished to help Him, and who smote the\nhigh priest\u2019s servant, and cut off his ear, He said: \u201cPut up thy sword\ninto its sheath: for all they who draw the sword shall perish by the\nsword. Thinkest thou that I cannot even now pray to my Father, and He\nwill presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then\nshould the Scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?\u201d[71] And if\nany one imagines these statements to be inventions of the writers of the\nGospels, why should not those statements rather be regarded as\ninventions which proceeded from a spirit of hatred and hostility against\nJesus and the Christians? and these the truth, which proceed from those\nwho manifest the sincerity of their feelings towards Jesus, by enduring\neverything, whatever it may be, for the sake of His words? For the\nreception by the disciples of such power of endurance and resolution\ncontinued even to death, with a disposition of mind that would not\ninvent regarding their Teacher what was not true, is a very evident\nproof to all candid judges that they were fully persuaded of the truth\nof what they wrote, seeing they submitted to trials so numerous and so\nsevere, for the sake of Him whom they believed to be the Son of God.\n\nFootnote 69:\n\n Matt. xxvi. 61.\n\nFootnote 70:\n\n John xviii. 4 sqq.\n\nFootnote 71:\n\n Matt. xxvi. 52-54.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XI.\n\n\nIn the next place, that He was betrayed by those whom He called His\ndisciples, is a circumstance which the Jew of Celsus learned from the\nGospels; calling the one Judas, however, \u201cmany disciples,\u201d that he might\nseem to add force to the accusation. Nor did he trouble himself to take\nnote of all that is related concerning Judas; how this Judas, having\ncome to entertain opposite and conflicting opinions regarding his\nMaster, neither opposed Him with his whole soul, nor yet with his whole\nsoul preserved the respect due by a pupil to his teacher. For he that\nbetrayed Him gave to the multitude that came to apprehend Jesus, a sign,\nsaying, \u201cWhomsoever I shall kiss, it is he; seize ye him,\u201d\u2014retaining\nstill some element of respect for his Master: for unless he had done so,\nhe would have betrayed Him, even publicly, without any pretence of\naffection. This circumstance, therefore, will satisfy all with regard to\nthe purpose of Judas, that along with his covetous disposition, and his\nwicked design to betray his Master, he had still a feeling of a mixed\ncharacter in his mind, produced in him by the words of Jesus, which had\nthe appearance (so to speak) of some remnant of good. For it is related\nthat, \u201cwhen Judas, who betrayed Him, knew that He was condemned, he\nrepented, and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the high\npriest and elders, saying, I have sinned, in that I have betrayed the\ninnocent blood. But they said, What is that to us? see thou to\nthat;\u201d[72]\u2014and that, having thrown the money down in the temple, he\ndeparted, and went and hanged himself. But if this covetous Judas, who\nalso stole the money placed in the bag for the relief of the poor,\nrepented, and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief\npriests and elders, it is clear that the instructions of Jesus had been\nable to produce some feeling of repentance in his mind, and were not\naltogether despised and loathed by this traitor. Nay, the declaration,\n\u201cI have sinned, in that I have betrayed the innocent blood,\u201d was a\npublic acknowledgment of his crime. Observe, also, how exceedingly\npassionate[73] was the sorrow for his sins that proceeded from that\nrepentance, and which would not suffer him any longer to live; and how,\nafter he had cast the money down in the temple, he withdrew, and went\naway and hanged himself: for he passed sentence upon himself, showing\nwhat a power the teaching of Jesus had over this sinner Judas, this\nthief and traitor, who could not always treat with contempt what he had\nlearned from Jesus. Will Celsus and his friends now say that those\nproofs which show that the apostasy of Judas was not a complete\napostasy, even after his attempts against his Master, are inventions,\nand that this alone is true, viz. that one of His disciples betrayed\nHim; and will they add to the scriptural account that he betrayed Him\nalso with his whole heart? To act in this spirit of hostility with the\nsame writings, both as to what we are to believe and what we are not to\nbelieve, is absurd.[74] And if we must make a statement regarding Judas\nwhich may overwhelm our opponents with shame, we would say that, in the\nbook of Psalms, the whole of the 108th contains a prophecy about Judas,\nthe beginning of which is this: \u201cO God, hold not Thy peace before my\npraise; for the mouth of the sinner, and the mouth of the crafty man,\nare opened against me.\u201d[75] And it is predicted in this psalm, both that\nJudas separated himself from the number of the apostles on account of\nhis sins, and that another was selected in his place; and this is shown\nby the words: \u201cAnd his bishopric let another take.\u201d[76] But suppose now\nthat He had been betrayed by some one of His disciples, who was\npossessed by a worse spirit than Judas, and who had completely poured\nout, as it were, all the words which he had heard from Jesus, what would\nthis contribute to an accusation against Jesus or the Christian\nreligion? And how will this demonstrate its doctrine to be false? We\nhave replied in the preceding chapter to the statements which follow\nthis, showing that Jesus was not taken prisoner when attempting to flee,\nbut that He gave Himself up voluntarily for the sake of us all. Whence\nit follows, that even if He were bound, He was bound agreeably to His\nown will; thus teaching us the lesson that we should undertake similar\nthings for the sake of religion in no spirit of unwillingness.\n\nFootnote 72:\n\n Matt. xxvii. 3-5.\n\nFootnote 73:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c6\u03bf\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac.\n\nFootnote 74:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03af\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 75:\n\n Ps. cix. 1, 2.\n\nFootnote 76:\n\n Ps. cix. 8.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XII.\n\n\nAnd the following appear to me to be childish assertions, viz. that \u201cno\ngood general and leader of great multitudes was ever betrayed; nor even\na wicked captain of robbers and commander of very wicked men, who seemed\nto be of any use to his associates; but Jesus, having been betrayed by\nhis subordinates, neither governed like a good general, nor, after\ndeceiving his disciples, produced in the minds of the victims of his\ndeceit that feeling of good-will which, so to speak, would be manifested\ntowards a brigand chief.\u201d Now one might find many accounts of generals\nwho were betrayed by their own soldiers, and of robber chiefs who were\ncaptured through the instrumentality of those who did not keep their\nbargains with them. But grant that no general or robber chief was ever\nbetrayed, what does that contribute to the establishment of the fact as\na charge against Jesus, that one of His disciples became His betrayer?\nAnd since Celsus makes an ostentatious exhibition of philosophy, I would\nask of him, If, then, it was a charge against Plato, that Aristotle,\nafter being his pupil for twenty years, went away and assailed his\ndoctrine of the immortality of the soul, and styled the ideas of Plato\nthe merest trifling?[77] And if I were still in doubt, I would continue\nthus: Was Plato no longer mighty in dialectics, nor able to defend his\nviews, after Aristotle had taken his departure; and, on that account,\nare the opinions of Plato false? Or may it not be, that while Plato is\ntrue, as the pupils of his philosophy would maintain, Aristotle was\nguilty of wickedness and ingratitude towards his teacher? Nay,\nChrysippus also, in many places of his writings, appears to assail\nCleanthes, introducing novel opinions opposed to his views, although the\nlatter had been his teacher when he was a young man, and began the study\nof philosophy. Aristotle, indeed, is said to have been Plato\u2019s pupil for\ntwenty years, and no inconsiderable period was spent by Chrysippus in\nthe school of Cleanthes; while Judas did not remain so much as three\nyears with Jesus. But from the narratives of the lives of philosophers\nwe might take many instances similar to those on which Celsus founds a\ncharge against Jesus on account of Judas. Even the Pythagoreans erected\ncenotaphs[78] to those who, after betaking themselves to philosophy,\nfell back again into their ignorant mode of life; and yet neither was\nPythagoras nor his followers, on that account, weak in argument and\ndemonstration.\n\nFootnote 77:\n\n \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 78:\n\n Cf. Clem. Alex. _Strom._ v. c. ix.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIII.\n\n\nThis Jew of Celsus continues, after the above, in the following fashion:\n\u201cAlthough he could state many things regarding the events of the life of\nJesus which are true, and not like those which are recorded by the\ndisciples, he willingly omits them.\u201d What, then, are those true\nstatements, unlike the accounts in the Gospels, which the Jew of Celsus\npasses by without mention? Or is he only employing what appears to be a\nfigure of speech,[79] in pretending to have something to say, while in\nreality he had nothing to produce beyond the Gospel narrative which\ncould impress the hearer with a feeling of its truth, and furnish a\nclear ground of accusation against Jesus and His doctrine? And he\ncharges the disciples with having invented the statement that Jesus\nforeknew and foretold all that happened to Him; but the truth of this\nstatement we shall establish, although Celsus may not like it, by means\nof many other predictions uttered by the Saviour, in which He foretold\nwhat would befall the Christians in after generations. And who is there\nwho would not be astonished at this prediction: \u201cYe shall be brought\nbefore governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and\nthe Gentiles;\u201d[80] and at any others which He may have delivered\nrespecting the future persecution of His disciples? For what system of\nopinions ever existed among men on account of which others are punished,\nso that any one of the accusers of Jesus could say that, foreseeing the\nimpiety or falsity of his opinions to be the ground of an accusation\nagainst them, he thought that this would redound to his credit, that he\nhad so predicted regarding it long before? Now if any deserve to be\nbrought, on account of their opinions, before governors and kings, what\nothers are they, save the Epicureans, who altogether deny the existence\nof providence? And also the Peripatetics, who say that prayers are of no\navail, and sacrifices offered as to the Divinity? But some one will say\nthat the Samaritans suffer persecution because of their religion. In\nanswer to whom we shall state that the Sicarians,[81] on account of the\npractice of circumcision, as mutilating themselves contrary to the\nestablished laws and the customs permitted to the Jews alone, are put to\ndeath. And you never hear a judge inquiring whether a Sicarian who\nstrives to live according to this established religion of his will be\nreleased from punishment if he apostatizes, but will be led away to\ndeath if he continues firm; for the evidence of the circumcision is\nsufficient to ensure the death of him who has undergone it. But\nChristians alone, according to the prediction of their Saviour, \u201cYe\nshall be brought before governors and kings for my sake,\u201d are urged up\nto their last breath by their judges to deny Christianity, and to\nsacrifice according to the public customs; and after the oath of\nabjuration, to return to their homes, and to live in safety. And observe\nwhether it is not with great authority that this declaration is uttered:\n\u201cWhosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess\nalso before my Father who is in heaven. And whosoever shall deny me\nbefore men,\u201d[82] etc. And go back with me in thought to Jesus when He\nuttered these words, and see His predictions not yet accomplished.\nPerhaps you will say, in a spirit of incredulity, that he is talking\nfolly, and speaking to no purpose, for his words will have no\nfulfilment; or, being in doubt about assenting to his words, you will\nsay, that if these predictions be fulfilled, and the doctrine of Jesus\nbe established, so that governors and kings think of destroying those\nwho acknowledge Jesus, then we shall believe that he utters these\nprophecies as one who has received great power from God to implant this\ndoctrine among the human race, and as believing that it will prevail.\nAnd who will not be filled with wonder, when he goes back in thought to\nHim who then taught and said, \u201cThis gospel shall be preached throughout\nthe whole world, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles,\u201d and\nbeholds, agreeably to His words, the gospel of Jesus Christ preached in\nthe whole world under heaven to Greeks and barbarians, wise and foolish\nalike? For the word, spoken with power, has gained the mastery over men\nof all sorts of nature, and it is impossible to see any race of men\nwhich has escaped accepting the teaching of Jesus. But let this Jew of\nCelsus, who does not believe that He foreknew all that happened to Him,\nconsider how, while Jerusalem was still standing, and the whole Jewish\nworship celebrated in it, Jesus foretold what would befall it from the\nhand of the Romans. For they will not maintain that the acquaintances\nand pupils of Jesus Himself handed down His teaching contained in the\nGospels without committing it to writing, and left His disciples without\nthe memoirs of Jesus contained in their works. Now in these it is\nrecorded, that \u201cwhen ye shall see Jerusalem compassed about with armies,\nthen shall ye know that the desolation thereof is nigh.\u201d[83] But at that\ntime there were no armies around Jerusalem, encompassing and enclosing\nand besieging it; for the siege began in the reign of Nero, and lasted\ntill the government of Vespasian, whose son Titus destroyed Jerusalem,\non account, as Josephus says, of James the Just, the brother of Jesus\nwho was called Christ, but in reality, as the truth makes clear, on\naccount of Jesus Christ the Son of God.\n\nFootnote 79:\n\n \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9 \u1fe5\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc7.\n\nFootnote 80:\n\n Matt. x. 18.\n\nFootnote 81:\n\n Modestinus, lib. vi. _Regularum, ad legem Corneliam de Sicariis_:\n \u201cCircumcidere filios suos Jud\u00e6is tantum rescripto divi Pii\n permittitur: in non ejusdem religionis qui hoc fecerit, castrantis\n p\u0153na irrogatur.\u201d\n\nFootnote 82:\n\n Matt. x. 18.\n\nFootnote 83:\n\n Matt. xxiv. 14.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIV.\n\n\nCelsus, however, accepting or granting that Jesus foreknew what would\nbefall Him, might think to make light of the admission, as he did in the\ncase of the miracles, when he alleged that they were wrought by means of\nsorcery; for he might say that many persons by means of divination,\neither by auspices, or auguries, or sacrifices, or nativities, have come\nto the knowledge of what was to happen. But this concession he would not\nmake, as being too great a one; and although he somehow granted that\nJesus worked miracles, he thought to weaken the force of this by the\ncharge of sorcery. Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I\nthink, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of\nfuture events (although falling into confusion about some things which\nrefer to Peter, as if they referred to Jesus), but also testified that\nthe result corresponded to His predictions. So that he also, by these\nvery admissions regarding foreknowledge, as if against his will,\nexpressed his opinion that the doctrines taught by the fathers of our\nsystem were not devoid of divine power.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XV.\n\n\nCelsus continues: \u201cThe disciples of Jesus, having no undoubted fact on\nwhich to rely, devised the fiction that he foreknew everything before it\nhappened;\u201d not observing, or not wishing to observe, the love of truth\nwhich actuated the writers, who acknowledged that Jesus had told His\ndisciples beforehand, \u201cAll ye shall be offended because of me this\nnight,\u201d\u2014a statement which was fulfilled by their all being offended; and\nthat He predicted to Peter, \u201cBefore the cock crow, thou shalt deny me\nthrice,\u201d which was followed by Peter\u2019s threefold denial. Now if they had\nnot been lovers of truth, but, as Celsus supposes, inventors of\nfictions, they would not have represented Peter as denying, nor His\ndisciples as being offended. For although these events actually\nhappened, who could have proved that they turned out in that manner? And\nyet, according to all probability, these were matters which ought to\nhave been passed over in silence by men who wished to teach the readers\nof the Gospels to despise death for the sake of confessing Christianity.\nBut now, seeing that the word, by its power, will gain the mastery over\nmen, they related those facts which they have done, and which, I know\nnot how, were neither to do any harm to their readers, nor to afford any\npretext for denial.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVI.\n\n\nExceedingly weak is his assertion, that \u201cthe disciples of Jesus wrote\nsuch accounts regarding him, by way of extenuating the charges that told\nagainst him: as if,\u201d he says, \u201cany one were to say that a certain person\nwas a just man, and yet were to show that he was guilty of injustice; or\nthat he was pious, and yet had committed murder; or that he was\nimmortal, and yet was dead; subjoining to all these statements the\nremark that he had foretold all these things.\u201d Now his illustrations are\nat once seen to be inappropriate; for there is no absurdity in Him who\nhad resolved that He would become a living pattern to men, as to the\nmanner in which they were to regulate their lives, showing also how they\nought to die for the sake of their religion, apart altogether from the\nfact that His death on behalf of men was a benefit to the whole world,\nas we proved in the preceding book. He imagines, moreover, that the\nwhole of the confession of the Saviour\u2019s sufferings confirms his\nobjection instead of weakening it. For he is not acquainted either with\nthe philosophical remarks of Paul,[84] or the statements of the\nprophets, on this subject. And it escaped him that certain heretics have\ndeclared that Jesus underwent His sufferings in appearance, not in\nreality. For had he known, he would not have said: \u201cFor ye do not even\nallege this, that he seemed to wicked men to suffer this punishment,\nthough not undergoing it in reality; but, on the contrary, ye\nacknowledge that he openly suffered.\u201d But we do not view His sufferings\nas having been merely in appearance, in order that His resurrection also\nmay not be a false, but a real event. For he who really died, actually\narose, if he did arise; whereas he who appeared only to have died, did\nnot in reality arise. But since the resurrection of Jesus Christ is a\nsubject of mockery to unbelievers, we shall quote the words of\nPlato,[85] that Herus the son of Armenius rose from the funeral pile\ntwelve days after he had been laid upon it, and gave an account of what\nhe had seen in Hades; and as we are replying to unbelievers, it will not\nbe altogether useless to refer in this place to what Heraclides[86]\nrelates respecting the woman who was deprived of life. And many persons\nare recorded to have risen from their tombs, not only on the day of\ntheir burial, but also on the day following. What wonder is it, then, if\nin the case of one who performed many marvellous things, both beyond the\npower of man and with such fulness of evidence, that he who could not\ndeny their performance, endeavoured to calumniate them by comparing them\nto acts of sorcery, should have manifested also in His death some\ngreater display of divine power, so that His soul, if it pleased, might\nleave its body, and having performed certain offices out of it, might\nreturn again at pleasure? And such a declaration is Jesus said to have\nmade in the Gospel of John, when He said: \u201cNo man taketh my life from\nme, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have\npower to take it again.\u201d[87] And perhaps it was on this account that He\nhastened His departure from the body, that He might preserve it, and\nthat His legs might not be broken, as were those of the robbers who were\ncrucified with Him. \u201cFor the soldiers broke the legs of the first, and\nof the other who was crucified with Him; but when they came to Jesus,\nand saw that He was dead, they brake not His legs.\u201d[88] We have\naccordingly answered the question, \u201cHow is it credible that Jesus could\nhave predicted these things?\u201d And with respect to this, \u201cHow could the\ndead man be immortal?\u201d let him who wishes to understand know, that it is\nnot the dead man who is immortal, but He who rose from the dead. So far,\nindeed, was the dead man from being immortal, that even the Jesus before\nHis decease\u2014the compound being, who was to suffer death\u2014was not\nimmortal.[89] For no one is immortal who is destined to die; but he is\nimmortal when he shall no longer be subject to death. But \u201cChrist, being\nraised from the dead, dieth no more: death hath no more dominion over\nHim;\u201d[90] although those may be unwilling to admit this who cannot\nunderstand how such things should be said.\n\nFootnote 84:\n\n \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03a0\u03b1\u03cd\u03bb\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03cc\u03c6\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 85:\n\n Cf. Plato, _de Rep._ x.\n\nFootnote 86:\n\n Cf. Plin. _Nat. Hist._ vii. c. 52.\n\nFootnote 87:\n\n John x. 18.\n\nFootnote 88:\n\n John xix. 52.\n\nFootnote 89:\n\n \u039f\u1f50 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f41 \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u2019 \u1f41 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2\n \u1f41 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5 \u1f14\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b5\u03b8\u03bd\u03ae\u03be\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 90:\n\n Rom. vi. 9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVII.\n\n\nExtremely foolish also is his remark, \u201cWhat God, or spirit, or prudent\nman would not, on foreseeing that such events were to befall him, avoid\nthem if he could; whereas he threw himself headlong into those things\nwhich he knew beforehand were to happen?\u201d And yet Socrates knew that he\nwould die after drinking the hemlock, and it was in his power, if he had\nallowed himself to be persuaded by Crito, by escaping from prison, to\navoid these calamities; but nevertheless he decided, as it appeared to\nhim consistent with right reason, that it was better for him to die as\nbecame a philosopher, than to retain his life in a manner unbecoming\none. Leonidas also, the Lacedemonian general, knowing that he was on the\npoint of dying with his followers at Thermopyl\u00e6, did not make any effort\nto preserve his life by disgraceful means, but said to his companions,\n\u201cLet us go to breakfast, as we shall sup in Hades.\u201d And those who are\ninterested in collecting stories of this kind, will find numbers of\nthem. Now, where is the wonder if Jesus, knowing all things that were to\nhappen, did not avoid them, but encountered what He foreknew; when Paul,\nHis own disciple, having heard what would befall him when he went up to\nJerusalem, proceeded to face the danger, reproaching those who were\nweeping around him, and endeavouring to prevent him from going up to\nJerusalem? Many also of our contemporaries, knowing well that if they\nmade a confession of Christianity they would be put to death, but that\nif they denied it they would be liberated, and their property restored,\ndespised life, and voluntarily selected death for the sake of their\nreligion.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVIII.\n\n\nAfter this the Jew makes another silly remark, saying, \u201cHow is it that,\nif Jesus pointed out beforehand both the traitor and the perjurer, they\ndid not fear him as a God, and cease, the one from his intended treason,\nand the other from his perjury?\u201d Here the learned Celsus did not see the\ncontradiction in his statement: for if Jesus foreknew events as a God,\nthen it was impossible for His foreknowledge to prove untrue; and\ntherefore it was impossible for him who was known to Him as going to\nbetray Him not to execute his purpose, nor for him who was rebuked as\ngoing to deny Him not to have been guilty of that crime. For if it had\nbeen possible for the one to abstain from the act of betrayal, and the\nother from that of denial, as having been warned of the consequences of\nthese actions beforehand, then His words were no longer true, who\npredicted that the one would betray Him and the other deny Him. For if\nHe had foreknowledge of the traitor, He knew the wickedness in which the\ntreason originated, and this wickedness was by no means taken away by\nthe foreknowledge. And, again, if He had ascertained that one would deny\nHim, He made that prediction from seeing the weakness out of which that\nact of denial would arise, and yet this weakness was not to be taken\naway thus at once[91] by the foreknowledge. But whence he derived the\nstatement, \u201cthat these persons betrayed and denied him without\nmanifesting any concern about him,\u201d I know not; for it was proved, with\nrespect to the traitor, that it is false to say that he betrayed his\nmaster without an exhibition of anxiety regarding Him. And this was\nshown to be equally true of him who denied Him; for he went out, after\nthe denial, and wept bitterly.\n\nFootnote 91:\n\n \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b8\u03c1\u03cc\u03c9\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIX.\n\n\nSuperficial also is his objection, that \u201cit is always the case when a\nman against whom a plot is formed, and who comes to the knowledge of it,\nmakes known to the conspirators that he is acquainted with their design,\nthat the latter are turned from their purpose, and keep upon their\nguard.\u201d For many have continued to plot even against those who were\nacquainted with their plans. And then, as if bringing his argument to a\nconclusion, he says: \u201cNot because these things were predicted did they\ncome to pass, for that is impossible; but since they have come to pass,\ntheir being predicted is shown to be a falsehood: for it is altogether\nimpossible that those who heard beforehand of the discovery of their\ndesigns, should carry out their plans of betrayal and denial!\u201d But if\nhis premisses are overthrown, then his conclusion also falls to the\nground, viz. \u201cthat we are not to believe, because these things were\npredicted, that they have come to pass.\u201d Now we maintain that they not\nonly came to pass as being possible, but also that, because they came to\npass, the fact of their being predicted is shown to be true; for the\ntruth regarding future events is judged of by results. It is false,\ntherefore, as asserted by him, that the prediction of these events is\nproved to be untrue; and it is to no purpose that he says, \u201cIt is\naltogether impossible for those who heard beforehand that their designs\nwere discovered, to carry out their plans of betrayal and denial.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XX.\n\n\nLet us see how he continues after this: \u201cThese events,\u201d he says, \u201che\npredicted as being a God, and the prediction must by all means come to\npass. God, therefore, who above all others ought to do good to men, and\nespecially to those of his own household, led on his own disciples and\nprophets, with whom he was in the habit of eating and drinking, to such\na degree of wickedness, that they became impious and unholy men. Now, of\na truth, he who shared a man\u2019s table would not be guilty of conspiring\nagainst him; but after banqueting with God, he became a conspirator.\nAnd, what is still more absurd, God himself plotted against the members\nof his own table, by converting them into traitors and villains!\u201d Now,\nsince you wish me to answer even those charges of Celsus which seem to\nme frivolous,[92] the following is our reply to such statements. Celsus\nimagines that an event, predicted through foreknowledge, comes to pass\nbecause it was predicted; but we do not grant this, maintaining that he\nwho foretold it was not the cause of its happening, because he foretold\nit would happen; but the future event itself, which would have taken\nplace though not predicted, afforded the occasion to him, who was\nendowed with foreknowledge, of foretelling its occurrence. Now,\ncertainly this result is present to the foreknowledge of him who\npredicts an event, when it is possible that it may or may not happen,\nviz. that one or other of these things will take place. For we do not\nassert that he who foreknows an event, by secretly taking away the\npossibility of its happening or not, makes any such declaration as this:\n\u201cThis shall infallibly happen, and it is impossible that it can be\notherwise.\u201d And this remark applies to all the foreknowledge of events\ndependent upon ourselves, whether contained in the sacred Scriptures or\nin the histories of the Greeks. Now, what is called by logicians an\n\u201cidle argument,\u201d[93] which is a sophism, will be no sophism as far as\nCelsus can help, but according to sound reasoning it is a sophism. And\nthat this may be seen, I shall take from the Scriptures the predictions\nregarding Judas, or the foreknowledge of our Saviour regarding him as\nthe traitor; and from the Greek histories the oracle that was given to\nLaius, conceding for the present its truth, since it does not affect the\nargument. Now, in Ps. cix., Judas is spoken of by the mouth of the\nSaviour, in words beginning thus: \u201cHold not Thy peace, O God of my\npraise; for the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful are\nopened against me.\u201d Now, if you carefully observe the contents of the\npsalm, you will find that, as it was foreknown that he would betray the\nSaviour, so also was he considered to be himself the cause of the\nbetrayal, and deserving, on account of his wickedness, of the\nimprecations contained in the prophecy. For let him suffer these things,\n\u201cbecause,\u201d says the psalmist, \u201che remembered not to show mercy, but\npersecuted the poor and needy man.\u201d Wherefore it was possible for him to\nshow mercy, and not to persecute him whom he did persecute. But although\nhe might have done these things, he did not do them, but carried out the\nact of treason, so as to merit the curses pronounced against him in the\nprophecy.\n\nAnd in answer to the Greeks we shall quote the following oracular\nresponse to Laius, as recorded by the tragic poet, either in the exact\nwords of the oracle or in equivalent terms. Future events are thus made\nknown to him by the oracle: \u201cDo not try to beget children against the\nwill of the gods. For if you beget a son, your son shall murder you; and\nall your household shall wade in blood.\u201d[94] Now from this it is clear\nthat it was within the power of Laius not to try to beget children, for\nthe oracle would not have commanded an impossibility; and it was also in\nhis power to do the opposite, so that neither of these courses was\ncompulsory. And the consequence of his not guarding against the\nbegetting of children was, that he suffered from so doing the calamities\ndescribed in the tragedies relating to \u0152dipus and Jocasta and their\nsons. Now that which is called the \u201cidle argument,\u201d being a quibble, is\nsuch as might be applied, say in the case of a sick man, with the view\nof sophistically preventing him from employing a physician to promote\nhis recovery; and it is something like this: \u201cIf it is decreed that you\nshould recover from your disease, you will recover whether you call in a\nphysician or not; but if it is decreed that you should not recover, you\nwill not recover whether you call in a physician or no. But it is\ncertainly decreed either that you should recover, or that you should not\nrecover; and therefore it is in vain that you call in a physician.\u201d Now\nwith this argument the following may be wittily compared: \u201cIf it is\ndecreed that you should beget children, you will beget them, whether you\nhave intercourse with a woman or not. But if it is decreed that you\nshould not beget children, you will not do so, whether you have\nintercourse with a woman or no. Now, certainly, it is decreed either\nthat you should beget children or not; therefore it is in vain that you\nhave intercourse with a woman.\u201d For, as in the latter instance,\nintercourse with a woman is not employed in vain, seeing it is an utter\nimpossibility for him who does not use it to beget children; so, in the\nformer, if recovery from disease is to be accomplished by means of the\nhealing art, of necessity the physician is summoned, and it is therefore\nfalse to say that \u201cin vain do you call in a physician.\u201d We have brought\nforward all these illustrations on account of the assertion of this\nlearned Celsus, that \u201cbeing a God he predicted these things, and the\npredictions must _by all means_ come to pass.\u201d Now, if by \u201c_by all\nmeans_\u201d he means \u201c_necessarily_,\u201d we cannot admit this. For it was quite\npossible, also, that they might _not_ come to pass. But if he uses \u201c_by\nall means_\u201d in the sense of \u201c_simple futurity_,\u201d[95] which nothing\nhinders from being true (although it was possible that they might not\nhappen), he does not at all touch my argument; nor did it follow, from\nJesus having predicted the acts of the traitor or the perjurer, that it\nwas the same thing with His being the cause of such impious and unholy\nproceedings. For He who was amongst us, and knew what was in man, seeing\nhis evil disposition, and foreseeing what he would attempt from his\nspirit of covetousness, and from his want of stable ideas of duty\ntowards his Master, along with many other declarations, gave utterance\nto this also: \u201cHe that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same\nshall betray me.\u201d[96]\n\nFootnote 92:\n\n \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 93:\n\n \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 94:\n\n Euripid. _Ph\u0153niss\u00e6_, 18-20.\n\nFootnote 95:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 96:\n\n Matt. xxvi. 23.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXI.\n\n\nObserve also the superficiality and manifest falsity of such a statement\nof Celsus, when he asserts \u201cthat he who was partaker of a man\u2019s table\nwould not conspire against him; and if he would not conspire against a\nman, much less would he plot against a God after banqueting with him.\u201d\nFor who does not know that many persons, after partaking of the salt on\nthe table,[97] have entered into a conspiracy against their\nentertainers? The whole of Greek and barbarian history is full of such\ninstances. And the Iambic poet of Paros,[98] when upbraiding Lycambes\nwith having violated covenants confirmed by the salt of the table, says\nto him:\n\n \u201cBut thou hast broken a mighty oath\u2014that, viz., by the salt of the\n table.\u201d\n\nAnd they who are interested in historical learning, and who give\nthemselves wholly to it, to the neglect of other branches of knowledge\nmore necessary for the conduct of life,[99] can quote numerous\ninstances, showing that they who shared in the hospitality of others\nentered into conspiracies against them.\n\nFootnote 97:\n\n \u1f01\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03ad\u03b6\u03b7\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 98:\n\n Archilochus.\n\nFootnote 99:\n\n Guietus would expunge these words as \u201cinept.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXII.\n\n\nHe adds to this, as if he had brought together an argument with\nconclusive demonstrations and consequences, the following: \u201cAnd, which\nis still more absurd, God himself conspired against those who sat at his\ntable, by converting them into traitors and impious men.\u201d But how Jesus\ncould either conspire or convert His disciples into traitors or impious\nmen, it would be impossible for him to prove, save by means of such a\ndeduction as any one could refute with the greatest ease.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIII.\n\n\nHe continues in this strain: \u201cIf he had determined upon these things,\nand underwent chastisement in obedience to his Father, it is manifest\nthat, being a God, and submitting voluntarily, those things that were\ndone agreeably to his own decision were neither painful nor\ndistressing.\u201d But he did not observe that here he was at once\ncontradicting himself. For if he granted that He was chastised because\nHe had determined upon these things, and had submitted Himself to His\nFather, it is clear that He actually suffered punishment, and it was\nimpossible that what was inflicted on Him by His chastisers should not\nbe painful, because pain is an involuntary thing. But if, because He was\nwilling to suffer, His inflictions were neither painful nor distressing,\nhow did He grant that \u201cHe was chastised?\u201d He did not perceive that when\nJesus had once, by His birth, assumed a body, He assumed one which was\ncapable both of suffering pains, and those distresses incidental to\nhumanity, if we are to understand by distresses what no one voluntarily\nchooses. Since, therefore, He voluntarily assumed a body, not wholly of\na different nature from that of human flesh, so along with His body He\nassumed also its sufferings and distresses, which it was not in His\npower to avoid enduring, it being in the power of those who inflicted\nthem to send upon Him things distressing and painful. And in the\npreceding pages we have already shown, that He would not have come into\nthe hands of men had He not so willed. But He did come, because He was\nwilling to come, and because it was manifest beforehand that His dying\nupon behalf of men would be of advantage to the whole human race.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIV.\n\n\nAfter this, wishing to prove that the occurrences which befell Him were\npainful and distressing, and that it was impossible for Him, had He\nwished, to render them otherwise, he proceeds: \u201cWhy does he mourn, and\nlament, and pray to escape the fear of death, expressing himself in\nterms like these: \u2018O Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from\nme?\u2019\u201d[100] Now in these words observe the malignity of Celsus, how not\naccepting the love of truth which actuates the writers of the Gospels\n(who might have passed over in silence those points which, as Celsus\nthinks, are censurable, but who did not omit them for many reasons,\nwhich any one, in expounding the Gospel, can give in their proper\nplace), he brings an accusation against the Gospel statement, grossly\nexaggerating the facts, and quoting what is not written in the Gospels,\nseeing it is nowhere found that Jesus lamented. And he changes the words\nin the expression, \u201cFather, if it be possible, let this cup pass from\nme,\u201d and does not give what follows immediately after, which manifests\nat once the ready obedience of Jesus to His Father, and His greatness of\nmind, and which runs thus: \u201cNevertheless, not as I will, but as Thou\nwilt.\u201d[101] Nay, even the cheerful obedience of Jesus to the will of His\nFather in those things which He was condemned to suffer, exhibited in\nthe declaration, \u201cIf this cup cannot pass from me except I drink it, Thy\nwill be done,\u201d he pretends not to have observed, acting here like those\nwicked individuals who listen to the Holy Scriptures in a malignant\nspirit, and \u201cwho talk wickedness with lofty head.\u201d For they appear to\nhave heard the declaration, \u201cI kill,\u201d[102] and they often make it to us\na subject of reproach; but the words, \u201cI will make alive,\u201d they do not\nremember,\u2014the whole sentence showing that those who live amid public\nwickedness, and who work wickedly, are put to death by God, and that a\nbetter life is infused into them instead, even one which God will give\nto those who have died to sin. And so also these men have heard the\nwords, \u201cI will smite;\u201d but they do not see these, \u201cand I will heal,\u201d\nwhich are like the words of a physician, who cuts bodies asunder, and\ninflicts severe wounds, in order to extract from them substances that\nare injurious and prejudicial to health, and who does not terminate his\nwork with pains and lacerations, but by his treatment restores the body\nto that state of soundness which he has in view. Moreover, they have not\nheard the whole of the announcement, \u201cFor He maketh sore, and again\nbindeth up;\u201d but only this part, \u201cHe maketh sore.\u201d So in like manner\nacts this Jew of Celsus, who quotes the words, \u201cO Father, would that\nthis cup might pass from me;\u201d but who does not add what follows, and\nwhich exhibits the firmness of Jesus, and His preparedness for\nsuffering. But these matters, which afford great room for explanation\nfrom the wisdom of God, and which may reasonably be pondered over[103]\nby those whom Paul calls \u201cperfect\u201d when he said, \u201cWe speak wisdom among\nthem who are perfect,\u201d[104] we pass by for the present, and shall speak\nfor a little of those matters which are useful for our present purpose.\n\nFootnote 100:\n\n Matt. xxvi. 39.\n\nFootnote 101:\n\n Matt. xxvi. 39.\n\nFootnote 102:\n\n Deut. xxxii. 39.\n\nFootnote 103:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72, \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ae\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03a0\u03b1\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n \u1f60\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 104:\n\n 1 Cor. ii. 6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXV.\n\n\nWe have mentioned in the preceding pages that there are some of the\ndeclarations of Jesus which refer to that Being in Him which was the\n\u201cfirst-born of every creature,\u201d such as, \u201cI am the way, and the truth,\nand the life,\u201d and such like; and others, again, which belong to that in\nHim which is understood to be man, such as, \u201cBut now ye seek to kill me,\na man that hath told you the truth which I have heard of the\nFather.\u201d[105] And here, accordingly, he describes the element of\nweakness belonging to human flesh, and that of readiness of spirit which\nexisted in His humanity: the element of weakness in the expression,\n\u201cFather, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me;\u201d the readiness of\nthe spirit in this, \u201cNevertheless, not as I will, but as Thou wilt.\u201d And\nsince it is proper to observe the order of our quotations, observe that,\nin the first place, there is mentioned only the single instance, as one\nwould say, indicating the weakness of the flesh; and afterwards those\nother instances, greater in number, manifesting the willingness of the\nspirit. For the expression, \u201cFather, if it be possible, let this cup\npass from me,\u201d is only one: whereas more numerous are those others,\nviz., \u201cNot as I will, but as Thou wilt;\u201d and, \u201cO my Father, if this cup\ncannot pass from me except I drink it, Thy will be done.\u201d It is to be\nnoted also, that the words are not, \u201clet this cup depart from me;\u201d but\nthat the whole expression is marked by a tone of piety and reverence,\n\u201cFather, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me.\u201d I know, indeed,\nthat there is another explanation of this passage to the following\neffect:\u2014The Saviour, foreseeing the sufferings which the Jewish people\nand the city of Jerusalem were to undergo in requital of the wicked\ndeeds which the Jews had dared to perpetrate upon Him, from no other\nmotive than that of the purest philanthropy towards them, and from a\ndesire that they might escape the impending calamities, gave utterance\nto the prayer, \u201cFather, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me.\u201d\nIt is as if He had said, \u201cBecause of my drinking this cup of punishment,\nthe whole nation will be forsaken by Thee, I pray, if it be possible,\nthat this cup may pass from me, in order that Thy portion, which was\nguilty of such crimes against me, may not be altogether deserted by\nThee.\u201d But if, as Celsus would allege, \u201cnothing at that time was done to\nJesus which was either painful or distressing,\u201d how could men afterwards\nquote the example of Jesus as enduring sufferings for the sake of\nreligion, if He did _not_ suffer what are human sufferings, but only had\nthe _appearance_ of so doing?\n\nFootnote 105:\n\n John viii. 40.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVI.\n\n\nThis Jew of Celsus still accuses the disciples of Jesus of having\ninvented these statements, saying to them: \u201cEven although guilty of\nfalsehood, ye have not been able to give a colour of credibility to your\ninventions.\u201d In answer to which we have to say, that there was an easy\nmethod of concealing these occurrences,\u2014that, viz., of not recording\nthem at all. For if the Gospels had not contained the accounts of these\nthings, who could have reproached us with Jesus having spoken such words\nduring His stay upon the earth? Celsus, indeed, did not see that it was\nan inconsistency for the same persons both to be deceived regarding\nJesus, believing Him to be God, and the subject of prophecy, and to\ninvent fictions about Him, knowing manifestly that these statements were\nfalse. Of a truth, therefore, they were not guilty of inventing\nuntruths, but such were their real impressions, and they recorded them\ntruly; or else they were guilty of falsifying the histories, and did not\nentertain these views, and were not deceived when they acknowledged Him\nto be God.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVII.\n\n\nAfter this he says, that certain of the Christian believers, like\npersons who in a fit of drunkenness lay violent hands upon themselves,\nhave corrupted the Gospel from its original integrity, to a threefold,\nand fourfold, and many-fold degree, and have remodelled it, so that they\nmight be able to answer objections. Now I know of no others who have\naltered the Gospel, save the followers of Marcion, and those of\nValentinus, and, I think, also those of Lucian. But such an allegation\nis no charge against the Christian system, but against those who dared\nso to trifle with the Gospels. And as it is no ground of accusation\nagainst philosophy, that there exist Sophists, or Epicureans, or\nPeripatetics, or any others, whoever they may be, who hold false\nopinions; so neither is it against genuine Christianity that there are\nsome who corrupt the Gospel histories, and who introduce heresies\nopposed to the meaning of the doctrine of Jesus.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVIII.\n\n\nAnd since this Jew of Celsus makes it a subject of reproach that\nChristians should make use of the prophets, who predicted the events of\nChrist\u2019s life, we have to say, in addition to what we have already\nadvanced upon this head, that it became him to spare individuals, as he\nsays, and to expound the prophecies themselves; and after admitting the\nprobability of the Christian interpretation of them, to show how the use\nwhich they make of them may be overturned.[106] For in this way he would\nnot appear hastily to assume so important a position on small grounds,\nand particularly when he asserts that the \u201cprophecies agree with ten\nthousand other things more credibly than with Jesus.\u201d And he ought to\nhave carefully met this powerful argument of the Christians, as being\nthe strongest which they adduce, and to have demonstrated with regard to\neach particular prophecy, that it can apply to other events with greater\nprobability than to Jesus. He did not, however, perceive that this was a\nplausible argument to be advanced against the Christians only by one who\nwas an opponent of the prophetic writings; but Celsus has here put in\nthe mouth of a Jew an objection which a Jew would not have made. For a\nJew will not admit that the prophecies may be applied to countless other\nthings with greater probability than to Jesus; but he will endeavour,\nafter giving what appears to him the meaning of each, to oppose the\nChristian interpretation, not indeed by any means adducing convincing\nreasons, but only attempting to do so.\n\nFootnote 106:\n\n The original here is probably corrupt: \u1f4d\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd (\u1f65\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd)\n \u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\n \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. For \u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd Boherellus would read \u03ba\u03b7\u03b4\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd,\n and \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03ae\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIX.\n\n\nIn the preceding pages we have already spoken of this point, viz. the\nprediction that there were to be two advents of Christ to the human\nrace, so that it is not necessary for us to reply to the objection,\nsupposed to be urged by a Jew, that \u201cthe prophets declare the coming one\nto be a mighty potentate, Lord of all nations and armies.\u201d But it is in\nthe spirit of a Jew, I think, and in keeping with their bitter\nanimosity, and baseless and even improbable calumnies against Jesus,\nthat he adds: \u201cNor did the prophets predict such a pestilence.\u201d[107] For\nneither Jews, nor Celsus, nor any other, can bring any argument to prove\nthat a pestilence converts men from the practice of evil to a life which\nis according to nature, and distinguished by temperance and other\nvirtues.\n\nFootnote 107:\n\n \u1f44\u03bb\u03b5\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXX.\n\n\nThis objection also is cast in our teeth by Celsus: \u201cFrom such signs and\nmisinterpretations, and from proofs so mean, no one could prove him to\nbe God, and the Son of God.\u201d Now it was his duty to enumerate the\nalleged misinterpretations, and to prove them to be such, and to show by\nreasoning the meanness of the evidence, in order that the Christian, if\nany of his objections should seem to be plausible, might be able to\nanswer and confute his arguments. What he said, however, regarding\nJesus, did indeed come to pass, because He was a mighty potentate,\nalthough Celsus refuses to see that it so happened, notwithstanding that\nthe clearest evidence proves it true of Jesus. \u201cFor as the sun,\u201d he\nsays, \u201cwhich enlightens all other objects, first makes himself visible,\nso ought the Son of God to have done.\u201d We would say in reply, that so He\ndid; for righteousness has arisen in His days, and there is abundance of\npeace, which took its commencement at His birth, God preparing the\nnations for His teaching, that they might be under one prince, the king\nof the Romans, and that it might not, owing to the want of union among\nthe nations, caused by the existence of many kingdoms, be more difficult\nfor the apostles of Jesus to accomplish the task enjoined upon them by\ntheir Master, when He said, \u201cGo and teach all nations.\u201d Moreover it is\ncertain that Jesus was born in the reign of Augustus, who, so to speak,\nfused together into one monarchy the many populations of the earth. Now\nthe existence of many kingdoms would have been a hindrance to the spread\nof the doctrine of Jesus throughout the entire world; not only for the\nreasons mentioned, but also on account of the necessity of men\neverywhere engaging in war, and fighting on behalf of their native\ncountry, which was the case before the times of Augustus, and in periods\nstill more remote, when necessity arose, as when the Peloponnesians and\nAthenians warred against each other, and other nations in like manner.\nHow, then, was it possible for the gospel doctrine of peace, which does\nnot permit men to take vengeance even upon enemies, to prevail\nthroughout the world, unless at the advent of Jesus a milder spirit had\nbeen everywhere introduced into the conduct of things?\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXI.\n\n\nHe next charges the Christians with being \u201cguilty of sophistical\nreasoning, in saying that the Son of God is the Logos Himself.\u201d And he\nthinks that he strengthens the accusation, because \u201cwhen we declare the\nLogos to be the Son of God, we do not present to view a pure and holy\nLogos, but a most degraded man, who was punished by scourging and\ncrucifixion.\u201d Now, on this head we have briefly replied to the charges\nof Celsus in the preceding pages, where Christ was shown to be the\nfirst-born of all creation, who assumed a body and a human soul; and\nthat God gave commandment respecting the creation of such mighty things\nin the world, and they were created; and that He who received the\ncommand was God the Logos. And seeing it is a Jew who makes these\nstatements in the work of Celsus, it will not be out of place to quote\nthe declaration, \u201cHe sent His word, and healed them, and delivered them\nfrom their destruction,\u201d[108]\u2014a passage of which we spoke a little ago.\nNow, although I have conferred with many Jews who professed to be\nlearned men, I never heard any one expressing his approval of the\nstatement that the Logos is the Son of God, as Celsus declares they do,\nin putting into the mouth of the Jew such a declaration as this: \u201cIf\nyour Logos is the Son of God, we also give our assent to the same.\u201d\n\nFootnote 108:\n\n Ps. cvi. 20.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXII.\n\n\nWe have already shown that Jesus can be regarded neither as an arrogant\nman, nor a sorcerer; and therefore it is unnecessary to repeat our\nformer arguments, lest, in replying to the tautologies of Celsus, we\nourselves should be guilty of needless repetition. And now, in finding\nfault with our Lord\u2019s genealogy, there are certain points which occasion\nsome difficulty even to Christians, and which, owing to the discrepancy\nbetween the genealogies, are advanced by some as arguments against their\ncorrectness, but which Celsus has not even mentioned. For Celsus, who is\ntruly a braggart, and who professes to be acquainted with all matters\nrelating to Christianity, does not know how to raise doubts in a skilful\nmanner against the credibility of Scripture. But he asserts that the\n\u201cframers of the genealogies, from a feeling of pride, made Jesus to be\ndescended from the first man, and from the kings of the Jews.\u201d And he\nthinks that he makes a notable charge when he adds, that \u201cthe\ncarpenter\u2019s wife could not have been ignorant of the fact, had she been\nof such illustrious descent.\u201d But what has this to do with the question?\nGranted that she was not ignorant of her descent, how does that affect\nthe result? Suppose that she _were_ ignorant, how could her ignorance\nprove that she was not descended from the first man, or could not derive\nher origin from the Jewish kings? Does Celsus imagine that the poor must\nalways be descended from ancestors who are poor, or that kings are\nalways born of kings? But it appears folly to waste time upon such an\nargument as this, seeing it is well known that, even in our own days,\nsome who are poorer than Mary are descended from ancestors of wealth and\ndistinction, and that rulers of nations and kings have sprung from\npersons of no reputation.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIII.\n\n\n\u201cBut,\u201d continues Celsus, \u201cwhat great deeds did Jesus perform as being a\nGod? Did he put his enemies to shame, or bring to a ridiculous\nconclusion what was designed against him?\u201d Now to this question,\nalthough we are able to show the striking and miraculous character of\nthe events which befell Him, yet from what other source can we furnish\nan answer than from the Gospel narratives, which state that \u201cthere was\nan earthquake, and that the rocks were split asunder, and the tombs\nopened, and the veil of the temple rent in twain from top to bottom, and\nthat darkness prevailed in the day-time, the sun failing to give\nlight?\u201d[109] But if Celsus believe the Gospel accounts when he thinks\nthat he can find in them matter of charge against the Christians, and\nrefuse to believe them when they establish the divinity of Jesus, our\nanswer to him is: \u201cSir,[110] either disbelieve all the Gospel\nnarratives, and then no longer imagine that you can found charges upon\nthem; or, in yielding your belief to their statements, look in\nadmiration on the Logos of God, who became incarnate, and who desired to\nconfer benefits upon the whole human race. And this feature evinces the\nnobility of the work of Jesus, that, down to the present time, those\nwhom God wills are healed by His name. And with regard to the eclipse in\nthe time of Tiberius C\u00e6sar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been\ncrucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place, Phlegon too,\nI think, has written in the thirteenth or fourteenth book of his\nChronicles.\u201d[111]\n\nFootnote 109:\n\n Cf. Matt. xxvii. 51, 52; cf. Luke xxiii. 44, 45.\n\nFootnote 110:\n\n \u1f61 \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 111:\n\n On Phlegon, cf. note in Migne, pp. 823, 854.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIV.\n\n\nThis Jew of Celsus, ridiculing Jesus, as he imagines, is described as\nbeing acquainted with the Bacch\u00e6 of Euripides, in which Dionysus says:\n\n \u201cThe divinity himself will liberate me whenever I wish.\u201d[112]\n\nNow the Jews are not much acquainted with Greek literature; but suppose\nthat there was a Jew so well versed in it [as to make such a quotation\non his part appropriate], how [does it follow] that Jesus _could_ not\nliberate Himself, because He did not do so? For let him believe from our\nown Scriptures that Peter obtained his freedom after having been bound\nin prison, an angel having loosed his chains; and that Paul, having been\nbound in the stocks along with Silas in Philippi of Macedonia, was\nliberated by divine power, when the gates of the prison were opened. But\nit is probable that Celsus treats these accounts with ridicule, or that\nhe never read them; for he would probably say in reply, that there are\ncertain sorcerers who are able by incantations to unloose chains and to\nopen doors, so that he would liken the events related in our histories\nto the doings of sorcerers. \u201cBut,\u201d he continues, \u201cno calamity happened\neven to him who condemned him, as there did to Pentheus, viz. madness or\ndiscerption.\u201d[113] And yet he does not know that it was not so much\nPilate that condemned Him (who knew that \u201cfor envy the Jews had\ndelivered Him\u201d), as the Jewish nation, which _has_ been condemned by\nGod, and rent in pieces, and dispersed over the whole earth, in a degree\nfar beyond what happened to Pentheus. Moreover, why did he intentionally\nomit what is related of Pilate\u2019s wife, who beheld a vision, and who was\nso moved by it as to send a message to her husband, saying: \u201cHave thou\nnothing to do with that just man; for I have suffered many things this\nday in a dream because of him?\u201d[114] And again, passing by in silence\nthe proofs of the divinity of Jesus, Celsus endeavours to cast reproach\nupon Him from the narratives in the Gospel, referring to those who\nmocked Jesus, and put on Him the purple robe, and the crown of thorns,\nand placed the reed in His hand. From what source now, Celsus, did you\nderive these statements, save from the Gospel narratives? And did you,\naccordingly, see that they were fit matters for reproach, while they who\nrecorded them did not think that you, and such as you, would turn them\ninto ridicule; but that others would receive from them an example how to\ndespise those who ridiculed and mocked Him on account of His religion,\nwho appropriately laid down His life for its sake? Admire rather their\nlove of truth, and that of the Being who bore these things voluntarily\nfor the sake of men, and who endured them with all constancy and\nlong-suffering. For it is not recorded that He uttered any lamentation,\nor that after His condemnation He either did or uttered anything\nunbecoming.\n\nFootnote 112:\n\n Eurip. _Bacch\u00e6_, v. 498 (ed. Dindorf).\n\nFootnote 113:\n\n Cf. Euseb. _Hist. Eccles._ b. ii. c. vii.\n\nFootnote 114:\n\n Matt. xxvii. 19.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXV.\n\n\nBut in answer to this objection, \u201cIf not before, yet why now, at least,\ndoes he not give some manifestation of his divinity, and free himself\nfrom this reproach, and take vengeance upon those who insult both him\nand his Father?\u201d We have to reply, that it would be the same thing as if\nwe were to say to those among the Greeks who accept the doctrine of\nprovidence, and who believe in portents, Why does God not punish those\nwho insult the Divinity, and subvert the doctrine of providence? For as\nthe Greeks would answer such objections, so would we, in the same, or a\nmore effective manner. There was not only a portent from heaven\u2014the\neclipse of the sun\u2014but also the other miracles, which show that the\ncrucified One possessed something that was divine, and greater than was\npossessed by the majority of men.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVI.\n\n\nCelsus next says: \u201cWhat is the nature of the ichor in the body of the\ncrucified Jesus? Is it \u2018such as flows in the bodies of the immortal\ngods?\u2019\u201d[115] He puts this question in a spirit of mockery; but we shall\nshow from the serious narratives of the Gospels, although Celsus may not\nlike it, that it was no mythic and Homeric ichor which flowed from the\nbody of Jesus, but that, after His death, \u201cone of the soldiers with a\nspear pierced His side, and there came thereout blood and water. And he\nthat saw it bare record, and his record is true, and he knoweth that he\nsaith the truth.\u201d[116] Now, in other dead bodies the blood congeals, and\npure water does not flow forth; but the miraculous feature in the case\nof the dead body of Jesus was, that around the dead body blood and water\nflowed forth from the side. But if this Celsus, who, in order to find\nmatter of accusation against Jesus and the Christians, extracts from the\nGospel even passages which are incorrectly interpreted, but passes over\nin silence the evidences of the divinity of Jesus, would listen to\ndivine portents, let him read the Gospel, and see that even the\ncenturion, and they who with him kept watch over Jesus, on seeing the\nearthquake, and the events that occurred, were greatly afraid, saying,\n\u201cThis man was the son of God.\u201d[117]\n\nFootnote 115:\n\n Cf. _Iliad_, vi. 340.\n\nFootnote 116:\n\n Cf. John xix. 34, 35.\n\nFootnote 117:\n\n Cf. Matt. xxvii. 54.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVII.\n\n\nAfter this, he who extracts from the Gospel narrative those statements\non which he thinks he can found an accusation, makes the vinegar and the\ngall a subject of reproach to Jesus, saying that \u201che rushed with open\nmouth[118] to drink of them, and could not endure his thirst as any\nordinary man frequently endures it.\u201d Now this matter admits of an\nexplanation of a peculiar and figurative kind; but on the present\noccasion, the statement that the prophets predicted this very incident\nmay be accepted as the more common answer to the objection. For in the\nsixty-ninth Psalm there is written, with reference to Christ: \u201cAnd they\ngave me gall for my meat, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to\ndrink.\u201d[119] Now, let the Jews say who it is that the prophetic writing\nrepresents as uttering these words; and let them adduce from history one\nwho received gall for his food, and to whom vinegar was given as drink.\nWould they venture to assert that the Christ whom they expect still to\ncome might be placed in such circumstances? Then we would say, What\nprevents the prediction from having been already accomplished? For this\nvery prediction was uttered many ages before, and is sufficient, along\nwith the other prophetic utterances, to lead him who fairly examines the\nwhole matter to the conclusion that Jesus is He who was prophesied of as\nChrist, and as the Son of God.\n\nFootnote 118:\n\n \u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u1f78\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 119:\n\n Ps. lxix. 21.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVIII.\n\n\nThe Jew next remarks: \u201cYou, O sincere believers,[120] find fault with\nus, because we do not recognise this individual as God, nor agree with\nyou that he endured these [sufferings] for the benefit of mankind, in\norder that we also might despise punishment.\u201d Now, in answer to this, we\nsay that we blame the Jews, who have been brought up under the training\nof the law and the prophets (which foretell the coming of Christ),\nbecause they neither refute the arguments which we lay before them to\nprove that He is the Messiah,[121] adducing such refutation as a defence\nof their unbelief; nor yet, while not offering any refutation, do they\nbelieve in Him who was the subject of prophecy, and who clearly\nmanifested through His disciples, even after the period of His\nappearance in the flesh, that He underwent these things for the benefit\nof mankind; having, as the object of His first advent, not to condemn\nmen and their actions[122] before He had instructed them, and pointed\nout to them their duty,[123] nor to chastise the wicked and save the\ngood, but to disseminate His doctrine in an extraordinary[124] manner,\nand with the evidence of divine power, among the whole human race, as\nthe prophets also have represented these things. And we blame them,\nmoreover, because they did not believe in Him who gave evidence of the\npower that was in Him, but asserted that He cast out demons from the\nsouls of men through Beelzebub the prince of the demons; and we blame\nthem because they slander the philanthropic character of Him, who\noverlooked not only no city, but not even a single village in Judea,\nthat He might everywhere announce the kingdom of God, accusing Him of\nleading the wandering life of a vagabond, and passing an anxious\nexistence in a disgraceful body. But there is no disgrace in enduring\nsuch labours for the benefit of all those who may be able to understand\nHim.\n\nFootnote 120:\n\n \u1f61 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 121:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 122:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 123:\n\n \u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 124:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03c9\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIX.\n\n\nAnd how can the following assertion of this Jew of Celsus appear\nanything else than a manifest falsehood, viz. that Jesus \u201chaving gained\nover no one during his life, not even his own disciples, underwent these\npunishments and sufferings?\u201d For from what other source sprang the envy\nwhich was aroused against Him by the Jewish high priests, and elders,\nand scribes, save from the fact that multitudes obeyed and followed Him,\nand were led into the deserts not only by the persuasive[125] language\nof Him whose words were always appropriate to His hearers, but who also\nby His miracles made an impression on those who were not moved to belief\nby His words? And is it not a manifest falsehood to say that \u201che did not\ngain over even his own disciples,\u201d who exhibited, indeed, at that time\nsome symptoms of human weakness arising from cowardly fear\u2014for they had\nnot yet been disciplined to the exhibition of full courage\u2014but who by no\nmeans abandoned the judgments which they had formed regarding Him as the\nChrist? For Peter, after his denial, perceiving to what a depth of\nwickedness he had fallen, \u201cwent out and wept bitterly;\u201d while the\nothers, although stricken with dismay on account of what had happened to\nJesus (for they still continued to admire Him), had, by His glorious\nappearance,[126] their belief more firmly established than before that\nHe was the Son of God.\n\nFootnote 125:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 126:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XL.\n\n\nIt is, moreover, in a very unphilosophical spirit that Celsus imagines\nour Lord\u2019s pre-eminence among men to consist, not in the preaching of\nsalvation and in a pure morality, but in acting contrary to the\ncharacter of that personality which He had taken upon Him, and in not\ndying, although He had assumed mortality; or, if dying, yet at least not\nsuch a death as might serve as a pattern to those who were to learn by\nthat very act how to die for the sake of religion, and to comport\nthemselves boldly through its help, before those who hold erroneous\nviews on the subject of religion and irreligion, and who regard\nreligious men as altogether irreligious, but imagine those to be most\nreligious who err regarding God, and who apply to everything rather than\nto God the ineradicable[127] idea of Him [which is implanted in the\nhuman mind], and especially when they eagerly rush to destroy those who\nhave yielded themselves up with their whole soul (even unto death), to\nthe clear evidence of one God who is over all things.\n\nFootnote 127:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03bd\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLI.\n\n\nIn the person of the Jew, Celsus continues to find fault with Jesus,\nalleging that \u201che did not show himself to be pure from all evil.\u201d Let\nCelsus state from what \u201cevil\u201d our Lord did not show Himself to be pure.\nIf he means that He was not pure from what is properly termed \u201cevil,\u201d\nlet him clearly prove the existence of any wicked work in Him. But if he\ndeems poverty and the cross to be evils, and conspiracy on the part of\nwicked men, then it is clear that he would say that evil had happened\nalso to Socrates, who was unable to show himself pure from evils. And\nhow great also the other band of poor men is among the Greeks, who have\ngiven themselves to philosophical pursuits, and have voluntarily\naccepted a life of poverty, is known to many among the Greeks from what\nis recorded of Democritus, who allowed his property to become pasture\nfor sheep; and of Crates, who obtained his freedom by bestowing upon the\nThebans the price received for the sale of his possessions. Nay, even\nDiogenes himself, from excessive poverty, came to live in a tub; and\nyet, in the opinion of no one possessed of moderate understanding, was\nDiogenes on that account considered to be in an evil (sinful) condition.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLII.\n\n\nBut further, since Celsus will have it that \u201cJesus was not\nirreproachable,\u201d let him instance any one of those who adhere to His\ndoctrine, who has recorded anything that could truly furnish ground of\nreproach against Jesus; or if it be not from these that he derives his\nmatter of accusation against Him, let him say from what quarter he has\nlearned that which has induced him to say that He is not free from\nreproach. Jesus, however, performed all that He promised to do, and by\nwhich He conferred benefits upon His adherents. And we, continually\nseeing fulfilled all that was predicted by Him before it happened, viz.\nthat this gospel of His should be preached throughout the whole world,\nand that His disciples should go among all nations and announce His\ndoctrine; and, moreover, that they should be brought before governors\nand kings on no other account than because of His teaching; we are lost\nin wonder at Him, and have our faith in Him daily confirmed. And I know\nnot by what greater or more convincing proofs Celsus would have Him\nconfirm His predictions; unless, indeed, as seems to be the case, not\nunderstanding that the Logos had become the man Jesus, he would have Him\nto be subject to no human weakness, nor to become an illustrious pattern\nto men of the manner in which they ought to bear the calamities of life,\nalthough these appear to Celsus to be most lamentable and disgraceful\noccurrences, seeing that he regards labour[128] to be the greatest of\nevils, and pleasure the perfect good,\u2014a view accepted by none of those\nphilosophers who admit the doctrine of providence, and who allow that\ncourage, and fortitude, and magnanimity are virtues. Jesus, therefore,\nby His sufferings cast no discredit upon the faith of which He was the\nobject; but rather confirmed the same among those who would approve of\nmanly courage, and among those who were taught by Him that what was\ntruly and properly the happy life was not here below, but was to be\nfound in that which was called, according to His own words, the \u201ccoming\nworld;\u201d whereas in what is called the \u201cpresent world\u201d life is a\ncalamity, or at least the first and greatest struggle of the soul.[129]\n\nFootnote 128:\n\n \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 129:\n\n \u1f00\u03b3\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIII.\n\n\nCelsus next addresses to us the following remark: \u201cYou will not, I\nsuppose, say of him, that, after failing to gain over those who were in\nthis world, he went to Hades to gain over those who were there.\u201d But\nwhether he like it or not, we assert that not only while Jesus was in\nthe body did He win over not a few persons merely, but so great a\nnumber, that a conspiracy was formed against Him on account of the\nmultitude of His followers; but also, that when He became a soul,\nwithout the covering of the body, He dwelt among those souls which were\nwithout bodily covering, converting such of them as were willing to\nHimself, or those whom He saw, for reasons known to Him alone, to be\nbetter adapted to such a course.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIV.\n\n\nCelsus in the next place says, with indescribable silliness: \u201cIf, after\ninventing defences which are absurd, and by which ye were ridiculously\ndeluded, ye imagine that you really make a good defence, what prevents\nyou from regarding those other individuals who have been condemned, and\nhave died a miserable death, as greater and more divine messengers of\nheaven [than Jesus]?\u201d Now, that manifestly and clearly there is no\nsimilarity between Jesus, who suffered what is described, and those who\nhave died a wretched death on account of their sorcery, or whatever else\nbe the charge against them, is patent to every one. For no one can point\nto any acts of a sorcerer which turned away souls from the practice of\nthe many sins which prevail among men, and from the flood of wickedness\n(in the world).[130] But since this Jew of Celsus compares Him to\nrobbers, and says that \u201cany similarly shameless fellow might be able to\nsay regarding even a robber and murderer whom punishment had overtaken,\nthat such an one was not a robber, but a god, because he predicted to\nhis fellow-robbers that he would suffer such punishment as he actually\ndid suffer,\u201d it might, in the first place, be answered, that it is not\nbecause He predicted that He would suffer such things that we entertain\nthose opinions regarding Jesus which lead us to have confidence in Him,\nas one who has come down to us from God. And, in the second place, we\nassert that this very comparison[131] has been somehow foretold in the\nGospels; since God was numbered with the transgressors by wicked men,\nwho desired rather a \u201cmurderer\u201d (one who for sedition and murder had\nbeen cast into prison) to be released unto them, and Jesus to be\ncrucified, and who crucified Him between two robbers. Jesus, indeed, is\never crucified with robbers among His genuine disciples and witnesses to\nthe truth, and suffers the same condemnation which they do among men.\nAnd we say, that if those persons have any resemblance to robbers, who\non account of their piety towards God suffer all kinds of injury and\ndeath, that they may keep it pure and unstained, according to the\nteaching of Jesus, then it is clear also that Jesus, the author of such\nteaching, is with good reason compared by Celsus to the captain of a\nband of robbers. But neither was He who died for the common good of\nmankind, nor they who suffered because of their religion, and alone of\nall men were persecuted because of what appeared to them the right way\nof honouring God, put to death in accordance with justice, nor was Jesus\npersecuted without the charge of impiety being incurred by His\npersecutors.\n\nFootnote 130:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 131:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLV.\n\n\nBut observe the superficial nature of his argument respecting the former\ndisciples of Jesus, in which he says: \u201cIn the next place, those who were\nhis associates while alive, and who listened to his voice, and enjoyed\nhis instructions as their teacher, on seeing him subjected to punishment\nand death, neither died with him, nor for him, nor were even induced to\nregard punishment with contempt, but denied even that they were his\ndisciples, whereas now ye die along with him.\u201d And here he believes the\nsin which was committed by the disciples while they were yet beginners\nand imperfect, and which is recorded in the Gospels, to have been\nactually committed, in order that he may have matter of accusation\nagainst the gospel; but their upright conduct after their transgression,\nwhen they behaved with courage before the Jews, and suffered countless\ncruelties at their hands, and at last suffered death for the doctrine of\nJesus, he passes by in silence. For he would neither hear the words of\nJesus, when He predicted to Peter, \u201cWhen thou shalt be old, thou shalt\nstretch forth thy hands,\u201d[132] etc., to which the Scripture adds, \u201cThis\nspake He, signifying by what death he should glorify God;\u201d nor how James\nthe brother of John\u2014an apostle, the brother of an apostle\u2014was slain with\nthe sword by Herod for the doctrine of Christ; nor even the many\ninstances of boldness displayed by Peter and the other apostles because\nof the gospel, and \u201chow they went forth from the presence of the\nSanhedrim after being scourged, rejoicing that they were counted worthy\nto suffer shame for His name,\u201d[133] and so surpassing many of the\ninstances related by the Greeks of the fortitude and courage of their\nphilosophers. From the very beginning, then, this was inculcated as a\nprecept of Jesus among His hearers, which taught men to despise the life\nwhich is eagerly sought after by the multitude, but to be earnest in\nliving the life which resembles that of God.\n\nFootnote 132:\n\n John xxi. 18.\n\nFootnote 133:\n\n Acts v. 41.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVI.\n\n\nBut how can this Jew of Celsus escape the charge of falsehood, when he\nsays that Jesus, \u201cwhen on earth, gained over to himself only ten sailors\nand tax-gatherers of the most worthless character, and not even the\nwhole of these?\u201d Now it is certain that the Jews themselves would admit\nthat He drew over not ten persons merely, nor a hundred, nor a thousand,\nbut on one occasion five thousand at once, and on another four thousand;\nand that He attracted them to such a degree that they followed Him even\ninto the deserts, which alone could contain the assembled multitude of\nthose who believed in God through Jesus, and where He not only addressed\nto them discourses, but also manifested to them His works. And now,\nthrough his tautology, he compels us also to be tautological, since we\nare careful to guard against being supposed to pass over any of the\ncharges advanced by him; and therefore, in reference to the matter\nbefore us, following the order of his treatise as we have it, he says:\n\u201cIs it not the height of absurdity to maintain, that if, while he\nhimself was alive, he won over not a single person to his views, after\nhis death any who wish are able to gain over such a multitude of\nindividuals?\u201d Whereas he ought to have said, in consistency with truth,\nthat if, after His death, not simply those who will, but they who have\nthe will and the power, can gain over so many proselytes, how much more\nconsonant to reason is it, that while He was alive He should, through\nthe greater power of His words and deeds, have won over to Himself\nmanifold greater numbers of adherents?\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVII.\n\n\nHe represents, moreover, a statement of his own as if it were an answer\nto one of his questions, in which he asks: \u201cBy what train of argument\nwere you led to regard him as the Son of God?\u201d For he makes us answer\nthat \u201cwe were won over to him, because[134] we know that his punishment\nwas undergone to bring about the destruction of the father of evil.\u201d Now\nwe were won over to His doctrine by innumerable other considerations, of\nwhich we have stated only the smallest part in the preceding pages; but,\nif God permit, we shall continue to enumerate them, not only while\ndealing with the so-called _True Discourse_ of Celsus, but also on many\nother occasions. And, as if we said that we consider Him to be the Son\nof God because He suffered punishment, he asks: \u201cWhat then? have not\nmany others, too, been punished, and that not less disgracefully?\u201d And\nhere Celsus acts like the most contemptible enemies of the gospel, and\nlike those who imagine that it follows as a consequence from our history\nof the crucified Jesus, that we should worship those who have undergone\ncrucifixion!\n\nFootnote 134:\n\n The reading in the text is \u03b5\u1f30 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f14\u1f34\u03c3\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd; for which both Bohereau and\n De la Rue propose \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u1f34\u03c3\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, which has been adopted in the\n translation: cf. \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u1f14\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7, _infra_.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVIII.\n\n\nCelsus, moreover, unable to resist the miracles which Jesus is recorded\nto have performed, has already on several occasions spoken of them\nslanderously as works of sorcery; and we also on several occasions have,\nto the best of our ability, replied to his statements. And now he\nrepresents us as saying that \u201cwe deemed Jesus to be the Son of God,\nbecause he healed the lame and the blind.\u201d And he adds: \u201cMoreover, as\nyou assert, he raised the dead.\u201d That He healed the lame and the blind,\nand that therefore we hold Him to be the Christ and the Son of God, is\nmanifest to us from what is contained in the prophecies: \u201cThen the eyes\nof the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall hear; then\nshall the lame man leap as an hart.\u201d[135] And that He also raised the\ndead, and that it is no fiction of those who composed the Gospels, is\nshown by this, that if it had been a fiction, _many_ individuals would\nhave been represented as having risen from the dead, and these, too,\nsuch as had been many years in their graves. But as it is no fiction,\nthey are very easily counted of whom this is related to have happened;\nviz. the daughter of the ruler of the synagogue (of whom I know not why\nHe said, \u201cShe is not dead, but sleepeth,\u201d stating regarding her\nsomething which does not apply to all who die); and the only son of the\nwidow, on whom He took compassion and raised him up, making the bearers\nof the corpse to stand still; and the third instance, that of Lazarus,\nwho had been four days in the grave. Now, regarding these cases we would\nsay to all persons of candid mind, and especially to the Jew, that as\nthere were many lepers in the days of Elisha the prophet, and none of\nthem was healed save Naaman the Syrian, and many widows in the days of\nElijah the prophet, to none of whom was Elijah sent save to Sarepta in\nSidonia (for the widow there had been deemed worthy by a divine decree\nof the miracle which was wrought by the prophet in the matter of the\nbread); so also there were many dead in the days of Jesus, but those\nonly rose from the grave whom the Logos knew to be fitted for a\nresurrection, in order that the works done by the Lord might not be\nmerely symbols of certain things, but that by the very acts themselves\nHe might gain over many to the marvellous doctrine of the gospel. I\nwould say, moreover, that, agreeably to the promise of Jesus, His\ndisciples performed even greater works than these miracles of Jesus,\nwhich were perceptible only to the senses.[136] For the eyes of those\nwho are blind in soul are ever opened; and the ears of those who were\ndeaf to virtuous words, listen readily to the doctrine of God, and of\nthe blessed life with Him; and many, too, who were lame in the feet of\nthe \u201cinner man,\u201d as Scripture calls it, having now been healed by the\nword, do not simply leap, but leap as the hart, which is an animal\nhostile to serpents, and stronger than all the poison of vipers. And\nthese lame who have been healed, receive from Jesus power to trample,\nwith those feet in which they were formerly lame, upon the serpents and\nscorpions of wickedness, and generally upon all the power of the enemy;\nand though they tread upon it, they sustain no injury, for they also\nhave become stronger than the poison of all evil and of demons.\n\nFootnote 135:\n\n Cf. Isa. xxxv. 5, 6.\n\nFootnote 136:\n\n \u1f67\u03bd \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIX.\n\n\nJesus, accordingly, in turning away the minds of His disciples, not\nmerely from giving heed to sorcerers in general, and those who profess\nin any other manner to work miracles\u2014for His disciples did not need to\nbe so warned\u2014but from such as gave themselves out as the Christ of God,\nand who tried by certain apparent[137] miracles to gain over to them the\ndisciples of Jesus, said in a certain passage: \u201cThen, if any man shall\nsay unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there\nshall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs\nand wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the\nvery elect. Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore, if they shall say\nunto you, Behold, he is in the desert, go not forth; behold, he is in\nthe secret chambers, believe it not. For as the lightning cometh out of\nthe east, and shineth even to the west, so also shall the coming of the\nSon of man be.\u201d[138] And in another passage: \u201cMany will say unto me in\nthat day, Lord, Lord, have we not eaten and drunk in Thy name, and by\nThy name have cast out demons, and done many wonderful works? And then\nwill I say unto them, Depart from me, because ye are workers of\niniquity.\u201d[139] But Celsus, wishing to assimilate the miracles of Jesus\nto the works of human sorcery, says in express terms as follows: \u201cO\nlight and truth! he distinctly declares, with his own voice, as ye\nyourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others,\nemploying miracles of a similar kind, who are wicked men, and sorcerers;\nand he calls him who makes use of such devices, one Satan. So that Jesus\nhimself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine,\nbut are the acts of wicked men; and being compelled by the force of\ntruth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but\nconvicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable\ninference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the\nothers sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be\naccounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their\nwitness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are\nnot the works of a divine nature, but the inventions of certain\ndeceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men.\u201d Observe, now, whether Celsus\nis not clearly convicted of slandering the gospel by such statements,\nsince what Jesus says regarding those who are to work signs and wonders\nis different from what this Jew of Celsus alleges it to be. For if Jesus\nhad simply told His disciples to be on their guard against those who\nprofessed to work miracles, without declaring what they would give\nthemselves out to be, then perhaps there would have been some ground for\nhis suspicion. But since those against whom Jesus would have us to be on\nour guard give themselves out as the Christ\u2014which is not a claim put\nforth by sorcerers\u2014and since he says that even some who lead wicked\nlives will perform miracles in the name of Jesus, and expel demons out\nof men, sorcery in the case of these individuals, or any suspicion of\nsuch, is rather, if we may so speak, altogether banished, and the\ndivinity of Christ established, as well as the divine mission[140] of\nHis disciples; seeing that it is possible that one who makes use of His\nname, and who is wrought upon by some power, in some way unknown, to\nmake the pretence that he is the Christ, should seem to perform miracles\nlike those of Jesus, while others through His name should do works\nresembling those of His genuine disciples.\n\nFootnote 137:\n\n \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 138:\n\n Matt. xxiv. 23-27.\n\nFootnote 139:\n\n Cf. Matt. vii. 22, 23, with Luke xiii. 26, 27.\n\nFootnote 140:\n\n \u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, lit. divinity.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter L.\n\n\nPaul, moreover, in the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, shows in\nwhat manner there will one day be revealed \u201cthe man of sin, the son of\nperdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called\nGod, or that is worshipped; so that he sitteth in the temple of God,\nshowing himself that he is God.\u201d[141] And again he says to the\nThessalonians: \u201cAnd now ye know what withholdeth that he might be\nrevealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work:\nonly He who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way: and\nthen shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the\nspirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His\ncoming: even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all\npower, and signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of\nunrighteousness in them that perish.\u201d[142] And in assigning the reason\nwhy the man of sin is permitted to continue in existence, he says:\n\u201cBecause they received not the love of the truth, that they might be\nsaved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they\nshould believe a lie; that they all might be damned who believed not the\ntruth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.\u201d[143] Let any one now say\nwhether any of the statements in the Gospel, or in the writings of the\napostle, could give occasion for the suspicion that there is therein\ncontained any prediction of sorcery. Any one, moreover, who likes may\nfind the prophecy in Daniel respecting antichrist.[144] But Celsus\nfalsifies the words of Jesus, since He did not say that others would\ncome working similar miracles to Himself, but who are wicked men and\nsorcerers, although Celsus asserts that He uttered such words. For as\nthe power of the Egyptian magicians was not similar to the\ndivinely-bestowed grace of Moses, but the issue clearly proved that the\nacts of the former were the effect of magic, while those of Moses were\nwrought by divine power; so the proceedings of the antichrists, and of\nthose who feign that they can work miracles as being the disciples of\nChrist, are said to be lying signs and wonders, prevailing with all\ndeceivableness of unrighteousness among them that perish; whereas the\nworks of Christ and His disciples had for their fruit, not deceit, but\nthe salvation of human souls. And who would rationally maintain that an\nimproved moral life, which daily lessened the number of a man\u2019s\noffences, could proceed from a system of deceit?\n\nFootnote 141:\n\n 2 Thess. ii. 3, 4.\n\nFootnote 142:\n\n 2 Thess. ii. 6-10.\n\nFootnote 143:\n\n 2 Thess. ii. 10-12.\n\nFootnote 144:\n\n Cf. Dan. vii. 26.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LI.\n\n\nCelsus, indeed, evinced a slight knowledge of Scripture when he made\nJesus say, that it is \u201ca certain Satan who contrives such devices;\u201d\nalthough he begs the question[145] when he asserts that \u201cJesus did not\ndeny that these works have in them nothing of divinity, but proceed from\nwicked men,\u201d for he makes things which differ in kind to be the same.\nNow, as a wolf is not of the same species as a dog, although it may\nappear to have some resemblance in the figure of its body and in its\nvoice, nor a common wood-pigeon[146] the same as a dove,[147] so there\nis no resemblance between what is done by the power of God and what is\nthe effect of sorcery. And we might further say, in answer to the\ncalumnies of Celsus, Are those to be regarded as miracles which are\nwrought through sorcery by wicked demons, but those not which are\nperformed by a nature that is holy and divine? and does human life\nendure the worse, but never receive the better? Now it appears to me\nthat we must lay it down as a general principle, that as, wherever\nanything that is evil would make itself to be of the same nature with\nthe good, there must by all means be something that is good opposed to\nthe evil; so also, in opposition to those things which are brought about\nby sorcery, there must also of necessity be some things in human life\nwhich are the result of divine power. And it follows from the same, that\nwe must either annihilate both, and assert that neither exists, or,\nassuming the one, and particularly the evil, admit also the reality of\nthe good. Now, if one were to lay it down that works are wrought by\nmeans of sorcery, but would not grant that there are also works which\nare the product of divine power, he would seem to me to resemble him who\nshould admit the existence of sophisms and plausible arguments, which\nhave the appearance of establishing the truth, although really\nundermining it, while denying that truth had anywhere a home among men,\nor a dialectic which differed from sophistry. But if we once admit that\nit is consistent with the existence of magic and sorcery (which derive\ntheir power from evil demons, who are spell-bound by elaborate\nincantations, and become subject to sorcerers) that some works must be\nfound among men which proceed from a power that is divine, why shall we\nnot test those who profess to perform them by their lives and morals,\nand the consequences of their miracles, viz. whether they tend to the\ninjury of men or to the reformation of conduct? What minister of evil\ndemons, _e.g._, can do such things? and by means of what incantations\nand magic arts? And who, on the other hand, is it that, having his soul\nand his spirit, and I imagine also his body, in a pure and holy state,\nreceives a divine spirit, and performs such works in order to benefit\nmen, and to lead them to believe on the true God? But if we must once\ninvestigate (without being carried away by the miracles themselves) who\nit is that performs them by help of a good, and who by help of an evil\npower, so that we may neither slander all without discrimination, nor\nyet admire and accept all as divine, will it not be manifest, from what\noccurred in the times of Moses and Jesus, when entire nations were\nestablished in consequence of their miracles, that these men wrought by\nmeans of divine power what they are recorded to have performed? For\nwickedness and sorcery would not have led a whole nation to rise not\nonly above idols and images erected by men, but also above all created\nthings, and to ascend to the uncreated origin of the God of the\nuniverse.\n\nFootnote 145:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03c0\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 146:\n\n \u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 147:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LII.\n\n\nBut since it is a Jew who makes these assertions in the treatise of\nCelsus, we would say to him: Pray, friend, why do you believe the works\nwhich are recorded in your writings as having been performed by God\nthrough the instrumentality of Moses to be really divine, and endeavour\nto refute those who slanderously assert that they were wrought by\nsorcery, like those of the Egyptian magicians; while, in imitation of\nyour Egyptian opponents, you charge those which were done by Jesus, and\nwhich, you admit, were actually performed, with not being divine? For if\nthe final result, and the founding of an entire nation by the miracles\nof Moses, manifestly demonstrate that it was God who brought these\nthings to pass in the time of Moses the Hebrew lawgiver, why should not\nsuch rather be shown to be the case with Jesus, who accomplished far\ngreater works than those of Moses? For the former took those of his own\nnation, the descendants of Abraham, who had observed the rite of\ncircumcision transmitted by tradition, and who were careful observers of\nthe Abrahamic usages, and led them out of Egypt, enacting for them those\nlaws which you believe to be divine; whereas the latter ventured upon a\ngreater undertaking, and superinduced upon the pre-existing\nconstitution, and upon ancestral customs and modes of life agreeable to\nthe existing laws, a constitution in conformity with the gospel. And as\nit was necessary, in order that Moses should find credit not only among\nthe elders, but the common people, that there should be performed those\nmiracles which he is recorded to have performed, why should not Jesus\nalso, in order that He may be believed on by those of the people who had\nlearned to ask for signs and wonders, require to work such miracles as,\non account of their greater grandeur and divinity (in comparison with\nthose of Moses), were able to convert men from Jewish fables, and from\nthe human traditions which prevailed among them, and make them admit\nthat He who taught and did such things was greater than the prophets?\nFor how was not He greater than the prophets, who was proclaimed by them\nto be the Christ, and the Saviour of the human race?\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIII.\n\n\nAll the arguments, indeed, which this Jew of Celsus advances against\nthose who believe on Jesus, may, by parity of reasoning, be urged as\nground of accusation against Moses: so that there is no difference in\nasserting that the sorcery practised by Jesus and that by Moses were\nsimilar to each other,[148]\u2014both of them, so far as the language of this\nJew of Celsus is concerned, being liable to the same charge; as, _e.g._,\nwhen this Jew says of Christ, \u201cBut, O light and truth! Jesus with his\nown voice expressly declares, as you yourselves have recorded, that\nthere will appear among you others also, who will perform miracles like\nmine, but who are wicked men and sorcerers,\u201d some one, either Greek or\nEgyptian, or any other party who disbelieved the Jew, might say\nrespecting Moses, \u201cBut, O light and truth! Moses with his own voice\nexpressly declares, as ye also have recorded, that there will appear\namong you others also, who will perform miracles like mine, but who are\nwicked men and sorcerers. For it is written in your law, \u2018If there arise\namong you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a\nwonder, and the sign or wonder come to pass whereof he spake unto thee,\nsaying, Let us go after other gods which thou hast not known, and let us\nserve them; thou shalt not hearken to the words of that prophet or\ndreamer of dreams,\u2019\u201d[149] etc. Again, perverting the words of Jesus, he\nsays, \u201cAnd he terms him who devises such things, one Satan;\u201d while one,\napplying this to Moses, might say, \u201cAnd he terms him who devises such\nthings, a prophet who dreams dreams.\u201d And as this Jew asserts regarding\nJesus, that \u201ceven he himself does not deny that these works have in them\nnothing of divinity, but are the acts of wicked men;\u201d so any one who\ndisbelieves the writings of Moses might say, quoting what has been\nalready said, the same thing, viz., that \u201ceven Moses does not deny that\nthese works have in them nothing of divinity, but are the acts of wicked\nmen.\u201d And he will do the same thing also with respect to this: \u201cBeing\ncompelled by the force of truth, Moses at the same time both exposed the\ndoings of others, and convicted himself of the same.\u201d And when the Jew\nsays, \u201cIs it not a wretched inference from the same acts, to conclude\nthat the one is a God, and the others sorcerers?\u201d one might object to\nhim, on the ground of those words of Moses already quoted, \u201cIs it not\nthen a wretched inference from the same acts, to conclude that the one\nis a prophet and servant of God, and the others sorcerers?\u201d But when, in\naddition to those comparisons which I have already mentioned, Celsus,\ndwelling upon the subject, adduces this also: \u201cWhy from these works\nshould the others be accounted wicked, rather than this man, seeing they\nhave him as a witness against himself?\u201d\u2014we, too, shall adduce the\nfollowing, in addition to what has been already said: \u201cWhy, from those\npassages in which Moses forbids us to believe those who exhibit signs\nand wonders, ought we to consider such persons as wicked, rather than\nMoses, because he calumniates some of them in respect of their signs and\nwonders?\u201d And urging more to the same effect, that he may appear to\nstrengthen his attempt, he says: \u201cHe himself acknowledged that these\nwere not the works of a divine nature, but were the inventions of\ncertain deceivers, and of very wicked men.\u201d Who, then, is \u201chimself?\u201d\nYou, O Jew, say that it is Jesus; but he who accuses you as liable to\nthe same charges, will transfer this \u201chimself\u201d to the person of Moses.\n\nFootnote 148:\n\n \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b3\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1fc7\n \u039c\u03c9\u03cb\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 149:\n\n Deut. xiii. 1-3.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIV.\n\n\nAfter this, forsooth, the Jew of Celsus, to keep up the character\nassigned to the Jew from the beginning, in his address to those of his\ncountrymen who had become believers, says: \u201cBy what, then, were you\ninduced [to become his followers]? Was it because he foretold that after\nhis death he would rise again?\u201d Now this question, like the others, can\nbe retorted upon Moses. For we might say to the Jew: \u201cBy what, then,\nwere _you_ induced [to become the follower of Moses]? Was it because he\nput on record the following statement about his own death: \u2018And Moses,\nthe servant of the Lord, died there, in the land of Moab, according to\nthe word of the Lord; and they buried him in Moab, near the house of\nPhogor: and no one knoweth his sepulchre until this day?\u2019\u201d[150] For as\nthe Jew casts discredit upon the statement, that \u201cJesus foretold that\nafter His death He would rise again,\u201d another person might make a\nsimilar assertion about Moses, and would say in reply, that Moses also\nput on record (for the book of Deuteronomy is his composition) the\nstatement, that \u201cno one knoweth his sepulchre until this day,\u201d in order\nto magnify and enhance the importance of his place of burial, as being\nunknown to mankind.\n\nFootnote 150:\n\n Cf. Deut. xxxiv. 5, 6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LV.\n\n\nThe Jew continues his address to those of his countrymen who are\nconverts, as follows: \u201cCome now, let us grant to you that the prediction\nwas actually uttered. Yet how many others are there who practise such\njuggling tricks, in order to deceive their simple hearers, and who make\ngain by their deception?\u2014as was the case, they say, with Zamolxis[151]\nin Scythia, the slave of Pythagoras; and with Pythagoras himself in\nItaly; and with Rhampsinitus[152] in Egypt (the latter of whom, they\nsay, played at dice with Demeter in Hades, and returned to the upper\nworld with a golden napkin which he had received from her as a gift);\nand also with Orpheus[153] among the Odrysians, and Protesilaus in\nThessaly, and Hercules[154] at Cape T\u00e6narus, and Theseus. But the\nquestion is, whether any one who was really dead ever rose with a\nveritable body.[155] Or do you imagine the statements of others not only\nto be myths, but to have the appearance of such, while you have\ndiscovered a becoming and credible termination to your drama in the\nvoice from the cross, when he breathed his last, and in the earthquake\nand the darkness? That while alive he was of no assistance to himself,\nbut that when dead he rose again, and showed the marks of his\npunishment, and how his hands were pierced with nails: who beheld this?\nA half-frantic[156] woman, as you state, and some other one, perhaps, of\nthose who were engaged in the same system of delusion, who had either\ndreamed so, owing to a peculiar state of mind,[157] or under the\ninfluence of a wandering imagination had formed to himself an appearance\naccording to his own wishes,[158] which has been the case with\nnumberless individuals; or, which is most probable, one who desired to\nimpress others with this portent, and by such a falsehood to furnish an\noccasion to impostors like himself.\u201d\n\nNow, since it is a Jew who makes these statements, we shall conduct the\ndefence of our Jesus as if we were replying to a Jew, still continuing\nthe comparison derived from the accounts regarding Moses, and saying to\nhim: \u201cHow many others are there who practise similar juggling tricks to\nthose of Moses, in order to deceive their silly hearers, and who make\ngain by their deception?\u201d Now this objection would be more appropriate\nin the mouth of one who did not believe in Moses (as we might quote the\ninstances of Zamolxis and Pythagoras, who were engaged in such juggling\ntricks) than in that of a Jew, who is not very learned in the histories\nof the Greeks. An Egyptian, moreover, who did not believe the miracles\nof Moses, might credibly adduce the instance of Rhampsinitus, saying\nthat it was far more credible that he had descended to Hades, and had\nplayed at dice with Demeter, and that after stealing from her a golden\nnapkin he exhibited it as a sign of his having been in Hades, and of his\nhaving returned thence, than that Moses should have recorded that he\nentered into the darkness, where God was, and that he alone, above all\nothers, drew near to God. For the following is his statement: \u201cMoses\nalone shall come near the Lord; but the rest shall not come nigh.\u201d[159]\nWe, then, who are the disciples of Jesus, say to the Jew who urges these\nobjections: \u201cWhile assailing our belief in Jesus, defend yourself, and\nanswer the Egyptian and the Greek objectors: what will you say to those\ncharges which you brought against our Jesus, but which also might be\nbrought against Moses first? And if you should make a vigorous effort to\ndefend Moses, as indeed his history does admit of a clear and powerful\ndefence, you will unconsciously, in your support of Moses, be an\nunwilling assistant in establishing the greater divinity of Jesus.\u201d\n\nFootnote 151:\n\n Cf. Herodot. iv. 95.\n\nFootnote 152:\n\n Cf. Herodot. ii. 122.\n\nFootnote 153:\n\n Cf. Diodor. iv. _Bibl. Hist._\n\nFootnote 154:\n\n Cf. Diodor. iv. _Bibl. Hist._\n\nFootnote 155:\n\n \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 156:\n\n \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u1f74 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 157:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f40\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03ce\u03be\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 158:\n\n \u1f22 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b2\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1fc3 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 159:\n\n Cf. Ex. xxiv. 2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVI.\n\n\nBut since the Jew says that these histories of the alleged descent of\nheroes to Hades, and of their return thence, are juggling\nimpositions,[160] maintaining that these heroes disappeared for a\ncertain time, and secretly withdrew themselves from the sight of all\nmen, and gave themselves out afterwards as having returned from\nHades,\u2014for such is the meaning which his words seem to convey respecting\nthe Odrysian Orpheus, and the Thessalian Protesilaus, and the T\u00e6narian\nHercules, and Theseus also,\u2014let us endeavour to show that the account of\nJesus being raised from the dead cannot possibly be compared to these.\nFor each one of the heroes respectively mentioned might, had he wished,\nhave secretly withdrawn himself from the sight of men, and returned\nagain, if so determined, to those whom he had left; but seeing that\nJesus was crucified before all the Jews, and His body slain in the\npresence of His nation, how can they bring themselves to say that He\npractised a similar deception[161] with those heroes who are related to\nhave gone down to Hades, and to have returned thence? But we say that\nthe following consideration might be adduced, perhaps, as a defence of\nthe public crucifixion of Jesus, especially in connection with the\nexistence of those stories of heroes who are supposed to have been\ncompelled[162] to descend to Hades: that if we were to suppose Jesus to\nhave died an obscure death, so that the fact of His decease was not\npatent to the whole nation of the Jews, and afterwards to have actually\nrisen from the dead, there would, in such a case, have been ground for\nthe same suspicion entertained regarding the heroes being also\nentertained regarding Himself. Probably, then, in addition to other\ncauses for the crucifixion of Jesus, this also may have contributed to\nHis dying a conspicuous death upon the cross, that no one might have it\nin his power to say that He voluntarily withdrew from the sight of men,\nand seemed only to die, without really doing so; but, appearing again,\nmade a juggler\u2019s trick[163] of the resurrection from the dead. But a\nclear and unmistakeable proof of the fact I hold to be the undertaking\nof His disciples, who devoted themselves to the teaching of a doctrine\nwhich was attended with danger to human life,\u2014a doctrine which they\nwould not have taught with such courage had they invented the\nresurrection of Jesus from the dead; and who also, at the same time, not\nonly prepared others to despise death, but were themselves the first to\nmanifest their disregard for its terrors.\n\nFootnote 160:\n\n \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 161:\n\n \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f34\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f30\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2,\n etc.\n\nFootnote 162:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b5\u03b2\u03b7\u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03b9\u1fb7. Bohereau proposes the omission of \u03b2\u03b9\u1fb7.\n\nFootnote 163:\n\n \u1f10\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVII.\n\n\nBut observe whether this Jew of Celsus does not talk very blindly, in\nsaying that it is impossible for any one to rise from the dead with a\nveritable body, his language being: \u201cBut this is the question, whether\nany one who was really dead ever rose again with a veritable body?\u201d Now\na Jew would not have uttered these words, who believed what is recorded\nin the third and fourth books of Kings regarding little children, of\nwhom the one was raised up by Elijah,[164] and the other by Elisha.[165]\nAnd on this account, too, I think it was that Jesus appeared to no other\nnation than the Jews, who had become accustomed to miraculous\noccurrences; so that, by comparing what they themselves believed with\nthe works which were done by Him, and with what was related of Him, they\nmight confess that He, in regard to whom greater things were done, and\nby whom mightier marvels were performed, was greater than all those who\npreceded Him.\n\nFootnote 164:\n\n Cf. 1 Kings xvii. 21, 22.\n\nFootnote 165:\n\n Cf. 2 Kings iv. 34, 35.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVIII.\n\n\nFurther, after these Greek stories which the Jew adduced respecting\nthose who were guilty of juggling practices,[166] and who pretended to\nhave risen from the dead, he says to those Jews who are converts to\nChristianity: \u201cDo you imagine the statements of others not only to be\nmyths, but to have the appearance of such, while you have discovered a\nbecoming and credible termination to your drama in the voice from the\ncross, when he breathed his last?\u201d We reply to the Jew: \u201cWhat you adduce\nas myths, we regard also as such; but the statements of the Scriptures\nwhich are common to us both, in which not you only, but we also, take\npride, we do not at all regard as myths. And therefore we accord our\nbelief to those who have therein related that some rose from the dead,\nas not being guilty of imposition; and to Him especially there mentioned\nas having risen, who both predicted the event Himself, and was the\nsubject of prediction by others. And His resurrection is more miraculous\nthan that of the others in this respect, that they were raised by the\nprophets Elijah and Elisha, while He was raised by none of the prophets,\nbut by His Father in heaven. And therefore His resurrection also\nproduced greater results than theirs. For what great good has accrued to\nthe world from the resurrection of the children through the\ninstrumentality of Elijah and Elisha, such as has resulted from the\npreaching of the resurrection of Jesus, accepted as an article of\nbelief, and as effected through the agency of divine power?\u201d\n\nFootnote 166:\n\n \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIX.\n\n\nHe imagines also that both the earthquake and the darkness were an\ninvention;[167] but regarding these, we have in the preceding pages made\nour defence, according to our ability, adducing the testimony of\nPhlegon, who relates that these events took place at the time when our\nSaviour suffered. And he goes on to say, that \u201cJesus, while alive, was\nof no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and\nexhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been\npierced by nails.\u201d We ask him what he means by the expression, \u201cwas of\nno assistance to himself?\u201d For if he means it to refer to want of\nvirtue, we reply that He _was_ of very great assistance. For He neither\nuttered nor committed anything that was improper, but was truly \u201cled as\na sheep to the slaughter, and was dumb as a lamb before the\nshearer;\u201d[168] and the Gospel testifies that He opened not His mouth.\nBut if Celsus applies the expression to things indifferent and\ncorporeal,[169] [meaning that in such Jesus could render no help to\nHimself,] we say that we have proved from the Gospels that He went\nvoluntarily to encounter His sufferings. Speaking next of the statements\nin the Gospels, that after His resurrection He showed the marks of His\npunishment, and how His hands had been pierced, he asks, \u201cWho beheld\nthis?\u201d And discrediting the narrative of Mary Magdalene, who is related\nto have seen Him, he replies, \u201cA half-frantic woman, as ye state.\u201d And\nbecause she is not the only one who is recorded to have seen the Saviour\nafter His resurrection, but others also are mentioned, this Jew of\nCelsus calumniates these statements also in adding, \u201cAnd some one else\nof those engaged in the same system of deception!\u201d\n\nFootnote 167:\n\n \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 168:\n\n Isa. liii. 7.\n\nFootnote 169:\n\n \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78 \u201c\u1f10\u03c0\u03ae\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd\u201d \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LX.\n\n\nIn the next place, as if this were possible, viz. that the image of a\nman who was dead could appear to another as if he were still living, he\nadopts this opinion as an Epicurean, and says, \u201cThat some one having so\ndreamed owing to a peculiar state of mind, or having, under the\ninfluence of a perverted imagination, formed such an appearance as he\nhimself desired, reported that such had been seen; and this,\u201d he\ncontinues, \u201chas been the case with numberless individuals.\u201d But even if\nthis statement of his seems to have a considerable degree of force, it\nis nevertheless only fitted to confirm a necessary doctrine, that the\nsoul of the dead exists in a separate state [from the body]; and he who\nadopts such an opinion does not believe without good reason in the\nimmortality, or at least continued existence, of the soul, as even Plato\nsays in his treatise on the Soul that shadowy phantoms of persons\nalready dead have appeared to some around their sepulchres. Now the\nphantoms which exist about the soul of the dead are produced by some\nsubstance, and this substance is in the soul, which exists apart in a\nbody said to be of splendid appearance.[170] But Celsus, unwilling to\nadmit any such view, will have it that some dreamed a waking dream,[171]\nand, under the influence of a perverted imagination, formed to\nthemselves such an image as they desired. Now it is not irrational to\nbelieve that a dream may take place while one is asleep; but to suppose\na waking vision in the case of those who are not altogether out of their\nsenses, and under the influence of delirium or hypochondria, is\nincredible. And Celsus, seeing this, called the woman \u201chalf-mad,\u201d\u2014a\nstatement which is not made by the history recording the fact, but from\nwhich he took occasion to charge the occurrences with being untrue.\n\nFootnote 170:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f51\u03c6\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03ba\u03c5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1ff3\n \u03b1\u1f50\u03b3\u03bf\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd. Cf. note in Benedictine ed.\n\nFootnote 171:\n\n \u1f51\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXI.\n\n\nJesus accordingly, as Celsus imagines, exhibited after His death only\nthe appearance of wounds received on the cross, and was not in reality\nso wounded as He is described to have been; whereas, according to the\nteaching of the Gospel\u2014some portions of which Celsus arbitrarily\naccepts, in order to find ground of accusation, and other parts of which\nhe rejects\u2014Jesus called to Him one of His disciples who was sceptical,\nand who deemed the miracle an impossibility. That individual had,\nindeed, expressed his belief in the statement of the woman who said that\nshe had seen Him, because he did not think it impossible that the soul\nof a dead man could be seen; but he did not yet consider the report to\nbe true that He had been raised in a body, which was the antitype of the\nformer.[172] And therefore he did not merely say, \u201cUnless I see, I will\nnot believe;\u201d but he added, \u201cUnless I put my hand into the print of the\nnails, and lay my hands upon His side, I will not believe.\u201d These words\nwere spoken by Thomas, who deemed it possible that the body of the soul\nmight be seen by the eye of sense, resembling in all respects its former\nappearance,\n\n \u201cBoth in size, and in beauty of eyes,\n And in voice;\u201d\n\nand frequently, too,\n\n \u201cHaving, also, such garments around the person[173] [as when\n alive].\u201d\n\nJesus accordingly, having called Thomas, said, \u201cReach hither thy finger,\nand behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my\nside: and be not faithless, but believing.\u201d[174]\n\nFootnote 172:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c4\u03cd\u03c0\u1ff3 \u1f10\u03b3\u03b7\u03b3\u03ad\u03c1\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 173:\n\n Cf. Homer, _Iliad_, xxiii. 66, 67.\n\nFootnote 174:\n\n Cf. John xx. 27.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXII.\n\n\nNow it followed from all the predictions which were uttered regarding\nHim\u2014amongst which was this prediction of the resurrection\u2014and from all\nthat was done by Him, and from all the events which befell Him, that\nthis event should be marvellous above all others. For it had been said\nbeforehand by the prophet in the person of Jesus: \u201cMy flesh shall rest\nin hope, and Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades, and wilt not suffer\nThine Holy One to see corruption.\u201d[175] And truly, after His\nresurrection, He existed in a body intermediate, as it were, between the\ngrossness of that which He had before His sufferings, and the appearance\nof a soul uncovered by such a body. And hence it was, that when His\ndisciples were together, and Thomas with them, there \u201ccame Jesus, the\ndoors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.\nThen saith He to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger,\u201d[176] etc. And in the\nGospel of Luke also, while Simon and Cleopas were conversing with each\nother respecting all that had happened to them, Jesus \u201cdrew near, and\nwent with them. And their eyes were holden, that they should not know\nHim. And He said unto them, What manner of communications are these that\nye have one to another, as ye walk?\u201d And when their eyes were opened,\nand they knew Him, then the Scripture says, in express words, \u201cAnd He\nvanished out of their sight.\u201d[177] And although Celsus may wish to place\nwhat is told of Jesus, and of those who saw Him after His resurrection,\non the same level with imaginary appearances of a different kind, and\nthose who have invented such, yet to those who institute a candid and\nintelligent examination, the events will appear only the more\nmiraculous.\n\nFootnote 175:\n\n Ps. xvi. 9, 10.\n\nFootnote 176:\n\n John xx. 26, 27.\n\nFootnote 177:\n\n Luke xxiv. 15, 31.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIII.\n\n\nAfter these points, Celsus proceeds to bring against the Gospel\nnarrative a charge which is not to be lightly passed over, saying that\n\u201cif Jesus desired to show that his power was really divine, he ought to\nhave appeared to those who had ill-treated him, and to him who had\ncondemned him, and to all men universally.\u201d For it appears to us also to\nbe true, according to the Gospel account, that He was not seen after His\nresurrection in the same manner as He used formerly to show\nHimself\u2014publicly, and to all men. But it is recorded in the Acts, that\n\u201cbeing seen during forty days,\u201d He expounded to His disciples \u201cthe\nthings pertaining to the kingdom of God.\u201d[178] And in the Gospels[179]\nit is not stated that He was always with them; but that on one occasion\nHe appeared in their midst, after eight days, when the doors were shut,\nand on another in some similar fashion. And Paul also, in the concluding\nportions of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, in reference to His\nnot having publicly appeared as He did in the period before He suffered,\nwrites as follows: \u201cFor I delivered unto you first of all that which I\nalso received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the\nScriptures; and that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: after\nthat He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the\ngreater part remain unto the present time, but some are fallen asleep.\nAfter that He was seen of James, then of all the apostles. And last of\nall He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.\u201d[180] I am\nof opinion now that the statements in this passage contain some great\nand wonderful mysteries, which are beyond the grasp not merely of the\ngreat multitude of ordinary believers, but even of those who are far\nadvanced [in Christian knowledge], and that in them the reason would be\nexplained why He did not show Himself, after His resurrection from the\ndead, in the same manner as before that event. And in a treatise of this\nnature, composed in answer to a work directed against the Christians and\ntheir faith, observe whether we are able to adduce a few rational\narguments out of a greater number, and thus make an impression upon the\nhearers of this apology.\n\nFootnote 178:\n\n Acts i. 3.\n\nFootnote 179:\n\n Cf. John xx. 26.\n\nFootnote 180:\n\n 1 Cor. xv. 3-8.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIV.\n\n\nAlthough Jesus was only a single individual, He was nevertheless more\nthings than one, according to the different standpoint from which He\nmight be regarded;[181] nor was He seen in the same way by all who\nbeheld Him. Now, that He was more things than one, according to the\nvarying point of view, is clear from this statement, \u201cI am the way, and\nthe truth, and the life;\u201d and from this, \u201cI am the bread;\u201d and this, \u201cI\nam the door,\u201d and innumerable others. And that when seen He did not\nappear in like fashion to all those who saw Him, but according to their\nseveral ability to receive Him, will be clear to those who notice why,\nat the time when He was about to be transfigured on the high mountain,\nHe did not admit all His apostles [to this sight], but only Peter, and\nJames, and John, because they alone were capable of beholding His glory\non that occasion, and of observing the glorified appearance of Moses and\nElijah, and of listening to their conversation, and to the voice from\nthe heavenly cloud. I am of opinion, too, that before He ascended the\nmountain where His disciples came to Him alone, and where He taught them\nthe beatitudes, when He was somewhere in the lower part of the mountain,\nand when, as it became late, He healed those who were brought to Him,\nfreeing them from all sickness and disease, He did not appear the same\nperson to the sick, and to those who needed His healing aid, as to those\nwho were able by reason of their strength to go up the mountain along\nwith Him. Nay, even when He interpreted privately to His own disciples\nthe parables which were delivered to the multitudes without, from whom\nthe explanation was withheld, as they who heard them explained were\nendowed with higher organs of hearing than they who heard them without\nexplanation, so was it altogether the same with the eyes of their soul,\nand, I think, also with those of their body.[182] And the following\nstatement shows that He had not always the same appearance, viz. that\nJudas, when about to betray Him, said to the multitudes who were setting\nout with him, as not being acquainted with Him, \u201cWhomsoever I shall\nkiss, the same is he.\u201d[183] And I think that the Saviour Himself\nindicates the same thing by the words: \u201cI was daily with you, teaching\nin the temple, and ye laid no hold on me.\u201d[184] Entertaining, then, such\nexalted views regarding Jesus, not only with respect to the Deity\nwithin, and which was hidden from the view of the multitude, but with\nrespect to the transfiguration of His body, which took place when and to\nwhom He would, we say, that before Jesus had \u201cput off the governments\nand powers,\u201d[185] and while as yet He was not dead unto sin, all men\nwere capable of seeing Him; but that, when He had \u201cput off the\ngovernments and powers,\u201d and had no longer anything which was capable of\nbeing seen by the multitude, all who had formerly seen Him were not now\nable to behold Him. And therefore, sparing them, He did not show Himself\nto all after His resurrection from the dead.\n\nFootnote 181:\n\n \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03af\u1fb3 \u1f26\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 182:\n\n \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f44\u03c8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2, \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u2019 \u1f21\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 183:\n\n Matt. xxvi. 48.\n\nFootnote 184:\n\n Matt. xxvi. 55.\n\nFootnote 185:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, etc. Cf. Alford, _in loco_ (Col. ii. 15).\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXV.\n\n\nAnd why do I say \u201cto all?\u201d For even with His own apostles and disciples\nHe was not perpetually present, nor did He constantly show Himself to\nthem, because they were not able without intermission[186] to receive\nHis divinity. For His deity was more resplendent after He had finished\nthe economy[187] [of salvation]: and this Peter, surnamed Cephas, the\nfirst-fruits as it were of the apostles, was enabled to behold, and\nalong with him the twelve (Matthias having been substituted in room of\nJudas); and after them He appeared to the five hundred brethren at once,\nand then to James, and subsequently to all the others besides the twelve\napostles, perhaps to the seventy also, and lastly to Paul, as to one\nborn out of due time, and who knew well how to say, \u201cUnto me, who am\nless than the least of all saints, is this grace given;\u201d and probably\nthe expression \u201cleast of all\u201d has the same meaning with \u201cone born out of\ndue time.\u201d For as no one could reasonably blame Jesus for not having\nadmitted all His apostles to the high mountain, but only the three\nalready mentioned, on the occasion of His transfiguration, when He was\nabout to manifest the splendour which appeared in His garments, and the\nglory of Moses and Elias talking with Him, so none could reasonably\nobject to the statements of the apostles, who introduce the appearance\nof Jesus after His resurrection as having been made not to all, but to\nthose only whom He knew to have received eyes capable of seeing His\nresurrection. I think, moreover, that the following statement regarding\nHim has an apologetic value[188] in reference to our subject, viz.: \u201cFor\nto this end Christ died, and rose again, that He might be Lord both of\nthe dead and living.\u201d[189] For observe, it is conveyed in these words,\nthat Jesus died that He might be Lord of the dead; and that He rose\nagain to be Lord not only of the dead, but also of the living. And the\napostle understands, undoubtedly, by the dead over whom Christ is to be\nLord, those who are so called in the first Epistle to the Corinthians,\n\u201cFor the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised\nincorruptible;\u201d[190] and by the living, those who are to be changed, and\nwho are different from the dead who are to be raised. And respecting the\nliving the words are these, \u201cAnd we shall be changed;\u201d an expression\nwhich follows immediately after the statement, \u201cThe dead shall be raised\nfirst.\u201d[191] Moreover, in the first Epistle to the Thessalonians,\ndescribing the same change in different words, he says that they who\nsleep are not the same as those who are alive; his language being, \u201cI\nwould not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them who are\nasleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we\nbelieve that Jesus died, and rose again, even so them also that sleep in\nJesus will God bring with Him. For this we say unto you by the word of\nthe Lord, that we who are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord,\nshall not prevent them that are asleep.\u201d[192] The explanation which\nappeared to us to be appropriate to this passage, we gave in the\nexegetical remarks which we have made on the first Epistle to the\nThessalonians.\n\nFootnote 186:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 187:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 188:\n\n \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u03bf\u1f36\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 189:\n\n Cf. Rom. xiv. 9.\n\nFootnote 190:\n\n 1 Cor. xv. 52.\n\nFootnote 191:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 52 with 1 Thess. iv. 16.\n\nFootnote 192:\n\n Cf. 1 Thess. iv. 13-15.\n\n Chapter LXVI.\n\n\nAnd be not surprised if all the multitudes who have believed on Jesus do\nnot behold His resurrection, when Paul, writing to the Corinthians, can\nsay to them, as being incapable of receiving greater matters, \u201cFor I\ndetermined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him\ncrucified;\u201d[193] which is the same as saying, \u201cHitherto ye were not\nable, neither yet now are ye able, for ye are still carnal.\u201d[194] The\nScripture, therefore, doing everything by appointment of God, has\nrecorded of Jesus, that before His sufferings He appeared to all\nindifferently, but not always; while after His sufferings He no longer\nappeared to all in the same way, but with a certain discrimination which\nmeasured out to each his due. And as it is related that \u201cGod appeared to\nAbraham,\u201d or to one of the saints, and this \u201cappearance\u201d was not a thing\nof constant occurrence, but took place at intervals, and not to all, so\nunderstand that the Son of God appeared in the one case on the same\nprinciple that God appeared to the latter.[195]\n\nFootnote 193:\n\n 1 Cor. ii. 2.\n\nFootnote 194:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 2, 3.\n\nFootnote 195:\n\n \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bd\u03cc\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c5\u1f31\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f66\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u1fb3 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f66\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03bd, \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVII.\n\n\nTo the best of our ability, therefore, as in a treatise of this nature,\nwe have answered the objection, that \u201cif Jesus had really wished to\nmanifest his divine power, he ought to have shown himself to those who\nill-treated him, and to the judge who condemned him, and to all without\nreservation.\u201d There was, however, no obligation on Him to appear either\nto the judge who condemned Him, or to those who ill-treated Him. For\nJesus spared both the one and the other, that they might not be smitten\nwith blindness, as the men of Sodom were when they conspired against the\nbeauty of the angels entertained by Lot. And here is the account of the\nmatter: \u201cBut the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house\nto them, and shut to the door. And they smote the men who were at the\ndoor of the house with blindness, both small and great; so that they\nwearied themselves to find the door.\u201d[196] Jesus, accordingly, wished to\nshow that His power was divine to each one who was capable of seeing it,\nand according to the measure of His capability. And I do not suppose\nthat He guarded against being seen on any other ground than from a\nregard to the fitness of those who were incapable of seeing Him. And it\nis in vain for Celsus to add, \u201cFor he had no longer occasion to fear any\nman after his death, being, as you say, a God; nor was he sent into the\nworld at all for the purpose of being hid.\u201d Yet He was sent into the\nworld not only to become known, but also to be hid. For all that He was,\nwas not known even to those to whom He was known, but a certain part of\nHim remained concealed even from them; and to some He was not known at\nall. And He opened the gates of light to those who were the sons of\ndarkness and of night, and had devoted themselves to becoming the sons\nof light and of the day. For our Saviour Lord, like a good physician,\ncame rather to us who were full of sins, than to those who were\nrighteous.\n\nFootnote 196:\n\n Cf. Gen. xix. 10, 11.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVIII.\n\n\nBut let us observe how this Jew of Celsus asserts that, \u201cif this at\nleast would have helped to manifest his divinity, he ought accordingly\nto have at once disappeared from the cross.\u201d Now this seems to me to be\nlike the argument of those who oppose the doctrine of providence, and\nwho arrange things differently from what they are, and allege that the\nworld would be better if it were as they arrange it. Now, in those\ninstances in which their arrangement is a possible one, they are proved\nto make the world, so far as depends upon them, worse by their\narrangement than it actually is; while in those cases in which they do\nnot portray things worse than they really are, they are shown, to desire\nimpossibilities; so that in either case they are deserving of ridicule.\nAnd here, accordingly, that there was no impossibility in His coming, as\na being of diviner nature, in order to disappear when He chose, is clear\nfrom the very nature of the case; and is certain, moreover, from what is\nrecorded of Him, in the judgment of those who do not adopt certain\nportions merely of the narrative that they may have ground for accusing\nChristianity, and who consider other portions to be fiction. For it is\nrelated in St. Luke\u2019s Gospel, that Jesus after His resurrection took\nbread, and blessed it, and breaking it, distributed it to Simon and\nCleopas; and when they had received the bread, \u201ctheir eyes were opened,\nand they knew Him, and He vanished out of their sight.\u201d[197]\n\nFootnote 197:\n\n Cf. Luke xxiv. 30, 31.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIX.\n\n\nBut we wish to show that His instantaneous bodily disappearance from the\ncross was not better fitted to serve the purposes of the whole economy\nof salvation [than His remaining upon it was]. For the mere letter and\nnarrative of the events which happened to Jesus do not present the whole\nview of the truth. For each one of them can be shown, to those who have\nan intelligent apprehension of Scripture, to be a symbol of something\nelse. Accordingly, as His crucifixion contains a truth, represented in\nthe words, \u201cI am crucified with Christ,\u201d and intimated also in these,\n\u201cGod forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus\nChrist, by whom the world is crucified to me, and I unto the\nworld;\u201d[198] and as His death was necessary, because of the statement,\n\u201cFor in that He died, He died unto sin once,\u201d[199] and this, \u201cBeing made\nconformable to His death,\u201d[200] and this, \u201cFor if we be dead with Him,\nwe shall also live with Him:\u201d[201] so also His burial has an application\nto those who have been made conformable to His death, who have been both\ncrucified with Him, and have died with Him; as is declared by Paul, \u201cFor\nwe were buried with Him by baptism, and have also risen with Him.\u201d[202]\nThese matters, however, which relate to His burial, and his sepulchre,\nand him who buried Him, we shall expound at greater length on a more\nsuitable occasion, when it will be our professed purpose to treat of\nsuch things. But, for the present, it is sufficient to notice the clean\nlinen in which the pure body of Jesus was to be enwrapped, and the new\ntomb which Joseph had hewn out of the rock, where \u201cno one was yet\nlying,\u201d[203] or, as John expresses it, \u201cwherein was never man yet\nlaid.\u201d[204] And observe whether the harmony of the three evangelists\nhere is not fitted to make an impression: for they have thought it right\nto describe the tomb as one that was \u201cquarried or hewn out of the rock;\u201d\nso that he who examines the words of the narrative may see something\nworthy of consideration, both in them and in the _newness_ of the\ntomb,\u2014a point mentioned by Matthew and John,[205]\u2014and in the statement\nof Luke and John,[206] that no one had ever been interred therein\nbefore. For it became Him, who was unlike other dead men (but who even\nin death manifested signs of life in the water and the blood), and who\nwas, so to speak, a _new_ dead man, to be laid in a new and clean tomb,\nin order that, as His birth was purer than any other (in consequence of\nHis being born, not in the way of ordinary generation, but of a virgin),\nHis burial also might have the purity symbolically indicated in His body\nbeing deposited in a sepulchre which was new, not built of stones\ngathered from various quarters, and having no natural unity, but\nquarried and hewed out of _one_ rock, united together in all its parts.\nRegarding the explanation, however, of these points, and the method of\nascending from the narratives themselves to the things which they\nsymbolized, one might treat more profoundly, and in a manner more\nadapted to their divine character, on a more suitable occasion, in a\nwork expressly devoted to such subjects. The literal narrative, however,\none might thus explain, viz. that it was appropriate for Him who had\nresolved to endure suspension upon the cross, to maintain all the\naccompaniments of the character He had assumed, in order that He who as\na man had been put to death, and who as a man had died, might also as a\nman be buried. But even if it had been related in the Gospels, according\nto the view of Celsus, that Jesus had immediately disappeared from the\ncross, he and other unbelievers would have found fault with the\nnarrative, and would have brought against it some such objection as\nthis: \u201cWhy, pray, did he disappear after he had been put upon the cross,\nand not disappear before he suffered?\u201d If, then, after learning from the\nGospels that He did not at once disappear from the cross, they imagine\nthat they can find fault with the narrative, because it did not invent,\nas they consider it ought to have done, any such instantaneous\ndisappearance, but gave a true account of the matter, is it not\nreasonable that they should accord their faith also to His resurrection,\nand should believe that He, according to His pleasure, on one occasion,\nwhen the doors were shut, stood in the midst of His disciples, and on\nanother, after distributing bread to two of His acquaintances,\nimmediately disappeared from view, after He had spoken to them certain\nwords?\n\nFootnote 198:\n\n Cf. Gal. vi. 14.\n\nFootnote 199:\n\n Rom. vi. 10.\n\nFootnote 200:\n\n Phil. iii. 10.\n\nFootnote 201:\n\n 2 Tim. ii. 11.\n\nFootnote 202:\n\n Cf. Rom. vi. 4.\n\nFootnote 203:\n\n Luke xxiii. 53, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f26\u03bd \u03bf\u1f54\u03c0\u03c9 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 204:\n\n John xix. 41, \u1f10\u03bd \u1fa7 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03c0\u03c9 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c4\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7.\n\nFootnote 205:\n\n Cf. Matt. xxvii. 60 with John xix. 41.\n\nFootnote 206:\n\n Cf. Luke xxiii. 53 with John xix. 41.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXX.\n\n\nBut how is it that this Jew of Celsus could say that Jesus concealed\nHimself? For his words regarding Him are these: \u201cAnd who that is sent as\na messenger ever conceals himself when he ought to make known his\nmessage?\u201d Now, He did not conceal Himself, who said to those who sought\nto apprehend Him, \u201cI was daily teaching openly in the temple, and ye\nlaid no hold upon me.\u201d But having once already answered this charge of\nCelsus, now again repeated, we shall content ourselves with what we have\nformerly said. We have answered, also, in the preceding pages, this\nobjection, that \u201cwhile he was in the body, and no one believed upon him,\nhe preached to all without intermission; but when he might have produced\na powerful belief in himself after rising from the dead, he showed\nhimself secretly only to one woman, and to his own boon\ncompanions.\u201d[207] Now it is not true that He showed Himself only to one\nwoman; for it is stated in the Gospel according to Matthew, that \u201cin the\nend of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn towards the first day of the\nweek, came Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre.\nAnd, behold, there had been a great earthquake: for the angel of the\nLord had descended from heaven, and come and rolled back the\nstone.\u201d[208] And, shortly after, Matthew adds: \u201cAnd, behold, Jesus met\n_them_\u201d\u2014clearly meaning the afore-mentioned Marys\u2014\u201csaying, All hail. And\nthey came and held Him by the feet, and worshipped Him.\u201d[209] And we\nanswered, too, the charge, that \u201cwhile undergoing his punishment he was\nseen by all, but after his resurrection only by one,\u201d when we offered\nour defence of the fact that \u201cHe was not seen by all.\u201d And now we might\nsay that His merely human attributes were visible to all men, but those\nwhich were divine in their nature\u2014I speak of the attributes not as\nrelated, but as distinct[210]\u2014were not capable of being received by all.\nBut observe here the manifest contradiction into which Celsus falls. For\nhaving said, a little before, that Jesus had appeared secretly to one\nwoman and His own boon companions, he immediately subjoins: \u201cWhile\nundergoing his punishment he was seen by all men, but after his\nresurrection by one, whereas the opposite ought to have happened.\u201d And\nlet us hear what he means by \u201cought to have happened.\u201d The being seen by\nall men while undergoing His punishment, but after His resurrection only\nby one individual, are opposites.[211] Now, so far as his language\nconveys a meaning, he would have that to take place which is both\nimpossible and absurd, viz., that while undergoing His punishment He\nshould be seen only by one individual, but after His resurrection by all\nmen! or else how will you explain his words, \u201cThe opposite ought to have\nhappened?\u201d\n\nFootnote 207:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03ce\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 208:\n\n Matt. xxviii. 1, 2.\n\nFootnote 209:\n\n Matt. xxviii. 9.\n\nFootnote 210:\n\n \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c3\u03c7\u03ad\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f15\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c7\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 211:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f11\u03c9\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd. The\n Benedictine editor reads \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, and Bohereau proposes\n \u1f10\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03b6\u03af\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd, etc.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXI.\n\n\nJesus taught us who it was that sent Him, in the words, \u201cNone knoweth\nthe Father but the Son;\u201d[212] and in these, \u201cNo man hath seen God at any\ntime; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath\ndeclared Him.\u201d[213] He, treating of Deity, stated to His true disciples\nthe doctrine regarding God; and we, discovering traces of such teaching\nin the Scripture narratives, take occasion from such to aid our\ntheological conceptions,[214] hearing it declared in one passage, that\n\u201cGod is light, and in Him there is no darkness at all;\u201d[215] and in\nanother, \u201cGod is a Spirit, and they that worship Him must worship Him in\nspirit and in truth.\u201d[216] But the purposes for which the Father sent\nHim are innumerable; and these any one may ascertain who chooses, partly\nfrom the prophets who prophesied of Him, and partly from the narratives\nof the evangelists. And not a few things also will he learn from the\napostles, and especially from Paul. Moreover, those who are pious He\nleadeth to the light, and those who sin He will punish,\u2014a circumstance\nwhich Celsus not observing, has represented Him \u201cas one who will lead\nthe pious to the light, and who will have mercy on others, whether they\nsin or repent.\u201d[217]\n\nFootnote 212:\n\n Cf. Luke x. 22.\n\nFootnote 213:\n\n John i. 18.\n\nFootnote 214:\n\n \u1f67\u03bd \u1f34\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f51\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 215:\n\n 1 John i. 5.\n\nFootnote 216:\n\n John iv. 24.\n\nFootnote 217:\n\n The text is, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f24 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd. Bohereau\n would read \u03bc\u1f74 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, or would render the passage as if the\n reading were \u1f24 \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f24 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2. This suggestion has been\n adopted in the translation.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXII.\n\n\nAfter the above statements, he continues: \u201cIf he wished to remain hid,\nwhy was there heard a voice from heaven proclaiming him to be the Son of\nGod? And if he did not seek to remain concealed, why was he punished? or\nwhy did he die?\u201d Now, by such questions he thinks to convict the\nhistories of discrepancy, not observing that Jesus neither desired all\nthings regarding Himself to be known to all whom He happened to meet,\nnor yet all things to be unknown. Accordingly, the voice from heaven\nwhich proclaimed Him to be the Son of God, in the words, \u201cThis is my\nbeloved Son, in whom I am well pleased,\u201d[218] is not stated to have been\naudible to the multitudes, as this Jew of Celsus supposed. The voice\nfrom the cloud on the high mountain, moreover, was heard only by those\nwho had gone up with Him. For the divine voice is of such a nature, as\nto be heard only by those whom the speaker wishes to hear it. And I\nmaintain, that the voice of God which is referred to, is neither air\nwhich has been struck, nor any concussion of the air, nor anything else\nwhich is mentioned in treatises on the voice;[219] and therefore it is\nheard by a better and more divine organ of hearing than that of sense.\nAnd when the speaker will not have his voice to be heard by all, he that\nhas the finer ear hears the voice of God, while he who has the ears of\nhis soul deadened does not perceive that it is God who speaks. These\nthings I have mentioned because of his asking, \u201cWhy was there heard a\nvoice from heaven proclaiming him to be the Son of God?\u201d while with\nrespect to the query, \u201cWhy was he punished, if he wished to remain hid?\u201d\nwhat has been stated at greater length in the preceding pages on the\nsubject of His sufferings may suffice.\n\nFootnote 218:\n\n Matt. iii. 17.\n\nFootnote 219:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03c0\u03c9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76\u03bd \u1f00\u1f74\u03c1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f24 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03b3\u1f74 \u1f00\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f24\n \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1f72 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af \u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIII.\n\n\nThe Jew proceeds, after this, to state as a consequence what does not\nfollow from the premises; for it does _not_ follow from \u201cHis having\nwished, by the punishments which He underwent, to teach us also to\ndespise death,\u201d that after His resurrection He should openly summon all\nmen to the light, and instruct them in the object of His coming. For He\nhad formerly summoned all men to the light in the words, \u201cCome unto me,\nall ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.\u201d[220]\nAnd the object of His coming had been explained at great length in His\ndiscourses on the beatitudes, and in the announcements which followed\nthem, and in the parables, and in His conversations with the scribes and\nPharisees. And the instruction afforded us by the Gospel of John, shows\nthat the eloquence of Jesus consisted not in words, but in deeds; while\nit is manifest from the Gospel narratives that His speech was \u201cwith\npower,\u201d on which account also they marvelled at Him.\n\nFootnote 220:\n\n Cf. Matt. xi. 28.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIV.\n\n\nIn addition to all this, the Jew further says: \u201cAll these statements are\ntaken from your own books, in addition to which we need no other\nwitness; for ye fall upon your own swords.\u201d[221]\n\nNow we have proved that many foolish assertions, opposed to the\nnarratives of our Gospels, occur in the statements of the Jew, either\nwith respect to Jesus or ourselves. And I do not think that he has shown\nthat \u201cwe fall upon our own swords;\u201d but he only so imagines. And when\nthe Jew adds, in a general way, this to his former remarks: \u201cO most high\nand heavenly one! what God, on appearing to men, is received with\nincredulity?\u201d we must say to him, that according to the accounts in the\nlaw of Moses, God is related to have visited the Hebrews in a most\npublic manner, not only in the signs and wonders performed in Egypt, and\nalso in the passage of the Red Sea, and in the pillar of fire and cloud\nof light, but also when the Decalogue was announced to the whole people,\nand yet was received with incredulity by those who saw these things: for\nhad they believed what they saw and heard, they would not have fashioned\nthe calf, nor changed their own glory into the likeness of a\ngrass-eating calf; nor would they have said to one another with\nreference to the calf, \u201cThese be thy gods, O Israel, who brought thee up\nout of the land of Egypt.\u201d[222] And observe whether it is not entirely\nin keeping with the character of the same people, who formerly refused\nto believe such wonders and such appearances of divinity, throughout the\nwhole period of wandering in the wilderness, as they are recorded in the\nlaw of the Jews to have done, to refuse to be convinced also, on\noccasion of the glorious advent of Jesus, by the mighty words which were\nspoken by Him with authority, and the marvels which He performed in the\npresence of all the people.\n\nFootnote 221:\n\n \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03af\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5.\n\nFootnote 222:\n\n Cf. Ex. xxxii. 4.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXV.\n\n\nI think what has been stated is enough to convince any one that the\nunbelief of the Jews with regard to Jesus was in keeping with what is\nrelated of this people from the beginning. For I would say in reply to\nthis Jew of Celsus, when he asks, \u201cWhat God that appeared among men is\nreceived with incredulity, and that, too, when appearing to those who\nexpect him? or why, pray, is he not recognised by those who have been\nlong looking for him?\u201d what answer, friends, would you have us return to\nyour[223] questions? Which class of miracles, in your judgment, do you\nregard as the greater? Those which were wrought in Egypt and the\nwilderness, or those which we declare that Jesus performed among you?\nFor if the former are in your opinion greater than the latter, does it\nnot appear from this very fact to be in conformity with the character of\nthose who disbelieved the greater to despise the less? And this is the\nopinion entertained with respect to our accounts of the miracles of\nJesus. But if those related of Jesus are considered to be as great as\nthose recorded of Moses, what strange thing has come to pass among a\nnation which has manifested incredulity with regard to the commencement\nof both dispensations?[224] For the beginning of the legislation was in\nthe time of Moses, in whose work are recorded the sins of the\nunbelievers and wicked among you, while the commencement of our\nlegislation and second covenant is admitted to have been in the time of\nJesus. And by your unbelief of Jesus ye show that ye are the sons of\nthose who in the desert discredited the divine appearances; and thus\nwhat was spoken by our Saviour will be applicable also to you who\nbelieved not on Him: \u201cTherefore ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds\nof your fathers.\u201d[225] And there is fulfilled among you also the\nprophecy which said: \u201cYour life shall hang in doubt before your eyes,\nand you will have no assurance of your life.\u201d[226] For ye did not\nbelieve in the life which came to visit the human race.\n\nFootnote 223:\n\n The text reads \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd, for which Bohereau and the Benedictine editor\n propose either \u1f51\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 or \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2, the former of which is preferred by\n Lommatzsch.\n\nFootnote 224:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019 \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 225:\n\n Cf. Luke xi. 48.\n\nFootnote 226:\n\n Cf. Deut. xxviii. 66.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVI.\n\n\nCelsus, in adopting the character of a Jew, could not discover any\nobjections to be urged against the gospel which might not be retorted on\nhim as liable to be brought also against the law and the prophets. For\nhe censures Jesus in such words as the following: \u201cHe makes use of\nthreats, and reviles men on light grounds, when he says, \u2018Woe unto you,\u2019\nand \u2018I tell you beforehand.\u2019 For by such expressions he manifestly\nacknowledges his inability to persuade; and this would not be the case\nwith a God, or even a prudent man.\u201d Observe, now, whether these charges\ndo not manifestly recoil upon the Jew. For in the writings of the law\nand the prophets God makes use of threats and revilings, when He employs\nlanguage of not less severity than that found in the Gospel, such as the\nfollowing expressions of Isaiah: \u201cWoe unto them that join house to\nhouse, and lay field to field;\u201d[227] and, \u201cWoe unto them that rise up\nearly in the morning that they may follow strong drink;\u201d[228] and, \u201cWoe\nunto them that draw their sins after them as with a long rope;\u201d[229]\nand, \u201cWoe unto them that call evil good, and good evil;\u201d[230] and, \u201cWoe\nunto those of you who are mighty to drink wine;\u201d[231] and innumerable\nother passages of the same kind. And does not the following resemble the\nthreats of which he speaks: \u201cAh, sinful nation, a people laden with\niniquity, a seed of evil-doers, children that are corrupters?\u201d[232] and\nso on, to which he subjoins such threats as are equal in severity to\nthose which, he says, Jesus made use of. For is it not a threatening,\nand a great one, which declares, \u201cYour country is desolate, your cities\nare burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your presence,\nand it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers?\u201d[233] And are there not\nrevilings in Ezekiel directed against the people, when the Lord says to\nthe prophet, \u201cThou dwellest in the midst of scorpions?\u201d[234] Were you\nserious, then, Celsus, in representing the Jew as saying of Jesus, that\n\u201che makes use of threats and revilings on slight grounds, when he\nemploys the expressions, \u2018Woe unto you,\u2019 and \u2018I tell you beforehand?\u2019\u201d\nDo you not see that the charges which this Jew of yours brings against\nJesus might be brought by him against God? For the God who speaks in the\nprophetic writings is manifestly liable to the same accusations, as\nCelsus regards them, of inability to persuade. I might, moreover, say to\nthis Jew, who thinks that he makes a good charge against Jesus by such\nstatements, that if he undertakes, in support of the scriptural account,\nto defend the numerous curses recorded in the books of Leviticus and\nDeuteronomy, we should make as good, or better, a defence of the\nrevilings and threatenings which are regarded as having been spoken by\nJesus. And as respects the law of Moses itself, we are in a position to\nmake a better defence of it than the Jew is, because we have been taught\nby Jesus to have a more intelligent apprehension of the writings of the\nlaw. Nay, if the Jew perceive the meaning of the prophetic Scriptures,\nhe will be able to show that it is for no light reason that God employs\nthreatenings and revilings, when He says, \u201cWoe unto you,\u201d and \u201cI tell\nyou beforehand.\u201d And how should God employ such expressions for the\nconversion of men, which Celsus thinks that even a prudent man would not\nhave recourse to? But Christians, who know only one God\u2014the same who\nspoke in the prophets and in the Lord [Jesus]\u2014can prove the\nreasonableness of those threatenings and revilings, as Celsus considers\nand entitles them. And here a few remarks shall be addressed to this\nCelsus, who professes both to be a philosopher, and to be acquainted\nwith all our system. How is it, friend, when Hermes, in Homer, says to\nOdysseus,\n\n \u201cWhy, now, wretched man, do you come wandering alone over the\n mountain-tops?\u201d[235]\n\nthat you are satisfied with the answer, which explains that the Homeric\nHermes addresses such language to Odysseus to remind him of his\nduty,[236] because it is characteristic of the Sirens to flatter and to\nsay pleasing things, around whom\n\n \u201cIs a huge heap of bones,\u201d[237]\n\nand who say,\n\n \u201cCome hither, much lauded Odysseus, great glory of the Greeks;\u201d[238]\n\nwhereas, if our prophets and Jesus Himself, in order to turn their\nhearers from evil, make use of such expressions as \u201cWoe unto you,\u201d and\nwhat you regard as revilings, there is no condescension in such language\nto the circumstances of the hearers, nor any application of such words\nto them as healing[239] medicine? Unless, indeed, you would have God, or\none who partakes of the divine nature, when conversing with men, to have\nregard to His own nature alone, and to what is worthy of Himself, but to\nhave no regard to what is fitting to be brought before men who are under\nthe dispensation and leading of His word, and with each one of whom He\nis to converse agreeably to his individual character. And is it not a\nridiculous assertion regarding Jesus, to say that He was unable to\npersuade men, when you compare the state of matters not only among the\nJews, who have many such instances recorded in the prophecies, but also\namong the Greeks, among whom all of those who have attained great\nreputation for their wisdom have been unable to persuade those who\nconspired against them, or to induce their judges or accusers to cease\nfrom evil, and to endeavour to attain to virtue by the way of\nphilosophy?\n\nFootnote 227:\n\n Isa. v. 8.\n\nFootnote 228:\n\n Isa. v. 11.\n\nFootnote 229:\n\n Isa. v. 18.\n\nFootnote 230:\n\n Isa. v. 20.\n\nFootnote 231:\n\n Isa. v. 22.\n\nFootnote 232:\n\n Cf. Isa. i. 4.\n\nFootnote 233:\n\n Isa. i. 7.\n\nFootnote 234:\n\n Ezek. ii. 6.\n\nFootnote 235:\n\n Cf. _Odyss._ x. 281.\n\nFootnote 236:\n\n \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 237:\n\n Cf. _Odyss._ xii. 45.\n\nFootnote 238:\n\n _Ibid._ xii. 184.\n\nFootnote 239:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVII.\n\n\nAfter this the Jew remarks, manifestly in accordance with the Jewish\nbelief: \u201cWe certainly hope that there will be a bodily resurrection, and\nthat we shall enjoy an eternal life; and the example and archetype of\nthis will be He who is sent to us, and who will show that nothing is\nimpossible with God.\u201d We do not know, indeed, whether the Jew would say\nof the expected Christ, that He exhibits in Himself an example of the\nresurrection; but let it be supposed that he both thinks and says so. We\nshall give this answer, then, to him who has told us that he drew his\ninformation from our own writings: \u201cDid you read those writings, friend,\nin which you think you discover matter of accusation against us, and not\nfind there the resurrection of Jesus, and the declaration that He was\nthe first-born from the dead? Or because you will not allow such things\nto have been recorded, were they not actually recorded?\u201d But as the Jew\nstill admits the resurrection of the body, I do not consider the present\na suitable time to discuss the subject with one who both believes and\nsays that there is a bodily resurrection, whether he has an\narticulate[240] understanding of such a topic, and is able to plead well\non its behalf,[241] or not, but has only given his assent to it as being\nof a legendary character.[242] Let the above, then, be our reply to this\nJew of Celsus. And when he adds, \u201cWhere, then, is he, that we may see\nhim and believe upon him?\u201d we answer: Where is He now who spoke in the\nprophecies, and who wrought miracles, that we may see and believe that\nHe is part of God? Are _you_ to be allowed to meet the objection, that\nGod does not perpetually show Himself to the Hebrew nation, while _we_\nare not to be permitted the same defence with regard to Jesus, who has\nboth once risen Himself, and led His disciples to believe in His\nresurrection, and so thoroughly persuaded them of its truth, that they\nshow to all men by their sufferings how they are able to laugh at all\nthe troubles of life, beholding the life eternal and the resurrection\nclearly demonstrated to them both in word and deed?\n\nFootnote 240:\n\n \u03b5\u1f36\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c1\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u2019 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff7.\n\nFootnote 241:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 242:\n\n \u1f00\u03c4\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03b8\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVIII.\n\n\nThe Jew continues: \u201cDid Jesus come into the world for this purpose, that\nwe should not believe him?\u201d To which we immediately answer, that He did\nnot come with the object of producing incredulity among the Jews; but\nknowing beforehand that such would be the result, He foretold it, and\nmade use of their unbelief for the calling of the Gentiles. For through\ntheir sin salvation came to the Gentiles, respecting whom the Christ who\nspeaks in the prophecies says, \u201cA people whom I did not know became\nsubject to me: they were obedient to the hearing of my ear;\u201d[243] and,\n\u201cI was found of them who sought me not; I became manifest to those who\ninquired not after me.\u201d[244] It is certain, moreover, that the Jews were\npunished even in this present life, after treating Jesus in the manner\nin which they did. And let the Jews assert what they will when we charge\nthem with guilt, and say, \u201cIs not the providence and goodness of God\nmost wonderfully displayed in your punishment, and in your being\ndeprived of Jerusalem, and of the sanctuary, and of your splendid\nworship?\u201d For whatever they may say in reply with respect to the\nprovidence of God, we shall be able more effectually to answer it by\nremarking, that the providence of God was wonderfully manifested in\nusing the transgression of that people for the purpose of calling into\nthe kingdom of God, through Jesus Christ, those from among the Gentiles\nwho were strangers to the covenant and aliens to the promises. And these\nthings were foretold by the prophets, who said that, on account of the\ntransgressions of the Hebrew nation, God would make choice, not of a\nnation, but of individuals chosen from all lands;[245] and, having\nselected the foolish things of the world, would cause an ignorant nation\nto become acquainted with the divine teaching, the kingdom of God being\ntaken from the one and given to the other. And out of a larger number it\nis sufficient on the present occasion to adduce the prediction from the\nsong in Deuteronomy regarding the calling of the Gentiles, which is as\nfollows, being spoken in the person of the Lord: \u201cThey have moved me to\njealousy with those who are not gods; they have provoked me to anger\nwith their idols: and I will move them to jealousy with those who are\nnot a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.\u201d[246]\n\nFootnote 243:\n\n Cf. 2 Sam. xxii. 44, 45.\n\nFootnote 244:\n\n Cf. Isa. lxv. 1.\n\nFootnote 245:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7\u1f76 \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c7\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 246:\n\n Cf. Deut. xxxii. 21.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIX.\n\n\nThe conclusion of all these arguments regarding Jesus is thus stated by\nthe Jew: \u201cHe was therefore a man, and of such a nature, as the truth\nitself proves, and reason demonstrates him to be.\u201d I do not know,\nhowever, whether a man who had the courage to spread throughout the\nentire world his doctrine of religious worship and teaching,[247] could\naccomplish what he wished without the divine assistance, and could rise\nsuperior to all who withstood the progress of his doctrine\u2014kings and\nrulers, and the Roman senate, and governors in all places, and the\ncommon people. And how could the nature of a man possessed of no\ninherent excellence convert so vast a multitude? For it would not be\nwonderful if it were only the wise who were so converted; but it is the\nmost irrational of men, and those devoted to their passions, and who, by\nreason of their irrationality, change with the greater difficulty so as\nto adopt a more temperate course of life. And yet it is because Christ\nwas the power of God and the wisdom of the Father that He accomplished,\nand still accomplishes, such results, although neither the Jews nor\nGreeks who disbelieve His word will so admit. And therefore we shall not\ncease to believe in God, according to the precepts of Jesus Christ, and\nto seek to convert those who are blind on the subject of religion,\nalthough it is they who are truly blind themselves that charge us with\nblindness: and they, whether Jews or Greeks, who lead astray those that\nfollow them, accuse us of seducing men\u2014a good seduction, truly!\u2014that\nthey may become temperate instead of dissolute, or at least may make\nadvances to temperance; may become just instead of unjust, or at least\nmay tend to become so; prudent instead of foolish, or be on the way to\nbecome such; and instead of cowardice, meanness, and timidity, may\nexhibit the virtues of fortitude and courage, especially displayed in\nthe struggles undergone for the sake of their religion towards God, the\nCreator of all things. Jesus Christ therefore came announced beforehand,\nnot by one prophet, but by all; and it was a proof of the ignorance of\nCelsus, to represent a Jew as saying that one prophet only had predicted\nthe advent of Christ. But as this Jew of Celsus, after being thus\nintroduced, asserting that these things were indeed in conformity with\nhis own law, has somewhere here ended his discourse, with a mention of\nother matters not worthy of remembrance, I too shall here terminate this\nsecond book of my answer to his treatise. But if God permit, and the\npower of Christ abide in my soul, I shall endeavour in the third book to\ndeal with the subsequent statements of Celsus.\n\nFootnote 247:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03c3\u03ad\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n BOOK III.\n\n\n Chapter I.\n\n\nIn the first book of our answer to the work of Celsus, who had\nboastfully entitled the treatise which he had composed against us _A\nTrue Discourse_, we have gone through, as you enjoined, my faithful\nAmbrosius, to the best of our ability, his preface, and the parts\nimmediately following it, testing each one of his assertions as we went\nalong, until we finished with the tirade[248] of this Jew of his,\nfeigned to have been delivered against Jesus. And in the second book we\nmet, as we best could, all the charges contained in the invective of the\nsaid Jew, which were levelled at us who are believers in God through\nChrist; and now we enter upon this third division of our discourse, in\nwhich our object is to refute the allegations which he makes in his own\nperson.\n\nHe gives it as his opinion, that \u201cthe controversy between Jews and\nChristians is a most foolish one,\u201d and asserts that \u201cthe discussions\nwhich we have with each other regarding Christ differ in no respect from\nwhat is called in the proverb \u2018a fight about the shadow of an\nass;\u2019\u201d[249] and thinks that \u201cthere is nothing of importance[250] in the\ninvestigations of the Jews and Christians: for both believe that it was\npredicted by the Divine Spirit that one was to come as a Saviour to the\nhuman race, but do not yet agree on the point whether the person\npredicted has actually come or not.\u201d For we Christians, indeed, have\nbelieved in Jesus, as He who came according to the predictions of the\nprophets. But the majority of the Jews are so far from believing in Him,\nthat those of them who lived at the time of His coming conspired against\nHim; and those of the present day, approving of what the Jews of former\ntimes dared to do against Him, speak evil of Him, asserting that it was\nby means of sorcery[251] that he passed himself off for Him who was\npredicted by the prophets as the One who was to come, and who was\ncalled, agreeably to the traditions of the Jews,[252] the Christ.\n\nFootnote 248:\n\n \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1; cf. book i. c. 71.\n\nFootnote 249:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03ba\u03b9\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2. On this proverb, see\n Zenobius, _Centuria Sexta_, adag. 28, and the note of Schottius. Cf.\n also Suidas, _s.v._ \u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03ba\u03af\u03b1.\u2014DE LA RUE.\n\nFootnote 250:\n\n \u03c3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 251:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 252:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f38\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter II.\n\n\nBut let Celsus, and those who assent to his charges, tell us whether it\nis at all like \u201can ass\u2019s shadow,\u201d that the Jewish prophets should have\npredicted the birth-place of Him who was to be the ruler of those who\nhad lived righteous lives, and who are called the \u201cheritage\u201d of\nGod;[253] and that Emmanuel should be conceived by a virgin; and that\nsuch signs and wonders should be performed by Him who was the subject of\nprophecy; and that His word should have such speedy course, that the\nvoice of His apostles should go forth into all the earth; and that He\nshould undergo certain sufferings after His condemnation by the Jews;\nand that He should rise again from the dead. For was it by chance[254]\nthat the prophets made these announcements, with no persuasion of their\ntruth in their minds,[255] moving them not only to speak, but to deem\ntheir announcements worthy of being committed to writing? And did so\ngreat a nation as that of the Jews, who had long ago received a country\nof their own wherein to dwell, recognise certain men as prophets, and\nreject others as utterers of false predictions, without any conviction\nof the soundness of the distinction? And was there no motive which\ninduced them to class with the books of Moses, which were held as\nsacred, the words of those persons who were afterwards deemed to be\nprophets? And can those who charge the Jews and Christians with folly,\nshow us how the Jewish nation could have continued to subsist, had there\nexisted among them no promise of the knowledge of future events? and\nhow, while each of the surrounding nations believed, agreeably to their\nancient institutions, that they received oracles and predictions from\nthose whom they accounted gods, this people alone, who were taught to\nview with contempt all those who were considered gods by the heathen, as\nnot being gods, but demons, according to the declaration of the\nprophets, \u201cFor all the gods of the nations are demons,\u201d[256] had among\nthem no one who professed to be a prophet, and who could restrain such\nas, from a desire to know the future, were ready to desert[257] to the\ndemons of other nations? Judge, then, whether it were not a necessity,\nthat as the whole nation had been taught to despise the deities of other\nlands, they should have had an abundance of prophets, who made known\nevents which were of far greater importance in themselves,[258] and\nwhich surpassed the oracles of all other countries.\n\nFootnote 253:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6.\n\nFootnote 254:\n\n \u1f06\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03b5.\n\nFootnote 255:\n\n \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u1fb7 \u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 256:\n\n Ps. xcvi. 5, \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1; \u201cidols,\u201d Auth. Vers. We have in this passage,\n and in many others, the identification of the \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 or gods of the\n heathen with the \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 or \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1, \u201cevil spirits,\u201d or angels,\n supposed to be mentioned in Gen. vi. 2.\n\nFootnote 257:\n\n The reading in the text is \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, on which Bohereau, with whom\n the Benedictine editor agrees, remarks that we must either read\n \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, or understand some such word as \u1f11\u03c4\u03bf\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 before\n \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 258:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter III.\n\n\nIn the next place, miracles were performed in all countries, or at least\nin many of them, as Celsus himself admits, instancing the case of\nEsculapius, who conferred benefits on many, and who foretold future\nevents to entire cities, which were dedicated to him, such as Tricca,\nand Epidaurus, and Cos, and Pergamus; and along with Esculapius he\nmentions Aristeas of Proconnesus, and a certain Clazomenian, and\nCleomedes of Astypal\u00e6a. But among the Jews alone, who say they are\ndedicated to the God of all things, there was wrought no miracle or sign\nwhich might help to confirm their faith in the Creator of all things,\nand strengthen their hope of another and better life! But how can they\nimagine such a state of things? For they would immediately have gone\nover to the worship of those demons which gave oracles and performed\ncures, and deserted the God who was believed, as far as words went,[259]\nto assist them, but who never manifested to them His visible presence.\nBut if this result has not taken place, and if, on the contrary, they\nhave suffered countless calamities rather than renounce Judaism and\ntheir law, and have been cruelly treated, at one time in Assyria, at\nanother in Persia, and at another under Antiochus, is it not in keeping\nwith the probabilities of the case[260] for those to suppose who do not\nyield their belief to their miraculous histories and prophecies, that\nthe events in question could not be inventions, but that a certain\ndivine Spirit being in the holy souls of the prophets, as of men who\nunderwent any labour for the cause of virtue, _did_ move them to\nprophesy some things relating to their contemporaries, and others to\ntheir posterity, but chiefly regarding a certain personage who was to\ncome as a Saviour to the human race?\n\nFootnote 259:\n\n \u03bc\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 260:\n\n \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7\u1f76 \u1f10\u03be \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IV.\n\n\nAnd if the above be the state of the case, how do Jews and Christians\nsearch after \u201cthe shadow of an ass,\u201d in seeking to ascertain from those\nprophecies which they believe in common, whether He who was foretold has\ncome, or has not yet arrived, and is still an object of expectation? But\neven suppose[261] it be granted to Celsus that it was not Jesus who was\nannounced by the prophets, then, even on such a hypothesis, the\ninvestigation of the sense of the prophetic writings is no search after\n\u201cthe shadow of an ass,\u201d if he who was spoken of can be clearly pointed\nout, and it can be shown both what sort of person he was predicted to\nbe, and what he was to do, and, if possible, when he was to arrive. But\nin the preceding pages we have already spoken on the point of Jesus\nbeing the individual who was foretold to be the Christ, quoting a few\nprophecies out of a larger number. Neither Jews nor Christians, then,\nare wrong in assuming that the prophets spoke under divine\ninfluence;[262] but they are in error who form erroneous opinions\nrespecting Him who was expected by the prophets to come, and whose\nperson and character were made known in their \u201ctrue discourses.\u201d\n\nFootnote 261:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u2019 \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 262:\n\n \u03b8\u03b5\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter V.\n\n\nImmediately after these points, Celsus, imagining that the Jews are\nEgyptians by descent, and had abandoned Egypt, after revolting against\nthe Egyptian state, and despising the customs of that people in matters\nof worship, says that \u201cthey suffered from the adherents of Jesus, who\nbelieved in Him as the Christ, the same treatment which they had\ninflicted upon the Egyptians; and that the cause which led to the new\nstate of things[263] in either instance was rebellion against the\nstate.\u201d Now let us observe what Celsus has here done. The ancient\nEgyptians, after inflicting many cruelties upon the Hebrew race, who had\nsettled in Egypt owing to a famine which had broken out in Judea,\nsuffered, in consequence of their injustice to strangers and suppliants,\nthat punishment which divine Providence had decreed was to fall on the\nwhole nation for having combined against an entire people, who had been\ntheir guests, and who had done them no harm; and after being smitten by\nplagues from God, they allowed them, with difficulty, and after a brief\nperiod, to go wherever they liked, as being unjustly detained in\nslavery. Because, then, they were a selfish people, who honoured those\nwho were in any degree related to them far more than they did strangers\nof better lives, there is not an accusation which they have omitted to\nbring against Moses and the Hebrews,\u2014not altogether denying, indeed, the\nmiracles and wonders done by him, but alleging that they were wrought by\nsorcery, and not by divine power. Moses, however, not as a magician, but\nas a devout man, and one devoted to the God of all things, and a\npartaker in the divine Spirit, both enacted laws for the Hebrews,\naccording to the suggestions of the Divinity, and recorded events as\nthey happened with perfect fidelity.\n\nFootnote 263:\n\n \u03a4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VI.\n\n\nCelsus, therefore, not investigating in a spirit of impartiality the\nfacts, which are related by the Egyptians in one way, and by the Hebrews\nin another, but being bewitched, as it were,[264] in favour of the\nformer, accepted as true the statements of those who had oppressed the\nstrangers, and declared that the Hebrews, who had been unjustly treated,\nhad departed from Egypt after revolting against the Egyptians,\u2014not\nobserving how impossible it was for so great a multitude of rebellious\nEgyptians to become a nation, which, dating its origin from the said\nrevolt, should change its language at the time of its rebellion, so that\nthose who up to that time made use of the Egyptian tongue, should\ncompletely adopt, all at once, the language of the Hebrews! Let it be\ngranted, however, according to his supposition, that on abandoning Egypt\nthey did conceive a hatred also of their mother tongue,[265] how did it\nhappen that after so doing they did not rather adopt the Syrian or\nPh\u0153nician language, instead of preferring the Hebrew, which is different\nfrom both? But reason seems to me to demonstrate that the statement is\nfalse, which makes those who were Egyptians by race to have revolted\nagainst Egyptians, and to have left the country, and to have proceeded\nto Palestine, and occupied the land now called Judea. For Hebrew was the\nlanguage of their fathers before their descent into Egypt; and the\nHebrew letters, employed by Moses in writing those five books which are\ndeemed sacred by the Jews, were different from those of the Egyptians.\n\nFootnote 264:\n\n \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03c4\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03c5\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 265:\n\n \u03a4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u1f74\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VII.\n\n\nIn like manner, as the statement is false \u201cthat the Hebrews, being\n[originally] Egyptians, dated the commencement [of their political\nexistence] from the time of their rebellion,\u201d so also is this, \u201cthat in\nthe days of Jesus others who were Jews rebelled against the Jewish\nstate, and became His followers;\u201d for neither Celsus nor they who think\nwith him are able to point out any act on the part of Christians which\nsavours of rebellion. And yet, if a revolt had led to the formation of\nthe Christian commonwealth, so that it derived its existence in this way\nfrom that of the Jews, who were permitted to take up arms in defence of\nthe members of their families, and to slay their enemies, the Christian\nLawgiver would not have altogether forbidden the putting of men to\ndeath; and yet He nowhere teaches that it is right for His own disciples\nto offer violence to any one, however wicked. For He did not deem it in\nkeeping with such laws as His, which were derived from a divine source,\nto allow the killing of any individual whatever. Nor would the\nChristians, had they owed their origin to a rebellion, have adopted laws\nof so exceedingly mild a character as not to allow them, when it was\ntheir fate to be slain as sheep, on any occasion to resist their\npersecutors. And truly, if we look a little deeper into things, we may\nsay regarding the exodus from Egypt, that it is a miracle if a whole\nnation _at once_ adopted the language called Hebrew, as if it had been a\ngift from heaven, when one of their own prophets said, \u201cAs they went\nforth from Egypt, they heard a language which they did not\nunderstand.\u201d[266]\n\nFootnote 266:\n\n Cf. Ps. lxxxi. 5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VIII.\n\n\nIn the following way, also, we may conclude that they who came out of\nEgypt with Moses were not Egyptians; for if they had been Egyptians,\ntheir _names_ also would be Egyptian, because in every language the\ndesignations [of persons and things] are kindred to the language.[267]\nBut if it is certain, from the names being Hebrew, that the people were\nnot Egyptians,\u2014and the Scriptures are full of Hebrew names, and these\nbestowed, too, upon their children while they were in Egypt,\u2014it is clear\nthat the Egyptian account is false, which asserts that they were\nEgyptians, and went forth from Egypt with Moses. Now it is absolutely\ncertain[268] that, being descended, as the Mosaic history records, from\nHebrew ancestors, they employed a language from which they also took the\nnames which they conferred upon their children. But with regard to the\nChristians, because they were taught not to avenge themselves upon their\nenemies (and have thus observed laws of a mild and philanthropic\ncharacter); and because they would not, although able, have made war\neven if they had received authority to do so,\u2014they have obtained this\nreward from God, that He has always warred in their behalf, and on\ncertain occasions has restrained those who rose up against them and\ndesired to destroy them. For in order to remind others, that by seeing a\n_few_ engaged in a struggle for their religion, they also might be\nbetter fitted to despise death, some, on special occasions, and these\nindividuals who can be easily numbered, have endured death for the sake\nof Christianity,\u2014God not permitting the whole nation to be exterminated,\nbut desiring that it should continue, and that the whole world should be\nfilled with this salutary and religious doctrine. And again, on the\nother hand, that those who were of weaker minds might recover their\ncourage and rise superior to the thought of death, God interposed His\nprovidence on behalf of believers, dispersing by an act of His will\nalone all the conspiracies formed against them; so that neither kings,\nnor rulers, nor the populace, might be able to rage against them beyond\na certain point. Such, then, is our answer to the assertions of Celsus,\n\u201cthat a revolt was the original commencement of the ancient Jewish\nstate, and subsequently of Christianity.\u201d\n\nFootnote 267:\n\n \u03a3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 268:\n\n \u03a3\u03b1\u03c6\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03b3\u03ad\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IX.\n\n\nBut since he is manifestly guilty of falsehood in the statements which\nfollow, let us examine his assertion when he says, \u201cIf all men wished to\nbecome Christians, the latter would not desire such a result.\u201d Now that\nthe above statement is false is clear from this, that Christians do not\nneglect, as far as in them lies, to take measures to disseminate their\ndoctrine throughout the whole world. Some of them, accordingly, have\nmade it their business to itinerate not only through cities, but even\nvillages and country houses,[269] that they might make converts to God.\nAnd no one would maintain that they did this for the sake of gain, when\nsometimes they would not accept even necessary sustenance; or if at any\ntime they were pressed by a necessity of this sort, were contented with\nthe mere supply of their wants, although many were willing to share\n[their abundance] with them, and to bestow help upon them far above\ntheir need. At the present day, indeed, when, owing to the multitude of\nChristian believers, not only rich men, but persons of rank, and\ndelicate and high-born ladies, receive the teachers of Christianity,\nsome perhaps will dare to say that it is for the sake of a little\nglory[270] that certain individuals assume the office of Christian\ninstructors. It is impossible, however, rationally to entertain such a\nsuspicion with respect to Christianity in its beginnings, when the\ndanger incurred, especially by its teachers, was great; while at the\npresent day the discredit attaching to it among the rest of mankind is\ngreater than any supposed honour enjoyed among those who hold the same\nbelief, especially when such honour is not shared by all. It is false,\nthen, from the very nature of the case, to say that \u201cif all men wished\nto become Christians, the latter would not desire such a result.\u201d\n\nFootnote 269:\n\n \u1f18\u03c0\u03b1\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 270:\n\n \u0394\u03bf\u03be\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter X.\n\n\nBut observe what he alleges as a proof of his statement: \u201cChristians at\nfirst were few in number, and held the same opinions; but when they grew\nto be a great multitude, they were divided and separated, each wishing\nto have his own individual party:[271] for this was their object from\nthe beginning.\u201d That Christians at first were few in number, in\ncomparison with the multitudes who subsequently became Christian, is\nundoubted; and yet, all things considered, they were not so very\nfew.[272] For what stirred up the envy of the Jews against Jesus, and\naroused them to conspire against Him, was the great number of those who\nfollowed Him into the wilderness,\u2014five thousand men on one occasion, and\nfour thousand on another, having attended Him thither, without including\nthe women and children. For such was the charm[273] of Jesus\u2019 words,\nthat not only were _men_ willing to follow Him to the wilderness, but\n_women_ also, forgetting[274] the weakness of their sex and a regard for\noutward propriety[275] in thus following their Teacher into desert\nplaces. Children, too, who are altogether unaffected by such\nemotions,[276] either following their parents, or perhaps attracted also\nby His divinity, in order that it might be implanted within them, became\nHis followers along with their parents. But let it be granted that\nChristians were few in number at the beginning, how does that help to\nprove that Christians would be unwilling to make all men believe the\ndoctrine of the gospel?\n\nFootnote 271:\n\n \u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 272:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03af \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 273:\n\n \u1f34\u03c5\u03b3\u03be.\n\nFootnote 274:\n\n The reading in Spencer\u2019s and the Benedictine edition is \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2,\n for which Lommatzsch reads \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 275:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 276:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XI.\n\n\nHe says, in addition, that \u201call the Christians were of one mind,\u201d not\nobserving, even in this particular, that from the beginning there were\ndifferences of opinion among believers regarding the meaning[277] of the\nbooks held to be divine. At all events, while the apostles were still\npreaching, and while eye-witnesses of [the works of] Jesus were still\nteaching His doctrine, there was no small discussion among the converts\nfrom Judaism regarding Gentile believers, on the point whether they\nought to observe Jewish customs, or should reject the burden of clean\nand unclean meats, as not being obligatory on those who had abandoned\ntheir ancestral Gentile customs, and had become believers in Jesus. Nay,\neven in the epistles of Paul, who was contemporary with those who had\nseen Jesus, certain particulars are found mentioned as having been the\nsubject of dispute,\u2014viz. respecting the resurrection,[278] and whether\nit were already past, and the day of the Lord, whether it were nigh at\nhand[279] or not. Nay, the very exhortation to \u201cavoid profane and vain\nbabblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: which some\nprofessing, have erred concerning the faith,\u201d[280] is enough to show\nthat from the very beginning, when, as Celsus imagines, believers were\nfew in number, there were certain doctrines interpreted in different\nways.[281]\n\nFootnote 277:\n\n \u1f18\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 278:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 12 sqq.\n\nFootnote 279:\n\n Cf. 2 Thess. ii. 2.\n\nFootnote 280:\n\n Cf. 1 Tim. vi. 20.\n\nFootnote 281:\n\n \u03a4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03c7\u03b1\u1f76.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XII.\n\n\nIn the next place, since he reproaches us with the existence of heresies\nin Christianity as being a ground of accusation against it, saying that\n\u201cwhen Christians had greatly increased in numbers, they were divided and\nsplit up into factions, each individual desiring to have his own party;\u201d\nand further, that \u201cbeing thus separated through their numbers, they\nconfute one another, still having, so to speak, one _name_ in common, if\nindeed they still retain it. And this is the only thing which they are\nyet ashamed to abandon, while other matters are determined in different\nways by the various sects.\u201d In reply to which, we say that heresies of\ndifferent kinds have never originated from any matter in which the\nprinciple involved was not important and beneficial to human life. For\nsince the science of medicine is useful and necessary to the human race,\nand many are the points of dispute in it respecting the manner of curing\nbodies, there are found, for this reason, numerous heresies confessedly\nprevailing in the science of medicine among the Greeks, and also, I\nsuppose, among those barbarous nations who profess to employ medicine.\nAnd, again, since philosophy makes a profession of the truth, and\npromises a knowledge of existing things with a view to the regulation of\nlife, and endeavours to teach what is advantageous to our race, and\nsince the investigation of these matters is attended with great\ndifferences of opinion,[282] innumerable heresies have consequently\nsprung up in philosophy, some of which are more celebrated than others.\nEven Judaism itself afforded a pretext for the origination of heresies,\nin the different acceptation accorded to the writings of Moses and those\nof the prophets. So, then, seeing Christianity appeared an object of\nveneration to men, not to the more servile class alone, as Celsus\nsupposes, but to many among the Greeks who were devoted to literary\npursuits,[283] there necessarily originated heresies,\u2014not at all,\nhowever, as the result of faction and strife, but through the earnest\ndesire of many literary men to become acquainted with the doctrines of\nChristianity. The consequence of which was, that, taking in different\nacceptations those discourses which were believed by all to be divine,\nthere arose heresies, which received their names from those individuals\nwho admired, indeed, the origin of Christianity, but who were led, in\nsome way or other, by certain plausible reasons, to discordant views.\nAnd yet no one would act rationally in avoiding medicine because of its\nheresies; nor would he who aimed at that which is seemly[284] entertain\na hatred of philosophy, and adduce its many heresies as a pretext for\nhis antipathy. And so neither are the sacred books of Moses and the\nprophets to be condemned on account of the heresies in Judaism.\n\nFootnote 282:\n\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 283:\n\n \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 284:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIII.\n\n\nNow, if these arguments hold good, why should we not defend, in the same\nway, the existence of heresies in Christianity? And respecting these,\nPaul appears to me to speak in a very striking manner when he says, \u201cFor\nthere must be heresies among you, that they who are approved may be made\nmanifest among you.\u201d[285] For as that man is \u201capproved\u201d in medicine who,\non account of his experience in various [medical] heresies, and his\nhonest examination of the majority of them, has selected the preferable\nsystem,\u2014and as the great proficient in philosophy is he who, after\nacquainting himself experimentally with the various views, has given in\nhis adhesion to the best,\u2014so I would say that the wisest Christian was\nhe who had carefully studied the heresies both of Judaism and\nChristianity. Whereas he who finds fault with Christianity because of\nits heresies would find fault also with the teaching of Socrates, from\nwhose school have issued many others of discordant views. Nay, the\nopinions of Plato might be chargeable with error, on account of\nAristotle\u2019s having separated from his school, and founded a new one,\u2014on\nwhich subject we have remarked in the preceding book. But it appears to\nme that Celsus has become acquainted with certain heresies which do not\npossess even the _name_ of Jesus in common with us. Perhaps he had heard\nof the sects called Ophites and Cainites, or some others of a similar\nnature, which had departed in all points from the teaching of Jesus. And\nyet surely this furnishes no ground for a charge against the _Christian_\ndoctrine.\n\nFootnote 285:\n\n 1 Cor. xi. 19.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIV.\n\n\nAfter this he continues: \u201cTheir union is the more wonderful, the more it\ncan be shown to be based on no substantial reason. And yet rebellion is\na substantial reason, as well as the advantages which accrue from it,\nand the fear of external enemies. Such are the causes which give\nstability to their faith.\u201d To this we answer, that our union does thus\nrest upon a reason, or rather not upon a reason, but upon the divine\nworking,[286] so that its commencement was God\u2019s teaching men, in the\nprophetical writings, to expect the advent of Christ, who was to be the\nSaviour of mankind. For in so far as this point is not really refuted\n(although it may _seem_ to be by unbelievers), in the same proportion is\nthe doctrine commended as the doctrine of God, and Jesus shown to be the\nSon of God both before and after His incarnation. I maintain, moreover,\nthat even after His incarnation, He is always found by those who possess\nthe acutest spiritual vision to be most God-like, and to have really\ncome down to us from God, and to have derived His origin or subsequent\ndevelopment not from human wisdom, but from the manifestation[287] of\nGod within Him, who by His manifold wisdom and miracles established\nJudaism first, and Christianity afterwards; and the assertion that\nrebellion, and the advantages attending it, were the originating causes\nof a doctrine which has converted and improved so many men was\neffectually refuted.\n\nFootnote 286:\n\n \u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 287:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XV.\n\n\nBut again, that it is not the fear of external enemies which strengthens\nour union, is plain from the fact that this cause, by God\u2019s will, has\nalready, for a considerable time, ceased to exist. And it is probable\nthat the secure existence, so far as regards the world, enjoyed by\nbelievers at present, will come to an end, since those who calumniate\nChristianity in every way are again attributing the present frequency of\nrebellion to the multitude of believers, and to their not being\npersecuted by the authorities as in old times. For we have learned from\nthe gospel neither to relax our efforts in days of peace, and to give\nourselves up to repose, nor, when the world makes war upon us, to become\ncowards, and apostatize from the love of the God of all things which is\nin Jesus Christ. And we clearly manifest the illustrious nature of our\norigin, and do not (as Celsus imagines) conceal it, when we impress upon\nthe minds of our first converts a contempt for idols, and images of all\nkinds, and, besides this, raise their thoughts from the worship of\ncreated things instead of God, and elevate them to the universal\nCreator; clearly showing Him to be the subject of prophecy, both from\nthe predictions regarding Him\u2014of which there are many\u2014and from those\ntraditions which have been carefully investigated by such as are able\nintelligently to understand the Gospels, and the declarations of the\napostles.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVI.\n\n\n\u201cBut what the legends are of every kind which we gather together, or the\nterrors which we invent,\u201d as Celsus without proof asserts, he who likes\nmay show. I know not, indeed, what he means by \u201cinventing terrors,\u201d\nunless it be our doctrine of God as Judge, and of the condemnation of\nmen for their deeds, with the various proofs derived partly from\nScripture, partly from probable reason. And yet\u2014for truth is\nprecious\u2014Celsus says, at the close, \u201cForbid that either I, or these, or\nany other individual should ever reject the doctrine respecting the\nfuture punishment of the wicked and the reward of the good!\u201d What\nterrors, then, if you except the doctrine of punishment, do we invent\nand impose upon mankind? And if he should reply that \u201cwe weave together\nerroneous opinions drawn from ancient sources, and trumpet them aloud,\nand sound them before men, as the priests of Cybele clash their cymbals\nin the ears of those who are being initiated in their mysteries;\u201d[288]\nwe shall ask him in reply, \u201cErroneous opinions from what ancient\nsources?\u201d For, whether he refers to Grecian accounts, which taught the\nexistence of courts of justice under the earth, or Jewish, which, among\nother things, predicted the life that follows the present one; he will\nbe unable to show that we who, striving to believe on grounds of reason,\nregulate our lives in conformity with such doctrines, have failed\ncorrectly to ascertain the truth.[289]\n\nFootnote 288:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\u00b7 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n \u03ba\u03bf\u03c1\u03c5\u03b2\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03bf\u03bc\u03b2\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 289:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f04\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\n \u03b6\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b4\u03cc\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVII.\n\n\nHe wishes, indeed, to compare the articles of our faith to those of the\nEgyptians; \u201camong whom, as you approach their sacred edifices, are to be\nseen splendid enclosures, and groves, and large and beautiful\ngateways,[290] and wonderful temples, and magnificent tents around them,\nand ceremonies of worship full of superstition and mystery; but when you\nhave entered, and passed within, the object of worship is seen to be a\ncat, or an ape, or a crocodile, or a goat, or a dog!\u201d Now, what is the\nresemblance[291] between us and the splendours of Egyptian worship which\nare seen by those who draw near their temples? And where is the\nresemblance to those irrational animals which are worshipped within,\nafter you pass through the splendid gateways? Are our prophecies, and\nthe God of all things, and the injunctions against images, objects of\nreverence in the view of Celsus also, and Jesus Christ crucified, the\nanalogue to the worship of the irrational animal? But if he should\nassert this\u2014and I do not think that he will maintain anything else\u2014we\nshall reply that we have spoken in the preceding pages at greater length\nin defence of those charges affecting Jesus, showing that what appeared\nto have happened to Him in the capacity of His human nature, was fraught\nwith benefit to all men, and with salvation to the whole world.\n\nFootnote 290:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03c5\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7.\n\nFootnote 291:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVIII.\n\n\nIn the next place, referring to the statements of the Egyptians, who\ntalk loftily about irrational animals, and who assert that they are a\nsort of symbols of God, or anything else which their prophets, so\ntermed, are accustomed to call them, Celsus says that \u201can impression is\nproduced in the minds of those who have learned these things; that they\nhave not been initiated in vain;\u201d[292] while with regard to the truths\nwhich are taught in our writings to those who have made progress in the\nstudy of Christianity (through that which is called by Paul the gift\nconsisting in the \u201cword of wisdom\u201d through the Spirit, and in the \u201cword\nof knowledge\u201d according to the Spirit), Celsus does not seem even to\nhave formed an idea,[293] judging not only from what he has already\nsaid, but from what he subsequently adds in his attack upon the\nChristian system, when he asserts that Christians \u201crepel every wise man\nfrom the doctrine of their faith, and invite only the ignorant and the\nvulgar;\u201d on which assertions we shall remark in due time, when we come\nto the proper place.\n\nFootnote 292:\n\n \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\n \u03bc\u03b5\u03bc\u03cd\u03b7\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 293:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIX.\n\n\nHe says, indeed, that \u201cwe ridicule the Egyptians, although they present\nmany by no means contemptible mysteries[294] for our consideration, when\nthey teach us that such rites are acts of worship offered to eternal\nideas, and not, as the multitude think, to ephemeral animals; and that\nwe are silly, because we introduce nothing nobler than the goats and\ndogs of the Egyptian worship in our narratives about Jesus.\u201d Now to this\nwe reply, \u201cGood sir,[295] [suppose that] you are right in eulogizing the\nfact that the Egyptians present to view many by no means contemptible\nmysteries, and obscure explanations about the animals [worshipped] among\nthem, you nevertheless do not act consistently in accusing us as if you\nbelieved that _we_ had nothing to state which was worthy of\nconsideration, but that all _our_ doctrines were contemptible and of no\naccount, seeing we unfold[296] the narratives concerning Jesus according\nto the \u2018wisdom of the word\u2019 to those who are \u2018perfect\u2019 in Christianity.\nRegarding whom, as being competent to understand the wisdom that is in\nChristianity, Paul says: \u2018We speak wisdom among them that are perfect;\nyet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, who\ncome to nought, but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the\nhidden wisdom which God ordained before the world unto our glory, which\nnone of the princes of this world knew.\u2019\u201d[297]\n\nFootnote 294:\n\n \u03b1\u1f30\u03bd\u03af\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 295:\n\n \u1f66 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b5.\n\nFootnote 296:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03be\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 297:\n\n 1 Cor. ii. 6-8.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XX.\n\n\nAnd we say to those who hold similar opinions to those of Celsus: \u201cPaul\nthen, we are to suppose, had before his mind the idea of no pre-eminent\nwisdom when he professed to speak wisdom among them that are perfect?\u201d\nNow, as he spoke with his customary boldness when in making such a\nprofession he said that _he_ was possessed of no wisdom, we shall say in\nreply: first of all examine the epistles of him who utters these words,\nand look carefully at the meaning of each expression in them\u2014say, in\nthose to the Ephesians, and Colossians, and Thessalonians, and\nPhilippians, and Romans,\u2014and show two things, both that you understand\nPaul\u2019s words, and that you can demonstrate any of them to be silly or\nfoolish. For if any one give himself to their attentive perusal, I am\nwell assured either that he will be amazed at the understanding of the\nman who can clothe great ideas in common language; or if he be not\namazed, he will only exhibit himself in a ridiculous light, whether he\nsimply state the meaning of the writer as if he had comprehended it, or\ntry to controvert and confute what he only imagined that he understood!\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXI.\n\n\nAnd I have not yet spoken of the observance[298] of all that is written\nin the Gospels, each one of which contains much doctrine difficult to be\nunderstood, not merely by the multitude, but even by certain of the more\nintelligent, including a very profound explanation of the parables which\nJesus delivered to \u201cthose without,\u201d while reserving the exhibition of\ntheir full meaning[299] for those who had passed beyond the stage of\nexoteric teaching, and who came to Him privately in the house. And when\nhe comes to understand it, he will admire the reason why some are said\nto be \u201cwithout,\u201d and others \u201cin the house.\u201d And again, who would not be\nfilled with astonishment that is able to comprehend the movements[300]\nof Jesus; ascending at one time a mountain for the purpose of delivering\ncertain discourses, or of performing certain miracles, or for His own\ntransfiguration, and descending again to heal the sick and those who\nwere unable to follow Him whither His disciples went? But it is not the\nappropriate time to describe at present the truly venerable and divine\ncontents of the Gospels, or the mind of Christ\u2014that is, the wisdom and\nthe word\u2014contained in the writings of Paul. But what we have said is\nsufficient by way of answer to the unphilosophic sneers[301] of Celsus,\nin comparing the inner mysteries of the church of God to the cats, and\napes, and crocodiles, and goats, and dogs of Egypt.\n\nFootnote 298:\n\n \u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 299:\n\n \u03c3\u03b1\u03c6\u03ae\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 300:\n\n \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 301:\n\n \u1f00\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c7\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b7\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXII.\n\n\nBut this low jester[302] Celsus, omitting no species of mockery and\nridicule which can be employed against us, mentions in his treatise the\nDioscuri, and Hercules, and \u00c6sculapius, and Dionysus, who are believed\nby the Greeks to have become gods after being men, and says that \u201cwe\ncannot bear to call such beings gods, because they were at first\nmen,[303] and yet they manifested many noble qualities, which were\ndisplayed for the benefit of mankind, while we assert that Jesus was\nseen after His death by His own followers;\u201d and he brings against us an\nadditional charge, as if we said that \u201cHe was seen indeed, but was only\na shadow!\u201d Now to this we reply, that it was very artful of Celsus not\nhere clearly to indicate that he did not regard these beings as gods,\nfor he was afraid of the opinion of those who might peruse his treatise,\nand who might suppose him to be an atheist; whereas, if he had paid\nrespect to what appeared to him to be the truth, he would not have\n_feigned_ to regard them as gods.[304] Now to either of the allegations\nwe are ready with an answer. Let us, accordingly, to those who do _not_\nregard them as gods reply as follows: These beings, then, are not gods\nat all; but agreeably to the view of those who think that the soul of\nman perishes immediately [after death], the souls of these men also\nperished; or according to the opinion of those who say that the soul\ncontinues to subsist or is immortal, these men continue to exist or are\nimmortal, and they are not gods but heroes,\u2014or not even heroes, but\nsimply souls. If, then, on the one hand, you suppose them _not_ to\nexist, we shall have to prove the doctrine of the soul\u2019s immortality,\nwhich is to us a doctrine of pre-eminent importance;[305] if, on the\nother, they _do_ exist, we have _still_ to prove[306] the doctrine of\nimmortality, not only by what the Greeks have so well said regarding it,\nbut also in a manner agreeable to the teaching of Holy Scripture. And we\nshall demonstrate that it is impossible for those who were polytheists\nduring their lives to obtain a better country and position after their\ndeparture from this world, by quoting the histories that are related of\nthem, in which is recorded the great dissoluteness of Hercules, and his\neffeminate bondage with Omphale, together with the statements regarding\n\u00c6sculapius, that their Zeus struck him dead by a thunderbolt. And of the\nDioscuri, it will be said that they die often\u2014\n\n \u201cAt one time live on alternate days, and at another\n Die, and obtain honour equally with the gods.\u201d[307]\n\nHow, then, can they reasonably imagine that one of these is to be\nregarded as a god or a hero?\n\nFootnote 302:\n\n \u03b2\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 303:\n\n The reading in the text is \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9, for which Bohereau proposes \u03c4\u1f78\n \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, which we have adopted in the translation.\n\nFootnote 304:\n\n We have followed in the translation the emendation of Guietus, who\n proposed \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f00\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03b2\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f04\u03bd,\n \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb., instead of the textual reading, \u03b5\u1f34 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03b2\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f04\u03bd, \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb.\n\nFootnote 305:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 306:\n\n Bohereau conjectures, with great probability, that instead of\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03ad\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd, we ought to read \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 307:\n\n Cf. Hom. _Odyss._ xi. 303 and 304.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIII.\n\n\nBut we, in proving the facts related of our Jesus from the prophetic\nScriptures, and comparing afterwards His history with them, demonstrate\nthat no dissoluteness on his part is recorded. For even they who\nconspired against Him, and who sought false witnesses to aid them, did\nnot find even any plausible grounds for advancing a false charge against\nHim, so as to accuse Him of licentiousness; but His death was indeed the\nresult of a conspiracy, and bore no resemblance to the death of\n\u00c6sculapius by lightning. And what is there that is venerable in the\nmadman Dionysus, and his female garments, that _he_ should be worshipped\nas a god? And if they who would defend such beings betake themselves to\nallegorical interpretations, we must examine each individual instance,\nand ascertain whether it is well founded,[308] and also in each\nparticular case, whether those beings can have a real existence, and are\ndeserving of respect and worship who were torn by the Titans, and cast\ndown from their heavenly throne. Whereas our Jesus, who appeared to the\nmembers of His own troop[309]\u2014for I will take the word that Celsus\nemploys\u2014did _really_ appear, and Celsus makes a false accusation against\nthe gospel in saying that what appeared was a shadow. And let the\nstatements of their histories and that of Jesus be carefully compared\ntogether. Will Celsus have the former to be true, but the latter,\nalthough recorded by eye-witnesses who showed by their acts that they\nclearly understood the nature of what they had seen, and who manifested\ntheir state of mind by what they cheerfully underwent for the sake of\nHis gospel, to be inventions? Now, who is there that, desiring to act\nalways in conformity with right reason, would yield his assent at\nrandom[310] to what is related of the one, but would rush to the history\nof Jesus, and without examination refuse to believe what is recorded of\nHim?[311]\n\nFootnote 308:\n\n \u03b5\u1f30 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f51\u03b3\u03b9\u1f72\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 309:\n\n \u03b8\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 310:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 311:\n\n \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f41\u03c1\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIV.\n\n\nAnd again, when it is said of \u00c6sculapius that a great multitude both of\nGreeks and barbarians acknowledge that they have frequently seen, and\nstill see, no mere phantom, but \u00c6sculapius himself, healing and doing\ngood, and foretelling the future; Celsus requires us to believe this,\nand finds no fault with the believers in Jesus, when we express our\nbelief in such stories, but when we give our assent to the disciples,\nand eye-witnesses of the miracles of Jesus, who clearly manifest the\nhonesty of their convictions (because we see their guilelessness, as far\nas it is possible to see the conscience revealed in writing), we are\ncalled by him a set of \u201csilly\u201d individuals, although he cannot\ndemonstrate that an incalculable[312] number, as he asserts, of Greeks\nand barbarians acknowledge the existence of \u00c6sculapius; while we, if we\ndeem this a matter of importance, can clearly show a countless multitude\nof Greeks and barbarians who acknowledge the existence of Jesus. And\nsome give evidence of their having received through this faith a\nmarvellous power by the cures which they perform, invoking no other name\nover those who need their help than that of the God of all things, and\nof Jesus, along with a mention of His history. For by these means we too\nhave seen many persons freed from grievous calamities, and from\ndistractions of mind,[313] and madness, and countless other ills, which\ncould be cured neither by men nor devils.\n\nFootnote 312:\n\n \u1f00\u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 313:\n\n \u1f10\u03ba\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXV.\n\n\nNow, in order to grant that there did exist a healing spirit named\n\u00c6sculapius, who used to cure the bodies of men, I would say to those who\nare astonished at such an occurrence, or at the prophetic knowledge of\nApollo, that since the cure of bodies is a thing indifferent,[314] and a\nmatter within the reach not merely of the good,[315] but also of the\nbad; and as the foreknowledge of the future is also a thing\nindifferent\u2014for the possessor of foreknowledge does not necessarily\nmanifest the possession of virtue\u2014you must show that they who practise\nhealing or who foretell the future are in no respect wicked, but exhibit\na perfect pattern of virtue, and are not far from being regarded as\ngods. But they will _not_ be able to show that they are virtuous who\npractise the art of healing, or who are gifted with foreknowledge,\nseeing many who are not fit to live are related to have been healed; and\nthese, too, persons whom, as leading improper lives, no wise physician\nwould wish to heal. And in the responses of the Pythian oracle also you\nmay find some injunctions which are not in accordance with reason, two\nof which we will adduce on the present occasion; viz. when it gave\ncommandment that Cleomedes[316]\u2014the boxer, I suppose\u2014should be honoured\nwith divine honours, seeing some great importance or other attaching to\nhis pugilistic skill, but did not confer either upon Pythagoras or upon\nSocrates the honours which it awarded to pugilism; and also when it\ncalled Archilochus \u201cthe servant of the Muses\u201d\u2014a man who employed his\npoetic powers upon topics of the most wicked and licentious nature, and\nwhose public character was dissolute and impure\u2014and entitled him\n\u201cpious,\u201d[317] in respect of his being the servant of the Muses, who are\ndeemed to be goddesses! Now I am inclined to think that no one would\nassert that he was a \u201cpious\u201d man who was not adorned with all moderation\nand virtue, or that a decorous[318] man would utter such expressions as\nare contained in the unseemly[319] iambics of Archilochus. And if\nnothing that is divine in itself is shown to belong either to the\nhealing skill of \u00c6sculapius or the prophetic power of Apollo, how could\nany one, even were I to grant that the facts are as alleged, reasonably\nworship them as pure divinities?\u2014and especially when the prophetic\nspirit of Apollo, pure from any body of earth, secretly enters through\nthe private parts the person of her who is called the priestess, as she\nis seated at the mouth of the Pythian cave![320] Whereas regarding Jesus\nand His power we have no such notion; for the body which was born of the\nVirgin was composed of human material, and capable of receiving human\nwounds and death.\n\nFootnote 314:\n\n \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 315:\n\n \u1f00\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 316:\n\n Cf. Smith\u2019s _Dict. of Biograph._ _s.v._\n\nFootnote 317:\n\n \u03b5\u1f50\u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u1fc6.\n\nFootnote 318:\n\n \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 319:\n\n \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u1f76.\n\nFootnote 320:\n\n \u1f45\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a0\u03c5\u03b8\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1fc3 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1fc3 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03ae\u03c4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\n \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03ad\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f41 \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f78\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03b3\u03b7\u0390\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2. Boherellus conjectures \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVI.\n\n\nLet us see what Celsus says next, when he adduces from history\nmarvellous occurrences, which in themselves seem to be incredible, but\nwhich are not discredited by him, so far at least as appears from his\nwords. And, in the first place, regarding Aristeas of Proconnesus, of\nwhom he speaks as follows: \u201cThen, with respect to Aristeas of\nProconnesus, who disappeared from among men in a manner so indicative of\ndivine intervention,[321] and who showed himself again in so\nunmistakeable a fashion, and on many subsequent occasions visited many\nparts of the world, and announced marvellous events, and whom Apollo\nenjoined the inhabitants of Metapontium to regard as a god, no one\nconsiders him to be a god.\u201d This account he appears to have taken from\nPindar and Herodotus. It will be sufficient, however, at present to\nquote the statement of the latter writer from the fourth book of his\nhistories, which is to the following effect: \u201cOf what country Aristeas,\nwho made these verses, was, has already been mentioned, and I shall now\nrelate the account I heard of him in Proconnesus and Cyzicus. They say\nthat Aristeas, who was inferior to none of the citizens by birth,\nentering into a fuller\u2019s shop in Proconnesus, died suddenly, and that\nthe fuller, having closed his workshop, went to acquaint the relatives\nof the deceased. When the report had spread through the city that\nAristeas was dead, a certain Cyzicenian, arriving from Artace, fell into\na dispute with those who made the report, affirming that he had met and\nconversed with him on his way to Cyzicus, and he vehemently disputed the\ntruth of the report; but the relations of the deceased went to the\nfuller\u2019s shop, taking with them what was necessary for the purpose of\ncarrying the body away; but when the house was opened, Aristeas was not\nto be seen, either dead or alive. They say that afterwards, in the\nseventh year, he appeared in Proconnesus, composed those verses which by\nthe Greeks are now called Arimaspian, and having composed them,\ndisappeared a second time. Such is the story current in these cities.\nBut these things I know happened to the Metapontines in Italy 340 years\nafter the second disappearance of Aristeas, as I discovered by\ncomputation in Proconnesus and Metapontium. The Metapontines say that\nAristeas himself, having appeared in their country, exhorted them to\nerect an altar to Apollo, and to place near it a statue bearing the name\nof Aristeas the Proconnesian; for he said that Apollo had visited their\ncountry only of all the Italians, and that he himself, who was now\nAristeas, accompanied him; and that when he accompanied the god he was a\ncrow; and after saying this he vanished. And the Metapontines say they\nsent to Delphi to inquire of the god what the apparition of the man\nmeant; but the Pythian bade them obey the apparition, and if they obeyed\nit would conduce to their benefit. They accordingly, having received\nthis answer, fulfilled the injunctions. And now, a statue bearing the\nname of Aristeas is placed near the image of Apollo, and around it\nlaurels are planted: the image is placed in the public square. Thus much\nconcerning Aristeas.\u201d[322]\n\nFootnote 321:\n\n \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 322:\n\n Herod. book iv. chap. 14 and 15 (Cary\u2019s transl.).\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVII.\n\n\nNow, in answer to this account of Aristeas, we have to say, that if\nCelsus had adduced it as history, without signifying his own assent to\nits truth, it is in a different way that we should have met his\nargument. But since he asserts that he \u201cdisappeared through the\nintervention of the divinity,\u201d and \u201cshowed himself again in an\nunmistakeable manner,\u201d and \u201cvisited many parts of the world,\u201d and \u201cmade\nmarvellous announcements;\u201d and, moreover, that there was \u201can oracle of\nApollo, enjoining the Metapontines to treat Aristeas as a god,\u201d he gives\nthe accounts relating to him as upon his own authority, and with his\nfull assent. And [this being the case], we ask, How is it possible that,\nwhile supposing the marvels related by the disciples of Jesus regarding\ntheir Master to be wholly fictitious, and finding fault with those who\nbelieve them, you, O Celsus, do not regard these stories of yours to be\neither products of jugglery[323] or inventions? And how,[324] while\ncharging others with an irrational belief in the marvels recorded of\nJesus, can you show yourself justified in giving credence to such\nstatements as the above, without producing some proof or evidence of the\nalleged occurrences having taken place? Or do Herodotus and Pindar\nappear to you to speak the truth, while they who have made it their\nconcern to _die_ for the doctrine of Jesus, and who have left to their\nsuccessors writings so remarkable on the truths which they believed,\nentered upon a struggle for the sake of \u201cfictions\u201d (as you consider\nthem), and \u201cmyths,\u201d and \u201cjuggleries,\u201d which entails a life of danger and\na death of violence? Place yourself, then, as a neutral party, between\nwhat is related of Aristeas and what is recorded of Jesus, and see\nwhether, from the result, and from the benefits which have accrued to\nthe reformation of morals, and to the worship of the God who is over all\nthings, it is not allowable to conclude that we must believe the events\nrecorded of Jesus not to have happened without the divine intervention,\nbut that this was not the case with the story of Aristeas the\nProconnesian.\n\nFootnote 323:\n\n \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 324:\n\n Guietus conjectures, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2, \u1f66 \u03bb\u1ff7\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVIII.\n\n\nFor with what purpose in view did Providence accomplish the marvels\nrelated of Aristeas? And to confer what benefit upon the human race did\nsuch remarkable events, as you regard them, take place? You cannot\nanswer. But we, when we relate the events of the history of Jesus, have\nno ordinary defence to offer for their occurrence;\u2014this, viz., that God\ndesired to commend the doctrine of Jesus as a doctrine which was to save\nmankind, and which was based, indeed, upon the apostles as foundations\nof the rising[325] edifice of Christianity, but which increased in\nmagnitude also in the succeeding ages, in which not a few cures are\nwrought in the name of Jesus, and certain other manifestations of no\nsmall moment have taken place. Now what sort of person is Apollo, who\nenjoined the Metapontines to treat Aristeas as a god? And with what\nobject does he do this? And what advantage was he procuring to the\nMetapontines from this divine worship, if they were to regard him as a\ngod, who a little ago was a mortal? And yet the recommendations of\nApollo (viewed by us as a demon who has obtained the honour of libation\nand sacrificial odours[326]) regarding this Aristeas appear to you to be\nworthy of consideration; while those of the God of all things, and of\nHis holy angels, made known beforehand through the prophets\u2014not _after_\nthe birth of Jesus, but _before_ He appeared among men\u2014do not stir you\nup to admiration, not merely of the prophets who received the Divine\nSpirit, but of Him also who was the object of their predictions, whose\nentrance into life was so clearly predicted many years beforehand by\nnumerous prophets, that the whole Jewish people who were hanging in\nexpectation of the coming of Him who was looked for, did, after the\nadvent of Jesus, fall into a keen dispute with each other; and that a\ngreat multitude of them acknowledged Christ, and believed Him to be the\nobject of prophecy, while others did not believe in Him, but, despising\nthe meekness of those who, on account of the teaching of Jesus, were\nunwilling to cause even the most trifling sedition, dared to inflict on\nJesus those cruelties which His disciples have so truthfully and\ncandidly recorded, without secretly omitting from their marvellous\nhistory of Him what seems to the multitude to bring disgrace upon the\ndoctrine of Christianity. But both Jesus Himself and His disciples\ndesired that His followers should believe not merely in His Godhead and\nmiracles, as if He had not also been a partaker of human nature, and had\nassumed the human flesh which \u201clusteth against the Spirit;\u201d[327] but\nthey saw also that the power which had descended into human nature, and\ninto the midst of human miseries, and which had assumed a human soul and\nbody, contributed through faith, along with its divine elements, to the\nsalvation of believers,[328] when they see that from Him there began the\nunion of the divine with the human nature, in order that the human, by\ncommunion with the divine, might rise to be divine, not in Jesus alone,\nbut in all those who not only believe, but[329] enter upon the life\nwhich Jesus taught, and which elevates to friendship with God and\ncommunion with Him every one who lives according to the precepts of\nJesus.\n\nFootnote 325:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03bc\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 326:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u2019 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03b2\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5.\n\nFootnote 327:\n\n \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03bd\u1fc3 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u2019 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03ac\u03c1\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 328:\n\n \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f11\u03ce\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\n \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 329:\n\n \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd. Others read, \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIX.\n\n\nAccording to Celsus, then, Apollo wished the Metapontines to treat\nAristeas as a god. But as the Metapontines considered the evidence in\nfavour of Aristeas being a man\u2014and probably not a virtuous one\u2014to be\nstronger than the declaration of the oracle to the effect that he was a\ngod or worthy of divine honours, they for that reason would not obey\nApollo, and consequently no one regarded Aristeas as a god. But with\nrespect to Jesus we would say that, as it was of advantage to the human\nrace to accept him as the Son of God\u2014God come in a human soul and\nbody\u2014and as this did not seem to be advantageous to the gluttonous\nappetites[330] of the demons which love bodies, and to those who deem\nthem to be gods on that account, the demons that are on earth (which are\nsupposed to be gods by those who are not instructed in the nature of\ndemons), and also their worshippers, were desirous to prevent the spread\nof the doctrine of Jesus; for they saw that the libations and odours in\nwhich they greedily delighted were being swept away by the prevalence of\nthe instructions of Jesus. But the God who sent Jesus dissipated all the\nconspiracies of the demons, and made the gospel of Jesus to prevail\nthroughout the whole world for the conversion and reformation of men,\nand caused churches to be everywhere established in opposition to those\nof superstitious and licentious and wicked men; for such is the\ncharacter of the multitudes who constitute the citizens[331] in the\nassemblies of the various cities. Whereas the churches of God which are\ninstructed by Christ, when carefully contrasted with the assemblies of\nthe districts in which they are situated, are as beacons[332] in the\nworld; for who would not admit that even the inferior members of the\nchurch, and those who in comparison with the better are less worthy, are\nnevertheless more excellent than many of those who belong to the\nassemblies in the different districts?\n\nFootnote 330:\n\n \u03bb\u03b9\u03c7\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3.\n\nFootnote 331:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd\n \u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7.\n\nFootnote 332:\n\n \u03c6\u03c9\u03c3\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXX.\n\n\nFor the church[333] of God, _e.g._ which is at Athens, is a meek and\nstable body, as being one which desires to please God, who is over all\nthings; whereas the assembly[334] of the Athenians is given to sedition,\nand is not at all to be compared to the church of God in that city. And\nyou may say the same thing of the church of God at Corinth, and of the\nassembly of the Corinthian people; and also of the church of God at\nAlexandria, and of the assembly of the people of Alexandria. And if he\nwho hears this be a candid man, and one who investigates things with a\ndesire to ascertain the truth, he will be filled with admiration of Him\nwho not only conceived the design, but also was able to secure in all\nplaces the establishment of churches of God alongside[335] of the\nassemblies of the people in each city. In like manner, also, in\ncomparing the council[336] of the church of God with the council in any\ncity, you would find that certain councillors[337] of the church are\nworthy to rule in the city of God, if there be any such city in the\nwhole world;[338] whereas the councillors in all other places exhibit in\ntheir characters no quality worthy of the conventional[339] superiority\nwhich they appear to enjoy over their fellow-citizens. And so, too, you\nmust compare the ruler of the _church_ in each city with the ruler of\nthe _people_ of the city, in order to observe that even amongst those\ncouncillors and rulers of the church of God who come very far short of\ntheir duty, and who lead more indolent lives than others who are more\nenergetic, it is nevertheless possible to discover a general superiority\nin what relates to the progress of virtue over the characters of the\ncouncillors and rulers in the various cities.[340]\n\nFootnote 333:\n\n \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 334:\n\n \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 335:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 336:\n\n \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 337:\n\n \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76.\n\nFootnote 338:\n\n \u03b5\u1f55\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03af \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f34 \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\n \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, \u1f10\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. Boherellus\n conjectures \u03b5\u1f55\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f72\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd, \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb.\n\nFootnote 339:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 340:\n\n \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c3\u03c6\u03cc\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1fe5\u03b1\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c9\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd\n \u1f27\u03c4\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f51\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u1fc7, \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f24\u03b8\u03b7 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n Boherellus conjectures \u1fe5\u03b1\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXI.\n\n\nNow if these things be so, why should it not be consistent with reason\nto hold with regard to Jesus, who was able to effect results so great,\nthat there dwelt in _Him_ no ordinary divinity? while this was not the\ncase either with the Proconnesian Aristeas (although Apollo would have\nhim regarded as a god), or with the other individuals enumerated by\nCelsus when he says, \u201cNo one regards Abaris the Hyperborean as a god,\nwho was possessed of such power as to be borne along like an arrow from\na bow.\u201d[341] For with what object did the deity who bestowed upon this\nHyperborean Abaris the power of being carried along like an arrow,\nconfer upon him such a gift? Was it that the human race might be\nbenefited thereby,[342] or did he himself obtain any advantage from the\npossession of such a power?\u2014always supposing it to be conceded that\nthese statements are not wholly inventions, but that the thing actually\nhappened through the co-operation of some demon. But if it be recorded\nthat my Jesus was received up into glory,[343] I perceive the divine\narrangement[344] in such an act, viz. because God, who brought this to\npass, commends in this way the Teacher to those who witnessed it, in\norder that as men who are contending not for human doctrine, but for\ndivine teaching, they may devote themselves as far as possible to the\nGod who is over all, and may do all things in order to please Him, as\nthose who are to receive in the divine judgment the reward of the good\nor evil which they have wrought in this life.\n\nFootnote 341:\n\n \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f40\u03ca\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b2\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. Spencer and Bohereau would delete \u03b2\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\n as a gloss.\n\nFootnote 342:\n\n Guietus would insert \u1f24 before \u1f35\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f76 \u1f60\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1fc7. This emendation is\n adopted in the translation.\n\nFootnote 343:\n\n Cf. 1 Tim. iii. 16.\n\nFootnote 344:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXII.\n\n\nBut as Celsus next mentions the case of the Clazomenian, subjoining to\nthe story about him this remark, \u201cDo they not report that his soul\nfrequently quitted his body, and flitted about in an incorporeal form?\nand yet men did not regard him as a god,\u201d we have to answer that\nprobably certain wicked demons contrived that such statements should be\ncommitted to writing (for I do not believe that they contrived that such\na thing should actually _take place_), in order that the predictions\nregarding Jesus, and the discourses uttered by Him, might either be evil\nspoken of, as inventions like these, or might excite no surprise, as not\nbeing more remarkable than other occurrences. But my Jesus said\nregarding His own soul (which was separated from the body, not by virtue\nof any human necessity, but by the miraculous power which was given Him\nalso for this purpose): \u201cNo one taketh my life from me, but I lay it\ndown of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it\nagain.\u201d[345] For as He had power to lay it down, He laid it down when He\nsaid, \u201cFather, why hast Thou forsaken me? And when He had cried with a\nloud voice, He gave up the ghost,\u201d[346] anticipating the public\nexecutioners of the crucified, who break the legs of the victims, and\nwho do so in order that their punishment may not be further prolonged.\nAnd He \u201ctook His life,\u201d when He manifested Himself to His disciples,\nhaving in their presence foretold to the unbelieving Jews, \u201cDestroy this\ntemple, and in three days I will raise it up again,\u201d[347] and \u201cHe spake\nthis of the temple of His body;\u201d the prophets, moreover, having\npredicted such a result in many other passages of their writings, and in\nthis, \u201cMy flesh also shall rest in hope: for Thou wilt not leave my soul\nin hell, neither wilt Thou suffer thine holy One to see\ncorruption.\u201d[348]\n\nFootnote 345:\n\n Cf. John x. 18.\n\nFootnote 346:\n\n Cf. Matt. xxvii. 46-50.\n\nFootnote 347:\n\n Cf. John ii. 19.\n\nFootnote 348:\n\n Ps. xvi. 9, 10.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIII.\n\n\nCelsus, however, shows that he has read a good many Grecian histories,\nwhen he quotes further what is told of Cleomedes of Astypalea, \u201cwho,\u201d he\nrelates, \u201centered into an ark, and although shut up within it, was not\nfound therein, but through some arrangement of the divinity, flew out,\nwhen certain persons had cut open the ark in order to apprehend him.\u201d\nNow this story, if an invention, as it appears to be, cannot be compared\nwith what is related of Jesus, since in the lives of such men there is\nfound no indication of their possessing the divinity which is ascribed\nto them; whereas the divinity of Jesus is established both by the\nexistence of the churches of the saved,[349] and by the prophecies\nuttered concerning Him, and by the cures wrought in His name, and by the\nwisdom and knowledge which are in Him, and the deeper truths which are\ndiscovered by those who know how to ascend from a simple faith, and to\ninvestigate the meaning which lies in the divine Scriptures, agreeably\nto the injunctions of Jesus, who said, \u201cSearch the Scriptures,\u201d[350] and\nto the wish of Paul, who taught that \u201cwe ought to know how to answer\nevery man;\u201d[351] nay, also of him who said, \u201cBe ready always to give an\nanswer to every man that asketh of you a reason of the faith[352] that\nis in you.\u201d[353] If he wishes to have it conceded, however, that it is\nnot a fiction, let him show with what object this supernatural power\nmade him, through some arrangement of the divinity, flee from the ark.\nFor if he will adduce any reason worthy of consideration, and point out\nany purpose worthy of God in conferring such a power on Cleomedes, we\nwill decide on the answer which we ought to give; but if he fail to say\nanything convincing on the point, clearly because no reason _can_ be\ndiscovered, then we shall either speak slightingly of the story to those\nwho have not accepted it, and charge it with being false, or we shall\nsay that some demoniac power, casting a glamour over the eyes, produced,\nin the case of the Astypalean, a result like that which is produced by\nthe performers of juggling tricks,[354] while Celsus thinks that with\nrespect to him he has spoken like an oracle, when he said that \u201cby some\ndivine arrangement he flew away from the ark.\u201d\n\nFootnote 349:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f60\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 350:\n\n John v. 39.\n\nFootnote 351:\n\n Cf. Col. iv. 6.\n\nFootnote 352:\n\n \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 353:\n\n 1 Pet. iii. 15.\n\nFootnote 354:\n\n \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7\n \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u1fb3 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u00b7 \u1f24 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c6\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b3\u03cc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f40\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n \u1f08\u03c3\u03c4\u03c5\u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03ad\u03b1. Spencer in his edition includes \u03bc\u1f74 in brackets, and\n renders, \u201cAut eos incusabimus, qui istam virtutem admiserint.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIV.\n\n\nI am, however, of opinion that these individuals are the only instances\nwith which Celsus was acquainted. And yet, that he might appear\nvoluntarily to pass by other similar cases, he says, \u201cAnd one might name\nmany others of the same kind.\u201d Let it be granted, then, that many such\npersons have existed who conferred no benefit upon the human race: what\nwould each one of their acts be found to amount to in comparison with\nthe work of Jesus, and the miracles related of Him, of which we have\nalready spoken at considerable length? He next imagines that, \u201cin\nworshipping him who,\u201d as _he_ says, \u201cwas taken prisoner and put to\ndeath, we are acting like the Get\u00e6 who worship Zamolxis, and the\nCilicians who worship Mopsus, and the Acarnanians who pay divine honours\nto Amphilochus, and like the Thebans who do the same to Amphiaraus, and\nthe Lebadians to Trophonius.\u201d Now in these instances we shall prove that\nhe has compared us to the foregoing without good grounds. For these\ndifferent tribes erected temples and statues to those individuals above\nenumerated, whereas we have refrained from offering to the divinity\nhonour by any such means (seeing they are adapted rather to demons,\nwhich are somehow fixed in a certain place which they prefer to any\nother, or which take up their dwelling, as it were, after being removed\n[from one place to another] by certain rites and incantations), and are\nlost in reverential wonder at Jesus, who has recalled our minds from all\nsensible things, as being not only corruptible, but destined to\ncorruption, and elevated them to honour the God who is over all with\nprayers and a righteous life, which we offer to Him as being\nintermediate between the nature of the uncreated and that of all created\nthings,[355] and who bestows upon us the benefits which come from the\nFather, and who as High Priest conveys our prayers to the supreme God.\n\nFootnote 355:\n\n \u03bf\u1f33\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03be\u1f7a \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2. \u201cHoeschel (itemque Spencerus ad marg.)\n suspicabatur legendum: \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03be\u1f7a \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2. Male. Nihil mutari necesse\n est. Agitur quippe de precibus, quas offerimus Deo \u2018per eum, qui\n veluti medius est inter increatam naturam et creatam.\u2019\u201d\u2014RU\u00c6US.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXV.\n\n\nBut I should like, in answer to him who for some unknown reason advances\nsuch statements as the above, to make in a conversational way[356] some\nsuch remarks as the following, which seem not inappropriate to him. Are\nthen those persons whom you have mentioned nonentities, and is there no\npower in Lebadea connected with Trophonius, nor in Thebes with the\ntemple of Amphiaraus, nor in Acarnania with Amphilochus, nor in Cilicia\nwith Mopsus? Or is there in such persons some being, either a demon, or\na hero, or even a god, working works which are beyond the reach of man?\nFor if he answer that there is nothing either demoniacal or divine about\nthese individuals more than others, then let him at once make known his\nown opinion, as being that of an Epicurean, and of one who does not hold\nthe same views with the Greeks, and who neither recognises demons nor\nworships gods as do the Greeks; and let it be shown that it was to no\npurpose that he adduced the instances previously enumerated (as if he\nbelieved them to be true), together with those which he adds in the\nfollowing pages. But if he will assert that the persons spoken of are\neither demons, or heroes, or even gods, let him notice that he will\nestablish by what he has admitted a result which he does not desire,\nviz. that Jesus also was some such being; for which reason, too, he was\nable to demonstrate to not a few that He had come down from God to visit\nthe human race. And if he once admit this, see whether he will not be\nforced to confess that He is mightier than those individuals with whom\nhe classed Him, seeing none of the latter forbids the offering of honour\nto the others; while He, having confidence in Himself, because He is\nmore powerful than all those others, forbids them to be received as\ndivine[357] because they are wicked demons, who have taken possession of\nplaces on earth, through inability to rise to the purer and diviner\nregion, whither the grossnesses of earth and its countless evils cannot\nreach.\n\nFootnote 356:\n\n \u1f00\u03b4\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 357:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c7\u1f70\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVI.\n\n\nBut as he next introduces the case of the favourite of Adrian (I refer\nto the accounts regarding the youth Antinous, and the honours paid him\nby the inhabitants of the city of Antinous in Egypt), and imagines that\nthe honour paid to him falls little short of that which we render to\nJesus, let us show in what a spirit of hostility this statement is made.\nFor what is there in common between a life lived among the favourites of\nAdrian, by one who did not abstain even from unnatural lusts, and that\nof the venerable Jesus, against whom even they who brought countless\nother charges, and who told so many falsehoods, were not able to allege\nthat He manifested, even in the slightest degree, any tendency to what\nwas licentious?[358] Nay, further, if one were to investigate, in a\nspirit of truth and impartiality, the stories relating to Antinous, he\nwould find that it was due to the magical arts and rites of the\nEgyptians that there was even the _appearance_ of his performing\nanything [marvellous] in the city which bears his name, and that too\nonly after his decease,\u2014an effect which is said to have been produced in\nother temples by the Egyptians, and those who are skilled in the arts\nwhich they practise. For they set up in certain places demons claiming\nprophetic or healing power, and which frequently torture those who seem\nto have committed any mistake about ordinary kinds of food, or about\ntouching the dead body of a man, that they may have the appearance of\nalarming the uneducated multitude. Of this nature is the being that is\nconsidered to be a god in Antinoopolis in Egypt, whose [reputed] virtues\nare the lying inventions of some who live by the gain derived\ntherefrom;[359] while others, deceived by the demon placed there, and\nothers again convicted by a weak conscience, actually think that they\nare paying a divine penalty inflicted by Antinous. Of such a nature also\nare the mysteries which they perform, and the seeming predictions which\nthey utter. Far different from such are those of Jesus. For it was no\ncompany of sorcerers, paying court to a king or ruler at his bidding,\nwho seemed to have made him a god; but the Architect of the universe\nHimself, in keeping with the marvellously persuasive power of His\nwords,[360] commended Him as worthy of honour, not only to those men who\nwere well disposed, but to demons also, and other unseen powers, which\neven at the present time show that they either fear the name of Jesus as\nthat of a being of superior power, or reverentially accept Him as their\nlegal ruler.[361] For if the commendation had not been given Him by God,\nthe demons would not have withdrawn from those whom they had assailed,\nin obedience to the mere mention of His name.\n\nFootnote 358:\n\n \u1f61\u03c2 \u03ba\u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u1f02\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u2019 \u1f40\u03bb\u03b9\u03b3\u1f78\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5;\n\nFootnote 359:\n\n \u03bf\u1f57 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c5\u03b2\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c8\u03b5\u03cd\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 360:\n\n \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03b8\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc7 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 361:\n\n \u1f61\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVII.\n\n\nThe Egyptians, then, having been taught to worship Antinous, will, if\nyou compare him with Apollo or Zeus, endure such a comparison, Antinous\nbeing magnified in their estimation through being classed with these\ndeities; for Celsus is clearly convicted of falsehood when he says,\n\u201cthat they will not endure his being compared with Apollo or Zeus.\u201d\nWhereas Christians (who have learned that their eternal life consists in\nknowing the only true God, who is over all, and Jesus Christ, whom He\nhas sent; and who have learned also that all the gods of the heathen are\ngreedy demons, which flit around sacrifices and blood, and other\nsacrificial accompaniments,[362] in order to deceive those who have not\ntaken refuge with the God who is over all, but that the divine and holy\nangels of God are of a different nature and will[363] from all the\ndemons on earth, and that they are known to those exceedingly few\npersons who have carefully and intelligently investigated these matters)\nwill not endure a comparison to be made between them and Apollo or Zeus,\nor any being worshipped with odours and blood and sacrifices; some of\nthem, so acting from their extreme simplicity, not being able to give a\nreason for their conduct, but sincerely observing the precepts which\nthey have received; others, again, for reasons not to be lightly\nregarded, nay, even of a profound description, and (as a Greek would\nsay) drawn from the inner nature of things;[364] and amongst the latter\nof these God is a frequent subject of conversation, and those who are\nhonoured by God, through His only-begotten Word, with participation in\nHis divinity, and therefore also in His name. They speak much, too, both\nregarding the angels of God and those who are opposed to the truth, but\nhave been deceived; and who, in consequence of being deceived, call them\ngods or angels of God, or good demons, or heroes who have become such by\nthe transference into them of a good human soul.[365] And such\nChristians will also show, that as in philosophy there are many who\nappear to be in possession of the truth, who have yet either deceived\nthemselves by plausible arguments, or by rashly assenting to what was\nbrought forward and discovered by others; so also, among those souls\nwhich exist apart from bodies, both angels and demons, there are some\nwhich have been induced by plausible reasons to declare themselves gods.\nAnd because it was impossible that the reasons of such things could be\ndiscovered by men with perfect exactness, it was deemed safe that no\nmortal should entrust himself to any being as to God, with the exception\nof Jesus Christ, who is, as it were, the Ruler over all things, and who\nboth beheld these weighty secrets, and made them known to a few.\n\nFootnote 362:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u1f70\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 363:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 364:\n\n \u1f10\u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 365:\n\n \u1f22 \u1f25\u03c1\u03c9\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVIII.\n\n\nThe belief, then, in Antinous, or any other such person, whether among\nthe Egyptians or the Greeks, is, so to speak, unfortunate; while the\nbelief in Jesus would seem to be either a fortunate one, or the result\nof thorough investigation, having the appearance of the former to the\nmultitude, and of the latter to exceedingly few.[366] And when I speak\nof a certain belief being, as the multitude would call it, unfortunate,\nI in such a case refer the cause to God, who knows the reasons of the\nvarious fates allotted to each one who enters human life. The Greeks,\nmoreover, will admit that even amongst those who are considered to be\nmost largely endowed with wisdom, good fortune has had much to do, as in\nthe choice of teachers of one kind rather than another, and in meeting\nwith a better class of instructors (there being teachers who taught the\nmost opposite doctrines), and in being brought up in better\ncircumstances; for the bringing up of many has been amid surroundings of\nsuch a kind, that they were prevented from ever receiving any idea of\nbetter things, but constantly passed their life, from their earliest\nyouth, either as the favourites of licentious men or of tyrants, or in\nsome other wretched condition which forbade the soul to look upwards.\nAnd the causes of these varied fortunes, according to all probability,\nare to be found in the reasons of providence, though it is not easy for\nmen to ascertain these; but I have said what I have done by way of\ndigression from the main body of my subject, on account of the proverb,\nthat \u201csuch is the power of faith, because it seizes that which first\npresents itself.\u201d[367] For it was necessary, owing to the different\nmethods of education, to speak of the differences of belief among men,\nsome of whom are more, others less fortunate in their belief; and from\nthis to proceed to show that what is termed good or bad fortune would\nappear to contribute, even in the case of the most talented, to their\nappearing to be more fully endowed with reason, and to give their assent\non grounds of reason to the majority of human opinions. But enough on\nthese points.\n\nFootnote 366:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f02\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03c2, \u1f22 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b5\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2\n \u1f10\u03be\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7, \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, \u03b2\u03b5\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72\n \u1f10\u03be\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c5 \u1f40\u03bb\u03b9\u03b3\u03c9\u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 367:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f41\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIX.\n\n\nWe must notice the remarks which Celsus next makes, when he says to us,\nthat \u201cfaith, having taken possession of our minds, makes us yield the\nassent which we give to the doctrine of Jesus;\u201d for of a truth it is\nfaith which does produce such an assent. Observe, however, whether that\nfaith does not of itself exhibit what is worthy of praise, seeing we\nentrust ourselves to the God who is over all, acknowledging our\ngratitude to Him who has led us to such a faith, and declaring that He\ncould not have attempted or accomplished such a result without the\ndivine assistance. And we have confidence also in the intentions of the\nwriters of the Gospels, observing their piety and conscientiousness,\nmanifested in their writings, which contain nothing that is spurious, or\ndeceptive,[368] or false, or cunning; for it is evident to us that souls\nunacquainted with those artifices which are taught by the cunning\nsophistry of the Greeks (which is characterized by great plausibility\nand acuteness), and by the kind of rhetoric in vogue in the courts of\njustice, would not have been able thus to invent occurrences which are\nfitted of themselves to conduct to faith, and to a life in keeping with\nfaith. And I am of opinion that it was on this account that Jesus wished\nto employ such persons as teachers of His doctrines, viz. that there\nmight be no ground for any suspicion of plausible sophistry, but that it\nmight clearly appear to all who were capable of understanding, that the\nguileless purpose of the writers being, so to speak, marked with great\nsimplicity, was deemed worthy of being accompanied by a diviner power,\nwhich accomplished far more than it seemed possible could be\naccomplished by a periphrasis of words, and a weaving of sentences,\naccompanied by all the distinctions of Grecian art.\n\nFootnote 368:\n\n \u03ba\u03c5\u03b2\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XL.\n\n\nBut observe whether the principles of our faith, harmonizing with the\ngeneral ideas implanted in our minds at birth, do not produce a change\nupon those who listen candidly to its statements; for although a\nperverted view of things, with the aid of much instruction to the same\neffect, has been able to implant in the minds of the multitude the\nbelief that images are gods, and that things made of gold, and silver,\nand ivory, and stone are deserving of worship, yet common sense[369]\nforbids the supposition that God is at all a piece of corruptible\nmatter, or is honoured when made to assume by men a form embodied in\ndead matter, fashioned according to some image or symbol of His\nappearance. And therefore we say at once of images that they are not\ngods, and of such creations (of art) that they are not to be compared\nwith the Creator, but are small in contrast with the God who is over\nall, and who created, and upholds, and governs the universe. And the\nrational soul recognising, as it were, its relationship [to the divine],\nat once rejects what it for a time supposed to be gods, and resumes its\nnatural love[370] for its Creator; and because of its affection towards\nHim, receives Him also who first presented these truths to all nations\nthrough the disciples whom He had appointed, and whom He sent forth,\nfurnished with divine power and authority, to proclaim the doctrine\nregarding God and His kingdom.\n\nFootnote 369:\n\n \u1f21 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1f74 \u1f14\u03bd\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 370:\n\n \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLI.\n\n\nBut since he has charged us, I know not how often already, \u201cwith\nregarding this Jesus, who was but a mortal body, as a God, and with\nsupposing that we act piously in so doing,\u201d it is superfluous to say any\nmore in answer to this, as a great deal has been said in the preceding\npages. And yet let those who make this charge understand that He whom we\nregard and believe to have been from the beginning God, and the Son of\nGod, is the very Logos, and the very Wisdom, and the very Truth; and\nwith respect to His mortal body, and the human soul which it contained,\nwe assert that not by their communion merely with Him, but by their\nunity and intermixture,[371] they received the highest powers, and after\nparticipating in His divinity, were changed into God. And if any one\nshould feel a difficulty at our saying this regarding His body, let him\nattend to what is said by the Greeks regarding matter, which, properly\nspeaking, being without qualities, receives such as the Creator desires\nto invest it with, and which frequently divests itself of those which it\nformerly possessed, and assumes others of a different and higher kind.\nAnd if these opinions be correct, what is there wonderful in this, that\nthe mortal quality of the body of Jesus, if the providence of God has so\nwilled it, should have been changed into one that was ethereal and\ndivine?\n\nFootnote 371:\n\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f11\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLII.\n\n\nCelsus, then, does not speak as a good reasoner,[372] when he compares\nthe mortal flesh of Jesus to gold, and silver, and stone, asserting that\nthe former is more liable to corruption than the latter. For, to speak\ncorrectly, that which is incorruptible is not more free from corruption\nthan another thing which is incorruptible, nor that which is corruptible\nmore liable to corruption than another corruptible thing. But, admitting\nthat there are degrees of corruptibility, we can say in answer, that if\nit is possible for the matter which underlies all qualities to exchange\nsome of them, how should it be impossible for the flesh of Jesus also to\nexchange qualities, and to become such as it was proper for a body to be\nwhich had its abode in the ether and the regions above it, and\npossessing no longer the infirmities belonging to the flesh, and those\nproperties which Celsus terms \u201cimpurities,\u201d and in so terming them,\nspeaks unlike a philosopher? For that which is properly impure, is so\nbecause of its wickedness. Now the nature of body is not impure; for in\nso far as it is bodily nature, it does not possess vice, which is the\ngenerative principle of impurity. But, as he had a suspicion of the\nanswer which we would return, he says with respect to the change of the\nbody of Jesus, \u201cWell, after he has laid aside these qualities, he will\nbe a God:\u201d [and if so], why not rather \u00c6sculapius, and Dionysus, and\nHercules? To which we reply, \u201cWhat great deed has \u00c6sculapius, or\nDionysus, or Hercules wrought?\u201d And what individuals will they be able\nto point out as having been improved in character, and made better by\ntheir words and lives, so that they may make good their claim to be\ngods? For let us peruse the many narratives regarding them, and see\nwhether they were free from licentiousness, or injustice, or folly, or\ncowardice. And if nothing of that kind be found in them, the argument of\nCelsus might have force, which places the forenamed individuals upon an\nequality with Jesus. But if it is certain that, although some things are\nreported of them as reputable, they are recorded, nevertheless, to have\ndone innumerable things which are contrary to right reason, how could\nyou any longer say, with any show of reason, that these men, on putting\naside their mortal body, became gods rather than Jesus?\n\nFootnote 372:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIII.\n\n\nHe next says of us, that \u201cwe ridicule those who worship Jupiter, because\nhis tomb is pointed out in the island of Crete; and yet we worship him\nwho rose from the tomb,[373] although ignorant of the grounds[374] on\nwhich the Cretans observe such a custom.\u201d Observe now that he thus\nundertakes the defence of the Cretans, and of Jupiter, and of his tomb,\nalluding obscurely to the allegorical notions, in conformity with which\nthe myth regarding Jupiter is said to have been invented; while he\nassails us who acknowledge that our Jesus has been buried, indeed, but\nwho maintain that He has also been _raised_ from the tomb,\u2014a statement\nwhich the Cretans have not yet made regarding Jupiter. But since he\nappears to admit that the tomb of Jupiter is in Crete, when he says that\n\u201cwe are ignorant of the grounds on which the Cretans observe such a\ncustom,\u201d we reply that Callimachus the Cyrenian, who had read\ninnumerable poetic compositions, and nearly the whole of Greek history,\nwas not acquainted with any allegorical meaning which was contained in\nthe stories about Jupiter and his tomb; and accordingly he accuses the\nCretans in his hymn addressed to Jupiter, in the words:[375]\n\n \u201cThe Cretans are always liars: for thy tomb, O king,\n The Cretans have reared; and yet thou didst not die,\n For thou ever livest.\u201d\n\nNow he who said, \u201cThou didst not die, for thou ever livest,\u201d in denying\nthat Jupiter\u2019s tomb was in Crete, records nevertheless that in Jupiter\nthere was the beginning of death.[376] But birth upon earth is the\nbeginning of death. And his words run:\n\n \u201cAnd Rhea bore thee among the Parrhasians;\u201d\u2014\n\nwhereas he ought to have seen, after denying that the birth of Jupiter\ntook place in Crete because of his tomb, that it was quite congruous\nwith his birth in Arcadia that he who was born should also die. And the\nfollowing is the manner in which Callimachus speaks of these things: \u201cO\nJupiter, some say that thou wert born on the mountains of Ida, others in\nArcadia. Which of them, O father, have lied? The Cretans are always\nliars,\u201d etc. Now it is Celsus who made us discuss these topics, by the\nunfair manner in which he deals with Jesus, in giving his assent to what\nis related about His death and burial, but regarding as an invention His\nresurrection from the dead, although this was not only foretold by\ninnumerable prophets, but many proofs also were given of His having\nappeared after death.\n\nFootnote 373:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 374:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u03b5\u1f30\u03b4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1f78.\n\nFootnote 375:\n\n Cf. Callimach. Hymn i. Cf. also Tit. i. 12.\n\nFootnote 376:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0394\u03af\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIV.\n\n\nAfter these points Celsus quotes some objections against the doctrine of\nJesus, made by a very few individuals who are considered Christians, not\nof the more intelligent, as he supposes, but of the more ignorant class,\nand asserts that \u201cthe following are the rules laid down by them. Let no\none come to us who has been instructed, or who is wise or prudent (for\nsuch qualifications are deemed evil by us); but if there be any\nignorant, or unintelligent, or uninstructed, or foolish persons, let\nthem come with confidence. By which words, acknowledging that such\nindividuals are worthy of their God, they manifestly show that they\ndesire and are able to gain over only the silly, and the mean, and the\nstupid, with women and children.\u201d In reply to which, we say that, as if,\nwhile Jesus teaches continence, and says, \u201cWhosoever looketh upon a\nwoman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his\nheart,\u201d one were to behold a few of those who are deemed to be\nChristians living licentiously, he would most justly blame them for\nliving contrary to the teaching of Jesus, but would act most\nunreasonably if he were to charge the gospel with their censurable\nconduct; so, if he found nevertheless that the doctrine of the\nChristians invites men to wisdom, the blame then must remain with those\nwho rest in their own ignorance, and who utter, not what Celsus relates\n(for although some of them are simple and ignorant, they do not speak so\nshamelessly as he alleges), but other things of much less serious\nimport, which, however, serve to turn aside men from the practice of\nwisdom.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLV.\n\n\nBut that the object of Christianity[377] is that we should become wise,\ncan be proved not only from the ancient Jewish writings, which _we_ also\nuse, but especially from those which were composed after the time of\nJesus, and which are believed among the churches to be divine. Now, in\nthe fiftieth Psalm, David is described as saying in his prayer to God\nthese words: \u201cThe unseen and secret things of Thy wisdom Thou hast\nmanifested to me.\u201d[378] Solomon, too, because he asked for wisdom,\nreceived it; and if any one were to peruse the Psalms, he would find the\nbook filled with many maxims of wisdom; and the evidences of his wisdom\nmay be seen in his treatises, which contain a great amount of wisdom\nexpressed in few words, and in which you will find many laudations of\nwisdom, and encouragements towards obtaining it. So wise, moreover, was\nSolomon, that \u201cthe queen of Sheba, having heard his name, and the name\nof the Lord, came to try him with difficult questions, and spake to him\nall things, whatsoever were in her heart; and Solomon answered her all\nher questions. There was no question omitted by the king which he did\nnot answer her. And the queen of Sheba saw all the wisdom of Solomon,\nand the possessions which he had,[379] and there was no more spirit in\nher.[380] And she said to the king, The report is true which I heard in\nmine own land regarding thee and thy wisdom; and I believed not them who\ntold me, until I had come, and mine eyes have seen it. And, lo, they did\nnot tell me the half. Thou hast added wisdom and possessions above all\nthe report which I heard.\u201d[381] It is recorded also of him, that \u201cGod\ngave Solomon wisdom and understanding exceeding much, and largeness of\nheart, even as the sand that is on the sea-shore. And the wisdom that\nwas in Solomon greatly excelled the wisdom of all the ancients, and of\nall the wise men of Egypt; and he was wiser than all men, even than\nGethan the Ezrahite, and Emad, and Chalcadi, and Aradab, the sons of\nMadi. And he was famous among all the nations round about. And Solomon\nspake three thousand proverbs, and his songs were five thousand. And he\nspake of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon even to the hyssop\nwhich springeth out of the wall; and also of fishes and of beasts. And\nall nations came to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and from all the kings\nof the earth who had heard of the fame of his wisdom.\u201d[382]\n\nAnd to such a degree does the gospel desire that there should be wise\nmen among believers, that for the sake of exercising the understanding\nof its hearers, it has spoken certain truths in enigmas, others in what\nare called \u201cdark\u201d sayings, others in parables, and others in\nproblems.[383] And one of the prophets\u2014Hosea\u2014says at the end of his\nprophecies: \u201cWho is wise, and he will understand these things? or\nprudent, and he shall know them?\u201d[384] Daniel, moreover, and his\nfellow-captives, made such progress in the learning which the wise men\naround the king in Babylon cultivated, that they were shown to excel all\nof them in a tenfold degree. And in the book of Ezekiel it is said to\nthe ruler of Tyre, who greatly prided himself on his wisdom, \u201cArt thou\nwiser than Daniel? Every secret was not revealed to thee.\u201d[385]\n\nFootnote 377:\n\n \u1f41 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 378:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f04\u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c6\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03b4\u03ae\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 379:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 380:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03be \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf.\n\nFootnote 381:\n\n Cf. 1 Kings x. 1-9.\n\nFootnote 382:\n\n Cf. 1 Kings iv. 29-34. The text reads, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n \u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2, for which \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 has been substituted.\n\nFootnote 383:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b2\u03bb\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 384:\n\n Hos. x. 9.\n\nFootnote 385:\n\n Cf. Ezek. xx. 3.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVI.\n\n\nAnd if you come to the books written after the time of Jesus, you will\nfind that those multitudes of believers who hear the parables are, as it\nwere, \u201cwithout,\u201d and worthy only of exoteric doctrines, while the\ndisciples learn in private the explanation of the parables. For,\nprivately, to His own disciples did Jesus open up all things, esteeming\nabove the multitudes those who desired to know His wisdom. And He\npromises to those who believe upon Him to send them wise men and\nscribes, saying, \u201cBehold, I will send unto you wise men and scribes, and\nsome of them they shall kill and crucify.\u201d[386] And Paul also, in the\ncatalogue of \u201cCharismata\u201d bestowed by God, placed first \u201cthe word of\nwisdom,\u201d and second, as being inferior to it, \u201cthe word of knowledge,\u201d\nbut third, and lower down, \u201cfaith.\u201d[387] And because he regarded \u201cthe\nword\u201d as higher than miraculous powers, he for that reason places\n\u201cworkings of miracles\u201d and \u201cgifts of healings\u201d in a lower place than the\ngifts of the word. And in the Acts of the Apostles Stephen bears witness\nto the great learning of Moses, which he had obtained wholly from\nancient writings not accessible to the multitude. For he says: \u201cAnd\nMoses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians.\u201d[388] And\ntherefore, with respect to his miracles, it was suspected that he\nwrought them perhaps, not in virtue of his professing to come from God,\nbut by means of his Egyptian knowledge, in which he was well versed. For\nthe king, entertaining such a suspicion, summoned the Egyptian\nmagicians, and wise men, and enchanters, who were found to be of no\navail as against the wisdom of Moses, which proved superior to all the\nwisdom of the Egyptians.\n\nFootnote 386:\n\n Cf. Matt. xxiii. 34.\n\nFootnote 387:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xii. 8.\n\nFootnote 388:\n\n Acts vii. 22.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVII.\n\n\nBut it is probable that what is written by Paul in the First Epistle to\nthe Corinthians,[389] as being addressed to Greeks who prided themselves\ngreatly on their Grecian wisdom, has moved some to believe that it was\nnot the object of the gospel to win wise men. Now, let him who is of\nthis opinion understand that the gospel, as censuring wicked men, says\nof them that they are wise not in things which relate to the\nunderstanding, and which are unseen and eternal; but that in busying\nthemselves about things of sense alone, and regarding these as\nall-important, they are wise men of the world: for as there are in\nexistence a multitude of opinions, some of them espousing the cause of\nmatter and bodies,[390] and asserting that everything is corporeal which\nhas a substantial existence,[391] and that besides these nothing else\nexists, whether it be called invisible or incorporeal, it says also that\nthese constitute the wisdom of the world, which perishes and fades away,\nand belongs only to this age, while those opinions which raise the soul\nfrom things here to the blessedness which is with God, and to His\nkingdom, and which teach men to despise all sensible and visible things\nas existing only for a season, and to hasten on to things invisible, and\nto have regard to those things which are not seen,\u2014these, it says,\nconstitute the wisdom of God. But Paul, as a lover of truth, says of\ncertain wise men among the Greeks, when their statements are true, that\n\u201calthough they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were\nthankful.\u201d[392] And he bears witness that they knew God, and says, too,\nthat this did not happen to them without divine permission, in these\nwords: \u201cFor God showed it unto them;\u201d[393] dimly alluding, I think, to\nthose who ascend from things of sense to those of the understanding,\nwhen he adds, \u201cFor the invisible things of God from the creation of the\nworld are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made,\neven His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:\nbecause that, when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither\nwere thankful.\u201d[394]\n\nFootnote 389:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. i. 18, etc.\n\nFootnote 390:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f51\u03bb\u1fc7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 391:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c6\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 392:\n\n Cf. Rom. i. 21.\n\nFootnote 393:\n\n Rom. i. 19.\n\nFootnote 394:\n\n Cf. Rom. i. 20-22.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVIII.\n\n\nAnd perhaps also from the words, \u201cFor ye see your calling, brethren, how\nthat not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble,\nare called: but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to\nconfound the wise; and the base things, and the things which are\ndespised, hath God chosen, and things which are not, to bring to nought\nthings that are, that no flesh may glory in His presence;\u201d[395] some\nhave been led to suppose that no one who is instructed, or wise, or\nprudent, embraces the gospel. Now, in answer to such an one, we would\nsay that it has not been stated that \u201c_no_ wise man according to the\nflesh,\u201d but that \u201cnot _many_ wise men according to the flesh,\u201d are\ncalled. It is manifest, further, that amongst the characteristic\nqualifications of those who are termed \u201cbishops,\u201d Paul, in describing\nwhat kind of man the bishop ought to be, lays down as a qualification\nthat he should also be a teacher, saying that he ought to be able to\nconvince the gainsayers, that by the wisdom which is in him he may stop\nthe mouths of foolish talkers and deceivers.[396] And as he selects for\nthe episcopate a man who has been once married[397] rather than he who\nhas twice entered the married state, and a man of blameless life rather\nthan one who is liable to censure, and a sober man rather than one who\nis not such, and a prudent man rather than one who is not prudent, and a\nman whose behaviour is decorous rather than he who is open to the charge\neven of the slightest indecorum, so he desires that he who is to be\nchosen by preference for the office of a bishop should be apt to teach,\nand able to convince the gainsayers. How then can Celsus justly charge\nus with saying, \u201cLet no one come to us who is \u2018instructed,\u2019 or \u2018wise,\u2019\nor \u2018prudent?\u2019\u201d Nay, let him who wills come to us \u201cinstructed,\u201d and\n\u201cwise,\u201d and \u201cprudent;\u201d and none the less, if any one be ignorant and\nunintelligent, and uninstructed and foolish, let him also come: for it\nis these whom the gospel promises to cure, when they come, by rendering\nthem all worthy of God.\n\nFootnote 395:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. i. 26-28.\n\nFootnote 396:\n\n Cf. Tit. i. 9, 10.\n\nFootnote 397:\n\n \u039c\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03b3\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd. Cf. _Can. Apost._ c. xvii.: \u201c\u1f41 \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u1f76 \u03b3\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b2\u03ac\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1, \u1f22 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f22\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f22 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f22 \u1f45\u03bb\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6.\u201d Cf. note\n in Benedictine ed.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIX.\n\n\nThis statement also is untrue, that it is \u201conly foolish and low\nindividuals, and persons devoid of perception, and slaves, and women,\nand children, of whom the teachers of the divine word wish to make\nconverts.\u201d Such indeed does the gospel invite, in order to make them\nbetter; but it invites also others who are very different from these,\nsince Christ is the Saviour of all men, and especially of them that\nbelieve, whether they be intelligent or simple; and \u201cHe is the\npropitiation with the Father for our sins; and not for ours only, but\nalso for the sins of the whole world.\u201d[398] After this it is superfluous\nfor us to wish to offer a reply to such statements of Celsus as the\nfollowing: \u201cFor why is it an evil to have been educated, and to have\nstudied the best opinions, and to have both the reality and appearance\nof wisdom? What hindrance does this offer to the knowledge of God? Why\nshould it not rather be an assistance, and a means by which one might be\nbetter able to arrive at the truth?\u201d Truly it is no evil to have been\neducated, for education is the way to virtue; but to rank those amongst\nthe number of the educated who hold erroneous opinions is what even the\nwise men among the Greeks would not do. On the other hand, who would not\nadmit that to have studied the best opinions is a blessing? But what\nshall we call the best, save those which are true, and which incite men\nto virtue? Moreover, it is an excellent thing for a man to _be_ wise,\nbut not to _seem_ so, as Celsus says. And it is no hindrance to the\nknowledge of God, but an assistance, to have been educated, and to have\nstudied the best opinions, and to be wise. And it becomes us rather than\nCelsus to say this, especially if it be shown that he is an Epicurean.\n\nFootnote 398:\n\n Cf. 1 John ii. 2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter L.\n\n\nBut let us see what those statements of his are which follow next in\nthese words: \u201cNay, we see, indeed, that even those individuals, who in\nthe market-places perform the most disgraceful tricks, and who gather\ncrowds around them, would never approach an assembly of wise men, nor\ndare to exhibit their arts among them; but wherever they see young men,\nand a mob of slaves, and a gathering of unintelligent persons, thither\nthey thrust themselves in, and show themselves off.\u201d Observe, now, how\nhe slanders us in these words, comparing us to those who in the\nmarket-places perform the most disreputable tricks, and gather crowds\naround them! What disreputable tricks, pray, do we perform? Or what is\nthere in _our_ conduct that resembles theirs, seeing that by means of\nreadings, and explanations of the things read, we lead men to the\nworship of the God of the universe, and to the cognate virtues, and turn\nthem away from contemning Deity, and from all things contrary to right\nreason? Philosophers verily would wish to collect together such hearers\nof their discourses as exhort men to virtue,\u2014a practice which certain of\nthe Cynics especially have followed, who converse publicly with those\nwhom they happen to meet. Will they maintain, then, that these who do\nnot gather together persons who are considered to have been educated,\nbut who invite and assemble hearers from the public street, resemble\nthose who in the market-places perform the most disreputable tricks, and\ngather crowds around them? Neither Celsus, however, nor any one who\nholds the same opinions, will blame those who, agreeably to what they\nregard as a feeling of philanthropy, address their arguments to the\nignorant populace.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LI.\n\n\nAnd if they are not to be blamed for so doing, let us see whether\nChristians do not exhort multitudes to the practice of virtue in a\ngreater and better degree than they. For the philosophers who converse\nin public do not pick and choose their hearers, but he who likes stands\nand listens. The Christians, however, having previously, so far as\npossible, tested the souls of those who wish to become their hearers,\nand having previously instructed[399] them in private, when they appear\n(before entering the community) to have sufficiently evinced their\ndesire towards a virtuous life, introduce them then, and not before,\nprivately forming one class of those who are beginners, and are\nreceiving admission, but who have not yet obtained the mark of complete\npurification; and another of those who have manifested to the best of\ntheir ability their intention to desire no other things than are\napproved by Christians; and among these there are certain persons\nappointed to make inquiries regarding the lives and behaviour of those\nwho join them, in order that they may prevent those who commit acts of\ninfamy from coming into their public assembly, while those of a\ndifferent character they receive with their whole heart, in order that\nthey may daily make them better. And this is their method of procedure,\nboth with those who are sinners, and especially with those who lead\ndissolute lives, whom they exclude from their community, although,\naccording to Celsus, they resemble those who in the market-places\nperform the most shameful tricks. Now the venerable school of the\nPythagoreans used to erect a cenotaph to those who had apostatized from\ntheir system of philosophy, treating them as dead; but the Christians\nlament as dead those who have been vanquished by licentiousness or any\nother sin, because they are lost and dead to God, and as being risen\nfrom the dead (if they manifest a becoming change) they receive them\nafterwards, at some future time, after a greater interval than in the\ncase of those who were admitted at first, but not placing in any office\nor post of rank in the church of God those who, after professing the\ngospel, lapsed and fell.\n\nFootnote 399:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b5\u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LII.\n\n\nObserve now with regard to the following statement of Celsus, \u201cWe see\nalso those persons who in the market-places perform most disreputable\ntricks, and collect crowds around them,\u201d whether a manifest falsehood\nhas not been uttered, and things compared which have no resemblance. He\nsays that these individuals, to whom he compares us, who \u201cperform the\nmost disreputable tricks in the market-places and collect crowds, would\nnever approach an assembly of wise men, nor dare to show off their\ntricks before them; but wherever they see young men, and a mob of\nslaves, and a gathering of foolish people, thither do they thrust\nthemselves in and make a display.\u201d Now, in speaking thus he does nothing\nelse than simply load us with abuse, like the women upon the public\nstreets, whose object is to slander one another; for we do everything in\nour power to secure that our meetings should be composed of wise men,\nand those things among us which are especially excellent and divine we\nthen venture to bring forward publicly in our discussions when we have\nan abundance of intelligent hearers, while we conceal and pass by in\nsilence the truths of deeper import when we see that our audience is\ncomposed of simpler minds, which need such instruction as is\nfiguratively termed \u201cmilk.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIII.\n\n\nFor the word is used by our Paul in writing to the Corinthians, who were\nGreeks, and not yet purified in their morals: \u201cI have fed you with milk,\nnot with meat; for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now\nare ye able, for ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you\nenvying and strife, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?\u201d Now the same\nwriter, knowing that there was a certain kind of nourishment better\nadapted for the soul, and that the food of those young[400] persons who\nwere admitted was compared to milk, continues: \u201cAnd ye are become such\nas have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth\nmilk is unskilful in the word of righteousness; for he is a babe. But\nstrong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by\nreason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and\nevil.\u201d[401] Would then those who believe these words to be well spoken,\nsuppose that the noble doctrines of our faith would never be mentioned\nin an assembly of wise men, but that wherever [our instructors] see\nyoung men, and a mob of slaves, and a collection of foolish individuals,\nthey bring publicly forward divine and venerable truths, and before such\npersons make a display of themselves in treating of them? But it is\nclear to him who examines the whole spirit of our writings, that Celsus\nis animated with a hatred against the human race resembling that of the\nignorant populace, and gives utterance to these falsehoods without\nexamination.\n\nFootnote 400:\n\n \u03bd\u03b7\u03c0\u03af\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 401:\n\n Heb. v. 12-14.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIV.\n\n\nWe acknowledge, however, although Celsus will not have it so, that we\n_do_ desire to instruct all men in the word of God, so as to give to\nyoung men the exhortations which are appropriate to them, and to show to\nslaves how they may recover freedom of thought,[402] and be ennobled by\nthe word. And those amongst us who are the ambassadors of Christianity\nsufficiently declare that they are debtors[403] to Greeks and\nbarbarians, to wise men and fools, (for they do not deny their\nobligation to cure the souls even of foolish persons,) in order that as\nfar as possible they may lay aside their ignorance, and endeavour to\nobtain greater prudence, by listening also to the words of Solomon: \u201cOh,\nye fools, be of an understanding heart,\u201d[404] and \u201cWho is the most\nsimple among you, let him turn unto me;\u201d[405] and wisdom exhorts those\nwho are devoid of understanding in the words, \u201cCome, eat of my bread,\nand drink of the wine which I have mixed for you. Forsake folly that ye\nmay live, and correct understanding in knowledge.\u201d[406] This too would I\nsay (seeing it bears on the point),[407] in answer to the statement of\nCelsus: Do not philosophers invite young men to their lectures? and do\nthey not encourage young men to exchange a wicked life for a better? and\ndo they not desire slaves to learn philosophy? Must we find fault, then,\nwith philosophers who have exhorted slaves to the practice of virtue?\nwith Pythagoras for having so done with Zamolxis, Zeno with Perseus, and\nwith those who recently encouraged Epictetus to the study of philosophy?\nIs it indeed permissible for you, O Greeks, to call youths and slaves\nand foolish persons to the study of philosophy, but if _we_ do so, we do\nnot act from philanthropic motives in wishing to heal every rational\nnature with the medicine of reason, and to bring them into fellowship\nwith God, the Creator of all things? These remarks, then, may suffice in\nanswer to what are slanders rather than accusations[408] on the part of\nCelsus.\n\nFootnote 402:\n\n \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 403:\n\n Cf. Rom. i. 14.\n\nFootnote 404:\n\n Cf. Prov. viii. 5.\n\nFootnote 405:\n\n Cf. Prov. ix. 4.\n\nFootnote 406:\n\n Cf. Prov. ix. 5, 6.\n\nFootnote 407:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 408:\n\n \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f22 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LV.\n\n\nBut as Celsus delights to heap up calumnies against us, and, in addition\nto those which he has already uttered, has added others, let us examine\nthese also, and see whether it be the Christians or Celsus who have\nreason to be ashamed of what is said. He asserts, \u201cWe see, indeed, in\nprivate houses workers in wool and leather, and fullers, and persons of\nthe most uninstructed and rustic character, not venturing to utter a\nword in the presence of their elders and wiser masters;[409] but when\nthey get hold of the children privately, and certain women as ignorant\nas themselves, they pour forth wonderful statements, to the effect that\nthey ought not to give heed to their father and to their teachers, but\nshould obey them; that the former are foolish and stupid, and neither\nknow nor can perform anything that is really good, being preoccupied\nwith empty trifles; that _they_ alone know how men ought to live, and\nthat, if the children obey them, they will both be happy themselves, and\nwill make their home happy also. And while thus speaking, if they see\none of the instructors of youth approaching, or one of the more\nintelligent class, or even the father himself, the more timid among them\nbecome afraid, while the more forward incite the children to throw off\nthe yoke, whispering that in the presence of father and teachers they\nneither will nor can explain to them any good thing, seeing they turn\naway with aversion from the silliness and stupidity of such persons as\nbeing altogether corrupt, and far advanced in wickedness, and such as\nwould inflict punishment upon them; but that if they wish [to avail\nthemselves of their aid,] they must leave their father and their\ninstructors, and go with the women and their playfellows to the women\u2019s\napartments, or to the leather shop, or to the fuller\u2019s shop, that they\nmay attain to perfection;\u2014and by words like these they gain them over.\u201d\n\nFootnote 409:\n\n The allusion is to the practice of wealthy Greeks and Romans having\n among their slaves artificers of various kinds, for whose service\n there was constant demand in the houses and villas of the rich, and\n who therefore had their residence in or near the dwelling of their\n master. Many of these artificers seem, from the language of Celsus, to\n have been converts to Christianity.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVI.\n\n\nObserve now how by such statements he depreciates those amongst us who\nare teachers of the word, and who strive in every way to raise the soul\nto the Creator of all things, and who show that we ought to despise\nthings \u201csensible,\u201d and \u201ctemporal,\u201d and \u201cvisible,\u201d and to do our utmost\nto reach communion with God, and the contemplation of things that are\n\u201cintelligent,\u201d and \u201cinvisible,\u201d and a blessed life with God, and the\nfriends of God; comparing them to \u201cworkers in wool in private houses,\nand to leather-cutters, and to fullers, and to the most rustic of\nmankind, who carefully incite young boys to wickedness, and women to\nforsake their fathers and teachers, and follow them.\u201d Now let Celsus\npoint out from what wise parent, or from what teachers, we keep away\nchildren and women, and let him ascertain by comparison among those\nchildren and women who are adherents of our doctrine, whether any of the\nopinions which they formerly heard are better than ours, and in what\nmanner we draw away children and women from noble and venerable studies,\nand incite them to worse things. But he will not be able to make good\nany such charge against us, seeing that, on the contrary, we turn away\nwomen from a dissolute life, and from being at variance with those with\nwhom they live, from all mad desires after theatres and dancing, and\nfrom superstition; while we train to habits of self-restraint boys just\nreaching the age of puberty, and feeling a desire for sexual pleasures,\npointing out to them not only the disgrace which attends those sins, but\nalso the state to which the soul of the wicked is reduced through\npractices of that kind, and the judgments which it will suffer, and the\npunishments which will be inflicted.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVII.\n\n\nBut who are the teachers whom we call triflers and fools, whose defence\nis undertaken by Celsus, as of those who teach better things? [I know\nnot,] unless he deem those to be good instructors of women, and no\ntriflers, who invite them to superstition and to unchaste spectacles,\nand those, moreover, to be teachers not devoid of sense who lead young\nmen to the communion of all those disorderly acts which we know are\noften committed by them. We indeed call away these also, as far as we\ncan, from the dogmas of philosophy to our worship of God, by showing\nforth its excellence and purity. But as Celsus, by his statements, has\ndeclared that we do not do so, but that we call only the foolish, I\nwould say to him, \u201cIf you had charged us with withdrawing from the study\nof philosophy those who were already preoccupied with it, you would not\nhave spoken the truth, and yet your charge would have had an appearance\nof probability; but when you now say that we draw away our adherents\nfrom good teachers, show who are those other teachers save the teachers\nof philosophy, or those who have been appointed to give instruction in\nsome useful branch of study.\u201d[410]\n\nHe will be unable, however, to show any such; while we promise, openly\nand not in secret, that _they_ will be happy who live according to the\nword of God, and who look to Him in all things, and who do everything,\nwhatever it is, as if in the presence of God. Are these the instructions\nof workers in wool, and of leather-cutters, and fullers, and uneducated\nrustics? But such an assertion he cannot make good.\n\nFootnote 410:\n\n \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u1f22\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVIII.\n\n\nBut those who, in the opinion of Celsus, resemble the workers in wool in\nprivate houses, and the leather-cutters, and fullers, and uneducated\nrustics, will, he alleges, in the presence of father or teachers be\nunwilling to speak, or unable to explain to the boys anything that is\ngood. In answer to which, we would say, What kind of father, my good\nsir, and what kind of teacher, do you mean? If you mean one who approves\nof virtue, and turns away from vice, and welcomes what is better, then\nknow, that with the greatest boldness will we declare our opinions to\nthe children, because we will be in good repute with such a judge. But\nif, in the presence of a father who has a hatred of virtue and goodness,\nwe keep silence, and also before those who teach what is contrary to\nsound doctrine, do not blame us for so doing, since you will blame us\nwithout good reason. You, at all events, in a case where fathers deemed\nthe mysteries of philosophy an idle and unprofitable occupation for\ntheir sons, and for young men in general, would not, in teaching\nphilosophy, make known its secrets before worthless parents; but,\ndesiring to keep apart those sons of wicked parents who had been turned\ntowards the study of philosophy, you would observe the proper seasons,\nin order that the doctrines of philosophy might reach the minds of the\nyoung men. And we say the same regarding our teachers. For if we turn\n[our hearers] away from those instructors who teach obscene comedies and\nlicentious iambics, and many other things which neither improve the\nspeaker nor benefit the hearers (because the latter do not know how to\nlisten to poetry in a philosophic frame of mind, nor the former how to\nsay to each of the young men what tends to his profit), we are not, in\nfollowing such a course, ashamed to confess what we do. But if you will\nshow me teachers who train young men for philosophy, and who exercise\nthem in it, I will not from such turn away young men, but will try to\nraise them, as those who have been previously exercised in the whole\ncircle of learning and in philosophical subjects, to the venerable and\nlofty height of eloquence which lies hid from the multitude of\nChristians, where are discussed topics of the greatest importance, and\nwhere it is demonstrated and shown that they have been treated\nphilosophically both by the prophets of God and the apostles of Jesus.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIX.\n\n\nImmediately after this, Celsus, perceiving that he has slandered us with\ntoo great bitterness, as if by way of defence expresses himself as\nfollows: \u201cThat I bring no heavier charge than what the truth compels me,\nany one may see from the following remarks. Those who invite to\nparticipation in other mysteries, make proclamation as follows: \u2018Every\none who has clean hands, and a prudent tongue;\u2019[411] others again thus:\n\u2018He who is pure from all pollution, and whose soul is conscious of no\nevil, and who has lived well and justly.\u2019 Such is the proclamation made\nby those who promise purification from sins. But let us hear what kind\nof persons these Christians invite. Every one, they say, who is a\nsinner, who is devoid of understanding, who is a child, and, to speak\ngenerally, whoever is unfortunate, him will the kingdom of God receive.\nDo you not call him a sinner, then, who is unjust, and a thief, and a\nhousebreaker, and a poisoner, and a committer of sacrilege, and a robber\nof the dead? What others would a man invite if he were issuing a\nproclamation for an assembly of robbers?\u201d Now, in answer to such\nstatements, we say that it is not the same thing to invite those who are\n_sick in soul_ to be _cured_, and those who are _in health_ to the\n_knowledge_ and _study_ of divine things. We, however, keeping both\nthese things in view, at first invite all men to be healed, and exhort\nthose who are sinners to come to the consideration of the doctrines\nwhich teach men not to sin, and those who are devoid of understanding to\nthose which beget wisdom, and those who are children to rise in their\nthoughts to manhood, and those who are simply[412] unfortunate to good\nfortune,[413] or\u2014which is the more appropriate term to use\u2014to\nblessedness.[414] And when those who have been turned towards virtue\nhave made progress, and have shown that they have been purified by the\nword, and have led as far as they can a better life, then and not before\ndo we invite them to participation in our mysteries. \u201cFor we speak\nwisdom among them that are perfect.\u201d[415]\n\nFootnote 411:\n\n \u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 412:\n\n \u1f01\u03c0\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 413:\n\n \u03b5\u1f50\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 414:\n\n \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 415:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. ii. 6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LX.\n\n\nAnd as we teach, moreover, that \u201cwisdom will not enter into the soul of\na base man, nor dwell in a body that is involved in sin,\u201d[416] we say,\nWhoever has clean hands, and therefore lifts up holy hands to God, and\nby reason of being occupied with elevated and heavenly things, can say,\n\u201cThe lifting up of my hands is as the evening sacrifice,\u201d[417] let him\ncome to us; and whoever has a wise tongue through meditating on the law\nof the Lord day and night, and by \u201creason of habit has his senses\nexercised to discern between good and evil,\u201d let him have no reluctance\nin coming to the strong and rational sustenance which is adapted to\nthose who are athletes in piety and every virtue. And since the grace of\nGod is with all those who love with a pure affection the teacher of the\ndoctrines of immortality, whoever is pure not only from all defilement,\nbut from what are regarded as lesser transgressions, let him be boldly\ninitiated in the mysteries of Jesus, which properly are made known only\nto the holy and the pure. The initiated of Celsus accordingly says, \u201cLet\nhim whose soul is conscious of no evil come.\u201d But he who acts as\ninitiator, according to the precepts of Jesus, will say to those who\nhave been purified in heart, \u201cHe whose soul has, for a long time, been\nconscious of no evil, and especially since he yielded himself to the\nhealing of the word, let such an one hear the doctrines which were\nspoken in private by Jesus to His genuine disciples.\u201d Therefore in the\ncomparison which he institutes between the procedure of the initiators\ninto the Grecian mysteries, and the teachers of the doctrine of Jesus,\nhe does not know the difference between inviting the wicked to be\nhealed, and initiating those already purified into the sacred mysteries!\n\nFootnote 416:\n\n Wisd. Solom. i. 4.\n\nFootnote 417:\n\n Cf. Ps. cxli. 2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXI.\n\n\nNot to _participation in mysteries_, then, and to _fellowship in the\nwisdom hidden in a mystery_, which God ordained before the world to the\nglory of His saints,[418] do we invite the _wicked_ man, and the\n_thief_, and the _housebreaker_, and the _poisoner_, and the _committer\nof sacrilege_, and the _plunderer of the dead_, and all those others\nwhom Celsus may enumerate in his exaggerating style, but such as these\nwe invite to be _healed_. For there are in the divinity of the word some\nhelps towards the cure of those who are sick, respecting which the word\nsays, \u201cThey that be whole need not a physician, but they that are\nsick;\u201d[419] others, again, which to the pure in soul and body exhibit\n\u201cthe revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world\nbegan, but now is made manifest by the Scriptures of the prophets,\u201d[420]\nand \u201cby the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ,\u201d[421] which \u201cappearing\u201d\nis manifested to each one of those who are perfect, and which enlightens\nthe reason[422] in the true[423] knowledge of things. But as he\nexaggerates the charges against us, adding, after his list of those vile\nindividuals whom he has mentioned, this remark, \u201cWhat other persons\nwould a robber summon to himself by proclamation?\u201d we answer such a\nquestion by saying that a robber summons around him individuals of such\na character, in order to make use of their villany against the men whom\nthey desire to slay and plunder. A Christian, on the other hand, even\nthough he invite those whom the robber invites, invites them to a very\ndifferent vocation, viz. to bind up these wounds by His word, and to\napply to the soul, festering amid evils, the drugs obtained from the\nword, and which are analogous to the wine and oil, and plasters, and\nother healing appliances which belong to the art of medicine.\n\nFootnote 418:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. ii. 7.\n\nFootnote 419:\n\n Matt. ix. 12.\n\nFootnote 420:\n\n Rom. xvi. 25, 26.\n\nFootnote 421:\n\n Cf. 2 Tim. ii. 10.\n\nFootnote 422:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 423:\n\n \u1f00\u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u1fc6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXII.\n\n\nIn the next place, throwing a slur[424] upon the exhortations spoken and\nwritten to those who have led wicked lives, and which invite them to\nrepentance and reformation of heart, he asserts that we say \u201cthat it was\nto sinners that God has been sent.\u201d Now this statement of his is much\nthe same as if he were to find fault with certain persons for saying\nthat on account of the sick who were living in a city, a physician had\nbeen sent them by a very benevolent monarch. God the Word was sent,\nindeed, as a physician to sinners, but as a teacher of divine mysteries\nto those who are already pure and who sin no more. But Celsus, unable to\nsee this distinction,\u2014for he had no desire to be animated with a love of\ntruth,\u2014remarks, \u201cWhy was he not sent to those who were without sin? What\nevil is it not to have committed sin?\u201d To which we reply, that if by\nthose \u201cwho were without sin\u201d he means those who sin no more, then our\nSaviour Jesus was sent even to such, but not as a physician. While if by\nthose \u201cwho were without sin\u201d he means such as have never at any time\nsinned,\u2014for he made no distinction in his statement,\u2014we reply that it is\nimpossible for a man thus to be without sin. And this we say, excepting,\nof course, the man understood to be in Christ Jesus,[425] who \u201cdid no\nsin.\u201d It is with a malicious intent, indeed, that Celsus says of us that\nwe assert that \u201cGod will receive the unrighteous man if he humble\nhimself on account of his wickedness, but that He will not receive the\nrighteous man, although he look up to Him, [adorned] with virtue from\nthe beginning.\u201d Now we assert that it is impossible for a man to look up\nto God [adorned] with virtue from the beginning. For wickedness must\nnecessarily first exist in men. As Paul also says, \u201cWhen the commandment\ncame, sin revived, and I died.\u201d[426] Moreover, we do not teach regarding\nthe unrighteous man, that it is sufficient for him to humble himself on\naccount of his wickedness in order to his being accepted by God, but\nthat God will accept him if, after passing condemnation upon himself for\nhis past conduct, he walk humbly on account of it, and in a becoming\nmanner for the time to come.\n\nFootnote 424:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03ba\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 425:\n\n \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0396\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 426:\n\n Rom. vii. 9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIII.\n\n\nAfter this, not understanding how it has been said that \u201cevery one who\nexalteth himself shall be abased;\u201d[427] nor (although taught even by\nPlato) that \u201cthe good and virtuous man walketh humbly and orderly;\u201d and\nignorant, moreover, that we give the injunction, \u201cHumble yourselves,\ntherefore, under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due\ntime;\u201d[428] he says that \u201cthose persons who preside properly over a\ntrial make those individuals who bewail before them their evil deeds to\ncease from their piteous wailings, lest their decisions should be\ndetermined rather by compassion than by a regard to truth; whereas God\ndoes not decide in accordance with truth, but in accordance with\nflattery.\u201d[429] Now, what words of flattery and piteous wailing are\ncontained in the Holy Scriptures when the sinner says in his prayers to\nGod, \u201cI have acknowledged my sin, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I\nsaid, I will confess my transgression to the Lord,\u201d etc. etc.? For is he\nable to show that a procedure of this kind is not adapted to the\nconversion of sinners, who humble themselves in their prayers under the\nhand of God? And, becoming confused by his effort to accuse us, he\ncontradicts himself; appearing at one time to know a man \u201cwithout sin,\u201d\nand \u201ca righteous man, who can look up to God [adorned] with virtue from\nthe beginning;\u201d and at another time accepting our statement that there\nis no man altogether righteous, or without sin;[430] for, as if he\nadmitted its truth, he remarks, \u201cThis is indeed apparently true, that\nsomehow the human race is naturally inclined to sin.\u201d In the next place,\nas if all men were not invited by the word, he says, \u201cAll men, then,\nwithout distinction, ought to be invited, since all indeed are sinners.\u201d\nAnd yet, in the preceding pages, we have pointed out the words of Jesus:\n\u201cCome unto me, _all_ ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give\nyou rest.\u201d[431] _All_ men, therefore, labouring and being heavy laden on\naccount of the nature of sin, are invited to the rest spoken of in the\nword of God, \u201cfor God sent His word, and healed them, and delivered them\nfrom their destructions.\u201d[432]\n\nFootnote 427:\n\n Cf. Matt. xxiii. 12.\n\nFootnote 428:\n\n 1 Pet. v. 6.\n\nFootnote 429:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 430:\n\n In the text it is put interrogatively: \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2; \u1f22\n \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2; The allusion seems to be to Job xv. 14: \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f64\u03bd\n \u03b2\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f04\u03bc\u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2; \u1f22 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 431:\n\n Matt. xi. 28.\n\nFootnote 432:\n\n Ps. cvii. 20.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIV.\n\n\nBut since he says, in addition to this, \u201cWhat is this preference of\nsinners over others?\u201d and makes other remarks of a similar nature, we\nhave to reply that absolutely a sinner is not preferred before one who\nis not a sinner; but that sometimes a sinner, who has become conscious\nof his own sin, and for that reason comes to repentance, being humbled\non account of his sins, is preferred before one who is accounted a\nlesser sinner, but who does not consider himself one, but exalts himself\non the ground of certain good qualities which he thinks he possesses,\nand is greatly elated on their account. And this is manifest to those\nwho are willing to peruse the Gospels in a spirit of fairness, by the\nparable of the publican, who said, \u201cBe merciful to me a sinner,\u201d[433]\nand of the Pharisee who boasted with a certain wicked self-conceit in\nthe words, \u201cI thank Thee that I am not as other men are, extortioners,\nunjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.\u201d[434] For Jesus subjoins\nto His narrative of them both the words: \u201cThis man went down to his\nhouse justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth\nhimself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be\nexalted.\u201d[435] We utter no blasphemy, then, against God, neither are we\nguilty of falsehood, when we teach that every man, whoever he may be, is\nconscious of human infirmity in comparison with the greatness of God,\nand that we must ever ask from Him, who alone is able to supply our\ndeficiencies, what is wanting to our [mortal] nature.\n\nFootnote 433:\n\n Luke xviii. 13.\n\nFootnote 434:\n\n Luke xviii. 11.\n\nFootnote 435:\n\n Luke xviii. 14.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXV.\n\n\nHe imagines, however, that we utter these exhortations for the\nconversion of sinners, because we are able to gain over no one who is\nreally good and righteous, and therefore open our gates to the most\nunholy and abandoned of men. But if any one will fairly observe our\nassemblies, we can present a greater number of those who have been\nconverted from not a very wicked life, than of those who have committed\nthe most abominable sins. For naturally those who are conscious to\nthemselves of better things, desire that those promises may be true\nwhich are declared by God regarding the reward of the righteous, and\nthus assent more readily to the statements [of Scripture] than those do\nwho have led very wicked lives, and who are prevented by their very\nconsciousness [of evil] from admitting that they will be punished by the\nJudge of all with such punishment as befits those who have sinned so\ngreatly, and as would not be inflicted by the Judge of all contrary to\nright reason.[436] Sometimes, also, when very abandoned men are willing\nto accept the doctrine of [future] punishment, on account of the hope\nwhich is based upon repentance, they are prevented from so doing by\ntheir habit of sinning, being constantly dipped, and, as it were, dyed\nin wickedness, and possessing no longer the power to turn from it easily\nto a proper life, and one regulated according to right reason. And\nalthough Celsus observes this, he nevertheless, I know not why,\nexpresses himself in the following terms: \u201cAnd yet, indeed, it is\nmanifest to every one that no one by chastisement, much less by merciful\ntreatment, could effect a complete change in those who are sinners both\nby nature and custom, for to change nature is an exceedingly difficult\nthing. But they who are without sin are partakers of a better life.\u201d\n\nFootnote 436:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f40\u03c1\u03b8\u1f78\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVI.\n\n\nNow here Celsus appears to me to have committed a great error, in\nrefusing to those who are sinners by nature, and also by habit, the\npossibility of a complete transformation, alleging that they cannot be\ncured even by punishment. For it clearly appears that all men are\ninclined to sin by nature, and some not only by nature but by practice,\nwhile not all men are incapable of an entire transformation. For there\nare found in every philosophical sect, and in the word of God, persons\nwho are related to have undergone so great a change that they may be\nproposed as a model of excellence of life. Among the names of the heroic\nage some mention Hercules and Ulysses, among those of later times,\nSocrates, and of those who have lived very recently, Musonius.[437] Not\nonly against us, then, did Celsus utter the calumny, when he said that\n\u201cit was manifest to every one that those who were given to sin by nature\nand habit could not by any means\u2014even by punishments\u2014be completely\nchanged for the better,\u201d but also against the noblest names in\nphilosophy, who have not denied that the recovery of virtue was a\npossible thing for men. But although he did not express his meaning with\nexactness, we shall nevertheless, though giving his words a more\nfavourable construction, convict him of unsound reasoning. For his words\nwere: \u201cThose who are inclined to sin by nature and habit, no one could\ncompletely reform even by chastisement;\u201d and his words, as we understood\nthem, we refuted to the best of our ability.[438]\n\nFootnote 437:\n\n He is said to have been either a Babylonian or Tyrrhenian, and to have\n lived in the reign of Nero. Cf. Philostratus, iv. 12.\u2014RU\u00c6US.\n\nFootnote 438:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ad\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c8\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVII.\n\n\nIt is probable, however, that he meant to convey some such meaning as\nthis, that those who were both by nature and habit given to the\ncommission of those sins which are committed by the most abandoned of\nmen, could not be completely transformed even by punishment. And yet\nthis is shown to be false from the history of certain philosophers. For\nwho is there that would not rank among the most abandoned of men the\nindividual who somehow submitted to yield himself to his master, when he\nplaced him in a brothel,[439] that he might allow himself to be polluted\nby any one who liked? And yet such a circumstance is related of Ph\u00e6do!\nAnd who will not agree that he who burst, accompanied with a\nflute-player and a party of revellers, his profligate associates, into\nthe school of the venerable Xenocrates, to insult a man who was the\nadmiration of his friends, was not one of the greatest miscreants[440]\namong mankind? Yet, notwithstanding this, reason was powerful enough to\neffect their conversion, and to enable them to make such progress in\nphilosophy, that the one was deemed worthy by Plato to recount the\ndiscourse of Socrates on immortality, and to record his firmness in\nprison, when he evinced his contempt of the hemlock, and with all\nfearlessness and tranquillity of mind treated of subjects so numerous\nand important, that it is difficult even for those to follow them who\nare giving their utmost attention, and who are disturbed by no\ndistraction; while Polemon, on the other hand, who from a profligate\nbecame a man of most temperate life, was successor in the school of\nXenocrates, so celebrated for his venerable character. Celsus then does\nnot speak the truth when he says \u201cthat sinners by nature and habit\ncannot be completely reformed even by chastisement.\u201d\n\nFootnote 439:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 440:\n\n \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVIII.\n\n\nThat philosophical discourses, however, distinguished by orderly\narrangement and elegant expression,[441] should produce such results in\nthe case of those individuals just enumerated, and upon others[442] who\nhave led wicked lives, is not at all to be wondered at. But when we\nconsider that those discourses, which Celsus terms \u201cvulgar,\u201d[443] are\nfilled with power, as if they were spells, and see that they at once\nconvert multitudes from a life of licentiousness to one of extreme\nregularity,[444] and from a life of wickedness to a better, and from a\nstate of cowardice or unmanliness to one of such high-toned courage as\nto lead men to despise even death through the piety which shows itself\nwithin them, why should we not justly admire the power which they\ncontain? For the words of those who at the first assumed the office of\n[Christian] ambassadors, and who gave their labours to rear up the\nchurches of God,\u2014nay, their preaching also,\u2014were accompanied with a\npersuasive power, though not like that found among those who profess the\nphilosophy of Plato, or of any other merely human philosopher, which\npossesses no other qualities than those of human nature. But the\ndemonstration which followed the words of the apostles of Jesus was\ngiven from God, and was accredited[445] by the Spirit and by power. And\ntherefore _their_ word ran swiftly and speedily, or rather the word of\n_God_ through their instrumentality, transformed numbers of persons who\nhad been sinners both by nature and habit, whom no one could have\nreformed by punishment, but who were changed by the word, which moulded\nand transformed them according to its pleasure.\n\nFootnote 441:\n\n \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03ac\u03be\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 442:\n\n The reading in the text is \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c2, for which \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 has been\n conjectured by Ru\u00e6us and Boherellus, and which has been adopted in the\n translation.\n\nFootnote 443:\n\n \u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 444:\n\n \u03b5\u1f50\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 445:\n\n \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIX.\n\n\nCelsus continues in his usual manner, asserting that \u201cto change a nature\nentirely is exceedingly difficult.\u201d We, however, who know of only one\nnature in every rational soul, and who maintain that none has been\ncreated evil by the Author of all things, but that many have _become_\nwicked through education, and perverse example, and surrounding\ninfluences,[446] so that wickedness has been naturalized[447] in some\nindividuals, are persuaded that for the word of God to change a nature\nin which evil has been naturalized is not only not impossible, but is\neven a work of no very great difficulty, if a man only believe that he\nmust entrust himself to the God of all things, and do everything with a\nview to please Him with whom\n\n \u201cBoth good and bad are not in the same honour,\n Nor do the idle man and he who has laboured much\n Perish alike.\u201d[448]\n\nBut even if it be exceedingly difficult to effect a change in some\npersons, the cause must be held to lie in their own will, which is\nreluctant to accept the belief that the God over all things is a just\nJudge of all the deeds done during life. For deliberate choice and\npractice[449] avail much towards the accomplishment of things which\nappear to be very difficult, and, to speak hyperbolically, almost\nimpossible. Has the nature of man, when desiring to walk along a rope\nextended in the air through the middle of the theatre, and to carry at\nthe same time numerous and heavy weights, been able by practice and\nattention to accomplish such a feat; but when desiring to live in\nconformity with the practice of virtue, does it find it impossible to do\nso, although formerly it may have been exceedingly wicked? See whether\nhe who holds such views does not bring a charge against the nature of\nthe Creator of the rational animal[450] rather than against the\ncreature, if He has formed the nature of man with powers for the\nattainment of things of such difficulty, and of no utility whatever, but\nhas rendered it incapable of securing its own blessedness. But these\nremarks may suffice as an answer to the assertion that \u201centirely to\nchange a nature is exceedingly difficult.\u201d He alleges, in the next\nplace, that \u201cthey who are without sin are partakers of a better life;\u201d\nnot making it clear what he means by \u201cthose who are without sin,\u201d\nwhether those who are so from the beginning [of their lives], or those\nwho become so by a transformation. Of those who were so from the\nbeginning of their lives, there cannot possibly be any; while those who\nare so after a transformation [of heart] are found to be few in number,\nbeing those who have become so after giving in their allegiance to the\nsaving word. And they were not such when they gave in their allegiance.\nFor, apart from the aid of the word, and that too the word of\nperfection, it is impossible for a man to become free from sin.\n\nFootnote 446:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u1f70\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u1f70\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b7\u03c7\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 447:\n\n \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c9\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 448:\n\n Cf. _Iliad_, ix. 319, 320.\n\nFootnote 449:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 450:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b6\u03ce\u03bf\u03c5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXX.\n\n\nIn the next place, he objects to the statement, as if it were maintained\nby us, that \u201cGod will be able to do all things,\u201d not seeing even here\nhow these words are meant, and what the \u201c_all things_\u201d are which are\nincluded in it, and how it is said that God \u201cwill be able.\u201d But on these\nmatters it is not necessary now to speak; for although he might with a\nshow of reason have opposed this proposition, he has not done so.\nPerhaps he did not understand the arguments which might be plausibly\nused against it, or if he did, he saw the answers that might be\nreturned. Now in our judgment God can do everything which it is possible\nfor Him to do without ceasing to be God, and good, and wise. But Celsus\nasserts\u2014not comprehending the meaning of the expression \u201cGod can do all\nthings\u201d\u2014\u201cthat He will not desire to do anything wicked,\u201d admitting that\nHe has the _power_, but not the _will_, to commit evil. We, on the\ncontrary, maintain that as that which by nature possesses the property\nof sweetening other things through its own inherent sweetness cannot\nproduce bitterness contrary to its own peculiar nature,[451] nor that\nwhose nature it is to produce light through its being light can cause\ndarkness; so neither is God able to commit wickedness, for the power of\ndoing evil is contrary to His deity and its omnipotence. Whereas if any\none among existing things is able to commit wickedness from being\ninclined to wickedness by nature, it does so from not having in its\nnature the ability not to do evil.\n\nFootnote 451:\n\n \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c6\u03c5\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b3\u03bb\u03c5\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b3\u03bb\u03c5\u03ba\u1f7a \u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd,\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXI.\n\n\nHe next assumes what is not granted by the more rational class of\nbelievers, but what perhaps is considered to be true by some who are\ndevoid of intelligence,\u2014viz. that \u201cGod, like those who are overcome with\npity, being Himself overcome, alleviates the sufferings of the wicked\nthrough pity for their wailings, and casts off the good, who do nothing\nof that kind, which is the height of injustice.\u201d Now, in our judgment,\nGod lightens the suffering of no wicked man who has not betaken himself\nto a virtuous life, and casts off no one who is already good, nor yet\nalleviates the suffering of any one who mourns, simply because he utters\nlamentation, or takes pity upon him, to use the word pity in its more\ncommon acceptation.[452] But those who have passed severe condemnation\nupon themselves because of their sins, and who, as on that account,\nlament and bewail themselves as lost, so far as their previous conduct\nis concerned, and who have manifested a satisfactory change, are\nreceived by God on account of their repentance, as those who have\nundergone a transformation from a life of great wickedness. For virtue,\ntaking up her abode in the souls of these persons, and expelling the\nwickedness which had previous possession of them, produces an oblivion\nof the past. And even although virtue do not effect an entrance, yet if\na considerable progress take place in the soul, even that is sufficient,\nin the proportion that it is progressive, to drive out and destroy the\nflood of wickedness, so that it almost ceases to remain in the soul.\n\nFootnote 452:\n\n \u1f35\u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f10\u03bb\u03ad\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXII.\n\n\nIn the next place, speaking as in the person of a teacher of our\ndoctrine, he expresses himself as follows: \u201cWise men reject what we say,\nbeing led into error, and ensnared by their wisdom.\u201d In reply to which\nwe say that, since wisdom is the knowledge of divine and human things\nand of their causes, or, as it is defined by the word of God, \u201cthe\nbreath of the power of God, and a pure influence flowing from the glory\nof the Almighty, and the brightness of the everlasting light, and the\nunspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of His\ngoodness,\u201d[453] no one who was really wise would reject what is said by\na Christian acquainted with the principles of Christianity, or would be\nled into error, or ensnared by it. For true wisdom does not mislead, but\nignorance does, while of existing things knowledge alone is permanent,\nand the truth which is derived from wisdom. But if, contrary to the\ndefinition of wisdom, you call any one whatever who dogmatizes with\nsophistical opinions wise, we answer that in conformity with what _you_\ncall wisdom, such an one rejects the words of God, being misled and\nensnared by plausible sophisms. And since, according to our doctrine,\nwisdom is not the knowledge of evil, but the knowledge of evil, so to\nspeak, is in those who hold false opinions and who are deceived by them,\nI would therefore in such persons term it ignorance rather than wisdom.\n\nFootnote 453:\n\n Cf. Wisd. of Solom. vii. 25, 26.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIII.\n\n\nAfter this he again slanders the ambassador of Christianity, and gives\nout regarding him that he relates \u201cridiculous things,\u201d although he does\nnot show or clearly point out what are the things which he calls\n\u201cridiculous.\u201d And in his slanders he says that \u201cno wise man believes the\ngospel, being driven away by the multitudes who adhere to it.\u201d And in\nthis he acts like one who should say that owing to the multitude of\nthose ignorant persons who are brought into subjection to the laws, no\nwise man would yield obedience to Solon, for example, or to Lycurgus, or\nZaleucus, or any other legislator, and especially if by wise man he\nmeans one who is wise [by living] in conformity with virtue. For, as\nwith regard to these ignorant persons, the legislators, according to\ntheir ideas of utility, caused them to be surrounded with appropriate\nguidance and laws, so God, legislating through Jesus Christ for men in\nall parts of the world, brings to Himself even those who are not wise in\nthe way in which it is possible for such persons to be brought to a\nbetter life. And God, well knowing this, as we have already shown in the\npreceding pages, says in the books of Moses: \u201cThey have moved me to\njealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with\ntheir idols: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a\npeople; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.\u201d[454] And\nPaul also, knowing this, said, \u201cBut God hath chosen the foolish things\nof the world to confound the wise,\u201d[455] calling, in a general way, wise\nall who appear to have made advances in knowledge, but have fallen into\nan atheistic polytheism, since \u201cprofessing themselves to be wise they\nbecame fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an\nimage made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed\nbeasts, and creeping things.\u201d[456]\n\nFootnote 454:\n\n Cf. Deut. xxxii. 21.\n\nFootnote 455:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. i. 27.\n\nFootnote 456:\n\n Rom. i. 22, 23.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIV.\n\n\nHe accuses the Christian teacher, moreover, of \u201cseeking after the\nunintelligent.\u201d In answer, we ask, Whom do you mean by the\n\u201cunintelligent?\u201d For, to speak accurately, every wicked man is\n\u201cunintelligent.\u201d If then by \u201cunintelligent\u201d you mean the wicked, do you,\nin drawing men to philosophy, seek to gain the wicked or the\nvirtuous?[457] But it is impossible to gain the virtuous, because they\nhave already given themselves to philosophy. The wicked, then, [you try\nto gain;] but if they are wicked, are they \u201cunintelligent?\u201d And many\nsuch you seek to win over to philosophy, and you therefore seek the\n\u201cunintelligent.\u201d But if I seek after those who are thus termed\n\u201cunintelligent,\u201d I act like a benevolent physician, who should seek\nafter the sick in order to help and cure them. If, however, by\n\u201cunintelligent\u201d you mean persons who are not clever,[458] but the\ninferior class of men intellectually,[459] I shall answer that I\nendeavour to improve such also to the best of my ability, although I\nwould not desire to build up the Christian community out of such\nmaterials. For I seek in preference those who are more clever and acute,\nbecause they are able to comprehend the meaning of the hard sayings, and\nof those passages in the law, and prophecies, and Gospels, which are\nexpressed with obscurity, and which you have despised as not containing\nanything worthy of notice, because you have not ascertained the meaning\nwhich they contain, nor tried to enter into the aim of the writers.\n\nFootnote 457:\n\n \u1f00\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 458:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 459:\n\n The reading in the text is \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03c9\u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, of which Ru\u00e6us remarks,\n \u201cHic nullum habet locum.\u201d \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 has been conjectured instead,\n and has been adopted in the translation.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXV.\n\n\nBut as he afterwards says that \u201cthe teacher of Christianity acts\nlike a person who promises to restore patients to bodily health, but\nwho prevents them from consulting skilled physicians, by whom his\nignorance would be exposed,\u201d we shall inquire in reply, \u201cWhat are\nthe physicians to whom you refer, from whom we turn away ignorant\nindividuals? For you do not suppose that we exhort those to embrace\nthe gospel who are devoted to philosophy, so that you would regard\nthe latter as the physicians from whom we keep away such as we\ninvite to come to the word of God.\u201d He indeed will make no answer,\nbecause he cannot name the physicians; or else he will be obliged to\nbetake himself to those of them who are ignorant, and who of their\nown accord servilely yield themselves to the worship of many gods,\nand to whatever other opinions are entertained by ignorant\nindividuals. In either case, then, he will be shown to have employed\nto no purpose in his argument the illustration of \u201cone who keeps\nothers away from skilled physicians.\u201d But if, in order to preserve\nfrom the philosophy of Epicurus, and from such as are considered\nphysicians after his system, those who are deceived by them, why\nshould we not be acting most reasonably in keeping such away from a\ndangerous disease caused by the physicians of Celsus,\u2014that, viz.,\nwhich leads to the annihilation of providence, and the introduction\nof pleasure as a good? But let it be conceded that we do keep away\nthose whom we encourage to become our disciples from other\nphilosopher-physicians,\u2014from the Peripatetics, for example, who deny\nthe existence of providence and the relation of Deity to man,\u2014why\nshall we not piously[460] train and heal those who have been thus\nencouraged, persuading them to devote themselves to the God of all\nthings, and free those who yield obedience to us from the great\nwounds inflicted by the words of such as are deemed to be\nphilosophers? Nay, let it also be admitted that we turn away from\nphysicians of the sect of the Stoics, who introduce a corruptible\ngod, and assert that his essence consists of a body, which is\ncapable of being changed and altered in all its parts,[461] and who\nalso maintain that all things will one day perish, and that God\nalone will be left; why shall we not even thus emancipate our\nsubjects from evils, and bring them by pious arguments to devote\nthemselves to the Creator, and to admire the Father of the Christian\nsystem, who has so arranged that instruction of the most benevolent\nkind, and fitted for the conversion of souls,[462] should be\ndistributed throughout the whole human race? Nay, if we should cure\nthose who have fallen into the folly of believing in the\ntransmigration of souls through the teaching of physicians, who will\nhave it that the rational nature descends sometimes into all kinds\nof irrational animals, and sometimes into that state of being which\nis incapable of using the imagination,[463] why should we not\nimprove the souls of our subjects by means of a doctrine which does\nnot teach that a state of insensibility or irrationalism is produced\nin the wicked instead of punishment, but which shows that the\nlabours and chastisements inflicted upon the wicked by God are a\nkind of medicines leading to conversion? For those who are\nintelligent Christians,[464] keeping this in view, deal with the\nsimple-minded, as parents do with very young[465] children. We do\nnot betake ourselves then to young persons and silly rustics, saying\nto them, \u201cFlee from physicians.\u201d Nor do we say, \u201cSee that none of\nyou lay hold of knowledge;\u201d nor do we assert that \u201cknowledge is an\nevil;\u201d nor are we mad enough to say that \u201cknowledge causes men to\nlose their soundness of mind.\u201d We would not even say that any one\never perished through wisdom; and although we give instruction, we\nnever say, \u201cGive heed to me,\u201d but \u201cGive heed to the God of all\nthings, and to Jesus, the giver of instruction concerning Him.\u201d And\nnone of us is so great a braggart[466] as to say what Celsus put in\nthe mouth of one of our teachers to his acquaintances, \u201cI alone will\nsave you.\u201d Observe here the lies which he utters against us!\nMoreover, we do _not_ assert that \u201ctrue physicians destroy those\nwhom they promise to cure.\u201d\n\nFootnote 460:\n\n For \u03b5\u1f50\u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 in the text, Boherellus conjectures \u03b5\u1f50\u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 461:\n\n \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd \u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 462:\n\n The words in the text are, \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1ff6\u03bd\n \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, for which we have adopted in the translation\n the emendation of Boherellus, \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70\n \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 463:\n\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b8\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03bd\u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78\n \u1f30\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f41\u03c4\u1f72 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\n \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f41\u03c4\u1f72 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 464:\n\n Instead of \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, as in the text, Ru\u00e6us and\n Boherellus conjecture \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, etc.\n\nFootnote 465:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03b4\u1fc7 \u03bd\u03b7\u03c0\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 466:\n\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03b1\u03b6\u1f7c\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVI.\n\n\nAnd he produces a second illustration to our disadvantage, saying that\n\u201cour teacher acts like a drunken man, who, entering a company of\ndrunkards, should accuse those who are sober of being drunk.\u201d But let\nhim show, say from the writings of Paul, that the apostle of Jesus gave\nway to drunkenness, and that his words were not those of soberness; or\nfrom the writings of John, that his thoughts do not breathe a spirit of\ntemperance and of freedom from the intoxication of evil. No one, then,\nwho is of sound mind, and teaches the doctrines of Christianity, gets\ndrunk with wine; but Celsus utters these calumnies against us in a\nspirit very unlike that of a philosopher. Moreover, let Celsus say who\nthose \u201csober\u201d persons are whom the ambassadors of Christianity accuse.\nFor in our judgment all are intoxicated who address themselves to\ninanimate objects as to God. And why do I say \u201cintoxicated?\u201d \u201cInsane\u201d\nwould be the more appropriate word for those who hasten to temples and\nworship images or animals as divinities. And they too are not less\ninsane who think that images, fashioned by men of worthless and\nsometimes most wicked character, confer any honour upon genuine\ndivinities.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVII.\n\n\nHe next likens our teacher to one suffering from ophthalmia, and his\ndisciples to those suffering from the same disease, and says that \u201csuch\nan one amongst a company of those who are afflicted with ophthalmia,\naccuses those who are sharp-sighted of being blind.\u201d Who, then, would we\nask, O Greeks, are they who in our judgment do not see, save those who\nare unable to look up from the exceeding greatness of the world and its\ncontents, and from the beauty of created things, and to see that they\nought to worship, and admire, and reverence Him alone who made these\nthings, and that it is not befitting to treat with reverence anything\ncontrived by man, and applied to the honour of God, whether it be\nwithout a reference to the Creator, or with one?[467] For, to compare\nwith that illimitable excellence, which surpasses all created being,\nthings which ought not to be brought into comparison with it, is the act\nof those whose understanding is darkened. We do not then say that those\nwho are sharp-sighted are suffering from ophthalmia or blindness; but we\nassert that those who, in ignorance of God, give themselves to temples\nand images, and so-called sacred seasons,[468] are blinded in their\nminds, and especially when, in addition to their impiety, they live also\nin licentiousness, not even inquiring after any honourable work\nwhatever, but doing everything that is of a disgraceful character.\n\nFootnote 467:\n\n \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 468:\n\n \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVIII.\n\n\nAfter having brought against us charges of so serious a kind, he wishes\nto make it appear that, although he has others to adduce, he passes them\nby in silence. His words are as follow: \u201cThese charges I have to bring\nagainst them, and others of a similar nature, not to enumerate them one\nby one, and I affirm that they are in error, and that they act\ninsolently towards God, in order to lead on wicked men by empty hopes,\nand to persuade them to despise better things, saying that if they\nrefrain from them it will be better for them.\u201d In answer to which, it\nmight be said that from the power which shows itself in those who are\nconverted to Christianity, it is not at all the \u201cwicked\u201d who are won\nover to the gospel, as the more simple class of persons, and, as many\nwould term them, the \u201cunpolished.\u201d[469] For such individuals, through\nfear of the punishments that are threatened, which arouses and exhorts\nthem to refrain from those actions which are followed by punishments,\nstrive to yield themselves up to the Christian religion, being\ninfluenced by the power of the word to such a degree, that through fear\nof what are called in the word \u201ceverlasting punishments,\u201d they despise\nall the tortures which are devised against them among men,\u2014even death\nitself, with countless other evils,\u2014which no wise man would say is the\nact of persons of wicked mind. How can temperance and sober-mindedness,\nor benevolence and liberality, be practised by a man of wicked mind?\nNay, even the fear of God cannot be felt by such an one, with respect to\nwhich, because it is useful to the many, the gospel encourages those who\nare not yet able to choose that which ought to be chosen for its own\nsake, to select it as the greatest blessing, and one above all promise;\nfor this principle cannot be implanted in him who prefers to live in\nwickedness.\n\nFootnote 469:\n\n The reading in the text is \u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03c8\u03bf\u03af, which is so opposed to the sense of\n the passage, that the conjecture of Guietus, \u1f04\u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03c8\u03bf\u03b9, has been adopted\n in the translation.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIX.\n\n\nBut if in these matters any one were to imagine that it is superstition\nrather than wickedness which appears in the multitude of those who\nbelieve the word, and should charge our doctrine with making men\nsuperstitious, we shall answer him by saying that, as a certain\nlegislator replied to the question of one who asked him whether he had\nenacted for his citizens the best laws, that he had not given them\nabsolutely the best, but the best which they were capable of receiving;\nso it might be said by the Father of the Christian doctrine, I have\ngiven the best laws and instruction for the improvement of morals of\nwhich the many were capable, not threatening sinners with imaginary\nlabours and chastisements, but with such as are real, and necessary to\nbe applied for the correction of those who offer resistance, although\nthey do not at all understand the object of him who inflicts the\npunishment, nor the effect of the labours. For the doctrine of\npunishment is both attended with utility, and is agreeable to truth, and\nis stated in obscure terms with advantage. Moreover, as for the most\npart it is not the wicked whom the ambassadors of Christianity gain\nover, neither do we insult God. For we speak regarding Him both what is\ntrue, and what appears to be clear to the multitude, but not so clear to\nthem as it is to those few who investigate the truths of the gospel in a\nphilosophical manner.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXX.\n\n\nSeeing, however, that Celsus alleges that \u201cChristians are won over by us\nthrough vain hopes,\u201d we thus reply to him when he finds fault with our\ndoctrine of the blessed life, and of communion with God: \u201cAs for you,\ngood sir, they also are won over by vain hopes who have accepted the\ndoctrine of Pythagoras and Plato regarding the soul, that it is its\nnature to ascend to the vault[470] of heaven, and in the super-celestial\nspace to behold the sights which are seen by the blessed spectators\nabove.\u201d According to you, O Celsus, they also who have accepted the\ndoctrine of the duration of the soul [after death], and who lead a life\nthrough which they become heroes, and make their abodes with the gods,\nare won over by vain hopes. Probably also they who are persuaded that\nthe soul comes [into the body] from without, and that it will be\nwithdrawn from the power of death,[471] would be said by Celsus to be\nwon over by empty hopes. Let him then come forth to the contest, no\nlonger concealing the sect to which he belongs, but confessing himself\nto be an Epicurean, and let him meet the arguments, which are not\nlightly advanced among Greeks and barbarians, regarding the immortality\nof the soul, or its duration [after death], or the immortality of the\nthinking principle;[472] and let him prove that these are words which\ndeceive with empty hopes those who give their assent to them; but that\nthe adherents of his philosophical system are pure from empty hopes, and\nthat they indeed lead to hopes of good, or\u2014what is more in keeping with\nhis opinions\u2014give birth to no hope at all, on account of the immediate\nand complete destruction of the soul [after death]. Unless, perhaps,\nCelsus and the Epicureans will deny that it is a vain hope which they\nentertain regarding _their_ end,\u2014pleasure,\u2014which, according to them, is\nthe supreme good, and which consists in the permanent health of the\nbody, and the hope regarding it which is entertained by Epicurus.[473]\n\nFootnote 470:\n\n \u1f01\u03c8\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 471:\n\n \u03a4\u03ac\u03c7\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1f74\u03bd \u1f15\u03be\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, etc. Locus certe obscurus, cui lucem afferre\n conatur Boherellus, legendo divisim \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1f74\u03bd\n \u1f15\u03be\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, ut sensus sit \u201cmorti etiam mentem subductum iri.\u201d Nam si\n \u03b8\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f25\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2, consequens est ut \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1f74\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b7.\n Cf. Aristot. lib. ii. c. 3, _de generatione animalium_.\u2014SPENCER.\n\nFootnote 472:\n\n \u1f22 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 473:\n\n \u0395\u1f30 \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f04\u03c1\u03b1 \u039a\u03ad\u03bb\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c6\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c6\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bb\u03c0\u03af\u03b4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f21\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c2, \u1f25\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1f78\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f78\n \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u1f72\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c1\u1ff3\n \u1f14\u03bb\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXXI.\n\n\nAnd do not suppose that it is not in keeping with the Christian religion\nfor me to have accepted, against Celsus, the opinions of those\nphilosophers who have treated of the immortality or after-duration of\nthe soul; for, holding certain views in common with them, we shall more\nconveniently establish our position, that the future life of blessedness\nshall be for those only who have accepted the religion which is\naccording to Jesus, and that devotion towards the Creator of all things\nwhich is pure and sincere, and unmingled with any created thing\nwhatever. And let him who likes show what \u201cbetter things\u201d we persuade\nmen to despise, and let him compare the blessed end with God in\nChrist,\u2014that is, the word, and the wisdom, and all virtue,\u2014which,\naccording to our view, shall be bestowed, by the gift of God, on those\nwho have lived a pure and blameless life, and who have felt a single and\nundivided love for the God of all things, with that end which is to\nfollow according to the teaching of each philosophic sect, whether it be\nGreek or barbarian, or according to the professions of religious\nmysteries;[474] and let him prove that the end which is predicted by any\nof the others is superior to that which we promise, and consequently\nthat that is true, and ours not befitting the gift of God, nor those who\nhave lived a good life; or let him prove that these words were not\nspoken by the divine Spirit, who filled the souls of the holy prophets.\nAnd let him who likes show that those words which are acknowledged among\nall men to be human, are superior to those which are proved to be\ndivine, and uttered by inspiration. And what are the \u201cbetter\u201d things\nfrom which we teach those who receive them that it would be better to\nabstain? For if it be not arrogant so to speak, it is self-evident that\nnothing can be denied which is better than to entrust oneself to the God\nof all, and yield oneself up to the doctrine which raises us above all\ncreated things, and brings us, through the animate and living word\u2014which\nis also living wisdom and the Son of God\u2014to God who is over all.\nHowever, as the third book of our answers to the treatise of Celsus has\nextended to a sufficient length, we shall here bring our present remarks\nto a close, and in what is to follow shall meet what Celsus has\nsubsequently written.\n\nFootnote 474:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u2019 \u1f11\u03ba\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03cc\u03c6\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f35\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f22 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f22 \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03ce\u03b4\u03b7\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n BOOK IV.\n\n\n Chapter I.\n\n\nHaving, in the three preceding books, fully stated what occurred to us\nby way of answer to the treatise of Celsus, we now, reverend Ambrosius,\nwith prayer to God through Christ, offer this fourth book as a reply to\nwhat follows. And we pray that words may be given us, as it is written\nin the book of Jeremiah that the Lord said to the prophet: \u201cBehold, I\nhave put my words in thy mouth as fire. See, I have set thee this day\nover the nations, and over the kingdoms, to root out and to pull down,\nand to destroy, and to throw down, and to build and to plant.\u201d[475] For\nwe need words now which will root out of every wounded soul the\nreproaches uttered against the truth by this treatise of Celsus, or\nwhich proceed from opinions like his. And we need also thoughts which\nwill pull down all edifices based on false opinions, and especially the\nedifice raised by Celsus in his work, which resembles the building of\nthose who said, \u201cCome, let us build us a city, and a tower whose top\nshall reach to heaven.\u201d[476] Yea, we even require a wisdom which will\nthrow down all high things that rise against the knowledge of God,[477]\nand especially that height of arrogance which Celsus displays against\nus. And in the next place, as we must not stop with rooting out and\npulling down the hindrances which have just been mentioned, but must, in\nroom of what has been rooted out, plant the plants of \u201cGod\u2019s\nhusbandry;\u201d[478] and in place of what has been pulled down, rear up the\nbuilding of God, and the temple of His glory,\u2014we must for that reason\npray also to the Lord, who bestowed the gifts named in the book of\nJeremiah, that He may grant even to us words adapted both for building\nup the [temple] of Christ, and for planting the spiritual law, and the\nprophetic words referring to the same.[479] And above all is it\nnecessary to show, as against the assertions of Celsus which follow\nthose he has already made, that the prophecies regarding Christ are true\npredictions. For, arraying himself at the same time against both\nparties\u2014against the Jews on the one hand, who deny that the advent of\nChrist has taken place, but who expect it as future, and against\nChristians on the other, who acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ spoken\nof in prophecy\u2014he makes the following statement:\u2014\n\nFootnote 475:\n\n Cf. Jer. i. 9, 10.\n\nFootnote 476:\n\n Cf. Gen. xi. 4.\n\nFootnote 477:\n\n Cf. 2 Cor. x. 5.\n\nFootnote 478:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 9.\n\nFootnote 479:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter II.\n\n\n\u201cBut that certain Christians and [all] Jews should maintain, the former\nthat there _has_ already descended, the latter that there _will_\ndescend, upon the earth a certain God, or Son of a God, who will make\nthe inhabitants of the earth righteous,[480] is a most shameless\nassertion, and one the refutation of which does not need many words.\u201d\nNow here he appears to pronounce correctly regarding not \u201ccertain\u201d of\nthe Jews, but _all_ of them, that they imagine that there is a certain\n[God] who will descend upon the earth; and with regard to Christians,\nthat _certain of them_ say that he has already come down. For he means\nthose who prove from the Jewish Scriptures that the advent of Christ has\nalready taken place, and he seems to know that there are certain\nheretical sects which deny that Christ Jesus was predicted by the\nprophets. In the preceding pages, however, we have already discussed, to\nthe best of our ability, the question of Christ having been the subject\nof prophecy, and therefore, to avoid tautology, we do not repeat much\nthat might be advanced upon this head. Observe, now, that if he had\nwished with a kind of apparent force[481] to subvert faith in the\nprophetic writings, either with regard to the future or past advent of\nChrist, he ought to have set forth the prophecies themselves which we\nChristians and Jews quote in our discussions with each other. For in\nthis way he would have appeared to turn aside those who are carried away\nby the plausible character[482] of the prophetic statements, as he\nregards it, from assenting to their truth, and from believing, on\naccount of these prophecies, that Jesus is the Christ; whereas now,\nbeing unable to answer the prophecies relating to Christ, or else not\nknowing at all what are the prophecies relating to Him, he brings\nforward no prophetic declaration, although there are countless numbers\nwhich refer to Christ; but he thinks that he prefers an accusation\nagainst the prophetic Scriptures, while he does not even state what he\nhimself would call their \u201cplausible character!\u201d He is not, however,\naware that it is not at all the Jews who say that Christ will descend as\na God, or the Son of a God, as we have shown in the foregoing pages. And\nwhen he asserts that \u201che is said by us to have already come, but by the\nJews that his advent as Messiah[483] is still future,\u201d he appears by the\nvery charge to censure our statement as one that is most shameless, and\nwhich needs no lengthened refutation.\n\nFootnote 480:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 481:\n\n \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 482:\n\n \u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 483:\n\n \u0394\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2, not \u0394\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter III.\n\n\nAnd he continues: \u201cWhat is the meaning of such a descent upon the part\nof God?\u201d not observing that, according to our teaching, the meaning of\nthe descent is pre-eminently to convert what are called in the Gospel\nthe lost \u201csheep of the house of Israel;\u201d and secondly, to take away from\nthem, on account of their disobedience, what is called the \u201ckingdom of\nGod,\u201d and to give to other husbandmen than the ancient Jews, viz. to the\nChristians, who will render to God the fruits of His kingdom in due\nseason (each action being a \u201cfruit of the kingdom\u201d).[484] We shall\ntherefore, out of a greater number, select a few remarks by way of\nanswer to the question of Celsus, when he says, \u201cWhat is the meaning of\nsuch a descent upon the part of God?\u201d And Celsus here returns to himself\nan answer which would have been given neither by Jews nor by us, when he\nasks, \u201cWas it in order to learn what goes on amongst men?\u201d For not one\nof us asserts that it was in order to learn what goes on amongst men\nthat Christ entered into this life. Immediately after, however, as if\nsome would reply that it _was_ \u201cin order to learn what goes on among\nmen,\u201d he makes this objection to his own statement: \u201cDoes he not know\nall things?\u201d Then, as if we were to answer that He _does_ know all\nthings, he raises a new question, saying, \u201cThen he does know, but does\nnot make [men] better, nor is it possible for him by means of his divine\npower to make [men] better.\u201d Now all this on his part is silly\ntalk;[485] for God, by means of His word, which is continually passing\nfrom generation to generation into holy souls, and constituting them\nfriends of God and prophets, _does_ improve those who listen to His\nwords; and by the coming of Christ He improves, through the doctrine of\nChristianity, not those who are unwilling, but those who have chosen the\nbetter life, and that which is pleasing to God. I do not know, moreover,\nwhat kind of improvement Celsus wished to take place when he raised the\nobjection, asking, \u201cIs it then not possible for him, by means of his\ndivine power, to make [men] better, unless he send some one for that\nspecial purpose?\u201d[486] Would he then have the improvement to take place\nby God\u2019s filling the minds of men with new ideas, removing at once the\n[inherent] wickedness, and implanting virtue [in its stead]?[487]\nAnother person now would inquire whether this was not inconsistent or\nimpossible in the very nature of things; we, however, would say, \u201cGrant\nit to be so, and let it be possible.\u201d Where, then, is our free\nwill?[488] and what credit is there in assenting to the truth? or how is\nthe rejection of what is false praiseworthy? But even if it were once\ngranted that such a course was not only possible, but could be\naccomplished with propriety [by God], why would not one rather inquire\n(asking a question like that of Celsus) why it was not possible for God,\nby means of His divine power, to create men who needed no improvement,\nbut who were of themselves virtuous and perfect, evil being altogether\nnon-existent? These questions may perplex ignorant and foolish\nindividuals, but not him who sees into the nature of things; for if you\ntake away the spontaneity of virtue, you destroy its essence. But it\nwould need an entire treatise to discuss these matters; and on this\nsubject the Greeks have expressed themselves at great length in their\nworks on providence. They truly would not say what Celsus has expressed\nin words, that \u201cGod knows [all things] indeed, but does not make [men]\nbetter, nor is able to do so by His divine power.\u201d We ourselves have\nspoken in many parts of our writings on these points to the best of our\nability, and the Holy Scriptures have established the same to those who\nare able to understand them.\n\nFootnote 484:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03c0\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03ce\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u0398\u03b5\u1ff7, \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f11\u03ba\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f54\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 485:\n\n \u03b5\u1f50\u03ae\u03b8\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 486:\n\n The word \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 which is found in the text seems out of place, and has\n been omitted in the translation, agreeably to the emendation of\n Boherellus.\n\nFootnote 487:\n\n \u1f0e\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f24\u03b8\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd\n \u1f00\u03b8\u03c1\u03cc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f10\u03bc\u03c6\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c1\u03b8\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9;\n\nFootnote 488:\n\n \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03c6\u2019 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd;\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IV.\n\n\nThe argument which Celsus employs against us and the Jews will be turned\nagainst himself thus: My good sir, does the God who is over all things\nknow what takes place among men, or does He not know? Now if you admit\nthe existence of a God and of providence, as your treatise indicates, He\nmust of necessity know. And if He does know, why does He not make [men]\nbetter? Is it obligatory, then, on _us_ to defend God\u2019s procedure in not\nmaking men better, although He knows their state, but not equally\nbinding on _you_, who do not distinctly show by your treatise that you\nare an Epicurean, but pretend to recognise a providence, to explain why\nGod, although knowing all that takes place among men, does not make them\nbetter, nor by divine power liberate all men from evil? We are not\nashamed, however, to say that God is constantly sending [instructors] in\norder to make men better; for there are to be found amongst men\nreasons[489] given by God which exhort them to enter on a better life.\nBut there are many diversities amongst those who serve God, and they are\nfew in number who are perfect and pure ambassadors of the truth, and who\nproduce a complete reformation, as did Moses and the prophets. But above\nall these, great was the reformation effected by Jesus, who desired to\nheal not only those who lived in one corner of the world, but as far as\nin Him lay, men in every country, for He came as the Saviour of _all_\nmen.\n\nFootnote 489:\n\n \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03ad\u03bb\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9, \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03c9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2,\n \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter V.\n\n\nThe illustrious[490] Celsus, taking occasion I know not from what, next\nraises an additional objection against us, as if we asserted that \u201cGod\nHimself will come down to men.\u201d He imagines also that it follows from\nthis, that \u201cHe has left His own abode;\u201d for he does not know the power\nof God, and that \u201cthe Spirit of the Lord filleth the world, and that\nwhich upholdeth all things hath knowledge of the voice.\u201d[491] Nor is he\nable to understand the words, \u201cDo I not fill heaven and earth? saith the\nLord.\u201d[492] Nor does he see that, according to the doctrine of\nChristianity, we all \u201cin Him live, and move, and have our being,\u201d[493]\nas Paul also taught in his address to the Athenians; and therefore,\nalthough the God of the universe should through His own power descend\nwith Jesus into the life of men, and although the Word which was in the\nbeginning with God, which is also God Himself, should come to us, He\ndoes not give His place or vacate His own seat, so that one place should\nbe empty of Him, and another which did not formerly contain Him be\nfilled. But the power and divinity of God comes through him whom God\nchooses, and resides in him in whom it finds a place, not changing its\nsituation, nor leaving its own place empty and filling another: for, in\nspeaking of His quitting one place and occupying another, we do not mean\nsuch expressions to be taken _topically_; but we say that the soul of\nthe bad man, and of him who is overwhelmed in wickedness, is abandoned\nby God, while we mean that the soul of him who wishes to live\nvirtuously, or of him who is making progress [in a virtuous life], or\nwho is already living conformably thereto, is filled with or becomes a\npartaker of the Divine Spirit. It is not necessary, then, for the\ndescent of Christ, or for the coming of God to men, that He should\nabandon a greater seat, and that things on earth should be changed, as\nCelsus imagines when he says, \u201cIf you were to change a single one, even\nthe least, of things on earth, all things would be overturned and\ndisappear.\u201d And if we must speak of a change in any one by the appearing\nof the power of God, and by the entrance of the word among men, we shall\nnot be reluctant to speak of changing from a wicked to a virtuous, from\na dissolute to a temperate, and from a superstitious to a religious\nlife, the person who has allowed the word of God to find entrance into\nhis soul.\n\nFootnote 490:\n\n \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 491:\n\n Wisd. Solom. i. 7, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 492:\n\n Cf. Jer. xxiii. 24.\n\nFootnote 493:\n\n Cf. Acts xvii. 28.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VI.\n\n\nBut if you will have us to meet the most ridiculous among the charges of\nCelsus, listen to him when he says: \u201cNow God, being unknown amongst men,\nand deeming himself on that account to have less than his due,[494]\nwould desire to make himself known, and to make trial both of those who\nbelieve upon him and of those who do not, like those of mankind who have\nrecently come into the possession of riches, and who make a display of\ntheir wealth; and thus they testify to an excessive but very mortal\nambition on the part of God.\u201d[495] We answer, then, that God, not being\nknown by wicked men, would desire to make Himself known, not because He\nthinks that He meets with less than His due, but because the knowledge\nof Him will free the possessor from unhappiness. Nay, not even with the\ndesire to try those who do or who do not believe upon Him, does He, by\nHis unspeakable and divine power, Himself take up His abode in certain\nindividuals, or send His Christ; but He does this in order to liberate\nfrom all their wretchedness those who do believe upon Him, and who\naccept His divinity, and that those who do _not_ believe may no longer\nhave this as a ground of excuse, viz. that their unbelief is the\nconsequence of their not having heard the word of instruction. What\nargument, then, proves that it follows from our views that God,\naccording to our representations, is \u201clike those of mankind who have\nrecently come into the possession of riches, and who make a display of\ntheir wealth?\u201d For God makes no display towards us, from a desire that\nwe should understand and consider His pre-eminence; but desiring that\nthe blessedness which results from His being known by us should be\nimplanted in our souls, He brings it to pass through Christ, and His\never-indwelling word, that we come to an intimate fellowship[496] with\nHim. No mortal ambition, then, does the Christian doctrine testify as\nexisting on the part of God.\n\nFootnote 494:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u2019 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 495:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03ac\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bd\u03b5\u03cc\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c5 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 496:\n\n \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VII.\n\n\nI do not know how it is, that after the foolish remarks which he has\nmade upon the subject which we have just been discussing, he should add\nthe following, that \u201cGod does not desire to make himself known for his\nown sake, but because he wishes to bestow upon us the knowledge of\nhimself for the sake of our salvation, in order that those who accept it\nmay become virtuous and be saved, while those who do not accept may be\nshown to be wicked and be punished.\u201d And yet, after making such a\nstatement, he raises a new objection, saying: \u201cAfter so long a period of\ntime,[497] then, did God now bethink himself of making men live\nrighteous lives,[498] but neglect to do so before?\u201d To which we answer,\nthat there never was a time when God did not wish to make men live\nrighteous lives; but He continually evinced His care for the improvement\nof the rational animal,[499] by affording him occasions for the exercise\nof virtue. For in every generation the wisdom of God, passing into those\nsouls which it ascertains to be holy, converts them into friends and\nprophets of God. And there may be found in the sacred books [the names\nof] those who in each generation were holy, and were recipients of the\nDivine Spirit, and who strove to convert their contemporaries so far as\nin their power.\n\nFootnote 497:\n\n \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 498:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 499:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03b6\u1ff6\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VIII.\n\n\nAnd it is not matter of surprise that in certain generations there have\nexisted prophets who, in the reception of divine influence,[500]\nsurpassed, by means of their stronger and more powerful [religious]\nlife, other prophets who were their contemporaries, and others also who\nlived before and after them. And so it is not at all wonderful that\nthere should also have been a time when something of surpassing\nexcellence[501] took up its abode among the human race, and which was\ndistinguished above all that preceded or even that followed it. But\nthere is an element of profound mystery in the account of these things,\nand one which is incapable of being received by the popular\nunderstanding. And in order that these difficulties should be made to\ndisappear, and that the objections raised against the advent of Christ\nshould be answered\u2014viz. that, \u201cafter so long a period of time, then, did\nGod now bethink himself of making men live righteous lives, but neglect\nto do so before?\u201d\u2014it is necessary to touch upon the narrative of the\ndivisions [of the nations], and to make it evident why it was, that\n\u201cwhen the Most High divided the nations, when He separated the sons of\nAdam, He set the bounds of the nations according to the number of the\nangels of God, and the portion of the Lord was His people Jacob, Israel\nthe cord of His inheritance;\u201d[502] and it will be necessary to state the\nreason why the birth of each man took place within each particular\nboundary, under him who obtained the boundary by lot, and how it rightly\nhappened that \u201cthe portion of the Lord was His people Jacob, and Israel\nthe cord of His inheritance,\u201d and why formerly the portion of the Lord\nwas His people Jacob, and Israel the cord of His inheritance. But with\nrespect to those who come after, it is said to the Saviour by the\nFather, \u201cAsk of me, and I will give Thee the heathen for Thine\ninheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy\npossession.\u201d[503] For there are certain connected and related reasons,\nbearing upon the different treatment of human souls, which are difficult\nto state and to investigate.[504]\n\nFootnote 500:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c7\u1fc7 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 501:\n\n \u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03af \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03bc\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 502:\n\n Deut. xxxii. 8, 9 (according to the LXX.).\n\nFootnote 503:\n\n Cf. Ps. ii. 8.\n\nFootnote 504:\n\n \u0395\u1f30\u03c3\u1f76 \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f31\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f04\u03c6\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b4\u03b9\u03ae\u03b3\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IX.\n\n\nThere came, then, although Celsus may not wish to admit it, after the\nnumerous prophets who were the reformers of that well-known Israel, the\nChrist, the Reformer of the whole world, who did not need to employ\nagainst men whips, and chains, and tortures, as was the case under the\nformer economy. For when the sower went forth to sow, the doctrine\nsufficed to sow the word everywhere. But if there is a time coming which\nwill necessarily circumscribe the duration of the world, by reason of\nits having had a beginning, and if there is to be an end to the world,\nand after the end a just judgment of all things, it will be incumbent on\nhim who treats the declarations of the Gospels philosophically, to\nestablish these doctrines by arguments of all kinds, not only derived\ndirectly from the sacred Scriptures, but also by inferences deducible\nfrom them; while the more numerous and simpler class of believers, and\nthose who are unable to comprehend the many varied aspects of the divine\nwisdom, must entrust themselves to God, and to the Saviour of our race,\nand be contented with His \u201cipse dixit,\u201d[505] instead of this or any\nother demonstration whatever.\n\nFootnote 505:\n\n \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter X.\n\n\nIn the next place, Celsus, as is his custom, having neither proved nor\nestablished anything, proceeds to say, as if we talked of God in a\nmanner that was neither holy nor pious, that \u201cit is perfectly manifest\nthat they babble about God in a way that is neither holy nor\nreverential;\u201d and he imagines that we do these things to excite the\nastonishment of the ignorant, and that we do not speak the truth\nregarding the necessity of punishments for those who have sinned. And\naccordingly he likens us to those who \u201cin the Bacchic mysteries\nintroduce phantoms and objects of terror.\u201d With respect to the\nmysteries of Bacchus, whether there is any reliable account of them,\nor none that is such, let the Greeks tell, and let Celsus and his\nboon-companions[506] listen. But we defend our own procedure, when we\nsay that our object is to reform the human race, either by the threats\nof punishments which we are persuaded are necessary for the whole\nworld,[507] and which perhaps are not without use[508] to those who\nare to endure them; or by the promises made to those who have lived\nvirtuous lives, and in which are contained the statements regarding\nthe blessed termination which is to be found in the kingdom of God,\nreserved for those who are worthy of becoming His subjects.\n\nFootnote 506:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u1ff6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 507:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76.\n\nFootnote 508:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. On Origen\u2019s views respecting rewards and punishments,\n cf. Huet\u2019s _Origeniana_, Book ii. question xi.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XI.\n\n\nAfter this, being desirous to show that it is nothing either wonderful\nor new which we state regarding floods or conflagrations, but that, from\nmisunderstanding the accounts of these things which are current among\nGreeks or barbarous nations, we have accorded our belief to our own\nScriptures when treating of them, he writes as follows: \u201cThe belief has\nspread among them, from a misunderstanding of the accounts of these\noccurrences, that after lengthened cycles of time, and the returns and\nconjunctions of planets, conflagrations and floods are wont to happen,\nand because after the last flood, which took place in the time of\nDeucalion, the lapse of time, agreeably to the vicissitude of all\nthings, requires a conflagration; and this made them give utterance to\nthe erroneous opinion that God will descend, bringing fire like a\ntorturer.\u201d Now in answer to this we say, that I do not understand how\nCelsus, who has read a great deal, and who shows that he has perused\nmany histories, had not his attention arrested[509] by the antiquity of\nMoses, who is related by certain Greek historians to have lived about\nthe time of Inachus the son of Phoroneus, and is acknowledged by the\nEgyptians to be a man of great antiquity, as well as by those who have\nstudied the history of the Ph\u0153nicians. And any one who likes may peruse\nthe two books of Flavius Josephus on the antiquities of the Jews, in\norder that he may see in what way Moses was more ancient than those who\nasserted that floods and conflagrations take place in the world after\nlong intervals of time; which statement Celsus alleges the Jews and\nChristians to have misunderstood, and, not comprehending what was said\nabout a conflagration, to have declared that \u201cGod will descend, bringing\nfire like a torturer.\u201d[510]\n\nFootnote 509:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7.\n\nFootnote 510:\n\n \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u1fe6\u03c1 \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XII.\n\n\nWhether, then, there are cycles of time, and floods, or conflagrations\nwhich occur periodically or not, and whether the Scripture is aware of\nthis, not only in many passages, but especially where Solomon says,\n\u201cWhat is the thing which hath been? Even that which shall be. And what\nis the thing which hath been done? Even that which shall be done,\u201d[511]\netc. etc., belongs not to the present occasion to discuss. For it is\nsufficient only to observe, that Moses and certain of the prophets,\nbeing men of very great antiquity, did not receive from others the\nstatements relating to the [future] conflagration of the world; but, on\nthe contrary (if we must attend to the matter of time[512]), others\nrather misunderstanding them, and not inquiring accurately into their\nstatements, invented the fiction of the same events recurring at certain\nintervals, and differing neither in their essential nor accidental\nqualities.[513] But we do not refer either the deluge or the\nconflagration to cycles and planetary periods; but the cause of them we\ndeclare to be the extensive prevalence of wickedness,[514] and its\n[consequent] removal by a deluge or a conflagration. And if the voices\nof the prophets say that God \u201ccomes down,\u201d who has said, \u201cDo I not fill\nheaven and earth? saith the Lord,\u201d[515] the term is used in a figurative\nsense. For God \u201ccomes down\u201d from His own height and greatness when He\narranges the affairs of men, and especially those of the wicked. And as\ncustom leads men to say that teachers \u201ccondescend\u201d[516] to children, and\nwise men to those youths who have just betaken themselves to philosophy,\nnot by \u201cdescending\u201d in a _bodily_ manner; so, if God is said anywhere in\nthe Holy Scriptures to \u201ccome down,\u201d it is understood as spoken in\nconformity with the usage which so employs the word, and in like manner\nalso with the expression \u201cgo up.\u201d\n\nFootnote 511:\n\n Cf. Eccles. i. 9.\n\nFootnote 512:\n\n \u03b5\u1f30 \u03c7\u03c1\u1f74 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 513:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03cc\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03b5\u03b2\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 514:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c7\u03b5\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 515:\n\n Cf. Jer. xiii. 24.\n\nFootnote 516:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIII.\n\n\nBut as it is in mockery that Celsus says we speak of \u201cGod coming down\nlike a torturer bearing fire,\u201d and thus compels us unseasonably to\ninvestigate words of deeper meaning, we shall make a few remarks,\nsufficient to enable our hearers to form an idea[517] of the defence\nwhich disposes of the ridicule of Celsus against us, and then we shall\nturn to what follows. The divine word says that our God is \u201ca consuming\nfire,\u201d[518] and that \u201cHe draws rivers of fire before Him;\u201d[519] nay,\nthat He even entereth in as \u201ca refiner\u2019s fire, and as a fuller\u2019s\nherb,\u201d[520] to purify His own people. But when He is said to be a\n\u201cconsuming fire,\u201d we inquire what are the things which are appropriate\nto be consumed by God. And we assert that they are wickedness, and the\nworks which result from it, and which, being figuratively called \u201cwood,\nhay, stubble,\u201d[521] God consumes as a fire. The wicked man, accordingly,\nis said to build up on the previously-laid foundation of reason, \u201cwood,\nand hay, and stubble.\u201d If, then, any one can show that these words were\ndifferently understood by the writer, and can prove that the wicked man\n_literally_[522] builds up \u201cwood, or hay, or stubble,\u201d it is evident\nthat the fire must be understood to be material, and an object of sense.\nBut if, on the contrary, the works of the wicked man are spoken of\n_figuratively_ under the names of \u201cwood, or hay, or stubble,\u201d why does\nit not at once occur [to inquire] in what sense the word \u201cfire\u201d is to be\ntaken, so that \u201cwood\u201d of such a kind should be consumed? for [the\nScripture] says: \u201cThe fire will try each man\u2019s work of what sort it is.\nIf any man\u2019s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive\na reward. If any man\u2019s work be burned, he shall suffer loss.\u201d[523] But\nwhat work can be spoken of in these words as being \u201cburned,\u201d save all\nthat results from wickedness? Therefore our God is a \u201cconsuming fire\u201d in\nthe sense in which we have taken the word; and thus He enters in as a\n\u201crefiner\u2019s fire,\u201d to refine the rational nature, which has been filled\nwith the lead of wickedness, and to free it from the other impure\nmaterials, which adulterate the natural gold or silver, so to speak, of\nthe soul.[524] And, in like manner, \u201crivers of fire\u201d are said to be\nbefore God, who will thoroughly cleanse away the evil which is\nintermingled throughout the whole soul. But these remarks are sufficient\nin answer to the assertion, \u201cthat thus they were made to give expression\nto the erroneous opinion that God will come down bearing fire like a\ntorturer.\u201d\n\nFootnote 517:\n\n \u03b3\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 518:\n\n Cf. Deut. iv. 24, ix. 3.\n\nFootnote 519:\n\n Cf. Dan. vii. 10.\n\nFootnote 520:\n\n Cf. Mal. iii. 2.\n\nFootnote 521:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 12.\n\nFootnote 522:\n\n \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 523:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 13-15.\n\nFootnote 524:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 (\u1f35\u03bd\u2019 \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f40\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ac\u03c3\u03c9), \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2, \u1f22 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5,\n \u03b4\u03bf\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIV.\n\n\nBut let us look at what Celsus next with great ostentation announces in\nthe following fashion: \u201cAnd again,\u201d he says, \u201clet us resume the subject\nfrom the beginning, with a larger array of proofs. And I make no new\nstatement, but say what has been long settled. God is good, and\nbeautiful, and blessed, and that in the best and most beautiful\ndegree.[525] But if he come down among men, he must undergo a change,\nand a change from good to evil, from virtue to vice, from happiness to\nmisery, and from best to worst. Who, then, would make choice of such a\nchange? It is the nature of a mortal, indeed, to undergo change and\nremoulding, but of an immortal to remain the same and unaltered. God,\nthen, could not admit of such a change.\u201d Now it appears to me that the\nfitting answer has been returned to these objections, when I have\nrelated what is called in Scripture the \u201ccondescension\u201d[526] of God to\nhuman affairs; for which purpose He did not need to undergo a\ntransformation, as Celsus thinks we assert, nor a change from good to\nevil, nor from virtue to vice, nor from happiness to misery, nor from\nbest to worst. For, continuing unchangeable in His essence, He\ncondescends to human affairs by the economy of His providence.[527] We\nshow, accordingly, that the Holy Scriptures represent God as\nunchangeable, both by such words as \u201cThou art the same,\u201d[528] and \u201cI\nchange not;\u201d[529] whereas the gods of Epicurus, being composed of atoms,\nand, so far as their structure is concerned, capable of dissolution,\nendeavour to throw off the atoms which contain the elements of\ndestruction. Nay, even the god of the Stoics, as being corporeal, at one\ntime has his whole essence composed of the guiding principle[530] when\nthe conflagration [of the world] takes place; and at another, when a\nrearrangement of things occurs, he again becomes partly material.[531]\nFor even the Stoics were unable distinctly to comprehend the natural\nidea of God, as of a being altogether incorruptible and simple, and\nuncompounded and indivisible.\n\nFootnote 525:\n\n \u1f49 \u0398\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03cc\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f78\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n \u1f00\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff3.\n\nFootnote 526:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 527:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03af\u1fb3 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u1fb3.\n\nFootnote 528:\n\n Ps. cii. 27.\n\nFootnote 529:\n\n Mal. iii. 6.\n\nFootnote 530:\n\n \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 531:\n\n The reading in the text is, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b3\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2, which is thus\n corrected by Guietus: \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u1f74\u03c2 \u03b3\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XV.\n\n\nAnd with respect to His having descended among men, He was \u201cpreviously\nin the form of God;\u201d[532] and through benevolence, divested Himself [of\nHis glory], that He might be capable of being received by men. But He\ndid not, I imagine, undergo any change from \u201cgood to evil,\u201d for \u201cHe did\nno _sin_;\u201d[533] nor from \u201cvirtue to vice,\u201d for \u201cHe knew no _sin_.\u201d[534]\nNor did He pass from \u201chappiness to misery,\u201d but He humbled Himself, and\nnevertheless was blessed, even when His humiliation was undergone in\norder to benefit our race. Nor was there any change in Him from \u201cbest to\nworst,\u201d for how can goodness and benevolence be of \u201cthe worst?\u201d Is it\nbefitting to say of the physician, who looks on dreadful sights and\nhandles unsightly objects in order to cure the sufferers, that he passes\nfrom \u201cgood to evil,\u201d or from \u201cvirtue to vice,\u201d or from \u201chappiness to\nmisery?\u201d And yet the physician, in looking on dreadful sights and\nhandling unsightly objects, does not wholly escape the possibility of\nbeing involved in the same fate. But He who heals the wounds of our\nsouls, through the word of God that is in Him, is Himself incapable of\nadmitting any wickedness. But if the immortal God\u2014the Word\u2014by assuming a\nmortal body and a human soul, appears to Celsus to undergo a change and\ntransformation, let him learn that the Word, still remaining essentially\nthe Word, suffers none of those things which are suffered by the body or\nthe soul; but, condescending occasionally to [the weakness of] him who\nis unable to look upon the splendours and brilliancy of Deity, He\nbecomes as it were flesh, speaking with a literal voice, until he who\nhas received Him in such a form is able, through being elevated in some\nslight degree by the teaching of the Word, to gaze upon what is, so to\nspeak, His real and pre-eminent appearance.[535]\n\nFootnote 532:\n\n Cf. Phil. ii. 6, 7.\n\nFootnote 533:\n\n Cf. 1 Pet. ii. 22.\n\nFootnote 534:\n\n Cf. 2 Cor. v. 21.\n\nFootnote 535:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVI.\n\n\nFor there are different appearances, as it were, of the Word, according\nas He shows Himself to each one of those who come to His doctrine; and\nthis in a manner corresponding to the condition of him who is just\nbecoming a disciple, or of him who has made a little progress, or of him\nwho has advanced further, or of him who has already _nearly_ attained to\nvirtue, or who has even _already_ attained it. And hence it is not the\ncase, as Celsus and those like him would have it, that our God was\ntransformed, and ascending the lofty mountain, showed that His real\nappearance was something different, and far more excellent than what\nthose who remained below, and were unable to follow Him on high, beheld.\nFor those below did not possess eyes capable of seeing the\ntransformation of the Word into His glorious and more divine condition.\nBut with difficulty were they able to receive Him as He was; so that it\nmight be said of Him by those who were unable to behold His more\nexcellent nature: \u201cWe saw Him, and He had no form nor comeliness; but\nHis form was mean,[536] and inferior to that of the sons of men.\u201d[537]\nAnd let these remarks be an answer to the suppositions of Celsus, who\ndoes not understand the changes or transformations of Jesus, as related\nin the histories, nor His mortal and immortal nature.\n\nFootnote 536:\n\n \u1f04\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 537:\n\n \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVII.\n\n\nBut will not those narratives, especially when they are understood in\ntheir proper sense, appear far more worthy of respect than the story\nthat Dionysus was deceived by the Titans, and expelled from the throne\nof Jupiter, and torn in pieces by them, and his remains being afterwards\nput together again, he returned as it were once more to life, and\nascended to heaven? Or are the Greeks at liberty to refer such stories\nto the doctrine of the soul, and to interpret them figuratively, while\nthe door of a consistent explanation, and one everywhere in accord and\nharmony with the writings of the Divine Spirit, who had His abode in\npure souls, is closed against _us_? Celsus, then, is altogether ignorant\nof the purpose of our writings, and it is therefore upon his own\nacceptation of them that he casts discredit, and not upon their real\nmeaning; whereas, if he had reflected on what is appropriate[538] to a\nsoul which is to enjoy an everlasting life, and on the opinion which we\nare to form of its essence and principles, he would not so have\nridiculed the entrance of the immortal into a mortal body, which took\nplace not according to the metempsychosis of Plato, but agreeably to\nanother and higher view of things. And he would have observed one\n\u201cdescent,\u201d distinguished by its great benevolence, undertaken to convert\n(as the Scripture mystically terms them) the \u201clost sheep of the house of\nIsrael,\u201d which had strayed down from the mountains, and to which the\nShepherd is said in certain parables to have gone down, leaving on the\nmountains those \u201cwhich had not strayed.\u201d\n\nFootnote 538:\n\n \u03c4\u03af \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVIII.\n\n\nBut Celsus, lingering over matters which he does not understand, leads\nus to be guilty of tautology, as we do not wish even in appearance to\nleave any one of his objections unexamined. He proceeds, accordingly, as\nfollows: \u201cGod either really changes himself, as these assert, into a\nmortal body, and the impossibility of that has been already declared; or\nelse he does _not_ undergo a change, but only causes the beholders to\nimagine so, and thus deceives them, and is guilty of falsehood. Now\ndeceit and falsehood are nothing but evils, and would only be employed\nas a medicine, either in the case of sick and lunatic friends, with a\nview to their cure, or in that of enemies when one is taking measures to\nescape danger. But no sick man or lunatic is a friend of God, nor does\nGod fear any one to such a degree as to shun danger by leading him into\nerror.\u201d Now the answer to these statements might have respect partly to\nthe nature of the Divine Word, who is God, and partly to the soul of\nJesus. As respects the nature of the Word, in the same way as the\nquality of the food changes in the nurse into milk with reference to the\nnature of the child, or is arranged by the physician with a view to the\ngood of his health in the case of a sick man, or [is specially] prepared\nfor a stronger man, because he possesses greater vigour, so does God\nappropriately change, in the case of each individual, the power of the\nWord to which belongs the natural property of nourishing the human soul.\nAnd to one is given, as the Scripture terms it, \u201cthe sincere milk of the\nword;\u201d and to another, who is weaker, as it were, \u201cherbs;\u201d and to\nanother who is full-grown, \u201cstrong meat.\u201d And the Word does not, I\nimagine, prove false to His own nature, in contributing nourishment to\neach one, according as he is capable of receiving Him. Nor does He\nmislead or prove false. But if one were to take the change as referring\nto the soul of Jesus after it had entered a body, we would inquire in\nwhat sense the term \u201cchange\u201d is used. For if it be meant to apply to its\nessence, such a supposition is inadmissible, not only in relation to the\nsoul of Jesus, but also to the rational soul of any other being. And if\nit be alleged that it suffers anything from the body when united with\nit, or from the place to which it has come, then what inconvenience[539]\ncan happen to the Word who, in great benevolence, brought down a Saviour\nto the human race?\u2014seeing none of those who formerly professed to effect\na cure could accomplish so much as that soul showed _it_ could do, by\nwhat it performed, even by voluntarily descending to the level of human\ndestinies for the benefit of our race. And the Divine Word, well knowing\nthis, speaks to that effect in many passages of Scripture, although it\nis sufficient at present to quote one testimony of Paul to the following\neffect: \u201cLet this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus; who,\nbeing in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God,\nbut made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a\nservant, and was made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion\nas a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the\ndeath of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and\ngiven Him a name which is above every name.\u201d[540]\n\nFootnote 539:\n\n \u03c4\u03af \u1f04\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 540:\n\n Phil. ii. 5-9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIX.\n\n\nOthers, then, may concede to Celsus that God does not undergo a change,\nbut leads the spectators to imagine that He does; whereas we who are\npersuaded that the advent of Jesus among men was no mere appearance, but\na real manifestation, are not affected by this charge of Celsus. We\nnevertheless will attempt a reply, because you assert, Celsus, do you\nnot, that it is sometimes allowable to employ deceit and falsehood by\nway, as it were, of medicine?[541] Where, then, is the absurdity, if\nsuch a saving result were to be accomplished, that some such events\nshould have taken place? For certain words, when savouring of falsehood,\nproduce upon such characters a corrective effect (like the similar\ndeclarations of physicians to their patients), rather than when spoken\nin the spirit of truth. This, however, must be our defence against other\nopponents. For there is no absurdity in Him who healed sick friends,\nhealing the dear human race by means of such remedies as He would not\nemploy preferentially, but only according to circumstances.[542] The\nhuman race, moreover, when in a state of mental alienation, had to be\ncured by methods which the Word saw would aid in bringing back those so\nafflicted to a sound state of mind. But Celsus says also, that \u201cone acts\nthus towards enemies when taking measures to escape danger. But God does\nnot fear any one, so as to escape danger by leading into error those who\nconspire against him.\u201d Now it is altogether unnecessary and absurd to\nanswer a charge which is advanced by no one against our Saviour. And we\nhave already replied, when answering other charges, to the statement\nthat \u201cno one who is either in a state of sickness or mental alienation\nis a friend of God.\u201d For the answer is, that such arrangements have been\nmade, not for the sake of those who, being already friends, afterwards\nfell sick or became afflicted with mental disease, but in order that\nthose who were still enemies through sickness of the soul, and\nalienation of the natural reason, might become the friends of God. For\nit is distinctly stated that Jesus endured all things on behalf of\nsinners, that He might free them from sin, and convert them to\nrighteousness.\n\nFootnote 541:\n\n \u1f45\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c6\u1fc2\u03c2, \u1f66 \u039a\u03ad\u03bb\u03c3\u03b5, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03c1\u1fb3 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1f72\n \u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u1fb6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c8\u03b5\u03cd\u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 542:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XX.\n\n\nIn the next place, as he represents the Jews accounting in a way\npeculiar to themselves for their belief that the advent of Christ among\nthem is still in the future, and the Christians as maintaining in\n_their_ way that the coming of the Son of God into the life of men has\nalready taken place, let us, as far as we can, briefly consider these\npoints. According to Celsus, the Jews say that \u201c[human] life, being\nfilled with all wickedness, needed one sent from God, that the wicked\nmight be punished, and all things purified in a manner analogous to the\nfirst deluge which happened.\u201d And as the Christians are said to make\nstatements additional to this, it is evident that he alleges that they\nadmit these. Now, where is the absurdity in the coming of one who is, on\naccount of the prevailing flood of wickedness, to purify the world, and\nto treat every one according to his deserts? For it is not in keeping\nwith the character of God that the diffusion of wickedness should not\ncease, and all things be renewed. The Greeks, moreover, know of the\nearth\u2019s being purified at certain times by a deluge or a fire, as Plato,\ntoo, says somewhere to this effect: \u201cAnd when the gods overwhelm the\nearth, purifying it with water, some of them on the mountains,\u201d[543]\netc. etc. Must it be said, then, that if the Greeks make such\nassertions, they are to be deemed worthy of respect and consideration,\nbut that if we too maintain certain of these views, which are quoted\nwith approval by the Greeks, they cease to be honourable? And yet they\nwho care to attend to the connection and truth of all our records, will\nendeavour to establish not only the antiquity of the writers, but the\nvenerable nature of their writings, and the consistency of their several\nparts.\n\nFootnote 543:\n\n Cf. Plato in the _Tim\u00e6us_, and Book iii. _de legibus_.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXI.\n\n\nBut I do not understand how he can imagine the overturning of the tower\n[of Babel] to have happened with a similar object to that of the deluge,\nwhich effected a purification of the earth, according to the accounts\nboth of Jews and Christians. For, in order that the narrative contained\nin Genesis respecting the tower may be held to convey no secret meaning,\nbut, as Celsus supposes, may be taken as true to the letter,[544] the\nevent does not on such a view appear to have taken place for the purpose\nof purifying the earth; unless, indeed, he imagines that the so-called\nconfusion of tongues is such a purificatory process. But on this point,\nhe who has the opportunity will treat more seasonably when his object is\nto show not only what is the meaning of the narrative in its historical\nconnection, but what metaphorical meaning may be deduced from it.[545]\nSeeing that he imagines, however, that Moses, who wrote the account of\nthe tower, and the confusion of tongues, has perverted the story of the\nsons of Aloeus,[546] and referred it to the tower, we must remark that I\ndo not think any one prior to the time of Homer[547] has mentioned the\nsons of Aloeus, while I am persuaded that what is related about the\ntower has been recorded by Moses as being much older not only than\nHomer, but even than the invention of letters among the Greeks. Who,\nthen, are the perverters of each other\u2019s narratives? Whether do they who\nrelate the story of the Aload\u00e6 pervert the history of the time, or he\nwho wrote the account of the tower and the confusion of tongues the\nstory of the Aload\u00e6? Now to impartial hearers Moses appears to be more\nancient than Homer. The destruction by fire, moreover, of Sodom and\nGomorrha on account of their sins, related by Moses in Genesis, is\ncompared by Celsus to the story of Phaethon,\u2014all these statements of his\nresulting from one blunder, viz. his not attending to the [greater]\nantiquity of Moses. For they who relate the story of Phaethon seem to be\nyounger even than Homer, who, again, is much younger than Moses. We do\nnot deny, then, that the purificatory fire and the destruction of the\nworld took place in order that evil might be swept away, and all things\nbe renewed; for we assert that we have learned these things from the\nsacred books of the prophets. But since, as we have said in the\npreceding pages, the prophets, in uttering many predictions regarding\nfuture events, show that they have spoken the truth concerning many\nthings that are past, and thus give evidence of the indwelling of the\nDivine Spirit, it is manifest that, with respect to things still future,\nwe should repose faith in them, or rather in the Divine Spirit that is\nin them.\n\nFootnote 544:\n\n \u03c3\u03b1\u03c6\u1f74\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 545:\n\n \u1f18\u03c0\u1f70\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f96 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\n \u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 546:\n\n Otus and Ephialtes. Cf. Smith\u2019s _Dict. of Myth. and Biog._ _s.v._\n\nFootnote 547:\n\n Cf. Hom. _Odyss._ xi. 305.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXII.\n\n\nBut, according to Celsus, \u201cthe Christians, making certain additional\nstatements to those of the Jews, assert that the Son of God has been\nalready sent on account of the sins of the Jews; and that the Jews\nhaving chastised Jesus, and given him gall to drink, have brought upon\nthemselves the divine wrath.\u201d And any one who likes may convict this\nstatement of falsehood, if it be not the case that the whole Jewish\nnation was overthrown within one single generation after Jesus had\nundergone these sufferings at their hands. For forty and two years, I\nthink, after the date of the crucifixion of Jesus, did the destruction\nof Jerusalem take place. Now it has never been recorded, since the\nJewish nation began to exist, that they have been expelled for so long a\nperiod from their venerable temple-worship[548] and service, and\nenslaved by more powerful nations; for if at any time they appeared to\nbe abandoned because of their sins, they were notwithstanding visited\n[by God],[549] and returned to their own country, and recovered their\npossessions, and performed unhindered the observances of their law. One\nfact, then, which proves that Jesus was something divine and\nsacred,[550] is this, that Jews should have suffered on His account now\nfor a lengthened time calamities of such severity. And we say with\nconfidence that they will never be restored to their former\ncondition.[551] For they committed a crime of the most unhallowed kind,\nin conspiring against the Saviour of the human race in that city where\nthey offered up to God a worship containing the symbols of mighty\nmysteries. It accordingly behoved that city where Jesus underwent these\nsufferings to perish utterly, and the Jewish nation to be overthrown,\nand the invitation to happiness offered them by God to pass to\nothers,\u2014the Christians, I mean, to whom has come the doctrine of a pure\nand holy worship, and who have obtained new laws, in harmony with the\nestablished constitution in all countries;[552] seeing those which were\nformerly imposed, as on a single nation which was ruled by princes of\nits own race and of similar manners,[553] could not now be observed in\nall their entireness.\n\nFootnote 548:\n\n \u1f01\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 549:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03b7\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 550:\n\n \u0398\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 551:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u2019 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 552:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f01\u03c1\u03bc\u03cc\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ce\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3.\n\nFootnote 553:\n\n \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03ae\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIII.\n\n\nIn the next place, ridiculing after his usual style the race of Jews and\nChristians, he compares them all \u201cto a flight of bats or to a swarm of\nants issuing out of their nest, or to frogs holding council in a marsh,\nor to worms crawling together in the corner of a dunghill, and\nquarrelling with one another as to which of them were the greater\nsinners, and asserting that God shows and announces to us all things\nbeforehand; and that, abandoning the whole world, and the regions of\nheaven,[554] and this great earth, he becomes a citizen[555] among us\nalone, and to us alone makes his intimations, and does not cease sending\nand inquiring, in what way we may be associated with him for ever.\u201d And\nin his fictitious representation, he compares us to \u201cworms which assert\nthat there is a God, and that immediately after him, we who are made by\nhim are altogether like unto God, and that all things have been made\nsubject to us,\u2014earth, and water, and air, and stars,\u2014and that all things\nexist for our sake, and are ordained to be subject to us.\u201d And,\naccording to his representation, the worms\u2014that is, we ourselves\u2014say\nthat \u201cnow, since certain amongst us commit sin, God will come or will\nsend his Son to consume the wicked with fire, that the rest of us may\nhave eternal life with him.\u201d And to all this he subjoins the remark,\nthat \u201csuch wranglings would be more endurable amongst worms and frogs\nthan betwixt Jews and Christians.\u201d\n\nFootnote 554:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u1f70\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 555:\n\n \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIV.\n\n\nIn reply to these, we ask of those who accept such aspersions as are\nscattered against us, Do you regard all men as a collection of bats, or\nas frogs, or as worms, in consequence of the pre-eminence of God? or do\nyou not include the rest of mankind in this proposed comparison, but on\naccount of their possession of reason, and of the established laws,\ntreat _them_ as men, while you hold cheap[556] _Christians_ and _Jews_,\nbecause their opinions are distasteful to you, and compare them to the\nanimals above mentioned? And whatever answer you may return to our\nquestion, we shall reply by endeavouring to show that such assertions\nare most unbecoming, whether spoken of all men in general, or of us in\nparticular. For, let it be supposed that you say justly that all men, as\ncompared with God, are [rightly] likened to these worthless[557]\nanimals, since their littleness is not at all to be compared with the\nsuperiority of God, what then do you mean by littleness? Answer me, good\nsirs. If you refer to littleness of body, know that superiority and\ninferiority, if truth is to be judge, are not determined by a bodily\nstandard.[558] For, on such a view, vultures[559] and elephants would be\nsuperior to us men; for they are larger, and stronger, and longer-lived\nthan we. But no sensible person would maintain that these irrational\ncreatures are superior to rational beings, merely on account of their\nbodies: for the possession of reason raises a rational being to a vast\nsuperiority over all irrational creatures. Even the race of virtuous and\nblessed beings would admit this, whether they are, as ye say, good\ndemons, or, as we are accustomed to call them, the angels of God, or any\nother natures whatever superior to that of man, since the rational\nfaculty within them has been made perfect, and endowed with all virtuous\nqualities.[560]\n\nFootnote 556:\n\n \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 557:\n\n \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 558:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03bd \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 559:\n\n \u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03b5\u03c2; \u03b3\u03c1\u03cd\u03c0\u03b5\u03c2?\n\nFootnote 560:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXV.\n\n\nBut if you depreciate the littleness of man, not on account of his body,\nbut of his soul, regarding it as inferior to that of other rational\nbeings, and especially of those who are virtuous; and inferior, because\nevil dwells in it,\u2014why should those among Christians who are wicked, and\nthose among the Jews who lead sinful lives, be termed a collection of\nbats, or ants, or worms, or frogs, rather than those individuals among\nother nations who are guilty of wickedness?\u2014seeing, in this respect, any\nindividual whatever, especially if carried away by the tide of evil, is,\nin comparison with the rest of mankind, a bat, and worm, and frog, and\nant. And although a man may be an orator like Demosthenes, yet, if\nstained with wickedness like his,[561] and guilty of deeds proceeding,\nlike his, from a wicked nature; or an Antiphon, who was also considered\nto be indeed an orator, yet who annihilated the doctrine of providence\nin his writings, which were entitled _Concerning Truth_, like that\ndiscourse of Celsus,\u2014such individuals are notwithstanding worms, rolling\nin a corner of the dung-heap of stupidity and ignorance. Indeed,\nwhatever be the nature of the rational faculty, it could not reasonably\nbe compared to a worm, because it possesses capabilities of virtue.[562]\nFor these adumbrations[563] towards virtue do not allow of those who\npossess the power of acquiring it, and who are incapable of wholly\nlosing its seeds, to be likened to a worm. It appears, therefore, that\nneither can men in general be deemed worms in comparison with God. For\nreason, having its beginning in the reason of God, cannot allow of the\nrational animal being considered wholly alien from Deity. Nor can those\namong Christians and Jews who are wicked, and who, in truth, are neither\nChristians nor Jews, be compared, more than other wicked men, to worms\nrolling in a corner of a dunghill. And if the nature of reason will not\npermit of such comparisons, it is manifest that we must not calumniate\nhuman nature, which has been formed for virtue, even if it should sin\nthrough ignorance, nor liken it to animals of the kind described.\n\nFootnote 561:\n\n The allusion may possibly be to his flight from the field of Ch\u00e6ronea,\n or to his avarice, or to the alleged impurity of his life, which is\n referred to by Plutarch in his _Lives of the Ten Orators_.\u2014SPENCER.\n\nFootnote 562:\n\n \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 563:\n\n \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03c5\u03c0\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVI.\n\n\nBut if it is on account of those opinions of the Christians and Jews\nwhich displease Celsus (and which he does not at all appear to\nunderstand) that they are to be regarded as worms and ants, and the rest\nof mankind as different, let us examine the acknowledged opinions of\nChristians and Jews,[564] and compare them with those of the rest of\nmankind, and see whether it will not appear to those who have once\nadmitted that certain men are worms and ants, that _they_ are the worms\nand ants and frogs who have fallen away from sound views of God, and,\nunder a vain appearance of piety,[565] worship either irrational\nanimals, or images, or other objects, the works of men\u2019s hands;[566]\nwhereas, from the beauty of such, they ought to admire the Maker of\nthem, and worship Him: while those are indeed men, and more honourable\nthan men (if there be anything that is so), who, in obedience to their\nreason, are able to ascend from stocks and stones,[567] nay, even from\nwhat is reckoned the most precious of all matter\u2014silver and gold; and\nwho ascend up also from the beautiful things in the world to the Maker\nof all, and entrust themselves to Him who alone is able to satisfy[568]\nall existing things, and to overlook the thoughts of all, and to hear\nthe prayers of all; who send up their prayers to Him, and do all things\nas in the presence of Him who beholds everything, and who are careful,\nas in the presence of the Hearer of all things, to say nothing which\nmight not with propriety be reported to God. Will not such piety as\nthis\u2014which can be overcome neither by labours, nor by the dangers of\ndeath, nor by logical plausibilities[569]\u2014be of no avail in preventing\nthose who have obtained it from being any longer compared to worms, even\nif they had been so represented before their assumption of a piety so\nremarkable? Will they who subdue that fierce longing for sexual\npleasures which has reduced the souls of many to a weak and feeble\ncondition, and who subdue it because they are persuaded that they cannot\notherwise have communion with God, unless they ascend to Him through the\nexercise of temperance, appear to you to be the brothers of worms, and\nrelatives of ants, and to bear a likeness to frogs? What! is the\nbrilliant quality of justice, which keeps inviolate the rights common to\nour neighbour, and our kindred, and which observes fairness, and\nbenevolence, and goodness, of no avail in saving him who practises it\nfrom being termed a bird of the night? And are not they who wallow in\ndissoluteness, as do the majority of mankind, and they who associate\npromiscuously with common harlots, and who teach that such practices are\nnot wholly contrary to propriety, worms who roll in mire?\u2014especially\nwhen they are compared with those who have been taught not to take the\n\u201cmembers of Christ,\u201d and the body inhabited by the Word, and make them\nthe \u201cmembers of a harlot;\u201d and who have already learned that the body of\nthe rational being, as consecrated to the God of all things, is the\ntemple of the God whom they worship, becoming such from the pure\nconceptions which they entertain of the Creator, and who also, being\ncareful not to corrupt the temple of God by unlawful pleasure, practise\ntemperance as constituting piety towards God!\n\nFootnote 564:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03cc\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f38\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 565:\n\n \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u1fb3 \u03b4\u2019 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 566:\n\n \u1f22 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 567:\n\n \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03be\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 568:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 569:\n\n \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c4\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVII.\n\n\nAnd I have not yet spoken of the other evils which prevail amongst men,\nfrom which even those who have the appearance of philosophers are not\nspeedily freed, for in philosophy there are many pretenders. Nor do I\nsay anything on the point that many such evils are found to exist among\nthose who are neither Jews nor Christians. Of a truth, such evil\npractices do not at all prevail among _Christians_, if you properly\nexamine what constitutes a Christian. Or, if any persons of that kind\nshould be discovered, they are at least not to be found among those who\nfrequent the assemblies, and come to the public prayers, without their\nbeing excluded from them, unless it should happen, and that rarely, that\nsome one individual of such a character escapes notice in the crowd. We,\nthen, are not worms who assemble together; who take our stand against\nthe Jews on those Scriptures which they believe to be divine, and who\nshow that He who was spoken of in prophecy _has_ come, and that _they_\nhave been abandoned on account of the greatness of their sins, and that\n_we_ who have accepted the Word have the highest hopes in God, both\nbecause of our faith in Him, and of His ability to receive us into His\ncommunion pure from all evil and wickedness of life. If a man, then,\nshould call himself a Jew or a Christian, he would not say without\nqualification that God had made the whole world, and the vault of\nheaven[570] for us in particular. But if a man is, as Jesus taught, pure\nin heart, and meek, and peaceful, and cheerfully submits to dangers for\nthe sake of his religion, such an one might reasonably have confidence\nin God, and with a full apprehension of the word contained in the\nprophecies, might say this also: \u201cAll these things has God shown\nbeforehand, and announced to us who believe.\u201d\n\nFootnote 570:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVIII.\n\n\nBut since he has represented those whom he regards as worms, viz. the\nChristians, as saying that \u201cGod, having abandoned the heavenly regions,\nand despising this great earth, takes up His abode amongst us alone, and\nto us alone makes His announcements, and ceases not His messages and\ninquiries as to how we may become His associates for ever,\u201d we have to\nanswer that he attributes to us words which we never uttered, seeing we\nboth read and know that God loves all existing things, and loathes[571]\nnothing which He has made, for He would not have created anything in\nhatred. We have, moreover, read the declaration: \u201cAnd Thou sparest all\nthings, because they are Thine, O lover of souls. For Thine\nincorruptible Spirit is in all. And therefore those also who have fallen\naway for a little time Thou rebukest, and admonishest, reminding them of\ntheir sins.\u201d[572] How can we assert that \u201cGod, leaving the regions of\nheaven, and the whole world, and despising this great earth, takes up\nHis abode amongst us only,\u201d when we have found that all thoughtful\npersons must say in their prayers, that \u201cthe earth is full of the mercy\nof the Lord,\u201d[573] and that \u201cthe mercy of the Lord is upon all\nflesh;\u201d[574] and that God, being good, \u201cmaketh His sun to arise upon the\nevil and the good, and sendeth His rain upon the just and the\nunjust;\u201d[575] and that He encourages us to a similar course of action,\nin order that we may become His sons, and teaches us to extend the\nbenefits which we enjoy, so far as in our power, to all men? For He\nHimself is said to be the Saviour of all men, especially of them that\nbelieve;[576] and His Christ to be the \u201cpropitiation for our sins, and\nnot for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.\u201d[577] And\nthis, then, is our answer to the allegations of Celsus. Certain other\nstatements, in keeping with the character of the Jews, might be made by\nsome of that nation, but certainly not by the Christians, who have been\ntaught that \u201cGod commendeth His love towards us, in that, while we were\nyet sinners, Christ died for us;\u201d[578] and although \u201cscarcely for a\nrighteous man will one die, yet peradventure for a good man some would\neven dare to die.\u201d[579] But now is Jesus declared to have come for the\nsake of sinners in all parts of the world (that they may forsake their\nsin, and entrust themselves to God), being called also, agreeably to an\nancient custom of these Scriptures, the \u201cChrist of God.\u201d\n\nFootnote 571:\n\n \u03b2\u03b4\u03b5\u03bb\u03cd\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 572:\n\n Cf. Wisd. of Solom. xi. 26, xii. 1, 2.\n\nFootnote 573:\n\n Ps. xxxiii. 5.\n\nFootnote 574:\n\n Ecclus. xviii. 13.\n\nFootnote 575:\n\n Cf. Matt. v. 45.\n\nFootnote 576:\n\n Cf. 1 Tim. iv. 10.\n\nFootnote 577:\n\n Cf. 1 John ii. 2.\n\nFootnote 578:\n\n Cf. Rom. v. 8.\n\nFootnote 579:\n\n Cf. Rom. v. 7.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIX.\n\n\nBut Celsus perhaps has misunderstood certain of those whom he has termed\n\u201cworms,\u201d when they affirm that \u201cGod exists, and that _we_ are next to\nHim.\u201d And he acts like those who would find fault with an entire sect of\nphilosophers, on account of certain words uttered by some rash youth\nwho, after a three days\u2019 attendance upon the lectures of a philosopher,\nshould exalt himself above other people as inferior to himself, and\ndevoid of philosophy. For we know that there are many creatures more\nhonourable[580] than man; and we have read that \u201cGod standeth in the\ncongregation of gods,\u201d[581] but of gods who are not worshipped by the\nnations, \u201cfor all the gods of the nations are idols.\u201d[582] We have read\nalso, that \u201cGod, standing in the congregation of the gods, judgeth among\nthe gods.\u201d[583] We know, moreover, that \u201cthough there be that are called\ngods, whether in heaven or in earth (as there be gods many and lords\nmany), but to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things,\nand we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we\nby Him.\u201d[584] And we know that in this way the angels are superior to\nmen; so that men, when made perfect, become like the angels. \u201cFor in the\nresurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but the\nrighteous are as the angels in heaven,\u201d[585] and also become \u201cequal to\nthe angels.\u201d[586] We know, too, that in the arrangement of the universe\nthere are certain beings termed \u201cthrones,\u201d and others \u201cdominions,\u201d and\nothers \u201cpowers,\u201d and others \u201cprincipalities;\u201d and we see that we men,\nwho are far inferior to these, may entertain the hope that by a virtuous\nlife, and by acting in all things agreeably to reason, we may rise to a\nlikeness with all these. And, lastly, because \u201cit doth not yet appear\nwhat we shall be; but we know that when He shall appear, we shall be\nlike God, and shall see Him as He is.\u201d[587] And if any one were to\nmaintain what is asserted by some (either by those who possess\nintelligence or who do not, but have misconceived sound reason), that\n\u201cGod exists, and _we_ are next to Him,\u201d I would interpret the word \u201cwe,\u201d\nby using in its stead, \u201cWe who act according to reason,\u201d or rather, \u201cWe\n_virtuous_, who act according to reason.\u201d[588] For, in our opinion, the\nsame virtue belongs to _all_ the blessed, so that the virtue of man and\nof God is identical.[589] And therefore we are taught to become\n\u201cperfect,\u201d as our Father in heaven is perfect.[590] No good and virtuous\nman, then, is a \u201cworm rolling in filth,\u201d nor is a pious man an \u201cant,\u201d\nnor a righteous man a \u201cfrog;\u201d nor could one whose soul is enlightened\nwith the bright light of truth be reasonably likened to a \u201cbird of the\nnight.\u201d\n\nFootnote 580:\n\n \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03b9\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 581:\n\n Cf. Ps. lxxxii. 1.\n\nFootnote 582:\n\n \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1. Cf. Ps. xcvi. 5.\n\nFootnote 583:\n\n Cf. Ps. lxxxii. 1.\n\nFootnote 584:\n\n 1 Cor. viii. 5, 6.\n\nFootnote 585:\n\n Cf. Matt. xxii. 30.\n\nFootnote 586:\n\n Cf. Luke xx. 36.\n\nFootnote 587:\n\n Cf. 1 John iii. 2.\n\nFootnote 588:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03cc \u03b3\u2019 \u1f04\u03bd \u1f11\u03c1\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f78 \u201c\u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2\u201d \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03af.\n\nFootnote 589:\n\n \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f21 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1f74 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6. Cf. Cicero, _de leg._ i.:\n \u201cJam vero virtus eadem in homine ac deo est, neque ullo alio in genio\n pr\u00e6terea. Est autem virtus nihil aliud, quam in se perfecta, et ad\n summum perducta natura. Est igitur homini cum Deo similitudo.\u201d Cf.\n also Clemens Alex. _Strom._ vii.: \u039f\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03ac\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03a3\u03c4\u03c9\u03ca\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76, \u1f00\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2,\n \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6. Cf. Theodoret,\n _Serm._ xi.\u2014SPENCER.\n\nFootnote 590:\n\n Cf. Matt. v. 48.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXX.\n\n\nIt appears to me that Celsus has also misunderstood this statement, \u201cLet\nus make man in our image and likeness;\u201d[591] and has therefore\nrepresented the \u201cworms\u201d as saying that, being created by God, we\naltogether resemble Him. If, however, he had known the difference\nbetween man being created \u201cin the image of God\u201d and \u201cafter His\nlikeness,\u201d and that God is recorded to have said, \u201cLet us make man after\nour image and likeness,\u201d but that He made man \u201cafter the image\u201d of God,\nbut not then also \u201cafter His likeness,\u201d[592] he would not have\nrepresented us as saying that \u201cwe are altogether like Him.\u201d Moreover, we\ndo not assert that the stars are subject to us; since the resurrection\nwhich is called the \u201cresurrection of the just,\u201d and which is understood\nby wise men, is compared to the sun, and moon, and stars, by him who\nsaid, \u201cThere is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and\nanother glory of the stars; for one star differeth from another star in\nglory. So also is the resurrection of the dead.\u201d[593] Daniel also\nprophesied long ago regarding these things.[594] Celsus says further,\nthat we assert that \u201call things have been arranged so as to be subject\nto us,\u201d having perhaps heard some of the intelligent among us speaking\nto that effect, and perhaps also not understanding the saying, that \u201che\nwho is the greatest amongst us is the servant of all.\u201d[595] And if the\nGreeks say, \u201cThen sun and moon are the slaves of mortal men,\u201d[596] they\nexpress approval of the statement, and give an explanation of its\nmeaning; but since such a statement is either not made at all by us, or\nis expressed in a different way, Celsus here too falsely accuses us.\nMoreover, we who, according to Celsus, are \u201cworms,\u201d are represented by\nhim as saying that, \u201cseeing some among us are guilty of sin, God will\ncome to us, or will send His own Son, that He may consume the wicked,\nand that we other frogs may enjoy eternal life with Him.\u201d Observe how\nthis venerable philosopher, like a low buffoon,[597] turns into ridicule\nand mockery, and a subject of laughter, the announcement of a divine\njudgment, and of the punishment of the wicked, and of the reward of the\nrighteous; and subjoins to all this the remark, that \u201csuch statements\nwould be more endurable if made by worms and frogs than by Christians\nand Jews who quarrel with one another!\u201d We shall not, however, imitate\nhis example, nor say similar things regarding those philosophers who\nprofess to know the nature of all things, and who discuss with each\nother the manner in which all things were created, and how the heaven\nand earth originated, and all things in them; and how the souls [of\nmen], being either unbegotten, and not created by God, are yet governed\nby Him, and pass from one body to another;[598] or being formed at the\nsame time with the body, exist for ever or pass away. For instead of\ntreating with respect and accepting the intention of those who have\ndevoted themselves to the investigation of the truth, one might\nmockingly and revilingly say that such men were \u201cworms,\u201d who did not\nmeasure themselves by their corner of their dung-heap in human life, and\nwho accordingly gave forth their opinions on matters of such importance\nas if they understood them, and who strenuously assert that they have\nobtained a view of those things which cannot be seen without a higher\ninspiration and a diviner power. \u201cFor no man knoweth the things of a\nman, save the spirit of man which is in him: even so the things of God\nknoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.\u201d[599] We are not, however, mad,\nnor do we compare such human wisdom (I use the word \u201cwisdom\u201d in the\ncommon acceptation), which busies itself not about the affairs of the\nmultitude, but in the investigation of truth, to the wrigglings of worms\nor any other such creatures; but in the spirit of truth, we testify of\ncertain Greek philosophers that they knew God, seeing \u201cHe manifested\nHimself to them,\u201d[600] although \u201cthey glorified Him not as God, neither\nwere thankful, but became vain in their imaginations; and professing\nthemselves to be wise, they became foolish, and changed the glory of the\nincorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to\nbirds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.\u201d[601]\n\nFootnote 591:\n\n Cf. Gen. i. 26.\n\nFootnote 592:\n\n Cf. Gen. i. 27.\n\nFootnote 593:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 41, 42.\n\nFootnote 594:\n\n Cf. Dan. xii. 3.\n\nFootnote 595:\n\n Cf. Matt. xx. 28.\n\nFootnote 596:\n\n Cf. Eurip. _Ph\u0153niss._ 512.\n\nFootnote 597:\n\n \u03b2\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 598:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 599:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. ii. 11.\n\nFootnote 600:\n\n Cf. Rom. i. 19.\n\nFootnote 601:\n\n Rom. i. 21-23.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXI.\n\n\nAfter this, wishing to prove that there is no difference between Jews\nand Christians, and those animals previously enumerated by him, he\nasserts that the Jews were \u201cfugitives from Egypt, who never performed\nanything worthy of note, and never were held in any reputation or\naccount.\u201d[602] Now, on the point of their not being fugitives, nor\nEgyptians, but Hebrews who settled in Egypt, we have spoken in the\npreceding pages. But if he thinks his statement, that \u201cthey were never\nheld in any reputation or account,\u201d to be proved, because no remarkable\nevent in their history is found recorded by the Greeks, we would answer,\nthat if one will examine their polity from its first beginning, and the\narrangement of their laws, he will find that they were men who\nrepresented upon earth the shadow of a heavenly life, and that amongst\nthem God is recognised as nothing else, save He who is over all things,\nand that amongst them no maker of images was permitted to enjoy the\nrights of citizenship.[603] For neither painter nor image-maker existed\nin their state, the law expelling all such from it; that there might be\nno pretext for the construction of images,\u2014an art which attracts the\nattention of foolish men, and which drags down the eyes of the soul from\nGod to earth. There was, accordingly, amongst them a law to the\nfollowing effect: \u201cDo not transgress the law, and make to yourselves a\ngraven image, any likeness of male or female; either a likeness of any\none of the creatures that are upon the earth, or a likeness of any\nwinged fowl that flieth under the heaven, or a likeness of any creeping\nthing that creepeth upon the earth, or a likeness of any of the fishes\nwhich are in the waters under the earth.\u201d[604] The law, indeed, wished\nthem to have regard to the truth of each individual thing, and not to\nform representations of things contrary to reality, feigning the\nappearance merely of what was really male or really female, or the\nnature of animals, or of birds, or of creeping things, or of fishes.\nVenerable, too, and grand was this prohibition of theirs: \u201cLift not up\nthine eyes unto heaven, lest, when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and\nthe stars, and all the host of heaven, thou shouldst be led astray to\nworship them, and serve them.\u201d[605] And what a _r\u00e9gime_[606] was that\nunder which the whole nation was placed, and which rendered it\nimpossible for any effeminate person to appear in public;[607] and\nworthy of admiration, too, was the arrangement by which harlots were\nremoved out of the state, those incentives to the passions of the youth!\nTheir courts of justice also were composed of men of the strictest\nintegrity, who, after having for a lengthened period set the example of\nan unstained life, were entrusted with the duty of presiding over the\ntribunals, and who, on account of the superhuman purity of their\ncharacter,[608] were said to be gods, in conformity with an ancient\nJewish usage of speech. Here was the spectacle of a whole nation devoted\nto philosophy; and in order that there might be leisure to listen to\ntheir sacred laws, the days termed \u201cSabbath,\u201d and the other festivals\nwhich existed among them, were instituted. And why need I speak of the\norders of their priests and sacrifices, which contain innumerable\nindications [of deeper truths] to those who wish to ascertain the\nsignification of things?\n\nFootnote 602:\n\n \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bc\u1ff7 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 603:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf.\n\nFootnote 604:\n\n Cf. Deut. iv. 16-18.\n\nFootnote 605:\n\n Cf. Deut. iv. 19.\n\nFootnote 606:\n\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 607:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b7\u03bb\u03c5\u03b4\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03bf\u1f37\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u2019 \u1f26\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 608:\n\n \u03bf\u1f35 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u1f26\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXII.\n\n\nBut since nothing belonging to human nature is permanent, this polity\nalso must gradually be corrupted and changed. And Providence, having\nremodelled their venerable system where it needed to be changed, so as\nto adapt it to men of all countries, gave to believers of all nations,\nin place of the Jews, the venerable religion of Jesus, who, being\nadorned not only with understanding, but also with a share of\ndivinity,[609] and having overthrown the doctrine regarding earthly\ndemons, who delight in frankincense, and blood, and in the exhalations\nof sacrificial odours, and who, like the fabled Titans or Giants, drag\ndown men from thoughts of God; and having Himself disregarded their\nplots, directed chiefly against the better class of men, enacted laws\nwhich ensure happiness to those who live according to them, and who do\nnot flatter the demons by means of sacrifices, but altogether despise\nthem, through help of the word of God, which aids those who look upwards\nto Him. And as it was the will of God that the doctrine of Jesus should\nprevail amongst men, the demons could effect nothing, although straining\nevery nerve[610] to accomplish the destruction of Christians; for they\nstirred up both princes, and senates, and rulers in every place,\u2014nay,\neven nations themselves, who did not perceive the irrational and wicked\nprocedure of the demons,\u2014against the word, and those who believed in it;\nyet, notwithstanding, the word of God, which is more powerful than all\nother things, even when meeting with opposition, deriving from the\nopposition, as it were, a means of increase, advanced onwards, and won\nmany souls, such being the will of God. And we have offered these\nremarks by way of a necessary digression. For we wished to answer the\nassertion of Celsus concerning the Jews, that they were \u201cfugitives from\nEgypt, and that these men, beloved by God, never accomplished anything\nworthy of note.\u201d And further, in answer to the statement that \u201cthey were\nnever held in any reputation or account,\u201d we say, that living apart as a\n\u201cchosen nation and a royal priesthood,\u201d and shunning intercourse with\nthe many nations around them, in order that their morals might escape\ncorruption, they enjoyed the protection of the divine power, neither\ncoveting like the most of mankind the acquisition of other kingdoms, nor\nyet being abandoned so as to become, on account of their smallness, an\neasy object of attack to others, and thus be altogether destroyed; and\nthis lasted so long as they were worthy of the divine protection. But\nwhen it became necessary for them, as a nation wholly given to sin, to\nbe brought back by their sufferings to their God, they were abandoned\n[by Him], sometimes for a longer, sometimes for a shorter period, until\nin the time of the Romans, having committed the greatest of sins in\nputting Jesus to death, they were completely deserted.\n\nFootnote 609:\n\n \u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3 \u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03c1\u1fb3.\n\nFootnote 610:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b3\u03b5 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIII.\n\n\nImmediately after this, Celsus, assailing the contents of the first book\nof Moses, which is entitled \u201cGenesis,\u201d asserts that \u201cthe Jews\naccordingly endeavoured to derive their origin from the first race of\njugglers and deceivers,[611] appealing to the testimony of dark and\nambiguous words, whose meaning was veiled in obscurity, and which they\nmisinterpreted[612] to the unlearned and ignorant, and that, too, when\nsuch a point had never been called in question during the long preceding\nperiod.\u201d Now Celsus appears to me in these words to have expressed very\nobscurely the meaning which he intended to convey. It is probable,\nindeed, that his obscurity on this subject is intentional, inasmuch as\nhe saw the strength of the argument which establishes the descent of the\nJews from their ancestors; while again, on the other hand, he wished not\nto appear ignorant that the question regarding the Jews and their\ndescent was one that could not be lightly disposed of. It is certain,\nhowever, that the Jews trace their genealogy back to the three fathers,\nAbraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And the names of these individuals possess\nsuch efficacy, when united with the name of God, that not only do those\nbelonging to the nation employ in their prayers to God, and in the\nexorcising of demons, the words, \u201cGod of Abraham, and God of Isaac, and\nGod of Jacob,\u201d but so also do almost all those who occupy themselves\nwith incantations and magical rites. For there is found in treatises on\nmagic in many countries such an invocation of God, and assumption of the\ndivine name, as implies a familiar use of it by these men in their\ndealings with demons. These facts, then\u2014adduced by Jews and Christians\nto prove the sacred character of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, the\nfathers of the Jewish race\u2014appear to me not to have been altogether\nunknown to Celsus, but not to have been distinctly set forth by him,\nbecause he was unable to answer the argument which might be founded on\nthem.\n\nFootnote 611:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03bf\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 612:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03be\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIV.\n\n\nFor we inquire of all those who employ such invocations of God, saying:\nTell us, friends, who was Abraham, and what sort of person was Isaac,\nand what power did Jacob possess, that the appellation \u201cGod,\u201d when\njoined with their name, could effect such wonders? And from whom have\nyou learned, or can you learn, the facts relating to these individuals?\nAnd who has occupied himself with writing a history about them, either\ndirectly magnifying these men by ascribing to them mysterious powers, or\nhinting obscurely at their possession of certain great and marvellous\nqualities, patent to those who are qualified to see them?[613] And when,\nin answer to our inquiry, no one can show from what history\u2014whether\nGreek or barbarian\u2014or, if not a history, yet at least from what mystical\nnarrative,[614] the accounts of these men are derived, we shall bring\nforward the book entitled \u201cGenesis,\u201d which contains the acts of these\nmen, and the divine oracles addressed to them, and will say, Does not\nthe use by you of the names of these three ancestors of the race,\nestablishing in the clearest manner that effects not to be lightly\nregarded are produced by the invocation of them, evidence the divinity\nof the men?[615] And yet we know them from no other source than the\nsacred books of the Jews! Moreover, the phrases, \u201cthe God of Israel,\u201d\nand \u201cthe God of the Hebrews,\u201d and \u201cthe God who drowned in the Red Sea\nthe king of Egypt and the Egyptians,\u201d are _formul\u00e6_ frequently employed\nagainst demons and certain wicked powers. And we learn the history of\nthe names and their interpretation from those Hebrews, who in their\nnational literature and national tongue dwell with pride upon these\nthings, and explain their meaning. How, then, should the Jews attempt to\nderive their origin from the first race of those whom Celsus supposed to\nbe jugglers and deceivers, and shamelessly endeavour to trace themselves\nand their beginning back to these?\u2014whose names, being Hebrew, are an\nevidence to the Hebrews, who have their sacred books written in the\nHebrew language and letters, that their nation is akin to these men. For\nup to the present time, the Jewish names belonging to the Hebrew\nlanguage were either taken from their writings, or generally from words\nthe meaning of which was made known by the Hebrew language.\n\nFootnote 613:\n\n \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03c3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03cd\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u2019\n \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\n \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 614:\n\n \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 615:\n\n \u1f10\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u1f72\u00b7 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ae\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f51\u03c6\u2019 \u1f51\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f40\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n \u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba\n \u03b5\u1f50\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03cd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd\n \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd; Guietus would expunge the words \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXV.\n\n\nAnd let any one who peruses the treatise of Celsus observe whether it\ndoes not convey some such insinuation as the above, when he says: \u201cAnd\nthey attempted to derive their origin from the first race of jugglers\nand deceivers, appealing to the testimony of dark and ambiguous words,\nwhose meaning was veiled in obscurity.\u201d For these names are indeed\nobscure, and not within the comprehension and knowledge of many, though\nnot in our opinion of doubtful meaning, even although assumed by those\nwho are aliens to our religion; but as, according to Celsus, they do\nnot[616] convey any ambiguity, I am at a loss to know why he has\nrejected them. And yet, if he had wished honestly to overturn the\ngenealogy which he deemed the Jews to have so shamelessly arrogated, in\nboasting of Abraham and his descendants [as their progenitors], he ought\nto have quoted _all_ the passages bearing on the subject; and, in the\nfirst place, to have advocated his cause with such arguments as he\nthought likely to be convincing, and in the next to have bravely[617]\nrefuted, by means of what appeared to him to be the true meaning, and by\narguments in its favour, the errors existing on the subject. But neither\nCelsus nor any one else will be able, by their discussions regarding the\nnature of names employed for miraculous purposes, to lay down the\ncorrect doctrine regarding them, and to demonstrate that those men were\nto be lightly esteemed whose names merely, not among their countrymen\nalone, but also amongst foreigners, could accomplish [such results]. He\nought to have shown, moreover, how we, in misinterpreting[618] the\npassages in which these names are found, deceive our hearers, as he\nimagines, while he himself, who boasts that he is not ignorant or\nunintelligent, gives the true interpretation of them. And he hazarded\nthe assertion,[619] in speaking of those names, from which the Jews\ndeduce their genealogies, that \u201cnever, during the long antecedent\nperiod, has there been any dispute about these names, but that at the\npresent time the Jews dispute about them with certain others,\u201d whom he\ndoes not mention. Now, let him who chooses show who these are that\ndispute with the Jews, and who adduce even probable arguments to show\nthat Jews and Christians do not decide correctly on the points relating\nto these names, but that there are others who have discussed these\nquestions with the greatest learning and accuracy. But we are well\nassured that none can establish anything of the sort, it being manifest\nthat these names are derived from the Hebrew language, which is found\nonly among the Jews.\n\nFootnote 616:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u039a\u03ad\u03bb\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1. _Libri editi ad oram_ \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 617:\n\n \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 618:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03be\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 619:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b9\u03c8\u03b5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVI.\n\n\nCelsus in the next place, producing from history other than that of the\ndivine record, those passages which bear upon the claims to great\nantiquity put forth by many nations, as the Athenians, and Egyptians,\nand Arcadians, and Phrygians, who assert that certain individuals have\nexisted among them who sprang from the earth, and who each adduce proofs\nof these assertions, says: \u201cThe Jews, then, leading a grovelling\nlife[620] in some corner of Palestine, and being a wholly uneducated\npeople, who had not heard that these matters had been committed to verse\nlong ago by Hesiod and innumerable other inspired men, wove together\nsome most incredible and insipid stories,[621] viz. that a certain man\nwas formed by the hands of God, and had breathed into him the breath of\nlife, and that a woman was taken from his side, and that God issued\ncertain commands, and that a serpent opposed these, and gained a victory\nover the commandments of God; thus relating certain old wives\u2019 fables,\nand most impiously representing God as weak at the very beginning [of\nthings], and unable to convince even a single human being whom He\nHimself had formed.\u201d By these instances, indeed, this deeply read and\nlearned Celsus, who accuses Jews and Christians of ignorance and want of\ninstruction, clearly evinces the accuracy of his knowledge of the\nchronology of the respective historians, whether Greek or Barbarian,\nsince he imagines that Hesiod and the \u201cinnumerable\u201d others, whom he\nstyles \u201cinspired\u201d men, are older than Moses and his writings\u2014that very\nMoses who is shown to be much older than the time of the Trojan war! It\nis not the Jews, then, who have composed incredible and insipid stories\nregarding the birth of man from the earth, but these \u201cinspired\u201d men of\nCelsus, Hesiod and his other \u201cinnumerable\u201d companions, who, having\nneither learned nor heard of the far older and most venerable accounts\nexisting in Palestine, have written such histories as their Theogonies,\nattributing, so far as in their power, \u201cgeneration\u201d to their deities,\nand innumerable other absurdities. And these are the writers whom Plato\nexpels from his \u201cState\u201d as being corrupters of the youth,[622]\u2014Homer,\nviz., and those who have composed poems of a similar description! Now it\nis evident that Plato did not regard as \u201cinspired\u201d those men who had\nleft behind them such works. But perhaps it was from a desire to cast\nreproach upon us, that this Epicurean Celsus, who is better able to\njudge than Plato (if it be the same Celsus who composed two other books\nagainst the Christians), called those individuals \u201cinspired\u201d whom he did\nnot in reality regard as such.\n\nFootnote 620:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03cd\u03c8\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 621:\n\n \u1f00\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 622:\n\n Cf. Plato, _de Repub._ Book ii. etc.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVII.\n\n\nHe charges us, moreover, with introducing \u201ca man formed by the _hands_\nof God,\u201d although the book of Genesis has made no mention of the \u201chands\u201d\nof God, either when relating the creation or the \u201cfashioning\u201d[623] of\nthe man; while it is Job and David who have used the expression, \u201cThy\nhands have made me and fashioned me;\u201d[624] with reference to which it\nwould need a lengthened discourse to point out the sense in which these\nwords were understood by those who used them, both as regards the\ndifference between \u201cmaking\u201d and \u201cfashioning,\u201d and also the \u201chands\u201d of\nGod. For those who do not understand these and similar expressions in\nthe sacred Scriptures, imagine that we attribute to the God who is over\nall things a form[625] such as that of man; and according to their\nconceptions, it follows that we consider the body of God to be furnished\nwith wings, since the Scriptures, literally understood, attribute such\nappendages to God. The subject before us, however, does not require us\nto interpret these expressions; for, in our explanatory remarks upon the\nbook of Genesis, these matters have been made, to the best of our\nability, a special subject of investigation. Observe next the\nmalignity[626] of Celsus in what follows. For the Scripture, speaking of\nthe \u201cfashioning\u201d[627] of the man, says, \u201cAnd breathed into his face the\nbreath of life, and the man became a living soul.\u201d[628] Whereon Celsus,\nwishing maliciously to ridicule the \u201cinbreathing into his face of the\nbreath of life,\u201d and not understanding the sense in which the expression\nwas employed, states that \u201cthey composed a story that a man was\nfashioned by the hands of God, and was inflated by breath blown into\nhim,\u201d[629] in order that, taking the word \u201cinflated\u201d to be used in a\nsimilar way to the inflation of skins, he might ridicule the statement,\n\u201cHe breathed into his face the breath of life,\u201d\u2014terms which are used\nfiguratively, and require to be explained in order to show that God\ncommunicated to man of His incorruptible Spirit; as it is said, \u201cFor\nThine incorruptible Spirit is in all things.\u201d[630]\n\nFootnote 623:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 624:\n\n Cf. Job x. 8 and Ps. cxix. 73.\n\nFootnote 625:\n\n \u03c3\u03c7\u1fc6\u03bc\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 626:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 627:\n\n \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 628:\n\n Gen. ii. 7; Heb. \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d0\u05b5\u05b7\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05d9\u05d5 , LXX. \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 629:\n\n \u1f10\u03bc\u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 630:\n\n Wisd. of Solom. xii. 1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVIII.\n\n\nIn the next place, as it is his object to slander our Scriptures, he\nridicules the following statement: \u201cAnd God caused a deep sleep to fall\nupon Adam, and he slept: and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the\nflesh instead thereof. And the rib, which He had taken from the man,\nmade He a woman,\u201d[631] and so on; without quoting the words, which would\ngive the hearer the impression that they are spoken with a figurative\nmeaning. He would not even have it appear that the words were used\nallegorically, although he says afterwards, that \u201cthe more modest among\nJews and Christians are ashamed of these things, and endeavour to give\nthem somehow an allegorical signification.\u201d Now we might say to him, Are\nthe statements of your \u201cinspired\u201d Hesiod, which he makes regarding the\nwoman in the form of a myth, to be explained allegorically, in the sense\nthat she was given by Jove to men as an evil thing, and as a retribution\nfor the theft of \u201cthe fire;\u201d[632] while that regarding the woman who was\ntaken from the side of the man (after he had been buried in deep\nslumber), and was formed by God, appears to you to be related without\nany rational meaning and secret signification?[633] But is it not\nuncandid, not to ridicule the former as myths, but to admire them as\nphilosophical ideas in a mythical dress, and to treat with contempt[634]\nthe latter, as offending the understanding, and to declare that they are\nof no account? For if, because of the mere phraseology, we are to find\nfault with what is intended to have a secret meaning, see whether the\nfollowing lines of Hesiod, a man, as you say, \u201cinspired,\u201d are not better\nfitted to excite laughter:\n\n \u201c\u2018Son of Iapetus!\u2019 with wrathful heart,\n Spake the cloud-gatherer: \u2018Oh, unmatched in art!\n Exultest thou in this the flame retrieved,\n And dost thou triumph in the God deceived?\n But thou, with the posterity of man,\n Shalt rue the fraud whence mightier ills began;\n I will send evil for thy stealthy fire,\n While all embrace it, and their bane desire.\u2019\n The sire, who rules the earth, and sways the pole,\n Had said, and laughter fill\u2019d his secret soul.\n He bade the artist-god his hest obey,\n And mould with tempering waters ductile clay:\n Infuse, as breathing life and form began,\n The supple vigour, and the voice of man:\n Her aspect fair as goddesses above,\n A virgin\u2019s likeness, with the brows of love.\n He bade Minerva teach the skill that dyes\n The web with colours, as the shuttle flies;\n He called the magic of Love\u2019s Queen to shed\n A nameless grace around her courteous head;\n Instil the wish that longs with restless aim,\n And cares of dress that feed upon the frame:\n Bade Hermes last implant the craft refined\n Of artful manners, and a shameless mind.\n He said; their king th\u2019 inferior powers obeyed:\n The fictile likeness of a bashful maid\n Rose from the temper\u2019d earth, by Jove\u2019s behest,\n Under the forming God; the zone and vest\n Were clasp\u2019d and folded by Minerva\u2019s hand:\n The heaven-born graces, and persuasion bland\n Deck\u2019d her round limbs with chains of gold: the hours\n Of loose locks twined her temples with spring flowers.\n The whole attire Minerva\u2019s curious care\n Form\u2019d to her shape, and fitted to her air.\n But in her breast the herald from above,\n Full of the counsels of deep thundering Jove,\n Wrought artful manners, wrought perfidious lies,\n And speech that thrills the blood, and lulls the wise.\n Her did th\u2019 interpreter of Gods proclaim,\n And named the woman with Pandora\u2019s name;\n Since all the gods conferr\u2019d their gifts, to charm,\n For man\u2019s inventive race, this beauteous harm.\u201d[635]\n\nMoreover, what is said also about the casket is fitted of itself to\nexcite laughter; for example:\n\n \u201cWhilome on earth the sons of men abode\n From ills apart, and labour\u2019s irksome load,\n And sore diseases, bringing age to man;\n Now the sad life of mortals is a span.\n The woman\u2019s hands a mighty casket bear;\n She lifts the lid; she scatters griefs in air:\n Alone, beneath the vessels\u2019 rims detained,\n Hope still within th\u2019 unbroken cell remained,\n Nor fled abroad; so will\u2019d cloud-gatherer Jove:\n The woman\u2019s hand had dropp\u2019d the lid above.\u201d[636]\n\nNow, to him who would give to these lines a grave allegorical meaning\n(whether any such meaning be contained in them or not), we would say:\nAre the Greeks alone at liberty to convey a philosophic meaning in a\nsecret covering? or perhaps also the Egyptians, and those of the\nbarbarians who pride themselves upon their mysteries and the truth\n[which is concealed within them]; while the Jews alone, with their\nlawgiver and historians, appear to you the most unintelligent of men?\nAnd is this the only nation which has not received a share of divine\npower, and which yet was so grandly instructed how to rise upwards to\nthe uncreated nature of God, and to gaze on Him alone, and to expect\nfrom Him alone [the fulfilment of] their hopes?\n\nFootnote 631:\n\n Cf. Gen. ii. 21, 22.\n\nFootnote 632:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 633:\n\n \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 634:\n\n \u03bc\u03bf\u03c7\u03b8\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 635:\n\n Hesiod, _Works and Days_, i. v. 73-114 (Elton\u2019s translation).\n\nFootnote 636:\n\n Hesiod, _Works and Days_, i. v. 125-134 (Elton\u2019s translation).\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIX.\n\n\nBut as Celsus makes a jest also of the serpent, as counteracting the\ninjunctions given by God to the man, taking the narrative to be an old\nwife\u2019s fable,[637] and has purposely neither mentioned the paradise[638]\nof God, nor stated that God is said to have planted it in Eden towards\nthe east, and that there afterwards sprang up from the earth every tree\nthat was beautiful to the sight, and good for food, and the tree of life\nin the midst of the paradise, and the tree of the knowledge of good and\nevil, and the other statements which follow, which might of themselves\nlead a candid reader to see that all these things had not\ninappropriately an allegorical meaning, let us contrast with this the\nwords of Socrates regarding Eros in the Symposium of Plato, and which\nare put in the mouth of Socrates as being more appropriate than what was\nsaid regarding him by all the others at the Symposium. The words of\nPlato are as follow: \u201cWhen Aphrodite was born, the gods held a banquet,\nand there was present, along with the others, Porus the son of Metis.\nAnd after they had dined, Penia[639] came to beg for something (seeing\nthere was an entertainment), and she stood at the gate. Porus meantime,\nhaving become intoxicated with the nectar (for there was then no wine),\nwent into the garden of Zeus, and being heavy with liquor, lay down to\nsleep. Penia accordingly formed a secret plot, with a view of freeing\nherself from her condition of poverty,[640] to get a child by Porus, and\naccordingly lay down beside him, and became pregnant with Eros. And on\nthis account Eros has become the follower and attendant of Aphrodite,\nhaving been begotten on her birth-day feast,[641] and being at the same\ntime by nature a lover of the beautiful, because Aphrodite too is\nbeautiful. Seeing, then, that Eros is the son of Porus and Penia, the\nfollowing is his condition.[642] In the first place, he is always poor,\nand far from being delicate and beautiful, as most persons imagine; but\nis withered, and sunburnt,[643] and unshod, and without a home, sleeping\nalways upon the ground, and without a covering; lying in the open air\nbeside gates, and on public roads; possessing the nature of his mother,\nand dwelling continually with indigence.[644] But, on the other hand, in\nconformity with the character of his father, he is given to plotting\nagainst the beautiful and the good, being courageous, and hasty, and\nvehement;[645] a keen[646] hunter, perpetually devising contrivances;\nboth much given to forethought, and also fertile in resources;[647]\nacting like a philosopher throughout the whole of his life; a\nterrible[648] sorcerer, and dealer in drugs, and a sophist as well;\nneither immortal by nature nor yet mortal, but on the same day, at one\ntime he flourishes and lives when he has plenty, and again at another\ntime dies, and once more is recalled to life through possessing the\nnature of his father. But the supplies furnished to him are always\ngradually disappearing, so that he is never at any time in want, nor yet\nrich; and, on the other hand, he occupies an intermediate position\nbetween wisdom and ignorance.\u201d Now, if those who read these words were\nto imitate the malignity of Celsus\u2014which be it far from Christians to\ndo!\u2014they would ridicule the myth, and would turn this great Plato into a\nsubject of jest; but if, on investigating in a philosophic spirit what\nis conveyed in the dress of a myth, they should be able to discover the\nmeaning of Plato, [they will admire][649] the manner in which he was\nable to conceal, on account of the multitude, in the form of this myth,\nthe great ideas which presented themselves to him, and to speak in a\nbefitting manner to those who know how to ascertain from the myths the\ntrue meaning of him who wove them together. Now I have brought forward\nthis myth occurring in the writings of Plato, because of the mention in\nit of the garden of Zeus, which appears to bear some resemblance to the\nparadise of God, and of the comparison between Penia and the serpent,\nand the plot against Porus by Penia, which may be compared with the plot\nof the serpent against the man. It is not very clear, indeed, whether\nPlato fell in with these stories by chance, or whether, as some think,\nmeeting during his visit to Egypt with certain individuals who\nphilosophized on the Jewish mysteries, and learning some things from\nthem, he may have preserved a few of their ideas, and thrown others\naside, being careful not to offend the Greeks by a complete adoption of\nall the points of the philosophy of the Jews, who were in bad repute\nwith the multitude, on account of the foreign character of their laws\nand their peculiar polity. The present, however, is not the proper time\nfor explaining either the myth of Plato, or the story of the serpent and\nthe paradise of God, and all that is related to have taken place in it,\nas in our exposition of the book of Genesis we have especially occupied\nourselves as we best could with these matters.\n\nFootnote 637:\n\n \u201c\u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u201d \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 638:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 639:\n\n Penia, poverty; Porus, abundance.\n\nFootnote 640:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 641:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b8\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 642:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u1fc3 \u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u1fc3 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5.\n\nFootnote 643:\n\n \u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c7\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 644:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3.\n\nFootnote 645:\n\n \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 646:\n\n \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 647:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03cc\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 648:\n\n \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b3\u03cc\u03b7\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 649:\n\n Boherellus, quem Ru\u00e6eus sequitur, in notis; \u201cAnte voces: \u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd,\n videtur deesse: \u03b8\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03ac\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, aut quid simile.\u201d\u2014LOMMATZSCH.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XL.\n\n\nBut as he asserts that \u201cthe Mosaic narrative most impiously represents\nGod as in a state of weakness from the very commencement [of things],\nand as unable to gain over [to obedience] even one single man whom He\nHimself had formed,\u201d we say in answer that the objection[650] is much\nthe same as if one were to find fault with the existence of evil, which\nGod has not been able to prevent even in the case of a single\nindividual, so that _one_ man might be found from the very beginning of\nthings who was born into the world untainted by sin. For as those whose\nbusiness it is to defend the doctrine of providence do so by means of\narguments which are not to be despised,[651] so also the subjects of\nAdam and his son will be philosophically dealt with by those who are\naware that in the Hebrew language Adam signifies man; and that in those\nparts of the narrative which appear to refer to Adam as an individual,\nMoses is discoursing upon the nature of man in general.[652] For \u201cin\nAdam\u201d (as the Scripture[653] says) \u201call die,\u201d and were condemned in the\nlikeness of Adam\u2019s transgression, the word of God asserting this not so\nmuch of _one particular individual_ as of the _whole human race_. For in\nthe connected series of statements which appears to apply as to one\nparticular individual, the curse pronounced upon Adam is regarded as\ncommon to all [the members of the race], and what was spoken with\nreference to the woman is spoken of _every_ woman without\nexception.[654] And the expulsion of the man and woman from paradise,\nand their being clothed with tunics of skins (which God, because of the\ntransgression of men, made for those who had sinned), contain a certain\nsecret and mystical doctrine (far transcending that of Plato) of the\nsoul\u2019s losing its wings,[655] and being borne downwards to earth, until\nit can lay hold of some stable resting-place.\n\nFootnote 650:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 651:\n\n \u03b5\u1f50\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 652:\n\n \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6 \u039c\u03c9\u03cb\u03c3\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 653:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 22 with Rom. v. 14.\n\nFootnote 654:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u2019 \u1f27\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 655:\n\n \u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03c5\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2. This is a correction for \u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03c5\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2, the textual\n reading in the Benedictine and Spencer\u2019s edd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLI.\n\n\nAfter this he continues as follows: \u201cThey speak, in the next place, of a\ndeluge, and of a monstrous[656] ark, having within it all things, and of\na dove and a crow[657] as messengers, falsifying and recklessly\naltering[658] the story of Deucalion; not expecting, I suppose, that\nthese things would come to light, but imagining that they were inventing\nstories merely for young children.\u201d Now in these remarks observe the\nhostility\u2014so unbecoming a philosopher\u2014displayed by this man towards this\nvery ancient Jewish narrative. For, not being able to say anything\nagainst the history of the deluge, and not perceiving what he might have\nurged against the ark and its dimensions,\u2014viz. that, according to the\ngeneral opinion, which accepted the statements that it was three hundred\ncubits in length, and fifty in breadth, and thirty in height, it was\nimpossible to maintain that it contained [all] the animals that were\nupon the earth, fourteen specimens of every clean and four of every\nunclean beast,\u2014he merely termed it \u201cmonstrous, containing all things\nwithin it.\u201d Now wherein was its \u201cmonstrous\u201d character, seeing it is\nrelated to have been a hundred years in building, and to have had the\nthree hundred cubits of its length and the fifty of its breadth\ncontracted, until the thirty cubits of its height terminated in a top\none cubit long and one cubit broad? Why should we not rather admire a\nstructure which resembled an extensive city, if its measurements be\ntaken to mean what they are capable of meaning,[659] so that it was nine\nmyriads of cubits long in the base, and two thousand five hundred in\nbreadth? And why should we not admire the design evinced in having it so\ncompactly built, and rendered capable of sustaining a tempest which\ncaused a deluge? For it was not daubed with pitch, or any material of\nthat kind, but was securely coated with bitumen. And is it not a subject\nof admiration, that by the providential arrangement of God, the elements\nof all the races were brought into it, that the earth might receive\nagain the seeds of all living things, while God made use of a most\nrighteous man to be the progenitor of those who were to be born after\nthe deluge?\n\nFootnote 656:\n\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03cc\u03ba\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 657:\n\n \u03ba\u03bf\u03c1\u03ce\u03bd\u03b7.\n\nFootnote 658:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1fe5\u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 659:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLII.\n\n\nIn order to show that he had read the book of Genesis, Celsus rejects\nthe story of the dove, although unable to adduce any reason which might\nprove it to be a fiction. In the next place, as his habit is, in order\nto put the narrative in a more ridiculous light, he converts the \u201craven\u201d\ninto a \u201ccrow,\u201d and imagines that Moses so wrote, having recklessly\naltered the accounts related of the Grecian Deucalion; unless perhaps he\nregards the narrative as not having proceeded from Moses, but from\n_several_ individuals, as appears from his employing the _plural_ number\nin the expressions, \u201cfalsifying and recklessly altering the story of\nDeucalion,\u201d[660] as well as from the words, \u201cFor _they_ did not expect,\nI suppose, that these things would come to light.\u201d But how should they,\nwho gave their Scriptures to the _whole_ nation, not expect that they\nwould come to light, and who predicted, moreover, that this religion\nshould be proclaimed to _all_ nations? Jesus declared, \u201cThe kingdom of\nGod shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the\nfruits thereof;\u201d[661] and in uttering these words to the Jews, what\nother meaning did He intend to convey than this, viz. that He Himself\nshould, through His divine power, bring forth into light the whole of\nthe Jewish Scriptures, which contain the mysteries of the kingdom of\nGod? If, then, they peruse the Theogonies of the Greeks, and the stories\nabout the twelve gods, they impart to them an air of dignity, by\ninvesting them with an allegorical signification; but when they wish to\nthrow contempt upon our biblical narratives, they assert that they are\nfables, clumsily invented for infant children!\n\nFootnote 660:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1fe5\u1fb3\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 661:\n\n Cf. Matt. xxi. 43.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIII.\n\n\n\u201cAltogether absurd, and out of season,\u201d[662] he continues, \u201cis the\n[account of the] begetting of children,\u201d where, although he has\nmentioned no names, it is evident that he is referring to the history of\nAbraham and Sarah. Cavilling also at the \u201cconspiracies of the brothers,\u201d\nhe alludes either to the story of Cain plotting against Abel,[663] or,\nin addition, to that of Esau against Jacob;[664] and [speaking] of \u201ca\nfather\u2019s sorrow,\u201d he probably refers to that of Isaac on account of the\nabsence of Jacob, and perhaps also to that of Jacob because of Joseph\nhaving been sold into Egypt. And when relating the \u201ccrafty procedure of\nmothers,\u201d I suppose he means the conduct of Rebecca, who contrived that\nthe blessing of Isaac should descend, not upon Esau, but upon Jacob. Now\nif we assert that in all these cases God interposed in a very marked\ndegree,[665] what absurdity do we commit, seeing we are persuaded that\nHe never withdraws His providence[666] from those who devote themselves\nto Him in an honourable and vigorous[667] life? He ridicules, moreover,\nthe acquisition of property made by Jacob while living with Laban, not\nunderstanding to what these words refer: \u201cAnd those which had no spots\nwere Laban\u2019s, and those which were spotted were Jacob\u2019s;\u201d[668] and he\nsays that \u201cGod presented his sons with asses, and sheep, and\ncamels,\u201d[669] and did not see that \u201call these things happened unto them\nfor ensamples, and were written for our sake, upon whom the ends of the\nworld are come.\u201d[670] The varying customs [prevailing among the\ndifferent nations] becoming famous,[671] are regulated by the word of\nGod, being given as a possession to him who is figuratively termed\nJacob. For those who become converts to Christ from among the heathen,\nare indicated by the history of Laban and Jacob.\n\nFootnote 662:\n\n \u1f14\u03be\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 663:\n\n Cf. Gen. iv. 8.\n\nFootnote 664:\n\n Cf. Gen. xxi. 2.\n\nFootnote 665:\n\n \u1f04\u03b3\u03c7\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 666:\n\n \u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 667:\n\n \u1f10\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 668:\n\n Cf. Gen. xxx. 42 (LXX.). \u201cThe feebler were Laban\u2019s, and the stronger\n Jacob\u2019s\u201d (Auth. Vers.).\n\nFootnote 669:\n\n Cf. Gen. xxx. 43.\n\nFootnote 670:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. x. 11.\n\nFootnote 671:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u2019 \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03bb\u03b1 \u1f24\u03b8\u03b7 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1, \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u1ff7 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03b4\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1ff3 \u1f38\u03b1\u03ba\u03ce\u03b2: \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 is\n the term employed to denote the \u201cspotted\u201d cattle of Laban, and is here\n used by Origen in its figurative sense of \u201cdistinguished,\u201d thus\n playing on the double meaning of the word.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIV.\n\n\nAnd erring widely from the meaning of Scripture, he says that \u201cGod gave\nwells[672] also to the righteous.\u201d Now he did not observe that the\nrighteous do not construct cisterns,[673] but dig wells, seeking to\ndiscover the inherent ground and source of potable blessings,[674]\ninasmuch as they receive in a figurative sense the commandment which\nenjoins, \u201cDrink waters from your own vessels, and from your own wells of\nfresh water. Let not your water be poured out beyond your own fountain,\nbut let it pass into your own streets. Let it belong to you alone, and\nlet no alien partake with thee.\u201d[675] Scripture frequently makes use of\nthe histories of real events, in order to present to view more important\ntruths, which are but obscurely intimated; and of this kind are the\nnarratives relating to the \u201cwells,\u201d and to the \u201cmarriages,\u201d and to the\nvarious acts of \u201csexual intercourse\u201d recorded of righteous persons,\nrespecting which, however, it will be more seasonable to offer an\nexplanation in the exegetical writings referring to those very passages.\nBut that wells were constructed by righteous men in the land of the\nPhilistines, as related in the book of Genesis,[676] is manifest from\nthe wonderful wells which are shown at Ascalon, and which are deserving\nof mention on account of their structure, so foreign and peculiar\ncompared with that of other wells. Moreover, that both young women[677]\nand female servants are to be understood metaphorically, is not _our_\ndoctrine merely, but one which we have received from the beginning from\nwise men, among whom a certain one said, when exhorting his hearers to\ninvestigate the figurative meaning: \u201cTell me, ye that read the law, do\nye not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons; the\none by a bond maid, the other by a free woman. But he who was of the\nbond woman was born after the flesh; but he of the free woman was by\npromise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants;\nthe one from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is\nAgar.\u201d[678] And a little after, \u201cBut Jerusalem which is above is free,\nwhich is the mother of us all.\u201d And any one who will take up the Epistle\nto the Galatians may learn how the passages relating to the \u201cmarriages,\u201d\nand the intercourse with \u201cthe maid-servants,\u201d have been allegorized; the\nScripture desiring us to imitate not the literal acts of those who did\nthese things, but (as the apostles of Jesus are accustomed to call them)\nthe spiritual.\n\nFootnote 672:\n\n \u03c6\u03c1\u03ad\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 673:\n\n \u03bb\u03ac\u03ba\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 674:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03c5\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b3\u1fc6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1ff6\u03bd. Boherellus\n proposes: \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03c5\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03b7\u03b3\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03b4\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 675:\n\n Cf. Prov. v. 15-17.\n\nFootnote 676:\n\n Cf. Gen. xxvi. 15.\n\nFootnote 677:\n\n \u03bd\u03cd\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 678:\n\n Cf. Gal. iv. 21-24.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLV.\n\n\nAnd whereas Celsus ought to have recognised the love of truth displayed\nby the writers of sacred Scripture, who have not concealed even what is\nto their discredit,[679] and thus been led to accept the other and more\nmarvellous accounts as true, he has done the reverse, and has\ncharacterized the story of Lot and his daughters (without examining\neither its literal or its figurative meaning) as \u201cworse than the crimes\nof Thyestes.\u201d The figurative signification of that passage of history it\nis not necessary at present to explain, nor what is meant by Sodom, and\nby the words of the angels to him who was escaping thence, when they\nsaid: \u201cLook not behind thee, neither stay thou in all the surrounding\ndistrict; escape to the mountain, lest thou be consumed;\u201d[680] nor what\nis intended by Lot and his wife, who became a pillar of salt because she\nturned back; nor by his daughters intoxicating their father, that they\nmight become mothers by him. But let us in a few words soften down the\nrepulsive features of the history. The nature of actions\u2014good, bad, and\nindifferent\u2014has been investigated by the Greeks; and the more successful\nof such investigators[681] lay down the principle that intention alone\ngives to actions the character of good or bad, and that all things which\nare done without a purpose are, strictly speaking, indifferent; that\nwhen the intention is directed to a becoming end, it is praiseworthy;\nwhen the reverse, it is censurable. They have said, accordingly, in the\nsection relating to \u201cthings indifferent,\u201d that, strictly speaking, for a\nman to have sexual intercourse with his daughters is a thing\nindifferent, although such a thing ought not to take place in\nestablished communities. And for the sake of hypothesis, in order to\nshow that such an act belongs to the class of things indifferent, they\nhave assumed the case of a wise man being left with an only daughter,\nthe entire human race besides having perished; and they put the question\nwhether the father can fitly have intercourse with his daughter, in\norder, agreeably to the supposition, to prevent the extermination of\nmankind. Is this to be accounted sound reasoning among the Greeks, and\nto be commended by the influential[682] sect of the Stoics; but when\nyoung maidens, who had heard of the burning of the world, though without\ncomprehending [its full meaning], saw fire devastating their city and\ncountry, and supposing that the only means left of rekindling the\nflame[683] of human life lay in their father and themselves, should, on\nsuch a supposition, conceive the desire that the world should continue,\nshall their conduct be deemed worse than that of the wise man who,\naccording to the hypothesis of the Stoics, acts becomingly in having\nintercourse with his daughters in the case already supposed, of all men\nhaving been destroyed? I am not unaware, however, that some have taken\noffence at the desire[684] of Lot\u2019s daughters, and have regarded their\nconduct as very wicked; and have said that two accursed nations\u2014Moab and\nAmmon\u2014have sprung from that unhallowed intercourse. And yet truly sacred\nScripture is nowhere found distinctly approving of their conduct as\ngood, nor yet passing sentence upon it as blameworthy. Nevertheless,\nwhatever be the real state of the case, it admits not only of a\nfigurative meaning, but also of being defended on its own merits.[685]\n\nFootnote 679:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 680:\n\n Gen. xix. 17.\n\nFootnote 681:\n\n \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 682:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u03b5\u1f50\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 683:\n\n \u03b6\u03ce\u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 684:\n\n \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 685:\n\n \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u2019 \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u1f78 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVI.\n\n\nCelsus, moreover, sneers at the \u201chatred\u201d of Esau (to which, I suppose,\nhe refers) against Jacob, although he was a man who, according to the\nScriptures, is acknowledged to have been wicked; and not clearly stating\nthe story of Simeon and Levi, who sallied out [on the Shechemites] on\naccount of the insult offered to their sister, who had been violated by\nthe son of the Shechemite king, he inveighs against their conduct. And\npassing on, he speaks of \u201cbrothers selling [one another],\u201d alluding to\nthe sons of Jacob; and of \u201ca brother sold,\u201d Joseph to wit; and of \u201ca\nfather deceived,\u201d viz. Jacob, because he entertained no suspicion of his\nsons when they showed him Joseph\u2019s coat of many colours, but believed\ntheir statement, and mourned for his son, who was a slave in Egypt, as\nif he were dead. And observe in what a spirit of hatred and falsehood\nCelsus collects together the statements of the sacred history; so that\nwherever it appeared to him to contain a ground of accusation he\nproduces the passage, but wherever there is any exhibition of virtue\nworthy of mention\u2014as when Joseph would not gratify the lust of his\nmistress, refusing alike her allurements and her threats\u2014he does not\neven mention the circumstance! He should see, indeed, that the conduct\nof Joseph was far superior to what is related of Bellerophon,[686] since\nthe former chose rather to be shut up in prison than do violence to his\nvirtue. For although he might have offered a just defence against his\naccuser, he magnanimously remained silent, entrusting his cause to God.\n\nFootnote 686:\n\n Cf. Homer, _Iliad_, vi. 160.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVII.\n\n\nCelsus next, for form\u2019s sake,[687] and with great want of precision,\nspeaks of \u201cthe dreams of the chief butler and chief baker, and of\nPharaoh, and of the explanation of them, in consequence of which Joseph\nwas taken out of prison in order to be entrusted by Pharaoh with the\nsecond place in Egypt.\u201d What absurdity, then, did the history contain,\nlooked at even in itself, that it should be adduced as matter of\naccusation by this Celsus, who gave the title of _True Discourse_ to a\ntreatise not containing doctrines, but full of charges against Jews and\nChristians? He adds: \u201cHe who had been sold behaved kindly to his\nbrethren (who had sold him), when they were suffering from hunger, and\nhad been sent with their asses to purchase [provisions];\u201d although he\nhas not related these occurrences [in his treatise]. But he _does_\nmention the circumstance of Joseph making himself known to his brethren,\nalthough I know not with what view, or what absurdity he can point out\nin such an occurrence; since it is impossible for Momus himself, we\nmight say, to find any reasonable fault with events which, apart from\ntheir figurative meaning, present so much that is attractive. He\nrelates, further, that \u201cJoseph, who had been sold as a slave, was\nrestored to liberty, and went up with a solemn procession to his\nfather\u2019s funeral,\u201d and thinks that the narrative furnishes matter of\naccusation against us, as he makes the following remark: \u201cBy whom\n(Joseph, namely) the illustrious and divine nation of the Jews, after\ngrowing up in Egypt to be a multitude of people, was commanded to\nsojourn somewhere beyond the limits of the kingdom, and to pasture their\nflocks in districts of no repute.\u201d Now the words, \u201cthat they were\ncommanded to pasture their flocks in districts of no repute,\u201d are an\naddition, proceeding from his own feelings of hatred; for he has not\nshown that Goshen, the district of Egypt, is a place of no repute. The\nexodus of the people from Egypt he calls a flight, not at all\nremembering what is written in the book of Exodus regarding the\ndeparture of the Hebrews from the land of Egypt. We have enumerated\nthese instances to show that what, literally considered, might appear to\nfurnish ground of accusation, Celsus has not succeeded in proving to be\neither objectionable or foolish, having utterly failed to establish the\nevil character, as he regards it, of our Scriptures.\n\nFootnote 687:\n\n \u1f41\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f15\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVIII.\n\n\nIn the next place, as if he had devoted himself solely to the\nmanifestation of his hatred and dislike of the Jewish and Christian\ndoctrine, he says: \u201cThe more modest of Jewish and Christian writers give\nall these things an allegorical meaning;\u201d and, \u201cBecause they are ashamed\nof these things, they take refuge in allegory.\u201d Now one might say to\nhim, that if we must admit fables and fictions, whether written with a\nconcealed meaning or with any other object, to be shameful narratives\nwhen taken in their literal acceptation,[688] of what histories can this\nbe said more truly than of the Grecian? In these histories, gods who are\nsons castrate the gods who are their fathers, and gods who are parents\ndevour their own children, and a goddess-mother gives to the \u201cfather of\ngods and men\u201d a stone to swallow instead of his own son, and a father\nhas intercourse with his daughter, and a wife binds her own husband,\nhaving as her allies in the work the brother of the fettered god and his\nown daughter! But why should I enumerate these absurd stories of the\nGreeks regarding their gods, which are most shameful in themselves, even\nthough invested with an allegorical meaning? [Take the instance] where\nChrysippus of Soli, who is considered to be an ornament of the Stoic\nsect, on account of his numerous and learned treatises, explains a\npicture at Samos, in which Juno was represented as committing\nunspeakable abominations with Jupiter. This reverend philosopher says in\nhis treatises, that matter receives the spermatic words[689] of the god,\nand retains them within herself, in order to ornament the universe. For\nin the picture at Samos Juno represents matter, and Jupiter God. Now it\nis on account of these, and of countless other similar fables, that we\nwould not even in word call the God of all things Jupiter, or the sun\nApollo, or the moon Diana. But we offer to the Creator a worship which\nis pure, and speak with religious respect of His noble works of\ncreation, not contaminating even in word the things of God; approving of\nthe language of Plato in the _Philebus_, who would not admit that\npleasure was a goddess, \u201cso great is my reverence, Protarchus,\u201d he says,\n\u201cfor the very names of the gods.\u201d We verily entertain such reverence for\nthe name of God, and for His noble works of creation, that we would not,\neven under pretext of an allegorical meaning, admit any fable which\nmight do injury to the young.\n\nFootnote 688:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 689:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIX.\n\n\nIf Celsus had read the Scriptures in an impartial spirit, he would not\nhave said that \u201cour writings are incapable of admitting an allegorical\nmeaning.\u201d For from the prophetic Scriptures, in which historical events\nare recorded (not from the historical), it is possible to be convinced\nthat the historical portions also were written with an allegorical\npurpose, and were most skilfully adapted not only to the multitude of\nthe simpler believers, but also to the few who are able or willing to\ninvestigate matters in an intelligent spirit. If, indeed, those writers\nat the present day who are deemed by Celsus the \u201cmore modest of the Jews\nand Christians\u201d were the [first] allegorical interpreters of our\nScriptures, he would have the appearance, perhaps, of making a plausible\nallegation. But since the very fathers and authors of the doctrines\nthemselves give them an allegorical signification, what other inference\ncan be drawn than that they were composed so as to be allegorically\nunderstood in their chief signification?[690] And we shall adduce a few\ninstances out of very many to show that Celsus brings an empty charge\nagainst the Scriptures, when he says \u201cthat they are incapable of\nadmitting an allegorical meaning.\u201d Paul, the apostle of Jesus, says: \u201cIt\nis written in the law, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that\ntreadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? or saith He it\naltogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that\nhe that plougheth should plough in hope, and he that thresheth in hope\nof partaking.\u201d[691] And in another passage the same Paul says: \u201cFor it\nis written, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and\nshall be joined to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a\ngreat mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the church.\u201d[692] And\nagain, in another place: \u201cWe know that all our fathers were under the\ncloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses\nin the cloud, and in the sea.\u201d[693] Then, explaining the history\nrelating to the manna, and that referring to the miraculous issue of the\nwater from the rock, he continues as follows: \u201cAnd they did all eat the\nsame spiritual meat, and did all drink the same spiritual drink. For\nthey drank of that spiritual rock that followed them, and that rock was\nChrist.\u201d[694] Asaph, moreover, who, in showing the histories in Exodus\nand Numbers to be full of difficulties and parables,[695] begins in the\nfollowing manner, as recorded in the book of Psalms, where he is about\nto make mention of these things: \u201cGive ear, O my people, to my law:\nincline your ears to the words of my mouth. I will open my mouth in\nparables; I will utter dark sayings of old, which we have heard and\nknown, and our fathers have told us.\u201d[696]\n\nFootnote 690:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bf\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 691:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. ix. 9, 10, and Deut. xxv. 4.\n\nFootnote 692:\n\n Cf. Eph. v. 31, 32. Cf. Gen. ii. 24.\n\nFootnote 693:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. x. 1, 2.\n\nFootnote 694:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. x. 3, 4.\n\nFootnote 695:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b2\u03bb\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03af.\n\nFootnote 696:\n\n Cf. Ps. lxxxvii. 1, 2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter L.\n\n\nMoreover, if the law of Moses had contained nothing which was to be\nunderstood as having a secret meaning, the prophet would not have said\nin his prayer to God, \u201cOpen Thou mine eyes, and I will behold wondrous\nthings out of Thy law;\u201d[697] whereas he knew that there was a veil of\nignorance lying upon the heart of those who read but do not understand\nthe figurative meaning, which veil is taken away by the gift of God,\nwhen He hears him who has done all that he can,[698] and who by reason\nof habit has his senses exercised to distinguish between good and evil,\nand who continually utters the prayer, \u201cOpen Thou mine eyes, and I will\nbehold wondrous things out of Thy law.\u201d And who is there that, on\nreading of the dragon that lives in the Egyptian river,[699] and of the\nfishes which lurk in his scales, or of the excrement of Pharaoh which\nfills the mountains of Egypt,[700] is not led at once to inquire who he\nis that fills the Egyptian mountains with his stinking excrement, and\nwhat the Egyptian mountains are; and what the rivers in Egypt are, of\nwhich the aforesaid Pharaoh boastfully says, \u201cThe rivers are mine, and I\nhave made them;\u201d[701] and who the dragon is, and the fishes in its\nscales,\u2014and this so as to harmonize with the interpretation to be given\nof the rivers? But why establish at greater length what needs no\ndemonstration? For to these things applies the saying: \u201cWho is wise, and\nhe shall understand these things? or who is prudent, and he shall know\nthem?\u201d[702] Now I have gone at some length into the subject, because I\nwished to show the unsoundness of the assertion of Celsus, that \u201cthe\nmore modest among the Jews and Christians endeavour somehow to give\nthese stories an allegorical signification, although some of them do not\nadmit of this, but on the contrary are exceedingly silly inventions.\u201d\nMuch rather are the stories of the Greeks not only very silly, but very\nimpious inventions. For our narratives keep expressly in view the\nmultitude of simpler believers, which was not done by those who invented\nthe Grecian fables. And therefore not without propriety does Plato expel\nfrom his state all fables and poems of such a nature as those of which\nwe have been speaking.\n\nFootnote 697:\n\n Cf. Ps. cxix. 18.\n\nFootnote 698:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u1f70\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u2019 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 699:\n\n Cf. Ezek. xxix. 3.\n\nFootnote 700:\n\n Cf. Ezek. xxxii. 6.\n\nFootnote 701:\n\n Cf. Ezek. xxix. 3.\n\nFootnote 702:\n\n Cf. Hos. xiv. 9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LI.\n\n\nCelsus appears to me to have heard that there are treatises in existence\nwhich contain allegorical explanations of the law of Moses. These,\nhowever, he could not have read; for if he had, he would not have said:\n\u201cThe allegorical explanations, however, which have been devised, are\nmuch more shameful and absurd than the fables themselves, inasmuch as\nthey endeavour to unite with marvellous and altogether insensate folly\nthings which cannot at all be made to harmonize.\u201d He seems to refer in\nthese words to the works of Philo, or to those of still older writers,\nsuch as Aristobulus. But I conjecture that Celsus has not read their\nbooks, since it appears to me that in many passages they have so\nsuccessfully hit the meaning [of the sacred writers], that even Grecian\nphilosophers would have been captivated by their explanations; for in\ntheir writings we find not only a polished style, but exquisite thoughts\nand doctrines, and a rational use of what Celsus imagines to be fables\nin the sacred writings. I know, moreover, that Numenius the\nPythagorean\u2014a surpassingly excellent expounder of Plato, and who held a\nforemost place as a teacher of the doctrines of Pythagoras\u2014in many of\nhis works quotes from the writings of Moses and the prophets, and\napplies to the passages in question a not improbable allegorical\nmeaning, as in his work called _Epops_, and in those which treat of\n\u201cNumbers\u201d and of \u201cPlace.\u201d And in the third book of his dissertation on\n_The Good_, he quotes also a narrative regarding Jesus\u2014without, however,\nmentioning His name\u2014and gives it an allegorical signification, whether\nsuccessfully or the reverse I may state on another occasion. He relates\nalso the account respecting Moses, and Jannes, and Jambres.[703] But we\nare not elated on account of this instance, though we express our\napproval of Numenius, rather than of Celsus and other Greeks, because he\nwas willing to investigate our histories from a desire to acquire\nknowledge, and was [duly] affected by them as narratives which were to\nbe allegorically understood, and which did not belong to the category of\nfoolish compositions.\n\nFootnote 703:\n\n Cf. 2 Tim. iii. 8.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LII.\n\n\nAfter this, selecting from all the treatises which contain allegorical\nexplanations and interpretations, expressed in a language and style not\nto be despised, the least important,[704] such as might contribute,\nindeed, to strengthen the faith of the multitude of simple believers,\nbut were not adapted to impress those of more intelligent mind, he\ncontinues: \u201cOf such a nature do I know the work to be, entitled\n_Controversy between one Papiscus and Jason_, which is fitted to excite\npity and hatred instead of laughter. It is not my purpose, however, to\nconfute the statements contained in such works; for their fallacy is\nmanifest to all, especially if any one will have the patience to read\nthe books themselves. Rather do I wish to show that Nature teaches this,\nthat God made nothing that is mortal, but that His works, whatever they\nare, are immortal, and theirs mortal. And the soul[705] is the work of\nGod, while the nature of the body is different. And in this respect\nthere is no difference between the body of a bat, or of a worm, or of a\nfrog, and that of a man; for the matter[706] is the same, and their\ncorruptible part is alike.\u201d Nevertheless I could wish that every one who\nheard Celsus declaiming and asserting that the treatise entitled\n_Controversy between Jason and Papiscus regarding Christ_ was fitted to\nexcite not laughter, but hatred, could take the work into his hands, and\npatiently listen to its contents; that, finding in it nothing to excite\nhatred, he might condemn Celsus out of the book itself. For if it be\nimpartially perused, it will be found that there is nothing to excite\neven laughter in a work in which a Christian is described as conversing\nwith a Jew on the subject of the Jewish Scriptures, and proving that the\npredictions regarding Christ fitly apply to Jesus; although the other\ndisputant maintains the discussion in no ignoble style, and in a manner\nnot unbecoming the character of a Jew.\n\nFootnote 704:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 705:\n\n \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74.\n\nFootnote 706:\n\n \u1f55\u03bb\u03b7.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIII.\n\n\nI do not know, indeed, how he could conjoin things that do not admit of\nunion, and which cannot exist together at the same time in human nature,\nin saying, as he did, that \u201cthe above treatise deserved to be treated\nboth with pity and hatred.\u201d For every one will admit that he who is the\nobject of pity is not at the same moment an object of hatred, and that\nhe who is the object of hatred is not at the same time a subject of\npity. Celsus, moreover, says that it was not his purpose to refute such\nstatements, because he thinks that their absurdity is evident to all,\nand that, even before offering any logical refutation, they will appear\nto be bad, and to merit both pity and hatred. But we invite him who\nperuses this reply of ours to the charges of Celsus to have patience,\nand to listen to our sacred writings themselves, and, as far as\npossible, to form an opinion from their _contents_ of the purpose of the\nwriters, and of their consciences and disposition of mind; for he will\ndiscover that they are men who strenuously contend for what they uphold,\nand that some of them show that the history which they narrate is one\nwhich they have both seen and experienced,[707] which was miraculous,\nand worthy of being recorded for the advantage of their future hearers.\nWill any one indeed venture to say that it is not the source and\nfountain of all blessing[708] [to men] to believe in the God of all\nthings, and to perform all our actions with the view of pleasing Him in\neverything whatever, and not to entertain even a thought unpleasing to\nHim, seeing that not only our words and deeds, but our very thoughts,\nwill be the subject of future judgment? And what other arguments would\nmore effectually lead human nature to adopt a virtuous life, than the\nbelief or opinion that the supreme God beholds all things, not only what\nis said and done, but even what is thought by us? And let any one who\nlikes compare any other system which at the same time converts and\nameliorates, not merely one or two individuals, but, as far as in it\nlies, countless numbers, that by the comparison of both methods he may\nform a correct idea of the arguments which dispose to a virtuous life.\n\nFootnote 707:\n\n The reading in the text of Spencer and of the Benedictine ed. is\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, for which Lommatzsch has adopted the conjecture of\n Boherellus, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 708:\n\n \u1f60\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIV.\n\n\nBut as in the words which I quoted from Celsus, which are a paraphrase\nfrom the _Tim\u0153us_, certain expressions occur, such as, \u201cGod made nothing\nmortal, but immortal things alone, while mortal things are the works of\nothers, and the soul is a work of God, but the nature of the body is\ndifferent, and there is no difference between the body of a man and that\nof a bat, or of a worm, or of a frog; for the matter is the same, and\ntheir corruptible part alike,\u201d\u2014let us discuss these points for a little;\nand let us show that Celsus either does not disclose his Epicurean\nopinions, or, as might be said by one person, has exchanged them for\nbetter, or, as another might say, has nothing in common save the name,\nwith Celsus, the Epicurean. For he ought, in giving expression to such\nopinions, and in proposing to contradict not only us, but the by no\nmeans obscure sect of philosophers who are the adherents of Zeno of\nCitium, to have proved that the bodies of animals are not the work of\nGod, and that the great skill displayed in their construction did not\nproceed from the highest intelligence. And he ought also, with regard to\nthe countless diversities of plants, which are regulated by an inherent,\nincomprehensible nature,[709] and which have been created for the by no\nmeans despicable[710] use of man in general, and of the animals which\nminister to man, whatever other reasons may be adduced for their\nexistence,[711] not only to have stated his opinion, but also to have\nshown us that it was no perfect intelligence which impressed these\nqualities upon the matter of plants. And when he had once represented\n[various] divinities as the creators of all the bodies, the soul alone\nbeing the work of God, why did not he, who separated these great acts of\ncreation, and apportioned them among a plurality of creators, next\ndemonstrate by some convincing reason the existence of these diversities\namong divinities, some of which construct the bodies of men, and\nothers\u2014those, say, of beasts of burden, and others\u2014those of wild\nanimals? And he who saw that some divinities were the creators of\ndragons, and of asps, and of basilisks, and others of each plant and\nherb according to its species, ought to have explained the causes of\nthese diversities. For probably, had he given himself carefully to the\ninvestigation of each particular point, he would either have observed\nthat it was one God who was the creator of all, and who made each thing\nwith a certain object and for a certain reason; or if he had failed to\nobserve this, he would have discovered the answer which he ought to\nreturn to those who assert that corruptibility is a thing indifferent in\nits nature; and that there was no absurdity in a world which consists of\ndiverse materials, being formed by one architect, who constructed the\ndifferent kinds of things so as to secure the good of the whole. Or,\nfinally, he ought to have expressed no opinion at all on so important a\ndoctrine, since he did not intend to prove what he professed to\ndemonstrate; unless, indeed, he who censures others for professing a\nsimple faith, would have us to believe his mere assertions, although he\ngave out that he would not merely assert, but would prove his\nassertions.\n\nFootnote 709:\n\n \u1f51\u03c0\u2019 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c5\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 710:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u03b5\u1f50\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 711:\n\n \u1f45\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1f72 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LV.\n\n\nBut I maintain that, if he had had the patience (to use his own\nexpression) to listen to the writings of Moses and the prophets, he\nwould have had his attention arrested by the circumstance that the\nexpression \u201cGod made\u201d is applied to heaven and earth, and to what is\ncalled the firmament, and also to the lights and stars; and after these,\nto the great fishes, and to every living thing among creeping animals\nwhich the waters brought forth after their kinds, and to every fowl of\nheaven after its kind; and after these, to the wild beasts of the earth\nafter their kind, and the beasts after their kind, and to every creeping\nthing upon the earth after its kind; and last of all to man. The\nexpression \u201cmade,\u201d however, is not applied to other things; but it is\ndeemed sufficient to say regarding light, \u201cAnd it was light;\u201d and\nregarding the one gathering together of all the waters that are under\nthe whole heaven, \u201cIt was so.\u201d And in like manner also, with regard to\nwhat grew upon the earth, where it is said, \u201cThe earth brought forth\ngrass, and herb yielding seed after its kind and after its likeness, and\nthe fruit-tree yielding fruit, whose seed is in itself, after its kind,\nupon the earth.\u201d He would have inquired, moreover, whether the recorded\ncommands of God respecting the coming into existence of each part of the\nworld were addressed to one thing or to several;[712] and he would not\nlightly have charged with being unintelligible, and as having no secret\nmeaning, the accounts related in these books, either by Moses, or, as\n_we_ would say, by the Divine Spirit speaking in Moses, from whom also\nhe derived the power of prophesying; since he \u201cknew both the present,\nand the future, and the past,\u201d in a higher degree than those priests who\nare alleged by the poets to have possessed a knowledge of these things.\n\nFootnote 712:\n\n \u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03b9 \u1f22 \u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVI.\n\n\nMoreover, since Celsus asserts that \u201cthe soul is the work of God, but\nthat the nature of body is different; and that in this respect there is\nno difference between the body of a bat, or of a worm, or of a frog, and\nthat of a man, for the matter is the same, and their corruptible part\nalike,\u201d\u2014we have to say in answer to this argument of his, that if, since\nthe same matter underlies the body of a bat, or of a worm, or of a frog,\nor of a man, these bodies will differ in no respect from one another, it\nis evident then that these bodies also will differ in no respect from\nthe sun, or the moon, or the stars, or the sky, or any other thing which\nis called by the Greeks a god, cognisable by the senses.[713] For the\nsame matter, underlying _all_ bodies, is, properly speaking, without\nqualities and without form, and derives its qualities from some [other]\nsource, I know not whence, since Celsus will have it that nothing\ncorruptible can be the work of God. Now the corruptible part of\neverything whatever, being produced from the same underlying matter,\nmust necessarily be the same, by Celsus\u2019 own showing; unless, indeed,\nfinding himself here hard pressed, he should desert Plato, who makes the\nsoul arise from a certain bowl,[714] and take refuge with Aristotle and\nthe Peripatetics, who maintain that the ether is _immaterial_,[715] and\nconsists of a fifth nature, separate from the other four elements,[716]\nagainst which view both the Platonists and the Stoics have nobly\nprotested. And we too, who are despised by Celsus, will contravene it,\nseeing we are required to explain and maintain the following statement\nof the prophet: \u201cThe heavens shall perish, but Thou remainest: and they\nall shall wax old as a garment; and as a vesture shalt Thou fold them\nup, and they shall be changed: but Thou art the same.\u201d[717] These\nremarks, however, are sufficient in reply to Celsus, when he asserts\nthat \u201cthe soul is the work of God, but that the nature of body is\ndifferent;\u201d for from his argument it follows that there is no difference\nbetween the body of a bat, or of a worm, or of a frog, and that of a\nheavenly[718] being.\n\nFootnote 713:\n\n \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6.\n\nFootnote 714:\n\n Cf. Plato in _Tim\u00e6o_.\n\nFootnote 715:\n\n \u1f04\u03cb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 716:\n\n \u03c0\u03ad\u03bc\u03c0\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 717:\n\n Cf. Ps. cii. 26, 27.\n\nFootnote 718:\n\n \u03b1\u1f30\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVII.\n\n\nSee, then, whether we ought to yield to one who, holding such opinions,\ncalumniates the Christians, and thus abandon a doctrine which explains\nthe difference existing among bodies as due to the different qualities,\ninternal and external, which are implanted in them. For we, too, know\nthat there are \u201cbodies celestial, and bodies terrestrial;\u201d and that \u201cthe\nglory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial\nanother;\u201d and that even the glory of the celestial bodies is not alike:\nfor \u201cone is the glory of the sun, and another the glory of the stars;\u201d\nand among the stars themselves, \u201cone star differeth from another star in\nglory.\u201d[719] And therefore, as those who expect the resurrection of the\ndead, we assert that the qualities which are in bodies undergo change:\nsince some bodies, which are sown in corruption, are raised in\nincorruption; and others, sown in dishonour, are raised in glory; and\nothers, again, sown in weakness, are raised in power; and those which\nare sown natural bodies, are raised as spiritual.[720] That the matter\nwhich underlies bodies is capable of receiving those qualities which the\nCreator pleases to bestow, is a point which all of us who accept the\ndoctrine of providence firmly hold; so that, if God so willed, one\nquality is at the present time implanted in this portion of matter, and\nafterwards another of a different and better kind. But since there are,\nfrom the beginning of the world, laws[721] established for the purpose\nof regulating the changes of bodies, and which will continue while the\nworld lasts, I do not know whether, when a new and different order of\nthings has succeeded[722] after the destruction of the world, and what\nour Scriptures call the end[723] [of the ages], it is not wonderful that\nat the present time a snake should be formed out of a dead man, growing,\nas the multitude affirm, out of the marrow of the back,[724] and that a\nbee should spring from an ox, and a wasp from a horse, and a beetle from\nan ass, and, generally, worms from the most of bodies. Celsus, indeed,\nthinks that this can be shown to be the consequence of none of these\nbodies being the work of God, and that qualities (I know not whence it\nwas so arranged that one should spring out of another) are not the work\nof a divine intelligence, producing the changes which occur in the\nqualities of matter.\n\nFootnote 719:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 41, etc.\n\nFootnote 720:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 44.\n\nFootnote 721:\n\n \u1f41\u03b4\u03bf\u1f76.\n\nFootnote 722:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f41\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, etc. For \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2,\n Boherellus would read \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03be\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2. Cf. Origen, _de Princip._ iii. c.\n v.\n\nFootnote 723:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 724:\n\n Cf. Pliny, x. c. 66: \u201cAnguem ex medull\u00e2 hominis spin\u00e6 gigni accepimus\n a multis.\u201d Cf. also Ovid, _Metamorphos._ xv. fab. iv.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVIII.\n\n\nBut we have something more to say to Celsus, when he declares that \u201cthe\nsoul is the work of God, and that the nature of body is different,\u201d and\nputs forward such an opinion not only without proof, but even without\nclearly defining his meaning; for he did not make it evident, whether he\nmeant that every soul is the work of God, or only the rational soul.\nThis, then, is what we have to say: If every soul is the work of God, it\nis manifest that those of the meanest irrational animals are God\u2019s work,\nso that the nature of all bodies is different from that of the soul. He\nappears, however, in what follows, where he says that \u201cirrational\nanimals are more beloved by God than we, and have a purer knowledge of\ndivinity,\u201d to maintain that not only is the soul of man, but in a much\ngreater degree that of irrational animals, the work of God; for this\nfollows from their being said to be more beloved by God than we. Now if\nthe rational soul alone be the work of God, then, in the first place, he\ndid not clearly indicate that such was his opinion; and in the second\nplace, this deduction follows from his indefinite language regarding the\nsoul\u2014viz. whether not every one, but only the rational, is the work of\nGod\u2014that neither is the nature of all bodies different [from the soul].\nBut if the nature of all bodies be not different, although the body of\neach animal correspond to its soul, it is evident that the body of that\nanimal whose soul was the work of God, would differ from the body of\nthat animal in which dwells a soul which was not the work of God. And so\nthe assertion will be false, that there is no difference between the\nbody of a bat, or of a worm, or of a frog, and that of a man.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIX.\n\n\nFor it would, indeed, be absurd that certain stones and buildings should\nbe regarded as more sacred or more profane than others, according as\nthey were constructed for the honour of God, or for the reception of\ndishonourable and accursed persons;[725] while bodies should not differ\nfrom bodies, according as they are inhabited by rational or irrational\nbeings, and according as these rational beings are the most virtuous or\nmost worthless of mankind. Such a principle of distinction, indeed, has\nled some to deify the bodies of distinguished men,[726] as having\nreceived a virtuous soul, and to reject and treat with dishonour those\nof very wicked individuals. I do not maintain that such a principle has\nbeen always soundly exercised, but that it had its origin in a correct\nidea. Would a wise man, indeed, after the death of Anytus and Socrates,\nthink of burying the bodies of both with like honours? And would he\nraise the same mound or tomb to the memory of both? These instances we\nhave adduced because of the language of Celsus, that \u201cnone of these is\nthe work of God\u201d (where the words \u201cof these\u201d refer to the body of a man,\nor to the snakes which come out of the body; and to that of an ox, or of\nthe bees which come from the body of an ox; and to that of a horse, or\nof an ass, and to the wasps which come from a horse, and the beetles\nwhich proceed from an ass); for which reason we have been obliged to\nreturn to the consideration of his statement, that \u201cthe soul is the work\nof God, but that the nature of body is different.\u201d\n\nFootnote 725:\n\n \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 726:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LX.\n\n\nHe next proceeds to say, that \u201ca common nature pervades all the\npreviously mentioned bodies, and one which goes and returns the same\namid recurring changes.\u201d[727] In answer to this, it is evident from what\nhas been already said, that not only does a common nature pervade those\nbodies which have been previously enumerated, but the heavenly bodies as\nwell. And if this is the case, it is clear also that, according to\nCelsus (although I do not know whether it is according to truth), it is\none nature which goes and returns the same through all bodies amid\nrecurring changes. It is evident also that this is the case in the\nopinion of those who hold that the world is to perish; while those also\nwho hold the opposite view will endeavour to show, without the\nassumption of a fifth substance,[728] that in their judgment too it is\none nature \u201cwhich goes and returns the same through all bodies amid\nrecurring changes.\u201d And thus, even that which is perishable remains in\norder to undergo a change;[729] for the matter which underlies [all\nthings], while its properties perish, still abides, according to the\nopinion of those who hold it to be uncreated. If, however, it can be\nshown by any arguments not to be uncreated, but to have been created for\ncertain purposes, it is clear that it will not have the same nature of\npermanency which it would possess on the hypothesis of being uncreated.\nBut it is not our object at present, in answering the charges of Celsus,\nto discuss these questions of natural philosophy.\n\nFootnote 727:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03b2\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f30\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 728:\n\n \u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 729:\n\n \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXI.\n\n\nHe maintains, moreover, that \u201cno product of matter is immortal.\u201d Now, in\nanswer to this it may be said, that if no product of matter is immortal,\nthen either the whole world is immortal, and thus not a product of\nmatter, or it is _not_ immortal. If, accordingly, the world is immortal\n(which is agreeable to the view of those who say that the soul alone is\nthe work of God, and was produced from a certain bowl), let Celsus show\nthat the world was not produced from a matter devoid of qualities,\nremembering his own assertion that \u201cno product of matter is immortal.\u201d\nIf, however, the world is not immortal (seeing it is a product of\nmatter), but mortal, does it also perish, or does it not? For if it\nperish, it will perish as being a work of God; and then, in the event of\nthe _world_ perishing, what will become of the _soul_, which is also a\nwork of God? Let Celsus answer this! But if, perverting the notion of\nimmortality, he will assert that, although _perishable_, it is immortal,\nbecause it does not _really_ perish; that it is _capable_ of dying, but\ndoes not _actually_ die,\u2014it is evident that, according to him, there\nwill exist something which is at the same time mortal and immortal, by\nbeing capable of both conditions; and that which does not die will be\nmortal, and that which is not immortal by nature will be termed in a\npeculiar sense immortal, because it does not die! According to what\ndistinction, then, in the meaning of words, will he maintain that no\nproduct of matter is immortal? And thus you see that the ideas contained\nin his writings, when closely examined and tested, are proved _not_ to\nbe sound and incontrovertible.[730] And after making these assertions he\nadds: \u201cOn this point these remarks are sufficient; and if any one is\ncapable of hearing and examining further, he will come to know [the\ntruth].\u201d Let us, then, who in his opinion are unintelligent individuals,\nsee what will result from our being able to listen to him for a little,\nand so continue our investigation.\n\nFootnote 730:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXII.\n\n\nAfter these matters, then, he thinks that he can make us acquainted in a\nfew words with the questions regarding the nature of evil, which have\nbeen variously discussed in many important treatises, and which have\nreceived very opposite explanations. His words are: \u201cThere neither were\nformerly, nor are there now, nor will there be again, more or fewer\nevils in the world [than have always been]. For the nature of all things\nis one and the same, and the generation of evils is always the same.\u201d He\nseems to have paraphrased these words from the discussions in the\n_The\u0153tetus_, where Plato makes Socrates say: \u201cIt is neither possible for\nevils to disappear from among men, nor for them to become established\namong the gods,\u201d and so on. But he appears to me not to have understood\nPlato correctly, although professing to include all truth[731] in this\none treatise, and giving to his own book against us the title of _A True\nDiscourse_. For the language in the _Tim\u0153us_, where it is said, \u201cWhen\nthe gods purify the earth with water,\u201d shows that the earth, when\npurified with water, contains less evil than it did before its\npurification. And this assertion, that there at one time were fewer\nevils in the world, is one which we make, in harmony with the opinion of\nPlato, because of the language in the _The\u0153tetus_, where he says that\n\u201cevils cannot disappear from among men.\u201d\n\nFootnote 731:\n\n \u1f41 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIII.\n\n\nI do not understand how Celsus, while admitting the existence of\nProvidence, at least so far as appears from the language of this book,\ncan say that there never existed [at any time] either more or fewer\nevils, but, as it were, a fixed number; thus annihilating the beautiful\ndoctrine regarding the indefinite[732] nature of evil, and asserting\nthat evil, even in its own nature,[733] is infinite. Now it appears to\nfollow from the position, that there never have been, nor are now, nor\never will be, more or fewer evils in the world; that as, according to\nthe view of those who hold the indestructibility of the world, the\nequipoise of the elements is maintained by a Providence (which does not\npermit one to gain the preponderance over the others, in order to\nprevent the destruction of the world), so a kind of Providence presides,\nas it were, over evils (the number of which is fixed),[734] to prevent\ntheir being either increased or diminished! In other ways, too, are the\narguments of Celsus concerning evil confuted, by those philosophers who\nhave investigated the subjects of good and evil, and who have proved\nalso from history that in former times it was without the city, and with\ntheir faces concealed by masks, that loose women hired themselves to\nthose who wanted them; that subsequently, becoming more impudent, they\nlaid aside their masks, though not being permitted by the laws to enter\nthe cities, they [still] remained without them, until, as the\ndissoluteness of manners daily increased, they dared [finally] even to\nenter the cities. Such accounts are given by Chrysippus in the\nintroduction to his work on _Good and Evil_. From this also it may be\nseen that evils both increase and decrease, viz. that those individuals\nwho were called \u201cAmbiguous\u201d[735] used formerly to present themselves\nopenly to view, suffering and committing all shameful things, while\nsubserving the passions of those who frequented their society; but\nrecently they have been expelled [from the city] by the\nauthorities.[736] And of countless evils which, owing to the spread of\nwickedness, have made their appearance in human life, we may say that\nformerly they did _not_ exist. For the most ancient histories, which\nbring innumerable other accusations against sinful men, know nothing of\nthe perpetrators of abominable[737] crimes.\n\nFootnote 732:\n\n \u1f00\u03cc\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 733:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u1ff3 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3.\n\nFootnote 734:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 735:\n\n \u1f08\u03bc\u03c6\u03af\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 736:\n\n \u1f08\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 737:\n\n \u1f00\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f34\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIV.\n\n\nAnd now, after these arguments, and others of a similar kind, how can\nCelsus escape appearing in a ridiculous light, when he imagines that\nthere never has been in the past, nor will be in the future, a greater\nor less number of evils? For although the nature of all things is one\nand the same, it does not at all follow that the production of evils is\na constant quantity.[738] For although the nature of a certain\nindividual is one and the same, yet his mind, and his reason, and his\nactions, are not always alike:[739] there being a time when he had not\nyet attained to reason; and another, when, with the possession of\nreason, he had become stained with wickedness, and when this increased\nto a greater or less degree; and again, a time when he devoted himself\nto virtue, and made greater or less progress therein, attaining\nsometimes the very summit of perfection, through longer or shorter\nperiods of contemplation.[740] In like manner, we may make the same\nassertion in a higher degree of the nature of the universe,[741] that\nalthough it is one and the same in kind, yet neither do exactly the same\nthings, nor yet things that are similar, occur in it; for we neither\nhave invariably productive nor unproductive seasons, nor yet periods of\ncontinuous rain or of drought. And so in the same way, with regard to\nvirtuous souls, there are neither appointed periods of fertility nor of\nbarrenness; and the same is the case with the greater or less spread of\nevil. And those who desire to investigate all things to the best of\ntheir ability, must keep in view this estimate of evils, that their\namount is not always the same, owing to the working of a Providence\nwhich either preserves earthly things, or purges them by means of floods\nand conflagrations; and effects this, perhaps, not merely with reference\nto things on earth, but also to the whole universe of things[742] which\nstands in need of purification, when the wickedness that is in it has\nbecome great.\n\nFootnote 738:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f21 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b5\u1f76 \u1f21 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ae.\n\nFootnote 739:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ac \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6,\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 740:\n\n \u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 741:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f45\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 742:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f41\u03bb\u1ff3 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u1ff3.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXV.\n\n\nAfter this Celsus continues: \u201cIt is not easy, indeed, for one who is not\na philosopher to ascertain the origin of evils, though it is sufficient\nfor the multitude to say that they do not proceed from God, but cleave\nto matter, and have their abode among mortal things; while the\ncourse[743] of mortal things being the same from beginning to end, the\nsame things must always, agreeably to the appointed cycles,[744] recur\nin the past, present, and future.\u201d Celsus here observes that it is not\neasy for one who is not a philosopher to ascertain the origin of evils,\nas if it were an easy matter for a philosopher to gain this knowledge,\nwhile for one who is not a philosopher it was difficult, though still\npossible, for such an one, although with great labour, to attain it.\nNow, to this we say, that the origin of evils is a subject which is not\neasy even for a philosopher to master, and that perhaps it is impossible\neven for such to attain a clear understanding of it, unless it be\nrevealed to them by divine inspiration, both what evils are, and how\nthey originated, and how they shall be made to disappear. But although\nignorance of God is an evil, and one of the greatest of these is not to\nknow how God is to be served and worshipped, yet, as even Celsus would\nadmit, there are undoubtedly some philosophers who have been ignorant of\nthis, as is evident from the views of the different philosophical sects;\nwhereas, according to our judgment, no one is capable of ascertaining\nthe origin of evils who does not know that it is wicked to suppose that\npiety is preserved uninjured amid the laws that are established in\ndifferent states, in conformity with the generally prevailing ideas of\ngovernment.[745] No one, moreover, who has not heard what is related of\nhim who is called \u201cdevil,\u201d and of his \u201cangels,\u201d and what he was before\nhe became a devil, and _how_ he became such, and what was the cause of\nthe simultaneous apostasy of those who are termed his angels, will be\nable to ascertain the origin of evils. But he who would attain to this\nknowledge must learn more accurately the nature of demons, and know that\nthey are not the work of God so far as respects their demoniacal nature,\nbut only in so far as they are possessed of reason; and also what their\norigin was, so that they became beings of such a nature, that while\nconverted into demons, the powers of their mind[746] remain. And if\nthere be any topic of human investigation which is difficult for our\nnature to grasp, certainly the origin of evils may be considered to be\nsuch.\n\nFootnote 743:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 744:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03c5\u03ba\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 745:\n\n \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f10\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03ba\u1f7c\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03c3\u03ad\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u03c3\u03ce\u03b6\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 746:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVI.\n\n\nCelsus in the next place, as if he were able to tell certain secrets\nregarding the origin of evils, but chose rather to keep silence, and say\nonly what was suitable to the multitude, continues as follows: \u201cIt is\nsufficient to say to the multitude regarding the origin of evils, that\nthey do not proceed from God, but cleave to matter, and dwell among\nmortal things.\u201d It is true, certainly, that evils do not proceed from\nGod; for according to Jeremiah, one of our prophets, it is certain that\n\u201cout of the mouth of the Most High proceedeth not evil and good.\u201d[747]\nBut to maintain that matter, dwelling among mortal things, is the cause\nof evils, is in our opinion not true. For it is the mind of each\nindividual which is the cause of the evil which arises in him, and this\nis evil in the abstract;[748] while the actions which proceed from it\nare wicked, and there is, to speak with accuracy, nothing else in our\nview that is evil. I am aware, however, that this topic requires very\nelaborate treatment, which (by the grace of God enlightening the mind)\nmay be successfully attempted by him who is deemed by God worthy to\nattain the necessary knowledge on this subject.\n\nFootnote 747:\n\n Cf. Lam. iii. 38.\n\nFootnote 748:\n\n \u1f25\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVII.\n\n\nI do not understand how Celsus should deem it of advantage, in writing a\ntreatise against us, to adopt an opinion which requires at least much\nplausible reasoning to make it appear, as far as he can do so, that \u201cthe\ncourse of mortal things is the same from beginning to end, and that the\nsame things must always, according to the appointed cycles, recur in the\npast, present, and future.\u201d Now, if this be true, our free-will is\nannihilated.[749] For if, in the revolution of mortal things, the same\nevents must perpetually occur in the past, present, and future,\naccording to the appointed cycles, it is clear that, of necessity,\nSocrates will always be a philosopher, and be condemned for introducing\nstrange gods and for corrupting the youth. And Anytus and Melitus must\nalways be his accusers, and the council of the Areopagus must ever\ncondemn him to death by hemlock. And in the same way, according to the\nappointed cycles, Phalaris must always play the tyrant, and Alexander of\nPher\u00e6 commit the same acts of cruelty, and those condemned to the\n[torture of the brazen] bull of Phalaris continually pour forth their\nwailings from it. But if these things be granted, I do not see how our\nfree-will can be preserved, or how praise or blame can be administered\nwith propriety. We may say further to Celsus, in answer to such a view,\nthat \u201cif the course of mortal things be always the same from beginning\nto end, and if, according to the appointed cycles, the same events must\nalways occur in the past, present, and future,\u201d then, according to the\nappointed cycles, Moses must again come forth from Egypt with the Jewish\npeople, and Jesus again come to dwell in human life, and perform the\nsame actions which, [according to this view], he has done not once, but\ncountless times, as the periods have revolved. Nay, Christians too will\nbe the same in the appointed cycles; and Celsus will again write this\ntreatise of his, which he has done innumerable times before!\n\nFootnote 749:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03c6\u2019 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u1fc4\u03c1\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVIII.\n\n\nCelsus, however, says that it is only \u201cthe course of _mortal_ things\nwhich, according to the appointed cycles, must always be the same in the\npast, present, and future;\u201d whereas the majority of the Stoics maintain\nthat this is the case not only with the course of mortal, but also with\nthat of immortal things, and of those whom they regard as gods. For\nafter the conflagration of the world,[750] which has taken place\ncountless times in the past, and will happen countless times in the\nfuture, there has been, and will be, the same arrangement of all things\nfrom the beginning to the end. The Stoics, indeed, in endeavouring to\nparry, I don\u2019t know how, the objections raised to their views, allege\nthat as cycle after cycle returns, all men will be altogether\nunchanged[751] from those who lived in former cycles; so that Socrates\nwill not live again, but one altogether like to Socrates, who will marry\na wife exactly like Xanthippe, and will be accused by men exactly like\nAnytus and Melitus. I do not understand, however, how the world is to be\nalways the same, and one individual not different from another, and yet\nthe things in it not the same, though exactly alike. But the main\nargument in answer to the statements of Celsus and of the Stoics will be\nmore appropriately investigated elsewhere, since on the present occasion\nit is not consistent with the purpose we have in view to expatiate on\nthese points.\n\nFootnote 750:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 751:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIX.\n\n\nHe continues to say, that \u201cneither have visible things[752] been given\nto man [by God], but each individual thing comes into existence and\nperishes for the sake of the safety of the whole, passing agreeably to\nthe change, which I have already mentioned, from one thing to another.\u201d\nIt is unnecessary, however, to linger over the refutation of these\nstatements, which have been already refuted to the best of my ability.\nAnd the following, too, has been answered, viz. that \u201cthere will neither\nbe more nor less good and evil among mortals.\u201d This point also has been\nreferred to, viz. that \u201cGod does not need to amend His work\nafresh.\u201d[753] But it is not as a man who has imperfectly designed some\npiece of workmanship, and executed it unskilfully, that God administers\ncorrection to the world, in purifying it by a flood or by a\nconflagration, but in order to prevent the tide of evil from rising to a\ngreater height; and, moreover, I am of opinion that it is at periods\nwhich are precisely determined beforehand that He sweeps wickedness\naway, so as to contribute to the good of the whole world.[754] If,\nhowever, he should assert that, after the disappearance of evil, it\nagain comes into existence, such questions will have to be examined in a\nspecial treatise. It is, then, always in order to repair what has become\nfaulty[755] that God desires to amend His work afresh. For although, in\nthe creation of the world, all things had been arranged by Him in the\nmost beautiful and stable manner, He nevertheless needed to exercise\nsome healing power upon those who were labouring under the disease of\nwickedness, and upon a whole world, which was polluted as it were\nthereby. But nothing has been neglected by God, or will be neglected by\nHim; for He does at each particular juncture what it becomes Him to do\nin a perverted and changed world. And as a husbandman performs different\nacts of husbandry upon the soil and its productions, according to the\nvarying seasons of the year, so God administers entire ages of time, as\nif they were, so to speak, so many individual years, performing during\neach one of them what is requisite with a reasonable regard to the care\nof the world; and this, as it is truly understood by God alone, so also\nis it accomplished by Him.\n\nFootnote 752:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f41\u03c1\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 753:\n\n \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u0398\u03b5\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c1\u03b8\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 754:\n\n \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af.\n\nFootnote 755:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c3\u03c6\u03ac\u03bb\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXX.\n\n\nCelsus has made a statement regarding evils of the following nature,\nviz., that \u201calthough a thing may seem to you to be evil, it is by no\nmeans certain that it is so; for you do not know what is of advantage to\nyourself, or to another, or to the whole world.\u201d Now this assertion is\nmade with a certain degree of caution;[756] and it hints that the nature\nof evil is not wholly wicked, because that which may be considered so in\nindividual cases, may contain something which is of advantage to the\nwhole community. However, lest any one should mistake my words, and find\na pretence of wrongdoing, as if his wickedness were profitable to the\nworld, or at least _might_ be so, we have to say, that although God, who\npreserves the free-will of each individual, may make use of the evil of\nthe wicked for the administration of the world, so disposing them as to\nconduce to the benefit of the whole; yet, notwithstanding, such an\nindividual is deserving of censure, and as such has been appointed for a\nuse, which is a subject of loathing to each separate individual,\nalthough of advantage to the whole community.[757] It is as if one were\nto say that in the case of a city, a man who had committed certain\ncrimes, and on account of these had been condemned to serve in public\nworks that were useful to the community, did something that was of\nadvantage to the entire city, while he himself was engaged in an\nabominable task,[758] in which no one possessed of moderate\nunderstanding would wish to be engaged. Paul also, the apostle of Jesus,\nteaches us that even the very wicked will contribute to the good of the\nwhole, while in themselves they will be amongst the vile, but that the\nmost virtuous men, too, will be of the greatest advantage to the world,\nand will therefore on that account occupy the noblest position. His\nwords are: \u201cBut in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and\nsilver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to\ndishonour. If a man therefore purge himself, he shall be a vessel unto\nhonour, sanctified and meet for the Master\u2019s use, prepared unto every\ngood work.\u201d[759] These remarks I have thought it necessary to make in\nreply to the assertion, that \u201calthough a thing may seem to you to be\nevil, it is by no means certain that it is so, for you do not know what\nis of advantage either to yourself or to another,\u201d in order that no one\nmay take occasion from what has been said on the subject to commit sin,\non the pretext that he will thus be useful to the world.\n\nFootnote 756:\n\n \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f50\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03ad\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 757:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c8\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f11\u03ba\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff3, \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\n \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af.\n\nFootnote 758:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 759:\n\n Cf. 1 Tim. ii. 20, 21.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXI.\n\n\nBut as, in what follows, Celsus, not understanding that the language of\nScripture regarding God is adapted to an anthropopathic point of view,\nridicules those passages which speak of words of anger addressed to the\nungodly, and of threatenings directed against sinners, we have to say\nthat, as we ourselves, when talking with very young children, do not aim\nat exerting our own power of eloquence,[760] but, adapting ourselves to\nthe weakness of our charge, both say and do those things which may\nappear to us useful for the correction and improvement of the children\nas children, so the word of God appears to have dealt with the history,\nmaking the capacity of the hearers, and the benefit which they were to\nreceive, the standard of the appropriateness of its announcements\n[regarding Him]. And, generally, with regard to such a style of speaking\nabout God, we find in the book of Deuteronomy the following: \u201cThe Lord\nthy God bare with your manners, as a man would bear with the manners of\nhis son.\u201d[761] It is, as it were, assuming the manners of a man in order\nto secure the advantage of men that the Scripture makes use of such\nexpressions; for it would not have been suitable to the condition of the\nmultitude, that what God had to say to them should be spoken by Him in a\nmanner more befitting the majesty of His own person. And yet he who is\nanxious to attain a true understanding of Holy Scripture, will discover\nthe spiritual truths which are spoken by it to those who are called\n\u201cspiritual,\u201d by comparing the meaning of what is addressed to those of\nweaker mind with what is announced to such as are of acuter\nunderstanding, both meanings being frequently found in the same passage\nby him who is capable of comprehending it.\n\nFootnote 760:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c7\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6.\n\nFootnote 761:\n\n Cf. Deut. i. 31. Origen appears to have read, not \u1f10\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, the\n common reading (Heb. \u05e0\u05b8\u05e9\u05b8\u05c2\u05d0), but \u1f10\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, the reading of the\n Codex Alex.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXII.\n\n\nWe speak, indeed, of the \u201cwrath\u201d of God. We do not, however, assert that\nit indicates any \u201cpassion\u201d on His part, but that it is something which\nis assumed in order to discipline by stern means those sinners who have\ncommitted many and grievous sins. For that which is called God\u2019s\n\u201cwrath,\u201d and \u201canger,\u201d is a means of discipline; and that such a view is\nagreeable to Scripture, is evident from what is said in the sixth Psalm,\n\u201cO Lord, rebuke me not in Thine anger, neither chasten me in Thy hot\ndispleasure;\u201d[762] and also in Jeremiah, \u201cO Lord, correct me, but with\njudgment: not in Thine anger, lest Thou bring me to nothing.\u201d[763] Any\none, moreover, who reads in the second book of Kings of the \u201cwrath\u201d of\nGod, inducing David to number the people, and finds from the first book\nof Chronicles that it was the devil who suggested this measure, will, on\ncomparing together the two statements, easily see for what purpose the\n\u201cwrath\u201d is mentioned, of which \u201cwrath,\u201d as the Apostle Paul declares,\nall men are children: \u201cWe were by nature children of wrath, even as\nothers.\u201d[764] Moreover, that \u201cwrath\u201d is no passion on the part of God,\nbut that each one brings it upon himself by his sins, will be clear from\nthe further statement of Paul: \u201cOr despisest thou the riches of His\ngoodness, and forbearance, and long-suffering, not knowing that the\ngoodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But after thy hardness and\nimpenitent heart, treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of\nwrath, and revelation of the righteous judgment of God.\u201d How, then, can\nany one treasure up for himself \u201cwrath\u201d against a \u201cday of wrath,\u201d if\n\u201cwrath\u201d be understood in the sense of \u201cpassion?\u201d or how can the \u201cpassion\nof wrath\u201d be a help to discipline? Besides, the Scripture, which tells\nus not to be angry at all, and which says in the thirty-seventh Psalm,\n\u201cCease from anger, and forsake wrath,\u201d[765] and which commands us by the\nmouth of Paul to \u201cput off all these, anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy,\nfilthy communication,\u201d[766] would not involve God in the same passion\nfrom which it would have us to be altogether free. It is manifest,\nfurther, that the language used regarding the wrath of God is to be\nunderstood _figuratively_ from what is related of His \u201csleep,\u201d from\nwhich, as if awaking Him, the prophet says: \u201cAwake, why sleepest Thou,\nLord?\u201d[767] and again: \u201cThen the Lord awaked as one out of sleep, and\nlike a mighty man that shouteth by reason of wine.\u201d[768] If, then,\n\u201csleep\u201d must mean something else, and not what the first acceptation of\nthe word conveys, why should not \u201cwrath\u201d also be understood in a similar\nway? The \u201cthreatenings,\u201d again, are intimations of the [punishments]\nwhich are to befall the wicked: for it is as if one were to call the\nwords of a physician \u201cthreats,\u201d when he tells his patients, \u201cI will have\nto use the knife, and apply cauteries, if you do not obey my\nprescriptions, and regulate your diet and mode of life in such a way as\nI direct you.\u201d It is no human passions, then, which we ascribe to God,\nnor impious opinions which we entertain of Him; nor do we err when we\npresent the various narratives concerning Him, drawn from the Scriptures\nthemselves, after careful comparison one with another. For those who are\nwise ambassadors of the \u201cword\u201d have no other object in view than to free\nas far as they can their hearers from weak opinions, and to endue them\nwith intelligence.\n\nFootnote 762:\n\n Cf. Ps. vi. 1.\n\nFootnote 763:\n\n Cf. Jer. x. 24.\n\nFootnote 764:\n\n Cf. Eph. ii. 3.\n\nFootnote 765:\n\n Cf. Ps. xxxvii. 8.\n\nFootnote 766:\n\n Cf. Col. iii. 8.\n\nFootnote 767:\n\n Ps. xliv. 23.\n\nFootnote 768:\n\n Cf. Ps. lxxviii. 65.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIII.\n\n\nAnd as a sequel to his non-understanding of the statements regarding the\n\u201cwrath\u201d of God, he continues: \u201cIs it not ridiculous to suppose that,\nwhereas a _man_, who became angry with the Jews, slew them all from the\nyouth upwards, and burned their city (so powerless were they to resist\nhim), the mighty _God_, as they say, being angry, and indignant, and\nuttering threats, should, [instead of punishing them,] send His own\n_Son_, who endured the sufferings which He did?\u201d If the Jews, then,\nafter the treatment which they dared to inflict upon Jesus, perished\nwith all their youth, and had their city consumed by fire, they suffered\nthis punishment in consequence of no other wrath than that which they\ntreasured up for themselves; for the judgment of God against them, which\nwas determined by the divine appointment, is termed \u201cwrath\u201d agreeably to\na traditional usage of the Hebrews. And what the Son of the mighty God\nsuffered, He suffered voluntarily for the salvation of men, as has been\nstated to the best of my ability in the preceding pages. He then\ncontinues: \u201cBut that I may speak not of the Jews alone (for that is not\nmy object), but of the whole of nature, as I promised, I will bring out\nmore clearly what has been already stated.\u201d Now what modest man, on\nreading these words, and knowing the weakness of humanity, would not be\nindignant at the offensive nature of the promise to give an account of\nthe \u201cwhole of nature,\u201d and at an arrogance like that which prompted him\nto inscribe upon his book the title which he ventured to give it [of a\nTrue Discourse]? But let us see what he has to say regarding the \u201cwhole\nof nature,\u201d and what he is to place \u201cin a clearer light.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIV.\n\n\nHe next, in many words, blames us for asserting that God made all things\nfor the sake of man. Because from the history of animals, and from the\nsagacity manifested by them, he would show that all things came into\nexistence not more for the sake of man than of the irrational animals.\nAnd here he seems to me to speak in a similar manner to those who,\nthrough dislike of their enemies, accuse them of the same things for\nwhich their own friends are commended. For as, in the instance referred\nto, hatred blinds these persons from seeing that they are accusing their\nvery dearest friends by the means through which they think they are\nslandering their enemies; so in the same way, Celsus also, becoming\nconfused in his argument, does not see that he is bringing a charge\nagainst the philosophers of the Porch, who, not amiss, place man in the\nforemost rank, and rational nature in general before irrational animals,\nand who maintain that Providence created all things mainly on account of\nrational nature. Rational beings, then, as being the principal ones,\noccupy the place, as it were, of children in the womb, while irrational\nand soulless beings hold that of the envelope which is created along\nwith the child.[769] I think, too, that as in cities the superintendents\nof the goods and market discharge their duties for the sake of no other\nthan human beings, while dogs and other irrational animals have the\nbenefit of the superabundance; so Providence provides _in a special\nmanner_ for rational creatures; while this also follows, that irrational\ncreatures likewise enjoy the benefit of what is done for the sake of\nman. And as he is in error who alleges that the superintendents of the\nmarkets[770] make provision in no greater degree for men than for dogs,\nbecause dogs also get their share of the goods; so in a far greater\ndegree are Celsus and they who think with him guilty of impiety towards\nthe God who makes provision for rational beings, in asserting that His\narrangements are made in no greater degree for the sustenance of human\nbeings than for that of plants, and trees, and herbs, and thorns.\n\nFootnote 769:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70, \u1f05\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1, \u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd\n \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f04\u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b1 \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u1ff3.\n\nFootnote 770:\n\n \u1f00\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXV.\n\n\nFor, in the first place, he is of opinion that \u201cthunders, and\nlightnings, and rains are not the works of God,\u201d\u2014thus showing more\nclearly at last his Epicurean leanings; and in the second place, that\n\u201ceven if one were to grant that these were the works of God, they are\nbrought into existence not more for the support of us who are human\nbeings, than for that of plants, and trees, and herbs, and\nthorns,\u201d\u2014maintaining, like a true Epicurean, that these things are the\nproduct of chance, and not the work of Providence. For if these things\nare of no more use to us than to plants, and trees, and herbs, and\nthorns, it is evident either that they do not proceed from Providence at\nall, or from a providence which does not provide for us in a greater\ndegree than for trees, and herbs, and thorns. Now, either of these\nsuppositions is impious in itself, and it would be foolish to refute\nsuch statements by answering any one who brought against us the charge\nof impiety; for it is manifest to every one, from what has been said,\nwho is the person guilty of impiety. In the next place, he adds:\n\u201cAlthough you may say that these things, viz. plants, and trees, and\nherbs, and thorns, grow for the use of men, why will you maintain that\nthey grow for the use of men rather than for that of the most savage of\nirrational animals?\u201d Let Celsus then say distinctly that the great\ndiversity among the products of the earth is not the work of Providence,\nbut that a certain fortuitous concurrence of atoms[771] gave birth to\nqualities so diverse, and that it was owing to chance that so many kinds\nof plants, and trees, and herbs resemble one another, and that no\ndisposing reason gave existence to them,[772] and that they do _not_\nderive their origin from an understanding that is beyond all admiration.\nWe Christians, however, who are devoted to the worship of the only God,\nwho created these things, feel grateful for them to Him who made them,\nbecause not only for us, but also (on our account) for the animals which\nare subject to us, He has prepared such a home,[773] seeing \u201cHe causeth\nthe grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man, that\nHe may bring forth food out of the earth, and wine that maketh glad the\nheart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which\nstrengtheneth man\u2019s heart.\u201d[774] But that He should have provided food\neven for the most savage animals is not matter of surprise, for these\nvery animals are said by some who have philosophized [upon the subject]\nto have been created for the purpose of affording exercise to the\nrational creature. And one of our own wise men says somewhere: \u201cDo not\nsay, What is this? or Wherefore is that? for all things have been made\nfor their uses. And do not say, What is this? or Wherefore is that? for\neverything shall be sought out in its season.\u201d[775]\n\nFootnote 771:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c4\u03cc\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 772:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ac.\n\nFootnote 773:\n\n \u1f11\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 774:\n\n Cf. Ps. civ. 14, 15.\n\nFootnote 775:\n\n Cf. Ecclus. xxxix. 21, and 16, 17.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVI.\n\n\nAfter this, Celsus, desirous of maintaining that Providence created the\nproducts of the earth, not more on our account than on that of the most\nsavage animals, thus proceeds: \u201cWe indeed by labour and suffering earn a\nscanty and toilsome subsistence,[776] while all things are produced for\nthem without their sowing and ploughing.\u201d He does not observe that God,\nwishing to exercise the human understanding in all countries (that it\nmight not remain idle and unacquainted with the arts), created man a\nbeing full of wants,[777] in order that by virtue of his very needy\ncondition he might be compelled to be the inventor of arts, some of\nwhich minister to his subsistence, and others to his protection. For it\nwas better that those who would not have sought out divine things, nor\nengaged in the study of philosophy, should be placed in a condition of\nwant, in order that they might employ their understanding in the\ninvention of the arts, than that they should altogether neglect the\ncultivation of their minds, because their condition was one of\nabundance. The want of the necessaries of human life led to the\ninvention on the one hand of the art of husbandry, on the other to that\nof the cultivation of the vine; again, to the art of gardening, and the\narts of carpentry and smithwork, by means of which were formed the tools\nrequired for the arts which minister to the support of life. The want of\ncovering, again, introduced the art of weaving, which followed that of\nwool-carding and spinning; and again, that of house-building: and thus\nthe intelligence of men ascended even to the art of architecture. The\nwant of necessaries caused the products also of other places to be\nconveyed, by means of the arts of sailing and pilotage,[778] to those\nwho were without them; so that even on that account one might admire the\nProvidence which made the rational being subject to want in a far higher\ndegree than the irrational animals, and yet all with a view to his\nadvantage. For the irrational animals have their food provided for them,\nbecause there is not in them even an impulse[779] towards the invention\nof the arts. They have, besides, a natural covering; for they are\nprovided either with hair, or wings, or scales, or shells. Let the\nabove, then, be our answer to the assertions of Celsus, when he says\nthat \u201cwe indeed by labour and suffering earn a scanty and toilsome\nsubsistence, while all things are produced for them without their sowing\nand ploughing.\u201d\n\nFootnote 776:\n\n \u03bc\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 777:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u1fc6.\n\nFootnote 778:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03bd\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03c5\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 779:\n\n \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVII.\n\n\nIn the next place, forgetting that his object is to accuse both Jews and\nChristians, he quotes against himself an iambic verse of Euripides,\nwhich is opposed to his view, and joining issue with the words, charges\nthem with being an erroneous statement. His words are as follow: \u201cBut if\nyou will quote the saying of Euripides, that\n\n \u2018The Sun and Night are to mortals slaves,\u2019[780]\n\nwhy should they be so in a greater degree to us than to ants and flies?\nFor the night is created for them in order that they may rest, and the\nday that they may see and resume their work.\u201d Now it is undoubted, that\nnot only have certain of the Jews and Christians declared that the sun\nand the heavenly bodies[781] are our servants; but he also has said\nthis, who, according to some, is the philosopher of the stage,[782] and\nwho was a hearer of the lectures on the philosophy of nature delivered\nby Anaxagoras. But this man asserts that all things in the world are\nsubject to all rational beings,\u2014one rational nature being taken to\nrepresent all, on the principle of a part standing for the whole;[783]\nwhich, again, clearly appears from the verse:\n\n \u201cThe Sun and Night are to mortals slaves.\u201d\n\nPerhaps the tragic poet meant the day when he said the sun, inasmuch as\nit is the cause of the day,\u2014teaching that those things which most need\nthe day and night are the things which are under the moon, and other\nthings in a less degree than those which are upon the earth. Day and\nnight, then, are subject to mortals, being created for the sake of\nrational beings. And if ants and flies, which labour by day and rest by\nnight, have, besides, the benefit of those things which were created for\nthe sake of men, we must not say that day and night were brought into\nbeing for the sake of ants and flies, nor must we suppose that they were\ncreated for the sake of nothing, but, agreeably to the design of\nProvidence, were formed for the sake of man.\n\nFootnote 780:\n\n Cf. Eurip. _Ph\u0153niss._ v. 512.\n\nFootnote 781:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f10\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff7.\n\nFootnote 782:\n\n \u1f41 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03a3\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2. Euripides himself is the person\n alluded to. He is called by Athen\u00e6us and Clemens Alexandrinus\n (_Strom._ v.), \u1f41 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2.\u2014DE LA RUE.\n\nFootnote 783:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVIII.\n\n\nHe next proceeds further to object against himself[784] what is said on\nbehalf of man, viz. that the irrational animals were created on his\naccount, saying: \u201cIf one were to call us the lords of the animal\ncreation because we hunt the other animals and live upon their flesh, we\nwould say, Why were not _we_ rather created on _their_ account, since\nthey hunt and devour us? Nay, _we_ require nets and weapons, and the\nassistance of many persons, along with dogs, when engaged in the chase;\nwhile they are immediately and spontaneously provided by nature with\nweapons which easily bring us under their power.\u201d And here we may\nobserve, that the gift of understanding has been bestowed upon us as a\nmighty aid, far superior to any weapon which wild beasts may seem to\npossess. We, indeed, who are far weaker in bodily strength than the\nbeasts, and shorter in stature than some of them, yet by means of our\nunderstanding obtain the mastery, and capture the huge elephants. We\nsubdue by our gentle treatment those animals whose nature it is to be\ntamed, while with those whose nature is different, or which do not\nappear likely to be of use to us when tamed, we take such precautionary\nmeasures, that when we desire it, we keep such wild beasts shut up; and\nwhen we need the flesh of their bodies for food, we slaughter them, as\nwe do those beasts which are not of a savage nature. The Creator, then,\nhas constituted all things the servants of the rational being and of his\nnatural understanding. For some purposes we require dogs, say as\nguardians of our sheep-folds, or of our cattle-yards, or goat-pastures,\nor of our dwellings; and for other purposes we need oxen, as for\nagriculture; and for others, again, we make use of those which bear the\nyoke, or beasts of burden. And so it may be said that the race of lions,\nand bears, and leopards, and wild boars, and such like, has been given\nto us in order to call into exercise the elements of the manly character\nthat exists within us.\n\nFootnote 784:\n\n \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIX.\n\n\nIn the next place, in answer to the human race, who perceive their own\nsuperiority, which far exceeds that of the irrational animals, he says:\n\u201cWith respect to your assertion, that God gave you the power to capture\nwild beasts, and to make your own use of them, we would say that, in all\nprobability, before cities were built, and arts invented, and societies\nsuch as now exist were formed, and weapons and nets employed, men were\ngenerally caught and devoured by wild beasts, while wild beasts were\nvery seldom captured by men.\u201d Now, in reference to this, observe that\nalthough men catch wild beasts, and wild beasts make prey of men, there\nis a great difference between the case of such as by means of their\nunderstanding obtain the mastery over those whose superiority consists\nin their savage and cruel nature, and that of those who do not make use\nof their understanding to secure their safety from injury by wild\nbeasts. But when Celsus says, \u201cbefore cities were built, and arts\ninvented, and societies such as now exist were formed,\u201d he appears to\nhave forgotten what he had before said, that \u201cthe world was uncreated\nand incorruptible, and that it was only the things on earth which\nunderwent deluges and conflagrations, and that all these things did not\nhappen at the same time.\u201d Now let it be granted that these admissions on\nhis part are entirely in harmony with our views, though not at all with\nhim and his statements made above; yet what does it all avail to prove\nthat in the beginning men were mostly captured and devoured by wild\nbeasts, while wild beasts were never caught by men? For, since the world\nwas created in conformity with the will of Providence, and God presided\nover the universe of things, it was necessary that the elements[785] of\nthe human race should at the commencement of its existence be placed\nunder some protection of the higher powers, so that there might be\nformed from the beginning a union of the divine nature with that of men.\nAnd the poet of Ascra, perceiving this, sings:\n\n \u201cFor common then were banquets, and common were seats,\n Alike to immortal gods and mortal men.\u201d[786]\n\nFootnote 785:\n\n \u03b6\u03ce\u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 786:\n\n Cf. Hesiod, _Fragmenta Incerta_, ed. Goettling, p. 231.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXX.\n\n\nThose Holy Scriptures, moreover, which bear the name of Moses, introduce\nthe first men as hearing divine voices and oracles, and beholding\nsometimes the angels of God coming to visit them. For it was probable\nthat in the beginning of the world\u2019s existence human nature would be\nassisted to a greater degree [than afterwards], until progress had been\nmade towards the attainment of understanding and the other virtues, and\nthe invention of the arts, and they should thus be able to maintain life\nof themselves, and no longer stand in need of superintendents, and of\nthose to guide them who do so with a miraculous manifestation of the\nmeans which subserve the will of God. Now it follows from this, that it\nis false that \u201cin the beginning men were captured and devoured by wild\nbeasts, while wild beasts were very seldom caught by men.\u201d And from\nthis, too, it is evident that the following statement of Celsus is\nuntrue, that \u201cin this way God rather subjected men to wild beasts.\u201d For\nGod did not subject men to wild beasts, but gave wild beasts to be a\nprey to the understanding of man, and to the arts, which are directed\nagainst them, and which are the product of the understanding. For it was\nnot without the help of God[787] that men desired for themselves the\nmeans of protection against wild beasts, and of securing the mastery\nover them.\n\nFootnote 787:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f00\u03b8\u03b5\u03b5\u03af.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXXI.\n\n\nOur noble opponent, however, not observing how many philosophers there\nare who admit the existence of Providence, and who hold that Providence\ncreated all things for the sake of rational beings, overturns as far as\nhe can those doctrines which are of use in showing the harmony that\nprevails in these matters between Christianity and philosophy; nor does\nhe see how great is the injury done to religion from accepting the\nstatement that before God there is no difference between a man and an\nant or a bee, but proceeds to add, that \u201cif men appear to be superior to\nirrational animals on this account, that they have built cities, and\nmake use of a political constitution, and forms of government, and\nsovereignties,[788] this is to say nothing to the purpose, for ants and\nbees do the same. Bees, indeed, have a sovereign, who has followers and\nattendants; and there occur among them wars and victories, and\nslaughterings of the vanquished,[789] and cities and suburbs, and a\nsuccession of labours, and judgments passed upon the idle and the\nwicked; for the drones are driven away and punished.\u201d Now here he did\nnot observe the difference that exists between what is done after reason\nand consideration, and what is the result of an irrational nature, and\nis purely mechanical. For the origin of these things is not explained by\nthe existence of any rational principle in those who make them, because\nthey do not possess any such principle; but the most ancient Being, who\nis also the Son of God, and the King of all things that exist, has\ncreated an irrational nature, which, as being irrational, acts as a help\nto those who are deemed worthy of reason. Cities, accordingly, were\nestablished among men, with many arts and well-arranged laws; while\nconstitutions, and governments, and sovereignties among men are either\nsuch as are properly so termed, and which exemplify certain virtuous\ntendencies and workings, or they are those which are improperly so\ncalled, and which were devised, so far as could be done, in imitation of\nthe former: for it was by contemplating these that the most successful\nlegislators established the best constitutions, and governments, and\nsovereignties. None of these things, however, can be found among\nirrational animals, although Celsus may transfer rational names, and\narrangements which belong to rational beings, as cities and\nconstitutions, and rulers and sovereignties, even to ants and bees; in\nrespect to which matters, however, ants and bees merit no approval,\nbecause they do not act from reflection. But we ought to admire the\ndivine nature, which extended even to irrational animals the capacity,\nas it were, of imitating rational beings, perhaps with a view of putting\nrational beings to shame; so that by looking upon ants, for instance,\nthey might become more industrious and more thrifty in the management of\ntheir goods; while, by considering the bees, they might place themselves\nin subjection to their Ruler, and take their respective parts in those\nconstitutional duties which are of use in ensuring the safety of cities.\n\nFootnote 788:\n\n \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 789:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03c4\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2. \u201cNota \u03b1\u1f31\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 hoc loco sumi pro\n internecionibus, c\u00e6dibus. Haud scio an alibi reperiatur pari\n significatu. Forte etiam scribendum \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2.\u201d\u2014RU\u00c6US.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXXII.\n\n\nPerhaps also the so-called wars among the bees convey instruction as to\nthe manner in which wars, if ever there arise a necessity for them,\nshould be waged in a just and orderly way among men. But the bees have\nno cities or suburbs; while their hives and hexagonal cells, and\nsuccession of labours, are for the sake of men, who require honey for\nmany purposes, both for cure of disordered bodies, and as a pure article\nof food. Nor ought we to compare the proceedings taken by the bees\nagainst the drones with the judgments and punishments inflicted on the\nidle and wicked in cities. But, as I formerly said, we ought on the one\nhand in these things to admire the divine nature, and on the other to\nexpress our admiration of man, who is capable of considering and\nadmiring all things (as co-operating with Providence), and who executes\nnot merely the works which are determined by the providence of God, but\nalso those which are the consequences of his own foresight.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXXIII.\n\n\nAfter Celsus has finished speaking of the bees, in order to depreciate\n(as far as he can) the cities, and constitutions, and governments, and\nsovereignties not only of us Christians, but of all mankind, as well as\nthe wars which men undertake on behalf of their native countries, he\nproceeds, by way of digression, to pass a eulogy upon the ants, in order\nthat, while praising them, he may compare the measures which men take to\nsecure their subsistence with those adopted by these insects,[790] and\nso evince his contempt for the forethought which makes provision for\nwinter, as being nothing higher than the irrational providence of the\nants, as he regards it. Now might not some of the more simple-minded,\nand such as know not how to look into the nature of all things, be\nturned away (so far, at least, as Celsus could accomplish it) from\nhelping those who are weighed down with the burdens [of life], and from\nsharing their toils, when he says of the ants, that \u201cthey help one\nanother with their loads, when they see one of their number toiling\nunder them?\u201d For he who needs to be disciplined by the word, but who\ndoes not at all understand[791] its voice, will say: \u201cSince, then, there\nis no difference between us and the ants, even when we help those who\nare weary with bearing their heavy burdens, why should we continue to do\nso to no purpose?\u201d And would not the ants, as being irrational\ncreatures, be greatly puffed up, and think highly of themselves, because\ntheir works were compared to those of men? while men, on the other hand,\nwho by means of their reason are enabled to hear how their\nphilanthropy[792] towards others is contemned, would be injured, so far\nas could be effected by Celsus and his arguments: for he does not\nperceive that, while he wishes to turn away from Christianity those who\nread his treatise, he turns away also the sympathy of those who are not\nChristians from those who bear the heaviest burdens [of life]. Whereas,\nhad he been a philosopher, who was capable of perceiving the good which\nmen may do each other, he ought, in addition to not removing along with\nChristianity the blessings which are found amongst men, to have lent his\naid to co-operate (if he had it in his power) with those principles of\nexcellence which are common to Christianity and the rest of mankind.\nMoreover, even if the ants set apart in a place by themselves those\ngrains which sprout forth, that they may not swell into bud, but may\ncontinue throughout the year as their food, this is not to be deemed as\nevidence of the existence of _reason_ among ants, but as the work of the\nuniversal mother, Nature, which adorned even irrational animals, so that\neven the most insignificant is not omitted, but bears traces of the\nreason implanted in it by nature. Unless, indeed, by these assertions\nCelsus means obscurely to intimate (for in many instances he would like\nto adopt Platonic ideas) that all souls are of the same species, and\nthat there is no difference between that of a man and those of ants and\nbees, which is the act of one who would bring down the soul from the\nvault of heaven, and cause it to enter not only a human body, but that\nof an animal. Christians, however, will not yield their assent to such\nopinions: for they have been instructed before now that the human soul\nwas created in the image of God; and they see that it is impossible for\na nature fashioned in the divine image to have its [original] features\naltogether obliterated, and to assume others, formed after I know not\nwhat likeness of irrational animals.\n\nFootnote 790:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u1fc3 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u03cd\u03c1\u03bc\u03b7\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2. \u201cVerba: \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n \u03bc\u03cd\u03c1\u03bc\u03b7\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 addititia videntur et recidenda.\u201d\u2014RU\u00c6US.\n\nFootnote 791:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u0390\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 792:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXXIV.\n\n\nAnd since he asserts that, \u201cwhen ants die, the survivors set apart a\nspecial place [for their interment], and that their ancestral sepulchres\nsuch a place is,\u201d we have to answer, that the greater the laudations\nwhich he heaps upon irrational animals, so much the more does he magnify\n(although against his will) the work of that reason which arranged all\nthings in order, and points out the skill[793] which exists among men,\nand which is capable of adorning by its reason even the gifts which are\nbestowed by nature on the irrational creation. But why do I say\n\u201cirrational,\u201d since Celsus is of opinion that these animals, which,\nagreeably to the common ideas of all men, are termed irrational, are not\nreally so? Nor does _he_ regard the ants as devoid of reason, who\nprofessed to speak of \u201cuniversal nature,\u201d and who boasted of his\ntruthfulness in the inscription of his book. For, speaking of the ants\nconversing with one another, he uses the following language: \u201cAnd when\nthey meet one another they enter into conversation, for which reason\nthey never mistake their way; consequently they possess a full endowment\nof reason, and some common ideas on certain general subjects, and a\nvoice by which they express themselves regarding accidental\nthings.\u201d[794] Now conversation between one man and another is carried on\nby means of a voice, which gives expression to the meaning intended, and\nwhich also gives utterances concerning what are called \u201caccidental\nthings;\u201d but to say that this was the case with ants would be a most\nridiculous assertion.\n\nFootnote 793:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 794:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03af\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f14\u03bd\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u1f74, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXXV.\n\n\nHe is not ashamed, moreover, to say, in addition to these statements\n(that the unseemly character[795] of his opinions may be manifest to\nthose who will live after him): \u201cCome now, if one were to look down from\nheaven upon earth, in what respect would _our_ actions appear to differ\nfrom those of ants and bees?\u201d Now does he who, according to his own\nsupposition, looks from heaven upon the proceedings of men and ants,\nlook upon their bodies alone, and not rather have regard to the\ncontrolling reason which is called into action by reflection;[796]\nwhile, on the other hand, the guiding principle of the latter is\nirrational, and set in motion irrationally by impulse and fancy, in\nconjunction with a certain natural apparatus?[797] But it is absurd to\nsuppose that he who looks from heaven upon earthly things would desire\nto look from such a distance upon the _bodies_ of men and ants, and\nwould not rather consider the nature of the guiding principles, and the\nsource of impulses, whether that be rational or irrational. And if he\nonce look upon the source of all impulses, it is manifest that he would\nbehold also the difference which exists, and the superiority of man, not\nonly over ants, but even over elephants. For he who looks from heaven\nwill see among irrational creatures, however large their bodies, no\nother principle[798] than, so to speak, irrationality;[799] while\namongst rational beings he will discover reason, the common possession\nof men, and of divine and heavenly beings, and perhaps of the supreme\nGod Himself, on account of which man is said to have been created in the\nimage of God, for the image of the Supreme God is his reason.[800]\n\nFootnote 795:\n\n \u1f00\u03c3\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 796:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd;\n\nFootnote 797:\n\n \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 798:\n\n \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03ae\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 799:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 800:\n\n \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXXVI.\n\n\nImmediately after this, as if doing his utmost to reduce the human race\nto a still lower position, and to bring them to the level of the\nirrational animals, and desiring to omit not a single circumstance\nrelated of the latter which manifests their greatness, he declares that\n\u201cin certain individuals among the irrational creation there exists the\npower of sorcery;\u201d so that even in this particular men cannot specially\npride themselves, nor wish to arrogate a superiority over irrational\ncreatures. And the following are his words: \u201cIf, however, men entertain\nlofty notions because of their possessing the power of sorcery, yet even\nin that respect are serpents and eagles their superiors in wisdom; for\nthey are acquainted with many prophylactics against persons and\ndiseases, and also with the virtues of certain stones which help to\npreserve their young. If men, however, fall in with these, they think\nthat they have gained a wonderful possession.\u201d Now, in the first place,\nI know not why he should designate as sorcery the knowledge of natural\nprophylactics displayed by animals,\u2014whether that knowledge be the result\nof experience, or of some natural power of apprehension;[801] for the\nterm \u201csorcery\u201d has by usage been assigned to something else. Perhaps,\nindeed, he wishes quietly, as an Epicurean, to censure the entire use of\nsuch arts, as resting only on the professions of sorcerers. However, let\nit be granted him that men _do_ pride themselves greatly upon the\nknowledge of such arts, whether they are sorcerers or not: how can\nserpents be in this respect wiser than men, when they make use of the\nwell-known fennel[802] to sharpen their power of vision and to produce\nrapidity of movement, having obtained this natural power not from the\nexercise of reflection, but from the constitution of their body,[803]\nwhile men do not, like serpents, arrive at such knowledge merely by\nnature, but partly by experiment, partly by reason, and sometimes by\nreflection and knowledge? So, if eagles, too, in order to preserve their\nyoung in the nest, carry thither the eagle-stone when they have\ndiscovered it, how does it appear that they are wise, and more\nintelligent than men, who find out by the exercise of their reflective\npowers and of their understanding what has been bestowed by nature upon\neagles as a gift?\n\nFootnote 801:\n\n \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c8\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 802:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b8\u03c1\u1ff3.\n\nFootnote 803:\n\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f10\u03ba \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXXVII.\n\n\nLet it be granted, however, that there are other prophylactics against\npoisons known to animals: what does that avail to prove that it is not\nnature, but reason, which leads to the discovery of such things among\nthem? For if reason were the discoverer, this one thing (or, if you\nwill, one or two more things) would not be (exclusive[804] of all\nothers) the sole discovery made by serpents, and some other thing the\nsole discovery of the eagle, and so on with the rest of the animals; but\nas many discoveries would have been made amongst them as among men. But\nnow it is manifest from the determinate inclination of the nature of\neach animal towards certain kinds of help, that they possess neither\nwisdom nor reason, but a natural constitutional tendency implanted by\nthe Logos[805] towards such things in order to ensure the preservation\nof the animal. And, indeed, if I wished to join issue with Celsus in\nthese matters, I might quote the words of Solomon from the book of\nProverbs, which run thus: \u201cThere be four things which are little upon\nthe earth, but these are wiser than the wise: The ants are a people not\nstrong, yet they prepare their meat in the summer; the conies[806] are\nbut a feeble folk, yet make they their houses in the rocks; the locusts\nhave no king, yet go they forth in order at one command; and the spotted\nlizard,[807] though leaning upon its hands, and being easily captured,\ndwelleth in kings\u2019 fortresses.\u201d[808] I do not quote these words,\nhowever, as taking them in their literal signification, but, agreeably\nto the title of the book (for it is inscribed \u201cProverbs\u201d), I investigate\nthem as containing a secret meaning. For it is the custom of these\nwriters [of Scripture] to distribute into many classes those writings\nwhich express one sense when taken literally,[809] but which convey a\ndifferent signification as their hidden meaning; and one of these kinds\nof writing is \u201cProverbs.\u201d And for this reason, in our Gospels too, is\nour Saviour described as saying: \u201cThese things have I spoken to you in\nproverbs, but the time cometh when I shall no more speak unto you in\nproverbs.\u201d[810] It is not, then, the _visible_ ants which are \u201cwiser\neven than the wise,\u201d but they who are indicated as such under the\n\u201cproverbial\u201d style of expression. And such must be our conclusion\nregarding the rest of the animal creation, although Celsus regards the\nbooks of the Jews and Christians as exceedingly simple and\ncommonplace,[811] and imagines that those who give them an allegorical\ninterpretation do violence to the meaning of the writers. By what we\nhave said, then, let it appear that Celsus calumniates us in vain, and\nlet his assertions that serpents and eagles are wiser than men also\nreceive their refutation.\n\nFootnote 804:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 805:\n\n \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7.\n\nFootnote 806:\n\n \u03c7\u03bf\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03b3\u03c1\u03cd\u03bb\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9. Heb. \u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b7\u05e0\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05dd.\n\nFootnote 807:\n\n \u1f00\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 808:\n\n Cf. Prov. xxx. 24-28.\n\nFootnote 809:\n\n \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 810:\n\n John xvi. 25.\n\nFootnote 811:\n\n \u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXXVIII.\n\n\nAnd wishing to show at greater length that even the thoughts of God\nentertained by the human race are not superior to those of all other\nmortal creatures, but that certain of the irrational animals are capable\nof thinking about Him regarding whom opinions so discordant have existed\namong the most acute of mankind\u2014Greeks and Barbarians\u2014he continues: \u201cIf,\nbecause man has been able to grasp the idea of God, he is deemed\nsuperior to the other animals, let those who hold this opinion know that\nthis capacity will be claimed by many of the other animals; and with\ngood reason: for what would any one maintain to be more divine than the\npower of foreknowing and predicting future events? Men accordingly\nacquire the art from the other animals, and especially from birds. And\nthose who listen to the indications furnished by them, become possessed\nof the gift of prophecy. If, then, birds, and the other prophetic\nanimals, which are enabled by the gift of God to foreknow events,\ninstruct us by means of signs, so much the nearer do they seem to be to\nthe society of God, and to be endowed with greater wisdom, and to be\nmore beloved by Him. The more intelligent of men, moreover, say that the\nanimals hold meetings which are more sacred than our assemblies, and\nthat they know what is said at these meetings, and show that in reality\nthey possess this knowledge, when, having previously stated that the\nbirds have declared their intention of departing to some particular\nplace, and of doing this thing or the other, the truth of their\nassertions is established by the departure of the birds to the place in\nquestion, and by their doing what was foretold. And no race of animals\nappears to be more observant of oaths than the elephants are, or to show\ngreater devotion to divine things; and this, I presume, solely because\nthey have some knowledge of God.\u201d See here now how he at once lays hold\nof, and brings forward as acknowledged facts, questions which are the\nsubject of dispute among those philosophers, not only among the Greeks,\nbut also among the Barbarians, who have either discovered or learned\nfrom certain demons some things about birds of augury and other animals,\nby which certain prophetic intimations are said to be made to men. For,\nin the first place, it has been disputed whether there _is_ an art of\naugury, and, in general, a method of divination by animals, or not. And,\nin the second place, they who admit that there is an art of divination\nby birds, are not agreed about the manner of the divination; since some\nmaintain that it is from certain demons or gods of divination[812] that\nthe animals receive their impulses to action\u2014the birds to flights and\nsounds of different kinds, and the other animals to movements of one\nsort or another. Others, again, believe that their souls are more divine\nin their nature, and fitted to operations of that kind, which is a most\nincredible supposition.\n\nFootnote 812:\n\n \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXXIX.\n\n\nCelsus, however, seeing he wished to prove by the foregoing statements\nthat the irrational animals are more divine and intelligent than human\nbeings, ought to have established at greater length the actual existence\nof such an art of divination, and in the next place have energetically\nundertaken its defence, and effectually refuted the arguments of those\nwho would annihilate such arts of divination, and have overturned in a\nconvincing manner also the arguments of those who say that it is from\ndemons or from gods that animals receive the movements which lead them\nto divination, and to have proved in the next place that the soul of\nirrational animals is more divine than that of man. For, had he done so,\nand manifested a philosophical spirit in dealing with such things, we\nshould to the best of our power have met his confident assertions,\nrefuting in the first place the allegation that irrational animals are\nwiser than men, and showing the falsity of the statement that they have\nideas of God more sacred than ours, and that they hold among themselves\ncertain sacred assemblies. But now, on the contrary, _he_ who accuses us\nbecause we believe in the Supreme God, requires us to believe that the\nsouls of birds entertain ideas of God more divine and distinct than\nthose of men. Yet if this is true, the birds have clearer ideas of God\nthan Celsus himself; and it is not matter of surprise that it should be\nso with him, who so greatly depreciates human beings. Nay, so far as\nCelsus can make it appear, the birds possess grander and more divine\nideas than, I do not say we Christians do, or than the Jews, who use the\nsame Scriptures with ourselves, but even than are possessed by the\ntheologians among the Greeks, for they were only human beings. According\nto Celsus, indeed, the tribe of birds that practise divination,\nforsooth, understand the nature of the Divine Being better than\nPherecydes, and Pythagoras, and Socrates, and Plato! We ought then to go\nto the birds as our teachers, in order that as, according to the view of\nCelsus, they instruct us by their power of divination in the knowledge\nof future events, so also they may free men from doubts regarding the\nDivine Being, by imparting to them the clear ideas which they have\nobtained respecting Him! It follows, accordingly, that Celsus, who\nregards birds as superior to men, ought to employ them as his\ninstructors, and not one of the Greek philosophers!\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XC.\n\n\nBut we have a few remarks to make, out of a larger number, in answer to\nthese statements of Celsus, that we may show the ingratitude towards his\nMaker which is involved in his holding these false opinions.[813] For\nCelsus, although a man, and \u201cbeing in honour,\u201d[814] does not possess\nunderstanding, and therefore he did not compare himself with the birds\nand the other irrational animals, which he regards as capable of\ndivining; but yielding to them the foremost place, he lowered himself,\nand as far as he could the whole human race with him (as entertaining\nlower and inferior views of God than the irrational animals), beneath\nthe Egyptians, who worship irrational animals as divinities. Let the\nprincipal point of investigation, however, be this: whether there\nactually is or not an art of divination, by means of birds and other\nliving things believed to have such power. For the arguments which tend\nto establish either view are not to be despised. On the one hand, it is\npressed upon us not to admit such an art, lest the rational being should\nabandon the divine oracles, and betake himself to birds; and on the\nother, there is the energetic testimony of many, that numerous\nindividuals have been saved from the greatest dangers by putting their\ntrust in divination by birds. For the present, however, let it be\ngranted that an art of divination does exist, in order that I may in\nthis way show to those who are prejudiced on the subject, that if this\nbe admitted, the superiority of man over irrational animals, even over\nthose that are endowed with power of divination, is great, and beyond\nall reach of comparison with the latter. We have then to say, that if\nthere was in them any divine nature capable of foretelling future\nevents, and so rich [in that knowledge] as out of its superabundance to\nmake them known to any man who wished to know them, it is manifest that\nthey would know what concerned themselves far sooner [than what\nconcerned others]; and had they possessed this knowledge, they would\nhave been upon their guard against flying to any particular place where\nmen had planted snares and nets to catch them, or where archers took aim\nand shot at them in their flight. And especially, were eagles aware\nbeforehand of the designs formed against their young, either by serpents\ncrawling up to their nests and destroying them, or by men who take them\nfor their amusement, or for any other useful purpose or service, they\nwould not have placed their young in a spot where they were to be\nattacked; and, in general, not one of these animals would have been\ncaptured by men, because they were more divine and intelligent than\nthey.\n\nFootnote 813:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 814:\n\n Ps. xlix. 12.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XCI.\n\n\nBut besides, if birds of augury converse with one another,[815] as\nCelsus maintains they do, the prophetic birds having a divine nature,\nand the other rational animals also ideas of the divinity and\nforeknowledge of future events; and if they had communicated this\nknowledge to others, the sparrow mentioned in Homer would not have built\nher nest in the spot where a serpent was to devour her and her young\nones, nor would the serpent in the writings of the same poet have failed\nto take precautions against being captured by the eagle. For this\nwonderful poet says, in his poem regarding the former:\n\n \u201cA mighty dragon shot, of dire portent;\n From Jove himself the dreadful sign was sent.\n Straight to the three his sanguine spires he rolled,\n And curled around in many a winding fold.\n The topmost branch a mother bird possessed;\n Eight callow infants filled the mossy nest;\n Herself the ninth: the serpent, as he hung,\n Stretched his black jaws, and crushed the dying young;\n While hovering near, with miserable moan,\n The drooping mother wailed her children gone.\n The mother last, as round the nest she flew,\n Seized by the beating wing, the monster slew:\n Nor long survived: to marble turned, he stands\n A lasting prodigy on Aulis sands.\n Such was the will of Jove; and hence we dare\n Trust in his omen, and support the war.\u201d[816]\n\nAnd regarding the second\u2014the bird\u2014the poet says:\n\n \u201cJove\u2019s bird on rounding pinions beat the skies,\n A bleeding serpent of enormous size,\n His talons twined; alive, and curling round,\n He stung the bird, whose throat received the wound.\n Mad with the smart, he drops the fatal prey,\n In airy circles wings his painful way,\n Floats on the winds, and rends the heaven with cries;\n Amidst the host, the fallen serpent lies.\n They, pale with terror, mark its spires unrolled,\n And Jove\u2019s portent with beating hearts behold.\u201d[817]\n\nDid the eagle, then, possess the power of divination, and the serpent\n(since this animal also is made use of by the augurs) not? But as this\ndistinction can be easily refuted, cannot the assertion that both were\ncapable of divination be refuted also? For if the serpent had possessed\nthis knowledge, would not he have been on his guard against suffering\nwhat he did from the eagle? And innumerable other instances of a similar\ncharacter may be found, to show that animals do not possess a prophetic\nsoul, but that, according to the poet and the majority of mankind, it is\nthe \u201cOlympian himself who sent him to the light.\u201d And it is with a\nsymbolical meaning[818] that Apollo employs the hawk[819] as his\nmessenger, for the hawk[820] is called the \u201cswift messenger of\nApollo.\u201d[821]\n\nFootnote 815:\n\n \u03b5\u1f34\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f30\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f30\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9. For \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 Ru\u00e6us conjectures\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, which is adopted by Lommatzsch.\n\nFootnote 816:\n\n Homer, _Ilias_, ii. 308 sq. (Pope\u2019s translation.)\n\nFootnote 817:\n\n Homer, _Ilias_, xii. 290 sq. (Pope\u2019s translation.)\n\nFootnote 818:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 819:\n\n \u1f31\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03be.\n\nFootnote 820:\n\n \u03ba\u03af\u03c1\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2, \u201cthe hen-harrier,\u201d \u201cFalco,\u201d or \u201cCircus pygargus.\u201d Cf. Liddell\n and Scott, _s.v._\n\nFootnote 821:\n\n Cf. Homer, _Odyss._ xv. v. 526.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XCII.\n\n\nIn my opinion, however, it is certain wicked demons, and, so to speak,\nof the race of Titans or Giants, who have been guilty of impiety towards\nthe true God, and towards the angels in heaven, and who have fallen from\nit, and who haunt the denser parts of bodies, and frequent unclean\nplaces upon earth, and who, possessing some power of distinguishing\nfuture events, because they are without bodies of earthly material,\nengage in an employment of this kind, and desiring to lead the human\nrace away from the true God, secretly enter the bodies of the more\nrapacious and savage and wicked of animals, and stir them up to do\nwhatever they choose, and at whatever time they choose: either turning\nthe fancies of these animals to make flights and movements of various\nkinds, in order that men may be caught by the divining power that is in\nthe irrational animals, and neglect to seek after the God who contains\nall things; or to search after the pure worship of God, but allow their\nreasoning powers to grovel on the earth, and amongst birds and serpents,\nand even foxes and wolves. For it has been observed by those who are\nskilled in such matters, that the clearest prognostications are obtained\nfrom animals of this kind; because the demons cannot act so effectively\nin the milder sort of animals as they can in these, in consequence of\nthe similarity between them in point of wickedness; and yet it is not\nwickedness, but something like wickedness,[822] which exists in these\nanimals.\n\nFootnote 822:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f31\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XCIII.\n\n\nFor which reason, whatever else there may be in the writings of Moses\nwhich excites my wonder, I would say that the following is worthy of\nadmiration, viz. that Moses, having observed the varying natures of\nanimals, and having either learned from God what was peculiar to them,\nand to the demons which are kindred to each of the animals, or having\nhimself ascertained these things by his own wisdom, has, in arranging\nthe different kinds of animals, pronounced all those which are supposed\nby the Egyptians and the rest of mankind to possess the power of\ndivination to be unclean, and, as a general rule, all that are not of\nthat class to be clean. And amongst the unclean animals mentioned by\nMoses are the wolf, and fox, and serpent, and eagle, and hawk, and such\nlike. And, generally speaking, you will find that not only in the law,\nbut also in the prophets, these animals are employed as examples of all\nthat is most wicked; and that a wolf or a fox is never mentioned for a\ngood purpose. Each species of demon, consequently, would seem to possess\na certain affinity with a certain species of animal. And as among men\nthere are some who are stronger than others, and this not at all owing\nto their moral character, so, in the same way, some demons will be more\npowerful in things indifferent than others;[823] and one class of them\nemploys one kind of animal for the purpose of deluding men, in\naccordance with the will of him who is called in our Scriptures the\n\u201cprince of this world,\u201d while others predict future events by means of\nanother kind of animal. Observe, moreover, to what a pitch of wickedness\nthe demons proceed, so that they even assume the bodies of weasels in\norder to reveal the future! And now, consider with yourself whether it\nis better to accept the belief that it is the Supreme God and His Son\nwho stir up the birds and the other living creatures to divination, or\nthat those who stir up these creatures, and not human beings (although\nthey are present before them), are wicked, and, as they are called by\nour Scriptures, unclean demons.\n\nFootnote 823:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XCIV.\n\n\nBut if the soul of birds is to be esteemed divine because future events\nare predicted by them, why should we not rather maintain, that when\nomens[824] are accepted by men, the souls of those are divine through\nwhich the omens are heard? Accordingly, among such would be ranked the\nfemale slave mentioned in Homer, who ground the corn, when she said\nregarding the suitors:\n\n \u201cFor the very last time, now, will they sup here.\u201d[825]\n\nThis slave, then, was divine, while the great Ulysses, the friend of\nHomer\u2019s Pallas Athene, was _not_ divine, but understanding the words\nspoken by this \u201cdivine\u201d grinder of corn as an omen, rejoiced, as the\npoet says:\n\n \u201cThe divine Ulysses rejoiced at the omen.\u201d[826]\n\nObserve, now, as the birds are possessed of a divine soul, and are\ncapable of perceiving God, or, as Celsus says, the gods, it is clear\nthat when we men also sneeze, we do so in consequence of a kind of\ndivinity that is within us, and which imparts a prophetic power to our\nsoul. For this belief is testified by many witnesses, and therefore the\npoet also says:\n\n \u201cAnd while he prayed, he sneezed.\u201d[827]\n\nAnd Penelope, too, said:\n\n \u201cPerceiv\u2019st thou not that at every word my son did sneeze?\u201d[828]\n\nFootnote 824:\n\n \u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 825:\n\n Cf. Homer, _Odyss._ iv. v. 685; cf. also xx. vv. 116, 119.\n\nFootnote 826:\n\n Cf. Homer, _Odyss._ xx. 120.\n\nFootnote 827:\n\n Cf. Homer, _Odyss._ xvii. 541.\n\nFootnote 828:\n\n Cf. Homer, _Odyss._ xvii. 545.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XCV.\n\n\nThe true God, however, neither employs irrational animals, nor any\nindividuals whom chance may offer,[829] to convey a knowledge of the\nfuture; but, on the contrary, the most pure and holy of human souls,\nwhom He inspires and endows with prophetic power. And therefore,\nwhatever else in the Mosaic writings may excite our wonder, the\nfollowing must be considered as fitted to do so: \u201cYe shall not practise\naugury, nor observe the flight of birds;\u201d[830] and in another place:\n\u201cFor the nations whom the Lord thy God will destroy from before thy\nface, shall listen to omens and divinations; but as for thee, the Lord\nthy God has not suffered thee to do so.\u201d[831] And he adds: \u201cA prophet\nshall the Lord your God raise up unto you from among your\nbrethren.\u201d[832] On one occasion, moreover, God, wishing by means of an\naugur to turn away [His people] from the practice of divination, caused\nthe spirit that was in the augur to speak as follows: \u201cFor there is no\nenchantment in Jacob, nor is there divination in Israel. In due time\nwill it be declared to Jacob and Israel what the Lord will do.\u201d[833] And\nnow, we who knew these and similar sayings wish to observe this precept\nwith the mystical meaning, viz. \u201cKeep thy heart with all\ndiligence,\u201d[834] that nothing of a demoniacal nature may enter into our\nminds, or any spirit of our adversaries turn our imagination whither it\nchooses. But we pray that the light of the knowledge of the glory of God\nmay shine in our hearts, and that the Spirit of God may dwell in our\nimaginations, and lead them to contemplate the things of God; for \u201cas\nmany as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.\u201d[835]\n\nFootnote 829:\n\n \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 830:\n\n Cf. Lev. xix. 26. The Septuagint here differs from the Masoretic text.\n\nFootnote 831:\n\n Cf. Deut. xviii. 14, cf. 12.\n\nFootnote 832:\n\n Cf. Deut. xviii. 15.\n\nFootnote 833:\n\n Cf. Num. xxiii. 23.\n\nFootnote 834:\n\n Prov. iv. 23.\n\nFootnote 835:\n\n Cf. Rom. viii. 14.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XCVI.\n\n\nWe ought to take note, however, that the power of foreknowing the future\nis by no means a proof of divinity; for in itself it is a thing\nindifferent, and is found occurring amongst both good and bad.\nPhysicians, at any rate, by means of their professional skill foreknow\ncertain things, although their character may happen to be bad. And in\nthe same way also pilots, although perhaps wicked men, are able to\nforetell the signs[836] [of good or bad weather], and the approach of\nviolent tempests of wind, and atmospheric changes,[837] because they\ngather this knowledge from experience and observation, although I do not\nsuppose that on that account any one would term them \u201cgods\u201d if their\ncharacters happened to be bad. The assertion, then, of Celsus is false,\nwhen he says: \u201cWhat could be called more divine than the power of\nforeknowing and foretelling the future?\u201d And so also is this, that \u201cmany\nof the animals claim to have ideas of God;\u201d for none of the irrational\nanimals possess any idea of God. And wholly false, too, is his\nassertion, that \u201cthe irrational animals are nearer the society of God\n[than men],\u201d when even men who are still in a state of wickedness,\nhowever great their progress in knowledge, are far removed from that\nsociety. It is, then, those alone who are truly wise and sincerely\nreligious who are nearer to God\u2019s society; such persons as were our\nprophets, and Moses, to the latter of whom, on account of his exceeding\npurity, the Scripture said: \u201cMoses alone shall come near the Lord, but\nthe rest shall not come nigh.\u201d[838]\n\nFootnote 836:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 837:\n\n \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03ac\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 838:\n\n Cf. Ex. xxiv. 2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XCVII.\n\n\nHow impious, indeed, is the assertion of this man, who charges us with\nimpiety, that \u201cnot only are the irrational animals wiser than the human\nrace, but that they are more beloved by God [than they]!\u201d And who would\nnot be repelled [by horror] from paying any attention to a man who\ndeclared that a serpent, and a fox, and a wolf, and an eagle, and a\nhawk, were more beloved by God than the human race? For it follows from\nhis maintaining such a position, that if these animals be more beloved\nby God than human beings, it is manifest that they are dearer to God\nthan Socrates, and Plato, and Pythagoras, and Pherecydes, and those\ntheologians whose praises he had sung a little before. And one might\naddress him with the prayer: \u201cIf these animals be dearer to God than\nmen, may you be beloved of God along with them, and be made like to\nthose whom you consider as dearer to Him than human beings!\u201d And let no\none suppose that such a prayer is meant as an imprecation; for who would\nnot pray to resemble in all respects those whom he believes to be dearer\nto God than others, in order that he, like them, may enjoy the divine\nlove? And as Celsus is desirous to show that the assemblies of the\nirrational animals are more sacred than ours, he ascribes the statement\nto that effect not to any ordinary individuals, but to persons of\nintelligence. Yet it is the virtuous alone who are truly wise, for no\nwicked man is so. He speaks, accordingly, in the following style:\n\u201cIntelligent men say that these animals hold assemblies which are more\nsacred than ours, and that they know what is spoken at them, and\nactually prove that they are not without such knowledge, when they\nmention beforehand that the birds have announced their intention of\ndeparting to a particular place, or of doing this thing or that, and\nthen show that they _have_ departed to the place in question, and have\ndone the particular thing which was foretold.\u201d Now, truly, no person of\nintelligence ever related such things; nor did any wise man ever say\nthat the assemblies of the irrational animals were more sacred than\nthose of men. But if, for the purpose of examining [the soundness of]\nhis statements, we look to their consequences, it is evident that, in\nhis opinion, the assemblies of the irrational animals are more sacred\nthan those of the venerable Pherecydes, and Pythagoras, and Socrates,\nand Plato, and of philosophers in general; which assertion is not only\nincongruous[839] in itself, but full of absurdity. In order that we may\nbelieve, however, that certain individuals _do_ learn from the\nindistinct sound of birds that they are about to take their departure,\nand do this thing or that, and announce these things beforehand, we\nwould say that this information is imparted to men by demons by means of\nsigns, with the view of having men deceived by demons, and having their\nunderstanding dragged down from God and heaven to earth, and to places\nlower still.\n\nFootnote 839:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XCVIII.\n\n\nI do not know, moreover, how Celsus could hear of the elephants\u2019\n[fidelity to] oaths, and of their great devotedness to our God, and of\nthe knowledge which they possess of Him. For I know many wonderful\nthings which are related of the nature of this animal, and of its gentle\ndisposition. But I am not aware that any one has spoken of its\nobservance of oaths; unless indeed to its gentle disposition, and its\nobservance of compacts, so to speak, when once concluded between it and\nman, he give the name of keeping its oath, which statement also in\nitself is false. For although rarely, yet sometimes it has been recorded\nthat, after their apparent tameness, they have broken out against men in\nthe most savage manner, and have committed murder, and have been on that\naccount condemned to death, because no longer of any use. And seeing\nthat after this, in order to establish (as he thinks he does) that the\nstork is more pious than any human being, he adduces the accounts which\nare narrated regarding that creature\u2019s display of filial affection[840]\nin bringing food to its parents for their support, we have to say in\nreply, that this is done by the storks, not from a regard to what is\nproper, nor from reflection, but from a natural instinct; the nature\nwhich formed them being desirous to show an instance among the\nirrational animals which might put men to shame, in the matter of\nexhibiting their gratitude to their parents. And if Celsus had known how\ngreat the difference is between acting in this way from reason, and from\nan irrational natural impulse, he would not have said that storks are\nmore pious than human beings. But further, Celsus, as still contending\nfor the piety of the irrational creation, quotes the instance of the\nArabian bird the ph\u0153nix, which after many years repairs to Egypt, and\nbears thither its parent, when dead and buried in a ball of myrrh, and\ndeposits its body in the Temple of the Sun. Now this story is indeed\nrecorded, and, if it be true, it is possible that it may occur in\nconsequence of some provision of nature; divine providence freely\ndisplaying to human beings, by the differences which exist among living\nthings, the variety of constitution which prevails in the world, and\nwhich extends even to birds, and in harmony with which He has brought\ninto existence one creature, the only one of its kind, in order that by\nit men may be led to admire, not the creature, but Him who created it.\n\nFootnote 840:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XCIX.\n\n\nIn addition to all that he has already said, Celsus subjoins the\nfollowing: \u201cAll things, accordingly, were not made for man, any more\nthan they were made for lions, or eagles, or dolphins, but that this\nworld, as being God\u2019s work, might be perfect and entire in all respects.\nFor this reason all things have been adjusted, not with reference to\neach other, but with regard to their bearing upon the whole.[841] And\nGod takes care of the whole, and [His] providence will never forsake it;\nand it does not become worse; nor does God after a time bring it back to\nhimself; nor is He angry on account of men any more than on account of\napes or flies; nor does He threaten these beings, each one of which has\nreceived its appointed lot in its proper place.\u201d Let us then briefly\nreply to these statements. I think, indeed, that I have shown in the\npreceding pages that all things were created for man, and every rational\nbeing, and that it was chiefly for the sake of the rational creature\nthat the creation took place. Celsus, indeed, may say that this was done\nnot more for man than for lions, or the other creatures which he\nmentions; but we maintain that the Creator did not form these things for\nlions, or eagles, or dolphins, but all for the sake of the rational\ncreature, and \u201cin order that this world, as being God\u2019s work, might be\nperfect and complete in all things.\u201d For to this sentiment we must yield\nour assent as being well said. And God takes care, not, as Celsus\nsupposes, merely of the _whole_, but beyond the whole, in a special\ndegree of every rational being. Nor will Providence ever abandon the\nwhole; for although it should become more wicked, owing to the sin of\nthe rational being, which is a portion of the whole, He makes\narrangements to purify it, and after a time to bring back the whole to\nHimself. Moreover, He is not angry with apes or flies; but on human\nbeings, as those who have transgressed the laws of nature, He sends\njudgments and chastisements, and threatens them by the mouth of the\nprophets, and by the Saviour who came to visit the whole human race,\nthat those who hear the threatenings may be converted by them, while\nthose who neglect these calls to conversion may deservedly suffer those\npunishments which it becomes God, in conformity with that will of His\nwhich acts for the advantage of the whole, to inflict upon those who\nneed such painful discipline and correction. But as our fourth book has\nnow attained sufficient dimensions, we shall here terminate our\ndiscourse. And may God grant, through His Son, who is God the Word, and\nWisdom, and Truth, and Righteousness, and everything else which the\nsacred Scriptures when speaking of God call Him, that we may make a good\nbeginning of the fifth book, to the benefit of our readers, and may\nbring it to a successful conclusion, with the aid of His word abiding in\nour soul.\n\nFootnote 841:\n\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u03b5\u1f30 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd. \u201cGelenius does not recognise these words, and\n Guietus regards them as superfluous.\u201d They are omitted in the\n translation.\n\n\n\n\n BOOK V.\n\n\n Chapter I.\n\n\nIt is not, my reverend Ambrosius, because we seek after many words\u2014a\nthing which is forbidden, and in the indulgence of which it is\nimpossible to avoid sin[842]\u2014that we now begin the fifth book of our\nreply to the treatise of Celsus, but with the endeavour, so far as may\nbe within our power, to leave none of his statements without\nexamination, and especially those in which it might appear to some that\nhe had skilfully assailed us and the Jews. If it were possible, indeed,\nfor me to enter along with my words into the conscience of every one\nwithout exception who peruses this work, and to extract each dart which\nwounds him who is not completely protected with the \u201cwhole armour\u201d of\nGod, and apply a rational medicine to cure the wound inflicted by\nCelsus, which prevents those who listen to his words from remaining\n\u201csound in the faith,\u201d I would do so. But since it is the work of God\nalone, in conformity with His own Spirit, and along with that of Christ,\nto take up His abode invisibly in those persons whom He judges worthy of\nbeing visited; so, on the other hand, is _our_ object to try, by means\nof arguments and treatises, to confirm men in their faith, and to earn\nthe name of \u201cworkmen needing not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the\nword of truth.\u201d[843] And there is one thing above all which it appears\nto us we ought to do, if we would discharge faithfully the task enjoined\nupon us by you, and that is to overturn to the best of our ability the\nconfident assertions of Celsus. Let us then quote such assertions of his\nas follow those which we have already refuted (the reader must decide\nwhether we have done so successfully or not), and let us reply to them.\nAnd may God grant that we approach not our subject with our\nunderstanding and reason empty and devoid of divine inspiration, that\nthe faith of those whom we wish to aid may not depend upon human wisdom,\nbut that, receiving the \u201cmind\u201d of Christ from His Father, who alone can\nbestow it, and being strengthened by participating in the word of God,\nwe may pull down \u201cevery high thing that exalteth itself against the\nknowledge of God,\u201d[844] and the imagination of Celsus, who exalts\nhimself against us, and against Jesus, and also against Moses and the\nprophets, in order that He who \u201cgave the word to those who published it\nwith great power\u201d[845] may supply us also, and bestow upon us \u201cgreat\npower,\u201d so that faith in the word and power of God may be implanted in\nthe minds of all who will peruse our work.\n\nFootnote 842:\n\n Cf. Prov. x. 19.\n\nFootnote 843:\n\n Cf. 2 Tim. ii. 15.\n\nFootnote 844:\n\n Cf. 2 Cor. x. 5.\n\nFootnote 845:\n\n Cf. Ps. lxviii. 11.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter II.\n\n\nWe have now, then, to refute that statement of his which runs as\nfollows: \u201cO Jews and Christians, no God or son of a God either came or\nwill come down [to earth]. But if you mean that certain angels did so,\nthen what do you call them? Are they gods, or some other race of beings?\nSome other race of beings [doubtless], and in all probability demons.\u201d\nNow as Celsus here is guilty of repeating himself (for in the preceding\npages such assertions have been frequently advanced by him), it is\nunnecessary to discuss the matter at greater length, seeing what we have\nalready said upon this point may suffice. We shall mention, however, a\nfew considerations out of a greater number, such as we deem in harmony\nwith our former arguments, but which have not altogether the same\nbearing as they, and by which we shall show that in asserting generally\nthat no God, or son of God, ever descended [among men], he overturns not\nonly the opinions entertained by the majority of mankind regarding the\nmanifestation of Deity, but also what was formerly admitted by himself.\nFor if the general statement, that \u201cno God or son of God has come down\nor will come down,\u201d be truly maintained by Celsus, it is manifest that\nwe have here overthrown the belief in the existence of gods upon the\nearth who had descended from heaven either to predict the future to\nmankind or to heal them by means of divine responses; and neither the\nPythian Apollo, nor Esculapius, nor any other among those supposed to\nhave done so, would be a god descended from heaven. He might, indeed,\neither be a god who had obtained as his lot [the obligation] to dwell on\nearth for ever, and be thus a fugitive, as it were, from the abode of\nthe gods, or he might be one who had no power to share in the society of\nthe gods in heaven;[846] or else Apollo, and Esculapius, and those\nothers who are believed to perform acts on earth, would not be gods, but\nonly certain demons, much inferior to those wise men among mankind, who\non account of their virtue ascend to the vault[847] of heaven.\n\nFootnote 846:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 847:\n\n \u1f01\u03c8\u03af\u03b4\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter III.\n\n\nBut observe how, in his desire to subvert our opinions, he who never\nacknowledged himself throughout his whole treatise to be an Epicurean,\nis convicted of being a deserter to that sect. And now is the time for\nyou, [reader], who peruse the works of Celsus, and give your assent to\nwhat has been advanced, either to overturn the belief in a God who\nvisits the human race, and exercises a providence over each individual\nman, or to grant this, and prove the falsity of the assertions of\nCelsus. If you, then, wholly annihilate providence, you will falsify\nthose assertions of his in which he grants the existence of \u201cGod and a\nprovidence,\u201d in order that you may maintain the truth of your own\nposition; but if, on the other hand, you still admit the existence of\nprovidence, because you do not assent to the dictum of Celsus, that\n\u201cneither has a God nor the son of a God come down nor is to come\ndown[848] to mankind,\u201d why not rather carefully ascertain from the\nstatements made regarding Jesus, and the prophecies uttered concerning\nHim, who it is that we are to consider as having come down to the human\nrace as God, and the Son of God?\u2014whether that Jesus who said and\nministered so much, or those who, under pretence of oracles and\ndivinations, do not reform the morals of their worshippers, but who have\nbesides apostatized from the pure and holy worship and honour due to the\nMaker of all things, and who tear away the souls of those who give heed\nto them from the one only visible and true God, under a pretence of\npaying honour to a multitude of deities?\n\nFootnote 848:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IV.\n\n\nBut since he says, in the next place, as if the Jews or Christians had\nanswered regarding those who come down to visit the human race, that\nthey were angels: \u201cBut if ye say that they are angels, what do you call\nthem?\u201d he continues, \u201cAre they gods, or some other race of beings?\u201d and\nthen again introduces us as if answering, \u201cSome other race of beings,\nand probably demons,\u201d\u2014let us proceed to notice these remarks. For we\nindeed acknowledge that angels are \u201cministering spirits,\u201d and we say\nthat \u201cthey are sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of\nsalvation;\u201d[849] and that they ascend, bearing the supplications of men,\nto the purest of the heavenly places in the universe, or even to\nsupercelestial regions purer still;[850] and that they come down from\nthese, conveying to each one, according to his deserts, something\nenjoined by God to be conferred by them upon those who are to be the\nrecipients of His benefits. Having thus learned to call these beings\n\u201cangels\u201d from their employments, we find that because they are divine\nthey are sometimes termed \u201cGod\u201d in the sacred Scriptures,[851] but not\nso that we are commanded to honour and worship in place of God those who\nminister to us, and bear to us His blessings. For every prayer, and\nsupplication, and intercession, and thanksgiving, is to be sent up to\nthe Supreme God through the High Priest, who is above all the angels,\nthe living Word and God. And to the Word Himself shall we also pray and\nmake intercessions, and offer thanksgivings and supplications to Him, if\nwe have the capacity of distinguishing between the proper use and abuse\nof prayer.[852]\n\nFootnote 849:\n\n Cf. Heb. i. 14.\n\nFootnote 850:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f22 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 851:\n\n Cf. Ps. lxxxvi. 8, xcvi. 4, cxxxvi. 2.\n\nFootnote 852:\n\n \u1f10\u1f70\u03bd \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03be\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter V.\n\n\nFor to invoke angels without having obtained a knowledge of their nature\ngreater than is possessed by men, would be contrary to reason. But,\nconformably to our hypothesis, let this knowledge of them, which is\nsomething wonderful and mysterious, be obtained. Then this knowledge,\nmaking known to us their nature, and the offices to which they are\nseverally appointed, will not permit us to pray with confidence to any\nother than to the Supreme God, who is sufficient for all things, and\nthat through our Saviour the Son of God, who is the Word, and Wisdom,\nand Truth, and everything else which the writings of God\u2019s prophets and\nthe apostles of Jesus entitle Him. And it is enough to secure that the\nholy angels of God be propitious to us, and that they do all things on\nour behalf, that our disposition of mind towards God should imitate as\nfar as it is within the power of human nature the example of these holy\nangels, who again follow the example of their God; and that the\nconceptions which we entertain of His Son, the Word, so far as\nattainable by us, should not be opposed to the clearer conceptions of\nHim which the holy angels possess, but should daily approach these in\nclearness and distinctness. But because Celsus has not read our Holy\nScriptures, he gives himself an answer as if it came from us, saying\nthat we \u201cassert that the angels who come down from heaven to confer\nbenefits on mankind are a different race from the gods,\u201d and adds that\n\u201cin all probability they would be called demons by us:\u201d not observing\nthat the name \u201cdemons\u201d is not a term of indifferent meaning like that of\n\u201cmen,\u201d among whom some are good and some bad, nor yet a term of\nexcellence like that of \u201cthe gods,\u201d which is applied not to wicked\ndemons, or to statues, or to animals, but (by those who know divine\nthings) to what is truly divine and blessed; whereas the term \u201cdemons\u201d\nis always applied to those wicked powers, freed from the encumbrance of\na grosser body, who lead men astray, and fill them with distractions,\nand drag them down from God and supercelestial thoughts to things here\nbelow.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VI.\n\n\nHe next proceeds to make the following statement about the Jews:\u2014\u201cThe\nfirst point relating to the Jews which is fitted to excite wonder, is\nthat they should worship the heaven and the angels who dwell therein,\nand yet pass by and neglect its most venerable and powerful parts, as\nthe sun, and moon, and the other heavenly bodies, both fixed stars and\nplanets, as if it were possible that \u2018the whole\u2019 could be God, and yet\nits parts not divine; or [as if it were reasonable] to treat with the\ngreatest respect those who are said to appear to such as are in darkness\nsomewhere, blinded by some crooked sorcery, or dreaming dreams through\nthe influence of shadowy spectres,[853] while those who prophesy so\nclearly and strikingly to all men, by means of whom rain, and heat, and\nclouds, and thunder (to which they offer worship), and lightnings, and\nfruits, and all kinds of productiveness, are brought about,\u2014by means of\nwhom God is revealed to them,\u2014the most prominent heralds among those\nbeings that are above,\u2014those that are truly heavenly angels,\u2014are to be\nregarded as of no account!\u201d In making these statements, Celsus appears\nto have fallen into confusion, and to have penned them from false ideas\nof things which he did not understand; for it is patent to all who\ninvestigate the practices of the Jews, and compare them with those of\nthe Christians, that the Jews who follow the law, which, speaking in the\nperson of God, says, \u201cThou shalt have no other gods before me: thou\nshalt not make unto thee an image, nor a likeness of anything that is in\nheaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters\nunder the earth; thou shalt not bow down to them, nor serve them,\u201d[854]\nworship nothing else than the Supreme God, who made the heavens, and all\nthings besides. Now it is evident that those who live according to the\nlaw, and worship the _Maker_ of heaven, will not worship the heaven at\nthe same time with God. Moreover, no one who obeys the law of Moses will\nbow down to the angels who are in heaven; and, in like manner, as they\ndo not bow down to sun, moon, and stars, the host of heaven, they\nrefrain also from doing obeisance to heaven and its angels, obeying the\nlaw which declares: \u201cLest thou lift up thine eyes to heaven, and when\nthou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of\nheaven, shouldst be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the\nLord thy God hath divided unto all nations.\u201d[855]\n\nFootnote 853:\n\n \u1f22 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03ba \u03b3\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f40\u03c1\u03b8\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c5\u03c6\u03bb\u03ce\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f22 \u03b4\u03b9\u2019\n \u1f00\u03bc\u03c5\u03b4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f40\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03c7\u03c1\u03af\u03bc\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f56 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\n \u03b8\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 854:\n\n Cf. Ex. xx. 3, 4, 5.\n\nFootnote 855:\n\n Cf. Deut. iv. 19.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VII.\n\n\nHaving, moreover, assumed that the Jews consider the heaven to be God,\nhe adds that this is absurd; finding fault with those who bow down to\nthe heaven, but not also to the sun, and moon, and stars, saying that\nthe Jews do this, as if it were possible that \u201cthe whole\u201d should be God,\nand its several parts not divine. And he seems to call the heaven \u201ca\nwhole,\u201d and sun, moon, and stars its several parts. Now, certainly\nneither Jews nor Christians call the \u201cheaven\u201d God. Let it be granted,\nhowever, that, as he alleges, the heaven _is_ called God by the Jews,\nand suppose that sun, moon, and stars _are_ parts of \u201cheaven,\u201d\u2014which is\nby no means true, for neither are the animals and plants upon the earth\nany portion of it,\u2014how is it true, even according to the opinions of the\nGreeks, that if God be a whole, His parts also are divine? Certainly\nthey say that the Cosmos taken as the whole[856] is God, the Stoics\ncalling it the First God, the followers of Plato the Second, and some of\nthem the Third. According to these philosophers, then, seeing the whole\nCosmos is God, its parts also are divine; so that not only are human\nbeings divine, but the whole of the irrational creation, as being\n\u201c_portions_\u201d of the Cosmos; and besides these, the plants also are\ndivine. And if the rivers, and mountains, and seas are portions of the\nCosmos, then, since the whole Cosmos is God, are the rivers and seas\nalso gods? But this even the Greeks will not assert. Those, however, who\npreside over rivers and seas (either demons or gods, as they call them),\nthey would term gods. Now from this it follows that the general\nstatement of Celsus, even according to the Greeks, who hold the doctrine\nof Providence, is false, that if any \u201cwhole\u201d be a god, its parts\nnecessarily are divine. But it follows from the doctrine of Celsus, that\nif the Cosmos be God, all that is in it is divine, being parts of the\nCosmos. Now, according to this view, animals, as flies, and gnats, and\nworms, and every species of serpent, as well as of birds and fishes,\nwill be divine,\u2014an assertion which would not be made even by those who\nmaintain that the Cosmos is God. But the Jews, who live according to the\nlaw of Moses, although they may not know how to receive the secret\nmeaning of the law, which is conveyed in obscure language, will not\nmaintain that either the heaven or the angels are God.\n\nFootnote 856:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f45\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f41 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VIII.\n\n\nAs we allege, however, that he has fallen into confusion in consequence\nof false notions which he has imbibed, come and let us point them out to\nthe best of our ability, and show that although Celsus considers it to\nbe a Jewish custom to bow down to the heaven and the angels in it, such\na practice is not at all Jewish, but is in violation of Judaism, as it\nalso is to do obeisance to sun, moon, and stars, as well as images. You\nwill find at least in the book of Jeremiah the words of God censuring by\nthe mouth of the prophet the Jewish people for doing obeisance to such\nobjects, and for sacrificing to the queen of heaven, and to all the host\nof heaven.[857] The writings of the Christians, moreover, show, in\ncensuring the sins committed among the Jews, that when God abandoned\nthat people on account of certain sins, these sins [of idol-worship]\nalso were committed by them. For it is related in the Acts of the\nApostles regarding the Jews, that \u201cGod turned, and gave them up to\nworship the host of heaven; as it is written in the book of the\nprophets, O ye house of Israel, have ye offered to me slain beasts and\nsacrifices by the space of forty years in the wilderness? Yea, ye took\nup the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures\nwhich you made to worship them.\u201d[858] And in the writings of Paul, who\nwas carefully trained in Jewish customs, and converted afterwards to\nChristianity by a miraculous appearance of Jesus, the following words\nmay be read in the Epistle to the Colossians: \u201cLet no man beguile you of\nyour reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding\ninto those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his\nfleshly mind; and not holding the head, from which all the body by joint\nand bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth\nwith the increase of God.\u201d[859] But Celsus, having neither read these\nverses, nor having learned their contents from any other source, has\nrepresented, I know not how, the Jews as not transgressing their law in\nbowing down to the heavens, and to the angels therein.\n\nFootnote 857:\n\n Cf. Jer. vii. 17, 18.\n\nFootnote 858:\n\n Cf. Acts vii. 42, 43.\n\nFootnote 859:\n\n Cf. Col. ii. 18, 19.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IX.\n\n\nAnd still continuing a little confused, and not taking care to see what\nwas relevant to the matter, he expressed his opinion that the Jews were\ninduced by the incantations employed in jugglery and sorcery (in\nconsequence of which certain phantoms appear, in obedience to the spells\nemployed by the magicians) to bow down to the angels in heaven, not\nobserving that this was contrary to their law, which said to them who\npractised such observances: \u201cRegard not them which have familiar\nspirits,[860] neither seek after wizards,[861] to be defiled by them: I\nam the Lord your God.\u201d[862] He ought, therefore, either not to have at\nall attributed this practice to the Jews, seeing he has observed that\nthey keep their law, and has called them \u201cthose who live according to\ntheir law;\u201d or if he did attribute it, he ought to have shown that the\nJews did this in violation of their code. But again, as they transgress\ntheir law who offer worship to those who are said to appear to them who\nare involved in darkness and blinded by sorcery, and who dream dreams,\nowing to obscure phantoms presenting themselves; so also do they\ntransgress the law who offer sacrifice to sun, moon, and stars.[863] And\nthere is thus great inconsistency in the same individual saying that the\nJews are careful to keep their law by not bowing down to sun, and moon,\nand stars, while they are not so careful to keep it in the matter of\nheaven and the angels.\n\nFootnote 860:\n\n \u1f10\u03b3\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 861:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 862:\n\n Cf. Lev. xix. 31.\n\nFootnote 863:\n\n The emendations of Ru\u00e6us have been adopted in the translation, the\n text being probably corrupt. Cf. Ru\u00e6us, _in loc._\n\n\n\n\n Chapter X.\n\n\nAnd if it be necessary for us to offer a defence of our refusal to\nrecognise as gods, equally with angels, and sun, and moon, and stars,\nthose who are called by the Greeks \u201cmanifest and visible\u201d divinities, we\nshall answer that the law of Moses knows that these latter have been\napportioned by God among all the nations under the heaven, but not\namongst those who were selected by God as His chosen people above all\nthe nations of the earth. For it is written in the book of Deuteronomy:\n\u201cAnd lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the\nsun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldst\nbe driven to worship them, and serve them, which the Lord thy God hath\ndivided unto all nations under the whole heaven. But the Lord hath taken\nus, and brought us forth out of the iron furnace, even out of Egypt, to\nbe unto Him a people of inheritance, as ye are this day.\u201d[864] The\nHebrew people, then, being called by God a \u201cchosen generation, and a\nroyal priesthood, and a holy nation, and a purchased people,\u201d[865]\nregarding whom it was foretold to Abraham by the voice of the Lord\naddressed to him, \u201cLook now towards heaven, and tell the stars, if thou\nbe able to number them: and He said unto him, So shall thy seed\nbe;\u201d[866] and having thus a hope that they would become as the stars of\nheaven, were not likely to bow down to those objects which they were to\nresemble as a result of their understanding and observing the law of\nGod. For it was said to them: \u201cThe Lord our God hath multiplied us; and,\nbehold, ye are this day as the stars of heaven for multitude.\u201d[867] In\nthe book of Daniel, also, the following prophecies are found relating to\nthose who are to share in the resurrection: \u201cAnd at that time thy people\nshall be delivered, every one that has been written in the book. And\nmany of them that sleep in the dust[868] of the earth shall awake; some\nto everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And\nthey that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament, and\n[those] of the many righteous[869] as the stars for ever and ever,\u201d[870]\netc. And hence Paul, too, when speaking of the resurrection, says: \u201cAnd\nthere are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory\nof the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.\nThere is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and\nanother glory of the stars; for one star differeth from another star in\nglory. So also is the resurrection of the dead.\u201d[871] It was not\ntherefore consonant to reason that those who had been taught\nsublimely[872] to ascend above all created things, and to hope for the\nenjoyment of the most glorious rewards with God on account of their\nvirtuous lives, and who had heard the words, \u201cYe are the light of the\nworld,\u201d[873] and, \u201cLet your light so shine before men, that they, seeing\nyour good works, may glorify your Father who is in heaven,\u201d[874] and who\npossessed through practice this brilliant and unfading wisdom, or who\nhad secured even the \u201cvery reflection of everlasting light,\u201d[875] should\nbe so impressed with the [mere] _visible_ light of sun, and moon, and\nstars, that, on account of that sensible light of theirs, they should\ndeem themselves (although possessed of so great a rational light of\nknowledge, and of the true light, and the light of the world, and the\nlight of men) to be somehow inferior to them, and to bow down to them;\nseeing they ought to be worshipped, if they are to receive worship at\nall, not for the sake of the sensible light which is admired by the\nmultitude, but because of the rational and true light, if indeed the\nstars in heaven are rational and virtuous beings, and have been\nilluminated with the light of knowledge by that wisdom which is the\n\u201creflection of everlasting light.\u201d For that sensible light of theirs is\nthe work of the Creator of all things, while that rational light is\nderived perhaps from the principle of free-will within them.[876]\n\nFootnote 864:\n\n Cf. Deut. iv. 19, 20.\n\nFootnote 865:\n\n Cf. 1 Pet. ii. 9.\n\nFootnote 866:\n\n Cf. Gen. xv. 5.\n\nFootnote 867:\n\n Cf. Deut. i. 10.\n\nFootnote 868:\n\n \u03c7\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 869:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 870:\n\n Cf. Dan. xii. 1, 2, 3.\n\nFootnote 871:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 40-42.\n\nFootnote 872:\n\n \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c6\u03c5\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 873:\n\n Matt. v. 14.\n\nFootnote 874:\n\n Cf. Matt. v. 16.\n\nFootnote 875:\n\n Cf. Origen, _de Principiis_, i. c. vii.\n\nFootnote 876:\n\n \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b5\u03be\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b7\u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u03cc\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XI.\n\n\nBut even this rational light itself ought not to be worshipped by him\nwho beholds and understands the true light, by sharing in which these\nalso are enlightened; nor by him who beholds God, the Father of the true\nlight,\u2014of whom it has been said, \u201cGod is light, and in Him there is no\ndarkness at all.\u201d[877] Those, indeed, who worship sun, moon, and stars\nbecause their light is visible and celestial, would not bow down to a\nspark of fire or a lamp upon earth, because they see the incomparable\nsuperiority of those objects which are deemed worthy of homage to the\nlight of sparks and lamps. So those who understand that God is light,\nand who have apprehended that the Son of God is \u201cthe true light which\nlighteth every man that cometh into the world,\u201d and who comprehend also\nhow He says, \u201cI am the light of the world,\u201d would not rationally offer\nworship to that which is, as it were, a spark in sun, moon, and stars,\nin comparison with God, who is light of the true light. Nor is it with a\nview to depreciate these great works of God\u2019s creative power, or to call\nthem, after the fashion of Anaxagoras, \u201cfiery masses,\u201d[878] that we thus\nspeak of sun, and moon, and stars; but because we perceive the\ninexpressible superiority of the divinity of God, and that of His\nonly-begotten Son, which surpasses all other things. And being persuaded\nthat the sun himself, and moon, and stars pray to the Supreme God\nthrough His only-begotten Son, we judge it improper to pray to those\nbeings who themselves offer up prayers [to God], seeing even they\nthemselves would prefer that we should send up our requests to the God\nto whom they pray, rather than send them downwards to themselves, or\napportion our power of prayer[879] between God and them. And here I may\nemploy this illustration, as bearing upon this point: Our Lord and\nSaviour, hearing Himself on one occasion addressed as \u201cGood\nMaster,\u201d[880] referring him who used it to His own Father, said, \u201cWhy\ncallest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God the\nFather.\u201d[881] And since it was in accordance with sound reason that this\nshould be said by the Son of His Father\u2019s love, as being the image of\nthe goodness of God, why should not the sun say with greater reason to\nthose that bow down to him, Why do you worship me? \u201cfor thou wilt\nworship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve;\u201d[882] for it is\nHe whom I and all who are with me serve and worship. And although one\nmay not be so exalted [as the sun], nevertheless let such an one pray to\nthe Word of God (who is able to heal him), and still more to His Father,\nwho also to the righteous of former times \u201csent His word, and healed\nthem, and delivered them from their destructions.\u201d[883]\n\nFootnote 877:\n\n Cf. 1 John i. 5.\n\nFootnote 878:\n\n \u03bc\u03cd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 879:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 880:\n\n Cf. Matt. xix. 17; cf. Mark x. 18.\n\nFootnote 881:\n\n Ibid.\n\nFootnote 882:\n\n Cf. Deut. vi. 13.\n\nFootnote 883:\n\n Cf. Ps. cvii. 20.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XII.\n\n\nGod accordingly, in His kindness, condescends to mankind, not in any\nlocal sense, but through His providence;[884] while the Son of God, not\nonly [when on earth], but at _all_ times, is with His own disciples,\nfulfilling the promise, \u201cLo, I am with you always, even to the end of\nthe world.\u201d[885] And if a branch cannot bear fruit except it abide in\nthe vine, it is evident that the disciples also of the Word, who are the\nrational branches of the Word\u2019s true vine, cannot produce the fruits of\nvirtue unless they abide in the true vine, the Christ of God, who is\nwith us locally here below upon the earth, and who is with those who\ncleave to Him in all parts of the world, and is also in all places with\nthose who do not know Him. Another is made manifest by that John who\nwrote the Gospel, when, speaking in the person of John the Baptist, he\nsaid, \u201cThere standeth one among you whom ye know not; He it is who\ncometh after me.\u201d[886] And it is absurd, when He who fills heaven and\nearth, and who said, \u201cDo I not fill heaven and earth? saith the\nLord,\u201d[887] is with us, and near us (for I believe Him when He says, \u201cI\nam a God nigh at hand, and not afar off, saith the Lord\u201d[888]), to seek\nto pray to sun or moon, or one of the stars, whose influence does not\nreach the whole of the world.[889] But, to use the very words of Celsus,\nlet it be granted that \u201cthe sun, moon, and stars _do_ foretell rain, and\nheat, and clouds, and thunders,\u201d why, then, if they really do foretell\nsuch great things, ought we not rather to do homage to God, whose\nservant they are in uttering these predictions, and show reverence to\n_Him_ rather than His _prophets_? Let them predict, then, the approach\nof lightnings, and fruits, and all manner of productions, and let all\nsuch things be under their administration; yet we shall not on that\naccount worship those who themselves offer worship, as we do not worship\neven Moses, and those prophets who came from God after him, and who\npredicted better things than rain, and heat, and clouds, and thunders,\nand lightnings, and fruits, and all sorts of productions visible to the\nsenses. Nay, even if sun, and moon, and stars were able to prophesy\nbetter things than rain, not even then shall we worship _them_, but the\n_Father_ of the prophecies which are in them, and the _Word_ of God,\ntheir minister. But grant that they are His heralds, and truly\nmessengers of heaven, why, even then ought we not to worship the _God_\nwhom they only proclaim and announce, rather than those who are the\n_heralds_ and _messengers_?\n\nFootnote 884:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 885:\n\n Matt. xxviii. 20.\n\nFootnote 886:\n\n Cf. John i. 26, 27.\n\nFootnote 887:\n\n Cf. Jer. xxiii. 24.\n\nFootnote 888:\n\n Cf. Jer. xxiii. 23.\n\nFootnote 889:\n\n \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f54\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c6\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIII.\n\n\nCelsus, moreover, assumes that sun, and moon, and stars are regarded by\nus as of no account. Now, with regard to these, we acknowledge that they\ntoo are \u201cwaiting for the manifestation of the sons of God,\u201d being for\nthe present subjected to the \u201cvanity\u201d of their material bodies, \u201cby\nreason of Him who has subjected the same in hope.\u201d[890] But if Celsus\nhad read the innumerable other passages where we speak of sun, moon, and\nstars, and especially these,\u2014\u201cPraise Him, all ye stars, and thou, O\nlight,\u201d[891] and, \u201cPraise Him, ye heaven of heavens,\u201d\u2014he would not have\nsaid of us that we regard such mighty beings, which \u201cgreatly praise\u201d the\nLord God, as of no account. Nor did Celsus know the passage: \u201cFor the\nearnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the\nsons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly,\nbut by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope; because the\ncreature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption\ninto the glorious liberty of the children of God.\u201d[892] And with these\nwords let us terminate our defence against the charge of not worshipping\nsun, moon, and stars. And let us now bring forward those statements of\nhis which follow, that we may, God willing, address to him in reply such\narguments as shall be suggested by the light of truth.\n\nFootnote 890:\n\n Cf. Rom. viii. 19-21.\n\nFootnote 891:\n\n Cf. Ps. cxlviii. 3.\n\nFootnote 892:\n\n Cf. Rom. viii. 19-21.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIV.\n\n\nThe following, then, are his words: \u201cIt is folly on their part to\nsuppose that when God, as if He were a cook,[893] introduces the fire\n[which is to consume the world], all the rest of the human race will be\nburnt up, while they alone will remain, not only such of them as are\nthen alive, but also those who are long since dead, which latter will\narise from the earth clothed with the self-same flesh [as during life];\nfor such a hope is simply one which might be cherished by worms. For\nwhat sort of human soul is that which would still long for a body that\nhad been subject to corruption? Whence, also, this opinion of yours is\nnot shared by some of the Christians, and they pronounce it to be\nexceedingly vile, and loathsome, and impossible; for what kind of body\nis that which, after being completely corrupted, can return to its\noriginal nature, and to that self-same first condition out of which it\nfell into dissolution? Being unable to return any answer, they betake\nthemselves to a most absurd refuge, viz. that all things are possible to\nGod. And yet God _cannot_ do things that are disgraceful, nor does He\nwish to do things that are contrary to His nature; nor, if (in\naccordance with the wickedness of your own heart) you desired anything\nthat was evil, would God accomplish it; nor must you believe at once\nthat it will be done. For God does not rule the world in order to\nsatisfy inordinate desires, or to allow disorder and confusion, but to\ngovern a nature that is upright and just.[894] For the _soul_, indeed,\nHe might be able to provide an everlasting life; while dead _bodies_, on\nthe contrary, are, as Heraclitus observes, more worthless than dung.\nGod, however, neither can nor will declare, contrary to all reason, that\nthe flesh, which is full of those things which it is not even honourable\nto mention, is to exist for ever. For He is the reason of all things\nthat exist, and therefore can do nothing either contrary to reason or\ncontrary to Himself.\u201d\n\nFootnote 893:\n\n \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bc\u03ac\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 894:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u1f40\u03c1\u03ad\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03c3\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70\n \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f40\u03c1\u03b8\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b7\u03b3\u03ad\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XV.\n\n\nObserve, now, here at the very beginning, how, in ridiculing the\ndoctrine of a conflagration of the world, held by certain of the Greeks\nwho have treated the subject in a philosophic spirit not to be\ndepreciated, he would make us, \u201crepresenting God, as it were, as a cook,\nhold the belief in a general conflagration;\u201d not perceiving that, as\ncertain Greeks were of opinion (perhaps having received their\ninformation from the ancient nation of the Hebrews), it is a\npurificatory fire which is brought upon the world, and probably also on\neach one of those who stand in need of chastisement by the fire and\nhealing at the same time, seeing it _burns_ indeed, but does not\n_consume_, those who are without a material body,[895] which needs to be\nconsumed by that fire, and which burns and consumes those who by their\nactions, words, and thoughts have built up wood, or hay, or stubble, in\nthat which is figuratively termed a \u201cbuilding.\u201d[896] And the Holy\nScriptures say that the Lord will, like a refiner\u2019s fire and fuller\u2019s\nsoap,[897] visit each one of those who require purification, because of\nthe intermingling in them of a flood of wicked matter proceeding from\ntheir evil nature; who need fire, I mean, to refine, as it were, [the\ndross of] those who are intermingled with copper, and tin, and lead. And\nhe who likes may learn this from the prophet Ezekiel.[898] But that we\nsay that God brings fire upon the world, not like a cook, but like a\nGod, who is the benefactor of them who stand in need of the discipline\nof fire,[899] will be testified by the prophet Isaiah, in whose writings\nit is related that a sinful nation was thus addressed: \u201cBecause thou\nhast coals of fire, sit upon them: they shall be to thee a help.\u201d[900]\nNow the Scripture is appropriately adapted to the multitudes of those\nwho are to peruse it, because it speaks obscurely of things that are sad\nand gloomy,[901] in order to terrify those who cannot by any other means\nbe saved from the flood of their sins, although even then the attentive\nreader will clearly discover the end that is to be accomplished by these\nsad and painful punishments upon those who endure them. It is\nsufficient, however, for the present to quote the words of Isaiah: \u201cFor\nmy name\u2019s sake will I show mine anger, and my glory I will bring upon\nthee, that I may not destroy thee.\u201d[902] We have thus been under the\nnecessity of referring in obscure terms to questions not fitted to the\ncapacity of simple believers, who require a simpler instruction in\nwords, that we might not appear to leave unrefuted the accusation of\nCelsus, that \u201cGod introduces the fire, [which is to destroy the world],\nas if He were a cook.\u201d\n\nFootnote 895:\n\n \u1f55\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 896:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 12.\n\nFootnote 897:\n\n Cf. Mal. iii. 2.\n\nFootnote 898:\n\n Cf. Ezek. xxii. 18, 20.\n\nFootnote 899:\n\n \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 900:\n\n Cf. Isa. xlvii. 14, 15.\n\nFootnote 901:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c3\u03ba\u03c5\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03ac.\n\nFootnote 902:\n\n Cf. Isa. xlviii. 9 (Septuagint).\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVI.\n\n\nFrom what has been said, it will be manifest to intelligent hearers how\nwe have to answer the following: \u201cAll the rest of the race will be\ncompletely burnt up, and they alone will remain.\u201d It is not to be\nwondered at, indeed, if such thoughts have been entertained by those\namongst us who are called in Scripture the \u201cfoolish things\u201d of the\nworld, and \u201cbase things,\u201d and \u201cthings which are despised,\u201d and \u201cthings\nwhich are not,\u201d because \u201cby the foolishness of preaching it pleased God\nto save them that believe on Him, after that, in the wisdom of God, the\nworld by wisdom knew not God,\u201d[903]\u2014because such individuals are unable\nto see distinctly the sense of each particular passage,[904] or\nunwilling to devote the necessary leisure to the investigation of\nScripture, notwithstanding the injunction of Jesus, \u201cSearch the\nScriptures.\u201d[905] The following, moreover, are his ideas regarding the\nfire which is to be brought upon the world by God, and the punishments\nwhich are to befall sinners. And perhaps, as it is appropriate to\nchildren that some things should be addressed to them in a manner\nbefitting their infantile condition, to convert them, as being of very\ntender age, to a better course of life; so, to those whom the word terms\n\u201cthe foolish things of the world,\u201d and \u201cthe base,\u201d and \u201cthe despised,\u201d\nthe just and obvious meaning of the passages relating to punishments is\nsuitable, inasmuch as they cannot receive any other mode of conversion\nthan that which is by fear and the presentation of punishment, and thus\nbe saved from the many evils [which would befall them].[906] The\nScripture accordingly declares that only those who are unscathed by the\nfire and the punishments are to remain,\u2014those, viz., whose opinions, and\nmorals, and mind have been purified to the highest degree; while, on the\nother hand, those of a different nature\u2014those, viz., who, according to\ntheir deserts, require the administration of punishment by fire\u2014will be\ninvolved in these sufferings with a view to an end which it is suitable\nfor God to bring upon those who have been created in His image, but who\nhave lived in opposition to the will of that nature which is according\nto His image. And this is our answer to the statement, \u201cAll the rest of\nthe race will be completely burnt up, but they alone are to remain.\u201d\n\nFootnote 903:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. i. 21.\n\nFootnote 904:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 905:\n\n Cf. John v. 39.\n\nFootnote 906:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03ae\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVII.\n\n\nThen, in the next place, having either himself misunderstood the sacred\nScriptures, or those [interpreters] by whom they were not understood, he\nproceeds to assert that \u201cit is said by us that there will remain at the\ntime of the visitation which is to come upon the world by the fire of\npurification, not only those who are then alive, but also those who are\nlong ago dead;\u201d not observing that it is with a secret kind of wisdom\nthat it was said by the apostle of Jesus: \u201cWe shall not all sleep, but\nwe shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the\nlast trump; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised\nincorruptible, and we shall be changed.\u201d[907] Now he ought to have\nnoticed what was the meaning of him who uttered these words, as being\none who was by no means dead, who made a distinction between himself and\nthose like him and the dead, and who said afterwards, \u201cThe dead shall be\nraised incorruptible,\u201d and \u201cwe shall be changed.\u201d And as a proof that\nsuch was the apostle\u2019s meaning in writing those words which I have\nquoted from the First Epistle to the Corinthians, I will quote also from\nthe First to the Thessalonians, in which Paul, as one who is alive and\nawake, and different from those who are asleep, speaks as follows: \u201cFor\nthis we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and\nremain unto the coming of the Lord, shall not prevent them who are\nasleep; for the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout,\nwith the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God.\u201d[908] Then,\nagain, after this, knowing that there were others dead in Christ besides\nhimself and such as he, he subjoins the words, \u201cThe dead in Christ shall\nrise first; then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together\nwith them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air.\u201d[909]\n\nFootnote 907:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52.\n\nFootnote 908:\n\n Cf. 1 Thess. iv. 15, 16.\n\nFootnote 909:\n\n Cf. 1 Thess. iv. 16, 17.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVIII.\n\n\nBut since he has ridiculed at great length the doctrine of the\nresurrection of the flesh, which has been preached in the churches, and\nwhich is more clearly understood by the more intelligent believer; and\nas it is unnecessary again to quote his words, which have been already\nadduced, let us, with regard to the problem[910] (as in an apologetic\nwork directed against an alien from the faith, and for the sake of those\nwho are still \u201cchildren, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every\nwind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby\nthey lie in wait to deceive\u201d[911]), state and establish to the best of\nour ability a few points expressly intended for our readers. Neither we,\nthen, nor the Holy Scriptures, assert that with the same bodies, without\na change to a higher condition, \u201cshall those who were long dead arise\nfrom the earth and live again;\u201d for in so speaking, Celsus makes a false\ncharge against us. For we may listen to many passages of Scripture\ntreating of the resurrection in a manner worthy of God, although it may\nsuffice for the present to quote the language of Paul from the First\nEpistle to the Corinthians, where he says: \u201cBut some man will say, How\nare the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? Thou fool, that\nwhich thou sowest is not quickened, except it die. And that which thou\nsowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may\nchance of wheat, or of some other grain; but God giveth it a body as it\nhath pleased Him, and to every seed his own body.\u201d[912] Now, observe how\nin these words he says that there is sown, \u201cnot that body that shall\nbe;\u201d but that of the body which is sown and cast naked into the earth\n(God giving to each seed its own body), there takes place as it were a\nresurrection: from the seed that was cast into the ground there arising\na stalk, _e.g._ among such plants as the following, viz. the mustard\nplant, or of a larger tree, as in the olive,[913] or one of the\nfruit-trees.\n\nFootnote 910:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b2\u03bb\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 911:\n\n Cf. Eph. iv. 14.\n\nFootnote 912:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 35-38.\n\nFootnote 913:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIX.\n\n\nGod, then, gives to each thing its own body as He pleases: as in the\ncase of plants that are sown, so also in the case of those beings who\nare, as it were, sown in dying, and who in due time receive, out of what\nhas been \u201csown,\u201d the body assigned by God to each one according to his\ndeserts. And we may hear, moreover, the Scripture teaching us at great\nlength the difference between that which is, as it were, \u201csown,\u201d and\nthat which is, as it were, \u201craised\u201d from it, in these words: \u201cIt is sown\nin corruption, it is raised in incorruption; it is sown in dishonour, it\nis raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is\nsown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.\u201d[914] And let him\nwho has the capacity understand the meaning of the words: \u201cAs is the\nearthy, such are they also that are earthy; and as is the heavenly, such\nare they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the\nearthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.\u201d[915] And although\nthe apostle wished to conceal the secret meaning of the passage, which\nwas not adapted to the simpler class of believers, and to the\nunderstanding of the common people, who are led by their faith to enter\non a better course of life, he was nevertheless obliged afterwards to\nsay (in order that we might not misapprehend his meaning), after \u201cLet us\nbear the image of the heavenly,\u201d these words also: \u201cNow this I say,\nbrethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God;\nneither doth corruption inherit incorruption.\u201d[916] Then, knowing that\nthere was a secret and mystical meaning in the passage, as was becoming\nin one who was leaving, in his epistles, to those who were to come after\nhim words full of significance, he subjoins the following, \u201cBehold, I\nshow you a mystery;\u201d[917] which is his usual style in introducing\nmatters of a profounder and more mystical nature, and such as are\nfittingly concealed from the multitude, as is written in the book of\nTobit: \u201cIt is good to keep close the secret of a king, but honourable to\nreveal the works of God,\u201d[918]\u2014in a way consistent with truth and God\u2019s\nglory, and so as to be to the advantage of the multitude. Our hope,\nthen, is _not_ \u201cthe hope of worms, nor does our soul long for a body\nthat has seen corruption;\u201d for although it may require a body, for the\nsake of moving from place to place,[919] yet it understands (as having\nmeditated on the wisdom [that is from above], agreeably to the\ndeclaration, \u201cThe mouth of the righteous will speak wisdom\u201d[920]) the\ndifference between the \u201cearthly house,\u201d in which is the tabernacle of\nthe building that is to be dissolved, and that in which the righteous do\ngroan, being burdened,\u2014not wishing to \u201cput off\u201d the tabernacle, but to\nbe \u201cclothed therewith,\u201d that by being clothed upon, mortality might be\nswallowed up of life. For, in virtue of the whole nature of the body\nbeing corruptible, the corruptible tabernacle must put on incorruption;\nand its other part, being mortal, and becoming liable to the death which\nfollows sin, must put on immortality, in order that, when the\ncorruptible shall have put on incorruption, and the mortal immortality,\nthen shall come to pass what was predicted of old by the prophets,\u2014the\nannihilation of the \u201cvictory\u201d of death (because it had conquered and\nsubjected us to his sway), and of its \u201csting,\u201d with which it stings the\nimperfectly defended soul, and inflicts upon it the wounds which result\nfrom sin.\n\nFootnote 914:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 42, 43.\n\nFootnote 915:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 48, 49.\n\nFootnote 916:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 49.\n\nFootnote 917:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 50.\n\nFootnote 918:\n\n Cf. Tobit xii. 7.\n\nFootnote 919:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 920:\n\n Cf. Ps. xxxvii. 30.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XX.\n\n\nBut since our views regarding the resurrection have, as far as time\nwould permit, been stated in part on the present occasion (for we have\nsystematically examined the subject in greater detail in other parts of\nour writings); and as now we must by means of sound reasoning refute the\nfallacies of Celsus, who neither understands the meaning of our\nScripture, nor has the capacity of judging that the meaning of our wise\nmen is not to be determined by those individuals who make no profession\nof anything more than of a [simple] faith in the Christian system, let\nus show that men, not to be lightly esteemed on account of their\nreasoning powers and dialectic subtleties, have given expression to very\nabsurd[921] opinions. And if we must sneer[922] at them as contemptible\nold wives\u2019 fables, it is at them rather than at our narrative that we\nmust sneer. The disciples of the Porch assert, that after a period of\nyears there will be a conflagration of the world, and after that an\narrangement of things in which everything will be unchanged, as compared\nwith the former arrangement of the world. Those of them, however, who\nevinced their respect for this doctrine have said that there will be a\nchange, although exceedingly slight, at the end of the cycle, from what\nprevailed during the preceding. And these men maintain, that in the\nsucceeding cycle the same things will occur, and Socrates will be again\nthe son of Sophroniscus, and a native of Athens; and Ph\u00e6narete, being\nmarried to Sophroniscus, will again become his mother. And although they\ndo not mention the word \u201cresurrection,\u201d they show in reality that\nSocrates, who derived his origin from seed, will spring from that of\nSophroniscus, and will be fashioned in the womb of Ph\u00e6narete; and being\nbrought up at Athens, will practise the study of philosophy, as if his\nformer philosophy had arisen again, and were to be in no respect\ndifferent from what it was before. Anytus and Melitus, too, will arise\nagain as accusers of Socrates, and the Council of Areopagus will condemn\nhim to death! But what is more ridiculous still, is that Socrates will\nclothe himself with garments not at all different from those which he\nwore during the former cycle, and will live in the same unchanged state\nof poverty, and in the same unchanged city of Athens! And Phalaris will\nagain play the tyrant, and his brazen bull will pour forth its\nbellowings from the voices of victims within, unchanged from those who\nwere condemned in the former cycle! And Alexander of Pher\u00e6, too, will\nagain act the tyrant with a cruelty unaltered from the former time, and\nwill condemn to death the same \u201cunchanged\u201d individuals as before. But\nwhat need is there to go into detail upon the doctrine held by the Stoic\nphilosophers on such things, and which escapes the ridicule of Celsus,\nand is perhaps even venerated by him, since he regards Zeno as a wiser\nman than Jesus?\n\nFootnote 921:\n\n \u03c3\u03c6\u03cc\u03b4\u03c1\u2019 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 922:\n\n \u03bc\u03c5\u03c7\u03b8\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXI.\n\n\nThe disciples of Pythagoras, too, and of Plato, although they appear to\nhold the incorruptibility of the world, yet fall into similar errors.\nFor as the planets, after certain definite cycles, assume the same\npositions, and hold the same relations to one another, all things on\nearth will, they assert, be like what they were at the time when the\nsame state of planetary relations existed in the world. From this view\nit necessarily follows, that when, after the lapse of a lengthened\ncycle, the planets come to occupy towards each other the same relations\nwhich they occupied in the time of Socrates, Socrates will again be born\nof the same parents, and suffer the same treatment, being accused by\nAnytus and Melitus, and condemned by the Council of Areopagus! The\nlearned among the Egyptians, moreover, hold similar views, and yet they\nare treated with respect, and do not incur the ridicule of Celsus and\nsuch as he; while we, who maintain that all things are administered by\nGod in proportion to the relation of the free-will of each individual,\nand are ever being brought into a better condition, so far as they admit\nof being so,[923] and who know that the nature of our free-will admits\nof the occurrence of contingent events[924] (for it is incapable of\nreceiving the wholly unchangeable character of God), yet do not appear\nto say anything worthy of a testing examination.\n\nFootnote 923:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 924:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03c6\u2019 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f03 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXII.\n\n\nLet no one, however, suspect that, in speaking as we do, we belong to\nthose who are indeed called Christians, but who set aside the doctrine\nof the resurrection as it is taught in Scripture. For these persons\ncannot, so far as their principles apply, at all establish that the\nstalk or tree which springs up comes from the grain of wheat, or\nanything else [which was cast into the ground]; whereas we, who believe\nthat that which is \u201csown\u201d is not \u201cquickened\u201d unless it die, and that\nthere is sown not that body that shall be (for God gives it a body as it\npleases Him, raising it in incorruption after it is sown in corruption;\nand after it is sown in dishonour, raising it in glory; and after it is\nsown in weakness, raising it in power; and after it is sown a natural\nbody, raising it a spiritual),\u2014we preserve both the doctrine[925] of the\nchurch of Christ and the grandeur of the divine promise, proving also\nthe possibility of its accomplishment not by mere assertion, but by\narguments; knowing that although heaven and earth, and the things that\nare in them, may pass away, yet His words regarding each individual\nthing, being, as parts of a whole, or species of a genus, the utterances\nof Him who was God the Word, who was in the beginning with God, shall by\nno means pass away. For we desire to listen to Him who said: \u201cHeaven and\nearth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.\u201d[926]\n\nFootnote 925:\n\n \u03b2\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 926:\n\n Cf. Matt. xxiv. 35; cf. Mark xiii. 31.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIII.\n\n\nWe, therefore, do not maintain that the body which has undergone\ncorruption resumes its original nature, any more than the grain of wheat\nwhich has decayed returns to its former condition. But we do maintain,\nthat as above the grain of wheat there arises a stalk, so a certain\npower[927] is implanted in the body, which is not destroyed, and from\nwhich the body is raised up in incorruption. The philosophers of the\nPorch, however, in consequence of the opinions which they hold regarding\nthe unchangeableness of things after a certain cycle, assert that the\nbody, after undergoing complete corruption, will return to its original\ncondition, and will again assume that first nature from which it passed\ninto a state of dissolution, establishing these points, as they think,\nby irresistible arguments.[928] We, however, do not betake ourselves to\na most absurd refuge, saying that with God _all_ things are possible;\nfor we know how to understand this word \u201call\u201d as not referring either to\nthings that are \u201cnon-existent\u201d or that are inconceivable. But we\nmaintain, at the same time, that God cannot do what is disgraceful,\nsince then He would be capable of ceasing to be God; for if He do\nanything that is disgraceful, He is not God. Since, however, he lays it\ndown as a principle, that \u201cGod does not desire what is contrary to\nnature,\u201d we have to make a distinction, and say that if any one asserts\nthat wickedness is contrary to nature, while we maintain that \u201cGod does\nnot desire what is contrary to nature,\u201d\u2014either what springs from\nwickedness or from an irrational principle,\u2014yet, if such things happen\naccording to the word and will of God, we must at once necessarily hold\nthat they are not contrary to nature. Therefore things which are done by\nGod, although they may be, or may _appear_ to some to be incredible, are\nnot contrary to nature. And if we must press the force of words,[929] we\nwould say that, in comparison with what is generally understood as\n\u201cnature,\u201d there _are_ certain things which are _beyond_ its power, which\nGod could at any time do; as, _e.g._, in raising man above the level of\nhuman nature, and causing him to pass into a better and more divine\ncondition, and preserving him in the same, so long as he who is the\nobject of His care shows by his actions that he desires [the continuance\nof His help].\n\nFootnote 927:\n\n \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 928:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 929:\n\n \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c7\u03c1\u1f74 \u03b2\u03b5\u03b2\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f40\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIV.\n\n\nMoreover, as we have already said that for God to desire anything\nunbecoming Himself would be destructive of His existence as Deity, we\nwill add that if man, agreeably to the wickedness of his nature, should\ndesire anything that is abominable,[930] God cannot grant it. And now it\nis from no spirit of contention that we answer the assertions of Celsus;\nbut it is in the spirit of truth that we investigate them, as assenting\nto his view that \u201cHe is the God, not of inordinate desires, nor of error\nand disorder, but of a nature just and upright,\u201d because He is the\nsource of all that is good. And that He is able to provide an eternal\nlife for the soul we acknowledge; and that He possesses not only the\n\u201cpower,\u201d but the \u201cwill.\u201d In view, therefore, of these considerations, we\nare not at all distressed by the assertion of Heraclitus, adopted by\nCelsus, that \u201cdead bodies are to be cast out as more worthless than\ndung;\u201d and yet, with reference even to this, one might say that dung,\nindeed, ought to be cast out, while the dead bodies of men, on account\nof the soul by which they were inhabited, especially if it had been\nvirtuous, ought not to be cast out. For, in harmony with those laws\nwhich are based upon the principles of equity, bodies are deemed worthy\nof sepulture, with the honours accorded on such occasions, that no\ninsult, so far as can be helped, may be offered to the soul which dwelt\nwithin, by casting forth the body (after the soul has departed) like\nthat of the animals. Let it not then be held, contrary to reason, that\nit is the will of God to declare that the grain of wheat is not\nimmortal, but the stalk which springs from it, while the body which is\nsown in corruption is not, but that which is raised by Him in\nincorruption. But according to Celsus, God Himself is the reason of all\nthings, while according to our view it is His Son, of whom we say in\nphilosophic language, \u201cIn the beginning was the Word, and the Word was\nwith God, and the Word was God;\u201d[931] while in our judgment also, God\ncannot do anything which is contrary to reason, or contrary to Himself.\n\nFootnote 930:\n\n \u03b2\u03b4\u03b5\u03bb\u03c5\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 931:\n\n Cf. John i. 1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXV.\n\n\nLet us next notice the statements of Celsus, which follow the preceding,\nand which are as follow: \u201cAs the Jews, then, became a peculiar people,\nand enacted laws in keeping with the customs of their country,[932] and\nmaintain them up to the present time, and observe a mode of worship\nwhich, whatever be its nature, is yet derived from their fathers, they\nact in these respects like other men, because each nation retains its\nancestral customs, whatever they are, if they happen to be established\namong them. And such an arrangement appears to be advantageous, not only\nbecause it has occurred to the mind of other nations to decide some\nthings differently, but also because it is a duty to protect what has\nbeen established for the public advantage; and also because, in all\nprobability, the various quarters of the earth were from the beginning\nallotted to different superintending spirits,[933] and were thus\ndistributed among certain governing powers,[934] and in this manner the\nadministration of the world is carried on. And whatever is done among\neach nation in this way would be rightly done, wherever it was agreeable\nto the wishes [of the superintending powers], while it would be an act\nof impiety to get rid of[935] the institutions established from the\nbeginning in the various places.\u201d By these words Celsus shows that the\nJews, who were formerly Egyptians, subsequently became a \u201cpeculiar\npeople,\u201d and enacted laws which they carefully preserve. And not to\nrepeat his statements, which have been already before us, he says that\nit is advantageous to the Jews to observe their ancestral worship, as\nother nations carefully attend to theirs. And he further states a deeper\nreason why it is of advantage to the Jews to cultivate their ancestral\ncustoms, in hinting dimly that those to whom was allotted the office of\nsuperintending the country which was being legislated for, enacted the\nlaws of each land in co-operation with its legislators. He appears,\nthen, to indicate that both the country of the Jews, and the nation\nwhich inhabits it, are superintended by one or more beings, who, whether\nthey were one or more, co-operated with Moses, and enacted the laws of\nthe Jews.\n\nFootnote 932:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b8\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 933:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b7 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03cc\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bc\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 934:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03b7\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 935:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVI.\n\n\n\u201cWe must,\u201d he says, \u201cobserve the laws, not only because it has occurred\nto the mind of others to decide some things differently, but because it\nis a duty to protect what has been enacted for the public advantage, and\nalso because, in all probability, the various quarters of the earth were\nfrom the beginning allotted to different superintending spirits, and\nwere distributed among certain governing powers, and in this manner the\nadministration of the world is carried on.\u201d Thus Celsus, as if he had\nforgotten what he had said against the Jews, now includes them in the\ngeneral eulogy which he passes upon all who observe their ancestral\ncustoms, remarking: \u201cAnd whatever is done among each nation in this way,\nwould be rightly done whenever agreeable to the wishes [of the\nsuperintendents].\u201d And observe here, whether he does not openly, so far\nas he can, express a wish that the Jew should live in the observance of\nhis own laws, and not depart from them, because he would commit an act\nof impiety if he apostatized; for his words are: \u201cIt would be an act of\nimpiety to get rid of the institutions established from the beginning in\nthe various places.\u201d Now I should like to ask him, and those who\nentertain his views, who it was that distributed the various quarters of\nthe earth from the beginning among the different superintending spirits;\nand especially, who gave the country of the Jews, and the Jewish people\nthemselves, to the one or more superintendents to whom it was allotted?\nWas it, as Celsus would say, Jupiter who assigned the Jewish people and\ntheir country to a certain spirit or spirits? And was it _his_ wish, to\nwhom they were thus assigned, to enact among them the laws which\nprevail, or was it _against_ his will that it was done? You will observe\nthat, whatever be his answer, he is in a strait. But if the various\nquarters of the earth were _not_ allotted by some one being to the\nvarious superintending spirits, then each one at random, and without the\nsuperintendence of a higher power, divided the earth according to\nchance; and yet such a view is absurd, and destructive in no small\ndegree of the providence of the God who presides over all things.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVII.\n\n\nAny one, indeed, who chooses, may relate how the various quarters of the\nearth, being distributed among certain governing powers, are\nadministered by those who superintend them; but let him tell us also how\nwhat is done among each nation is done rightly when agreeable to the\nwishes of the superintendents. Let him, for example, tell us whether the\nlaws of the Scythians, which permit the murder of parents, are right\nlaws; or those of the Persians, which do not forbid the marriages of\nsons with their mothers, or of daughters with their own fathers. But\nwhat need is there for me to make selections from those who have been\nengaged in the business of enacting laws among the different nations,\nand to inquire how the laws are rightly enacted among each, according as\nthey please the superintending powers? Let Celsus, however, tell us how\nit would be an act of impiety to get rid of those ancestral laws which\npermit the marriages of mothers and daughters; or which pronounce a man\nhappy who puts an end to his life by hanging, or declare that they\nundergo entire purification who deliver themselves over to the fire, and\nwho terminate their existence by fire; and how it is an act of impiety\nto do away with those laws which, for example, prevail in the Tauric\nChersonese, regarding the offering up of strangers in sacrifice to\nDiana, or among certain of the Libyan tribes regarding the sacrifice of\nchildren to Saturn. Moreover, this inference follows from the dictum of\nCelsus, that it is an act of impiety on the part of the Jews to do away\nwith those ancestral laws which forbid the worship of any other deity\nthan the Creator of all things. And it will follow, according to his\nview, that piety is not divine by its own nature, but by a certain\n[external] arrangement and appointment. For it is an act of piety among\ncertain tribes to worship a crocodile, and to eat what is an object of\nadoration among other tribes; while, again, with others it is a pious\nact to worship a calf, and among others, again, to regard the goat as a\ngod. And, in this way, the same individual will be regarded as acting\npiously according to one set of laws, and impiously according to\nanother; and this is the most absurd result that can be conceived!\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVIII.\n\n\nIt is probable, however, that to such remarks as the above, the answer\nreturned would be, that he was pious who kept the laws of his _own_\ncountry, and not at all chargeable with impiety for the non-observance\nof those of _other_ lands; and that, again, he who was deemed guilty of\nimpiety among certain nations was not really so, when he worshipped his\nown gods, agreeably to his country\u2019s laws, although he made war against,\nand even feasted on,[936] those who were regarded as divinities among\nthose nations which possessed laws of an opposite kind. Now, observe\nhere whether these statements do not exhibit the greatest confusion of\nmind regarding the nature of what is just, and holy, and religious;\nsince there is no accurate definition laid down of these things, nor are\nthey described as having a peculiar character of their own, and stamping\nas religious those who act according to their injunctions. If, then,\nreligion, and piety, and righteousness belong to those things which are\nso only by comparison, so that the same act may be both pious and\nimpious, according to different relations and different laws, see\nwhether it will not follow that temperance[937] also is a thing of\ncomparison, and courage as well, and prudence, and the other virtues,\nthan which nothing could be more absurd! What we have said, however, is\nsufficient for the more general and simple class of answers to the\nallegations of Celsus. But as we think it likely that some of those who\nare accustomed to deeper investigation will fall in with this treatise,\nlet us venture to lay down some considerations of a profounder kind,\nconveying a mystical and secret view respecting the original\ndistribution of the various quarters of the earth among different\nsuperintending spirits; and let us prove to the best of our ability,\nthat our doctrine is free from the absurd consequences enumerated above.\n\nFootnote 936:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1fb6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 937:\n\n \u03c3\u03c9\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIX.\n\n\nIt appears to me, indeed, that Celsus has misunderstood some of the\ndeeper reasons relating to the arrangement of terrestrial affairs, some\nof which are touched upon[938] even in Grecian history, when certain of\nthose who are considered to be gods are introduced as having contended\nwith each other about the possession of Attica; while in the writings of\nthe Greek poets also, some who are called gods are represented as\nacknowledging that certain places here are preferred by them[939] before\nothers. The history of barbarian nations, moreover, and especially that\nof Egypt, contains some such allusions to the division of the so-called\nEgyptian nomes, when it states that Athena, who obtained Sa\u00efs by lot, is\nthe same who also has possession of Attica. And the learned among the\nEgyptians can enumerate innumerable instances of this kind, although I\ndo not know whether they include the Jews and their country in this\ndivision. And now, so far as testimonies outside the word of God bearing\non this point are concerned, enough have been adduced for the present.\nWe say, moreover, that our prophet of God and His genuine servant Moses,\nin his song in the book of Deuteronomy, makes a statement regarding the\nportioning out of the earth in the following terms: \u201cWhen the Most High\ndivided the nations, when He dispersed the sons of Adam, He set the\nbounds of the people according to the number of the angels of God; and\nthe Lord\u2019s portion was His people Jacob, and Israel the cord of His\ninheritance.\u201d[940] And regarding the distribution of the nations, the\nsame Moses, in his work entitled Genesis, thus expresses himself in the\nstyle of a historical narrative: \u201cAnd the whole earth was of one\nlanguage and of one speech; and it came to pass, as they journeyed from\nthe east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt\nthere.\u201d[941] A little further on he continues: \u201cAnd the Lord came down\nto see the city and the tower, which the children of men had built. And\nthe Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one\nlanguage; and this they have begun to do: and now nothing will be\nrestrained from them which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go\ndown, and there confound their language, that they may not understand\none another\u2019s speech. And the Lord scattered them abroad from thence\nupon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city and\nthe tower. Therefore is the name of it called Confusion;[942] because\nthe Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from\nthence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the\nearth.\u201d[943] In the treatise of Solomon, moreover, on \u201cWisdom,\u201d and on\nthe events at the time of the confusion of languages, when the division\nof the earth took place, we find the following regarding Wisdom:\n\u201cMoreover, the nations. in their wicked conspiracy being confounded, she\nfound out the righteous, and preserved him blameless unto God, and kept\nhim strong in his tender compassion towards his son.\u201d[944] But on these\nsubjects much, and that of a mystical kind, might be said; in keeping\nwith which is the following: \u201cIt is good to keep close the secret of a\nking,\u201d[945]\u2014in order that the doctrine of the entrance of souls into\nbodies (not, however, that of the transmigration from one body into\nanother) may not be thrown before the common understanding, nor what is\nholy given to the dogs, nor pearls be cast before swine. For such a\nprocedure would be impious, being equivalent to a betrayal of the\nmysterious declarations of God\u2019s wisdom, of which it has been well said:\n\u201cInto a malicious soul wisdom shall not enter, nor dwell in a body\nsubject to sin.\u201d[946] It is sufficient, however, to represent in the\nstyle of a historic narrative what is intended to convey a secret\nmeaning in the garb of history, that those who have the capacity may\nwork out for themselves all that relates to the subject.\n\nFootnote 938:\n\n \u1f10\u03c6\u03ac\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 939:\n\n \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 940:\n\n Cf. Deut. xxxii. 8, 9 (LXX.).\n\nFootnote 941:\n\n Cf. Gen. xi. 1, 2.\n\nFootnote 942:\n\n \u03c3\u03cd\u03b3\u03c7\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 943:\n\n Cf. Gen. xi. 5-9.\n\nFootnote 944:\n\n Cf. Wisd. of Sol. x. 5.\n\nFootnote 945:\n\n Cf. Tobit xii. 7.\n\nFootnote 946:\n\n Cf. Wisd. of Sol. i. 4.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXX.\n\n\n[The narrative, then, may be understood as follows.] All the people upon\nthe earth are to be regarded as having used one divine language, and so\nlong as they lived harmoniously together were preserved in the use of\nthis divine language, and they remained without moving from the east so\nlong as they were imbued with the sentiments of the \u201clight,\u201d and of the\n\u201creflection\u201d of the eternal light.[947] But when they departed from the\neast, and began to entertain sentiments alien to those of the east,[948]\nthey found a place in the land of Shinar (which, when interpreted, means\n\u201cgnashing of teeth,\u201d by way of indicating symbolically that they had\nlost the means of their support), and in it they took up their abode.\nThen, desiring to gather together material things,[949] and to join to\nheaven what had no natural affinity for it, that by means of material\nthings they might conspire against such as were immaterial, they said,\n\u201cCome, let us make bricks, and burn them with fire.\u201d Accordingly, when\nthey had hardened and compacted these materials of clay and matter, and\nhad shown their desire to make brick into stone, and clay into bitumen,\nand by these means to build a city and a tower, the head of which was,\nat least in their conception, to reach up to the heavens, after the\nmanner of the \u201chigh things which exalt themselves against the knowledge\nof God,\u201d each one was handed over (in proportion to the greater or less\ndeparture from the east which had taken place among them, and in\nproportion to the extent in which bricks had been converted into stones,\nand clay into bitumen, and building carried on out of these materials)\nto angels of character more or less severe, and of a nature more or less\nstern, until they had paid the penalty of their daring deeds; and they\nwere conducted by those angels, who imprinted on each his native\nlanguage, to the different parts of the earth according to their\ndeserts: some, for example, to a region of burning heat, others to a\ncountry which chastises its inhabitants by its cold; others, again, to a\nland exceedingly difficult of cultivation, others to one less so in\ndegree; while a fifth were brought into a land filled with wild beasts,\nand a sixth to a country comparatively free of these.\n\nFootnote 947:\n\n \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c6\u03c9\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c6\u03c9\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f00\u03ca\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03c5\u03b3\u03ac\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 948:\n\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03cc\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 949:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f55\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXI.\n\n\nNow, in the next place, if any one has the capacity, let him understand\nthat in what assumes the form of history, and which contains some things\nthat are literally true, while yet it conveys a deeper meaning, those\nwho preserved their original language continued, by reason of their not\nhaving migrated from the east, in possession of the east, and of their\neastern language. And let him notice, that these alone became the\nportion of the Lord, and His people who were called Jacob, and Israel\nthe cord of His inheritance; and these alone were governed by a ruler\nwho did not receive those who were placed under him for the purpose of\npunishment, as was the case with the others. Let him also, who has the\ncapacity to perceive as far as mortals may, observe that in the body\npolitic[950] of those who were assigned to the Lord as His pre-eminent\nportion, sins were committed, first of all, such as might be forgiven,\nand of such a nature as not to make the sinner worthy of entire\ndesertion, while subsequently they became more numerous, though still of\na nature to be pardoned. And while remarking that this state of matters\ncontinued for a considerable time, and that a remedy was always applied,\nand that after certain intervals these persons returned to their duty,\nlet him notice that they were given over, in proportion to their\ntransgressions, to those to whom had been assigned the other quarters of\nthe earth; and that, after being at first slightly punished, and having\nmade atonement,[951] they returned, as if they had undergone\ndiscipline,[952] to their proper habitations. Let him notice also that\nafterwards they were delivered over to rulers of a severer character\u2014to\nAssyrians and Babylonians, as the Scriptures would call them. In the\nnext place, notwithstanding that means of healing were being applied,\nlet him observe that they were still multiplying their transgressions,\nand that they were on that account dispersed into other regions by the\nrulers of the nations that oppressed them. And their own ruler\nintentionally overlooked their oppression at the hands of the rulers of\nthe other nations, in order that he also with good reason, as avenging\nhimself, having obtained power to tear away from the other nations as\nmany as he can, may do so, and enact for them laws, and point out a\nmanner of life agreeably to which they ought to live, that so he may\nconduct them to the end to which those of the former people were\nconducted who did not commit sin.\n\nFootnote 950:\n\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3.\n\nFootnote 951:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 952:\n\n \u1f61\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXII.\n\n\nAnd by this means let those who have the capacity of comprehending\ntruths so profound, learn that he to whom were allotted those who had\nnot formerly sinned is far more powerful than the others, since he has\nbeen able to make a selection of individuals from the portion of the\nwhole,[953] and to separate them from those who received them for the\npurpose of punishment, and to bring them under the influence of laws,\nand of a mode of life which helps to produce an oblivion of their former\ntransgressions. But, as we have previously observed, these remarks are\nto be understood as being made by us with a concealed meaning, by way of\npointing out the mistakes of those who asserted that \u201cthe various\nquarters of the earth were from the beginning distributed among\ndifferent superintending spirits, and being allotted among certain\ngoverning powers, were administered in this way;\u201d from which statement\nCelsus took occasion to make the remarks referred to. But since those\nwho wandered away from the east were delivered over, on account of their\nsins, to \u201ca reprobate mind,\u201d and to \u201cvile affections,\u201d and to\n\u201cuncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts,\u201d[954] in order that,\nbeing sated with sin, they might hate it, we shall refuse our assent to\nthe assertion of Celsus, that \u201cbecause of the superintending spirits\ndistributed among the different parts of the earth, what is done among\neach nation is rightly done;\u201d for our desire is to do what is _not_\nagreeable to these spirits.[955] For we see that it is a religious act\nto do away with the customs originally established in the various places\nby means of laws of a better and more divine character, which were\nenacted by Jesus, as one possessed of the greatest power, who has\nrescued us \u201cfrom the present evil world,\u201d and \u201cfrom the princes of the\nworld that come to nought;\u201d and that it is a mark of irreligion not to\nthrow ourselves at the feet of Him who has manifested Himself to be\nholier and more powerful than all other rulers, and to whom God said, as\nthe prophets many generations before predicted: \u201cAsk of me, and I shall\ngive Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of\nthe earth for Thy possession.\u201d[956] For He, too, has become the\n\u201cexpectation\u201d of us who from among the heathen have believed upon Him,\nand upon His Father, who is God over all things.\n\nFootnote 953:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 954:\n\n Cf. Rom. i. 24, 26, 28.\n\nFootnote 955:\n\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1, \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f45\u03c0\u03b7 \u1f96 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 956:\n\n Ps. ii. 8.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIII.\n\n\nThe remarks which we have made not only answer the statements of Celsus\nregarding the superintending spirits, but anticipate in some measure\nwhat he afterwards brings forward, when he says: \u201cLet the second party\ncome forward; and I shall ask them whence they come, and whom they\nregard as the originator of their ancestral customs. They will reply, No\none, because they spring from the same source as the Jews themselves,\nand derive their instruction and superintendence[957] from no other\nquarter, and notwithstanding they have revolted from the Jews.\u201d Each one\nof us, then, is come \u201cin the last days,\u201d when one Jesus has visited us,\nto the \u201cvisible mountain of the Lord,\u201d the Word that is above every\nword, and to the \u201chouse of God,\u201d which is \u201cthe church of the living God,\nthe pillar and ground of the truth.\u201d[958] And we notice how it is built\nupon \u201cthe tops of the mountains,\u201d _i.e._ the predictions of all the\nprophets, which are its foundations. And this house is exalted above the\nhills, _i.e._ those individuals among men who make a profession of\nsuperior attainments in wisdom and truth; and all the nations come to\nit, and the \u201cmany nations\u201d go forth, and say to one another, turning to\nthe religion which in the last days has shone forth through Jesus\nChrist: \u201cCome ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the\nhouse of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and we will\nwalk in them.\u201d[959] For the law came forth from the dwellers in Sion,\nand settled among us as a spiritual law. Moreover, the word of the Lord\ncame forth from that very Jerusalem, that it might be disseminated\nthrough all places, and might judge in the midst of the heathen,\nselecting those whom it sees to be submissive, and rejecting[960] the\ndisobedient, who are many in number. And to those who inquire of us\nwhence we come, or who is our founder,[961] we reply that we are come,\nagreeably to the counsels of Jesus, to \u201ccut down our hostile and\ninsolent \u2018wordy\u2019[962] swords into ploughshares, and to convert into\npruning-hooks the spears formerly employed in war.\u201d[963] For we no\nlonger take up \u201csword against nation,\u201d nor do we \u201clearn war any more,\u201d\nhaving become children of peace, for the sake of Jesus, who is our\nleader, instead of those whom our fathers followed, among whom we were\n\u201cstrangers to the covenant,\u201d and having received a law, for which we\ngive thanks to Him that rescued us from the error [of our ways], saying,\n\u201cOur fathers honoured lying idols, and there is not among them one that\ncauseth it to rain.\u201d[964] Our Superintendent, then, and Teacher, having\ncome forth from the Jews, regulates the whole world by the word of His\nteaching. And having made these remarks by way of anticipation, we have\nrefuted as well as we could the untrue statements of Celsus, by\nsubjoining the appropriate answer.\n\nFootnote 957:\n\n \u03c7\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 958:\n\n Cf. 1 Tim. iii. 15.\n\nFootnote 959:\n\n Cf. Isa. ii. 3.\n\nFootnote 960:\n\n \u1f10\u03bb\u03ad\u03bd\u03c7\u1fc3.\n\nFootnote 961:\n\n \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b7\u03b3\u03ad\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 962:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03cc\u03c8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f51\u03b2\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2\n \u1f04\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u03b6\u03b9\u03b2\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\n \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 963:\n\n Cf. Isa. ii. 4.\n\nFootnote 964:\n\n Cf. Jer. xvi. 19 and xiv. 22: \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u1fc6 \u1f10\u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd\n \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03c9\u03bb\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f51\u03b5\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIV.\n\n\nBut, that we may not pass without notice what Celsus has said between\nthese and the preceding paragraphs, let us quote his words: \u201cWe might\nadduce Herodotus as a witness on this point, for he expresses himself as\nfollows: \u2018For the people of the cities Marea and Apis, who inhabit those\nparts of Egypt that are adjacent to Libya, and who look upon themselves\nas Libyans, and not as Egyptians, finding their sacrificial worship\noppressive, and wishing not to be excluded from the use of cows\u2019 flesh,\nsent to the oracle of Jupiter Ammon, saying that there was no\nrelationship between them and the Egyptians, that they dwelt outside the\nDelta, that there was no community of sentiment between them and the\nEgyptians, and that they wished to be allowed to partake of all kinds of\nfood. But the god would not allow them to do as they desired, saying\nthat that country was a part of Egypt, which was watered by the\ninundation of the Nile, and that those were Egyptians who dwell to the\nsouth of the city of Elephantine, and drink of the river Nile.\u2019[965]\nSuch is the narrative of Herodotus. But,\u201d continues Celsus, \u201cAmmon in\ndivine things would not make a worse ambassador than the angels of the\nJews,[966] so that there is nothing wrong in each nation observing its\nestablished method of worship. Of a truth, we shall find very great\ndifferences prevailing among the nations, and yet each seems to deem its\nown by far the best. Those inhabitants of Ethiopia who dwell in Meroe\nworship Jupiter and Bacchus alone; the Arabians, Urania and Bacchus\nonly; all the Egyptians, Osiris and Isis; the Sa\u00eftes, Minerva; while the\nNaucratites have recently classed Serapis among their deities, and the\nrest according to their respective laws. And some abstain from the flesh\nof sheep, and others from that of crocodiles; others, again, from that\nof cows, while they regard swine\u2019s flesh with loathing. The Scythians,\nindeed, regard it as a noble act to banquet upon human beings. Among the\nIndians, too, there are some who deem themselves discharging a holy duty\nin eating their fathers, and this is mentioned in a certain passage by\nHerodotus. For the sake of credibility, I shall again quote his very\nwords, for he writes as follows: \u2018For if any one were to make this\nproposal to all men, viz. to bid him select out of all existing laws the\nbest, each would choose, after examination, those of his own country.\nMen each consider their own laws much the best, and therefore it is not\nlikely that any other than a madman would make these things a subject of\nridicule. But that such are the conclusions of all men regarding the\nlaws, may be determined by many other evidences, and especially by the\nfollowing illustration. Darius, during his reign, having summoned before\nhim those Greeks who happened to be present at the time, inquired of\nthem for how much they would be willing to eat their deceased fathers;\ntheir answer was, that for no consideration would they do such a thing.\nAfter this, Darius summoned those Indians who are called Callatians, who\nare in the habit of eating their parents, and asked of them in the\npresence of these Greeks, who learned what passed through an\ninterpreter, for what amount of money they would undertake to burn their\ndeceased fathers with fire; on which they raised a loud shout, and bade\nthe king say no more.\u2019[967] Such is the way, then, in which these\nmatters are regarded. And Pindar appears to me to be right in saying\nthat \u2018law\u2019 is the king of all things.\u201d[968]\n\nFootnote 965:\n\n Cf. Herodot. ii. 18.\n\nFootnote 966:\n\n \u1f41 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f0c\u03bc\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1, \u1f22 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f38\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 967:\n\n \u03b5\u1f50\u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 968:\n\n Cf. Herodot. iii. 38.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXV.\n\n\nThe argument of Celsus appears to point by these illustrations to this\nconclusion: that it is \u201can obligation incumbent on all men to live\naccording to their country\u2019s customs, in which case they will escape\ncensure; whereas the Christians, who have abandoned their native usages,\nand who are not one nation like the Jews, are to be blamed for giving\ntheir adherence to the teaching of Jesus.\u201d Let him then tell us whether\nit is a becoming thing for philosophers, and those who have been taught\nnot to yield to superstition, to abandon their country\u2019s customs, so as\nto eat of those articles of food which are prohibited in their\nrespective cities? or whether this proceeding of theirs is opposed to\nwhat is becoming? For if, on account of their philosophy, and the\ninstructions which they have received against superstition, they should\neat, in disregard of their native laws, what was interdicted by their\nfathers, why should the Christians (since the gospel requires _them_ not\nto busy themselves about statues and images, or even about any of the\ncreated works of God, but to ascend on high, and present the soul to the\nCreator), when acting in a similar manner to the philosophers, be\ncensured for so doing? But if, for the sake of defending the theses\nwhich he has proposed to himself, Celsus, or those who think with him,\nshould say, that even one who had studied philosophy would keep his\ncountry\u2019s laws, then philosophers in Egypt, for example, would act most\nridiculously in avoiding the eating of onions, in order to observe their\ncountry\u2019s laws, or certain parts of the body, as the head and shoulders,\nin order not to transgress the traditions of their fathers. And I do not\nspeak of those Egyptians who shudder with fear at the discharge of wind\nfrom the body, because if any one of these were to become a philosopher,\nand still observe the laws of his country, he would be a ridiculous\nphilosopher, acting very unphilosophically.[969] In the same way, then,\nhe who has been led by the gospel to worship the God of all things, and,\nfrom regard to his country\u2019s laws, lingers here below among images and\nstatues of men, and does not desire to ascend to the Creator, will\nresemble those who have indeed learned philosophy, but who are afraid of\nthings which ought to inspire no terrors, and who regard it as an act of\nimpiety to eat of those things which have been enumerated.\n\nFootnote 969:\n\n \u03b3\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVI.\n\n\nBut what sort of being is this Ammon of Herodotus, whose words Celsus\nhas quoted, as if by way of demonstrating how each one ought to keep his\ncountry\u2019s laws? For this Ammon would not allow the people of the cities\nof Marea and Apis, who inhabit the districts adjacent to Libya, to treat\nas a matter of indifference the use of cows\u2019 flesh, which is a thing not\nonly indifferent in its own nature, but which does not prevent a man\nfrom being noble and virtuous. If Ammon, then, forbade the use of cows\u2019\nflesh, because of the advantage which results from the use of the animal\nin the cultivation of the ground, and in addition to this, because it is\nby the female that the breed is increased, the account would possess\nmore plausibility. But now he simply requires that those who drink of\nthe Nile should observe the laws of the Egyptians regarding kine. And\nhereupon Celsus, taking occasion to pass a jest upon the employment of\nthe angels among the Jews as the ambassadors of God, says that \u201cAmmon\ndid not make a worse ambassador of divine things than did the angels of\nthe Jews,\u201d into the meaning of whose words and manifestations he\ninstituted no investigation; otherwise he would have seen, that it is\nnot for oxen that God is concerned, even where He may appear to\nlegislate for them, or for irrational animals, but that what is written\nfor the sake of men, under the appearance of relating to irrational\nanimals, contains certain truths of nature.[970] Celsus, moreover, says\nthat no wrong is committed by any one who wishes to observe the\nreligious worship sanctioned by the laws of his country; and it follows,\naccording to his view, that the Scythians commit no wrong, when, in\nconformity with their country\u2019s laws, they eat human beings. And those\nIndians who eat their own fathers are considered, according to Celsus,\nto do a religious, or at least not a wicked act. He adduces, indeed, a\nstatement of Herodotus which favours the principle that each one ought,\nfrom a sense of what is becoming, to obey his country\u2019s laws; and he\nappears to approve of the custom of those Indians called Callatians, who\nin the time of Darius devoured their parents, since, on Darius inquiring\nfor how great a sum of money they would be willing to lay aside this\nusage, they raised a loud shout, and bade the king say no more.\n\nFootnote 970:\n\n \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVII.\n\n\nAs there are, then, generally two laws presented to us, the one being\nthe law of nature, of which God would be the legislator, and the other\nbeing the written law of cities, it is a proper thing, when the written\nlaw is not opposed to that of God, for the citizens not to abandon it\nunder pretext of foreign customs; but when the law of nature, that is,\nthe law of God, commands what is opposed to the written law, observe\nwhether reason will not tell us to bid a long farewell to the written\ncode, and to the desire of its legislators, and to give ourselves up to\nthe legislator God, and to choose a life agreeable to His word, although\nin doing so it may be necessary to encounter dangers, and countless\nlabours, and even death and dishonour. For when there are some laws in\nharmony with the will of God, which are opposed to others which are in\nforce in cities, and when it is impracticable to please God (and those\nwho administer laws of the kind referred to), it would be absurd to\ncontemn those acts by means of which we may please the Creator of all\nthings, and to select those by which we shall become displeasing to God,\nthough we may satisfy unholy laws, and those who love them. But since it\nis reasonable in other matters to prefer the law of nature, which is the\nlaw of God, before the written law, which has been enacted by men in a\nspirit of opposition to the law of God, why should we not do this still\nmore in the case of those laws which relate to God? Neither shall we,\nlike the Ethiopians who inhabit the parts about Meroe, worship, as is\ntheir pleasure, Jupiter and Bacchus only; nor shall we at all reverence\nEthiopian gods in the Ethiopian manner; nor, like the Arabians, shall we\nregard Urania and Bacchus alone as divinities; nor in any degree at all\ndeities in which the difference of sex has been a ground of distinction\n(as among the Arabians, who worship Urania as a female, and Bacchus as a\nmale deity); nor shall we, like all the Egyptians, regard Osiris and\nIsis as gods; nor shall we enumerate Athena among these, as the Sa\u00eftes\nare pleased to do. And if to the ancient inhabitants of Naucratis it\nseemed good to worship other divinities, while their modern descendants\nhave begun quite recently to pay reverence to Serapis, who never was a\ngod at all, we shall not on that account assert that a new being who was\nnot formerly a god, nor at all known to men, is a deity. For the Son of\nGod, \u201cthe First-born of all creation,\u201d although He seemed recently to\nhave become incarnate, is not by any means on that account recent. For\nthe Holy Scriptures know Him to be the most ancient of all the works of\ncreation;[971] for it was to Him that God said regarding the creation of\nman, \u201cLet us make man in our image, after our likeness.\u201d[972]\n\nFootnote 971:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03cd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 972:\n\n Cf. Gen. i. 26.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVIII.\n\n\nI wish, however, to show how Celsus asserts without any good reason,\nthat each one reveres his domestic and native institutions. For he\ndeclares that \u201cthose Ethiopians who inhabit Meroe know only of two gods,\nJupiter and Bacchus, and worship these alone; and that the Arabians also\nknow only of two, viz. Bacchus, who is also an Ethiopian deity, and\nUrania, whose worship is confined to them.\u201d According to his account,\nneither do the Ethiopians worship Urania, nor the Arabians Jupiter. If,\nthen, an Ethiopian were from any accident to fall into the hands of the\nArabians, and were to be judged guilty of impiety because he did not\nworship Urania, and for this reason should incur the danger of death,\nwould it be proper for the Ethiopian to die, or to act contrary to his\ncountry\u2019s laws, and do obeisance to Urania? Now, if it would be proper\nfor him to act contrary to the laws of his country, he will do what is\nnot right, so far as the language of Celsus is any standard; while, if\nhe should be led away to death, let him show the reasonableness of\nselecting such a fate. I know not whether, if the Ethiopian doctrine\ntaught men to philosophize on the immortality of the soul, and the\nhonour which is paid to religion, they would reverence those as deities\nwho are deemed to be such by the laws of the country.[973] A similar\nillustration may be employed in the case of the Arabians, if from any\naccident they happened to visit the Ethiopians about Meroe. For, having\nbeen taught to worship Urania and Bacchus alone, they will not worship\nJupiter along with the Ethiopians; and if, adjudged guilty of impiety,\nthey should be led away to death, let Celsus tell us what it would be\nreasonable on their part to do. And with regard to the fables which\nrelate to Osiris and Isis, it is superfluous and out of place at present\nto enumerate them. For although an allegorical meaning may be given to\nthe fables, they will nevertheless teach us to offer divine worship to\ncold water, and to the earth, which is subject to men, and all the\nanimal creation. For in this way, I presume, they refer Osiris to water,\nand Isis to earth; while with regard to Serapis the accounts are\nnumerous and conflicting, to the effect that very recently he appeared\nin public, agreeably to certain juggling tricks performed at the desire\nof Ptolemy, who wished to show to the people of Alexandria as it were a\nvisible god. And we have read in the writings of Numenius the\nPythagorean regarding his formation, that he partakes of the essence of\nall the animals and plants that are under the control of nature, that he\nmay appear to have been fashioned into a god, not by the makers of\nimages alone, with the aid of profane mysteries, and juggling tricks\nemployed to invoke demons, but also by magicians and sorcerers, and\nthose demons who are bewitched by their incantations.[974]\n\nFootnote 973:\n\n This sentence is regarded by Guietus as an interpolation, which should\n be struck out of the text.\n\nFootnote 974:\n\n \u1f35\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u1fc3 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2\n \u03bc\u03b1\u03b3\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03bc\u03ac\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1ff3\u03b4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIX.\n\n\nWe must therefore inquire what may be fittingly eaten or not by the\nrational and gentle[975] animal, which acts always in conformity with\nreason; and not worship at random, sheep, or goats, or kine; to abstain\nfrom which is an act of moderation,[976] for much advantage is derived\nby men from these animals. Whereas, is it not the most foolish of all\nthings to spare crocodiles, and to treat _them_ as sacred to some\nfabulous divinity or other? For it is a mark of exceeding stupidity to\nspare those animals which do not spare us, and to bestow care on those\nwhich make a prey of human beings. But Celsus approves of those who, in\nkeeping with the laws of their country, worship and tend crocodiles, and\nnot a word does he say against them, while the Christians appear\ndeserving of censure, who have been taught to loath evil, and to turn\naway from wicked works, and to reverence and honour virtue as being\ngenerated by God, and as being His Son. For we must not, on account of\ntheir feminine name and nature, regard wisdom and righteousness as\nfemales;[977] for these things are in our view the Son of God, as His\ngenuine disciple has shown, when he said of Him, \u201cWho of God is made to\nus wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.\u201d[978]\nAnd although we may call Him a \u201csecond\u201d God, let men know that by the\nterm \u201csecond God\u201d we mean nothing else than a virtue capable of\nincluding all other virtues, and a reason capable of containing all\nreason whatsoever which exists in all things, which have arisen\nnaturally, directly, and for the general advantage, and which \u201creason,\u201d\nwe say, dwelt in the soul of Jesus, and was united to Him in a degree\nfar above all other souls, seeing He alone was enabled completely to\nreceive the highest share in the absolute reason, and the absolute\nwisdom, and the absolute righteousness.\n\nFootnote 975:\n\n \u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u1ff3.\n\nFootnote 976:\n\n \u03bc\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 977:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b8\u03b7\u03bb\u03c5\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c3\u03af\u1fb3 \u03b8\u03ae\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 978:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. i. 30.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XL.\n\n\nBut since, after Celsus had spoken to the above effect of the different\nkinds of laws, he adds the following remark, \u201cPindar appears to me to be\ncorrect in saying that law is king of all things,\u201d let us proceed to\ndiscuss this assertion. What law do you mean to say, good sir, is \u201cking\nof all things?\u201d If you mean those which exist in the various cities,\nthen such an assertion is not true. For all men are not governed by the\nsame law. You ought to have said that \u201claws are kings of all men,\u201d for\nin every nation some law is king of all. But if you mean that which is\nlaw in the proper sense, then it is this which is by nature \u201cking of all\nthings;\u201d although there are some individuals who, having like robbers\nabandoned the law, deny its validity, and live lives of violence and\ninjustice. We Christians, then, who have come to the knowledge of the\nlaw which is by nature \u201cking of all things,\u201d and which is the same with\nthe law of God, endeavour to regulate our lives by its prescriptions,\nhaving bidden a long farewell to those of an unholy kind.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLI.\n\n\nLet us notice the charges which are next advanced by Celsus, in which\nthere is exceedingly little that has reference to the Christians, as\nmost of them refer to the Jews. His words are: \u201cIf, then, in these\nrespects the Jews were carefully to preserve their own law, they are not\nto be blamed for so doing, but those persons rather who have forsaken\ntheir own usages, and adopted those of the Jews. And if they pride\nthemselves on it, as being possessed of superior wisdom, and keep aloof\nfrom intercourse with others, as not being equally pure with themselves,\nthey have already heard that their doctrine concerning heaven is not\npeculiar to them, but, to pass by all others, is one which has long ago\nbeen received by the Persians, as Herodotus somewhere mentions. \u2018For\nthey have a custom,\u2019 he says, \u2018of going up to the tops of the mountains,\nand of offering sacrifices to Jupiter, giving the name of Jupiter to the\nwhole circle of the heavens.\u2019[979] And I think,\u201d continues Celsus, \u201cthat\nit makes no difference whether you call the highest being Zeus, or Zen,\nor Adonai, or Sabaoth, or Ammoun like the Egyptians, or Papp\u00e6us like the\nScythians. Nor would they be deemed at all holier than others in this\nrespect, that they observe the rite of circumcision, for this was done\nby the Egyptians and Colchians before them; nor because they abstain\nfrom swine\u2019s flesh, for the Egyptians practised abstinence not only from\nit, but from the flesh of goats, and sheep, and oxen, and fishes as\nwell; while Pythagoras and his disciples do not eat beans, nor anything\nthat contains life. It is not probable, however, that they enjoy God\u2019s\nfavour, or are loved by Him differently from others, or that angels were\nsent from heaven to them alone, as if they had had allotted to them\n\u2018some region of the blessed,\u2019[980] for we see both themselves and the\ncountry of which they were deemed worthy. Let this band,[981] then, take\nits departure, after paying the penalty of its vaunting, not having a\nknowledge of the great God, but being led away and deceived by the\nartifices of Moses, having become his pupil to no good end.\u201d\n\nFootnote 979:\n\n Cf. Herodot. i. 135.\n\nFootnote 980:\n\n \u03bf\u1f37\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03ae \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03ac\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 981:\n\n \u03c7\u03bf\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLII.\n\n\nIt is evident that, by the preceding remarks, Celsus charges the Jews\nwith falsely giving themselves out as the chosen portion of the Supreme\nGod above all other nations. And he accuses them of boasting, because\nthey gave out that they knew the great God, although they did not really\nknow Him, but were led away by the artifices of Moses, and were deceived\nby him, and became his disciples to no good end. Now we have in the\npreceding pages already spoken in part of the venerable and\ndistinguished polity of the Jews, when it existed amongst them as a\nsymbol of the city of God, and of His temple, and of the sacrificial\nworship offered in it and at the altar of sacrifice. But if any one were\nto turn his attention to the meaning of the legislator, and to the\nconstitution which he established, and were to examine the various\npoints relating to him, and compare them with the present method of\nworship among other nations, there are none which he would admire to a\ngreater degree; because, so far as can be accomplished among mortals,\neverything that was not of advantage to the human race was withheld from\nthem, and only those things which are useful bestowed. And for this\nreason they had neither gymnastic contests, nor scenic representations,\nnor horse-races; nor were there among them women who sold their beauty\nto any one who wished to have sexual intercourse without offspring, and\nto cast contempt upon the nature of human generation. And what an\nadvantage was it to be taught from their tender years to ascend above\nall visible nature, and to hold the belief that God was not fixed\nanywhere within its limits, but to look for Him on high, and beyond the\nsphere of all bodily substance![982] And how great was the advantage\nwhich they enjoyed in being instructed almost from their birth, and as\nsoon as they could speak,[983] in the immortality of the soul, and in\nthe existence of courts of justice under the earth, and in the rewards\nprovided for those who have lived righteous lives! These truths, indeed,\nwere proclaimed in the veil of fable to children, and to those whose\nviews of things were childish; while to those who were already occupied\nin investigating the truth, and desirous of making progress therein,\nthese fables, so to speak, were transfigured into the truths which were\nconcealed within them. And I consider that it was in a manner worthy of\ntheir name as the \u201cportion of God\u201d that they despised all kinds of\ndivination, as that which bewitches men to no purpose, and which\nproceeds rather from wicked demons than from anything of a better\nnature; and sought the knowledge of future events in the souls of those\nwho, owing to their high degree of purity, received the spirit of the\nSupreme God.\n\nFootnote 982:\n\n \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 983:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIII.\n\n\nBut what need is there to point out how agreeable to sound reason, and\nunattended with injury either to master or slave, was the law that one\nof the same faith[984] should not be allowed to continue in slavery more\nthan six years?[985] The Jews, then, cannot be said to preserve their\nown law in the same points with the other nations. For it would be\ncensurable in them, and would involve a charge of insensibility to the\nsuperiority of their law, if they were to believe that they had been\nlegislated for in the same way as the other nations among the heathen.\nAnd although Celsus will not admit it, the Jews nevertheless _are_\npossessed of a wisdom superior not only to that of the multitude, but\nalso of those who have the appearance of philosophers; because those who\nengage in philosophical pursuits, after the utterance of the most\nvenerable philosophical sentiments, fall away into the worship of idols\nand demons, whereas the very lowest Jew directs his look to the Supreme\nGod alone; and they do well, indeed, so far as this point is concerned,\nto pride themselves thereon, and to keep aloof from the society of\nothers as accursed and impious. And would that they had not sinned, and\ntransgressed the law, and slain the prophets in former times, and in\nthese latter days conspired against Jesus, that we might be in\npossession of a pattern of a heavenly city which even Plato would have\nsought to describe; although I doubt whether he could have accomplished\nas much as was done by Moses and those who followed him, who nourished a\n\u201cchosen generation,\u201d and \u201ca holy nation,\u201d dedicated to God, with words\nfree from all superstition.\n\nFootnote 984:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f41\u03c1\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03bf\u03b3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 985:\n\n Cf. Ex. xxi. 2 and Jer. xxxiv. 14.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIV.\n\n\nBut as Celsus would compare the venerable customs of the Jews with the\nlaws of certain nations, let us proceed to look at them. He is of\nopinion, accordingly, that there is no difference between the doctrine\nregarding \u201cheaven\u201d and that regarding \u201cGod;\u201d and he says that \u201cthe\nPersians, like the Jews, offer sacrifices to Jupiter upon the tops of\nthe mountains,\u201d\u2014not observing that, as the Jews were acquainted with one\nGod, so they had only one holy house of prayer, and one altar of whole\nburnt-offerings, and one censer for incense, and one high priest of God.\nThe Jews, then, had nothing in common with the Persians, who ascend the\nsummits of their mountains, which are many in number, and offer up\nsacrifices which have nothing in common with those which are regulated\nby the Mosaic code,\u2014in conformity to which the Jewish priests \u201cserved\nunto the example and shadow of heavenly things,\u201d explaining\nenigmatically the object of the law regarding the sacrifices, and the\nthings of which these sacrifices were the symbols. The Persians\ntherefore may call the \u201cwhole circle of heaven\u201d Jupiter; but we maintain\nthat \u201cthe heaven\u201d is neither Jupiter nor God, as we indeed know that\ncertain beings of a class inferior to God have ascended above the\nheavens and all visible nature: and in this sense we understand the\nwords, \u201cPraise God, ye heaven of heavens, and ye waters that be above\nthe heavens; let them praise the name of the Lord.\u201d[986]\n\nFootnote 986:\n\n Cf. Ps. cxlviii. 4, 5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLV.\n\n\nAs Celsus, however, is of opinion that it matters nothing whether the\nhighest being be called Jupiter, or Zen, or Adonai, or Sabaoth, or\nAmmoun (as the Egyptians term him), or Papp\u00e6us (as the Scythians entitle\nhim), let us discuss the point for a little, reminding the reader at the\nsame time of what has been said above upon this question, when the\nlanguage of Celsus led us to consider the subject. And now we maintain\nthat the nature of names is not, as Aristotle supposes, an enactment of\nthose who impose them.[987] For the languages which are prevalent among\nmen do not derive their origin from men, as is evident to those who are\nable to ascertain the nature of the charms which are appropriated by the\ninventors of the languages differently, according to the various\ntongues, and to the varying pronunciations of the names, on which we\nhave spoken briefly in the preceding pages, remarking that when those\nnames which in a certain language were possessed of a natural power were\ntranslated into another, they were no longer able to accomplish what\nthey did before when uttered in their native tongues. And the same\npeculiarity is found to apply to men; for if we were to translate the\nname of one who was called from his birth by a certain appellation in\nthe Greek language into the Egyptian or Roman, or any other tongue, we\ncould not make him do or suffer the same things which he would have done\nor suffered under the appellation first bestowed upon him. Nay, even if\nwe translated into the Greek language the name of an individual who had\nbeen originally invoked in the Roman tongue, we could not produce the\nresult which the incantation professed itself capable of accomplishing\nhad it preserved the name first conferred upon him. And if these\nstatements are true when spoken of the names of _men_, what are we to\nthink of those which are transferred, for any cause whatever, to the\n_Deity_? For example, something is transferred[988] from the name\nAbraham when translated into Greek, and something is signified by that\nof Isaac, and also by that of Jacob; and accordingly, if any one, either\nin an invocation or in swearing an oath, were to use the expression,\n\u201cthe God of Abraham,\u201d and \u201cthe God of Isaac,\u201d and \u201cthe God of Jacob,\u201d he\nwould produce certain effects, either owing to the nature of these names\nor to their powers, since even demons are vanquished and become\nsubmissive to him who pronounces these names; whereas if we say, \u201cthe\ngod of the chosen father of the echo, and the god of laughter, and the\ngod of him who strikes with the heel,\u201d[989] the mention of the name is\nattended with no result, as is the case with other names possessed of no\npower. And in the same way, if we translate the word \u201cIsrael\u201d into Greek\nor any other language, we shall produce no result; but if we retain it\nas it is, and join it to those expressions to which such as are skilled\nin these matters think it ought to be united, there would then follow\nsome result from the pronunciation of the word which would accord with\nthe professions of those who employ such invocations. And we may say the\nsame also of the pronunciation of \u201cSabaoth,\u201d a word which is frequently\nemployed in incantations; for if we translate the term into \u201cLord of\nhosts,\u201d or \u201cLord of armies,\u201d or \u201cAlmighty\u201d (different acceptations of it\nhaving been proposed by the interpreters), we shall accomplish nothing;\nwhereas if we retain the original pronunciation, we shall, as those who\nare skilled in such matters maintain, produce some effect. And the same\nobservation holds good of Adonai. If, then, neither \u201cSabaoth\u201d nor\n\u201cAdonai,\u201d when rendered into what appears to be their meaning in the\nGreek tongue, can accomplish anything, how much less would be the result\namong those who regard it as a matter of indifference whether the\nhighest being be called Jupiter, or Zen, or Adonai, or Sabaoth!\n\nFootnote 987:\n\n \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f21 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f40\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u1f76 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 988:\n\n \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b9, \u03c6\u03b5\u03c1\u2019 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd. In the editions of H\u0153schel and\n Spencer, \u03c4\u03b9 is wanting.\n\nFootnote 989:\n\n \u1f41 \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f20\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f41 \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bb\u03c9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f41 \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6. Cf. note in Benedictine ed.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVI.\n\n\nIt was for these and similar mysterious reasons, with which Moses and\nthe prophets were acquainted, that they forbade the name of other gods\nto be pronounced by him who bethought himself of praying to the one\nSupreme God alone, or to be remembered by a heart which had been taught\nto be pure from all foolish thoughts and words. And for these reasons we\nshould prefer to endure all manner of suffering rather than acknowledge\nJupiter to be God. For we do not consider Jupiter and Sabaoth to be the\nsame, nor Jupiter to be at all divine, but that some demon, unfriendly\nto men and to the true God, rejoices under this title.[990] And although\nthe Egyptians were to hold Ammon before us under threat of death, we\nwould rather die than address him as God, it being a name used in all\nprobability in certain Egyptian incantations in which this demon is\ninvoked. And although the Scythians may call Papp\u00e6us the supreme God,\nyet we will not yield our assent to this; granting, indeed, that there\n_is_ a Supreme Deity, although we do not give the name Papp\u00e6us to Him as\nHis proper title, but regard it as one which is agreeable to the demon\nto whom was allotted the desert of Scythia, with its people and its\nlanguage. He, however, who gives God His title in the Scythian tongue,\nor in the Egyptian or in any language in which he has been brought up,\nwill not be guilty of sin.\n\nFootnote 990:\n\n \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f40\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVII.\n\n\nNow the reason why circumcision is practised among the Jews is not the\nsame as that which explains its existence among the Egyptians and\nColchians, and therefore it is not to be considered the same\ncircumcision. And as he who sacrifices does not sacrifice to the same\ngod, although he appears to perform the rite of sacrifice in a similar\nmanner, and he who offers up prayer does not pray to the same divinity,\nalthough he asks the same things in his supplication; so, in the same\nway, if one performs the rite of circumcision, it by no means follows\nthat it is not a different act from the circumcision performed upon\nanother. For the purpose, and the law, and the wish of him who performs\nthe rite, place the act in a different category. But that the whole\nsubject may be still better understood, we have to remark that the term\nfor \u201crighteousness\u201d[991] is the same among all the Greeks; but\nrighteousness is shown to be one thing according to the view of\nEpicurus; and another according to the Stoics, who deny the threefold\ndivision of the soul; and a different thing again according to the\nfollowers of Plato, who hold that righteousness is the proper business\nof the parts of the soul.[992] And so also the \u201ccourage\u201d[993] of\nEpicurus is one thing, who would undergo some labours in order to escape\nfrom a greater number; and a different thing that of the philosopher of\nthe Porch, who would choose all virtue for its own sake; and a different\nthing still that of Plato, who maintains that virtue itself is the act\nof the irascible part of the soul, and who assigns to it a place about\nthe breast.[994] And so circumcision will be a different thing according\nto the varying opinions of those who undergo it. But on such a subject\nit is unnecessary to speak on this occasion in a treatise like the\npresent; for whoever desires to see what led us to the subject, can read\nwhat we have said upon it in the Epistle of Paul to the Romans.\n\nFootnote 991:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7.\n\nFootnote 992:\n\n \u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 993:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 994:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b8\u03c9\u03c1\u03ac\u03ba\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVIII.\n\n\nAlthough the Jews, then, pride themselves on circumcision, they will\nseparate it not only from that of the Colchians and Egyptians, but also\nfrom that of the Arabian Ishmaelites; and yet the latter was derived\nfrom their ancestor Abraham, the father of Ishmael, who underwent the\nrite of circumcision along with his father. The Jews say that the\ncircumcision performed on the eighth day is the principal circumcision,\nand that which is performed according to circumstances is different; and\nprobably it was performed on account of the hostility of some angel\ntowards the Jewish nation, who had the power to injure such of them as\nwere not circumcised, but was powerless against those who had undergone\nthe rite. This may be said to appear from what is written in the book of\nExodus, where the angel before the circumcision of Eliezer[995] was able\nto work against[996] Moses, but could do nothing after his son was\ncircumcised. And when Zipporah had learned this, she took a pebble and\ncircumcised her child, and is recorded, according to the reading of the\ncommon copies, to have said, \u201cThe blood of my child\u2019s circumcision is\nstayed,\u201d but according to the Hebrew text, \u201cA bloody husband art thou to\nme.\u201d[997] For she had known the story about a certain angel having power\nbefore the shedding of the blood, but who became powerless through the\nblood of circumcision. For which reason the words were addressed to\nMoses, \u201cA bloody husband art thou to me.\u201d But these things, which appear\nrather of a curious nature, and not level to the comprehension of the\nmultitude, I have ventured to treat at such length; and now I shall only\nadd, as becomes a Christian, one thing more, and shall then pass on to\nwhat follows. For this angel might have had power, I think, over those\nof the people who were not circumcised, and generally over all who\nworshipped only the Creator; and this power lasted so long as Jesus had\nnot assumed a human body. But when He had done this, and had undergone\nthe rite of circumcision in His own person, all the power of the angel\nover those who practise the same worship, but are not circumcised,[998]\nwas abolished; for Jesus reduced it to nought by [the power of] His\nunspeakable divinity. And therefore His disciples are forbidden to\ncircumcise themselves, and are reminded [by the apostle]: \u201cIf ye be\ncircumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.\u201d[999]\n\nFootnote 995:\n\n Cf. Ex. iv. 24, 25. Eliezer was one of the two sons of Moses. Cf. Ex.\n xviii. 4.\n\nFootnote 996:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u039c\u03c9\u03cb\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 997:\n\n Cf. Ex. iv. 25, 26.\n\nFootnote 998:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u1fc3 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03c2. Boherellus\n inserts \u03bc\u1f74 before \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, which has been adopted in the text.\n\nFootnote 999:\n\n Gal. v. 2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIX.\n\n\nBut neither do the Jews pride themselves upon abstaining from swine\u2019s\nflesh, as if it were some great thing; but upon their having ascertained\nthe nature of clean and unclean animals, and the cause of the\ndistinction, and of swine being classed among the unclean. And these\ndistinctions were signs of certain things until the advent of Jesus;\nafter whose coming it was said to His disciple, who did not yet\ncomprehend the doctrine concerning these matters, but who said, \u201cNothing\nthat is common or unclean hath entered into my mouth,\u201d[1000] \u201cWhat God\nhath cleansed, call not thou common.\u201d It therefore in no way affects\neither the Jews or us that the Egyptian priests abstain not only from\nthe flesh of swine, but also from that of goats, and sheep, and oxen,\nand fish. But since it is not that \u201cwhich entereth into the mouth that\ndefiles a man,\u201d and since \u201cmeat does not commend us to God,\u201d we do not\nset great store on refraining from eating, nor yet are we induced to eat\nfrom a gluttonous appetite. And therefore, so far as we are concerned,\nthe followers of Pythagoras, who abstain from all things that contain\nlife, may do as they please; only observe the different reason for\nabstaining from things that have life on the part of the Pythagoreans\nand our ascetics. For the former abstain on account of the fable about\nthe transmigration of souls, as the poet says:\n\n \u201cAnd some one, lifting up his beloved son,\n Will slay him after prayer; O how foolish he!\u201d[1001]\n\nWe, however, when we do abstain, do so because \u201cwe keep under our body,\nand bring it into subjection,\u201d[1002] and desire \u201cto mortify our members\nthat are upon the earth, fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection,\nevil concupiscence;\u201d[1003] and we use every effort to \u201cmortify the deeds\nof the flesh.\u201d[1004]\n\nFootnote 1000:\n\n Cf. Acts x. 14.\n\nFootnote 1001:\n\n A quotation:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03c5\u1f31\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2,\n \u03c3\u03c6\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1 \u03bd\u03ae\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n \u2014A verse of Empedocles, quoted by Plutarch, _de Superstitione_, c.\n xii. Spencer. Cf. note _in loc._ in Benedictine edition.\n\nFootnote 1002:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. ix. 27.\n\nFootnote 1003:\n\n Cf. Col. iii. 5.\n\nFootnote 1004:\n\n Cf. Rom. viii. 13.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter L.\n\n\nCelsus, still expressing his opinion regarding the Jews, says: \u201cIt is\nnot probable that they are in great favour with God, or are regarded by\nHim with more affection than others, or that angels are sent by Him to\nthem alone, as if to them had been allotted some region of the blessed.\nFor we may see both the people themselves, and the country of which they\nwere deemed worthy.\u201d We shall refute this, by remarking that it is\nevident that this nation _was_ in great favour with God, from the fact\nthat the God who presides over all things was called the God of the\nHebrews, even by those who were aliens to our faith. And because they\nwere in favour with God, they were not abandoned by Him;[1005] but\nalthough few in number, they continued to enjoy the protection of the\ndivine power, so that in the reign of Alexander of Macedon they\nsustained no injury from him, although they refused, on account of\ncertain covenants and oaths, to take up arms against Darius. They say\nthat on that occasion the Jewish high priest, clothed in his sacred\nrobe, received obeisance from Alexander, who declared that he had beheld\nan individual arrayed in this fashion, who announced to him in his sleep\nthat he was to be the subjugator of the whole of Asia. Accordingly, we\nChristians maintain that \u201cit was the fortune of that people in a\nremarkable degree to enjoy God\u2019s favour, and to be loved by Him in a way\ndifferent from others;\u201d but that this economy of things and this divine\nfavour were transferred to us, after Jesus had conveyed the power which\nhad been manifested among the Jews to those who had become converts to\nHim from among the heathen. And for this reason, although the Romans\ndesired to perpetrate many atrocities against the Christians, in order\nto ensure their extermination, they were unsuccessful; for there was a\ndivine hand which fought on their behalf, and whose desire it was that\nthe word of God should spread from one corner of the land of Judea\nthroughout the whole human race.\n\nFootnote 1005:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5 \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf. The negative particle\n (\u03bf\u1f50\u03ba) is wanting in the editions of H\u0153schel and Spencer, but is found\n in the Royal, Basil, and Vatican MSS. Guietus would delete \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd (which\n emendation has been adopted in the translation), while Boherellus\n would read \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 instead.\u2014RU\u00c6US.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LI.\n\n\nBut seeing that we have answered to the best of our ability the charges\nbrought by Celsus against the Jews and their doctrine, let us proceed to\nconsider what follows, and to prove that it is no empty boast on our\npart when we make a profession of knowing the great God, and that we\nhave not been led away by any juggling tricks[1006] of Moses (as Celsus\nimagines), or even of our own Saviour Jesus; but that for a good end we\nlisten to the God who speaks in Moses, and have accepted Jesus, whom he\ntestifies to be God, as the Son of God, in hope of receiving the best\nrewards if we regulate our lives according to His word. And we shall\nwillingly pass over what we have already stated by way of anticipation\non the points, \u201cwhence we came, and who is our leader, and what law\nproceeded from Him.\u201d And if Celsus would maintain that there is no\ndifference between us and the Egyptians, who worship the goat, or the\nram, or the crocodile, or the ox, or the river-horse, or the dog-faced\nbaboon,[1007] or the cat, he can ascertain if it be so, and so may any\nother who thinks alike on the subject. We, however, have to the best of\nour ability defended ourselves at great length in the preceding pages on\nthe subject of the honour which we render to our Jesus, pointing out\nthat we have found the better part;[1008] and that in showing that the\ntruth which is contained in the teaching of Jesus Christ is pure and\nunmixed with error, we are not commending ourselves, but our Teacher, to\nwhom testimony was borne through many witnesses by the Supreme God and\nthe prophetic writings among the Jews, and by the very clearness of the\ncase itself, for it is demonstrated that He could not have accomplished\nsuch mighty works without the divine help.\n\nFootnote 1006:\n\n \u03b3\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3.\n\nFootnote 1007:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03ba\u03ad\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1008:\n\n \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f55\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LII.\n\n\nBut the statement of Celsus which we wish to examine at present is the\nfollowing: \u201cLet us then pass over the refutations which might be adduced\nagainst the claims of their teacher, and let him be regarded as really\nan angel. But is he the first and only one who came [to men], or were\nthere others before him? If they should say that he is the only one,\nthey would be convicted of telling lies against themselves. For they\nassert that on many occasions others came, and sixty or seventy of them\ntogether, and that these became wicked, and were cast under the earth\nand punished with chains, and that from this source originate the warm\nsprings, which are their tears; and, moreover, that there came an angel\nto the tomb of this said being\u2014according to some, indeed, one, but\naccording to others, two\u2014who answered the women that he had arisen. For\nthe Son of God could not himself, as it seems, open the tomb, but needed\nthe help of another to roll away the stone. And again, on account of the\npregnancy of Mary, there came an angel to the carpenter, and once more\nanother angel, in order that they might take up the young child and flee\naway [into Egypt]. But what need is there to particularize everything,\nor to count up the number of angels said to have been sent to Moses, and\nothers amongst them? If, then, others were sent, it is manifest that he\nalso came from the same God. But he may be supposed to have the\nappearance of announcing something of greater importance [than those who\npreceded him], as if the Jews had been committing sin, or corrupting\ntheir religion, or doing deeds of impiety; for these things are\nobscurely hinted at.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIII.\n\n\nThe preceding remarks might suffice as an answer to the charges of\nCelsus, so far as regards those points in which our Saviour Jesus Christ\nis made the subject of special investigation. But that we may avoid the\nappearance of intentionally passing over any portion of his work, as if\nwe were unable to meet him, let us, even at the risk of being\ntautological (since we are challenged to this by Celsus), endeavour as\nfar as we can with all due brevity to continue our discourse, since\nperhaps something either more precise or more novel may occur to us upon\nthe several topics. He says, indeed, that \u201che has omitted the\nrefutations which have been adduced against the claims which Christians\nadvance on behalf of their teacher,\u201d although he has _not_ omitted\nanything which he was able to bring forward, as is manifest from his\nprevious language, but makes this statement only as an empty rhetorical\ndevice. That we are not refuted, however, on the subject of our great\nSaviour, although the accuser may _appear_ to refute us, will be\nmanifest to those who peruse in a spirit of truth-loving investigation\nall that is predicted and recorded of Him. And, in the next place, since\nhe considers that he makes a concession in saying of the Saviour, \u201cLet\nhim appear to be really an angel,\u201d we reply that we do not accept of\nsuch a concession from Celsus; but we look to the work of Him who came\nto visit the whole human race in His word and teaching, as each one of\nHis adherents was capable of receiving Him. And this was the work of one\nwho, as the prophecy regarding Him said, was not simply an angel, but\nthe \u201cAngel of the great council:\u201d[1009] for He announced to men the\ngreat counsel of the God and Father of all things regarding them,\n[saying] of those who yield themselves up to a life of pure religion,\nthat they ascend by means of their great deeds to God; but of those who\ndo not adhere to Him, that they place themselves at a distance from God,\nand journey on to destruction through their unbelief of Him. He then\ncontinues: \u201cIf even the angel came to men, is he the first and only one\nwho came, or did others come on former occasions?\u201d And he thinks he can\nmeet either of these dilemmas at great length, although there is not a\nsingle real Christian who asserts that Christ was the only being that\nvisited the human race. For, as Celsus says, \u201cIf they should say the\nonly one,\u201d there are others who appeared to different individuals.\n\nFootnote 1009:\n\n Cf. Isa. ix. 6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIV.\n\n\nIn the next place, he proceeds to answer himself as he thinks fit in the\nfollowing terms: \u201cAnd so he is not the only one who is recorded to have\nvisited the human race, as even those who, under pretext of teaching in\nthe name of Jesus, have apostatized from the Creator as an inferior\nbeing, and have given in their adherence to one who is a superior God\nand father of him who visited [the world], assert that before him\ncertain beings came from the Creator to visit the human race.\u201d Now, as\nit is in the spirit of truth that we investigate all that relates to the\nsubject, we shall remark that it is asserted by Apelles, the celebrated\ndisciple of Marcion, who became the founder of a certain sect, and who\ntreated the writings of the Jews as fabulous, that Jesus is the only one\nthat came to visit the human race. Even against him, then, who\nmaintained that Jesus was the only one that came from God to men, it\nwould be in vain for Celsus to quote the statements regarding the\ndescent of other angels, seeing Apelles discredits, as we have already\nmentioned, the miraculous narratives of the Jewish Scriptures; and much\nmore will he decline to admit what Celsus has adduced, from not\nunderstanding the contents of the book of Enoch. No one, then, convicts\nus of falsehood, or of making contradictory assertions, as if we\nmaintained both that our Saviour was the only being that ever came to\nmen, and yet that many others came on different occasions. And in a most\nconfused manner, moreover, does he adduce, when examining the subject of\nthe visits of angels to men, what he has derived, without seeing its\nmeaning, from the contents of the book of Enoch; for he does not appear\nto have read the passages in question, nor to have been aware that the\nbooks which bear the name of Enoch do not at all circulate in the\nchurches as divine, although it is from this source that he might be\nsupposed to have obtained the statement, that \u201csixty or seventy angels\ndescended at the same time, who fell into a state of wickedness.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LV.\n\n\nBut, that we may grant to him in a spirit of candour what he has not\ndiscovered in the contents of the book of Genesis, that \u201cthe sons of\nGod, seeing the daughters of men, that they were fair, took to them\nwives of all whom they chose,\u201d we shall nevertheless even on this point\npersuade those who are capable of understanding the meaning of the\nprophet, that even before us there was one who referred this narrative\nto the doctrine regarding souls, which became possessed with a desire\nfor the corporeal life of men, and this in metaphorical language, he\nsaid, was termed \u201cdaughters of men.\u201d But whatever may be the meaning of\nthe \u201csons of God desiring to possess the daughters of men,\u201d it will not\nat all contribute to prove that Jesus was not the only one who visited\nmankind as an angel, and who manifestly became the Saviour and\nbenefactor of all those who depart from the flood of wickedness. Then,\nmixing up and confusing whatever he had at any time heard, or had\nanywhere found written\u2014whether held to be of divine origin among\nChristians or not\u2014he adds: \u201cThe sixty or seventy who descended together\nwere cast under the earth, and were punished with chains.\u201d And he quotes\n(as from the book of Enoch, but without naming it) the following: \u201cAnd\nhence it is that the tears of these angels are warm springs,\u201d\u2014a thing\nneither mentioned nor heard of in the churches of God! For no one was\never so foolish as to materialize into human tears those which were shed\nby the angels who had come down from heaven. And if it were right to\npass a jest upon what is advanced against us in a serious spirit by\nCelsus, we might observe that no one would ever have said that hot\nsprings, the greater part of which are fresh water, were the tears of\nthe angels, since tears are saltish in their nature, unless indeed the\nangels, in the opinion of Celsus, shed tears which are fresh.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVI.\n\n\nProceeding immediately after to mix up and compare with one another\nthings that are dissimilar, and incapable of being united, he subjoins\nto his statement regarding the sixty or seventy angels who came down\nfrom heaven, and who, according to him, shed fountains of warm water for\ntears, the following: \u201cIt is related also that there came to the tomb of\nJesus himself, according to some, two angels, according to others, one;\u201d\nhaving failed to notice, I think, that Matthew and Mark speak of one,\nand Luke and John of two, which statements are not contradictory. For\nthey who mention \u201cone,\u201d say that it was he who rolled away the stone\nfrom the sepulchre; while they who mention \u201ctwo,\u201d refer to those who\nappeared in shining raiment to the women that repaired to the sepulchre,\nor who were seen within sitting in white garments. Each of these\noccurrences might now be demonstrated to have actually taken place, and\nto be indicative of a figurative meaning existing in these \u201cphenomena,\u201d\n[and intelligible] to those who were prepared to behold the resurrection\nof the Word. Such a task, however, does not belong to our present\npurpose, but rather to an exposition of the gospel.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVII.\n\n\nNow, that miraculous appearances have sometimes been witnessed by human\nbeings, is related by the Greeks; and not only by those of them who\nmight be suspected of composing fabulous narratives, but also by those\nwho have given every evidence of being genuine philosophers, and of\nhaving related with perfect truth what had happened to them. Accounts of\nthis kind we have read in the writings of Chrysippus of Soli, and also\nsome things of the same kind relating to Pythagoras; as well as in some\nof the more recent writers who lived a very short time ago, as in the\ntreatise of Plutarch of Ch\u00e6ronea \u201con the Soul,\u201d and in the second book\nof the work of Numenius the Pythagorean on the \u201cIncorruptibility of the\nSoul.\u201d Now, when such accounts are related by the Greeks, and especially\nby the philosophers among them, they are not to be received with mockery\nand ridicule, nor to be regarded as fictions and fables; but when those\nwho are devoted to the God of all things, and who endure all kinds of\ninjury, even to death itself, rather than allow a falsehood to escape\ntheir lips regarding God, announce the appearances of angels which they\nhave themselves witnessed, they are to be deemed unworthy of belief, and\ntheir words are not to be regarded as true! Now it is opposed to sound\nreason to judge in this way whether individuals are speaking truth or\nfalsehood. For those who act honestly, only after a long and careful\nexamination into the details of a subject, slowly and cautiously express\ntheir opinion of the veracity or falsehood of this or that person with\nregard to the marvels which they may relate; since it is the case that\nneither do all men show themselves worthy of belief, nor do all make it\ndistinctly evident that they are relating to men only fictions and\nfables. Moreover, regarding the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, we\nhave this remark to make, that it is not at all wonderful if, on such an\noccasion, either one or two angels should have appeared to announce that\nJesus had risen from the dead, and to provide for the safety of those\nwho believed in such an event to the advantage of their souls. Nor does\nit appear to me at all unreasonable, that those who believe in the\nresurrection of Jesus, and who manifest, as a fruit of their faith not\nto be lightly esteemed, their possession of a virtuous[1010] life, and\ntheir withdrawal from the flood of evils, should not be unattended by\nangels who lend their help in accomplishing their conversion to God.\n\nFootnote 1010:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVIII.\n\n\nBut Celsus challenges the account also that an angel rolled away the\nstone from the sepulchre where the body of Jesus lay, acting like a lad\nat school, who should bring a charge against any one by help of a string\nof commonplaces. And, as if he had discovered some clever objection to\nthe narrative, he remarks: \u201cThe Son of God, then, it appears, could not\nopen his tomb, but required the aid of another to roll away the stone.\u201d\nNow, not to overdo the discussion of this matter, or to have the\nappearance of unreasonably introducing philosophical remarks, by\nexplaining the figurative meaning at present, I shall simply say of the\nnarrative alone, that it does appear in itself a more respectful\nproceeding, that the servant and inferior should have rolled away the\nstone, than that such an act should have been performed by Him whose\nresurrection was to be for the advantage of mankind. I do not speak of\nthe desire of those who conspired against the Word, and who wished to\nput Him to death, and to show to all men that He _was_ dead and\nnon-existent,[1011] that His tomb should not be opened, in order that no\none might behold the Word alive after their conspiracy; but the \u201cAngel\nof God\u201d who came into the world for the salvation of men, with the help\nof another angel, proved more powerful than the conspirators, and rolled\naway the weighty stone, that those who deemed the Word to be dead might\nbe convinced that He is not with the \u201cdeparted,\u201d but is alive, and\nprecedes those who are willing to follow Him, that He may manifest to\nthem those truths which come after those which He formerly showed them\nat the time of their first entrance [into the school of Christianity],\nwhen they were as yet incapable of receiving deeper instruction. In the\nnext place, I do not understand what advantage he thinks will accrue to\nhis purpose when he ridicules the account of \u201cthe angel\u2019s visit to\nJoseph regarding the pregnancy of Mary;\u201d and again, that of the angel to\nwarn the parents \u201cto take up the new-born child, whose life was in\ndanger, and to flee with it into Egypt.\u201d Concerning these matters,\nhowever, we have in the preceding pages answered his statements. But\nwhat does Celsus mean by saying, that \u201caccording to the Scriptures,\nangels are recorded to have been sent to Moses, and others as well?\u201d For\nit appears to me to contribute nothing to his purpose, and especially\nbecause none of them made any effort to accomplish, as far as in his\npower, the conversion of the human race from their sins. Let it be\ngranted, however, that other angels were sent from God, but that he came\nto announce something of greater importance [than any others who\npreceded him]; and when the Jews had fallen into sin, and corrupted\ntheir religion, and had done unholy deeds, transferred the kingdom of\nGod to other husbandmen, who in all the churches take special care of\nthemselves,[1012] and use every endeavour by means of a holy life, and\nby a doctrine conformable thereto, to win over to the God of all things\nthose who would rush away from the teaching of Jesus.[1013]\n\nFootnote 1011:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 1012:\n\n \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd. Guietus would read \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, to agree with \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1013:\n\n Instead of \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03ac\u03c2, Boherellus\n conjectures \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 ... \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, which has been adopted in the\n translation.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIX.\n\n\nCelsus then continues: \u201cThe Jews accordingly, and these (clearly meaning\nthe Christians), have the same God;\u201d and as if advancing a proposition\nwhich would not be conceded, he proceeds to make the following\nassertion: \u201cIt is certain, indeed, that the members of the great\nchurch[1014] admit this, and adopt as true the accounts regarding the\ncreation of the world which are current among the Jews, viz. concerning\nthe six days and the seventh;\u201d on which day, as the Scripture says, God\n\u201cceased\u201d[1015] from His works, retiring into the contemplation of\nHimself, but on which, as Celsus says (who does not abide by the letter\nof the history, and who does not understand its meaning), God\n\u201crested,\u201d[1016]\u2014a term which is not found in the record. With respect,\nhowever, to the creation of the world, and the \u201crest[1017] which is\nreserved after it for the people of God,\u201d the subject is extensive, and\nmystical, and profound, and difficult of explanation. In the next place,\nas it appears to me, from a desire to fill up his book, and to give it\nan appearance of importance, he recklessly adds certain statements, such\nas the following, relating to the first man, of whom he says: \u201cWe give\nthe same account as do the Jews, and deduce the same genealogy from him\nas they do.\u201d However, as regards \u201cthe conspiracies of brothers against\none another,\u201d we know of none such, save that Cain conspired against\nAbel, and Esau against Jacob; but not Abel against Cain, nor Jacob\nagainst Esau: for if this had been the case, Celsus would have been\ncorrect in saying that we give the same accounts as do the Jews of \u201cthe\nconspiracies of brothers against one another.\u201d Let it be granted,\nhowever, that we speak of the same descent into Egypt as they, and of\ntheir return[1018] thence, which was not a \u201cflight,\u201d[1019] as Celsus\nconsiders it to have been, what does that avail towards founding an\naccusation against us or against the Jews? Here, indeed, he thought to\ncast ridicule upon us, when, in speaking of the Hebrew people, he termed\ntheir exodus a \u201cflight;\u201d but when it was his business to investigate the\naccount of the punishments inflicted by God upon Egypt, that topic he\npurposely passed by in silence.\n\nFootnote 1014:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1015:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c0\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1016:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1017:\n\n \u03c3\u03b1\u03b2\u03b2\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6.\n\nFootnote 1018:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1019:\n\n \u03c6\u03c5\u03b3\u1f74\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LX.\n\n\nIf, however, it be necessary to express ourselves with precision in our\nanswer to Celsus, who thinks that we hold the same opinions on the\nmatters in question as do the Jews, we would say that we both agree that\nthe books [of Scripture] were written by the Spirit of God, but that we\ndo _not_ agree about the meaning of their contents; for we do not\nregulate our lives like the Jews, because we are of opinion that the\nliteral acceptation of the laws is not that which conveys the meaning of\nthe legislation. And we maintain, that \u201cwhen Moses is read, the veil is\nupon their heart,\u201d[1020] because the meaning of the law of Moses has\nbeen concealed from those who have not welcomed[1021] the way which is\nby Jesus Christ. But we know that if one turn to the Lord (for \u201cthe Lord\nis that Spirit\u201d), the veil being taken away, \u201che beholds, as in a mirror\nwith unveiled face, the glory of the Lord\u201d in those thoughts which are\nconcealed in their literal expression, and to his own glory becomes a\nparticipator of the divine glory; the term \u201cface\u201d being used\nfiguratively for the \u201cunderstanding,\u201d as one would call it without a\nfigure, in which is the face of the \u201cinner man,\u201d filled with light and\nglory, flowing from the true comprehension of the contents of the law.\n\nFootnote 1020:\n\n 2 Cor. iii. 15.\n\nFootnote 1021:\n\n \u1f00\u03c3\u03c0\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXI.\n\n\nAfter the above remarks he proceeds as follows: \u201cLet no one suppose that\nI am ignorant that some of them will concede that their God is the same\nas that of the Jews, while others will maintain that he is a different\none, to whom the latter is in opposition, and that it was from the\nformer that the Son came.\u201d Now, if he imagine that the existence of\nnumerous heresies among the Christians is a ground of accusation against\nChristianity, why, in a similar way, should it not be a ground of\naccusation against philosophy, that the various sects of philosophers\ndiffer from each other, not on small and indifferent points, but upon\nthose of the highest importance? Nay, medicine also ought to be a\nsubject of attack, on account of its many conflicting schools. Let it be\nadmitted, then, that there are amongst us some who deny that our God is\nthe same as that of the Jews: nevertheless, on that account those are\nnot to be blamed who prove from the same Scriptures that one and the\nsame Deity is the God of the Jews and of the Gentiles alike, as Paul,\ntoo, distinctly says, who was a convert from Judaism to Christianity, \u201cI\nthank my God, whom I serve from my forefathers with a pure\nconscience.\u201d[1022] And let it be admitted also, that there is a third\nclass who call certain persons \u201ccarnal,\u201d and others \u201cspiritual\u201d (I think\nhe here means the followers of Valentinus): yet what does this avail\nagainst us, who belong to the church, and who make it an accusation\nagainst such as hold that certain natures are saved, and that others\nperish in consequence of their natural constitution?[1023] And let it be\nadmitted further, that there are some who give themselves out as\nGnostics, in the same way as those Epicureans who call themselves\nphilosophers: yet neither will they who annihilate the doctrine of\nprovidence be deemed true philosophers, nor those true Christians who\nintroduce monstrous inventions, which are disapproved of by those who\nare the disciples of Jesus. Let it be admitted, moreover, that there are\nsome who accept Jesus, and who boast on that account of being\nChristians, and yet would regulate their lives, like the Jewish\nmultitude, in accordance with the Jewish law,\u2014and these are the twofold\nsect of Ebionites, who either acknowledge with us that Jesus was born of\na virgin, or deny this, and maintain that He was begotten like other\nhuman beings,\u2014what does that avail by way of charge against such as\nbelong to the church, and whom Celsus has styled \u201cthose of the\nmultitude?\u201d[1024] He adds, also, that certain of the Christians are\nbelievers in the Sibyl,[1025] having probably misunderstood some who\nblamed such as believed in the existence of a prophetic Sibyl, and\ntermed those who held this belief Sibyllists.\n\nFootnote 1022:\n\n 2 Tim. i. 3.\n\nFootnote 1023:\n\n \u1f10\u03ba \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1024:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1025:\n\n \u03a3\u03b9\u03b2\u03c5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXII.\n\n\nHe next pours down upon us a heap of names, saying that he knows of the\nexistence of certain Simonians who worship Helene, or Helenus, as their\nteacher, and are called Helenians. But it has escaped the notice of\nCelsus that the Simonians do not at all acknowledge Jesus to be the Son\nof God, but term Simon the \u201cpower\u201d of God, regarding whom they relate\ncertain marvellous stories, saying that he imagined that if he could\nbecome possessed of similar powers to those with which he believed Jesus\nto be endowed, he too would become as powerful among men as Jesus was\namongst the multitude. But neither Celsus nor Simon could comprehend how\nJesus, like a good husbandman of the word of God, was able to sow the\ngreater part of Greece, and of barbarian lands, with His doctrine, and\nto fill these countries with words which transform the soul from all\nthat is evil, and bring it back to the Creator of all things. Celsus\nknows, moreover, certain Marcellians, so called from Marcellina, and\nHarpocratians from Salome, and others who derive their name from\nMariamne, and others again from Martha. We, however, who from a love of\nlearning examine to the utmost of our ability not only the contents of\nScripture, and the differences to which they give rise, but have also,\nfrom love to the truth, investigated as far as we could the opinions of\nphilosophers, have never at any time met in with these sects. He makes\nmention also of the Marcionites, whose leader was Marcion.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIII.\n\n\nIn the next place, that he may have the appearance of knowing still more\nthan he has yet mentioned, he says, agreeably to his usual custom, that\n\u201cthere are others who have wickedly invented some being as their teacher\nand demon, and who wallow about in a great darkness, more unholy and\naccursed than that of the companions of the Egyptian Antinous.\u201d And he\nseems to me, indeed, in touching on these matters, to say with a certain\ndegree of truth, that there are certain others who have wickedly\ninvented another demon, and who have found him to be their lord, as they\nwallow about in the great darkness of their ignorance. With respect,\nhowever, to Antinous, who is compared with our Jesus, we shall not\nrepeat what we have already said in the preceding pages. \u201cMoreover,\u201d he\ncontinues, \u201cthese persons utter against one another dreadful\nblasphemies, saying all manner of things shameful to be spoken; nor will\nthey yield in the slightest point for the sake of harmony, hating each\nother with a perfect hatred.\u201d Now, in answer to this, we have already\nsaid that in philosophy and medicine sects are to be found warring\nagainst sects. We, however, who are followers of the word of Jesus, and\nhave exercised ourselves in thinking, and saying, and doing what is in\nharmony with His words, \u201cwhen reviled, bless; being persecuted, we\nsuffer it; being defamed, we entreat;\u201d[1026] and we would _not_ utter\n\u201call manner of things shameful to be spoken\u201d against those who have\nadopted different opinions from ours, but, if possible, use every\nexertion to raise them to a better condition through adherence to the\nCreator alone, and lead them to perform every act as those who will [one\nday] be judged. And if those who hold different opinions will not be\nconvinced, we observe the injunction laid down for the treatment of\nsuch: \u201cA man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition,\nreject, knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being\ncondemned of himself.\u201d[1027] Moreover, we who know the maxim, \u201cBlessed\nare the peacemakers,\u201d and this also, \u201cBlessed are the meek,\u201d would not\nregard with hatred the corrupters of Christianity, nor term those who\nhad fallen into error Circes and flattering deceivers.[1028]\n\nFootnote 1026:\n\n 1 Cor. iv. 12, 13.\n\nFootnote 1027:\n\n Tit. iii. 10.\n\nFootnote 1028:\n\n \u039a\u03af\u03c1\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03cd\u03ba\u03b7\u03b8\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f31\u03bc\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIV.\n\n\nCelsus appears to me to have misunderstood the statement of the apostle,\nwhich declares that \u201cin the latter times some shall depart from the\nfaith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils, speaking\nlies in hypocrisy, having their conscience seared with a hot iron,\nforbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God\nhath created to be received with thanksgiving of them who\nbelieve;\u201d[1029] and to have misunderstood also those who employed these\ndeclarations of the apostle against such as had corrupted the doctrines\nof Christianity. And it is owing to this cause that Celsus has said that\n\u201ccertain among the Christians are called \u2018cauterized in the\nears;\u2019\u201d[1030] and also that some are termed \u201cenigmas,\u201d[1031]\u2014a term\nwhich we have never met. The expression \u201cstumbling-block\u201d[1032] is,\nindeed, of frequent occurrence in these writings,\u2014an appellation which\nwe are accustomed to apply to those who turn away simple persons, and\nthose who are easily deceived, from sound doctrine. But neither we, nor,\nI imagine, any other, whether Christian or heretic, know of any who are\nstyled Sirens, who betray and deceive,[1033] and stop their ears, and\nchange into swine those whom they delude. And yet this man, who affects\nto know everything, uses such language as the following: \u201cYou may hear,\u201d\nhe says, \u201call those who differ so widely, and who assail each other in\ntheir disputes with the most shameless language, uttering the words,\n\u2018The world is crucified to me, and I unto the world.\u2019\u201d And this is the\nonly phrase which, it appears, Celsus could remember out of Paul\u2019s\nwritings; and yet why should we not also employ innumerable other\nquotations from the Scriptures, such as, \u201cFor though we do walk in the\nflesh, we do not war after the flesh; (for the weapons of our warfare\nare not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of\nstrongholds,) casting down imaginations, and every high thing that\nexalteth itself against the knowledge of God?\u201d[1034]\n\nFootnote 1029:\n\n Cf. 1 Tim. iv. 1-3.\n\nFootnote 1030:\n\n \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1. Cf. note in Benedictine ed.\n\nFootnote 1031:\n\n \u03b1\u1f30\u03bd\u03af\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1. Cf. note in Benedictine ed.\n\nFootnote 1032:\n\n \u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 1033:\n\n \u1f10\u03be\u03bf\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1034:\n\n Cf. 2 Cor. x. 3.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXV.\n\n\nBut since he asserts that \u201cyou may hear all those who differ so widely\nsaying, \u2018The world is crucified to me, and I unto the world,\u2019\u201d we shall\nshow the falsity of such a statement. For there are certain heretical\nsects which do not receive the epistles of the Apostle Paul, as the two\nsects of Ebionites, and those who are termed Encratites. Those, then,\nwho do not regard the apostle as a holy and wise man, will not adopt his\nlanguage, and say, \u201cThe world is crucified to me, and I unto the world.\u201d\nAnd consequently in this point, too, Celsus is guilty of falsehood. He\ncontinues, moreover, to linger over the accusations which he brings\nagainst the diversity of sects which exist, but does not appear to me to\nbe accurate in the language which he employs, nor to have carefully\nobserved or understood how it is that those Christians who have made\nprogress in their studies say that they are possessed of greater\nknowledge than the Jews; and also, whether they acknowledge the same\nScriptures, but interpret them differently, or whether they do not\nrecognise these books as divine. For we find both of these views\nprevailing among the sects. He then continues: \u201cAlthough they have no\nfoundation for their doctrine, let us examine the system itself; and, in\nthe first place, let us mention the corruptions which they have made\nthrough ignorance and misunderstanding, when in the discussion of\nelementary principles they express their opinions in the most absurd\nmanner on things which they do not understand, such as the following.\u201d\nAnd then, to certain expressions which are continually in the mouths of\nthe believers in Christianity, he opposes certain others from the\nwritings of the philosophers, with the object of making it appear that\nthe noble sentiments which Celsus supposes to be used by Christians have\nbeen expressed in better and clearer language by the philosophers, in\norder that he might drag away to the study of philosophy those who are\ncaught by opinions which at once evidence their noble and religious\ncharacter. We shall, however, here terminate the fifth book, and begin\nthe sixth with what follows.\n\n\n\n\n BOOK VI.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter I.\n\n\nIn beginning this our sixth book, we desire, my reverend Ambrosius, to\nanswer in it those accusations which Celsus brings against the\n_Christians_, not, as might be supposed, those objections which he has\nadduced from _writers on philosophy_. For he has quoted a considerable\nnumber of passages, chiefly from Plato, and has placed alongside of\nthese such declarations of Holy Scripture as are fitted to impress even\nthe intelligent mind; subjoining the assertion, that \u201cthese things are\nstated much better among the Greeks [than in the Scriptures], and in a\nmanner which is free from all exaggerations[1035] and promises on the\npart of God, or the Son of God.\u201d Now we maintain, that if it is the\nobject of the ambassadors of the truth to confer benefits upon the\ngreatest possible number, and, so far as they can, to win over to its\nside, through their love to men, every one without exception\u2014intelligent\nas well as simple\u2014not Greeks only, but also barbarians (and great,\nindeed, is the humanity which should succeed in converting the rustic\nand the ignorant[1036]), it is manifest that they must adopt a style of\naddress fitted to do good to all, and to gain over to them men of every\nsort. Those, on the other hand, who turn away[1037] from the ignorant as\nbeing mere slaves,[1038] and unable to understand the flowing periods of\na polished and logical discourse, and so devote their attention solely\nto such as have been brought up amongst literary pursuits,[1039] confine\ntheir views of the public good within very strait and narrow limits.\n\nFootnote 1035:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1036:\n\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u1f7a \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f25\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u1f70\u03bd ... \u03bf\u1f37\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1037:\n\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c6\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1038:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1039:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03bf\u1f35\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c6\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter II.\n\n\nI have made these remarks in reply to the charges which Celsus and\nothers bring against the simplicity of the language of Scripture, which\nappears to be thrown into the shade by the splendour of polished\ndiscourse. For our prophets, and Jesus Himself, and His apostles, were\ncareful to adopt[1040] a style of address which should not merely convey\nthe truth, but which should be fitted to gain over the multitude, until\neach one, attracted and led onwards, should ascend as far as he could\ntowards the comprehension of those mysteries which are contained in\nthese apparently simple words. For, if I may venture to say so, few have\nbeen benefited (if they have indeed been benefited at all) by the\nbeautiful and polished style of Plato, and those who have written like\nhim; while, on the contrary, many have received advantage from those who\nwrote and taught in a simple and practical manner, and with a view to\nthe wants of the multitude. It is easy, indeed, to observe that Plato is\nfound only in the hands of those who profess to be literary men;[1041]\nwhile Epictetus is admired by persons of ordinary capacity, who have a\ndesire to be benefited, and who perceive the improvement which may be\nderived from his writings. Now we make these remarks, not to disparage\nPlato (for the great world of men has found even him useful), but to\npoint out the aim of those who said: \u201cAnd my speech and my preaching was\nnot with enticing words of man\u2019s wisdom, but in demonstration of the\nSpirit and of power, that our faith should not stand in the wisdom of\nmen, but in the power of God.\u201d[1042] For the word of God declares that\nthe preaching (although in itself true and most worthy of belief) is not\nsufficient to reach the human heart, unless a certain power be imparted\nto the speaker from God, and a grace appear upon his words; and it is\nonly by the divine agency that this takes place in those who speak\neffectually. The prophet says in the sixty-seventh Psalm, that \u201cthe Lord\nwill give a word with great power to them who preach.\u201d[1043] If, then,\nit should be granted with respect to certain points, that the same\ndoctrines are found among the Greeks as in our own Scriptures, yet they\ndo not possess the same power of attracting and disposing the souls of\nmen to follow them. And therefore the disciples of Jesus, men ignorant\nso far as regards Grecian philosophy, yet traversed many countries of\nthe world, impressing, agreeably to the desire of the Logos, each one of\ntheir hearers according to his deserts, so that they received a moral\namelioration in proportion to the inclination of their will to accept of\nthat which is good.\n\nFootnote 1040:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1041:\n\n \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1042:\n\n 1 Cor. ii. 4, 5.\n\nFootnote 1043:\n\n Such is the reading of the Septuagint version. The Masoretic text has:\n \u201cThe Lord gave a word; of them who published it there was a great\n host.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter III.\n\n\nLet the ancient sages, then, make known their sayings to those who are\ncapable of understanding them. Suppose that Plato, for example, the son\nof Ariston, in one of his Epistles, is discoursing about the \u201cchief\ngood,\u201d and that he says, \u201cThe chief good can by no means be described in\nwords, but is produced by long habit, and bursts forth suddenly as a\nlight in the soul, as from a fire which had leapt forth.\u201d We, then, on\nhearing these words, admit that they are well said, for it is God who\nrevealed to men these as well as all other noble expressions. And for\nthis reason it is that we maintain that those who have entertained\ncorrect ideas regarding God, but who have not offered to Him a worship\nin harmony with the truth, are liable to the punishments which fall on\nsinners. For respecting such Paul says in express words: \u201cThe wrath of\nGod is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness\nof men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; because that which may be\nknown of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them. For\nthe invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly\nseen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal\npower and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: because that, when\nthey knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; but\nbecame vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.\nProfessing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the\nglory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible\nman, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.\u201d[1044]\nThe truth, then, is verily held [in unrighteousness], as our Scriptures\ntestify, by those who are of opinion that \u201cthe chief good cannot be\ndescribed in words,\u201d but who assert that, \u201cafter long custom and\nfamiliar usage,[1045] a light becomes suddenly kindled in the soul, as\nif by a fire springing forth, and that it now supports itself alone.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1044:\n\n Cf. Rom. i. 18-23.\n\nFootnote 1045:\n\n \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03c1\u1fb6\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b6\u1fc6\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IV.\n\n\nNotwithstanding, those who have written in this manner regarding the\n\u201cchief good\u201d will go down to the Pir\u00e6us and offer prayer to Artemis, as\nif she were God, and will look [with approval] upon the solemn assembly\nheld by ignorant men; and after giving utterance to philosophical\nremarks of such profundity regarding the soul, and describing its\npassage [to a happier world] after a virtuous life, they pass from those\ngreat topics which God has revealed to them, and adopt mean and trifling\nthoughts, and offer a cock to Esculapius![1046] And although they had\nbeen enabled to form representations both of the \u201cinvisible things\u201d of\nGod and of the \u201carchetypal forms\u201d of things from the creation of the\nworld, and from [the contemplation of] sensible things, from which they\nascend to those objects which are comprehended by the understanding\nalone,\u2014and although they had no mean glimpses of His \u201ceternal power and\nGodhead,\u201d[1047] they nevertheless became \u201cfoolish in their\nimaginations,\u201d and their \u201cfoolish heart\u201d was involved in darkness and\nignorance as to the [true] worship of God. Moreover, we may see those\nwho greatly pride themselves upon their wisdom and theology worshipping\nthe image of a corruptible man, _in honour_, they say, of Him, and\nsometimes even descending, with the Egyptians, to the worship of birds,\nand four-footed beasts, and creeping things! And although some may\nappear to have risen above such practices, nevertheless they will be\nfound to have changed the truth of God into a lie, and to worship and\nserve the \u201ccreature more than the Creator.\u201d[1048] As the wise and\nlearned among the Greeks, then, commit errors in the service which they\nrender to God, God \u201cchose the foolish things of the world to confound\nthe wise; and base things of the world, and things that are weak, and\nthings which are despised, and things which are not, to bring to nought\nthings that are;\u201d[1049] and this, truly, \u201cthat no flesh should glory in\nthe presence of God.\u201d _Our_ wise men, however,\u2014Moses, the most ancient\nof them all, and the prophets who followed him,\u2014knowing that the chief\ngood could by no means be described in words, were the first who wrote\nthat, as God manifests Himself to the deserving, and to those who are\nqualified to behold Him,[1050] He appeared to Abraham, or to Isaac, or\nto Jacob. But who He was that appeared, and of what form, and in what\nmanner, and like to which of mortal beings,[1051] they have left to be\ninvestigated by those who are able to show that they resemble those\npersons to whom God showed Himself: for He was seen not by their bodily\neyes, but by the pure heart. For, according to the declaration of our\nJesus, \u201cBlessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.\u201d[1052]\n\nFootnote 1046:\n\n Cf. Plato, _Ph\u00e6do_.\n\nFootnote 1047:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f00\u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f30\u03b4\u03ad\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f00\u03c6\u2019 \u1f67\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\n \u1f00\u0390\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f30\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, etc.\n\nFootnote 1048:\n\n Rom. i. 25.\n\nFootnote 1049:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. i. 27, 28, 29.\n\nFootnote 1050:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1051:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd. Boherellus understands \u1f45\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, which has been\n adopted in the translation.\n\nFootnote 1052:\n\n Cf. Matt. v. 8.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter V.\n\n\nBut that a light is suddenly kindled in the soul, as by a fire leaping\nforth, is a fact known long ago to our Scriptures; as when the prophet\nsaid, \u201cLight ye for yourselves the light of knowledge.\u201d[1053] John also,\nwho lived after him, said, \u201cThat which was in the Logos was life, and\nthe life was the light of men;\u201d[1054] which \u201ctrue light lighteneth every\nman that cometh into the world\u201d (_i.e._ the true world, which is\nperceived by the understanding[1055]), and maketh him a light of the\nworld: \u201cFor this light shone in our hearts, to give the light of the\nglorious gospel of God in the face of Christ Jesus.\u201d[1056] And therefore\nthat very ancient prophet, who prophesied many generations before the\nreign of Cyrus (for he was older than he by more than fourteen\ngenerations), expressed himself in these words: \u201cThe Lord is my light\nand my salvation: whom shall I fear?\u201d[1057] and, \u201cThy law is a lamp unto\nmy feet, and a light unto my path;\u201d[1058] and again, \u201cThe light of Thy\ncountenance, O Lord, was manifested towards us;\u201d[1059] and, \u201cIn Thy\nlight we shall see light.\u201d[1060] And the Logos, exhorting us to come to\nthis light, says, in the prophecies of Isaiah: \u201cEnlighten thyself,\nenlighten thyself, O Jerusalem; for thy light is come, and the glory of\nthe Lord is risen upon thee.\u201d[1061] The same prophet also, when\npredicting the advent of Jesus, who was to turn away men from the\nworship of idols, and of images, and of demons, says, \u201cTo those that sat\nin the land and shadow of death, upon them hath the light arisen;\u201d[1062]\nand again, \u201cThe people that sat in darkness saw a great light.\u201d[1063]\nObserve now the difference between the fine phrases of Plato respecting\nthe \u201cchief good,\u201d and the declarations of our prophets regarding the\n\u201clight\u201d of the blessed; and notice that the truth as it is contained in\nPlato concerning this subject did not at all help his readers to attain\nto a pure worship of God, nor even himself, who could philosophize so\ngrandly about the \u201cchief good,\u201d whereas the simple language of the Holy\nScriptures has led to their honest readers being filled with a divine\nspirit;[1064] and this light is nourished within them by the oil, which\nin a certain parable is said to have preserved the light of the torches\nof the five wise virgins.[1065]\n\nFootnote 1053:\n\n Hos. x. 12. \u03c6\u03c9\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c6\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 (LXX.). The Masoretic\n text is, \u05e0\u05b4\u05a5\u05d9\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc \u05dc\u05b8\u05db\u05b6\u0596\u05dd \u05e0\u05b4\u0591\u05d9\u05e8 \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b5\u05ea, where for \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b5\u05ea (_and time_)\n the Septuagint translator apparently read \u05d3\u05e2\u05ea (_knowledge_), \u05d3 and\n \u05d5 being interchanged from their similarity.\n\nFootnote 1054:\n\n Cf. John i. 3, 4.\n\nFootnote 1055:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1056:\n\n Cf. 2 Cor. iv. 6.\n\nFootnote 1057:\n\n Ps. xxvii. 1 (attributed to David).\n\nFootnote 1058:\n\n Ps. cxix. 105.\n\nFootnote 1059:\n\n Ps. iv. 6 (Heb. \u201cLift upon us,\u201d etc.).\n\nFootnote 1060:\n\n Ps. xxxvi. 9.\n\nFootnote 1061:\n\n Cf. Isa. lx. 1.\n\nFootnote 1062:\n\n Cf. Isa. ix. 2.\n\nFootnote 1063:\n\n Cf. Isa. ix. 2.\n\nFootnote 1064:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u1fb6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1065:\n\n Cf. Matt. xxv. 4.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VI.\n\n\nSeeing, however, that Celsus quotes from an epistle of Plato another\nstatement to the following effect, viz.: \u201cIf it appeared to me that\nthese matters could be adequately explained to the multitude in writing\nand in oral address, what nobler pursuit in life could have been\nfollowed by me, than to commit to writing what was to prove of such\nadvantage to human beings, and to lead the nature of all men onwards to\nthe light?\u201d\u2014let us then consider this point briefly, viz. whether or not\nPlato were acquainted with any doctrines more profound than are\ncontained in his writings, or more divine than those which he has left\nbehind him, leaving it to each one to investigate the subject according\nto his ability, while we demonstrate that our prophets did know of\ngreater things than any in the Scriptures, but which they did not commit\nto writing. Ezekiel, _e.g._, received a roll,[1066] written within and\nwithout, in which were contained \u201clamentations,\u201d and \u201csongs,\u201d and\n\u201cdenunciations;\u201d[1067] but at the command of the Logos he swallowed the\nbook, in order that its contents might not be written, and so made known\nto unworthy persons. John also is recorded to have seen and done a\nsimilar thing.[1068] Nay, Paul even heard \u201cunspeakable words, which it\nis not lawful for a man to utter.\u201d[1069] And it is related of Jesus, who\nwas greater than all these, that He conversed with His disciples in\nprivate, and especially in their secret retreats, concerning the gospel\nof God; but the words which He uttered have not been preserved, because\nit appeared to the evangelists that they could not be adequately\nconveyed to the multitude in writing or in speech. And if it were not\ntiresome to repeat the truth regarding these illustrious individuals, I\nwould say that they saw better than Plato (by means of the intelligence\nwhich they received by the grace of God), what things were to be\ncommitted to _writing_, and how this was to be done, and what was by no\nmeans to be written to the multitude, and what was to be expressed in\n_words_, and what was not to be so conveyed. And once more, John, in\nteaching us the difference between what ought to be committed to writing\nand what not, declares that he heard seven thunders instructing him on\ncertain matters, and forbidding him to commit their words to\nwriting.[1070]\n\nFootnote 1066:\n\n \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b4\u03b1 \u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 1067:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03b1\u03af; cf. Ezek. ii. 9, 10.\n\nFootnote 1068:\n\n Cf. Apoc. x. 9.\n\nFootnote 1069:\n\n 2 Cor. xii. 4.\n\nFootnote 1070:\n\n Cf. Apoc. x. 4.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VII.\n\n\nThere might also be found in the writings of Moses and of the prophets,\nwho are older not only than Plato, but even than Homer and the invention\nof letters among the Greeks, passages worthy of the grace of God\nbestowed upon them, and filled with great thoughts, to which they gave\nutterance, but not because they understood Plato imperfectly, as Celsus\nimagines. For how was it possible that they should have heard one who\nwas not yet born? And if any one should apply the words of Celsus to the\napostles of Jesus, who were younger than Plato, say whether it is not on\nthe very face of it an incredible assertion, that Paul the tentmaker,\nand Peter the fisherman, and John who left his father\u2019s nets, should,\nthrough misunderstanding the language of Plato in his Epistles, have\nexpressed themselves as they have done regarding God? But as Celsus now,\nafter having often required of us immediate assent [to his views], as if\nhe were babbling forth something new in addition to what he has already\nadvanced, only repeats himself,[1071] what we have said in reply may\nsuffice. Seeing, however, he produces another quotation from Plato, in\nwhich he asserts that the employment of the method of question and\nanswer sheds light on the thoughts of those who philosophize like him,\nlet us show from the Holy Scriptures that the word of God also\nencourages us to the practice of dialectics: Solomon, _e.g._ declaring\nin one passage, that \u201cinstruction unquestioned goes astray;\u201d[1072] and\nJesus the son of Sirach, who has left us the treatise called \u201cWisdom,\u201d\ndeclaring in another, that \u201cthe knowledge of the unwise is as words that\nwill not stand investigation.\u201d[1073] Our methods of discussion, however,\nare rather of a gentle kind; for we have learned that he who presides\nover the preaching of the word ought to be able to confute gainsayers.\nBut if some continue indolent, and do not train themselves so as to\nattend to the reading of the word, and \u201cto search the Scriptures,\u201d and,\nagreeably to the command of Jesus, to investigate the _meaning_ of the\nsacred writings, and to ask of God concerning them, and to keep\n\u201cknocking\u201d at what may be closed within them, the Scripture is not on\nthat account to be regarded as devoid of wisdom.\n\nFootnote 1071:\n\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03ba\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \u1f41 \u039a\u03ad\u03bb\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b8\u03c1\u03c5\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f00\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1. Guietus thus amends the passage:\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03ba\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \u1f41 \u039a\u03ad\u03bb\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b8\u03c1\u03c5\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2, etc. Boherellus would change\n \u1f00\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd into \u1f00\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1072:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03be\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u1fb6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9; cf. Prov. x. 17.\n\nFootnote 1073:\n\n \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5, \u1f00\u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03be\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9; cf. Ecclus. xxi. 18.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VIII.\n\n\nIn the next place, after other Platonic declarations, which demonstrate\nthat \u201cthe good\u201d can be known by few, he adds: \u201cSince the multitude,\nbeing puffed up with a contempt for others, which is far from right, and\nbeing filled with vain and lofty hopes, assert that, because they have\ncome to the knowledge of some venerable doctrines, certain things are\ntrue.\u201d \u201cYet although Plato predicted these things, he nevertheless does\nnot talk marvels,[1074] nor shut the mouth of those who wish to ask him\nfor information on the subject of his promises; nor does he command them\nto come at once and believe that a God of a particular kind exists, and\nthat he has a son of a particular nature, who descended [to earth] and\nconversed with me.\u201d Now, in answer to this we have to say, that with\nregard to Plato, it is Aristander, I think, who has related that he was\nnot the son of Ariston, but of a phantom, which approached Amphictione\nin the guise of Apollo. And there are several other of the followers of\nPlato who, in their lives of their master, have made the same statement.\nWhat are we to say, moreover, about Pythagoras, who relates the greatest\npossible amount of wonders, and who, in a general assembly of the\nGreeks, showed his ivory thigh, and asserted that he recognised the\nshield which he wore when he was Euphorbus, and who is said to have\nappeared on one day in two different cities! He, moreover, who will\ndeclare that what is related of Plato and Socrates belongs to the\nmarvellous, will quote the story of the swan which was recommended to\nSocrates while he was asleep, and of the master saying when he met the\nyoung man, \u201cThis, then, was the swan!\u201d[1075] Nay, the third eye which\nPlato saw that he himself possessed, he will refer to the category of\nprodigies.[1076] But occasion for slanderous accusations will never be\nwanting to those who are ill-disposed, and who wish to speak evil of\nwhat has happened to such as are raised above the multitude. Such\npersons will deride as a fiction even the demon of Socrates. We do not,\nthen, relate marvels when we narrate the history of Jesus, nor have His\ngenuine disciples recorded any such stories of Him; whereas this Celsus,\nwho professes universal knowledge, and who quotes many of the sayings of\nPlato, is, I think, intentionally silent on the discourse concerning the\nSon of God which is related in Plato\u2019s epistle to Hermeas and Coriscus.\nPlato\u2019s words are as follows: \u201cAnd calling to witness the God of all\nthings\u2014the ruler both of things present and things to come, father and\nlord both of the ruler and cause\u2014whom, if we are philosophers indeed, we\nshall all clearly know, so far as it is possible for happy human beings\nto attain such knowledge.\u201d[1077]\n\nFootnote 1074:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1075:\n\n The night before Ariston brought Plato to Socrates as his pupil, the\n latter dreamed that a swan from the altar of Cupid alighted on his\n bosom. Cf. Pausanias in _Atticis_, p. 58.\n\nFootnote 1076:\n\n \u201cAlicubi forsan occurrit: me vero uspiam legisse non memini. Credo\n Platonem per tertium oculum suam \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03bc\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd et scientiam, qu\u00e2 ceteris\n anteibat, denotare voluisse.\u201d\u2014SPENCER.\n\nFootnote 1077:\n\n Plato, _Epist._ vi.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IX.\n\n\nCelsus quotes another saying of Plato to the following effect: \u201cIt has\noccurred to me to speak once more upon these subjects at greater length,\nas perhaps I might express myself about them more clearly than I have\nalready done: for there is a certain \u2018real\u2019 cause, which proves a\nhindrance in the way of him who has ventured, even to a slight extent,\nto write on such topics; and as this has been frequently mentioned by me\non former occasions, it appears to me that it ought to be stated now. In\neach of existing things, which are necessarily employed in the\nacquisition of knowledge, there are three elements; knowledge itself is\nthe fourth; and that ought to be laid down as the fifth which is both\ncapable of being known and is true. Of these, one is \u2018name;\u2019 the second\nis \u2018word;\u2019 the third, \u2018image;\u2019 the fourth, \u2018knowledge.\u2019\u201d[1078] Now,\naccording to this division, John is introduced before Jesus as the voice\nof one crying in the wilderness, so as to correspond with the \u201cname\u201d of\nPlato; and the second after John, who is pointed out by him, is Jesus,\nwith whom agrees the statement, \u201cThe Word became flesh,\u201d and that\ncorresponds to the \u201cword\u201d of Plato. Plato terms the third \u201cimage;\u201d but\nwe, who apply the expression \u201cimage\u201d to something different, would say\nwith greater precision, that the mark of the wounds which is made in the\nsoul by the word is the Christ which is in each one of us, and this mark\nis impressed by Christ the Word.[1079] And whether Christ, the wisdom\nwhich is in those of us who are perfect, correspond to the \u201cfourth\u201d\nelement\u2014knowledge\u2014will become known to him who has the capacity to\nascertain it.\n\nFootnote 1078:\n\n \u1f67\u03bd \u1f13\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd, \u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u00b7 \u03b4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72, \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03c9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f78\n \u03c4\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7.\n\nFootnote 1079:\n\n \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c6\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc7 \u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n \u03c4\u03cd\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f11\u03ba\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter X.\n\n\nHe next continues: \u201cYou see how Plato, although maintaining that [the\nchief good] cannot be described in words, yet, to avoid the appearance\nof retreating to an irrefutable position, subjoins a reason in\nexplanation of this difficulty, as even \u2018nothing\u2019[1080] might perhaps be\nexplained in words.\u201d But as Celsus adduces this to prove that we ought\nnot to yield a simple assent, but to furnish a reason for our belief, we\nshall quote also the words of Paul, where he says, in censuring the\nhasty[1081] believer, \u201cunless ye have believed inconsiderately.\u201d[1082]\nNow, through his practice of repeating himself, Celsus, so far as he\ncan, forces us to be guilty of tautology, reiterating, after the\nboastful language which has been quoted, that \u201cPlato is not guilty of\nboasting and falsehood, giving out that he has made some new discovery,\nor that he has come down from heaven to announce it, but acknowledges\nwhence these statements are derived.\u201d Now, if one wished to reply to\nCelsus, one might say in answer to such assertions, that even Plato _is_\nguilty of boasting, when in the _Tim\u0153us_ he puts the following language\nin the mouth of Zeus: \u201cGods of gods, whose creator and father I am,\u201d and\nso on. And if any one will defend such language on account of the\nmeaning which is conveyed under the name of Zeus, thus speaking in the\ndialogue of Plato, why should not he who investigates the meaning of the\nwords of the Son of God, or those of the Creator[1083] in the prophets,\nexpress a profounder meaning than any conveyed by the words of Zeus in\nthe _Tim\u0153us_? For the characteristic of divinity is the announcement of\nfuture events, predicted not by human power, but shown by the result to\nbe due to a divine spirit in him who made the announcement. Accordingly,\nwe do not say to each of our hearers, \u201cBelieve, first of all, that He\nwhom I introduce to thee is the Son of God;\u201d but we put the gospel\nbefore each one, as his character and disposition may fit him to receive\nit, inasmuch as we have learned to know \u201chow we ought to answer every\nman.\u201d[1084] And there are some who are capable of receiving nothing more\nthan an exhortation to believe, and to these we address that alone;\nwhile we approach others, again, as far as possible, in the way of\ndemonstration, by means of question and answer. Nor do we at all say, as\nCelsus scoffingly alleges, \u201cBelieve that He whom I introduce to thee is\nthe Son of God, although He was shamefully bound, and disgracefully\npunished, and very recently[1085] was most contumeliously treated before\nthe eyes of all men;\u201d neither do we add, \u201cBelieve it even the more [on\nthat account].\u201d For it is our endeavour to state, on each individual\npoint, arguments more numerous even than we have brought forward in the\npreceding pages.\n\nFootnote 1080:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1081:\n\n \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u1fc6 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1082:\n\n 1 Cor. xv. 2.\n\nFootnote 1083:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6.\n\nFootnote 1084:\n\n Cf. Col. iv. 6.\n\nFootnote 1085:\n\n \u03c7\u03b8\u1f72\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03b7\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XI.\n\n\nAfter this Celsus continues: \u201cIf these (meaning the Christians) bring\nforward this person, and others, again, a different individual [as the\nChrist], while the common and ready cry[1086] of all parties is,\n\u2018Believe, if thou wilt be saved, or else begone,\u2019 what shall those do\nwho are in earnest about their salvation? Shall they cast the dice, in\norder to divine whither they may betake themselves, and whom they shall\njoin?\u201d Now we shall answer this objection in the following manner, as\nthe clearness of the case impels us to do. If it had been recorded that\nseveral individuals had appeared in human life as sons of God in the\nmanner in which Jesus did, and if each of them had drawn a party of\nadherents to his side, so that, on account of the similarity of the\nprofession [in the case of each individual] that he was the Son of God,\nhe to whom his followers bore testimony to that effect was an object of\ndispute, there would have been ground for his saying, \u201cIf these bring\nforward this person, and others a different individual, while the common\nand ready cry of all parties is, \u2018Believe, if thou wilt be saved, or\nelse begone,\u2019\u201d and so on; whereas it has been proclaimed to the entire\nworld that Jesus Christ is the only Son of God who visited the human\nrace: for those who, like Celsus, have supposed that [the acts of Jesus]\nwere a series of prodigies,[1087] and who for that reason wished to\nperform acts of the same kind,[1088] that they, too, might gain a\nsimilar mastery over the minds of men, were convicted of being utter\nnonentities.[1089] Such were Simon, the Magus of Samaria, and Dositheus,\nwho was a native of the same place; since the former gave out that he\nwas the power of God that is called great,[1090] and the latter that he\nwas the Son of God. Now Simonians are found nowhere throughout the\nworld; and yet, in order to gain over to himself many followers, Simon\nfreed his disciples from the danger of death, which the Christians were\ntaught to prefer, by teaching them to regard idolatry as a matter of\nindifference. But even at the beginning of their existence the followers\nof Simon were not exposed to persecution. For that wicked demon who was\nconspiring against the doctrine of Jesus, was well aware that none of\nhis own maxims would be weakened by the teaching of Simon. The\nDositheans, again, even in former times, did not rise to any eminence,\nand now they are completely extinguished, so that it is said their whole\nnumber does not amount to thirty. Judas of Galilee also, as Luke relates\nin the Acts of the Apostles,[1091] wished to call himself some great\npersonage, as did Theudas before him; but as their doctrine was not of\nGod, they were destroyed, and all who obeyed them were immediately\ndispersed. We do not, then, \u201ccast the dice in order to divine whither we\nshall betake ourselves, and whom we shall join,\u201d as if there were many\nclaimants able to draw us after them by the profession of their having\ncome down from God to visit the human race. On these points, however, we\nhave said enough.\n\nFootnote 1086:\n\n \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f22 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd. For \u1f24, Boherellus reads \u1f96.\n\nFootnote 1087:\n\n \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u039a\u03b5\u03bb\u03c3\u1ff7 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. The word \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c2\n formerly stood, in the text of Spencer and Ru\u00e6eus, before\n \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, but is properly expunged, as arising from the preceding\n \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c2. Boherellus remarks: \u201cForte aliud quid exciderit, verbi grati\u00e2,\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0399\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1088:\n\n \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1089:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1090:\n\n Cf. Acts viii. 10.\n\nFootnote 1091:\n\n Cf. Acts v. 36, 37.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XII.\n\n\nAccordingly, let us pass on to another charge made by Celsus, who is not\neven acquainted with the words [of our sacred books], but who, from\nmisunderstanding them, has said that \u201cwe declare the wisdom that is\namong men to be foolishness with God;\u201d Paul having said that \u201cthe wisdom\nof the _world_ is foolishness with God.\u201d[1092] Celsus says that \u201cthe\nreason of this has been stated long ago.\u201d And the reason he imagines to\nbe, \u201cour desire to win over by means of this saying the ignorant and\nfoolish alone.\u201d But, as he himself has intimated, he has said the same\nthing before; and we, to the best of our ability, replied to it.\nNotwithstanding this, however, he wished to show that this statement was\nan invention[1093] of ours, and borrowed from the Grecian sages, who\ndeclare that human wisdom is of one kind, and divine of another. And he\nquotes the words of Heraclitus, where he says in one passage, that\n\u201cman\u2019s method of action is not regulated by fixed principles, but that\nof God is;\u201d[1094] and in another, that \u201ca foolish man listens to a\ndemon, as a boy does to a man.\u201d He quotes, moreover, the following from\nthe _Apology of Socrates_, of which Plato was the author: \u201cFor I, O men\nof Athens, have obtained this name by no other means than by my wisdom.\nAnd of what sort is this wisdom? Such, probably, as is human; for in\nthat respect I venture to think that I am in reality wise.\u201d[1095] Such\nare the passages adduced by Celsus. But I shall subjoin also the\nfollowing from Plato\u2019s letter to Hermeas, and Erastus, and Coriscus: \u201cTo\nErastus and Coriscus I say, although I am an old man, that, in addition\nto this noble knowledge of \u2018forms\u2019 [which they possess], they need a\nwisdom, with regard to the class of wicked and unjust persons, which may\nserve as a protective and repelling force against them. For they are\ninexperienced, in consequence of having passed a large portion of their\nlives with us, who are moderate[1096] individuals, and not wicked. I\nhave accordingly said that they need these things, in order that they\nmay not be compelled to neglect the true wisdom, and to apply themselves\nin a greater degree than is proper to that which is necessary and\nhuman.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1092:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 19.\n\nFootnote 1093:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1094:\n\n \u1f26\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1095:\n\n Cf. Plato\u2019s _Apolog._\n\nFootnote 1096:\n\n \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIII.\n\n\nAccording to the foregoing, then, the one kind of wisdom is human, and\nthe other divine. Now the \u201chuman\u201d wisdom is that which is termed by us\nthe wisdom of the \u201cworld,\u201d which is \u201cfoolishness with God;\u201d whereas the\n\u201cdivine\u201d\u2014being different from the \u201chuman,\u201d because it is \u201cdivine\u201d\u2014comes,\nthrough the grace of God who bestows it, to those who have evinced their\ncapacity for receiving it, and especially to those who, from knowing the\ndifference between either kind of wisdom, say, in their prayers to God,\n\u201cEven if one among the sons of men be perfect, while the wisdom is\nwanting that comes from Thee, he shall be accounted as nothing.\u201d[1097]\nWe maintain, indeed, that \u201chuman\u201d wisdom is an exercise for the soul,\nbut that \u201cdivine\u201d wisdom is the \u201cend,\u201d being also termed the \u201cstrong\u201d\nmeat of the soul by him who has said that \u201cstrong meat belongeth to them\nthat are perfect,[1098] even those who by reason of use have their\nsenses exercised to discern both good and evil.\u201d[1099] This opinion,\nmoreover, is truly an ancient one, its antiquity not being referred\nback, as Celsus thinks, merely to Heraclitus and Plato. For before these\nindividuals lived, the prophets distinguished between the two kinds of\nwisdom. It is sufficient for the present to quote from the words of\nDavid what he says regarding the man who is wise, according to divine\nwisdom, that \u201che will not see corruption when he beholds wise men\ndying.\u201d[1100] Divine wisdom, accordingly, being different from faith, is\nthe \u201cfirst\u201d of the so-called \u201ccharismata\u201d of God; and the \u201csecond\u201d after\nit\u2014in the estimation of those who know how to distinguish such things\naccurately\u2014is what is called \u201cknowledge;\u201d[1101] and the \u201cthird\u201d\u2014seeing\nthat even the more simple class of men who adhere to the service of God,\nso far as they can, must be saved\u2014is faith. And therefore Paul says: \u201cTo\none is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom, to another the word of\nknowledge by the same Spirit, to another faith by the same\nSpirit.\u201d[1102] And therefore it is no ordinary individuals whom you will\nfind to have participated in the \u201cdivine\u201d wisdom, but the more excellent\nand distinguished among those who have given in their adherence to\nChristianity; for it is not \u201cto the most ignorant, or servile, or most\nuninstructed of mankind,\u201d that one would discourse upon the topics\nrelating to the divine wisdom.\n\nFootnote 1097:\n\n Cf. Wisd. of Sol. ix. 6.\n\nFootnote 1098:\n\n \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1099:\n\n Heb. v. 14.\n\nFootnote 1100:\n\n Ps. xlix. 9, 10 (LXX.).\n\nFootnote 1101:\n\n \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1102:\n\n 1 Cor. xii. 8, 9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIV.\n\n\nIn designating others by the epithets of \u201cuninstructed, and servile, and\nignorant,\u201d Celsus, I suppose, means those who are not acquainted with\nhis laws, nor trained in the branches of Greek learning; while we, on\nthe other hand, deem those to be \u201cuninstructed\u201d who are not ashamed to\naddress [supplications] to inanimate objects, and to call upon those for\nhealth that have no strength, and to ask the dead for life, and to\nentreat the helpless for assistance.[1103] And although some may say\nthat these objects are not gods, but only imitations and symbols of real\ndivinities, nevertheless these very individuals, in imagining that the\nhands of low mechanics[1104] can frame imitations of divinity, are\n\u201cuninstructed, and servile, and ignorant;\u201d for we assert that the\nlowest[1105] among us have been set free from this ignorance and want of\nknowledge, while the most intelligent can understand and grasp the\ndivine hope. We do _not_ maintain, however, that it is impossible for\none who has not been trained in earthly wisdom to receive the \u201cdivine,\u201d\nbut we _do_ acknowledge that all human wisdom is \u201cfolly\u201d in comparison\nwith the \u201cdivine.\u201d In the next place, instead of endeavouring to adduce\nreasons, as he ought, for his assertions, he terms us \u201csorcerers,\u201d[1106]\nand asserts that \u201cwe flee away with headlong speed[1107] from the more\npolished[1108] class of persons, because they are not suitable subjects\nfor our impositions, while we seek to decoy[1109] those who are more\nrustic.\u201d Now he did not observe that from the very beginning our wise\nmen were trained in the external branches of learning: Moses, _e.g._, in\nall the wisdom of the Egyptians; Daniel, and Ananias, and Azariah, and\nMishael, in all Assyrian learning, so that they were found to surpass in\ntenfold degree all the wise men of that country. At the present time,\nmoreover, the churches have, in proportion to the multitudes [of\nordinary believers], a few \u201cwise\u201d men, who have come over to them from\nthat wisdom which is said by us to be \u201caccording to the flesh;\u201d[1110]\nand they have also some who have advanced from it to that wisdom which\nis \u201cdivine.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1103:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c8\u03cd\u03c7\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03bb\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd\n \u1f51\u03b3\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f00\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u1f72\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b6\u03c9\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2,\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f31\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1104:\n\n \u03b2\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1105:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c7\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1106:\n\n \u03b3\u03cc\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1107:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03ac\u03b4\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1108:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1109:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1110:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. i. 26.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XV.\n\n\nCelsus, in the next place, as one who has heard the subject of humility\ngreatly talked about,[1111] but who has not been at the pains to\nunderstand it,[1112] would wish to speak evil of that humility which is\npractised among us, and imagines that it is borrowed from some words of\nPlato imperfectly understood, where he expresses himself in the _Laws_\nas follows: \u201cNow God, according to the ancient account, having in\nHimself both the beginning and end and middle of all existing things,\nproceeds according to nature, and marches straight on.[1113] He is\nconstantly followed by justice, which is the avenger of all breaches of\nthe divine law: he who is about to become happy follows her closely in\nhumility, and becomingly adorned.\u201d[1114] He did not observe, however,\nthat in writers much older than Plato the following words occur in a\nprayer: \u201cLord, my heart is not haughty, nor mine eyes lofty, neither do\nI walk in great matters, nor in things too wonderful for me; if I had\nnot been humble,\u201d[1115] etc. Now these words show that he who is of\nhumble mind does not by any means humble himself in an unseemly or\ninauspicious manner, falling down upon his knees, or casting himself\nheadlong on the ground, putting on the dress of the miserable, or\nsprinkling himself with dust. But he who is of humble mind in the sense\nof the prophet, while \u201cwalking in great and wonderful things,\u201d which are\nabove his capacity\u2014viz. those doctrines that are truly great, and those\nthoughts that are wonderful\u2014\u201chumbles himself under the mighty hand of\nGod.\u201d If there are some, however, who through their stupidity[1116] have\nnot clearly understood the doctrine of humiliation, and act as they do,\nit is not our doctrine which is to be blamed; but we must extend our\nforgiveness to the stupidity[1117] of those who aim at higher things,\nand owing to their fatuity of mind[1118] fail to attain them. He who is\n\u201chumble and becomingly adorned,\u201d is so in a greater degree than Plato\u2019s\n\u201chumble and becomingly adorned\u201d individual: for he is becomingly\nadorned, on the one hand, because \u201che walks in things great and\nwonderful,\u201d which are beyond his capacity; and humble, on the other\nhand, because, while being in the midst of such, he yet voluntarily\nhumbles himself, not under any one at random, but under \u201cthe mighty hand\nof God,\u201d through Jesus Christ, the teacher of such instruction, \u201cwho did\nnot deem equality with God a thing to be eagerly clung to, but made\nHimself of no reputation, and took on Him the form of a servant, and\nbeing found in fashion as a man, humbled Himself, and became obedient\nunto death, even the death of the cross.\u201d[1119] And so great is this\ndoctrine of humiliation, that it has no ordinary individual as its\nteacher; but our great Saviour Himself says: \u201cLearn of me, for I am meek\nand lowly of heart, and ye shall find rest for your souls.\u201d[1120]\n\nFootnote 1111:\n\n \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b7\u03c7\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1112:\n\n \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1113:\n\n \u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1114:\n\n Plato, _de Legibus_, iv.\n\nFootnote 1115:\n\n Ps. cxxxi. 1, 2 (LXX.). The clause, \u201cIf I had not been humble,\u201d seems\n to belong to the following verse.\n\nFootnote 1116:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3.\n\nFootnote 1117:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3.\n\nFootnote 1118:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1119:\n\n Cf. Phil. ii. 6, 8.\n\nFootnote 1120:\n\n Cf. Matt. xi. 20.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVI.\n\n\nIn the next place, with regard to the declaration of Jesus against rich\nmen, when He said, \u201cIt is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a\nneedle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God,\u201d[1121]\nCelsus alleges that this saying manifestly proceeded from Plato, and\nthat Jesus perverted the words of the philosopher, which were, that \u201cit\nwas impossible to be distinguished for goodness, and at the same time\nfor riches.\u201d[1122] Now who is there that is capable of giving even\nmoderate attention to affairs\u2014not merely among the believers on Jesus,\nbut among the rest of mankind\u2014that would not laugh at Celsus, on hearing\nthat Jesus, who was born and brought up among the Jews, and was supposed\nto be the son of Joseph the carpenter, and who had not studied\nliterature\u2014not merely that of the Greeks, but not even that of the\nHebrews\u2014as the truth-loving Scriptures testify regarding Him,[1123] had\nread Plato, and being pleased with the opinion he expressed regarding\nrich men, to the effect that \u201cit was impossible to be distinguished for\ngoodness and riches at the same time,\u201d had perverted this, and changed\nit into, \u201cIt is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle,\nthan for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God!\u201d Now, if Celsus\nhad not perused the Gospels in a spirit of hatred and dislike, but had\nbeen imbued with a love of truth, he would have turned his attention to\nthe point why a camel\u2014that one of animals which, as regards its physical\nstructure, is crooked\u2014was chosen as an object of comparison with a rich\nman, and what signification the \u201cnarrow eye of a needle\u201d had for him who\nsaw that \u201cstrait and narrow was the way that leadeth unto life;\u201d[1124]\nand to this point also, that this animal, according to the law, is\ndescribed as \u201cunclean,\u201d having one element of acceptability, viz. that\nit ruminates, but one of condemnation, viz. that it does not divide the\nhoof. He would have inquired, moreover, how often the camel was adduced\nas an object of comparison in the sacred Scriptures, and in reference to\nwhat objects, that he might thus ascertain the meaning of the Logos\nconcerning the rich men. Nor would he have left without examination the\nfact that \u201cthe poor\u201d are termed \u201cblessed\u201d by Jesus, while \u201cthe rich\u201d are\ndesignated as \u201cmiserable;\u201d and whether these words refer to the rich and\npoor who are visible to the senses, or whether there is any kind of\npoverty known to the Logos which is to be deemed \u201caltogether blessed,\u201d\nand any rich man who is to be wholly condemned. For even a common\nindividual would not thus indiscriminately have praised the poor, many\nof whom lead most wicked lives. But on this point we have said enough.\n\nFootnote 1121:\n\n Cf. Matt. xix. 24.\n\nFootnote 1122:\n\n Cf. Plato, v. _de Legibus_.\n\nFootnote 1123:\n\n Cf. Matt. xiii. 54, Mark vi. 2, and John vii. 15.\n\nFootnote 1124:\n\n Cf. Matt. vii. 14.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVII.\n\n\nSince Celsus, moreover, from a desire to depreciate the accounts which\nour Scriptures give of the kingdom of God, has quoted none of them, as\nif they were unworthy of being recorded by him (or perhaps because he\nwas unacquainted with them), while, on the other hand, he quotes the\nsayings of Plato, both from his _Epistles_ and the _Ph\u0153drus_, as if\nthese were divinely inspired, but our Scriptures were not, let us set\nforth a few points, for the sake of comparison with these plausible\ndeclarations of Plato, which did not, however, dispose the philosopher\nto worship in a manner worthy of him the Maker of all things. For he\nought not to have adulterated or polluted this worship with what we call\n\u201cidolatry,\u201d but what the many would describe by the term \u201csuperstition.\u201d\nNow, according to a Hebrew figure of speech, it is said of God in the\neighteenth Psalm, that \u201cHe made darkness His secret place,\u201d[1125] to\nsignify that those notions which should be worthily entertained of God\nare invisible and unknowable, because God conceals Himself in darkness,\nas it were, from those who cannot endure the splendours of His\nknowledge, or are incapable of looking at them, partly owing to the\npollution of their understanding, which is clothed with the body of\nmortal lowliness, and partly owing to its feebler power of comprehending\nGod. And in order that it may appear that the knowledge of God has\nrarely been vouchsafed to men, and has been found in very few\nindividuals, Moses is related to have entered into the darkness where\nGod was.[1126] And again, with regard to Moses it is said: \u201cMoses alone\nshall come near the Lord, but the rest shall not come nigh.\u201d[1127] And\nagain, that the prophet may show the depth of the doctrines which relate\nto God, and which is unattainable by those who do not possess the\n\u201cSpirit which searcheth all things, even the deep things of God,\u201d he\nadded: \u201cThe abyss like a garment is His covering.\u201d[1128] Nay, our Lord\nand Saviour, the Logos of God, manifesting that the greatness of the\nknowledge of the Father is appropriately comprehended and known\npre-eminently by Him alone, and in the second place by those whose minds\nare enlightened by the Logos Himself and God, declares: \u201cNo man knoweth\nthe Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father but the Son,\nand he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him.\u201d[1129] For no one can\nworthily know the \u201cuncreated\u201d[1130] and first-born of all created nature\nlike the Father who begat Him, nor any one the Father like the living\nLogos, and His Wisdom and Truth. By sharing in Him who takes away from\nthe Father what is called \u201cdarkness,\u201d which He \u201cmade His secret place,\u201d\nand \u201cthe abyss,\u201d which is called His \u201ccovering,\u201d and in this way\nunveiling the Father, every one knows the Father who[1131] is capable of\nknowing Him.\n\nFootnote 1125:\n\n Cf. Ps. xviii. 11.\n\nFootnote 1126:\n\n Cf. Ex. xx. 21.\n\nFootnote 1127:\n\n Cf. Ex. xxiv. 2.\n\nFootnote 1128:\n\n Cf. Ps. civ. 6.\n\nFootnote 1129:\n\n Cf. Matt. xi. 27.\n\nFootnote 1130:\n\n \u1f00\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd. Locus diligenter notandus, ubi filius e creaturarum numero\n diserte eximitur, dum \u1f00\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 dicitur. At non dissimulandum in unico\n Cod. Anglicano secundo legi: \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd: cf. _Origenianorum_, lib.\n ii. qu\u00e6stio 2, num. 23.\u2014RU\u00c6US.\n\nFootnote 1131:\n\n \u1f45\u03c4\u03af \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u2019 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1fc7 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd. Boherellus proposes \u1f45\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u2019 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1fc7,\n etc.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVIII.\n\n\nI thought it right to quote these few instances from a much larger\nnumber of passages, in which our sacred writers express their ideas\nregarding God, in order to show that, to those who have eyes to behold\nthe venerable character of Scripture, the sacred writings of the\nprophets contain things more worthy of reverence than those sayings of\nPlato which Celsus admires. Now the declaration of Plato, quoted by\nCelsus, runs as follows: \u201cAll things are around the King of all, and all\nthings exist for his sake, and he is the cause of all good things. With\nthings of the second rank he is second, and with those of the third rank\nhe is third. The human soul, accordingly, is eager to learn what these\nthings are, looking to such things as are kindred to itself, none of\nwhich is perfect. But as regards the King and those things which I\nmentioned, there is nothing which resembles them.\u201d[1132] I might have\nmentioned, moreover, what is said of those beings which are called\nseraphim by the Hebrews, and described in Isaiah,[1133] who cover the\nface and feet of God, and of those called cherubim, whom Ezekiel[1134]\nhas described, and the postures of these, and of the manner in which God\nis said to be borne upon the cherubim. But since they are mentioned in a\nvery mysterious manner, on account of the unworthy and the indecent, who\nare unable to enter into the great thoughts and venerable nature of\ntheology, I have not deemed it becoming to discourse of them in this\ntreatise.\n\nFootnote 1132:\n\n Cf. Plato, _Epist._ ii. ad Dionys.\n\nFootnote 1133:\n\n Cf. Isa. vi. 2.\n\nFootnote 1134:\n\n Cf. Ezek. i. and x.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIX.\n\n\nCelsus in the next place alleges, that \u201ccertain Christians, having\nmisunderstood the words of Plato, loudly boast of a \u2018super-celestial\u2019\nGod, thus ascending beyond the heaven of the Jews.\u201d By these words,\nindeed, he does not make it clear whether they also ascend beyond the\n_God_ of the Jews, or only beyond the heaven by which they swear. It is\nnot our purpose at present, however, to speak of those who acknowledge\nanother god than the one worshipped by the Jews, but to defend\nourselves, and to show that it was impossible for the prophets of the\nJews, whose writings are reckoned among ours, to have borrowed anything\nfrom Plato, because they were older than he. They did not then borrow\nfrom him the declaration, that \u201call things are around the King of all,\nand that all exist on account of him;\u201d for we have learned that nobler\nthoughts than these have been uttered by the prophets, by Jesus Himself\nand His disciples, who have clearly indicated the meaning of the spirit\nthat was in them, which was none other than the spirit of Christ. Nor\nwas the philosopher the first to present to view the \u201csuper-celestial\u201d\nplace; for David long ago brought to view the profundity and multitude\nof the thoughts concerning God entertained by those who have ascended\nabove visible things, when he said in the book of Psalms: \u201cPraise God,\nye heaven of heavens; and ye waters that be above the heavens, let them\npraise the name of the Lord.\u201d[1135] I do not, indeed, deny that Plato\nlearned from certain Hebrews the words quoted from the _Ph\u0153drus_, or\neven, as some have recorded, that he quoted them from a perusal of our\nprophetic writings, when he said: \u201cNo poet here below has ever sung of\nthe super-celestial place, or ever will sing in a becoming manner,\u201d and\nso on. And in the same passage is the following: \u201cFor the essence, which\nis both colourless and formless, and which cannot be touched, which\nreally exists, is the pilot of the soul, and is beheld by the\nunderstanding alone; and around it the genus of true knowledge holds\nthis place.\u201d[1136] Our Paul, moreover, educated by these words, and\nlonging after things \u201csupra-mundane\u201d and \u201csuper-celestial,\u201d and doing\nhis utmost for their sake to attain them, says in the second Epistle to\nthe Corinthians: \u201cFor our light affliction, which is but for a moment,\nworketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory; while\nwe look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are\nnot seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things\nwhich are unseen are eternal.\u201d[1137]\n\nFootnote 1135:\n\n Ps. cxlviii. 4.\n\nFootnote 1136:\n\n Cf. Plato in _Ph\u00e6dro_.\n\nFootnote 1137:\n\n Cf. 2 Cor. iv. 17, 18.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XX.\n\n\nNow, to those who are capable of understanding him, the apostle\nmanifestly presents to view \u201cthings which are the objects of\nperception,\u201d calling them \u201cthings seen;\u201d while he terms \u201cunseen,\u201d things\nwhich are the object of the understanding, and cognisable by it alone.\nHe knows, also, that things \u201cseen\u201d and visible are \u201ctemporal,\u201d but that\nthings cognisable by the mind, and \u201cnot seen,\u201d are \u201ceternal;\u201d and\ndesiring to remain in the contemplation of these, and being assisted by\nhis earnest longing for them, he deemed all affliction as \u201clight\u201d and as\n\u201cnothing,\u201d and during the season of afflictions and troubles was not at\nall bowed down by them, but by his contemplation of [divine] things\ndeemed every calamity a light thing, seeing we also have \u201ca great High\nPriest,\u201d who by the greatness of His power and understanding \u201chas passed\nthrough the heavens, even Jesus the Son of God,\u201d who has promised to all\nthat have truly learned divine things, and have lived lives in harmony\nwith them, to go before them to the things that are supra-mundane; for\nHis words are: \u201cThat where I go, ye may be also.\u201d[1138] And therefore we\nhope, after the troubles and struggles which we suffer here, to reach\nthe highest heavens,[1139] and receiving, agreeably to the teaching of\nJesus, the fountains of water that spring up unto eternal life, and\nbeing filled with the rivers of knowledge,[1140] shall be united with\nthose waters that are said to be above the heavens, and which praise His\nname. And as many of us[1141] as praise Him shall not be carried about\nby the revolution of the heaven, but shall be ever engaged in the\ncontemplation of the invisible things of God, which are no longer\nunderstood by us through the things which He hath made from the creation\nof the world, but seeing, as it was expressed by the true disciple of\nJesus in these words, \u201cthen face to face;\u201d[1142] and in these, \u201cWhen\nthat which is perfect is come, then that which is in part will be done\naway.\u201d[1143]\n\nFootnote 1138:\n\n Cf. John xiv. 3.\n\nFootnote 1139:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f04\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1140:\n\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1141:\n\n For \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5 Boherellus proposes \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b5, which is adopted in the\n translation.\n\nFootnote 1142:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xiii. 12.\n\nFootnote 1143:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xiii. 10.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXI.\n\n\nThe Scriptures which are current in the churches of God do not speak of\n\u201cseven\u201d heavens, or of any definite number at all, but they do appear to\nteach the existence of \u201cheavens,\u201d whether that means the \u201cspheres\u201d of\nthose bodies which the Greeks call \u201cplanets,\u201d or something more\nmysterious. Celsus, too, agreeably to the opinion of Plato,[1144]\nasserts that souls can make their way to and from the earth through the\nplanets; while Moses, our most ancient prophet, says that a divine\nvision was presented to the view of our prophet Jacob,[1145]\u2014a ladder\nstretching to heaven, and the angels of God ascending and descending\nupon it, and the Lord supported[1146] upon its top,\u2014obscurely pointing,\nby this matter of the ladder, either to the same truths which Plato had\nin view, or to something greater than these. On this subject Philo has\ncomposed a treatise which deserves the thoughtful and intelligent\ninvestigation of all lovers of truth.\n\nFootnote 1144:\n\n Cf. Plato in _Tim\u00e6o_.\n\nFootnote 1145:\n\n Cf. Gen. xxviii. 12, 13.\n\nFootnote 1146:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXII.\n\n\nAfter this, Celsus, desiring to exhibit his learning in his treatise\nagainst us, quotes also certain Persian mysteries, where he says: \u201cThese\nthings are obscurely hinted at in the accounts of the Persians, and\nespecially in the mysteries of Mithras, which are celebrated amongst\nthem. For in the latter there is a representation of the two heavenly\nrevolutions,\u2014of the movement, viz., of the fixed[1147] stars, and of\nthat which takes place among the planets, and of the passage of the soul\nthrough these. The representation is of the following nature: There is a\nladder with lofty gates,[1148] and on the top of it an eighth gate. The\nfirst gate consists of lead, the second of tin, the third of copper, the\nfourth of iron, the fifth of a mixture of metals,[1149] the sixth of\nsilver, and the seventh of gold. The first gate they assign to Saturn,\nindicating by the \u2018lead\u2019 the slowness of this star; the second to Venus,\ncomparing her to the splendour and softness of tin; the third to\nJupiter, being firm[1150] and solid; the fourth to Mercury, for both\nMercury and iron are fit to endure all things, and are money-making and\nlaborious;[1151] the fifth to Mars, because, being composed of a mixture\nof metals, it is varied and unequal; the sixth, of silver, to the Moon;\nthe seventh, of gold, to the Sun,\u2014thus imitating the different colours\nof the two latter.\u201d He next proceeds to examine the reason of the stars\nbeing arranged in this order, which is symbolized by the names of the\nrest of matter.[1152] Musical reasons, moreover, are added or quoted by\nthe Persian theology; and to these, again, he strives to add a second\nexplanation, connected also with musical considerations. But it seems to\nme, that to quote the language of Celsus upon these matters would be\nabsurd, and similar to what he himself has done, when, in his\naccusations against Christians and Jews, he quoted, most\ninappropriately, not only the words of Plato; but, dissatisfied even\nwith these,[1153] he adduced in addition the mysteries of the Persian\nMithras, and the explanation of them. Now, whatever be the case with\nregard to these,\u2014whether the Persians and those who conduct the\nmysteries of Mithras give false or true accounts regarding them,\u2014why did\nhe select these for quotation, rather than some of the other mysteries,\nwith the explanation of them? For the mysteries of Mithras do not appear\nto be more famous among the Greeks than those of Eleusis, or than those\nin Egina, where individuals are initiated in the rites of Hecate. But if\nhe must introduce barbarian mysteries with their explanation, why not\nrather those of the Egyptians, which are highly regarded by many,[1154]\nor those of the Cappadocians regarding the Comanian Diana, or those of\nthe Thracians, or even those of the Romans themselves, who initiate the\nnoblest members of their senate?[1155] But if he deemed it inappropriate\nto institute a comparison with any of these, because they furnished no\naid in the way of accusing Jews or Christians, why did it not also\nappear to him inappropriate to adduce the instance of the mysteries of\nMithras?\n\nFootnote 1147:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1148:\n\n \u03ba\u03bb\u03af\u03bc\u03b1\u03be \u1f51\u03c8\u03af\u03c0\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2. Boherellus conjectures \u1f11\u03c0\u03c4\u03ac\u03c0\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1149:\n\n \u03ba\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1150:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03ba\u03bf\u03b2\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03ac\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1151:\n\n \u03c4\u03bb\u03ae\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u1f01\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03cd\u03ba\u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u03cc\u03bd\n \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c3\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f19\u03c1\u03bc\u1fc6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1152:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f55\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2. For \u1f55\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2, another reading is \u03c0\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1153:\n\n For \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, Spencer introduced into his text, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u2019\n \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, which has been adopted in the translation.\n\nFootnote 1154:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1f76 \u03c3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03cd\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1155:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03bb\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIII.\n\n\nIf one wished to obtain means for a profounder contemplation of the\nentrance of souls into divine things, not from the statements of that\nvery insignificant sect from which he quoted, but from books\u2014partly\nthose of the Jews, which are read in their synagogues, and adopted by\nChristians, and partly from those of Christians alone\u2014let him peruse, at\nthe end of Ezekiel\u2019s prophecies, the visions beheld by the prophet, in\nwhich gates of different kinds are enumerated,[1156] which obscurely\nrefer to the different modes in which divine souls enter into a better\nworld;[1157] and let him peruse also, from the Apocalypse of John, what\nis related of the city of God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and of its\nfoundations and gates.[1158] And if he is capable of finding out also\nthe road, which is indicated by symbols, of those who will march on to\ndivine things, let him read the book of Moses entitled Numbers, and let\nhim seek the help of one who is capable of initiating him into the\nmeaning of the narratives concerning the encampments of the children of\nIsrael; viz. of what sort those were which were arranged towards the\neast, as was the case with the first; and what those towards the\nsouth-west and south; and what towards the sea; and what the last were,\nwhich were stationed towards the north. For he will see that there is in\nthe respective places a meaning[1159] not to be lightly treated, nor, as\nCelsus imagines, such as calls only for silly and servile listeners: but\nhe will distinguish in the encampments certain things relating to the\nnumbers that are enumerated, and which are specially adapted to each\ntribe, of which the present does not appear to us to be the proper time\nto speak. Let Celsus know, moreover, as well as those who read his book,\nthat in no part of the genuine and divinely accredited Scriptures are\n\u201cseven\u201d heavens mentioned; neither do our prophets, nor the apostles of\nJesus, nor the Son of God Himself, repeat anything which they borrowed\nfrom the Persians or the Cabiri.\n\nFootnote 1156:\n\n Cf. Ezek. xlviii.\n\nFootnote 1157:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 1158:\n\n Cf. Apoc. xxi.\n\nFootnote 1159:\n\n \u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIV.\n\n\nAfter the instance borrowed from the Mithraic mysteries, Celsus declares\nthat he who would investigate the Christian mysteries, along with the\naforesaid Persian, will, on comparing the two together, and on unveiling\nthe rites of the Christians, see in this way the difference between\nthem. Now, wherever he was able to give the names of the various sects,\nhe was nothing loth to quote those with which he thought himself\nacquainted; but when he ought most of all to have done this, if they\nwere really known to him, and to have informed us which was the sect\nthat makes use of the diagram he has drawn, he has not done so. It seems\nto me, however, that it is from some statements of a very insignificant\nsect called Ophites, which he has misunderstood, that, in my opinion, he\nhas partly borrowed what he says about the diagram.[1160] Now, as we\nhave always been animated by a love of learning,[1161] we have fallen in\nwith this diagram, and we have found in it the representations of men\nwho, as Paul says, \u201ccreep into houses, and lead captive silly women\nladen with sins, led away with divers lusts; ever learning, and never\nable to come to the knowledge of the truth.\u201d[1162] The diagram was,\nhowever, so destitute of all credibility, that neither these easily\ndeceived women, nor the most rustic class of men, nor those who were\nready to be led away by any plausible pretender whatever, ever gave\ntheir assent to the diagram. Nor, indeed, have we ever met any\nindividual, although we have visited many parts of the earth, and have\nsought out all those who anywhere made profession of knowledge, that\nplaced any faith in this diagram.\n\nFootnote 1160:\n\n \u201cUtinam exstaret! Multum enim lucis procul dubio antiquissimorum\n Patrum libris, prisc\u00e6 ecclesi\u00e6 temporibus, et quibusdam sacr\u00e6\n Scriptur\u00e6 locis, accederet.\u201d\u2014SPENCER.\n\nFootnote 1161:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u1f72\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1162:\n\n Cf. 2 Tim. iii. 6, 7.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXV.\n\n\nIn this diagram were described ten circles, distinct from each other,\nbut united by one circle, which was said to be the soul of all things,\nand was called \u201cLeviathan.\u201d[1163] This Leviathan, the Jewish Scriptures\nsay, whatever they mean by the expression, was created by God for a\nplaything;[1164] for we find in the Psalms: \u201cIn wisdom hast Thou made\nall things: the earth is full of Thy creatures; so is this great and\nwide sea. There go the ships; small animals with great; there is this\ndragon, which Thou hast formed to play therein.\u201d[1165] Instead of the\nword \u201cdragon,\u201d the term \u201cleviathan\u201d is in the Hebrew. This impious\ndiagram, then, said of this leviathan, which is so clearly depreciated\nby the psalmist, that it was the soul which had travelled through all\nthings! We observed, also, in the diagram, the being named \u201cBehemoth,\u201d\nplaced as it were under the lowest circle. The inventor of this accursed\ndiagram had inscribed this leviathan at its circumference and centre,\nthus placing its name in two separate places. Moreover, Celsus says that\nthe diagram was \u201cdivided by a thick black line, and this line he\nasserted was called Gehenna, which is Tartarus.\u201d Now as we found that\nGehenna was mentioned in the Gospel as a place of punishment, we\nsearched to see whether it is mentioned anywhere in the ancient\nScriptures, and especially because the Jews too use the word. And we\nascertained that where the valley of the son of Ennom was named in\nScripture in the Hebrew, instead of \u201cvalley,\u201d with fundamentally the\nsame meaning, it was termed both the valley of Ennom and also Geenna.\nAnd continuing our researches, we find that what was termed \u201cGeenna,\u201d or\n\u201cthe valley of Ennom,\u201d was included in the lot of the tribe of Benjamin,\nin which Jerusalem also was situated. And seeking to ascertain what\nmight be the inference from the heavenly Jerusalem belonging to the lot\nof Benjamin and the valley of Ennom, we find a certain confirmation of\nwhat is said regarding the place of punishment, intended for the\npurification of such souls as are to be purified by torments, agreeably\nto the saying: \u201cThe Lord cometh like a refiner\u2019s fire, and like fuller\u2019s\nsoap: and He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver and of\ngold.\u201d[1166]\n\nFootnote 1163:\n\n Cf. note in Spencer\u2019s ed.\n\nFootnote 1164:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1165:\n\n Cf. Ps. civ. 24-26.\n\nFootnote 1166:\n\n Cf. Mal. iii. 2, 3.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVI.\n\n\nIt is in the precincts of Jerusalem, then, that punishments will be\ninflicted upon those who undergo the process of purification,[1167] who\nhave received into the substance of their soul the elements of\nwickedness, which in a certain place[1168] is figuratively termed\n\u201clead,\u201d and on that account iniquity is represented in Zechariah as\nsitting upon a \u201ctalent of lead.\u201d[1169] But the remarks which might be\nmade on this topic are neither to be made to all, nor to be uttered on\nthe present occasion; for it is not unattended with danger to commit to\nwriting the explanation of such subjects, seeing the multitude need no\nfurther instruction than that which relates to the punishment of\nsinners; while to ascend beyond this is not expedient, for the sake of\nthose who are with difficulty restrained, even by fear of eternal\npunishment, from plunging into any degree of wickedness, and into the\nflood of evils which result from sin. The doctrine of Geenna, then, is\nunknown both to the Diagram and to Celsus: for had it been otherwise,\nthe framers of the former would not have boasted of their pictures of\nanimals and diagrams, as if the truth were represented by these; nor\nwould Celsus, in his treatise against the Christians, have introduced\namong the charges directed against them statements which they never\nuttered, instead of what was spoken by some who perhaps are no longer in\nexistence, but have altogether disappeared, or been reduced to a very\nfew individuals, and these easily counted. And as it does not beseem\nthose who profess the doctrines of Plato to offer a defence of Epicurus\nand his impious opinions, so neither is it for us to defend the diagram,\nor to refute the accusations brought against it by Celsus. We may\ntherefore allow his charges on these points to pass as superfluous and\nuseless,[1170] for we would censure more severely than Celsus any who\nshould be carried away by such opinions.\n\nFootnote 1167:\n\n \u03c7\u03c9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1168:\n\n \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6.\n\nFootnote 1169:\n\n Cf. Zech. v. 7.\n\nFootnote 1170:\n\n \u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVII.\n\n\nAfter the matter of the Diagram, he brings forward certain monstrous\nstatements, in the form of question and answer,[1171] regarding what is\ncalled by ecclesiastical writers the \u201cseal,\u201d statements which did not\narise from imperfect information; such as that \u201che who impresses the\nseal is called father, and he who is sealed is called young man and\nson;\u201d and who answers, \u201cI have been anointed with white ointment from\nthe tree of life,\u201d\u2014things which we never heard to have occurred even\namong the heretics. In the next place, he determines even the number\nmentioned by those who deliver over the seal, as that \u201cof _seven_\nangels, who attach themselves to both sides of the soul of the dying\nbody; the one party being named angels of light, the others\n\u2018archontics;\u2019\u201d[1172] and he asserts that the \u201cruler of those named\n\u2018archontics\u2019 is termed the \u2018accursed\u2019 God.\u201d Then, laying hold of the\nexpression, he assails, not without reason, those who venture to use\nsuch language; and on that account we entertain a similar feeling of\nindignation with those who censure such individuals, if indeed there\nexist any who call the God of the Jews\u2014who sends rain and thunder, and\nwho is the Creator of this world, and the God of Moses, and of the\ncosmogony which he records\u2014an \u201caccursed\u201d divinity. Celsus, however,\nappears to have had in view, in employing these expressions, not a\n_rational_[1173] object, but one of a most irrational kind, arising out\nof his hatred towards us, which is so unlike a philosopher. For his aim\nwas, that those who are unacquainted with our customs should, on\nperusing his treatise, at once assail us as if we called the noble\nCreator of this world an \u201caccursed divinity.\u201d He appears to me, indeed,\nto have acted like those Jews who, when Christianity began to be first\npreached, scattered abroad false reports of the gospel, such as that\n\u201cChristians offered up an infant in sacrifice, and partook of its\nflesh;\u201d and again, \u201cthat the professors of Christianity, wishing to do\nthe \u2018works of darkness,\u2019 used to extinguish the lights [in their\nmeetings], and each one to have sexual intercourse with any woman whom\nhe chanced to meet.\u201d These calumnies have long exercised, although\nunreasonably, an influence over the minds of very many, leading those\nwho are aliens to the gospel to believe that Christians are men of such\na character; and even at the present day they mislead some, and prevent\nthem from entering even into the simple intercourse of conversation with\nthose who are Christians.\n\nFootnote 1171:\n\n \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03cc\u03ba\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u03ac\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1172:\n\n \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1173:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u03b5\u1f54\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac ... \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c5 \u1f00\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVIII.\n\n\nWith some such object as this in view does Celsus seem to have been\nactuated, when he alleged that Christians term the Creator an \u201caccursed\ndivinity;\u201d in order that he who believes these charges of his against\nus, should, if possible, arise and exterminate the Christians as the\nmost impious of mankind. Confusing, moreover, things that are\ndistinct,[1174] he states also the reason why the God of the Mosaic\ncosmogony is termed \u201caccursed,\u201d asserting that \u201csuch is his character,\nand worthy of execration in the opinion of those who so regard him,\ninasmuch as he pronounced a curse upon the serpent, who introduced the\nfirst human beings to the knowledge of good and evil.\u201d Now he ought to\nhave known that those who have espoused the cause of the serpent,\nbecause he gave good advice to the first human beings, and who go far\nbeyond the Titans and Giants of fable, and are on this account called\nOphites, are so far from being Christians, that they bring accusations\nagainst Jesus to as great a degree as Celsus himself; and they do not\nadmit any one into their assembly[1175] until he has uttered\nmaledictions against Jesus. See, then, how irrational is the procedure\nof Celsus, who, in his discourse against the Christians, represents as\nsuch those who will not even listen to the _name_ of Jesus, or admit\neven that He was a wise man, or a person of virtuous[1176] character!\nWhat, then, could evince greater folly or madness, not only on the part\nof those who wish to derive their name from the serpent as the author of\ngood,[1177] but also on the part of Celsus, who thinks that the\naccusations with which the Ophites[1178] are charged, are chargeable\nalso against the Christians! Long ago, indeed, that Greek philosopher\nwho preferred a state of poverty,[1179] and who exhibited the pattern of\na happy life, showing that he was not excluded from happiness although\nhe was possessed of nothing,[1180] termed himself a Cynic; while these\nimpious wretches, as not being human beings, whose enemy the serpent is,\nbut as being serpents, pride themselves upon being called Ophites from\nthe serpent, which is an animal most hostile to and greatly dreaded by\nman, and boast of one Euphrates[1181] as the introducer of these\nunhallowed opinions.\n\nFootnote 1174:\n\n \u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 1175:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1176:\n\n \u03bc\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f24\u03b8\u03b7.\n\nFootnote 1177:\n\n \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1178:\n\n \u1f48\u03c6\u03b9\u1fb6\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9; cf. Iren\u00e6us, vol. i. pp. 104-112 (_Ante-Nicene Library_).\n\nFootnote 1179:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03c0\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1180:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1181:\n\n \u201cEuphraten hujus h\u00e6resis auctorem solus Origenes tradit.\u201d\u2014SPENCER; cf.\n note in Spencer\u2019s ed.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIX.\n\n\nIn the next place, as if it were the Christians whom he was\ncalumniating, he continues his accusations against those who termed the\nGod of Moses and of his law an \u201caccursed\u201d divinity; and imagining that\nit is the Christians who so speak, he expresses himself thus: \u201cWhat\ncould be more foolish or insane than such senseless[1182] wisdom? For\nwhat blunder has the Jewish lawgiver committed? and why do you accept,\nby means, as you say,[1183] of a certain allegorical and typical method\nof interpretation, the cosmogony which he gives, and the law of the\nJews, while it is with unwillingness, O most impious man, that you give\npraise to the Creator of the world, who promised to give them all\nthings; who promised to multiply their race to the ends of the earth,\nand to raise them up from the dead with the same flesh and blood, and\nwho gave inspiration[1184] to their prophets; and, again, you slander\nHim! When you feel the force of such considerations, indeed, you\nacknowledge that you worship the same God; but when your teacher Jesus\nand the Jewish Moses give contradictory decisions,[1185] you seek\nanother God, instead of Him, and the Father!\u201d Now, by such statements,\nthis illustrious philosopher Celsus distinctly slanders the Christians,\nasserting that, when the Jews press them hard, they acknowledge the same\nGod as they do; but that when Jesus legislates differently from Moses,\nthey seek another god instead of Him. Now, whether we are conversing\nwith the Jews, or are alone with ourselves, we know of only one and the\nsame God, whom the Jews also worshipped of old time, and still profess\nto worship as God, and we are guilty of no impiety towards Him. We do\n_not_ assert, however, that God will raise men from the dead with the\nsame flesh and blood, as has been shown in the preceding pages; for we\ndo not maintain that the natural[1186] body, which is sown in\ncorruption, and in dishonour, and in weakness, will rise again such as\nit was sown. On such subjects, however, we have spoken at adequate\nlength in the foregoing pages.\n\nFootnote 1182:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 1183:\n\n Boherellus proposes \u03c6\u1fc7\u03c2 for the textual reading \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1184:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03ae\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03bd\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 1185:\n\n \u1f45\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03b1 \u1f41 \u03c3\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f41 \u1f38\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u039c\u03c9\u03cb\u03c3\u1fc6\u03c2,\n \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u1fc6.\n\nFootnote 1186:\n\n \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXX.\n\n\nHe next returns to the subject of the Seven ruling Demons,[1187] whose\nnames are not found among Christians, but who, I think, are accepted by\nthe Ophites. We found, indeed, that in the Diagram, which on their\naccount we procured a sight of, the same order was laid down as that\nwhich Celsus has given. Celsus says that \u201cthe goat was shaped like a\nlion,\u201d not mentioning the name given him by those who are truly the most\nimpious of individuals; whereas _we_ discovered that He who is honoured\nin Holy Scripture as the angel of the Creator is called by this accursed\nDiagram Michael the Lion-like. Again, Celsus says that the \u201csecond in\norder is a bull;\u201d whereas the Diagram which we possessed made him to be\nSuriel, the bull-like. Further, Celsus termed the third \u201can amphibious\nsort of animal, and one that hissed frightfully;\u201d while the Diagram\ndescribed the third as Raphael, the serpent-like. Moreover, Celsus\nasserted that the \u201cfourth had the form of an eagle;\u201d the Diagram\nrepresenting him as Gabriel, the eagle-like. Again, the \u201cfifth,\u201d\naccording to Celsus, \u201chad the countenance of a bear;\u201d and this,\naccording to the Diagram, was Thauthabaoth,[1188] the bear-like. Celsus\ncontinues his account, that the \u201csixth was described as having the face\nof a dog;\u201d and him the Diagram called Erataoth. The \u201cseventh,\u201d he adds,\n\u201chad the countenance of an ass, and was named Thaphabaoth or Onoel;\u201d\nwhereas we discovered that in the Diagram he is called Onoel, or\nThartharaoth, being somewhat asinine in appearance. We have thought it\nproper to be exact in stating these matters, that we might not appear to\nbe ignorant of those things which Celsus professed to know, but that we\nChristians, knowing them better than he, may demonstrate that these are\nnot the words of Christians, but of those who are altogether alienated\nfrom salvation, and who neither acknowledge Jesus as Saviour, nor God,\nnor teacher, nor Son of God.\n\nFootnote 1187:\n\n Cf. Spencer\u2019s note, as quoted in Benedictine ed.\n\nFootnote 1188:\n\n \u201cNescio, an h\u00e6resium Scriptores hujus Thauthabaoth, Erataoth,\n Thaphabaoth, Onoeles, et Thartharaoth, usquam meminerint. Hujus\n generis vocabula innumera invenies apud Epiphan. _H\u00e6r._ 31, qu\u00e6 est\n Valentinianorum, pp. 165-171.\u201d\u2014SPENCER.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXI.\n\n\nMoreover, if any one would wish to become acquainted with the artifices\nof those sorcerers, through which they desire to lead men away by their\nteaching (as if they possessed the knowledge of certain secret rites),\nbut are not at all successful in so doing, let him listen to the\ninstruction which they receive after passing through what is termed the\n\u201cfence of wickedness,\u201d[1189]\u2014gates which are subjected to the world of\nruling spirits.[1190] [The following, then, is the manner in which they\nproceed]: \u201cI salute the one-formed[1191] king, the bond of blindness,\ncomplete[1192] oblivion, the first power, preserved by the spirit of\nprovidence and by wisdom, from whom I am sent forth pure, being already\npart of the light of the son and of the father: grace be with me; yea, O\nfather, let it be with me.\u201d They say also that the beginnings of the\nOgdoad[1193] are derived from this. In the next place, they are taught\nto say as follows, while passing through what they call Ialdabaoth:\n\u201cThou, O first and seventh, who art born to command with confidence,\nthou, O Ialdabaoth, who art the rational ruler of a pure mind, and a\nperfect work to son and father, bearing the symbol of life in the\ncharacter of a type, and opening to the world the gate which thou didst\nclose against thy kingdom, I pass again in freedom through thy realm.\nLet grace be with me; yea, O father, let it be with me.\u201d They say,\nmoreover, that the star Ph\u00e6non[1194] is in sympathy[1195] with the\nlion-like ruler. They next imagine that he who has passed through\nIaldabaoth and arrived at Iao ought thus to speak: \u201cThou, O second Iao,\nwho shinest by night,[1196] who art the ruler of the secret mysteries of\nson and father, first prince of death, and portion of the innocent,\nbearing now mine own beard as symbol, I am ready to pass through thy\nrealm, having strengthened him who is born of thee by the living word.\nGrace be with me; father, let it be with me.\u201d They next come to Sabaoth,\nto whom they think the following should be addressed: \u201cO governor of the\nfifth realm, powerful Sabaoth, defender of the law of thy creatures, who\nare liberated by thy grace through the help of a more powerful\nPentad,[1197] admit me, seeing the faultless symbol of their art,\npreserved by the stamp of an image, a body liberated by a Pentad. Let\ngrace be with me, O father, let grace be with me.\u201d And after Sabaoth\nthey come to Astaph\u00e6us, to whom they believe the following prayer should\nbe offered: \u201cO Astaph\u00e6us, ruler of the third gate, overseer of the first\nprinciple of water, look upon me as one of thine initiated,[1198] admit\nme who am purified with the spirit of a virgin, thou who seest the\nessence of the world. Let grace be with me, O father, let grace be with\nme.\u201d After him comes Alo\u00e6us, who is to be thus addressed: \u201cO Alo\u00e6us,\ngovernor of the second gate, let me pass, seeing I bring to thee the\nsymbol of thy mother, a grace which is hidden by the powers of the\nrealms.[1199] Let grace be with me, O father, let it be with me.\u201d And\nlast of all they name Hor\u00e6us, and think that the following prayer ought\nto be offered to him: \u201cThou who didst fearlessly overleap the rampart of\nfire, O Hor\u00e6us, who didst obtain the government of the first gate, let\nme pass, seeing thou beholdest the symbol of thine own power,\nsculptured[1200] on the figure of the tree of life, and formed after\nthis image, in the likeness of innocence. Let grace be with me, O\nfather, let grace be with me.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1189:\n\n \u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1190:\n\n \u03c0\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03b5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1191:\n\n \u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1192:\n\n \u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1193:\n\n \u1f48\u03b3\u03b4\u03bf\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2. Cf. Tertullian, _de pr\u00e6script. adv. H\u00e6reticos_, c. 33\n (_Ante-Nicene Library_; Writings of Tertullian, vol. ii. p. 39), and\n other references in Benedictine ed.\n\nFootnote 1194:\n\n \u03a6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd. \u201cEa, qu\u00e6 Saturni stella dicitur, \u03a6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd a Gr\u00e6cis\n dicitur.\u201d\u2014CICERO, _de Nat. Deorum_, book ii.\n\nFootnote 1195:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1196:\n\n \u03bd\u03c5\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03ae\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1197:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac\u03b4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c9\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u1fb3.\n\nFootnote 1198:\n\n \u03bc\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1199:\n\n \u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03c5\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1200:\n\n For \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd Boherellus conjectures \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03bb\u03c5\u03c6\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd, which has been\n adopted in the translation.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXII.\n\n\nThe supposed great learning of Celsus, which is composed, however,\nrather of curious trifles and silly talk than anything else, has made us\ntouch upon these topics, from a wish to show to every one who peruses\nhis treatise and our reply, that we have no lack of information on those\nsubjects, from which he takes occasion to calumniate the Christians, who\nneither are acquainted with, nor concern themselves about, such matters.\nFor we, too, desired both to learn and set forth these things, in order\nthat sorcerers might not, under pretext of knowing more than we, delude\nthose who are easily carried away by the glitter[1201] of names. And I\ncould have given many more illustrations to show that we are acquainted\nwith the opinions of these deluders,[1202] and that we disown them, as\nbeing alien to ours, and impious, and not in harmony with the doctrines\nof true Christians, of which we are ready to make confession even to the\ndeath. It must be noticed, too, that those who have drawn up this array\nof fictions, have, from neither understanding magic, nor discriminating\nthe meaning of Holy Scripture, thrown everything into confusion; seeing\nthat they have borrowed from magic the names of Ialdabaoth, and\nAstaph\u00e6us, and Hor\u00e6us, and from the Hebrew Scriptures him who is termed\nin Hebrew Iao or Jah, and Sabaoth, and Adon\u00e6us, and Elo\u00e6us. Now the\nnames taken from the Scriptures are names of one and the same God;\nwhich, not being understood by the enemies of God, as even themselves\nacknowledge, led to their imagining that Iao was a different God, and\nSabaoth another, and Adon\u00e6us, whom the Scriptures term Adonai, a third\nbesides, and that Elo\u00e6us, whom the prophets name in Hebrew Eloi, was\nalso different.\n\nFootnote 1201:\n\n \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1202:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03ce\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIII.\n\n\nCelsus next relates other fables, to the effect that \u201ccertain persons\nreturn to the shapes of the archontics,[1203] so that some are called\nlions, others bulls, others dragons, or eagles, or bears, or dogs.\u201d We\nfound also in the Diagram which we possessed, and which Celsus called\nthe \u201csquare pattern,\u201d the statements[1204] made by these unhappy beings\nconcerning the gates of Paradise. The flaming sword was depicted as the\ndiameter of a flaming circle, and as if mounting guard over the tree of\nknowledge and of life. Celsus, however, either would not or could not\nrepeat the harangues which, according to the fables of these impious\nindividuals, are represented as spoken at each of the gates by those who\npass through them; but this we have done in order to show to Celsus and\nthose who read his treatise, that we know the depth of these unhallowed\nmysteries,[1205] and that they are far removed from the worship which\nChristians offer up to God.\n\nFootnote 1203:\n\n \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03ac\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1204:\n\n Guietus thinks that some word has been omitted here, as \u03be\u03af\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2, which\n seems very probable.\n\nFootnote 1205:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIV.\n\n\nAfter finishing the foregoing, and those analogous matters which we\nourselves have added, Celsus continues as follows: \u201cThey continue to\nheap together one thing after another,\u2014discourses of prophets, and\ncircles upon circles, and effluents[1206] from an earthly church, and\nfrom circumcision; and a power flowing from one Prunicos, a virgin and a\nliving soul; and a heaven slain in order to live, and an earth\nslaughtered by the sword, and many put to death that they may live, and\ndeath ceasing in the world, when the sin of the world is dead; and,\nagain, a narrow way, and gates that open spontaneously. And in all their\nwritings [is mention made] of the tree of life, and a resurrection of\nthe flesh by means[1207] of the \u2018tree,\u2019 because, I imagine, their\nteacher was nailed to a cross, and was a carpenter by trade; so that if\nhe had chanced to have been cast from a precipice, or thrust into a pit,\nor suffocated by hanging, or had been a leather-cutter, or stone-cutter,\nor worker in iron, there would have been [invented] a precipice of life\nbeyond the heavens, or a pit of resurrection, or a cord of immortality,\nor a blessed stone, or an iron of love, or a sacred leather! Now what\nold woman would not be ashamed to utter such things in a whisper, even\nwhen making stories to lull an infant to sleep?\u201d In using such language\nas this, Celsus appears to me to confuse together matters which he has\nimperfectly heard. For it seems likely that, even supposing that he had\nheard a few words traceable to some existing heresy, he did not clearly\nunderstand the meaning intended to be conveyed; but heaping the words\ntogether, he wished to show before those who knew nothing either of our\nopinions or of those of the heretics, that he was acquainted with all\nthe doctrines of the Christians. And this is evident also from the\nforegoing words.\n\nFootnote 1206:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03bf\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1207:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03be\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXV.\n\n\nIt is our practice, indeed, to make use of the words of the prophets,\nwho demonstrate that Jesus is the Christ predicted by them, and who show\nfrom the prophetic writings that the events in the Gospels regarding\nJesus have been fulfilled. But when Celsus speaks of \u201ccircles upon\ncircles,\u201d [he perhaps borrowed the expression] from the aforementioned\nheresy, which includes in one circle (which they call the soul of all\nthings, and Leviathan) the seven circles of archontic demons, or perhaps\nit arises from misunderstanding the preacher, when he says: \u201cThe wind\ngoeth in a circle of circles, and returneth again upon its\ncircles.\u201d[1208] The expression, too, \u201ceffluents of an earthly church and\nof circumcision,\u201d was probably taken from the fact that the church on\nearth was called by some an effluent from a heavenly church and a better\nworld; and that the circumcision described in the law was a symbol of\nthe circumcision performed there, in a certain place set apart for\npurification. The adherents of Valentinus, moreover, in keeping with\ntheir system of error,[1209] give the name of Prunicos to a certain kind\nof wisdom, of which they would have the woman afflicted with the twelve\nyears\u2019 issue of blood to be the symbol; so that Celsus, who confuses\ntogether all sorts of opinions\u2014Greek, Barbarian, and Heretical\u2014having\nheard of her, asserted that it was a power flowing forth from one\nPrunicos, a virgin. The \u201cliving soul,\u201d again, is perhaps mysteriously\nreferred by some of the followers of Valentinus to the being whom they\nterm the psychic[1210] creator of the world; or perhaps, in\ncontradistinction to a \u201cdead\u201d soul, the \u201cliving\u201d soul is termed by some,\nnot inelegantly,[1211] the soul of \u201chim who is saved.\u201d I know nothing,\nhowever, of a \u201cheaven which is said to be slain,\u201d or of an \u201cearth\nslaughtered by the sword,\u201d or of many persons slain in order that they\nmight live; for it is not unlikely that these were coined by Celsus out\nof his own brain.\n\nFootnote 1208:\n\n Eccles. i. 6 (literally rendered).\n\nFootnote 1209:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1210:\n\n \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1211:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVI.\n\n\nWe would say, moreover, that death ceases in the world when the sin of\nthe world dies, referring the saying to the mystical words of the\napostle, which run as follows: \u201cWhen He shall have put all enemies under\nHis feet, then the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.\u201d[1212]\nAnd also: \u201cWhen this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, then\nshall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed\nup in victory.\u201d[1213] The \u201cstrait descent,\u201d[1214] again, may perhaps be\nreferred by those who hold the doctrine of transmigration of souls to\nthat view of things. And it is not incredible that the gates which are\nsaid to open spontaneously are referred obscurely by some to the words,\n\u201cOpen to me the gates of righteousness, that I may go into them, and\npraise the Lord; this gate of the Lord, into it the righteous shall\nenter;\u201d[1215] and again, to what is said in the ninth psalm, \u201cThou that\nliftest me up from the gates of death, that I may show forth all Thy\npraise in the gates of the daughter of Zion.\u201d[1216] The Scripture\nfurther gives the name of \u201cgates of death\u201d to those sins which lead to\ndestruction, as it terms, on the contrary, good actions the \u201cgates of\nZion.\u201d So also \u201cthe gates of righteousness,\u201d which is an equivalent\nexpression to \u201cthe gates of virtue,\u201d and these are ready to be opened to\nhim who follows after virtuous pursuits. The subject of the \u201ctree of\nlife\u201d will be more appropriately explained when we interpret the\nstatements in the book of Genesis regarding the paradise planted by God.\nCelsus, moreover, has often mocked at the subject of a resurrection,\u2014a\ndoctrine which he did not comprehend; and on the present occasion, not\nsatisfied with what he has formerly said, he adds, \u201cAnd there is said to\nbe a resurrection of the flesh by means of the tree;\u201d not understanding,\nI think, the symbolical expression, that \u201cthrough the tree came death,\nand through the tree comes life,\u201d[1217] because death was in Adam, and\nlife in Christ. He next scoffs at the \u201ctree,\u201d assailing it on two\ngrounds, and saying, \u201cFor this reason is the tree introduced, either\nbecause our teacher was nailed to a cross, or because he was a carpenter\nby trade;\u201d not observing that the tree of life is mentioned in the\nMosaic writings, and being blind also to this, that in none of the\nGospels current in the churches is Jesus Himself ever described as being\na carpenter.[1218]\n\nFootnote 1212:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 25, 26.\n\nFootnote 1213:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 54; cf. Hos. xiii. 14.\n\nFootnote 1214:\n\n \u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1215:\n\n Cf. Ps. cxviii. 19, 20.\n\nFootnote 1216:\n\n Cf. Ps. ix. 13, 14.\n\nFootnote 1217:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 22.\n\nFootnote 1218:\n\n Cf., however, Mark vi. 3.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVII.\n\n\nCelsus, moreover, thinks that we have invented this \u201ctree of life\u201d to\ngive an allegorical meaning to the cross; and in consequence of his\nerror upon this point, he adds: \u201cIf he had happened to be cast down a\nprecipice, or shoved into a pit, or suffocated by hanging, there would\nhave been invented a precipice of life far beyond the heavens, or a pit\nof resurrection, or a cord of immortality.\u201d And again: \u201cIf the \u2018tree of\nlife\u2019 were an invention, because he (Jesus) [is reported] to have been a\ncarpenter, it would follow that if he had been a leather-cutter,\nsomething would have been said about holy leather; or had he been a\nstone-cutter, about a blessed stone; or if a worker in iron, about an\niron of love.\u201d Now, who does not see at once[1219] the paltry nature of\nhis charge, in thus calumniating men whom he professed to convert on the\nground of their being deceived? And after these remarks, he goes on to\nspeak in a way quite in harmony with the tone of those who have invented\nthe fictions of lion-like, and ass-headed, and serpent-like ruling\nangels,[1220] and other similar absurdities, but which does not affect\nthose who belong to the church. Of a truth, even a drunken old woman\nwould be ashamed to chaunt or whisper to an infant, in order to lull him\nto sleep, any such fables as those have done who invented the beings\nwith asses\u2019 heads, and the harangues, so to speak, which are delivered\nat each of the gates. But Celsus is not acquainted with the doctrines of\nthe members of the church, which very few have been able to comprehend,\neven of those who have devoted all their lives, in conformity with the\ncommand of Jesus, to the searching of the Scriptures, and have laboured\nto investigate the meaning of the sacred books, to a greater degree than\nGreek philosophers in their efforts to attain a so-called wisdom.\n\nFootnote 1219:\n\n \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1220:\n\n \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVIII.\n\n\nOur noble [friend], moreover, not satisfied with the objections which he\nhas drawn from the Diagram, desires, in order to strengthen his\naccusations against us, who have nothing in common with it, to introduce\ncertain other charges, which he adduces from the same [heretics], but\nyet as if they were from a different source. His words are: \u201cAnd that is\nnot the least of their marvels, for there are between the upper\ncircles\u2014those that are above the heavens\u2014certain inscriptions of which\nthey give the interpretation, and among others two words especially, \u2018a\ngreater and a less,\u2019 which they refer to Father and Son.\u201d[1221] Now, in\nthe Diagram referred to, we found the greater and the lesser circle,\nupon the diameter of which was inscribed \u201cFather and Son;\u201d and between\nthe greater circle (in which the lesser was contained) and another[1222]\ncomposed of two circles,\u2014the outer one of which was yellow, and the\ninner blue,\u2014a barrier inscribed in the shape of a hatchet. And above it,\na short circle, close to the greater of the two former, having the\ninscription \u201cLove;\u201d and lower down, one touching the same circle, with\nthe word \u201cLife.\u201d And on the second circle, which was intertwined with\nand included two other circles, another figure, like a rhomboid,\n[entitled] \u201cThe foresight of wisdom.\u201d And within their point of common\nsection was \u201cThe nature of wisdom.\u201d And above their point of common\nsection was a circle, on which was inscribed \u201cKnowledge;\u201d and lower down\nanother, on which was the inscription, \u201cUnderstanding.\u201d We have\nintroduced these matters into our reply to Celsus, to show to our\nreaders that we know better than he, and not by mere report, those\nthings, even although we also disapprove of them. Moreover, if those who\npride themselves upon such matters profess also a kind of magic and\nsorcery,\u2014which, in their opinion, is the summit of wisdom,\u2014we, on the\nother hand, make no affirmation about it, seeing we never have\ndiscovered anything of the kind. Let Celsus, however, who has been\nalready often convicted of false witness and irrational accusations, see\nwhether he is not guilty of falsehood in these also, or whether he has\nnot extracted and introduced into his treatise, statements taken from\nthe writings of those who are foreigners and strangers to our Christian\nfaith.\n\nFootnote 1221:\n\n \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bf \u1f04\u03c4\u03c4\u03b1, \u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c5\u1f31\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1222:\n\n For \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, the textual reading, Gelenius, with the approval of\n Boherellus, proposes \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5, which has been followed in\n the translation.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIX.\n\n\nIn the next place, speaking of those who employ the arts of magic and\nsorcery, and who invoke the barbarous names of demons, he remarks that\nsuch persons act like those who, in reference to the same things,[1223]\nperform marvels before those who are ignorant that the names of demons\namong the Greeks are different from what they are among the Scythians.\nHe then quotes a passage from Herodotus, stating that \u201cApollo is called\nGongosyrus by the Scythians; Poseidon, Thagimasada; Aphrodite,\nArgimpasan; Hestia, Tabiti.\u201d[1224] Now, he who has the capacity can\ninquire whether in these matters Celsus and Herodotus are not both\nwrong; for the Scythians do not understand the same thing as the Greeks,\nin what relates to those beings which are deemed to be gods. For how is\nit credible[1225] that Apollo should be called Gongosyrus by the\nScythians? I do not suppose that Gongosyrus, when transferred into the\nGreek language, yields the same etymology as Apollo; or that Apollo, in\nthe dialect of the Scythians, has the signification of Gongosyrus. Nor\nhas any such assertion hitherto been made regarding the other\nnames,[1226] for the Greeks took occasion from different circumstances\nand etymologies to give to those who are by them deemed gods the names\nwhich they bear; and the Scythians, again, from another set of\ncircumstances; and the same also was the case with the Persians, or\nIndians, or Ethiopians, or Libyans, or with those who delight to bestow\nnames [from fancy], and who do not abide by the just and pure idea of\nthe Creator of all things. Enough, however, has been said by us in the\npreceding pages, where we wished to demonstrate that Sabaoth and Zeus\nwere not the same deity, and where also we made some remarks, derived\nfrom the Holy Scriptures, regarding the different dialects. We\nwillingly, then, pass by these points, on which Celsus would make us\nrepeat ourselves. In the next place, again, mixing up together matters\nwhich belong to magic and sorcery, and referring them perhaps to no\none,\u2014because of the non-existence of any who practise magic under\npretence of a worship of this character,\u2014and yet, perhaps, having in\nview some who _do_ employ such practices in the presence of the simple\n(that they may have the appearance of acting by divine power), he adds:\n\u201cWhat need to number up all those who have taught methods of\npurification, or expiatory hymns, or spells for averting evil, or [the\nmaking of] images, or resemblances of demons, or the various sorts of\nantidotes against poison [to be found][1227] in clothes, or in numbers,\nor stones, or plants, or roots, or generally in all kinds of things?\u201d In\nrespect to these matters, reason does not require us to offer any\ndefence, since we are not liable in the slightest degree to suspicions\nof such a nature.\n\nFootnote 1223:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1224:\n\n Cf. Herodot. iv. 9.\n\nFootnote 1225:\n\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1226:\n\n For the textual reading, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c0\u03c9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6,\n Boherellus conjectures \u03b5\u1f34\u03c1\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, which has been adopted in the\n translation.\n\nFootnote 1227:\n\n For \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, Lommatzsch adopts the conjecture of Boherellus, approved\n by Ru\u00e6us, \u1f10\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XL.\n\n\nAfter these things, Celsus appears to me to act like those who, in their\nintense hatred of the Christians, maintain, in the presence of those who\nare utterly ignorant of the Christian faith, that they have actually\nascertained that Christians devour the flesh of infants, and give\nthemselves without restraint to sexual intercourse with their women.\nNow, as these statements have been condemned as falsehoods invented\nagainst the Christians, and this admission made by the multitude and\nthose altogether aliens to our faith; so would the following statements\nof Celsus be found to be calumnies invented against the Christians,\nwhere he says that \u201che has seen in the hands of certain presbyters\nbelonging to our faith[1228] barbarous books, containing the names and\nmarvellous doings of demons;\u201d asserting further, that \u201cthese presbyters\nof our faith professed to do no good, but all that was calculated to\ninjure human beings.\u201d Would, indeed, that all that is said by Celsus\nagainst the Christians was of such a nature as to be refuted by the\nmultitude, who have ascertained by experience that such things are\nuntrue, seeing that most of them have lived as neighbours with the\nChristians, and have not even heard of the existence of any such alleged\npractices!\n\nFootnote 1228:\n\n \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLI.\n\n\nIn the next place, as if he had forgotten that it was his object to\nwrite against the Christians, he says that, \u201chaving become acquainted\nwith one Dionysius, an Egyptian musician, the latter told him, with\nrespect to magic arts, that it was only over the uneducated and men of\ncorrupt morals that they had any power, while on philosophers they were\nunable to produce any effect, because they were careful to observe a\nhealthy manner of life.\u201d If, now, it had been our purpose to treat of\nmagic, we could have added a few remarks in addition to what we have\nalready said on this topic; but since it is only the more important\nmatters which we have to notice in answer to Celsus, we shall say of\nmagic, that any one who chooses to inquire whether philosophers were\never led captive by it or not, can read what has been written by\nMoiragenes regarding the memoirs of the magician and philosopher\nApollonius of Tyana, in which this individual, who is not a Christian,\nbut a philosopher, asserts that some philosophers of no mean note were\nwon over by the magic power possessed by Apollonius, and resorted to him\nas a sorcerer; and among these, I think, he especially mentioned\nEuphrates and a certain Epicurean. Now _we_, on the other hand, affirm,\nand have learned by experience, that they who worship the God of all\nthings in conformity with the Christianity which comes by Jesus, and who\nlive according to His gospel, using night and day, continuously and\nbecomingly, the prescribed prayers, are not carried away either by magic\nor demons. For verily \u201cthe angel of the Lord encamps round about them\nthat fear Him, and delivereth them\u201d[1229] from all evil; and the angels\nof the little ones in the church, who are appointed to watch over them,\nare said always to behold the face of their Father who is in\nheaven,[1230] whatever be the meaning of \u201cface\u201d or of \u201cbehold.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1229:\n\n Cf. Ps. xxxiv. 7.\n\nFootnote 1230:\n\n Cf. Matt. xviii. 10.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLII.\n\n\nAfter these matters, Celsus brings the following charges against us from\nanother quarter: \u201cCertain most impious errors,\u201d he says, \u201care committed\nby them, due to their extreme ignorance, in which they have wandered\naway from the meaning of the divine enigmas, creating an adversary to\nGod, the devil, and naming him in the Hebrew tongue, Satan. Now, of a\ntruth, such statements are altogether of mortal invention,[1231] and not\neven proper to be repeated, viz. that the mighty God, in His desire to\nconfer good upon men, has yet one counterworking Him, and is helpless.\nThe Son of God, it follows, is vanquished by the devil; and being\npunished by him, teaches us also to despise the punishments which he\ninflicts, telling us beforehand that Satan, after appearing to men as He\nHimself had done, will exhibit great and marvellous works, claiming for\nhimself the glory of God, but that those who wish to keep him at a\ndistance ought to pay no attention to these works of Satan, but to place\ntheir faith in Him alone. Such statements are manifestly the words of a\ndeluder, planning and man\u0153uvring against those who are opposed to his\nviews, and who rank themselves against them.\u201d In the next place,\ndesiring to point out the \u201cenigmas,\u201d our mistakes regarding which lead\nto the introduction of our views concerning Satan, he continues: \u201cThe\nancients allude obscurely to a certain war among the gods, Heraclitus\nspeaking thus of it: \u2018If one must say that there is a general war and\ndiscord, and that all things are done and administered in strife.\u2019\nPherecydes, again, who is much older than Heraclitus, relates a myth of\none army drawn up in hostile array against another, and names Kronos as\nthe leader of the one, and Ophioneus of the other, and recounts their\nchallenges and struggles, and mentions that agreements were entered into\nbetween them, to the end that whichever party should fall into the\nOcean[1232] should be held as vanquished, while those who had expelled\nand conquered them should have possession of heaven. The mysteries\nrelating to the Titans and Giants also had some such [symbolical]\nmeaning, as well as the Egyptian mysteries of Typhon, and Horus, and\nOsiris.\u201d After having made such statements, and not having got over the\ndifficulty[1233] as to the way in which these accounts contain a higher\nview of things, while our accounts are erroneous copies of them, he\ncontinues his abuse of us, remarking that \u201cthese are not like the\nstories which are related of a devil, or demon, or, as he remarks with\nmore truth, of a man who is an impostor, who wishes to establish an\nopposite doctrine.\u201d And in the same way he understands Homer, as if he\nreferred obscurely to matters similar to those mentioned by Heraclitus,\nand Pherecydes, and the originators of the mysteries about the Titans\nand Giants, in those words which Heph\u00e6stus addresses to Hera, as\nfollows:\n\n \u201cOnce in your cause I felt his matchless might,\n Hurled headlong downward from the ethereal height.\u201d[1234]\n\nAnd in those of Zeus to Hera:\n\n \u201cHast thou forgot, when bound and fix\u2019d on high\n From the vast concave of the spangled sky,\n I hung thee trembling on a golden chain,\n And all the raging gods opposed in vain?\n Headlong I hurled them from the Olympian hall,\n Stunn\u2019d in the whirl, and breathless with the fall.\u201d[1235]\n\nInterpreting, moreover, the words of Homer, he adds: \u201cThe words of Zeus\naddressed to Hera are the words of God addressed to matter; and the\nwords addressed to matter obscurely signify that the matter which at the\nbeginning was in a state of discord [with God], was taken by Him, and\nbound together and arranged under laws, which may be analogically\ncompared to chains;[1236] and that by way of chastising the demons who\ncreate disorder in it, he hurls them down headlong to this lower world.\u201d\nThese words of Homer, he alleges, were so understood by Pherecydes, when\nhe said that beneath that region is the region of Tartarus, which is\nguarded by the Harpies and Tempest, daughters of Boreas, and to which\nZeus banishes any one of the gods who becomes disorderly. With the same\nideas also are closely connected the _peplos_ of Athena, which is beheld\nby all in the procession of the _Panathen\u00e6a_. For it is manifest from\nthis, he continues, that a motherless and unsullied demon[1237] has the\nmastery over the daring of the Giants. While accepting, moreover, the\nfictions of the Greeks, he continues to heap against us such accusations\nas the following, viz., that \u201cthe Son of God is punished by the devil,\nand teaches us that we also, when punished by him, ought to endure it.\nNow these statements are altogether ridiculous. For it is the devil, I\nthink, who ought rather to be punished, and those human beings who are\ncalumniated by him ought not to be threatened with chastisement.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1231:\n\n \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac. Instead of this reading, Guietus conjectures \u03c0\u03c4\u03b7\u03ba\u03c4\u03ac, which is\n approved of by Ru\u00e6us.\n\nFootnote 1232:\n\n \u1f68\u03b3\u03b7\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd, _i.e._ in Oceanum, Hesych.; \u1f68\u03b3\u03b7\u03bd, \u1f60\u03ba\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2, Suid.\n\nFootnote 1233:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1234:\n\n Cf. _Iliad_, book i. v. 590, Pope\u2019s translation.\n\nFootnote 1235:\n\n Cf. _Iliad_, book xv. vv. 18-24, Pope\u2019s translation.\n\nFootnote 1236:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u1f41 \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1237:\n\n \u1f00\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03c7\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIII.\n\n\nMark now, whether he who charges us with having committed errors of the\nmost impious kind, and with having wandered away from the [true meaning]\nof the divine enigmas, is not himself clearly in error, from not\nobserving that in the writings of Moses, which are much older not merely\nthan Heraclitus and Pherecydes, but even than Homer, mention is made of\nthis wicked one, and of his having fallen from heaven. For the\nserpent[1238]\u2014from whom the Ophioneus spoken of by Pherecydes is\nderived\u2014having become the cause of man\u2019s expulsion from the divine\nParadise, obscurely shadows forth something similar, having deceived the\nwoman[1239] by a promise of divinity and of greater blessings; and her\nexample is said to have been followed also by the man. And, further, who\nelse could the destroying angel mentioned in the Exodus of Moses[1240]\nbe, than he who was the author of destruction to them that obeyed him,\nand did not withstand his wicked deeds, nor struggle against them?\nMoreover, [the goat], which in the book of Leviticus[1241] is sent away\n[into the wilderness], and which in the Hebrew language is named Azazel,\nwas none other than this; and it was necessary to send it away into the\ndesert, and to treat it as an expiatory sacrifice, because on it the lot\nfell. For all who belong to the \u201cworse\u201d part, on account of their\nwickedness, being opposed to those who are God\u2019s heritage, are deserted\nby God. Nay, with respect to the sons of Belial in the book of\nJudges,[1242] whose sons are they said to be, save his, on account of\ntheir wickedness? And besides all these instances, in the book of Job,\nwhich is older even than Moses himself, the devil is distinctly\ndescribed as presenting himself before God,[1243] and asking for power\nagainst Job, that he might involve him in trials[1244] of the most\npainful kind; the first of which consisted in the loss of all his goods\nand of his children, and the second in afflicting the whole body of Job\nwith the so-called disease of elephantiasis.[1245] I pass by what might\nbe quoted from the Gospels regarding the devil who tempted the Saviour,\nthat I may not appear to quote in reply to Celsus from more recent\nwritings on this question. In the last [chapter][1246] also of Job, in\nwhich the Lord utters to Job amid tempest and clouds what is recorded in\nthe book which bears his name, there are not a few things referring to\nthe serpent. I have not yet mentioned the passages in Ezekiel,[1247]\nwhere he speaks, as it were, of Pharaoh, or Nebuchadnezzar, or the\nprince of Tyre; or those in Isaiah,[1248] where lament is made for the\nking of Babylon, from which not a little might be learned concerning\nevil, as to the nature of its origin and generation, and as to how it\nderived its existence from some who had lost their wings,[1249] and who\nhad followed him who was the first to lose his own.\n\nFootnote 1238:\n\n Cf. Gen. iii.\n\nFootnote 1239:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b8\u03b7\u03bb\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1240:\n\n Cf. Ex. xii. 23.\n\nFootnote 1241:\n\n Cf. Lev. xvi. 8.\n\nFootnote 1242:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03bb\u03ae\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, \u1f14\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03af \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6.\n\nFootnote 1243:\n\n Cf. Job i., ii.\n\nFootnote 1244:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1245:\n\n \u1f00\u03b3\u03c1\u03af\u1ff3 \u1f10\u03bb\u03ad\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1246:\n\n Cf. Job xl. 20.\n\nFootnote 1247:\n\n Cf. Ezek. xxxii. 1-28.\n\nFootnote 1248:\n\n Isa. xiv. 4 sqq.\n\nFootnote 1249:\n\n \u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03c5\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd. Cf. Book iv. c. 40.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIV.\n\n\nFor it is impossible that the good which is the result of accident, or\nof communication, should be like that good which comes by nature; and\nyet the former will never be lost by him who, so to speak, partakes of\nthe \u201cliving\u201d bread with a view to his own preservation. But if it\nshould fail any one, it must be through his own fault, in being\nslothful to partake of this \u201cliving bread\u201d and \u201cgenuine drink,\u201d by\nmeans of which the wings, nourished and watered, are fitted for their\npurpose, even according to the saying of Solomon, the wisest of men,\nconcerning the truly rich man, that \u201che made to himself wings like an\neagle, and returns to the house of his patron.\u201d[1250] For it became\nGod, who knows how to turn to proper account even those who in their\nwickedness have apostatized from Him, to place wickedness of this sort\nin some part of the universe, and to appoint a training-school of\nvirtue, wherein those must exercise themselves who would desire to\nrecover in a \u201clawful manner\u201d[1251] the possession [which they had\nlost]; in order that being tested, like gold in the fire, by the\nwickedness of these, and having exerted themselves to the utmost to\nprevent anything base injuring their rational nature, they may appear\ndeserving of an ascent to divine things, and may be elevated by the\nWord to the blessedness which is above all things, and so to speak, to\nthe very summit of goodness. Now he who in the Hebrew language is\nnamed Satan, and by some Satanas\u2014as being more in conformity with the\ngenius of the Greek language\u2014signifies, when translated into Greek,\n\u201cadversary.\u201d But every one who prefers vice and a vicious life, is\n(because acting in a manner contrary to virtue) Satanas, that is, an\n\u201cadversary\u201d to the Son of God, who is righteousness, and truth, and\nwisdom.[1252] With more propriety, however, is _he_ called\n\u201cadversary,\u201d who was the first among those that were living a peaceful\nand happy life to lose his wings, and to fall from blessedness; he\nwho, according to Ezekiel, walked faultlessly in all his ways, \u201cuntil\niniquity was found in him,\u201d[1253] and who being the \u201cseal of\nresemblance\u201d and the \u201ccrown of beauty\u201d in the paradise of God, being\nfilled as it were with good things, fell into destruction, in\naccordance with the word which said to him in a mystic sense: \u201cThou\nhast fallen into destruction, and shalt not abide for ever.\u201d[1254] We\nhave ventured somewhat rashly to make these few remarks, although in\nso doing we have added nothing of importance to this treatise. If any\none, however, who has leisure for the examination of the sacred\nwritings, should collect together from all sources and form into one\nbody of doctrine what is recorded concerning the origin of evil, and\nthe manner of its dissolution, he would see that the views of Moses\nand the prophets regarding Satan had not been even dreamed of either\nby Celsus or any one of those whose soul had been dragged down, and\ntorn away from God, and from right views of Him, and from His word, by\nthis wicked demon.\n\nFootnote 1250:\n\n Cf. Prov. xxiii. 5.\n\nFootnote 1251:\n\n Cf. 1 Tim. ii. 5.\n\nFootnote 1252:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. i. 30.\n\nFootnote 1253:\n\n Cf. Ezek. xxviii. 15.\n\nFootnote 1254:\n\n Cf. Ezek. xxviii. 19.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLV.\n\n\nBut since Celsus rejects the statements concerning Antichrist, as it is\ntermed, having neither read what is said of him in the book of\nDaniel[1255] nor in the writings of Paul,[1256] nor what the Saviour in\nthe Gospels[1257] has predicted about his coming, we must make a few\nremarks upon this subject also; because, \u201cas faces do not resemble\nfaces,\u201d[1258] so also neither do men\u2019s \u201chearts\u201d resemble one another. It\nis certain, then, that there will be diversities amongst the hearts of\nmen,\u2014those which are inclined to virtue not being all modelled and\nshaped towards it in the same or like degree; while others, through\nneglect of virtue, rush to the opposite extreme. And amongst the latter\nare some in whom evil is deeply engrained, and others in whom it is less\ndeeply rooted. Where is the absurdity, then, in holding that there exist\namong men, so to speak, two extremes,[1259]\u2014the one of virtue, and the\nother of its opposite; so that the perfection of virtue dwells in the\nman who realizes the ideal given in Jesus, from whom there flowed to the\nhuman race so great a conversion, and healing, and amelioration, while\nthe opposite extreme is in the man who embodies the notion of him that\nis named Antichrist? For God, comprehending all things by means of His\nforeknowledge, and foreseeing what consequences would result from both\nof these, wished to make these known to mankind by His prophets, that\nthose who understand their words might be familiarized with the good,\nand be on their guard against its opposite. It was proper, moreover,\nthat the one of these extremes, and the best of the two, should be\nstyled the Son of God, on account of His pre-eminence; and the other,\nwho is diametrically opposite, be termed the son of the wicked demon,\nand of Satan, and of the devil. And, in the next place, since evil is\nspecially characterized by its diffusion, and attains its greatest\nheight when it simulates the appearance of the good, for that reason are\nsigns, and marvels, and lying miracles found to accompany evil, through\nthe co-operation of its father the devil. For, far surpassing the help\nwhich these demons give to jugglers (who deceive men for the basest of\npurposes), is the aid which the devil himself affords in order to\ndeceive the human race. Paul, indeed, speaks of him who is called\nAntichrist, describing, though with a certain reserve,[1260] both the\nmanner, and time, and cause of his coming to the human race. And notice\nwhether his language on this subject is not most becoming, and\nundeserving of being treated with even the slightest degree of ridicule.\n\nFootnote 1255:\n\n Cf. Dan. viii. 23.\n\nFootnote 1256:\n\n Cf. 2 Thess. ii. 3, 4.\n\nFootnote 1257:\n\n Cf. Matt. xxiv. 4.\n\nFootnote 1258:\n\n Cf. Prov. xxvii. 19.\n\nFootnote 1259:\n\n \u1f00\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1260:\n\n \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2. Cf. 2 Thess. ii. 9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVI.\n\n\nIt is thus that the apostle expresses himself: \u201cWe beseech you,\nbrethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering\ntogether unto Him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled,\nneither by word, nor by spirit, nor by letter as from us, as that the\nday of the Lord is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for\n_that day shall not come_, except there come a falling away first, and\nthat man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and\nexalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so\nthat he sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.\nRemember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?\nAnd now ye know what withholdeth, that he might be revealed in his time.\nFor the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only He who now letteth\n_will let_, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked\nbe revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth,\nand shall destroy with the brightness of His coming: _even him_, whose\ncoming is after the working of Satan, with all power, and signs, and\nlying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them\nthat perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they\nmight be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion,\nthat they should believe a lie; that they all might be damned who\nbelieved not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.\u201d[1261] To\nexplain each particular here referred to does not belong to our present\npurpose. The prophecy also regarding Antichrist is stated in the book of\nDaniel, and is fitted to make an intelligent and candid reader admire\nthe words as truly divine and prophetic; for in them are mentioned the\nthings relating to the coming kingdom, beginning with the times of\nDaniel, and continuing to the destruction of the world. And any one who\nchooses may read it. Observe, however, whether the prophecy regarding\nAntichrist be not as follows: \u201cAnd at the latter time of their kingdom,\nwhen their sins are coming to the full, there shall arise a king, bold\nin countenance, and understanding riddles. And his power shall be great,\nand he shall destroy wonderfully, and prosper, and practise; and shall\ndestroy mighty men, and the holy people. And the yoke of his chain shall\nprosper: there is craft in his hand, and he shall magnify himself in his\nheart, and by craft shall destroy many; and he shall stand up for the\ndestruction of many, and shall crush them as eggs in his hand.\u201d[1262]\nWhat is stated by Paul in the words quoted from him, where he says, \u201cso\nthat he sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is\nGod,\u201d[1263] is in Daniel referred to in the following fashion: \u201cAnd on\nthe temple shall be the abomination of desolations, and at the end of\nthe time an end shall be put to the desolation.\u201d[1264] So many, out of a\ngreater number of passages, have I thought it right to adduce, that the\nhearer may understand in some slight degree the meaning of Holy\nScripture, when it gives us information concerning the devil and\nAntichrist; and being satisfied with what we have quoted for this\npurpose, let us look at another of the charges of Celsus, and reply to\nit as we best may.\n\nFootnote 1261:\n\n 2 Thess. ii. 1-12.\n\nFootnote 1262:\n\n Cf. Dan. viii. 23-25 (LXX.).\n\nFootnote 1263:\n\n Cf. 2 Thess. ii. 4.\n\nFootnote 1264:\n\n Cf. Dan. ix. 27.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVII.\n\n\nCelsus, after what has been said, goes on as follows: \u201cI can tell how\nthe very thing occurred, viz. that they should call him \u2018Son of God.\u2019\nMen of ancient times termed this world, as being born of God, both his\nchild and his son.[1265] Both the one and other \u2018Son of God,\u2019 then,\ngreatly resembled each other.\u201d He is therefore of opinion that we\nemployed the expression \u201cSon of God,\u201d having perverted[1266] what is\nsaid of the world, as being born of God, and being His \u201cSon,\u201d and \u201ca\nGod.\u201d For he was unable so to consider the times of Moses and the\nprophets, as to see that the Jewish prophets predicted generally that\nthere was a \u201cSon of God\u201d long before the Greeks and those men of ancient\ntime of whom Celsus speaks. Nay, he would not even quote the passage in\nthe letters of Plato, to which we referred in the preceding pages,\nconcerning Him who so beautifully arranged this world, as being the Son\nof God; lest he too should be compelled by Plato, whom he often mentions\nwith respect, to admit that the architect of this world _is_ the Son of\nGod, and that His Father is the first God and Sovereign Ruler over all\nthings. Nor is it at all wonderful if we maintain that the soul of Jesus\nis made one with so great a Son of God through the highest union with\nHim, being no longer in a state of separation from Him. For the sacred\nlanguage of Holy Scripture knows of other things also, which, although\n\u201cdual\u201d in their own nature, are considered to be, and really are, \u201cone\u201d\nin respect to one another. It is said of husband and wife, \u201cThey are no\nlonger twain, but one flesh;\u201d[1267] and of the perfect man, and of him\nwho is joined to the true Lord, Word, and Wisdom, and Truth, that \u201che\nwho is joined to the Lord is one spirit.\u201d[1268] And if he who \u201cis joined\nto the Lord is one spirit,\u201d who has been joined to the Lord, the Very\nWord, and Wisdom, and Truth, and Righteousness, in a more intimate\nunion, or even in a manner at all approaching to it than the soul of\nJesus? And if this be so, then the soul of Jesus and God the Word\u2014the\nfirst-born of every creature\u2014are no longer two, [but one].\n\nFootnote 1265:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f20\u0390\u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1266:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1267:\n\n Cf. Gen. ii. 24.\n\nFootnote 1268:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. vi. 17.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVIII.\n\n\nIn the next place, when the philosophers of the Porch, who assert that\nthe virtue of God and man is the same, maintain that the God who is over\nall things is not happier than _their_ wise man, but that the happiness\nof both is equal, Celsus neither ridicules nor scoffs at their opinion.\nIf, however, Holy Scripture says that the perfect man is joined to and\nmade one with the Very Word by means of virtue, so that we infer that\nthe soul of Jesus is not separated from the first-born of all creation,\nhe laughs at Jesus being called \u201cSon of God,\u201d not observing what is said\nof Him with a secret and mystical signification in the Holy Scriptures.\nBut that we may win over to the reception of our views those who are\nwilling to accept the inferences which flow from our doctrines, and to\nbe benefited thereby, we say that the Holy Scriptures declare the body\nof Christ, animated by the Son of God, to be the whole church of God,\nand the members of this body\u2014considered as a whole\u2014to consist of those\nwho are believers; since, as a soul vivifies and moves the body, which\nof itself has not the natural power of motion like a living being, so\nthe Word, arousing and moving the whole body, the church, to befitting\naction, awakens, moreover, each individual member belonging to the\nchurch, so that they do nothing apart from the Word. Since all this,\nthen, follows by a train of reasoning not to be depreciated, where is\nthe difficulty in maintaining that, as the _soul_ of Jesus is joined in\na perfect and inconceivable manner with the very Word, so the person of\nJesus, generally speaking,[1269] is not separated from the only-begotten\nand first-born of all creation, and is not a different being from Him?\nBut enough here on this subject.\n\nFootnote 1269:\n\n \u1f01\u03c0\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIX.\n\n\nLet us notice now what follows, where, expressing in a single word his\nopinion regarding the Mosaic cosmogony, without offering, however, a\nsingle argument in its support, he finds fault with it, saying:\n\u201cMoreover, their cosmogony is extremely silly.\u201d[1270] Now, if he had\nproduced some credible proofs of its silly character, we should have\nendeavoured to answer them; but it does not appear to me reasonable that\nI should be called upon to demonstrate, in answer to his mere\n_assertion_, that it is _not_ \u201csilly.\u201d If any one, however, wishes to\nsee the reasons which led us to accept the Mosaic account, and the\narguments by which it may be defended, he may read what we have written\nupon Genesis, from the beginning of the book up to the passage, \u201cAnd\nthis is the book of the generation of men,\u201d[1271] where we have tried to\nshow from the Holy Scriptures themselves what the \u201cheaven\u201d was which was\ncreated in the beginning; and what the \u201cearth,\u201d and the \u201cinvisible part\nof the earth,\u201d and that which was \u201cwithout form;\u201d[1272] and what the\n\u201cdeep\u201d was, and the \u201cdarkness\u201d that was upon it; and what the \u201cwater\u201d\nwas, and the \u201cSpirit of God\u201d which was \u201cborne over it;\u201d and what the\n\u201clight\u201d which was created, and what the \u201cfirmament,\u201d as distinct from\nthe \u201cheaven\u201d which was created in the beginning; and so on with the\nother subjects that follow. Celsus has also expressed his opinion that\nthe narrative of the creation of man is \u201cexceedingly silly,\u201d without\nstating any proofs, or endeavouring to answer our arguments; for he had\nno evidence, in my judgment, which was fitted to overthrow the statement\nthat \u201cman has been made in the image of God.\u201d[1273] He does not even\nunderstand the meaning of the \u201cParadise\u201d that was planted by God, and of\nthe life which man first led in it; and of that which resulted from\naccident,[1274] when man was cast forth on account of his sin, and was\nsettled opposite the Paradise of delight. Now, as he asserts that these\nare silly statements, let him turn his attention not merely to each one\nof them [in general], but to this in particular, \u201cHe placed the\ncherubim, and the flaming sword, which turned every way, to keep the way\nof the tree of life,\u201d[1275] and say whether Moses wrote these words with\nno serious object in view, but in the spirit of the writers of the old\nComedy, who have sportively related that \u201cPr\u0153tus slew Bellerophon,\u201d and\nthat \u201cPegasus came from Arcadia.\u201d Now their object was to create\nlaughter in composing such stories; whereas it is incredible that he who\nleft behind him laws[1276] for a whole nation, regarding which he wished\nto persuade his subjects that they were given by God, should have\nwritten words so little to the purpose,[1277] and have said without any\nmeaning, \u201cHe placed the cherubim, and the flaming sword, which turned\nevery way, to keep the way of the tree of life,\u201d or made any other\nstatement regarding the creation of man, which is the subject of\nphilosophic investigation by the Hebrew sages.\n\nFootnote 1270:\n\n \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b7\u03b8\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae.\n\nFootnote 1271:\n\n Cf. Gen. v. 1.\n\nFootnote 1272:\n\n \u1f00\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03cd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1273:\n\n Cf. Gen. i. 26.\n\nFootnote 1274:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1275:\n\n Gen. iii. 24.\n\nFootnote 1276:\n\n \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03ac\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1277:\n\n \u1f00\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter L.\n\n\nIn the next place, Celsus, after heaping together, simply as mere\nassertions, the varying opinions of some of the ancients regarding the\nworld, and the origin of man, alleges that \u201cMoses and the prophets, who\nhave left to us our books, not knowing at all what the nature of the\nworld is, and of man, have woven together a web of sheer\nnonsense.\u201d[1278] If he had shown, now, _how_ it appeared to him that the\nHoly Scriptures contained \u201csheer nonsense,\u201d we should have tried to\ndemolish the arguments which appeared to him to establish their\nnonsensical character; but on the present occasion, following his own\nexample, we also sportively give it as our opinion that Celsus, knowing\nnothing at all about the nature of the meaning and language of the\nprophets,[1279] composed a work which contained \u201csheer nonsense,\u201d and\nboastfully gave it the title of a \u201ctrue discourse.\u201d And since he makes\nthe statements about the \u201cdays of creation\u201d ground of accusation,\u2014as if\nhe understood them clearly and correctly, some of which elapsed _before_\nthe creation of light and heaven, and sun, and moon, and stars, and some\nof them _after_ the creation of these,\u2014we shall only make this\nobservation, that Moses must then have forgotten that he had said a\nlittle before, \u201cthat in six days the creation of the world had been\nfinished,\u201d and that in consequence of this act of forgetfulness he\nsubjoins to these words the following: \u201cThis is the book of the creation\nof man, in the day when God made the heaven and the earth!\u201d But it is\nnot in the least credible, that after what he had said respecting the\nsix days, Moses should immediately add, without a special meaning, the\nwords, \u201cin the day that God made the heavens and the earth;\u201d and if any\none thinks that these words may be referred to the statement, \u201cIn the\nbeginning, God made the heaven and the earth,\u201d let him observe that\nbefore the words, \u201cLet there be light, and there was light,\u201d and these,\n\u201cGod called the light day,\u201d it has been stated that \u201cin the beginning\nGod made the heaven and the earth.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1278:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bb\u1fc6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03b8\u03cd\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1279:\n\n \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f21 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03ae\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LI.\n\n\nOn the present occasion, however, it is not our object to enter into an\nexplanation of the subject of intelligent and sensible beings,[1280] nor\nof the manner in which the different kinds[1281] of days were allotted\nto both sorts, nor to investigate the details which belong to the\nsubject, for we should need whole treatises for the exposition of the\nMosaic cosmogony; and that work we had already performed, to the best of\nour ability, a considerable time before the commencement of this answer\nto Celsus, when we discussed with such measure of capacity as we then\npossessed the question of the Mosaic cosmogony of the six days. We must\nkeep in mind, however, that the Word promises to the righteous through\nthe mouth of Isaiah, that days will come[1282] when not the sun, but the\nLord Himself, will be to them an everlasting light, and God will be\ntheir glory.[1283] And it is from misunderstanding, I think, some\npestilent heresy which gave an erroneous interpretation to the words,\n\u201cLet there be light,\u201d as if they were the expression of a _wish_[1284]\nmerely on the part of the Creator, that Celsus made the remark: \u201cThe\nCreator did not borrow light from above, like those persons who kindle\ntheir lamps at those of their neighbours.\u201d Misunderstanding, moreover,\nanother impious heresy, he has said: \u201cIf, indeed, there did exist an\naccursed god opposed to the great God, who did this contrary to his\napproval, why did he lend him the light?\u201d So far are we from offering a\ndefence of such puerilities, that we desire, on the contrary, distinctly\nto arraign the statements of these heretics as erroneous, and to\nundertake to refute, not those of their opinions with which we are\n_unacquainted_, as Celsus does, but those of which we have attained an\naccurate knowledge, derived in part from the statements of their own\nadherents, and partly from a careful perusal of their writings.\n\nFootnote 1280:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1281:\n\n \u03b1\u1f31 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1282:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f14\u03c3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1283:\n\n Cf. Isa. lx. 19.\n\nFootnote 1284:\n\n \u03b5\u1f50\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LII.\n\n\nCelsus proceeds as follows: \u201cWith regard to the origin of the world and\nits destruction, whether it is to be regarded as uncreated and\nindestructible, or as created indeed, but not destructible, or the\nreverse, I at present say nothing.\u201d For this reason we too say nothing\non these points, as the work in hand does not require it. Nor do we\nallege that the Spirit of the universal God mingled itself in things\nhere below as in things alien to itself,[1285] as might appear from the\nexpression, \u201cThe Spirit of God moved upon the water;\u201d nor do we assert\nthat certain wicked devices directed against His Spirit, as if by a\ndifferent creator from the great God, and which were tolerated by the\nSupreme Divinity, needed to be completely frustrated. And, accordingly,\nI have nothing further to say to those[1286] who utter such absurdities;\nnor to Celsus, who does not refute them with ability. For he ought\neither _not_ to have mentioned such matters at all, or else, in keeping\nwith that character for philanthropy which he assumes, have carefully\nset them forth, and then endeavoured to rebut these impious assertions.\nNor have we ever heard that the great God, after giving his spirit to\nthe creator, demands it back again. Proceeding next foolishly to assail\nthese impious assertions, he asks: \u201cWhat god gives anything with the\nintention of demanding it back? For it is the mark of a needy person to\ndemand back [what he has given], whereas God stands in need of nothing.\u201d\nTo this he adds, as if saying something clever against certain parties:\n\u201cWhy, when he lent [his spirit], was he ignorant that he was lending it\nto an evil being?\u201d He asks, further: \u201cWhy does he pass without\nnotice[1287] a wicked creator who was counter-working his purposes?\u201d\n\nFootnote 1285:\n\n \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc7\u03b4\u03b5.\n\nFootnote 1286:\n\n \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u1f70\u03bd \u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03ad\u03c4\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1287:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c1\u1fb7.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIII.\n\n\nIn the next place, mixing up together various heresies, and not\nobserving that some statements are the utterances of one heretical sect,\nand others of a different one, he brings forward the objections which we\nraised against Marcion.[1288] And, probably, having heard them from some\npaltry and ignorant individuals,[1289] he assails the very arguments\nwhich combat them, but not in a way that shows much intelligence.\nQuoting then our arguments against Marcion, and not observing that it is\n_against_ Marcion that he is speaking, he asks: \u201cWhy does he send\nsecretly, and destroy the works which he has created? Why does he\nsecretly employ force, and persuasion, and deceit? Why does he allure\nthose who, as ye assert, have been condemned or accused by him, and\ncarry them away like a slave-dealer? Why does he teach them to steal\naway from their Lord? Why to flee from their father? Why does he claim\nthem for himself against the father\u2019s will? Why does he profess to be\nthe father of strange children?\u201d To these questions he subjoins the\nfollowing remark, as if by way of expressing his surprise:[1290]\n\u201cVenerable, indeed, is the god who desires to be the father of those\nsinners who are condemned by another [god], and of the needy,[1291] and,\nas themselves say, of the very offscourings[1292] [of men], and who is\nunable to capture and punish his messenger, who escaped from him!\u201d After\nthis, as if addressing us who acknowledge that this world is not the\nwork of a different and strange god, he continues in the following\nstrain: \u201cIf these are his works, how is it that God created evil? And\nhow is it that he cannot persuade and admonish [men]? And how is it that\nhe repents on account of the ingratitude and wickedness of men? He finds\nfault, moreover, with his own handwork,[1293] and hates, and threatens,\nand destroys his own offspring? Whither can he transport them out of\nthis world, which he himself has made?\u201d Now it does not appear to me\nthat by these remarks he makes clear what \u201cevil\u201d is; and although there\nhave been among the Greeks many sects who differ as to the nature of\ngood and evil, he hastily concludes, as if it were a consequence of our\nmaintaining that this world also is a work of the universal God, that in\n_our_ judgment _God_ is the author of evil. Let it be, however,\nregarding evil as it may\u2014whether created by God or not\u2014it nevertheless\nfollows only as a _result_ when you compare the principal design.[1294]\nAnd I am greatly surprised if the inference regarding God\u2019s authorship\nof evil, which he thinks follows from our maintaining that this world\nalso is the work of the universal God, does not follow too from his\n_own_ statements. For one might say to Celsus: \u201cIf these are His works,\nhow is it that God created evil? and how is it that He cannot persuade\nand admonish men?\u201d It is indeed the greatest error in reasoning to\naccuse those who are of different opinions of holding unsound doctrines,\nwhen the accuser himself is much more liable to the same charge with\nregard to his own.\n\nFootnote 1288:\n\n Cf. Book v. c. 54.\n\nFootnote 1289:\n\n The textual reading is, \u1f00\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2, for which\n Ru\u00e6us reads, \u1f00\u03c0\u03cc \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd, which emendation has\n been adopted in the translation.\n\nFootnote 1290:\n\n \u03bf\u1f31\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1291:\n\n \u1f00\u03ba\u03bb\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1292:\n\n \u03c3\u03ba\u03c5\u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1293:\n\n \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1294:\n\n \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIV.\n\n\nLet us see, then, briefly what Holy Scripture has to say regarding good\nand evil, and what answer we are to return to the questions, \u201cHow is it\nthat God created evil?\u201d and, \u201cHow is He incapable of persuading and\nadmonishing men?\u201d Now, according to Holy Scripture, properly speaking,\nvirtues and virtuous actions are good, as, properly speaking, the\nreverse of these are evil. We shall be satisfied with quoting on the\npresent occasion some verses from the 34th Psalm, to the following\neffect: \u201cThey that seek the Lord shall not want any good thing. Come, ye\nchildren, hearken unto me; I will teach you the fear of the Lord. What\nman is he that desireth life, and loveth many days, that he may see\ngood? Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips from speaking guile.\nDepart from evil, and do good.\u201d[1295] Now, the injunctions to \u201cdepart\nfrom evil, and to do good,\u201d do not refer either to _corporeal_ evils or\n_corporeal_ blessings, as they are termed by some, nor to external\nthings at all, but to blessings and evils of a _spiritual_ kind; since\nhe who departs from such evils, and performs such virtuous actions,\nwill, as one who desires the true life, come to the enjoyment of it; and\nas one loving to see \u201cgood days,\u201d in which the word of righteousness\nwill be the Sun, he will see them, God taking him away from this\n\u201cpresent evil world,\u201d[1296] and from those evil days concerning which\nPaul said: \u201cRedeeming the time, because the days are evil.\u201d[1297]\n\nFootnote 1295:\n\n Cf. Ps. xxxiv. 10-14.\n\nFootnote 1296:\n\n Cf. Gal. i. 4.\n\nFootnote 1297:\n\n Cf. Eph. v. 16.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LV.\n\n\nPassages, indeed, might be found where corporeal and external [benefits]\nare improperly[1298] called \u201cgood,\u201d\u2014those things, viz., which contribute\nto the natural life, while those which do the reverse are termed \u201cevil.\u201d\nIt is in this sense that Job says to his wife: \u201cIf we have received good\nat the hand of the Lord, shall we not also receive evil?\u201d[1299] Since,\nthen, there is found in the sacred Scriptures, in a certain passage,\nthis statement put into the mouth of God, \u201cI make peace, and create\nevil;\u201d[1300] and again another, where it is said of Him that \u201cevil came\ndown from the Lord to the gate of Jerusalem, the noise of chariots and\nhorsemen,\u201d[1301]\u2014passages which have disturbed many readers of\nScripture, who are unable to see what Scripture means by \u201cgood\u201d and\n\u201cevil,\u201d\u2014it is probable that Celsus, being perplexed thereby, gave\nutterance to the question, \u201cHow is it that God created evil?\u201d or,\nperhaps, having heard some one discussing the matters relating to it in\nan ignorant manner, he made this statement which we have noticed. We, on\nthe other hand, maintain that \u201cevil,\u201d or \u201cwickedness,\u201d and the actions\nwhich proceed from it, were _not_ created by God. For if God created\nthat which is _really_ evil, how was it possible that the proclamation\nregarding [the last] judgment should be confidently announced,[1302]\nwhich informs us that the wicked are to be punished for their evil deeds\nin proportion to the amount of their wickedness, while those who have\nlived a virtuous life, or performed virtuous actions, will be in the\nenjoyment of blessedness, and will receive rewards from God? I am well\naware that those who would daringly assert that these evils were created\nby God will quote certain expressions of Scripture [in their support],\nbecause we are not able to show one consistent series[1303] of passages;\nfor although Scripture [generally] blames the wicked and approves of the\nrighteous, it nevertheless contains some statements which, although\ncomparatively[1304] few in number, seem to disturb the minds of ignorant\nreaders of Holy Scripture. I have not, however, deemed it appropriate to\nmy present treatise to quote on the present occasion those discordant\nstatements, which are many in number,[1305] and their explanations,\nwhich would require a long array of proofs. Evils, then, if those be\nmeant which are _properly_ so called, were _not_ created by God; but\nsome, although _few_ in comparison with the order of the _whole_ world,\n_have_ resulted from His principal works, as there follow from the chief\nworks of the carpenter such things as spiral shavings and sawdust,[1306]\nor as architects might appear to be the cause of the rubbish[1307] which\nlies around their buildings in the form of the filth which drops from\nthe stones and the plaster.\n\nFootnote 1298:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1299:\n\n Cf. Job ii. 10.\n\nFootnote 1300:\n\n Cf. Isa. xlv. 7.\n\nFootnote 1301:\n\n Cf. Mic. i. 12, 13. The rendering of the Heb. in the first clause of\n the thirteenth verse is different from that of the LXX.\n\nFootnote 1302:\n\n \u03c0\u03b1\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1303:\n\n \u1f55\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1304:\n\n \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03b1 must be taken _comparatively_, on account of the \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03c2 that\n follows afterwards.\n\nFootnote 1305:\n\n \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03c2. See note 3.\n\nFootnote 1306:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f11\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u1fc6 \u03be\u03ad\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 1307:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVI.\n\n\nIf we speak, however, of what are called \u201ccorporeal\u201d and \u201cexternal\u201d\nevils,\u2014which are improperly so termed,\u2014then it may be granted that\nthere _are_ occasions when some of these have been called into\nexistence by God, in order that by their means the conversion of\ncertain individuals might be effected. And what absurdity would follow\nfrom such a course? For as, if we should hear those sufferings[1308]\nimproperly termed \u201cevils\u201d which are inflicted by fathers, and\ninstructors, and pedagogues upon those who are under their care, or\nupon patients who are operated upon or cauterized by the surgeons in\norder to effect a cure, we were to say that a father was ill-treating\nhis son, or pedagogues and instructors their pupils, or physicians\ntheir patients, no blame would be laid upon the operators or\nchastisers; so, in the same way, if God is said to bring upon men such\nevils for the conversion and cure of those who need this discipline,\nthere would be no absurdity in the view, nor would \u201cevils come down\nfrom the Lord upon the gates of Jerusalem,\u201d[1309]\u2014which evils consist\nof the punishments inflicted upon the Israelites by their enemies with\na view to their conversion; nor would one visit \u201cwith a rod the\ntransgressions of those who forsake the law of the Lord, and their\niniquities with stripes;\u201d[1310] nor could it be said, \u201cThou hast coals\nof fire to set upon them; they shall be to thee a help.\u201d[1311] In the\nsame way also we explain the expressions, \u201cI, who make peace, and\ncreate evil;\u201d[1312] for He calls into existence \u201ccorporeal\u201d or\n\u201cexternal\u201d evils, while purifying and training those who would not be\ndisciplined by the word and sound doctrine. This, then, is our answer\nto the question, \u201cHow is it that God created evil?\u201d\n\nFootnote 1308:\n\n \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1309:\n\n Cf. Mic. i. 12.\n\nFootnote 1310:\n\n Cf. Ps. lxxxix. 32.\n\nFootnote 1311:\n\n Cf. Isa. xlvii. 14, 15.\n\nFootnote 1312:\n\n Cf. Isa. xlv. 7.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVII.\n\n\nWith respect to the question, \u201cHow is he incapable of persuading and\nadmonishing men?\u201d it has been already stated that, if such an objection\nwere really a ground of charge, then the objection of Celsus might be\nbrought against those who accept the doctrine of providence. Any one\nmight answer the charge that God is incapable of admonishing men; for He\nconveys His admonitions throughout the whole of Scripture, and by means\nof those persons who, through God\u2019s gracious appointment, are the\ninstructors of His hearers. Unless, indeed, some peculiar meaning be\nunderstood to attach to the word \u201cadmonish,\u201d as if it signified both to\npenetrate into the mind of the person admonished, and to make him hear\nthe words of his[1313] instructor, which is contrary to the usual\nmeaning of the word. To the objection, \u201cHow is he incapable of\npersuading?\u201d\u2014which also might be brought against all who believe in\nprovidence,\u2014we have to make the following remarks. Since the expression\n\u201cto be persuaded\u201d belongs to those words which are termed, so to speak,\n\u201creciprocal\u201d[1314] (compare the phrase \u201cto shave a man,\u201d when he makes\nan effort to submit himself to the barber[1315]), there is for this\nreason needed not merely the effort of him who persuades, but also the\nsubmission, so to speak, which is to be yielded to the persuader, or the\nacceptance of what is said by him. And therefore it must not be said\nthat it is because God is _incapable_ of persuading men that they are\nnot persuaded, but because they will not accept the faithful words of\nGod. And if one were to apply this expression to men who are the\n\u201cartificers of persuasion,\u201d[1316] he would not be wrong; for it is\npossible for a man who has thoroughly learned the principles of\nrhetoric, and who employs them properly, to do his utmost to persuade,\nand yet appear to fail, because he cannot overcome the will of him who\nought to yield to his persuasive arts. Moreover, that persuasion does\nnot come from God, although persuasive words may be uttered by him, is\ndistinctly taught by Paul, when he says: \u201cThis persuasion cometh not of\nhim that calleth you.\u201d[1317] Such also is the view indicated by these\nwords: \u201cIf ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the\nland; but if ye refuse and rebel, a sword shall devour you.\u201d[1318] For\nthat one may [really] desire what is addressed to him by one who\nadmonishes, and may become deserving of those promises of God which he\nhears, it is necessary to secure the will of the hearer, and his\ninclination to what is addressed to him. And therefore it appears to me,\nthat in the book of Deuteronomy the following words are uttered with\npeculiar emphasis: \u201cAnd now, O Israel, what doth the Lord thy God\nrequire of thee, but to fear the Lord thy God, and to walk in all His\nways, and to love Him, and to keep His commandments?\u201d[1319]\n\nFootnote 1313:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1ff3 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1314:\n\n \u1f61\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b8\u03cc\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1315:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7\n \u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1316:\n\n \u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b8\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1317:\n\n Cf. Gal. v. 8.\n\nFootnote 1318:\n\n Cf. Isa. i. 19, 20.\n\nFootnote 1319:\n\n Cf. Deut. x. 12, 13.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVIII.\n\n\nThere is next to be answered the following query: \u201cAnd how is it that he\nrepents when men become ungrateful and wicked; and finds fault with his\nown handwork, and hates, and threatens, and destroys his own offspring?\u201d\nNow Celsus here calumniates and falsifies what is written in the book of\nGenesis to the following effect: \u201cAnd the Lord God, seeing that the\nwickedness of men upon the earth was increasing, and that every one in\nhis heart carefully meditated to do evil continually, was grieved[1320]\nHe had made man upon the earth. And God meditated in His heart, and\nsaid, I will destroy man, whom I have made, from the face of the earth,\nboth man and beast, and creeping thing, and fowl of the air, because I\nam grieved[1321] that I made them;\u201d[1322] quoting words which are not\nwritten in Scripture, as if they conveyed the meaning of what was\nactually written. For there is no mention in these words of the\nrepentance of God, nor of His blaming and hating His own handwork. And\nif there is the appearance of God threatening the catastrophe of the\ndeluge, and thus destroying His own children in it, we have to answer\nthat, as the soul of man is immortal, the supposed threatening has for\nits object the conversion of the hearers, while the destruction of men\nby the flood is a purification of the earth, as certain among the Greek\nphilosophers of no mean repute have indicated by the expression: \u201cWhen\nthe gods purify the earth.\u201d[1323] And with respect to the transference\nto God of those anthropopathic phrases, some remarks have been already\nmade by us in the preceding pages.\n\nFootnote 1320:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd\u03b5\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7, in all probability a corruption for \u1f10\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7, which Hoeschel\n places in the text, and Spencer in the margin of his ed.: Heb. \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05e0\u05b8\u05bc\u05d7\u05b6\u05dd.\n\nFootnote 1321:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd\u03b5\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd. Cf. remark in note 2.\n\nFootnote 1322:\n\n Cf. Gen. vi. 5, 6.\n\nFootnote 1323:\n\n Cf. Plato in _Tim\u00e6o_.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIX.\n\n\nCelsus, in the next place, suspecting, or perhaps seeing clearly enough,\nthe answer which might be returned by those who defend the destruction\nof men by the deluge, continues: \u201cBut if he does not destroy his own\noffspring, whither does he convey them out of this world[1324] which he\nhimself created?\u201d To this we reply, that God by no means removes out of\nthe whole world, consisting of heaven and earth, those who suffered\ndeath by the deluge, but removes them from a life in the flesh, and,\nhaving set them free from their bodies, liberates them at the same time\nfrom an existence upon earth, which in many parts of Scripture it is\nusual to call the \u201cworld.\u201d In the Gospel according to John especially,\nwe may frequently find the regions of earth[1325] termed \u201cworld,\u201d as in\nthe passage, \u201cHe was the true light, which lighteneth every man that\ncometh into the \u2018world;\u2019\u201d[1326] as also in this, \u201cIn the world ye shall\nhave tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the\nworld.\u201d[1327] If, then, we understand by \u201cremoving out of the world\u201d a\ntransference from \u201cregions on earth,\u201d there is nothing absurd in the\nexpression. If, on the contrary, the system of things which consists of\nheaven and earth be termed \u201cworld,\u201d then those who perished in the\ndeluge are by no means removed out of the so-called \u201cworld.\u201d And yet,\nindeed, if we have regard to the words, \u201cLooking not at the things which\nare seen, but at the things which are not seen;\u201d[1328] and also to\nthese, \u201cFor the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world\nare clearly seen, being understood by the things that are\nmade,\u201d[1329]\u2014we might say that he who dwells amid the \u201cinvisible\u201d\nthings, and what are called generally \u201cthings not seen,\u201d _is_ gone out\nof the world, the Word having removed him hence, and transported him to\nthe heavenly regions, in order to behold all beautiful things.\n\nFootnote 1324:\n\n \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1325:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1326:\n\n Cf. John i. 9.\n\nFootnote 1327:\n\n Cf. John xvi. 33.\n\nFootnote 1328:\n\n Cf. 2 Cor. iv. 18.\n\nFootnote 1329:\n\n Cf. Rom. i. 20.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LX.\n\n\nBut after this investigation of his assertions, as if his object were to\nswell his book by many words, he repeats, in different language, the\nsame charges which we have examined a little ago, saying: \u201cBy far the\nmost silly thing is the distribution of the creation of the world over\ncertain days, _before days existed_: for, as the heaven was not yet\ncreated, nor the foundation of the earth yet laid,[1330] nor the sun yet\nrevolving,[1331] how could there be _days_?\u201d Now, what difference is\nthere between these words and the following: \u201cMoreover, taking and\nlooking at these things from the beginning, would it not be absurd in\nthe first and greatest God to issue the command, Let this [first thing]\ncome into existence, and this second thing, and this [third]; and after\naccomplishing so much on the first day, to do so much more again on the\nsecond, and third, and fourth, and fifth, and sixth?\u201d We answered to the\nbest of our ability this objection to God\u2019s \u201ccommanding this first,\nsecond, and third thing to be created,\u201d when we quoted the words, \u201cHe\nsaid, and it was done; He commanded, and all things stood fast;\u201d[1332]\nremarking that the immediate[1333] Creator, and, as it were, very\nMaker[1334] of the world was the Word, the Son of God; while the Father\nof the Word, by commanding His own Son\u2014the Word\u2014to create the world, is\n_primarily_ Creator. And with regard to the creation of the light upon\nthe first day, and of the firmament upon the second, and of the\ngathering together of the waters that are under the heaven into their\nseveral reservoirs[1335] on the third (the earth thus causing to sprout\nforth those [fruits] which are under the control of nature alone[1336]),\nand of the [great] lights and stars upon the fourth, and of\naquatic[1337] animals upon the fifth, and of land animals and man upon\nthe sixth, we have treated to the best of our ability in our notes upon\nGenesis, as well as in the foregoing pages, when we found fault with\nthose who, taking the words in their _apparent_ signification, said that\nthe time of six days was occupied in the creation of the world, and\nquoted the words: \u201cThese are the generations of the heavens and of the\nearth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the\nearth and the heavens.\u201d[1338]\n\nFootnote 1330:\n\n \u1f10\u03c1\u03b7\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1331:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc7\u03b4\u03b5 \u03c6\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 1332:\n\n Cf. Ps. xxxiii. 9.\n\nFootnote 1333:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03c7\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1334:\n\n \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1335:\n\n \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1f70\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1336:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 1337:\n\n \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bd\u03b7\u03ba\u03c4\u03ac.\n\nFootnote 1338:\n\n Cf. Gen. ii. 4.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXI.\n\n\nAgain, not understanding the meaning of the words, \u201cAnd God ended on the\nsixth day His works which He had made, and ceased[1339] on the seventh\nday from all His works which He had made: and God blessed the seventh\nday, and hallowed it, because on it He had ceased[1340] from all His\nworks which He had begun to make;\u201d[1341] and imagining the expression,\n\u201cHe _ceased_ on the seventh day,\u201d to be the same as this, \u201cHe\n_rested_[1342] on the seventh day,\u201d he makes the remark: \u201cAfter this,\nindeed, he is weary, like a very bad workman, who stands in need of rest\nto refresh himself!\u201d For he knows nothing of the day of the Sabbath and\nrest of God, which follows the completion of the world\u2019s creation, and\nwhich lasts during the duration of the world, and in which all those\nwill keep festival with God who have done all _their_ works in _their_\nsix days, and who, because they have omitted none of their duties,[1343]\nwill ascend to the contemplation [of celestial things], and to the\nassembly of righteous and blessed beings. In the next place, as if\neither the Scriptures made such a statement, or as if we ourselves so\nspoke of God as having rested from fatigue, he continues: \u201cIt is not in\nkeeping with the fitness of things[1344] that the first God should feel\nfatigue, or work with His hands,[1345] or give forth commands.\u201d Celsus\nsays, that \u201cit is not in keeping with the fitness of things that the\nfirst God should feel fatigue.\u201d Now we would say that neither does God\nthe Word feel fatigue, nor any of those beings who belong to a better\nand diviner order of things, because the sensation of fatigue is\npeculiar to those who are in the body. You can examine whether this is\ntrue of those who possess a body of any kind, or of those who have an\n_earthly_ body, or one a little better than this. But \u201cneither is it\nconsistent with the fitness of things that the first God should work\nwith His own hands.\u201d If you understand the words \u201cwork with His own\nhands\u201d _literally_, then neither are they applicable to the _second_\nGod, nor to any other being partaking of divinity. But suppose that they\nare spoken in an improper and figurative sense, so that we may translate\nthe following expressions, \u201cAnd the firmament showeth forth His\nhandywork,\u201d[1346] and \u201cthe heavens are the work of Thy hands,\u201d[1347] and\nany other similar phrases, in a figurative manner, so far as respects\nthe \u201chands\u201d and \u201climbs\u201d of Deity, where is the absurdity in the words,\n\u201cGod thus working with His own hands?\u201d And as there is no absurdity in\nGod thus working, so neither is there in His issuing \u201ccommands;\u201d so that\nwhat is done at His bidding should be beautiful and praiseworthy,\nbecause it was God who commanded it to be performed.\n\nFootnote 1339:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c0\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1340:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c0\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1341:\n\n Cf. Gen. ii. 2, 3.\n\nFootnote 1342:\n\n \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03c0\u03b1\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf.\n\nFootnote 1343:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1344:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b8\u03ad\u03bc\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1345:\n\n \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1346:\n\n Cf. Ps. xix. 1.\n\nFootnote 1347:\n\n Cf. Ps. cii. 25.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXII.\n\n\nCelsus, again, having perhaps misunderstood the words, \u201cFor the mouth of\nthe Lord hath spoken it,\u201d[1348] or perhaps because some ignorant\nindividuals had rashly ventured upon the explanation of such things, and\nnot understanding, moreover, on what principles parts called after the\nnames of the bodily members are assigned to the attributes[1349] of God,\nasserts: \u201cHe has neither mouth nor voice.\u201d Truly, indeed, God can have\nno voice, if the voice is a concussion of the air, or a stroke on the\nair, or a species of air, or any other definition which may be given to\nthe voice by those who are skilled in such matters; but what is called\nthe \u201cvoice of God\u201d is said to be _seen_ as \u201cGod\u2019s voice\u201d by the people\nin the passage, \u201cAnd all the people saw the voice of God;\u201d[1350] the\nword \u201csaw\u201d being taken, agreeably to the custom of Scripture, in a\nspiritual sense. Moreover, he alleges that \u201cGod possesses nothing else\nof which _we_ have any knowledge;\u201d but of what things _we_ have\nknowledge he gives no indication. If he means \u201climbs,\u201d we agree with\nhim, understanding the things \u201cof which we have knowledge\u201d to be those\ncalled corporeal, and pretty generally so termed. But if we are to\nunderstand the words \u201cof which _we_ have knowledge\u201d in a universal\nsense, then there are many things of which we have knowledge, [and which\nmay be attributed to God]; for He possesses virtue, and blessedness, and\ndivinity. If we, however, put a higher meaning upon the words, \u201cof which\n_we_ have knowledge,\u201d since all that we know is less than God, there is\nno absurdity in our also admitting that God possesses none of those\nthings \u201cof which _we_ have knowledge.\u201d For the attributes which belong\nto God are far superior to all things with which not merely the nature\nof man is acquainted, but even that of those who have risen far above\nit. And if he had read the writings of the prophets, David on the one\nhand saying, \u201cBut Thou art the same,\u201d[1351] and Malachi on the other, \u201cI\nam [the Lord], and change not,\u201d[1352] he would have observed that none\nof us assert that there is any change in God, either in act or thought.\nFor abiding the same, He administers mutable things according to their\nnature, and His word elects to undertake their administration.\n\nFootnote 1348:\n\n Cf. Isa. i. 20.\n\nFootnote 1349:\n\n \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1350:\n\n Cf. Ex. xx. 18 (LXX.). The Masoretic text is different.\n\nFootnote 1351:\n\n Cf. Ps. cii. 27.\n\nFootnote 1352:\n\n Cf. Mal. iii. 6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIII.\n\n\nCelsus, not observing the difference between \u201cafter the image of God\u201d\nand \u201cGod\u2019s image,\u201d next asserts that the \u201cfirst-born of every creature\u201d\nis the image of God,\u2014the very word and truth, and also the very wisdom,\nbeing the image of His goodness, while man has been created _after_ the\nimage of God; moreover, that every man whose head is Christ is the image\nand glory of God;\u2014and further, not observing to which of the\ncharacteristics of humanity the expression \u201cafter the image of God\u201d\nbelongs, and that it consists in a nature which never had or no longer\nhas \u201cthe old man with his deeds,\u201d being called \u201cafter the image of Him\nwho created it,\u201d from its not possessing these qualities,\u2014he maintains:\n\u201cNeither did He make man His image; for God is not such an one, nor like\nany other species of [visible] being.\u201d Is it possible to suppose that\nthe element which is \u201cafter the image of God\u201d should exist in the\ninferior part\u2014I mean the body\u2014of a compound being like man, because\nCelsus has explained that to be made after the image of God? For if that\nwhich is \u201cafter the image of God\u201d be in the body only, the better part,\nthe soul, has been deprived of that which is \u201cafter His image,\u201d and this\n[distinction] exists in the corruptible body,\u2014an assertion which is made\nby none of us. But if that which is \u201cafter the image of God\u201d be in _both\ntogether_, then God must necessarily be a compound being, and consist,\nas it were, of soul and body, in order that the element which is \u201cafter\nGod\u2019s image,\u201d the better part, may be in the soul; while the inferior\npart, and that which \u201cis according to the body,\u201d may be in the body,\u2014an\nassertion, again, which is made by none of us. It remains, therefore,\nthat that which is \u201cafter the image of God\u201d must be understood to be in\nour \u201cinner man,\u201d which is also renewed, and whose nature it is to be\n\u201cafter the image of Him who created it,\u201d when a man becomes \u201cperfect,\u201d\nas \u201cour Father in heaven is perfect,\u201d and hears the command, \u201cBe ye\nholy, for I the Lord your God am holy,\u201d[1353] and learning the precept,\n\u201cBe ye followers of God,\u201d[1354] receives into his virtuous soul the\ntraits of God\u2019s image. The body, moreover, of him who possesses such a\nsoul is a temple of God; and in the soul God dwells, because it has been\nmade after His image.[1355]\n\nFootnote 1353:\n\n Lev. xi. 44.\n\nFootnote 1354:\n\n Cf. Eph. v. 1 (\u03bc\u03b9\u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03af).\n\nFootnote 1355:\n\n The words as they stand in the text are probably corrupt: we have\n adopted in the translation the emendation of Guietus: \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03b1\u03cc\u03c2\n \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc7 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u2019 \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIV.\n\n\nCelsus, again, brings together a number of statements, which he gives as\nadmissions on our part, but which no intelligent Christian would allow.\nFor not one of us asserts that \u201cGod partakes of form or colour.\u201d Nor\ndoes He even partake of \u201cmotion,\u201d because He stands firm, and His nature\nis permanent, and He invites the righteous man also to do the same,\nsaying: \u201cBut as for thee, stand thou here by me.\u201d[1356] And if certain\nexpressions indicate a kind of motion, as it were, on his part, such as\nthis, \u201cThey heard the voice of the Lord God _walking_ in the garden in\nthe cool of the day,\u201d[1357] we must understand them in this way, that it\nis by sinners that God is understood as moving, or as we understand the\n\u201csleep\u201d of God, which is taken in a figurative sense, or His \u201canger,\u201d or\nany other similar attribute. But \u201cGod does not partake even of\nsubstance.\u201d[1358] For He is partaken of [by others] rather than that\nHimself partakes of them, and He is partaken of by those who have the\nSpirit of God. Our Saviour, also, does not partake of righteousness; but\nbeing Himself \u201crighteousness,\u201d He is partaken of _by_ the righteous. A\ndiscussion about \u201csubstance\u201d would be protracted and difficult, and\nespecially if it were a question whether that which is permanent and\nimmaterial be \u201csubstance\u201d properly so called, so that it would be found\nthat God is _beyond_ \u201csubstance,\u201d communicating of His \u201csubstance,\u201d by\nmeans of office and power,[1359] to those to whom He communicates\nHimself by His Word, as He does to the Word Himself; or even if He _is_\n\u201csubstance,\u201d yet He is said to be in His nature \u201cinvisible,\u201d in these\nwords respecting our Saviour, who is said to be \u201cthe image of the\n_invisible_ God,\u201d[1360] while from the term \u201cinvisible\u201d it is indicated\nthat He is \u201cimmaterial.\u201d It is also a question for investigation,\nwhether the \u201conly-begotten\u201d and \u201cfirst-born of every creature\u201d is to be\ncalled \u201csubstance of substances,\u201d and \u201cidea of ideas,\u201d and the\n\u201cprinciple of all things,\u201d while above all there is His Father and God.\n\nFootnote 1356:\n\n Deut. v. 31.\n\nFootnote 1357:\n\n Cf. Gen. iii. 8.\n\nFootnote 1358:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03c3\u03af\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 1359:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1360:\n\n Cf. Col. i. 15.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXV.\n\n\nCelsus proceeds to say of God that \u201cof Him are all things,\u201d abandoning\n[in so speaking], I know not how, all his principles;[1361] while our\nPaul declares, that \u201cof Him, and through Him, and to Him are all\nthings,\u201d[1362] showing that He is the beginning of the substance of all\nthings by the words \u201cof Him,\u201d and the bond of their subsistence by the\nexpression \u201cthrough Him,\u201d and their final end by the terms \u201cto Him.\u201d Of\na truth, God is of nothing. But when Celsus adds, that \u201cHe is not to be\nreached by word,\u201d[1363] I make a distinction, and say that if he means\nthe word that is in _us_\u2014whether the word conceived in the mind, or the\nword that is uttered[1364]\u2014I, too, admit that God is not to be reached\nby word. If, however, we attend to the passage, \u201cIn the beginning was\nthe Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,\u201d[1365] we are\nof opinion that God is to be reached by _this_ Word, and is comprehended\nnot by Him only, but by any one whatever to whom He may reveal the\nFather; and thus we shall prove the falsity of the assertion of Celsus,\nwhen he says, \u201cNeither is God to be reached by word.\u201d The statement,\nmoreover, that \u201cHe cannot be expressed by name,\u201d requires to be taken\nwith a distinction. If he means, indeed, that there is no word or\nsign[1366] that can represent the attributes of God, the statement is\ntrue, since there are many qualities which cannot be indicated by words.\nWho, for example, could describe in words the difference betwixt the\nquality of sweetness in a palm and that in a fig? And who could\ndistinguish and set forth in words the peculiar qualities of each\nindividual thing? It is no wonder, then, if in this way God cannot be\ndescribed by name. But if you take the phrase to mean that it is\npossible to represent by words something of God\u2019s attributes, in order\nto lead the hearer by the hand,[1367] as it were, and so enable him to\ncomprehend something of God, so far as attainable by human nature, then\nthere is no absurdity in saying that \u201cHe _can_ be described by name.\u201d\nAnd we make a similar distinction with regard to the expression, \u201cfor He\nhas undergone no suffering that can be conveyed by words.\u201d It _is_ true\nthat the Deity is beyond all suffering. And so much on this point.\n\nFootnote 1361:\n\n For \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 Boherellus conjectures \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, and translates, \u201c_Propria ipse\n principia_, qu\u00e6 sunt Epicuri, _subruens_.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1362:\n\n Rom. xi. 36.\n\nFootnote 1363:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u1ff7 \u1f10\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1364:\n\n \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff7.\n\nFootnote 1365:\n\n John i. 1.\n\nFootnote 1366:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03bb\u03ad\u03be\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1367:\n\n \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVI.\n\n\nLet us look also at his next statement, in which he introduces, as it\nwere, a certain person, who, after hearing what has been said, expresses\nhimself in the following manner, \u201cHow, then, shall I know God? and how\nshall I learn the way that leads to Him? And how will you show Him to\nme? Because now, indeed, you throw darkness before my eyes, and I see\nnothing distinctly.\u201d He then answers, as it were, the individual who is\nthus perplexed, and thinks that he assigns the reason why darkness has\nbeen poured upon the eyes of him who uttered the foregoing words, when\nhe asserts that \u201cthose whom one would lead forth out of darkness into\nthe brightness of light, being unable to withstand its splendours, have\ntheir power of vision affected[1368] and injured, and so imagine that\nthey are smitten with blindness.\u201d In answer to this, we would say that\nall those indeed sit in darkness, and are rooted in it, who fix their\ngaze upon the evil handiwork of painters, and moulders and sculptors,\nand who will not look upwards, and ascend in thought from all visible\nand sensible things, to the Creator of all things, who is light; while,\non the other hand, every one is in light who has followed the radiance\nof the Word, who has shown in consequence of what ignorance, and\nimpiety, and want of knowledge of divine things these objects were\nworshipped instead of God, and who has conducted the soul of him who\ndesires to be saved towards the uncreated God, who is over all. For \u201cthe\npeople that sat in darkness\u2014the Gentiles\u2014saw a great light, and to them\nwho sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up,\u201d[1369]\u2014the\nGod Jesus. No Christian, then, would give Celsus, or any accuser of the\ndivine Word, the answer, \u201cHow shall I know God?\u201d for each one of them\nknows God according to his capacity. And no one asks, \u201cHow shall I learn\nthe way which leads to Him?\u201d because he has heard Him who says, \u201cI am\nthe way, and the truth, and the life,\u201d[1370] and has tasted, in the\ncourse of the journey, the happiness which results from it. And not a\nsingle Christian would say to Celsus, \u201cHow will you show me God?\u201d\n\nFootnote 1368:\n\n \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1369:\n\n Cf. Matt. iv. 16 and Isa. ix. 2.\n\nFootnote 1370:\n\n John xiv. 6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVII.\n\n\nThe remark, indeed, was true which Celsus made, that any one, on hearing\nhis words, would answer, seeing that his words _are_ words of darkness,\n\u201cYou pour darkness before my eyes.\u201d Celsus verily, and those like him,\ndo desire to pour darkness before our eyes: we, however, by means of the\nlight of the Word, disperse the darkness of their impious opinions. The\nChristian, indeed, could retort on Celsus, who says nothing that is\ndistinct or true, \u201cI see nothing that is distinct among all _your_\nstatements.\u201d It is not, therefore, \u201cout of darkness\u201d into \u201cthe\nbrightness of light\u201d that Celsus leads us forth: he wishes, on the\ncontrary, to transport us from light into darkness, making the darkness\nlight and the light darkness, and exposing himself to the woe well\ndescribed by the prophet Isaiah in the following manner: \u201cWoe unto them\nthat put darkness for light, and light for darkness.\u201d[1371] But we, the\neyes of whose soul have been opened by the Word, and who see the\ndifference between light and darkness, prefer by all means to take our\nstand \u201cin the light,\u201d and will have nothing to do with darkness at all.\nThe true light, moreover, being endued with life, knows to whom his full\nsplendours are to be manifested, and to whom his light; for he does not\ndisplay his brilliancy on account of the still existing weakness in the\neyes of the recipient. And if we must speak at all of \u201csight being\naffected and injured,\u201d what other eyes shall we say are in this\ncondition, than his who is involved in ignorance of God, and who is\nprevented by his passions from seeing the truth? Christians, however, by\nno means consider that they are blinded by the words of Celsus, or any\nother who is opposed to the worship of God. But let those who perceive\nthat they are blinded by following multitudes who are in error, and\ntribes of those who keep festivals to demons, draw near to the Word, who\ncan bestow the gift of sight,[1372] in order that, like those poor and\nblind who had thrown themselves down by the wayside, and who were healed\nby Jesus because they said to Him, \u201cSon of David, have mercy upon me,\u201d\nthey too may receive mercy and recover their eyesight,[1373] fresh and\nbeautiful, as the Word of God can create it.\n\nFootnote 1371:\n\n Cf. Isa. v. 20.\n\nFootnote 1372:\n\n \u1f40\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1373:\n\n \u1f40\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVIII.\n\n\nAccordingly, if Celsus were to ask us how we think we know God, and how\nwe shall be saved by Him, we would answer that the Word of God, which\nentered into those who seek Him, or who accept Him when He appears, is\nable to make known and to reveal the Father, who was not seen [by any\none] before the appearance of the Word. And who else is able to save and\nconduct the soul of man to the God of all things, save God the Word,\nwho, \u201cbeing in the beginning with God,\u201d became flesh for the sake of\nthose who had cleaved to the flesh, and had become as flesh, that He\nmight be received by those who could not behold Him, inasmuch as He was\nthe Word, and was with God, and was God? And discoursing in human\nform,[1374] and announcing Himself as flesh, He calls to Himself those\nwho are flesh, that He may in the first place cause them to be\ntransformed according to the Word that was made flesh, and afterwards\nmay lead them upwards to behold Him as He was before He became flesh; so\nthat they, receiving the benefit, and ascending from their great\nintroduction to Him, which was according to the flesh, say, \u201cEven if we\nhave known Christ after the flesh, yet henceforth know we Him no more.\u201d\nTherefore He became flesh, and having become flesh, \u201cHe tabernacled\namong us,\u201d not dwelling without us; and after tabernacling and dwelling\n_within_ us, He did not continue in the form in which He first presented\nHimself, but caused us to ascend to the lofty mountain of His word, and\nshowed us His own glorious form, and the splendour of His garments; and\nnot His own form alone, but that also of the spiritual law, which is\nMoses, seen in glory along with Jesus. He showed to us, moreover, all\nprophecy, which did not perish even after His incarnation, but was\nreceived up into heaven, and whose symbol was Elijah. And he who beheld\nthese things could say, \u201cWe beheld His glory, the glory as of the\nonly-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.\u201d[1375] Celsus,\nthen, has exhibited considerable ignorance in the imaginary answer to\nhis question which he puts into our mouth, \u201cHow we think we can know\nGod? and how we know we shall be saved by Him?\u201d for our answer is what\nwe have just stated.\n\nFootnote 1374:\n\n \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1375:\n\n Cf. John i. 14.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIX.\n\n\nCelsus, however, asserts that the answer which we give is based upon a\nprobable conjecture,[1376] admitting that he describes our answer in the\nfollowing terms: \u201cSince God is great and difficult to see,[1377] He put\nHis own Spirit into a body that resembled ours, and sent it down to us,\nthat we might be enabled to hear Him and become acquainted with Him.\u201d\nBut the God and Father of all things is not the only being that is great\nin our judgment; for He has imparted [a share] of Himself and His\ngreatness to His only-begotten and first-born of every creature, in\norder that He, being the image of the invisible God, might preserve,\neven in His greatness, the image of the Father. For it was not possible\nthat there could exist a well-proportioned,[1378] so to speak, and\nbeautiful image of the invisible God, which did not at the same time\npreserve the image of His greatness. God, moreover, is in our judgment\ninvisible, because He is not a body, while He _can_ be seen by those who\nsee with the heart, that is, the understanding; not indeed with any kind\nof heart, but with one which is pure. For it is inconsistent with the\nfitness of things that a polluted heart should look upon God; for that\nmust be itself pure which would worthily behold that which is pure. Let\nit be granted, indeed, that God is \u201cdifficult to see,\u201d yet He is not the\nonly being who is so; for His Only-begotten also is \u201cdifficult to see.\u201d\nFor God the Word is \u201cdifficult to see,\u201d and so also is His[1379] wisdom,\nby which God created all things. For who is capable of seeing the wisdom\nwhich is displayed in each individual part of the whole system of\nthings, and by which God created every individual thing? It was not,\nthen, because God was \u201cdifficult to see\u201d that He sent God His Son to be\nan object \u201ceasy to be seen.\u201d[1380] And because Celsus does not\nunderstand this, he has represented us as saying, \u201cBecause God was\n\u2018difficult to see,\u2019 He put His own Spirit in a body resembling ours, and\nsent it down to us, that we might be enabled to hear Him and become\nacquainted with Him.\u201d Now, as we have stated, the Son also is \u201cdifficult\nto see,\u201d because He is God the Word, through whom all things were made,\nand who \u201ctabernacled amongst us.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1376:\n\n \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c7\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u1ff7.\n\nFootnote 1377:\n\n \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03ce\u03c1\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1378:\n\n \u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1379:\n\n For \u03bf\u1f51\u03c4\u03c9\u03c3\u1f76 we have adopted the conjecture of Guietus, \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 1380:\n\n \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u03b5\u03ce\u03c1\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXX.\n\n\nIf Celsus, indeed, had understood our teaching regarding the Spirit of\nGod, and had known that \u201cas many as are led by the Spirit of God, these\nare the sons of God,\u201d[1381] he would not have returned to himself the\nanswer which he represents as coming from us, that \u201cGod put His own\nSpirit into a body, and sent it down to us;\u201d for God is perpetually\nbestowing of His own Spirit to those who are capable of receiving it,\nalthough it is not by way of division and separation that He dwells in\n[the hearts of] the deserving. Nor is the Spirit, in our opinion, a\n\u201cbody,\u201d any more than fire is a \u201cbody,\u201d which God is said to be in the\npassage, \u201cOur God is a consuming fire.\u201d[1382] For all these are\nfigurative expressions, employed to denote the nature of \u201cintelligent\nbeings\u201d by means of familiar and corporeal terms. In the same way, too,\nif sins are called \u201cwood, and straw, and stubble,\u201d we shall not maintain\nthat sins are corporeal; and if blessings are termed \u201cgold, and silver,\nand precious stones,\u201d[1383] we shall not maintain that blessings are\n\u201ccorporeal;\u201d so also, if God be said to be a fire that consumes wood,\nand straw, and stubble, and all substance[1384] of sin, we shall not\nunderstand Him to be a \u201cbody,\u201d so neither do we understand Him to be a\nbody if He should be called \u201cfire.\u201d In this way, if God be called\n\u201cspirit,\u201d[1385] we do not mean that He is a \u201cbody.\u201d For it is the custom\nof Scripture to give to \u201cintelligent beings\u201d the names of \u201cspirits\u201d and\n\u201cspiritual things,\u201d by way of distinction from those which are the\nobjects of \u201csense;\u201d as when Paul says, \u201cBut our sufficiency is of God,\nwho hath also made us able ministers of the New Testament; not of the\nletter, but of the spirit; for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth\nlife,\u201d[1386] where by the \u201cletter\u201d he means that \u201cexposition of\nScripture which is apparent to the senses,\u201d[1387] while by the \u201cspirit\u201d\nthat which is the object of the \u201cunderstanding.\u201d It is the same, too,\nwith the expression, \u201cGod is a Spirit.\u201d And because the prescriptions of\nthe law were obeyed both by Samaritans and Jews in a corporeal and\nliteral[1388] manner, our Saviour said to the Samaritan woman, \u201cThe hour\nis coming, when neither in Jerusalem, nor in this mountain, shall ye\nworship the Father. God is a Spirit, and they that worship Him must\nworship Him in spirit and in truth.\u201d[1389] And by these words He taught\nmen that God must be worshipped not in the flesh, and with fleshly\nsacrifices, but in the spirit. And He will be understood to be a Spirit\nin proportion as the worship rendered to Him is rendered in spirit, and\nwith understanding. It is not, however, with images[1390] that we are to\nworship the Father, but \u201cin truth,\u201d which \u201ccame by Jesus Christ,\u201d after\nthe giving of the law by Moses. For when we turn to the Lord (and the\nLord is a Spirit[1391]), He takes away the veil which lies upon the\nheart when Moses is read.\n\nFootnote 1381:\n\n Rom. viii. 14.\n\nFootnote 1382:\n\n Cf. Heb. xii. 29.\n\nFootnote 1383:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 12.\n\nFootnote 1384:\n\n \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1385:\n\n \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1. There is an allusion to the two meanings of \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1, \u201cwind\u201d and\n \u201cspirit.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1386:\n\n 2 Cor. iii. 5, 6.\n\nFootnote 1387:\n\n \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03bf\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1388:\n\n \u03c4\u03c5\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2 here evidently must have the above meaning.\n\nFootnote 1389:\n\n Cf. John iv. 21, 24.\n\nFootnote 1390:\n\n \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03cd\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1391:\n\n Cf. 2 Cor. iii. 17.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXI.\n\n\nCelsus accordingly, as not understanding the doctrine relating to the\nSpirit of God (\u201cfor the natural man receiveth not the things of the\nSpirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know\nthem, because they are spiritually discerned\u201d[1392]), weaves together\n[such a web] as pleases himself,[1393] imagining that we, in calling God\na Spirit, differ in no respect in this particular from the Stoics among\nthe Greeks, who maintain that \u201cGod is a Spirit, diffused through all\nthings, and containing all things within Himself.\u201d Now the\nsuperintendence and providence of God does extend through all things,\nbut not in the way that spirit does, according to the Stoics. Providence\nindeed contains all things that are its objects, and comprehends them\nall, but not as a containing body includes its contents, because they\nalso are \u201cbody,\u201d[1394] but as a _divine_ power does it comprehend what\nit contains. According to the philosophers of the Porch, indeed, who\nassert that principles are \u201ccorporeal,\u201d and who on that account make all\nthings perishable, and who venture even to make the God of all things\ncapable of perishing, the very Word of God, who descends even to the\nlowest of mankind, would be\u2014did it not appear to them to be too gross an\nincongruity[1395]\u2014nothing else than a \u201ccorporeal\u201d spirit; whereas, in\nour opinion,\u2014who endeavour to demonstrate that the rational soul is\nsuperior to all \u201ccorporeal\u201d nature, and that it is an invisible\nsubstance, and incorporeal,\u2014God the Word, by whom all things were made,\nwho came, in order that all things might be made by the Word, not to men\nonly, but to what are deemed the very lowest of things, under the\ndominion of nature alone, would be no body. The Stoics, then, may\nconsign all things to destruction by fire; we, however, know of no\nincorporeal substance that is destructible by fire, nor [do we believe]\nthat the soul of man, or the substance of \u201cangels,\u201d or of \u201cthrones,\u201d or\n\u201cdominions,\u201d or \u201cprincipalities,\u201d or \u201cpowers,\u201d can be dissolved by fire.\n\nFootnote 1392:\n\n Cf. 1 Cor. ii. 14.\n\nFootnote 1393:\n\n \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1394:\n\n \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b5\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1395:\n\n \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c5 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXII.\n\n\nIt is therefore in vain that Celsus asserts, as one who knows not the\nnature of the Spirit of God, that \u201cas the Son of God, who existed in a\nhuman body, is a Spirit, this very Son of God would not be immortal.\u201d He\nnext becomes confused in his statements, as if there were some of us who\ndid not admit that God is a Spirit, but maintain that only with regard\nto His Son, and he thinks that he can answer us by saying that there \u201cis\nno kind of spirit which lasts for ever.\u201d This is much the same as if,\nwhen we term God a \u201cconsuming fire,\u201d he were to say that there \u201cis no\nkind of fire which lasts for ever;\u201d not observing the sense in which we\nsay that our God is a fire, and what the things are which He consumes,\nviz. sins, and wickedness. For it becomes a God of goodness, after each\nindividual has shown, by his efforts, what kind of combatant he has\nbeen, to consume vice by the fire of His chastisements. He proceeds, in\nthe next place, to assume what we do not maintain, that \u201cGod must\nnecessarily have given up the ghost;\u201d from which also it follows that\nJesus could not have risen again with His body. For God would not have\nreceived back the spirit which He had surrendered after it had been\nstained by contact with the body. It is foolish, however, for us to\nanswer statements as ours which were never made by us.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIII.\n\n\nHe proceeds to repeat himself, and after saying a great deal which he\nhad said before, and ridiculing the birth of God from a virgin,\u2014to which\nwe have already replied as we best could,\u2014he adds the following: \u201cIf God\nhad wished to send down His Spirit from Himself, what need was there to\nbreathe it into the womb of a woman? For as one who knew already how to\nform men, He could also have fashioned a body for this person, without\ncasting His own Spirit into so much pollution;[1396] and in this way He\nwould not have been received with incredulity, if He had derived His\nexistence immediately from above.\u201d He has made these remarks, because he\nknows not the pure and virgin birth, unaccompanied by any corruption, of\nthat body which was to minister to the salvation of men. For, quoting\nthe sayings of the Stoics,[1397] and affecting not to know the doctrine\nabout \u201cthings indifferent,\u201d he thinks that the divine nature was cast\namid pollution, and was stained either by being in the body of a woman,\nuntil a body was formed around it, or by assuming a body. And in this he\nacts like those who imagine that the sun\u2019s rays are polluted by dung and\nby foul-smelling bodies, and do not remain pure amid such things. If,\nhowever, according to the view of Celsus, the body of Jesus had been\nfashioned without generation, those who beheld the body would at once\nhave believed that it had not been formed by generation; and yet an\nobject, when seen, does not at the same time indicate the nature of that\nfrom which it has derived its origin. For example, suppose that there\nwere some honey [placed before one] which had not been manufactured by\nbees, no one could tell from the taste or sight that it was not their\nworkmanship, because the honey which comes from bees does not make known\nits origin by the senses,[1398] but experience alone can tell that it\ndoes not proceed from them. In the same way, too, experience teaches\nthat wine comes from the vine, for taste does not enable us to\ndistinguish [the wine] which comes from the vine. In the same manner,\ntherefore, the visible[1399] body does not make known the manner of its\nexistence. And you will be induced to accept this view,[1400] by\n[regarding] the heavenly bodies, whose existence and splendour we\nperceive as we gaze at them; and yet, I presume, their appearance does\nnot suggest to us whether they are created or uncreated; and accordingly\ndifferent opinions have existed on these points. And yet those who say\nthat they are created are not agreed as to the manner of their creation,\nfor their appearance does not suggest it, although the force of\nreason[1401] may have discovered that they are created, and how their\ncreation was effected.\n\nFootnote 1396:\n\n \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 1397:\n\n Cf. Book iv. cc. 14 and 68.\n\nFootnote 1398:\n\n \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1399:\n\n \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 1400:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03c7\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1ff3.\n\nFootnote 1401:\n\n \u03ba\u1f02\u03bd \u03b2\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f55\u03c1\u1fc3.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIV.\n\n\nAfter this he returns to the subject of Marcion\u2019s opinions (having\nalready spoken frequently of them), and states some of them correctly,\nwhile others he has misunderstood; these, however, it is not necessary\nfor us to answer or refute. Again, after this he brings forward the\nvarious arguments that may be urged on Marcion\u2019s behalf, and also\nagainst him, enumerating what the opinions are which exonerate him from\nthe charges, and what expose him to them; and when he desires to support\nthe statement which declares that Jesus has been the subject of\nprophecy,\u2014in order to found a charge against Marcion and his\nfollowers,\u2014he distinctly asks, \u201cHow could he, who was punished in such a\nmanner, be shown to be God\u2019s Son, unless these things had been predicted\nof him?\u201d He next proceeds to jest, and, as his custom is, to pour\nridicule upon the subject, introducing \u201ctwo sons of God, one the son of\nthe Creator,[1402] and the other the son of Marcion\u2019s God; and he\nportrays their single combats, saying that the Theomachies of the\nFathers are like the battles between quails;[1403] or that the Fathers,\nbecoming useless through age, and falling into their dotage,[1404] do\nnot meddle at all with one another, but leave their sons to fight it\nout.\u201d The remark which he made formerly we will turn against himself:\n\u201cWhat old woman would not be ashamed to lull a child to sleep with such\nstories as he has inserted in the work which he entitles _A True\nDiscourse?_ For when he ought seriously[1405] to apply himself to\nargument, he leaves serious argument aside, and betakes himself to\njesting and buffoonery, imagining that he is writing mimes or scoffing\nverses; not observing that such a method of procedure defeats his\npurpose, which is to make us abandon Christianity and give in our\nadherence to his opinions, which, perhaps, had they been stated with\nsome degree of gravity,[1406] would have appeared more likely to\nconvince, whereas, since he continues to ridicule, and scoff, and play\nthe buffoon, we answer that it is because he has no argument of\nweight[1407] (for such he neither had, nor could understand) that he has\nbetaken himself to such drivelling.\u201d[1408]\n\nFootnote 1402:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6.\n\nFootnote 1403:\n\n \u1f40\u03c1\u03c4\u03cd\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1404:\n\n \u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1405:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1406:\n\n \u1f10\u03c3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9.\n\nFootnote 1407:\n\n \u03c3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1408:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c6\u03bb\u03c5\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXV.\n\n\nTo the preceding remarks he adds the following: \u201cSince a divine Spirit\ninhabited the body [of Jesus], it must certainly have been different\nfrom that of other beings, in respect of grandeur, or beauty, or\nstrength, or voice, or impressiveness,[1409] or persuasiveness. For it\nis impossible that He, to whom was imparted some divine quality beyond\nother beings, should not differ from others; whereas this person did not\ndiffer in any respect from another, but was, as they report, little, and\nill-favoured, and ignoble.\u201d[1410] Now it is evident by these words, that\nwhen Celsus wishes to bring a charge against Jesus, he adduces the\nsacred writings, as one who believed them to be writings apparently\nfitted to afford a handle for a charge against Him; but wherever, in the\nsame writings, statements would appear to be made opposed to those\ncharges which are adduced, he pretends not even to know them! There are,\nindeed, admitted to be recorded some statements respecting the body of\nJesus having been \u201cill-favoured;\u201d not, however, \u201cignoble,\u201d as has been\nstated, nor is there any certain evidence that he was \u201clittle.\u201d The\nlanguage of Isaiah runs as follows, who prophesied regarding Him that He\nwould come and visit the multitude, not in comeliness of form, nor in\nany surpassing beauty: \u201cLord, who hath believed our report, and to whom\nwas the arm of the Lord revealed? He made announcement before Him, as a\nchild, as a root in a thirsty ground. He has no form nor glory, and we\nbeheld Him, and He had no form nor beauty; but His form was without\nhonour, and inferior to that of the sons of men.\u201d[1411] These passages,\nthen, Celsus listened to, because he thought they were of use to him in\nbringing a charge against Jesus; but he paid no attention to the words\nof the 45th Psalm, and why it is then said, \u201cGird Thy sword upon Thy\nthigh, O most mighty, with Thy comeliness and beauty, and continue, and\nprosper, and reign.\u201d[1412]\n\nFootnote 1409:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03be\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFootnote 1410:\n\n \u1f00\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u1f72\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1411:\n\n Cf. Isa. liii. 1-3 (LXX.).\n\nFootnote 1412:\n\n Cf. Ps. xlv. 3, 4 (LXX.).\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVI.\n\n\nLet it be supposed, however, that he had not read the prophecy, or that\nhe _had_ read it, but had been drawn away by those who misinterpreted it\nas not being spoken of Jesus Christ. What has he to say of the Gospel,\nin the narratives of which Jesus ascended up into a high mountain, and\nwas transfigured before the disciples, and was seen in glory, when both\nMoses and Elias, \u201cbeing seen in glory, spake of the decease which He was\nabout to accomplish at Jerusalem?\u201d or when the prophet says, \u201cWe beheld\nHim, and He had no form nor beauty,\u201d etc.? and Celsus accepts this\nprophecy as referring to Jesus, being blinded in so accepting it, and\nnot seeing that it is a great proof that the Jesus who appeared to be\n\u201cwithout form\u201d was the Son of God, that His very appearance should have\nbeen made the subject of prophecy many years before His birth. But if\nanother prophet speak of His comeliness and beauty, he will no longer\naccept the prophecy as referring to Christ! And if it were to be clearly\nascertained from the Gospels that \u201cHe had no form nor beauty, but that\nHis appearance was without honour, and inferior to that of the sons of\nmen,\u201d it might be said that it was not with reference to the prophetic\nwritings, but to the Gospels, that Celsus made his remarks. But now, as\nneither the Gospels nor the apostolic writings indicate that \u201cHe had no\nform nor beauty,\u201d it is evident that we must accept the declaration of\nthe prophets as true of Christ, and this will prevent the charge against\nJesus from being advanced.[1413]\n\nFootnote 1413:\n\n \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVII.\n\n\nBut again, how did he who said, \u201cSince a divine Spirit inhabited the\nbody [of Jesus], it must certainly have been different from that of\nother beings in respect of grandeur, or voice, or strength, or\nimpressiveness, or persuasiveness,\u201d not observe the changing relation of\nHis body according to the capacity of the spectators (and therefore its\ncorresponding utility), inasmuch as it appeared to each one of such a\nnature as it was requisite for him to behold it? Moreover, it is not a\nsubject of wonder that the matter, which is by nature susceptible of\nbeing altered and changed, and of being transformed into anything which\nthe Creator chooses, and is capable of receiving all the qualities which\nthe Artificer desires, should at one time possess a quality, agreeably\nto which it is said, \u201cHe had no form nor beauty,\u201d and at another, one so\nglorious, and majestic, and marvellous, that the spectators of such\nsurpassing loveliness\u2014three disciples who had ascended [the mount] with\nJesus\u2014should fall upon their faces. He will say, however, that these are\ninventions, and in no respect different from myths, as are also the\nother marvels related of Jesus; which objection we have answered at\ngreater length in what has gone before. But there is also something\nmystical in this doctrine, which announces that the varying appearances\nof Jesus are to be referred to the nature of the divine Word, who does\nnot show Himself in the same manner to the multitude as He does to those\nwho are capable of following Him to the high mountain which we have\nmentioned; for to those who still remain below, and are not yet prepared\nto ascend, the Word \u201chas neither form nor beauty,\u201d because to such\npersons His form is \u201cwithout honour,\u201d and inferior to the words given\nforth by men, which are figuratively termed \u201csons of men.\u201d For we might\nsay that the words of philosophers\u2014who are \u201csons of men\u201d\u2014appear far more\nbeautiful than the Word of God, who is proclaimed to the multitude, and\nwho also exhibits [what is called] the \u201cfoolishness of preaching,\u201d and\non account of this apparent \u201cfoolishness of preaching\u201d those who look at\nthis alone say, \u201cWe saw Him, but He had no form nor beauty.\u201d To those,\nindeed, who have received power to follow Him, in order that they may\nattend Him even when He ascends to the \u201clofty mount,\u201d He _has_ a diviner\nappearance, which they behold, if there happens to be [among them] a\nPeter, who has received within himself the edifice of the church based\nupon the Word, and who has gained such a habit [of goodness] that none\nof the gates of Hades will prevail against him, having been exalted by\nthe Word from the gates of death, that he may \u201cpublish the praises of\nGod in the gates of the daughter of Sion,\u201d and any others who have\nderived their birth from impressive preaching,[1414] and who are not at\nall inferior to \u201csons of thunder.\u201d But how can Celsus and the enemies of\nthe divine Word, and those who have not examined the doctrines of\nChristianity in the spirit of truth, know the meaning of the different\nappearances of Jesus? And I refer also to the different stages of His\nlife, and to any actions performed by Him before His sufferings, and\nafter His resurrection from the dead.\n\nFootnote 1414:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f34 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03ad\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c6\u03ce\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVIII.\n\n\nCelsus next makes certain observations of the following nature: \u201cAgain,\nif God, like Jupiter in the comedy, should, on awaking from a lengthened\nslumber, desire to rescue the human race from evil, why did He send this\nSpirit of which you speak into one corner [of the earth]? He ought to\nhave breathed it alike into many bodies, and have sent them out into all\nthe world. Now the comic poet, to cause laughter in the theatre, wrote\nthat Jupiter, after awakening, despatched Mercury to the Athenians and\nLaced\u00e6monians; but do not you think that you have made the Son of God\nmore ridiculous in sending Him to the Jews?\u201d Observe in such language as\nthis the irreverent character of Celsus, who, unlike a philosopher,\ntakes the writer of a comedy, whose business is to cause laughter, and\ncompares our God, the Creator of all things, to the being who, as\nrepresented in the play, on awaking, despatches Mercury [on an errand]!\nWe stated, indeed, in what precedes, that it was not as if awakening\nfrom a lengthened slumber that God sent Jesus to the human race, who has\nnow, for good reasons, fulfilled the economy of His incarnation, but who\nhas always conferred benefits upon the human race. For no noble deed has\never been performed amongst men, where the divine Word did not visit the\nsouls of those who were capable, although for a little time, of\nadmitting such operations of the divine Word. Moreover, the advent of\nJesus apparently to one corner [of the earth] was founded on good\nreasons, since it was necessary that He who was the subject of prophecy\nshould make His appearance among those who had become acquainted with\nthe doctrine of one God, and who perused the writings of His prophets,\nand who had come to know the announcement of Christ, and that He should\ncome to them at a time when the Word was about to be diffused from one\ncorner over the whole world.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIX.\n\n\nAnd therefore there was no need that there should everywhere exist many\nbodies, and many spirits like Jesus, in order that the whole world of\nmen might be enlightened by the Word of God. For the one Word was\nenough, having arisen as the \u201cSun of righteousness,\u201d to send forth from\nJudea His coming rays into the soul of all who were willing to receive\nHim. But if any one desires to see many bodies filled with a divine\nSpirit, similar to the one Christ, ministering to the salvation of men\neverywhere, let him take note of those who teach the gospel of Jesus in\nall lands in soundness of doctrine and uprightness of life, and who are\nthemselves termed \u201cchrists\u201d by the Holy Scriptures, in the passage,\n\u201cTouch not mine anointed,[1415] and do not my prophets any harm.\u201d[1416]\nFor as we have heard that Antichrist cometh, and yet have learned that\nthere are many antichrists in the world, in the same way, knowing that\nChrist has come, we see that, owing to Him, there are many christs in\nthe world, who, like Him, have loved righteousness and hated iniquity,\nand therefore God, the God of Christ, anointed them also with the \u201coil\nof gladness.\u201d But inasmuch as He loved righteousness and hated iniquity\nabove those who were His partners,[1417] He also obtained the\nfirst-fruits of His anointing, and, if we must so term it, the entire\nunction of the oil of gladness; while they who were His partners shared\nalso in His unction, in proportion to their individual capacity.\nTherefore, since Christ is the head of the church, so that Christ and\nthe church form one body, the ointment descended from the head to the\nbeard of Aaron,\u2014the symbols of the perfect man,\u2014and this ointment in its\ndescent reached to the very skirt of his garment. This is my answer to\nthe irreverent language of Celsus when he says, \u201cHe ought to have\nbreathed [His Spirit] alike into many bodies, and have sent it forth\ninto all the world.\u201d The comic poet, indeed, to cause laughter, has\nrepresented Jupiter asleep and awaking from slumber, and despatching\nMercury to the Greeks; but the Word, knowing that the nature of God is\nunaffected by sleep, may teach us that God administers in due season,\nand as right reason demands, the affairs of the world. It is not,\nhowever, a matter of surprise that, owing to the greatness and\nincomprehensibility[1418] of the divine judgments, ignorant persons\nshould make mistakes, and Celsus among them. There is therefore nothing\nridiculous in the Son of God having been sent to the Jews, amongst whom\nthe prophets had appeared, in order that, making a commencement among\nthem in a bodily shape, He might arise with might and power upon a world\nof souls, which no longer desired to remain deserted by God.\n\nFootnote 1415:\n\n \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nFootnote 1416:\n\n Cf. 1 Chron. xvi. 22 and Ps. cv. 15.\n\nFootnote 1417:\n\n \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03cc\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6.\n\nFootnote 1418:\n\n \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03b4\u03b9\u03b7\u03b3\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXX.\n\n\nAfter this, it seemed proper to Celsus to term the Chaldeans a most\ndivinely-inspired nation from the very earliest times,[1419] from whom\nthe delusive system of astrology[1420] has spread abroad among men. Nay,\nhe ranks the Magi also in the same category, from whom the art of magic\nderived its name and has been transmitted to other nations, to the\ncorruption and destruction of those who employ it. In the preceding part\nof this work, [we mentioned] that, in the opinion even of Celsus, the\nEgyptians also were guilty of error, because they had indeed solemn\nenclosures around what they considered their temples, while within them\nthere was nothing save apes, or crocodiles, or goats, or asps, or some\nother animal; but on the present occasion it pleases him to speak of the\nEgyptian people too as most divinely inspired, and that, too, from the\nearliest times,\u2014perhaps because they made war upon the Jews from an\nearly date. The Persians, moreover, who marry their own mothers, and\nhave intercourse with their own daughters, are, in the opinion of\nCelsus, an inspired race; nay, even the Indians are so, some of whom, in\nthe preceding, he mentioned as eaters of human flesh. To the Jews,\nhowever, especially those of ancient times, who employ none of these\npractices, he did not merely refuse the name of inspired, but declared\nthat they would immediately perish. And this prediction he uttered\nrespecting them, as being doubtless endued with prophetic power, not\nobserving that the whole history of the Jews, and their ancient and\nvenerable polity, were administered by God; and that it is by their fall\nthat salvation has come to the Gentiles, and that \u201ctheir fall is the\nriches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the\nGentiles,\u201d[1421] until the fulness of the Gentiles come, that after that\nthe whole of Israel, whom Celsus does not know, may be saved.\n\nFootnote 1419:\n\n \u1f10\u03be \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1420:\n\n \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b8\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 1421:\n\n Cf. Rom. xi. 11, 12.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXXI.\n\n\nI do not understand, however, how he should say of God, that although\n\u201cknowing all things, He was not aware of this, that He was sending His\nSon amongst wicked men, who were both to be guilty of sin, and to\ninflict punishment upon Him.\u201d Certainly he appears, in the present\ninstance, to have forgotten that all the sufferings which Jesus was to\nundergo were foreseen by the Spirit of God, and foretold by His\nprophets; from which it does not follow that \u201cGod did not know that He\nwas sending His Son amongst wicked and sinful men, who were also to\ninflict punishment upon Him.\u201d He immediately adds, however, that \u201cour\ndefence on this point is that all these things were predicted.\u201d But as\nour sixth book has now attained sufficient dimensions, we shall stop\nhere, and begin, God willing, the argument of the seventh, in which we\nshall consider the reasons which he thinks furnish an answer to our\nstatement, that everything regarding Jesus was foretold by the prophets;\nand as these are numerous, and require to be answered at length, we\nwished neither to cut the subject short, in consequence of the size of\nthe present book, nor, in order to avoid doing so, to swell this sixth\nbook beyond its proper proportions.\n\n\n\n\n BOOK VII.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter I.\n\n\nIn the six former books we have endeavoured, reverend brother Ambrosius,\naccording to our ability to meet the charges brought by Celsus against\nthe Christians, and have as far as possible passed over nothing without\nfirst subjecting it to a full and close examination. And now, while we\nenter upon the seventh book, we call upon God through Jesus Christ, whom\nCelsus accuses, that He who is the truth of God would shed light into\nour hearts and scatter the darkness of error, in accordance with that\nsaying of the prophet which we now offer as our prayer, \u201cDestroy them by\nThy truth.\u201d[1422] For it is evidently the words and reasonings opposed\nto the truth that God destroys by His truth; so that when these are\ndestroyed, all who are delivered from deception may go on with the\nprophet to say, \u201cI will freely sacrifice unto Thee,\u201d[1423] and may offer\nto the Most High a reasonable and smokeless sacrifice.\n\nFootnote 1422:\n\n Ps. liv. 5.\n\nFootnote 1423:\n\n Ps. liv. 6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter II.\n\n\nCelsus now sets himself to combat the views of those who say that the\nJewish prophets foretold events which happened in the life of Christ\nJesus. At the outset let us refer to a notion he has, that those who\nassume the existence of another God besides the God of the Jews have no\nground on which to answer his objections; while we who recognise the\nsame God rely for our defence on the prophecies which were delivered\nconcerning Jesus Christ. His words are: \u201cLet us see how they can raise a\ndefence. To those who admit another God, no defence is possible; and\nthey who recognise the same God will always fall back upon the same\nreason, \u2018This and that must have happened.\u2019 And why? \u2018Because it had\nbeen predicted long before.\u2019\u201d To this we answer, that the arguments\nrecently raised by Celsus against Jesus and Christians were so utterly\nfeeble, that they might easily be overthrown even by those who are\nimpious enough to bring in another God. Indeed, were it not dangerous to\ngive to the weak any excuse for embracing false notions, we could\nfurnish the answer ourselves, and show Celsus how unfounded is his\nopinion, that those who admit another God are not in a position to meet\nhis arguments. However, let us for the present confine ourselves to a\ndefence of the prophets, in continuation of what we have said on the\nsubject before.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter III.\n\n\nCelsus goes on to say of us: \u201cThey set no value on the oracles of the\nPythian priestess, of the priests of Dodona, of Clarus, of Branchid\u00e6, of\nJupiter Ammon, and of a multitude of others; although under their\nguidance we may say that colonies were sent forth, and the whole world\npeopled. But those sayings which were uttered or not uttered in Judea,\nafter the manner of that country, as indeed they are still delivered\namong the people of Ph\u0153nicia and Palestine\u2014these they look upon as\nmarvellous sayings, and unchangeably true.\u201d In regard to the oracles\nhere enumerated, we reply that it would be possible for us to gather\nfrom the writings of Aristotle and the Peripatetic school not a few\nthings to overthrow the authority of the Pythian and the other oracles.\nFrom Epicurus also, and his followers, we could quote passages to show\nthat even among the Greeks themselves there were some who utterly\ndiscredited the oracles which were recognised and admired throughout the\nwhole of Greece. But let it be granted that the responses delivered by\nthe Pythian and other oracles were not the utterances of false men who\npretended to a divine inspiration; and let us see if, after all, we\ncannot convince any sincere inquirers that there is no necessity to\nattribute these oracular responses to any divinities, but that, on the\nother hand, they may be traced to wicked demons\u2014to spirits which are at\nenmity with the human race, and which in this way wish to hinder the\nsoul from rising upwards, from following the path of virtue, and from\nreturning to God in sincere piety. It is said of the Pythian priestess,\nwhose oracle seems to have been the most celebrated, that when she sat\ndown at the mouth of the Castalian cave, the prophetic spirit of Apollo\nentered her private parts; and when she was filled with it, she gave\nutterance to responses which are regarded with awe as divine truths.\nJudge by this whether that spirit does not show its profane and impure\nnature, by choosing to enter the soul of the prophetess not through the\nmore becoming medium of the bodily pores which are both open and\ninvisible, but by means of what no modest man would ever see or speak\nof. And this occurs not once or twice, which would be more permissible,\nbut as often as she was believed to receive inspiration from Apollo.\nMoreover, it is not the part of a divine spirit to drive the prophetess\ninto such a state of ecstasy and madness that she loses control of\nherself. For he who is under the influence of the Divine Spirit ought to\nbe the first to receive the beneficial effects; and these ought not to\nbe first enjoyed by the persons who consult the oracle about the\nconcerns of natural or civil life, or for purposes of temporal gain or\ninterest; and, moreover, that should be the time of clearest perception,\nwhen a person is in close intercourse with the Deity.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IV.\n\n\nAccordingly, we can show from an examination of the sacred Scriptures,\nthat the Jewish prophets, who were enlightened as far as was necessary\nfor their prophetic work by the Spirit of God, were the first to enjoy\nthe benefit of the inspiration; and by the contact\u2014if I may so say\u2014of\nthe Holy Spirit they became clearer in mind, and their souls were filled\nwith a brighter light. And the body no longer served as a hindrance to a\nvirtuous life; for to that which we call \u201cthe lust of the flesh\u201d it was\ndeadened. For we are persuaded that the Divine Spirit \u201cmortifies the\ndeeds of the body,\u201d and destroys that enmity against God which the\ncarnal passions serve to excite. If, then, the Pythian priestess is\nbeside herself when she prophesies, what spirit must that be which fills\nher mind and clouds her judgment with darkness, unless it be of the same\norder with those demons which many Christians cast out of persons\npossessed with them? And this, we may observe, they do without the use\nof any curious arts of magic, or incantations, but merely by prayer and\nsimple adjurations which the plainest person can use. Because for the\nmost part it is unlettered persons who perform this work; thus making\nmanifest the grace which is in the word of Christ, and the despicable\nweakness of demons, which, in order to be overcome and driven out of the\nbodies and souls of men, do not require the power and wisdom of those\nwho are mighty in argument, and most learned in matters of faith.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter V.\n\n\nMoreover, if it is believed not only among Christians and Jews, but also\nby many others among the Greeks and barbarians, that the human soul\nlives and subsists after its separation from the body; and if reason\nsupports the idea that pure souls which are not weighed down with sin as\nwith a weight of lead ascend on high to the region of purer and more\netherial bodies, leaving here below their grosser bodies along with\ntheir impurities; whereas souls that are polluted and dragged down to\nthe earth by their sins, so that they are unable even to breathe\nupwards, wander hither and thither, at some times about sepulchres,\nwhere they appear as the apparitions of shadowy spirits, at others among\nother objects on the ground;\u2014if this is so, what are we to think of\nthose spirits that are attached for entire ages, as I may say, to\nparticular dwellings and places, whether by a sort of magical force or\nby their own natural wickedness? Are we not compelled by reason to set\ndown as evil such spirits as employ the power of prophesying\u2014a power in\nitself neither good nor bad\u2014for the purpose of deceiving men, and thus\nturn them away from God, and from the purity of His service? It is\nmoreover evident that this is their character, when we add that they\ndelight in the blood of victims, and in the smoke and odour of\nsacrifices, and that they feed their bodies on these, and that they take\npleasure in such haunts as these, as though they sought in them the\nsustenance of their lives; in this resembling those depraved men who\ndespise the purity of a life apart from the senses, and who have no\ninclination except for the pleasures of the body, and for that earthly\nand bodily life in which these pleasures are found. If the Delphian\nApollo were a god, as the Greeks suppose, would he not rather have\nchosen as his prophet some wise man? or if such an one was not to be\nfound, then one who was endeavouring to become wise? How came he not to\nprefer a man to a woman for the utterance of his prophecies? And if he\npreferred the latter sex, as though he could only find pleasure in the\nbreast of a woman, why did he not choose among women a virgin to\ninterpret his will?\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VI.\n\n\nBut no; the Pythian, so much admired among the Greeks, judged no wise\nman, nay, no man at all, worthy of the divine possession, as they call\nit. And among women he did not choose a virgin, or one recommended by\nher wisdom, or by her attainments in philosophy; but he selects a common\nwoman. Perhaps the better class of men were too good to become the\nsubjects of the inspiration. Besides, if he were a god, he should have\nemployed his prophetic power as a bait, so to speak, with which he might\ndraw men to a change of life, and to the practice of virtue. But history\nnowhere makes mention of anything of the kind. For if the oracle did\ncall Socrates the wisest of all men, it takes from the value of that\neulogy by what is said in regard to Euripides and Sophocles. The words\nare:\n\n \u201cSophocles is wise, and Euripides is wiser,\n But wiser than all men is Socrates.\u201d[1424]\n\nAs, then, he gives the designation \u201cwise\u201d to the tragic poets, it is not\non account of his philosophy that he holds up Socrates to veneration, or\nbecause of his love of truth and virtue. It is poor praise of Socrates\nto say that he prefers him to men who for a paltry reward compete upon\nthe stage, and who by their representations excite the spectators at one\ntime to tears and grief, and at another to unseemly laughter (for such\nis the intention of the satiric drama). And perhaps it was not so much\nin regard to his philosophy that he called Socrates the wisest of all\nmen, as on account of the victims which he sacrificed to him and the\nother demons. For it seems that the demons pay more regard in\ndistributing their favours to the sacrifices which are offered them than\nto deeds of virtue. Accordingly, Homer, the best of the poets, who\ndescribes what usually took place, when, wishing to show us what most\ninfluenced the demons to grant an answer to the wishes of their\nvotaries, introduces Chryses, who, for a few garlands and the thighs of\nbulls and goats, obtained an answer to his prayers for his daughter\nChryseis, so that the Greeks were driven by a pestilence to restore her\nback to him. And I remember reading in the book of a certain\nPythagorean, when writing on the hidden meanings in that poet, that the\nprayer of Chryses to Apollo, and the plague which Apollo afterwards sent\nupon the Greeks, are proofs that Homer knew of certain evil demons who\ndelight in the smoke of sacrifices, and who, to reward those who offer\nthem, grant in answer to their prayers the destruction of others. \u201cHe,\u201d\nthat is, Jupiter, \u201cwho rules over wintry Dodona, where his prophets have\never unwashed feet, and sleep upon the ground,\u201d[1425] has rejected the\nmale sex, and, as Celsus observes, employs the women of Dodona for the\nprophetic office. Granting that there are oracles similar to these, as\nthat at Clarus, another in Branchid\u00e6, another in the temple of Jupiter\nAmmon, or anywhere else; yet how shall it be proved that these are gods,\nand not demons?\n\nFootnote 1424:\n\n Suidas in \u03a3\u03bf\u03c6\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nFootnote 1425:\n\n Homer, _Iliad_, xvi. 234, etc.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VII.\n\n\nIn regard to the prophets among the Jews, some of them were wise men\nbefore they became divinely inspired prophets, while others became wise\nby the illumination which their minds received when divinely inspired.\nThey were selected by Divine Providence to receive the Divine Spirit,\nand to be the depositaries of His holy oracles, on the ground of their\nleading a life of almost unapproachable excellence, intrepid, noble,\nunmoved by danger or death. For reason teaches that such ought to be the\ncharacter of the prophets of the Most High, in comparison with which the\nfirmness of Antisthenes, Crates, and Diogenes will seem but as child\u2019s\nplay. It was therefore for their firm adherence to truth, and their\nfaithfulness in the reproof of the wicked, that they were \u201cstoned; they\nwere sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword; they\nwandered about in sheepskins and goatskins, being destitute, afflicted,\ntormented; they wandered in deserts and in mountains, and in dens and\ncaves of the earth, of whom the world was not worthy:\u201d[1426] for they\nlooked always to God and to His blessings, which, being invisible, and\nnot to be perceived by the senses, are eternal. We have the history of\nthe life of each of the prophets; but it will be enough at present to\ndirect attention to the life of Moses, whose prophecies are contained in\nthe law; to that of Jeremiah, as it is given in the book which bears his\nname; to that of Isaiah, who with unexampled austerity walked naked and\nbarefooted for the space of three years. Read and consider the severe\nlife of those children, Daniel and his companions, how they abstained\nfrom flesh, and lived on water and pulse. Or if you will go back to more\nremote times, think of the life of Noah, who prophesied; and of Isaac,\nwho gave his son a prophetic blessing; or of Jacob, who addressed each\nof his twelve sons, beginning with \u201cCome, that I may tell you what shall\nbefall you in the last days.\u201d These, and a multitude of others,\nprophesying on behalf of God, foretold events relating to Jesus Christ.\nWe therefore for this reason set at nought the oracles of the Pythian\npriestess, or those delivered at Dodona, at Clarus, at Branchid\u00e6, at the\ntemple of Jupiter Ammon, or by a multitude of other so-called prophets;\nwhilst we regard with reverent awe the Jewish prophets: for we see that\nthe noble, earnest, and devout lives of these men were worthy of the\ninspiration of the Divine Spirit, whose wonderful effects were widely\ndifferent from the divination of demons.\n\nFootnote 1426:\n\n Heb. xi. 37, 38.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VIII.\n\n\nI do not know what led Celsus, when saying, \u201cBut what things were spoken\nor not spoken in the land of Judea, according to the custom of the\ncountry,\u201d to use the words \u201cor not spoken,\u201d as though implying that he\nwas incredulous, and that he suspected that those things which were\nwritten were never spoken. In fact, he is unacquainted with these times;\nand he does not know that those prophets who foretold the coming of\nChrist, predicted a multitude of other events many years beforehand. He\nadds, with the view of casting a slight upon the ancient prophets, that\n\u201cthey prophesied in the same way as we find them still doing among the\ninhabitants of Ph\u0153nicia and Palestine.\u201d But he does not tell us whether\nhe refers to persons who are of different principles from those of the\nJews and Christians, or to persons whose prophecies are of the same\ncharacter as those of the Jewish prophets. However it be, his statement\nis false, taken in either way. For never have any of those who have not\nembraced our faith done anything approaching to what was done by the\nancient prophets; and in more recent times, since the coming of Christ,\nno prophets have arisen among the Jews, who have confessedly been\nabandoned by the Holy Spirit on account of their impiety towards God,\nand towards Him of whom their prophets spoke. Moreover, the Holy Spirit\ngave signs of His presence at the beginning of Christ\u2019s ministry, and\nafter His ascension He gave still more; but since that time these signs\nhave diminished, although there are still traces of His presence in a\nfew who have had their souls purified by the gospel, and their actions\nregulated by its influence. \u201cFor the holy spirit of discipline will flee\ndeceit, and remove from thoughts that are without understanding.\u201d[1427]\n\nFootnote 1427:\n\n Wisd. of Sol. i. 5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IX.\n\n\nBut as Celsus promises to give an account of the manner in which\nprophecies are delivered in Ph\u0153nicia and Palestine, speaking as though\nit were a matter with which he had a full and personal acquaintance, let\nus see what he has to say on the subject. First he lays it down that\nthere are several kinds of prophecies, but he does not specify what they\nare; indeed, he could not do so, and the statement is a piece of pure\nostentation. However, let us see what he considers the most perfect kind\nof prophecy among these nations. \u201cThere are many,\u201d he says, \u201cwho,\nalthough of no name, with the greatest facility and on the slightest\noccasion, whether within or without temples, assume the motions and\ngestures of inspired persons; while others do it in cities or among\narmies, for the purpose of attracting attention and exciting surprise.\nThese are accustomed to say, each for himself, \u2018I am God; I am the Son\nof God; or, I am the Divine Spirit; I have come because the world is\nperishing, and you, O men, are perishing for your iniquities. But I wish\nto save you, and you shall see me returning again with heavenly power.\nBlessed is he who now does me homage. On all the rest I will send down\neternal fire, both on cities and on countries. And those who know not\nthe punishments which await them shall repent and grieve in vain; while\nthose who are faithful to me I will preserve eternally.\u2019\u201d Then he goes\non to say: \u201cTo these promises are added strange, fanatical, and quite\nunintelligible words, of which no rational person can find the meaning:\nfor so dark are they, as to have no meaning at all; but they give\noccasion to every fool or impostor to apply them to suit his own\npurposes.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter X.\n\n\nBut if he were dealing honestly in his accusations, he ought to have\ngiven the exact terms of the prophecies, whether those in which the\nspeaker is introduced as claiming to be God Almighty, or those in which\nthe Son of God speaks, or finally those under the name of the Holy\nSpirit. For thus he might have endeavoured to overthrow these\nassertions, and have shown that there was no divine inspiration in those\nwords which urged men to forsake their sins, which condemned the past\nand foretold the future. For the prophecies were recorded and preserved\nby men living at the time, that those who came after might read and\nadmire them as the oracles of God, and that they might profit not only\nby the warnings and admonitions, but also by the predictions, which\nbeing shown by events to have proceeded from the Spirit of God, bind men\nto the practice of piety as set forth in the law and the prophets. The\nprophets have therefore, as God commanded them, declared with all\nplainness those things which it was desirable that the hearers should\nunderstand at once for the regulation of their conduct; while in regard\nto deeper and more mysterious subjects, which lay beyond the reach of\nthe common understanding, they set them forth in the form of enigmas and\nallegories, or of what are called dark sayings, parables, or\nsimilitudes. And this plan they have followed, that those who are ready\nto shun no labour and spare no pains in their endeavours after truth and\nvirtue might search into their meaning, and having found it, might apply\nit as reason requires. But Celsus, ever vigorous in his denunciations,\nas though he were angry at his inability to understand the language of\nthe prophets, scoffs at them thus: \u201cTo these grand promises are added\nstrange, fanatical, and quite unintelligible words, of which no rational\nperson can find the meaning; for so dark are they as to have no meaning\nat all; but they give occasion to every fool or impostor to apply them\nso as to suit his own purposes.\u201d This statement of Celsus seems\ningeniously designed to dissuade readers from attempting any inquiry or\ncareful search into their meaning. And in this he is not unlike certain\npersons, who said to a man whom a prophet had visited to announce future\nevents, \u201cWherefore came this mad fellow to thee?\u201d[1428]\n\nFootnote 1428:\n\n 2 Kings ix. 11.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XI.\n\n\nI am convinced, indeed, that much better arguments could be adduced than\nany I have been able to bring forward, to show the falsehood of these\nallegations of Celsus, and to set forth the divine inspiration of the\nprophecies; but we have according to our ability, in our commentaries on\nIsaiah, Ezekiel, and some of the twelve minor prophets, explained\nliterally and in detail what he calls \u201cthose fanatical and utterly\nunintelligible passages.\u201d And if God give us grace in the time that He\nappoints for us, to advance in the knowledge of His word, we shall\ncontinue our investigation into the parts which remain, or into such at\nleast as we are able to make plain. And other persons of intelligence\nwho wish to study Scripture may also find out its meaning for\nthemselves; for although there are many places in which the meaning is\nnot obvious, yet there are none where, as Celsus affirms, \u201cthere is no\nsense at all.\u201d Neither is it true that \u201cany fool or impostor can explain\nthe passages so as to make them suit his own purposes.\u201d For it belongs\nonly to those who are wise in the truth of Christ (and to all them it\ndoes belong) to unfold the connection and meaning of even the obscure\nparts of prophecy, \u201ccomparing spiritual things with spiritual,\u201d and\ninterpreting each passage according to the usage of Scripture writers.\nAnd Celsus is not to be believed when he says that he has heard such men\nprophesy; for no prophets bearing any resemblance to the ancient\nprophets have appeared in the time of Celsus. If there had been any,\nthose who heard and admired them would have followed the example of the\nancients, and have recorded the prophecies in writing. And it seems\nquite clear that Celsus is speaking falsely, when he says that \u201cthose\nprophets whom he had heard, on being pressed by him, confessed their\ntrue motives, and acknowledged that the ambiguous words they used really\nmeant nothing.\u201d He ought to have given the names of those whom he says\nhe had heard, if he had any to give, so that those who were competent to\njudge might decide whether his allegations were true or false.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XII.\n\n\nHe thinks, besides, that those who support the cause of Christ by a\nreference to the writings of the prophets can give no proper answer in\nregard to statements in them which attribute to God that which is\nwicked, shameful, or impure; and assuming that no answer can be given,\nhe proceeds to draw a whole train of inferences, none of which can be\nallowed. But he ought to know that those who wish to live according to\nthe teaching of sacred Scripture understand the saying, \u201cThe knowledge\nof the unwise is as talk without sense,\u201d[1429] and have learnt \u201cto be\nready always to give an answer to every one that asketh us a reason for\nthe hope that is in us.\u201d[1430] And they are not satisfied with affirming\nthat such and such things have been predicted; but they endeavour to\nremove any apparent inconsistencies, and to show that, so far from there\nbeing anything evil, shameful, or impure in these predictions,\neverything is worthy of being received by those who understand the\nsacred Scriptures. But Celsus ought to have adduced from the prophets\nexamples of what he thought bad, or shameful, or impure, if he saw any\nsuch passages; for then his argument would have had much more force, and\nwould have furthered his purpose much better. He gives no instances,\nhowever, but contents himself with loudly asserting the false charge\nthat these things are to be found in Scripture. There is no reason,\nthen, for us to defend ourselves against groundless charges, which are\nbut empty sounds, or to take the trouble of showing that in the writings\nof the prophets there is nothing evil, shameful, impure, or abominable.\n\nFootnote 1429:\n\n Ecclus. xxi. 18.\n\nFootnote 1430:\n\n 1 Pet. iii. 15.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIII.\n\n\nAnd there is no truth in the statement of Celsus, that \u201cGod does the\nmost shameless deeds, or suffers the most shameless sufferings,\u201d or that\n\u201cHe favours the commission of evil;\u201d for whatever he may say, no such\nthings have ever been foretold. He ought to have cited from the prophets\nthe passages in which God is represented as favouring evil, or as doing\nand enduring the most shameless deeds, and not have sought without\nfoundation to prejudice the minds of his readers. The prophets, indeed,\nforetold what Christ should suffer, and set forth the reason why He\nshould suffer. God therefore also knew what Christ would suffer; but\nwhere has he learnt that those things which the Christ of God should\nsuffer were most base and dishonourable? He goes on to explain what\nthose most shameful and degrading things were which Christ suffered, in\nthese words: \u201cFor what better was it for God to eat the flesh of sheep,\nor to drink vinegar and gall, than to feed on filth?\u201d But God, according\nto us, did not eat the flesh of sheep; and while it may seem that Jesus\nate, He did so only as possessing a body. But in regard to the vinegar\nand gall mentioned in the prophecy, \u201cThey gave me also gall for my meat,\nand in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink,\u201d[1431] we have already\nreferred[1432] to this point; and as Celsus compels us to recur to it\nagain, we would only say further, that those who resist the word of\ntruth do ever offer to Christ the Son of God the gall of their own\nwickedness, and the vinegar of their evil inclinations; but though He\ntastes of it, yet He will not drink it.\n\nFootnote 1431:\n\n Ps. lxix. 21.\n\nFootnote 1432:\n\n Book ii. chap. 37.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIV.\n\n\nIn the next place, wishing to shake the faith of those who believe in\nJesus on the ground of the prophecies which were delivered in regard to\nHim, Celsus says: \u201cBut pray, if the prophets foretold that the great\nGod\u2014not to put it more harshly\u2014would become a slave, or become sick, or\ndie; would there be therefore any necessity that God should die, or\nsuffer sickness, or become a slave, simply because such things had been\nforetold? Must he die in order to prove his divinity? But the prophets\nnever would utter predictions so wicked and impious. We need not\ntherefore inquire whether a thing has been predicted or not, but whether\nthe thing is honourable in itself, and worthy of God. In that which is\nevil and base, although it seemed that all men in the world had foretold\nit in a fit of madness, we must not believe. How then can the pious mind\nadmit that those things which are said to have happened to him, could\nhave happened to one who is God?\u201d From this it is plain that Celsus\nfeels the argument from prophecy to be very effective for convincing\nthose to whom Christ is preached; but he seems to endeavour to overthrow\nit by an opposite probability, namely, \u201cthat the question is not whether\nthe prophets uttered these predictions or not.\u201d But if he wished to\nreason justly and without evasion, he ought rather to have said, \u201cWe\nmust show that these things were never predicted, or that those things\nwhich were predicted of Christ have never been fulfilled in him,\u201d and in\nthat way he would have established the position which he holds. In that\nway it would have been made plain what those prophecies are which we\napply to Jesus, and how Celsus could justify himself in asserting that\nthat application was false. And we should thus have seen whether he\nfairly disproved all that we bring from the prophets in behalf of Jesus,\nor whether he is himself convicted of a shameless endeavour to resist\nthe plainest truths by violent assertions.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XV.\n\n\nAfter assuming that some things were foretold which are impossible in\nthemselves, and inconsistent with the character of God, he says: \u201cIf\nthese things were predicted of the Most High God, are we bound to\nbelieve them of God simply because they were predicted?\u201d And thus he\nthinks he proves, that although the prophets may have foretold truly\nsuch things of the Son of God, yet it is impossible for us to believe in\nthose prophecies declaring that He would do or suffer such things. To\nthis our answer is that the supposition is absurd, for it combines two\nlines of reasoning which are opposed to each other, and therefore\nmutually destructive. This may be shown as follows. The one argument is:\n\u201cIf any true prophets of the Most High say that God will become a slave,\nor suffer sickness, or die, these things will come to God; for it is\nimpossible that the prophets of the great God should utter lies.\u201d The\nother is: \u201cIf even true prophets of the Most High God say that these\nsame things shall come to pass, seeing that these things foretold are by\nthe nature of things impossible, the prophecies are not true, and\ntherefore those things which have been foretold will not happen to God.\u201d\nWhen, then, we find two processes of reasoning in both of which the\nmajor premiss is the same, leading to two contradictory conclusions, we\nuse the form of argument called \u201cthe theorem of two propositions,\u201d[1433]\nto prove that the major premiss is false, which in the case before us is\nthis, \u201cthat the prophets have foretold that the great God should become\na slave, suffer sickness, or die.\u201d We conclude, then, that the prophets\nnever foretold such things; and the argument is formally expressed as\nfollows: _1st_, Of two things, if the first is true, the second is true;\n_2d_, if the first is[1434] true, the second is not true, therefore the\nfirst is not true. The concrete example which the Stoics give to\nillustrate this form of argument is the following: _1st_, If you know\nthat you are dead, you are dead; _2d_, if you know that you are dead,\nyou are not dead. And the conclusion is\u2014\u201cyou do not know that you are\ndead.\u201d These propositions are worked out as follows: If you know that\nyou are dead, that which you know is certain; therefore you are dead.\nAgain, if you know that you are dead, your death is an object of\nknowledge; but as the dead know nothing, your knowing this proves that\nyou are not dead. Accordingly, by joining the two arguments together,\nyou arrive at the conclusion\u2014\u201cyou do not know that you are dead.\u201d Now\nthe hypothesis of Celsus which we have given above is much of the same\nkind.\n\nFootnote 1433:\n\n \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bf \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1.\n\nFootnote 1434:\n\n We follow Bouhereau and Valesius, who expunge the negative particle in\n this clause.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVI.\n\n\nBut besides, the prophecies which he introduces into his argument are\nvery different from what the prophets actually foretold of Jesus Christ.\nFor the prophecies do not foretell that God will be crucified, when they\nsay of Him who should suffer, \u201cWe beheld Him, and He had no form or\ncomeliness; but His form was dishonoured and marred more than the sons\nof men; He was a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.\u201d[1435]\nObserve, then, how distinctly they say that it was a man who should\nendure these human sufferings. And Jesus Himself, who knew perfectly\nthat one who was to die must be a man, said to His accusers: \u201cBut now ye\nseek to kill me, a man that hath spoken unto you the truth which I heard\nof God.\u201d[1436] And if in that man as He appeared among men there was\nsomething divine, namely the only-begotten Son of God, the first-born of\nall creation, one who said of Himself, \u201cI am the truth,\u201d \u201cI am the\nlife,\u201d \u201cI am the door,\u201d \u201cI am the way,\u201d \u201cI am the living bread which\ncame down from heaven,\u201d of this Being and His nature we must judge and\nreason in a way quite different from that in which we judge of the man\nwho was seen in Jesus Christ. Accordingly, you will find no Christian,\nhowever simple he may be, and however little versed in critical studies,\nwho would say that He who died was \u201cthe truth,\u201d \u201cthe life,\u201d \u201cthe way,\u201d\n\u201cthe living bread which came down from heaven,\u201d \u201cthe resurrection;\u201d for\nit was He who appeared to us in the form of the man Jesus, who taught\nus, saying, \u201cI am the resurrection.\u201d There is no one amongst us, I say,\nso extravagant as to affirm \u201cthe Life died,\u201d \u201cthe Resurrection died.\u201d\nThe supposition of Celsus would have some foundation if we were to say\nthat it had been foretold by the prophets that death would befall God\nthe Word, the Truth, the Life, the Resurrection, or any other name which\nis assumed by the Son of God.\n\nFootnote 1435:\n\n Isa. liii. 2, 3.\n\nFootnote 1436:\n\n John viii. 40.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVII.\n\n\nIn one point alone is Celsus correct in his statements on this subject.\nIt is that in which he says: \u201cThe prophets would not foretell this,\nbecause it involves that which is wicked and impious,\u201d\u2014namely, that the\ngreat God should become a slave or suffer death. But that which is\npredicted by the prophets is worthy of God, that He who is the\nbrightness and express image of the divine nature should come into the\nworld with the holy human soul which was to animate the body of Jesus,\nto sow the seed of His word, which might bring all who received and\ncherished it into union with the Most High God, and which would lead to\nperfect blessedness all those who felt within them the power of God the\nWord, who was to be in the body and soul of a man. He was to be in it\nindeed, but not in such a way as to confine therein all the rays of His\nglory; and we are not to suppose that the light of Him who is God the\nWord is shed forth in no other way than in this. If, then, we consider\nJesus in relation to the divinity that was in Him, the things which He\ndid in this capacity present nothing to offend our ideas of God, nothing\nbut what is holy; and if we consider Him as man, distinguished beyond\nall other men by an intimate communion with the Eternal Word, with\nabsolute Wisdom, He suffered as one who was wise and perfect, whatever\nit behoved Him to suffer who did all for the good of the human race,\nyea, even for the good of all intelligent beings. And there is nothing\nabsurd in a man having died, and in His death being not only an example\nof death endured for the sake of piety, but also the first blow in the\nconflict which is to overthrow the power of that evil spirit the devil,\nwho had obtained dominion over the whole world. For we have signs and\npledges of the destruction of his empire, in those who through the\ncoming of Christ are everywhere escaping from the power of demons, and\nwho, after their deliverance from this bondage in which they were held,\nconsecrate themselves to God, and earnestly devote themselves day by day\nto advancement in a life of piety.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVIII.\n\n\nCelsus adds: \u201cWill they not besides make this reflection? If the\nprophets of the God of the Jews foretold that he who should come into\nthe world would be the Son of this same God, how could he command them\nthrough Moses to gather wealth, to extend their dominion, to fill the\nearth, to put their enemies of every age to the sword, and to destroy\nthem utterly, which indeed he himself did\u2014as Moses says\u2014threatening\nthem, moreover, that if they did not obey his commands, he would treat\nthem as his avowed enemies; whilst, on the other hand, his Son, the man\nof Nazareth, promulgated laws quite opposed to these, declaring that no\none can come to the Father who loves power, or riches, or glory; that\nmen ought not to be more careful in providing food than the ravens; that\nthey were to be less concerned about their raiment than the lilies; that\nto him who has given them one blow, they should offer to receive\nanother? Whether is it Moses or Jesus who teaches falsely? Did the\nFather, when he sent Jesus, forget the commands which he had given to\nMoses? Or did he change his mind, condemn his own laws, and send forth a\nmessenger with counter instructions?\u201d Celsus, with all his boasts of\nuniversal knowledge, has here fallen into the most vulgar of errors, in\nsupposing that in the law and the prophets there is not a meaning deeper\nthan that afforded by a literal rendering of the words. He does not see\nhow manifestly incredible it is that worldly riches should be promised\nto those who lead upright lives, when it is a matter of common\nobservation that the best of men have lived in extreme poverty. Indeed,\nthe prophets themselves, who for the purity of their lives received the\nDivine Spirit, \u201cwandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being\ndestitute, afflicted, tormented: they wandered in deserts, and in\nmountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.\u201d[1437] For, as the\nPsalmist says, \u201cmany are the afflictions of the righteous.\u201d[1438] If\nCelsus had read the writings of Moses, he would, I daresay, have\nsupposed that when it is said to him who kept the law, \u201cThou shalt lend\nunto many nations, and thou thyself shalt not borrow,\u201d[1439] the promise\nis made to the just man, that his temporal riches should be so abundant,\nthat he would be able to lend not only to the Jews, not only to two or\nthree nations, but \u201cto many nations.\u201d What, then, must have been the\nwealth which the just man received according to the law for his\nrighteousness, if he could lend to many nations? And must we not suppose\nalso, in accordance with this interpretation, that the just man would\nnever borrow anything? For it is written, \u201cand thou shalt thyself borrow\nnothing.\u201d Did then that nation remain for so long a period attached to\nthe religion which was taught by Moses, whilst, according to the\nsupposition of Celsus, they saw themselves so grievously deceived by\nthat lawgiver? For nowhere is it said of any one that he was so rich as\nto lend to many nations. It is not to be believed that they would have\nfought so zealously in defence of a law whose promises had proved\nglaringly false, if they understood them in the sense which Celsus gives\nto them. And if any one should say that the sins which are recorded to\nhave been committed by the people are a proof that they despised the\nlaw, doubtless from the feeling that they had been deceived by it, we\nmay reply that we have only to read the history of the times in order to\nfind it shown that the whole people, after having done that which was\nevil in the sight of the Lord, returned afterwards to their duty, and to\nthe religion prescribed by the law.\n\nFootnote 1437:\n\n Heb. xi. 37, 38.\n\nFootnote 1438:\n\n Ps. xxxiv. 19.\n\nFootnote 1439:\n\n Deut. xxviii. 12.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIX.\n\n\nNow if these words in the law, \u201cThou shalt have dominion over many\nnations, and no one shall rule over thee,\u201d were simply a promise to them\nof dominion, and if they contain no deeper meaning than this, then it is\ncertain that the people would have had still stronger grounds for\ndespising the promises of the law. Celsus brings forward another\npassage, although he changes the terms of it, where it is said that the\nwhole earth shall be filled with the Hebrew race; which indeed,\naccording to the testimony of history, did actually happen after the\ncoming of Christ, although rather as a result of God\u2019s anger, if I may\nso say, than of His blessing. As to the promise made to the Jews that\nthey should slay their enemies, it may be answered that any one who\nexamines carefully into the meaning of this passage will find himself\nunable to interpret it literally. It is sufficient at present to refer\nto the manner in which in the Psalms the just man is represented as\nsaying, among other things, \u201cEvery morning will I destroy the wicked of\nthe land, that I may cut off all workers of iniquity from the city of\nJehovah.\u201d[1440] Judge, then, from the words and spirit of the speaker,\nwhether it is conceivable that, after having in the preceding part of\nthe Psalm, as any one may read for himself, uttered the noblest thoughts\nand purposes, he should in the sequel, according to the literal\nrendering of his words, say that in the morning, and at no other period\nof the day, he would destroy all sinners from the earth, and leave none\nof them alive, and that he would slay every one in Jerusalem who did\niniquity. And there are many similar expressions to be found in the law,\nas this, for example: \u201cWe left not anything alive.\u201d[1441]\n\nFootnote 1440:\n\n Ps. ci. 9.\n\nFootnote 1441:\n\n Deut. ii. 34.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XX.\n\n\nCelsus adds, that it was foretold to the Jews, that if they did not obey\nthe law, they would be treated in the same way as they treated their\nenemies; and then he quotes from the teaching of Christ some precepts\nwhich he considers contrary to those of the law, and uses that as an\nargument against us. But before proceeding to this point, we must speak\nof that which precedes. We hold, then, that the law has a twofold\nsense,\u2014the one literal, the other spiritual,\u2014as has been shown by some\nbefore us. Of the first or literal sense it is said, not by us, but by\nGod, speaking in one of the prophets, that \u201cthe statutes are not good,\nand the judgments not good;\u201d[1442] whereas, taken in a spiritual sense,\nthe same prophet makes God say that \u201cHis statutes are good, and His\njudgments good.\u201d Yet evidently the prophet is not saying things which\nare contradictory of each other. Paul in like manner says, that \u201cthe\nletter killeth, and the spirit giveth life,\u201d[1443] meaning by \u201cthe\nletter\u201d the literal sense, and by \u201cthe spirit\u201d the spiritual sense of\nScripture. We may therefore find in Paul, as well as in the prophet,\napparent contradictions. Indeed, if Ezekiel says in one place, \u201cI gave\nthem commandments which were not good, and judgments whereby they should\nnot live,\u201d and in another, \u201cI gave them good commandments and judgments,\nwhich if a man shall do, he shall live by them,\u201d Paul in like manner,\nwhen he wishes to disparage the law taken literally, says, \u201cIf the\nministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so\nthat the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of\nMoses for the glory of his countenance, which glory was to be done away,\nhow shall not the ministration of the Spirit be rather glorious?\u201d[1444]\nBut when in another place he wishes to praise and recommend the law, he\ncalls it \u201cspiritual,\u201d and says, \u201cWe know that the law is spiritual;\u201d\nand, \u201cWherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and\ngood.\u201d[1445]\n\nFootnote 1442:\n\n Ezek. xx. 25.\n\nFootnote 1443:\n\n 2 Cor. iii. 6.\n\nFootnote 1444:\n\n 2 Cor. iii. 7, 8.\n\nFootnote 1445:\n\n Rom. vii. 12, 14.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXI.\n\n\nWhen, then, the letter of the law promises riches to the just, Celsus\nmay follow the letter which killeth, and understand it of worldly\nriches, which blind men; but we say that it refers to those riches which\nenlighten the eyes, and which enrich a man \u201cin all utterance and in all\nknowledge.\u201d And in this sense we \u201ccharge them that are rich in this\nworld, that they be not high-minded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but\nin the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; that they\ndo good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing\nto communicate.\u201d[1446] For, as Solomon says, \u201criches\u201d are the true good,\nwhich \u201care the ransom of the life of a man;\u201d but the poverty which is\nthe opposite of these riches is destructive, for by it \u201cthe poor cannot\nbear rebuke.\u201d[1447] And what has been said of riches applies to\ndominion, in regard to which it is said, \u201cThe just man shall chase a\nthousand, and two put ten thousand to flight.\u201d[1448] Now if riches are\nto be taken in the sense we have just explained, consider if it is not\naccording to God\u2019s promise that he who is rich in all utterance, in all\nknowledge, in all wisdom, in all good works, may not out of these\ntreasures of utterance, of wisdom, and of knowledge, lend to many\nnations. It was thus that Paul lent to all the nations that he visited,\n\u201ccarrying the gospel of Christ from Jerusalem, and round about unto\nIllyricum.\u201d[1449] And as the divine knowledge was given to him by\nrevelation, and his mind was illumined by the Divine Word, he himself\ntherefore needed to borrow from no one, and required not the ministry of\nany man to teach him the word of truth. Thus, as it had been written,\n\u201cThou shalt have dominion over many nations, and they shall not have\ndominion over thee,\u201d he ruled over the Gentiles whom he brought under\nthe teaching of Jesus Christ; and he never \u201cgave place by subjection to\nmen, no, not for an hour,\u201d[1450] as being himself mightier than they.\nAnd thus also he \u201cfilled the earth.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1446:\n\n 1 Tim. vi. 17, 18.\n\nFootnote 1447:\n\n Prov. xiii. 8.\n\nFootnote 1448:\n\n Deut. xxxii. 30.\n\nFootnote 1449:\n\n Rom. xv. 19.\n\nFootnote 1450:\n\n Gal. ii. 5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXII.\n\n\nIf I must now explain how the just man \u201cslays his enemies,\u201d and prevails\neverywhere, it is to be observed that, when he says, \u201cEvery morning will\nI destroy the wicked of the land, that I may cut off all workers of\niniquity from the city of Jehovah,\u201d by \u201cthe land\u201d he means the flesh\nwhose lusts are at enmity with God; and by \u201cthe city of Jehovah\u201d he\ndesignates his own soul, in which was the temple of God, containing the\ntrue idea and conception of God, which makes it to be admired by all who\nlook upon it. As soon, then, as the rays of the Sun of righteousness\nshine into his soul, feeling strengthened and invigorated by their\ninfluence, he sets himself to destroy all the lusts of the flesh, which\nare called \u201cthe wicked of the land,\u201d and drives out of that city of the\nLord which is in his soul all thoughts which work iniquity, and all\nsuggestions which are opposed to the truth. And in this way also the\njust give up to destruction all their enemies, which are their vices, so\nthat they do not spare even the children, that is, the early beginnings\nand promptings of evil. In this sense also we understand the language of\nthe 137th Psalm: \u201cO daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy\nshall he be that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us: happy shall he\nbe that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.\u201d[1451]\nFor \u201cthe little ones\u201d of Babylon (which signifies confusion) are those\ntroublesome sinful thoughts which arise in the soul; and he who subdues\nthem by striking, as it were, their heads against the firm and solid\nstrength of reason and truth, is the man who \u201cdasheth the little ones\nagainst the stones;\u201d and he is therefore truly blessed. God may\ntherefore have commanded men to destroy all their vices utterly, even at\ntheir birth, without having enjoined anything contrary to the teaching\nof Christ; and He may Himself have destroyed before the eyes of those\nwho were \u201cJews inwardly\u201d[1452] all the offspring of evil as His enemies.\nAnd, in like manner, those who disobey the law and word of God may well\nbe compared to His enemies led astray by sin; and they may well be said\nto suffer the same fate as they deserve who have proved traitors to the\ntruth of God.\n\nFootnote 1451:\n\n Ps. cxxxvii. 8, 9.\n\nFootnote 1452:\n\n Rom. ii. 29.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIII.\n\n\nFrom what has been said, it is clear then that Jesus, \u201cthe man of\nNazareth,\u201d did not promulgate laws opposed to those just considered in\nregard to riches, when He said, \u201cIt is hard for the rich man to enter\ninto the kingdom of God;\u201d[1453] whether we take the word \u201crich\u201d in its\nsimplest sense, as referring to the man whose mind is distracted by his\nwealth, and, as it were, entangled with thorns, so that he brings forth\nno spiritual fruit; or whether it is the man who is rich in the sense of\nabounding in false notions, of whom it is written in the Proverbs,\n\u201cBetter is the poor man who is just, than the rich man who is\nfalse.\u201d[1454] Perhaps it is the following passages which have led Celsus\nto suppose that Jesus forbids ambition to His disciples: \u201cWhoever of you\nwill be the chiefest shall be servant of all;\u201d[1455] \u201cThe princes of the\nGentiles exercise dominion over them,\u201d[1456] and \u201cthey that exercise\nauthority upon them are called benefactors.\u201d[1457] But there is nothing\nhere inconsistent with the promise, \u201cThou shalt rule over many nations,\nand they shall not rule over thee,\u201d especially after the explanation\nwhich we have given of these words. Celsus next throws in an expression\nin regard to wisdom, as though he thought that, according to the\nteaching of Christ, no wise man could come to the Father. But we would\nask in what sense he speaks of a wise man. For if he means one who is\nwise in \u201cthe wisdom of this world,\u201d as it is called, \u201cwhich is\nfoolishness with God,\u201d[1458] then we would agree with him in saying that\naccess to the Father is denied to one who is wise in that sense. But if\nby wisdom any one means Christ, who is \u201cthe power and wisdom of God,\u201d\nfar from such a wise man being refused access to the Father, we hold\nthat he who is adorned by the Holy Spirit with that gift which is called\n\u201cthe word of wisdom,\u201d far excels all those who have not received the\nsame grace.\n\nFootnote 1453:\n\n Matt. xix. 23.\n\nFootnote 1454:\n\n Prov. xxviii. 6.\n\nFootnote 1455:\n\n Mark x. 44.\n\nFootnote 1456:\n\n Matt. xx. 25.\n\nFootnote 1457:\n\n Luke xxii. 25.\n\nFootnote 1458:\n\n 1 Cor. iii. 19.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIV.\n\n\nThe pursuit of human glory, we maintain, is forbidden not only by the\nteaching of Jesus, but also by the Old Testament. Accordingly we find\none of the prophets, when imprecating upon himself certain punishments\nfor the commission of certain sins, includes among the punishments this\none of earthly glory. He says, \u201cO Lord my God, if I have done this; if\nthere be iniquity in my hands; if I have rewarded evil unto him that was\nat peace with me; (yea, rather, I have delivered him that without cause\nis mine enemy;) let the enemy persecute my soul, and take it; yea, let\nhim tread down my life upon the earth, and _set my glory up on\nhigh_.\u201d[1459] And these precepts of our Lord, \u201cTake no thought what ye\nshall eat, or what ye shall drink. Behold the fowls of the air, or\nbehold the ravens: for they sow not, neither do they reap; yet your\nheavenly Father feedeth them. How much better are ye than they! And why\ntake ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the\nfield;\u201d[1460]\u2014these precepts, and those which follow, are not\ninconsistent with the promised blessings of the law, which teaches that\nthe just \u201cshall eat their bread to the full;\u201d[1461] nor with that saying\nof Solomon, \u201cThe righteous eateth to the satisfying of his soul, but the\nbelly of the wicked shall want.\u201d[1462] For we must consider the food\npromised in the law as the food of the soul, which is to satisfy not\nboth parts of man\u2019s nature, but the soul only. And the words of the\nGospel, although probably containing a deeper meaning, may yet be taken\nin their more simple and obvious sense, as teaching us not to be\ndisturbed with anxieties about our food and clothing, but, while living\nin plainness, and desiring only what is needful, to put our trust in the\nprovidence of God.\n\nFootnote 1459:\n\n Ps. vii. 3-5. Origen follows the reading \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd instead of \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2\n \u03c7\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd, \u201cmake my glory abide _in the dust_.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1460:\n\n Matt. vi. 25-28.\n\nFootnote 1461:\n\n Lev. xxvi. 5.\n\nFootnote 1462:\n\n Prov. xiii. 25.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXV.\n\n\nCelsus then extracts from the Gospel the precept, \u201cTo him who strikes\nthee once, thou shalt offer thyself to be struck again,\u201d although\nwithout giving any passage from the Old Testament which he considers\nopposed to it. On the one hand, we know that \u201cit was said to them in old\ntime, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth;\u201d[1463] and on the\nother, we have read, \u201cI say unto you, Whoever shall smite thee on the\none cheek, turn to him the other also.\u201d[1464] But as there is reason to\nbelieve that Celsus produces the objections which he has heard from\nthose who wish to make a difference between the God of the gospel and\nthe God of the law, we must say in reply, that this precept, \u201cWhosoever\nshall strike thee on the one cheek, turn to him the other,\u201d is not\nunknown to the older Scriptures. For thus, in the Lamentations of\nJeremiah, it is said, \u201cIt is good for a man that he beareth the yoke in\nhis youth: he sitteth alone, and keepeth silence, because he hath borne\nit upon him: he giveth his cheek to him that smiteth him; he is filled\nfull with reproach.\u201d[1465] There is no discrepancy, then, between the\nGod of the gospel and the God of the law, even when we take literally\nthe precept regarding the blow on the face. So, then, we infer that\nneither \u201cJesus nor Moses has taught falsely.\u201d The Father in sending\nJesus did not \u201cforget the commands which He had given to Moses:\u201d He did\nnot \u201cchange His mind, condemn His own laws, and send by His messenger\ncounter instructions.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1463:\n\n Ex. xxi. 24.\n\nFootnote 1464:\n\n Matt. v. 39.\n\nFootnote 1465:\n\n Lam. iii. 27, 29, 30.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVI.\n\n\nHowever, if we must refer briefly to the difference between the\nconstitution which was given to the Jews of old by Moses, and that which\nthe Christians, under the direction of Christ\u2019s teaching, wish now to\nestablish, we would observe that it must be impossible for the\nlegislation of Moses, taken literally, to harmonize with the calling of\nthe Gentiles, and with their subjection to the Roman government; and on\nthe other hand, it would be impossible for the Jews to preserve their\ncivil economy unchanged, supposing that they should embrace the gospel.\nFor Christians could not slay their enemies, or condemn to be burned or\nstoned, as Moses commands, those who had broken the law, and were\ntherefore condemned as deserving of these punishments; since the Jews\nthemselves, however desirous of carrying out their law, are not able to\ninflict these punishments. But in the case of the ancient Jews, who had\na land and a form of government of their own, to take from them the\nright of making war upon their enemies, of fighting for their country,\nof putting to death or otherwise punishing adulterers, murderers, or\nothers who were guilty of similar crimes, would be to subject them to\nsudden and utter destruction whenever the enemy fell upon them; for\ntheir very laws would in that case restrain them, and prevent them from\nresisting the enemy. And that same providence which of old gave the law,\nand has now given the gospel of Jesus Christ, not wishing the Jewish\nstate to continue longer, has destroyed their city and their temple: it\nhas abolished the worship which was offered to God in that temple by the\nsacrifice of victims, and other ceremonies which He had prescribed. And\nas it has destroyed these things, not wishing that they should longer\ncontinue, in like manner it has extended day by day the Christian\nreligion, so that it is now preached everywhere with boldness, and that\nin spite of the numerous obstacles which oppose the spread of Christ\u2019s\nteaching in the world. But since it was the purpose of God that the\nnations should receive the benefits of Christ\u2019s teaching, all the\ndevices of men against Christians have been brought to nought; for the\nmore that kings, and rulers, and peoples have persecuted them\neverywhere, the more have they increased in number and grown in\nstrength.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVII.\n\n\nAfter this Celsus relates at length opinions which he ascribes to us,\nbut which we do not hold, regarding the Divine Being, to the effect that\n\u201che is corporeal in his nature, and possesses a body like a man.\u201d As he\nundertakes to refute opinions which are none of ours, it would be\nneedless to give either the opinions themselves or their refutation.\nIndeed, if we did hold those views of God which he ascribes to us, and\nwhich he opposes, we would be bound to quote his words, to adduce our\nown arguments, and to refute his. But if he brings forward opinions\nwhich he has either heard from no one, or if it be assumed that he has\nheard them, it must have been from those who are very simple and\nignorant of the meaning of Scripture, then we need not undertake so\nsuperfluous a task as that of refuting them. For the Scriptures plainly\nspeak of God as of a being without body. Hence it is said, \u201cNo man hath\nseen God at any time;\u201d[1466] and the First-born of all creation is\ncalled \u201cthe image of the invisible God,\u201d[1467] which is the same as if\nit were said that He is incorporeal. However, we have already said\nsomething on the nature of God while examining into the meaning of the\nwords, \u201cGod is a Spirit, and they who worship Him must worship Him in\nspirit and in truth.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1466:\n\n John i. 18.\n\nFootnote 1467:\n\n Col. i. 15.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVIII.\n\n\nAfter thus misrepresenting our views of the nature of God, Celsus goes\non to ask of us \u201cwhere we hope to go after death;\u201d and he makes our\nanswer to be, \u201cto another land better than this.\u201d On this he comments as\nfollows: \u201cThe divine men of a former age have spoken of a happy life\nreserved for the souls of the blessed. Some designated it \u2018the isles of\nthe blest,\u2019 and others \u2018the Elysian plain,\u2019 so called because they were\nthere to be delivered from their present evils. Thus Homer says: \u2018But\nthe gods shall send thee to the Elysian plain, on the borders of the\nearth, where they lead a most quiet life.\u2019[1468] Plato also, who\nbelieved in the immortality of the soul, distinctly gives the name\n\u2018land\u2019 to the place where it is sent. \u2018The extent of it,\u2019[1469] says he,\n\u2018is immense, and we only occupy a small portion of it, from the Phasis\nto the Pillars of Hercules, where we dwell along the shores of the sea,\nas grasshoppers and frogs beside a marsh. But there are many other\nplaces inhabited in like manner by other men. For there are in different\nparts of the earth cavities, varying in form and in magnitude, into\nwhich run water, and clouds, and air. But that land which is pure lies\nin the pure region of heaven.\u2019\u201d Celsus therefore supposes that what we\nsay of a land which is much better and more excellent than this, has\nbeen borrowed from certain ancient writers whom he styles \u201cdivine,\u201d and\nchiefly from Plato, who in his _Ph\u0153don_ discourses on the pure land\nlying in a pure heaven. But he does not see that Moses, who is much\nolder than the Greek literature, introduces God as promising to those\nwho lived according to His law the holy land, which is \u201ca good land and\na large, a land flowing with milk and honey;\u201d[1470] which promise is not\nto be understood to refer, as some suppose, to that part of the earth\nwhich we call Jud\u00e6a; for it, however good it may be, still forms part of\nthe earth, which was originally cursed for the transgression of Adam.\nFor these words, \u201cCursed shall the ground be for what thou hast done;\nwith grief, that is, with labour, shalt thou eat of the fruit of it all\nthe days of thy life,\u201d[1471] were spoken of the whole earth, the fruit\nof which every man who died in Adam eats with sorrow or labour all the\ndays of his life. And as all the earth has been cursed, it brings forth\nthorns and briers all the days of the life of those who in Adam were\ndriven out of paradise; and in the sweat of his face every man eats\nbread until he returns to the ground from which he was taken. For the\nfull exposition of all that is contained in this passage much might be\nsaid; but we have confined ourselves to these few words at present,\nwhich are intended to remove the idea, that what is said of the good\nland promised by God to the righteous, refers to the land of Jud\u00e6a.\n\nFootnote 1468:\n\n _Odys._ iv. 563.\n\nFootnote 1469:\n\n _Ph\u00e6don_, p. 109.\n\nFootnote 1470:\n\n Ex. iii. 8.\n\nFootnote 1471:\n\n Gen. iii. 17.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIX.\n\n\nIf, then, the whole earth has been cursed in the deeds of Adam and of\nthose who died in him, it is plain that all parts of the earth share in\nthe curse, and among others the land of Jud\u00e6a; so that the words, \u201ca\ngood land and a large, a land flowing with milk and honey,\u201d cannot apply\nto it, although we may say of it, that both Jud\u00e6a and Jerusalem were the\nshadow and figure of that pure land, goodly and large, in the pure\nregion of heaven, in which is the heavenly Jerusalem. And it is in\nreference to this Jerusalem that the apostle spoke, as one who, \u201cbeing\nrisen with Christ, and seeking those things which are above,\u201d had found\na truth which formed no part of the Jewish mythology. \u201cYe are come,\u201d\nsays he, \u201cunto Mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the\nheavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels.\u201d[1472] And\nin order to be assured that our explanation of \u201cthe good and large land\u201d\nof Moses is not contrary to the intention of the Divine Spirit, we have\nonly to read in all the prophets what they say of those who, after\nhaving left Jerusalem, and wandered astray from it, should afterwards\nreturn and be settled in the place which is called the habitation and\ncity of God, as in the words, \u201cHis dwelling is in the holy place;\u201d[1473]\nand, \u201cGreat is the Lord, and greatly to be praised in the city of our\nGod, in the mountain of His holiness, beautiful for situation, the joy\nof the whole earth.\u201d[1474] It is enough at present to quote the words of\nthe thirty-seventh Psalm, which speaks thus of the land of the\nrighteous, \u201cThose that wait upon the Lord, they shall inherit the\nearth;\u201d and a little after, \u201cBut the meek shall inherit the earth, and\nshall delight themselves in the abundance of peace;\u201d and again, \u201cThose\nwho bless Him shall inherit the earth;\u201d and, \u201cThe righteous shall\ninherit the land, and dwell therein for ever.\u201d[1475] And consider\nwhether it is not evident to intelligent readers that the following\nwords from this same Psalm refer to the pure land in the pure heaven:\n\u201cWait on the Lord, and keep His way; and He shall exalt thee to inherit\nthe land.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1472:\n\n Heb. xii. 22.\n\nFootnote 1473:\n\n Ps. lxxvi. 2; English version, \u201cIn Salem is His tabernacle.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1474:\n\n Ps. xlviii. 1, 2.\n\nFootnote 1475:\n\n Ps. xxxvii. 9, 11, 22, 29, 34.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXX.\n\n\nIt seems to me also that that fancy of Plato, that those stones which we\ncall precious stones derive their lustre from a reflection, as it were,\nof the stones in that better land, is taken from the words of Isaiah in\ndescribing the city of God, \u201cI will make thy battlements of jasper, thy\nstones shall be crystal, and thy borders of precious stones;\u201d[1476] and,\n\u201cI will lay thy foundations with sapphires.\u201d Those who hold in greatest\nreverence the teaching of Plato, explain this myth of his as an\nallegory. And the prophecies from which, as we conjecture, Plato has\nborrowed, will be explained by those who, leading a godly life like that\nof the prophets, devote all their time to the study of the sacred\nScriptures, to those who are qualified to learn by purity of life, and\ntheir desire to advance in divine knowledge. For our part, our purpose\nhas been simply to say that what we affirm of that sacred land has not\nbeen taken from Plato or any of the Greeks, but that they rather\u2014living\nas they did not only after Moses, who was the oldest, but even after\nmost of the prophets\u2014borrowed from them, and in so doing either\nmisunderstood their obscure intimations on such subjects, or else\nendeavoured, in their allusions to the better land, to imitate those\nportions of Scripture which had fallen into their hands. Haggai\nexpressly makes a distinction between the earth and the dry land,\nmeaning by the latter the land in which we live. He says: \u201cYet once, and\nI will shake the heavens and the earth, and the dry land, and the\nsea.\u201d[1477]\n\nFootnote 1476:\n\n Isa. liv. 12, 11.\n\nFootnote 1477:\n\n Hagg. ii. 6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXI.\n\n\nReferring to the passage in the _Ph\u0153don_ of Plato, Celsus says: \u201cIt is\nnot easy for every one to understand the meaning of Plato\u2019s words, when\nhe says that on account of our weakness and slowness we are unable to\nreach the highest region of the air; but that if our nature were capable\nof so sublime a contemplation, we would then be able to understand that\nthat is the true heaven, and that the true light.\u201d As Celsus has\ndeferred to another opportunity the explanation of Plato\u2019s idea, we also\nthink that it does not fall within our purpose at present to enter into\nany full description of that holy and good land, and of the city of God\nwhich is in it; but reserve the consideration of it for our Commentary\non the Prophets, having already in part, according to our power, treated\nof the city of God in our remarks on the forty-sixth and forty-eighth\nPsalms. The writings of Moses and the prophets\u2014the most ancient of all\nbooks\u2014teach us that all things here on earth which are in common use\namong men, have other things corresponding to them in name which are\nalone real. Thus, for instance, there is the true light, and another\nheaven beyond the firmament, and a Sun of righteousness other than the\nsun we see. In a word, to distinguish those things from the objects of\nsense, which have no true reality, they say of God that \u201cHis works are\ntruth;\u201d[1478] thus making a distinction between the works of God and the\nworks of God\u2019s hands, which latter are of an inferior sort. Accordingly,\nGod in Isaiah complains of men, that \u201cthey regard not the works of the\nLord, nor consider the operation of His hands.\u201d[1479] But enough on this\npoint.\n\nFootnote 1478:\n\n Dan. iv. 37.\n\nFootnote 1479:\n\n Isa. v. 12.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXII.\n\n\nCelsus next assails the doctrine of the resurrection, which is a high\nand difficult doctrine, and one which more than others requires a high\nand advanced degree of wisdom to set forth how worthy it is of God; and\nhow sublime a truth it is which teaches us that there is a seminal\nprinciple lodged in that which Scripture speaks of as the \u201ctabernacle\u201d\nof the soul, in which the righteous \u201cdo groan, being burdened, not for\nthat they would be unclothed, but clothed upon.\u201d[1480] Celsus ridicules\nthis doctrine because he does not understand it, and because he has\nlearnt it from ignorant persons, who were unable to support it on any\nreasonable grounds. It will be profitable, therefore, that in addition\nto what we have said above, we should make this one remark. Our teaching\non the subject of the resurrection is not, as Celsus imagines, derived\nfrom anything that we have heard on the doctrine of metempsychosis; but\nwe know that the soul, which is immaterial and invisible in its nature,\nexists in no material place, without having a body suited to the nature\nof that place. Accordingly, it at one time puts off one body which was\nnecessary before, but which is no longer adequate in its changed state,\nand it exchanges it for a second; and at another time it assumes another\nin addition to the former, which is needed as a better covering, suited\nto the purer etherial regions of heaven. When it comes into the world at\nbirth, it casts off the integuments which it needed in the womb; and\nbefore doing this, it puts on another body suited for its life upon\nearth. Then, again, as there is \u201ca tabernacle\u201d and \u201can earthly house\u201d\nwhich is in some sort necessary for this tabernacle, Scripture teaches\nus that \u201cthe earthly house of this tabernacle shall be dissolved,\u201d but\nthat the tabernacle shall \u201cbe clothed upon with a house not made with\nhands, eternal in the heavens.\u201d[1481] The men of God say also that \u201cthe\ncorruptible shall put on incorruption,\u201d[1482] which is a different thing\nfrom \u201cthe incorruptible;\u201d and \u201cthe mortal shall put on immortality,\u201d\nwhich is different from \u201cthe immortal.\u201d Indeed, what \u201cwisdom\u201d is to \u201cthe\nwise,\u201d and \u201cjustice\u201d to \u201cthe just,\u201d and \u201cpeace\u201d to \u201cthe peaceable,\u201d the\nsame relation does \u201cincorruption\u201d hold to \u201cthe incorruptible,\u201d and\n\u201cimmortality\u201d to \u201cthe immortal.\u201d Behold, then, to what a prospect\nScripture encourages us to look, when it speaks to us of being clothed\nwith incorruption and immortality, which are, as it were, vestments\nwhich will not suffer those who are covered with them to come to\ncorruption or death. Thus far I have taken the liberty of referring to\nthis subject, in answer to one who assails the doctrine of the\nresurrection without understanding it, and who, simply because he knew\nnothing about it, made it the object of contempt and ridicule.\n\nFootnote 1480:\n\n 2 Cor. v. 1, 4.\n\nFootnote 1481:\n\n 2 Cor. v. 1.\n\nFootnote 1482:\n\n 1 Cor. xv. 53.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIII.\n\n\nAs Celsus supposes that we uphold the doctrine of the resurrection in\norder that we may see and know God, he thus follows out his notions on\nthe subject: \u201cAfter they have been utterly refuted and vanquished, they\nstill, as if regardless of all objections, come back again to the same\nquestion, \u2018How then shall we see and know God? how shall we go to Him?\u2019\u201d\nLet any, however, who are disposed to hear us observe, that if we have\nneed of a body for other purposes, as for occupying a material locality\nto which this body must be adapted, and if on that account the\n\u201ctabernacle\u201d is clothed in the way we have shown, we have no need of a\nbody in order to know God. For that which sees God is not the eye of the\nbody; it is the mind which is made in the image of the Creator,[1483]\nand which God has in His providence rendered capable of that knowledge.\nTo see God belongs to the pure heart, out of which no longer proceed\n\u201cevil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false\nwitness, blasphemies, the evil eye,\u201d[1484] or any other evil thing.\nWherefore it is said, \u201cBlessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see\nGod.\u201d[1485] But as the strength of our will is not sufficient to procure\nthe perfectly pure heart, and as we need that God should create it, he\ntherefore who prays as he ought, offers this petition to God, \u201cCreate in\nme a clean heart, O God.\u201d[1486]\n\nFootnote 1483:\n\n Bouh\u00e9reau follows the reading, \u201cthe mind which sees what is made in\n the image of the Creator.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1484:\n\n Matt. xv. 19 and vi. 23.\n\nFootnote 1485:\n\n Matt. v. 8.\n\nFootnote 1486:\n\n Ps. li. 10.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIV.\n\n\nAnd we do not ask the question, \u201cHow shall we go to God?\u201d as though we\nthought that God existed in some place. God is of too excellent a nature\nfor any place: He holds all things in His power, and is Himself not\nconfined by anything whatever. The precept, therefore, \u201cThou shalt walk\nafter the Lord thy God,\u201d[1487] does not command a bodily approach to\nGod; neither does the prophet refer to physical nearness to God, when he\nsays in his prayer, \u201cMy soul followeth hard after Thee.\u201d[1488] Celsus\ntherefore misrepresents us, when he says that we expect to see God with\nour bodily eyes, to hear Him with our ears, and to touch Him sensibly\nwith our hands. We know that the holy Scriptures make mention of eyes,\nof ears, and of hands, which have nothing but the name in common with\nthe bodily organs; and what is more wonderful, they speak of a diviner\nsense, which is very different from the senses as commonly spoken of.\nFor when the prophet says, \u201cOpen Thou mine eyes, that I may behold\nwondrous things out of Thy law,\u201d[1489] or, \u201cThe commandment of the Lord\nis pure, enlightening the eyes,\u201d[1490] or, \u201cLighten mine eyes, lest I\nsleep the sleep of death,\u201d[1491] no one is so foolish as to suppose that\nthe eyes of the body behold the wonders of the divine law, or that the\nlaw of the Lord gives light to the bodily eyes, or that the sleep of\ndeath falls on the eyes of the body. When our Saviour says, \u201cHe that\nhath ears to hear, let him hear,\u201d[1492] any one will understand that the\nears spoken of are of a diviner kind. When it is said that the word of\nthe Lord was \u201cin the hand\u201d of Jeremiah or of some other prophet; or when\nthe expression is used, \u201cthe law by the hand of Moses,\u201d or, \u201cI sought\nthe Lord with my hands, and was not deceived,\u201d[1493]\u2014no one is so\nfoolish as not to see that the word \u201chands\u201d is taken figuratively, as\nwhen John says, \u201cOur hands have handled the Word of life.\u201d[1494] And if\nyou wish further to learn from the sacred writings that there is a\ndiviner sense than the senses of the body, you have only to hear what\nSolomon says, \u201cThou shalt find a divine sense.\u201d[1495]\n\nFootnote 1487:\n\n Deut. xiii. 4.\n\nFootnote 1488:\n\n Ps. lxiii. 8.\n\nFootnote 1489:\n\n Ps. cxix. 18.\n\nFootnote 1490:\n\n Ps. xix. 8.\n\nFootnote 1491:\n\n Ps. xiii. 3.\n\nFootnote 1492:\n\n Matt. xiii. 9.\n\nFootnote 1493:\n\n Ps. lxxvii. 2, according to the LXX.\n\nFootnote 1494:\n\n 1 John i. 1.\n\nFootnote 1495:\n\n Prov. ii. 5. E. V. and LXX., \u201cThou shalt find the knowledge of God.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXV.\n\n\nSeeking God, then, in this way, we have no need to visit the oracles of\nTrophonius, of Amphiaraus, and of Mopsus, to which Celsus would send us,\nassuring us that we would there \u201csee the gods in human form, appearing\nto us with all distinctness, and without illusion.\u201d For we know that\nthese are demons, feeding on the blood, and smoke, and odour of victims,\nand shut up by their base desires in prisons, which the Greeks call\ntemples of the gods, but which we know are only the dwellings of\ndeceitful demons. To this Celsus maliciously adds, in regard to these\ngods which, according to him, are in human form, \u201cthey do not show\nthemselves for once, or at intervals, like him who has deceived men, but\nthey are ever open to intercourse with those who desire it.\u201d From this\nremark, it would seem that Celsus supposes that the appearance of Christ\nto His disciples after His resurrection was like that of a spectre\nflitting before their eyes; whereas these gods, as he calls them, in\nhuman shape always present themselves to those who desire it. But how is\nit possible that a phantom which, as he describes it, flew past to\ndeceive the beholders, could produce such effects after it had passed\naway, and could so turn the hearts of men as to lead them to regulate\ntheir actions according to the will of God, as in view of being\nhereafter judged by Him? And how could a phantom drive away demons, and\nshow other indisputable evidences of power, and that not in any one\nplace, like these so-called gods in human form, but making its divine\npower felt through the whole world, in drawing and congregating together\nall who are found disposed to lead a good and noble life?\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVI.\n\n\nAfter these remarks of Celsus, which we have endeavoured to answer as we\ncould, he goes on to say, speaking of us: \u201cAgain they will ask, \u2018How can\nwe know God, unless by the perception of the senses? for how otherwise\nthan through the senses are we able to gain any knowledge?\u2019\u201d To this he\nreplies: \u201cThis is not the language of a man; it comes not from the soul,\nbut from the flesh. Let them hearken to us, if such a spiritless and\ncarnal race are able to do so: if, instead of exercising the senses, you\nlook upwards with the soul; if, turning away the eye of the body, you\nopen the eye of the mind, thus and thus only will you be able to see\nGod. And if you seek one to be your guide along this way, you must shun\nall deceivers and jugglers, who will introduce you to phantoms.\nOtherwise you will be acting the most ridiculous part, if, whilst you\npronounce imprecations upon those others that are recognised as gods,\ntreating them as idols, you yet do homage to a more wretched idol than\nany of these, which indeed is not even an idol or a phantom, but a dead\nman, and you seek a father like to him.\u201d The first remark which we have\nto make on this passage is in regard to his use of personification, by\nwhich he makes us defend in this way the doctrine of the resurrection.\nThis figure of speech is properly employed when the character and\nsentiments of the person introduced are faithfully preserved; but it is\nan abuse of the figure when these do not agree with the character and\nopinions of the speaker. Thus we should justly condemn a man who put\ninto the mouths of barbarians, slaves, or uneducated people the language\nof philosophy; because we know that the philosophy belonged to the\nauthor, and not to such persons, who could not know anything of\nphilosophy. And in like manner we should condemn a man for introducing\npersons who are represented as wise and well versed in divine knowledge,\nand should make them give expression to language which could only come\nout of the mouths of those who are ignorant or under the influence of\nvulgar passions. Hence Homer is admired, among other things, for\npreserving a consistency of character in his heroes, as in Nestor,\nUlysses, Diomede, Agamemnon, Telemachus, Penelope, and the rest.\nEuripides, on the contrary, was assailed in the comedies of Aristophanes\nas a frivolous talker, often putting into the mouth of a barbarian\nwoman, a wretched slave, the wise maxims which he had learned from\nAnaxagoras or some other philosophers.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVII.\n\n\nNow if this is a true account of what constitutes the right and the\nwrong use of personification, have we not grounds for holding Celsus up\nto ridicule for thus ascribing to Christians words which they never\nuttered? For if those whom he represents as speaking are the unlearned,\nhow is it possible that such persons could distinguish between \u201csense\u201d\nand \u201creason,\u201d between \u201cobjects of sense\u201d and \u201cobjects of the reason?\u201d To\nargue in this way, they would require to have studied under the Stoics,\nwho deny all intellectual existences, and maintain that all that we\napprehend is apprehended through the senses, and that all knowledge\ncomes through the senses. But if, on the other hand, he puts these words\ninto the mouth of philosophers who search carefully into the meaning of\nChristian doctrines, the statements in question do not agree with their\ncharacter and principles. For no one who has learnt that God is\ninvisible, and that certain of His works are invisible, that is to say,\napprehended by the reason,[1496] can say, as if to justify his faith in\na resurrection, \u201cHow can they know God, except by the perception of the\nsenses?\u201d or, \u201cHow otherwise than through the senses can they gain any\nknowledge?\u201d For it is not in any secret writings, perused only by a few\nwise men, but in such as are most widely diffused and most commonly\nknown among the people, that these words are written: \u201cThe invisible\nthings of God from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being\nunderstood by the things that are made.\u201d[1497] From whence it is to be\ninferred, that though men who live upon the earth have to begin with the\nuse of the senses upon sensible objects, in order to go on from them to\na knowledge of the nature of things intellectual, yet their knowledge\nmust not stop short with the objects of sense. And thus, while\nChristians would not say that it is impossible to have a knowledge of\nintellectual objects without the senses, but rather that the senses\nsupply the first means of obtaining knowledge, they might well ask the\nquestion, \u201cWho can gain any knowledge without the senses?\u201d without\ndeserving the abuse of Celsus, when he adds, \u201cThis is not the language\nof a man; it comes not from the soul, but from the flesh.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1496:\n\n \u03bd\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac, falling under the province of \u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2, the reason. For\n convenience, we translate it elsewhere \u201cintellectual.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1497:\n\n Rom. i. 20.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVIII.\n\n\nSince we hold that the great God is in essence simple, invisible, and\nincorporeal, Himself pure intelligence, or something transcending\nintelligence and existence, we can never say that God is apprehended by\nany other means than through the intelligence which is formed in His\nimage, though now, in the words of Paul, \u201cwe see in a glass obscurely,\nbut then face to face.\u201d[1498] And if we use the expression \u201cface to\nface,\u201d let no one pervert its meaning; but let it be explained by this\npassage, \u201cBeholding with open face the glory of the Lord, we are changed\ninto the same image, from glory to glory,\u201d which shows that we do not\nuse the word in this connection to mean the visible face, but take it\nfiguratively, in the same way as we have shown that the eyes, the ears,\nand the other parts of the body are employed. And it is certain that a\nman\u2014I mean a soul using a body, otherwise called \u201cthe inner man,\u201d or\nsimply \u201cthe soul\u201d\u2014would answer, not as Celsus makes us answer, but as\nthe man of God himself teaches. It is certain also that a Christian will\nnot make use of \u201cthe language of the flesh,\u201d having learnt as he has \u201cto\nmortify the deeds of the body\u201d[1499] by the spirit, and \u201cto bear about\nin his body the dying of Jesus;\u201d[1500] and \u201cmortify your members which\nare on the earth,\u201d[1501] and with a true knowledge of these words, \u201cMy\nSpirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is\nflesh,\u201d[1502] and again, \u201cThey that are in the flesh cannot please\nGod,\u201d[1503] he strives in every way to live no longer according to the\nflesh, but only according to the Spirit.\n\nFootnote 1498:\n\n 1 Cor. xiii. 12.\n\nFootnote 1499:\n\n Rom. viii. 13.\n\nFootnote 1500:\n\n 2 Cor. iv. 10.\n\nFootnote 1501:\n\n Col. iii. 5.\n\nFootnote 1502:\n\n Gen. vi. 3.\n\nFootnote 1503:\n\n Rom. viii. 8.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIX.\n\n\nNow let us hear what it is that he invites us to learn, that we may\nascertain from him how we are to know God, although he thinks that his\nwords are beyond the capacity of all Christians. \u201cLet them hear,\u201d says\nhe, \u201cif they are able to do so.\u201d We have then to consider what the\nphilosopher wishes us to hear from him. But instead of instructing us as\nhe ought, he abuses us; and while he should have shown his goodwill to\nthose whom he addresses at the outset of his discourse, he stigmatizes\nas \u201ca cowardly race\u201d men who would rather die than abjure Christianity\neven by a word, and who are ready to suffer every form of torture, or\nany kind of death. He also applies to us the epithet \u201ccarnal\u201d or\n\u201cflesh-indulging,\u201d \u201calthough,\u201d as we are wont to say, \u201cwe have known\nChrist after the flesh, yet now henceforth we know Him no more,\u201d[1504]\nand although we are so ready to lay down our lives for the cause of\nreligion, that no philosopher could lay aside his robes more readily. He\nthen addresses to us these words: \u201cIf, instead of exercising your\nsenses, you look upwards with the soul; if, turning away the eye of the\nbody, you open the eye of the mind, thus and thus only you will be able\nto see God.\u201d He is not aware that this reference to the two eyes, the\neye of the body and the eye of the mind, which he has borrowed from the\nGreeks, was in use among our own writers; for Moses, in his account of\nthe creation of the world, introduces man before his transgression as\nboth seeing and not seeing: seeing, when it is said of the woman, \u201cThe\nwoman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to\nthe eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise;\u201d[1505] and again\nnot seeing, as when he introduces the serpent saying to the woman, as if\nshe and her husband had been blind, \u201cGod knows that on the day that ye\neat thereof your eyes shall be opened;\u201d[1506] and also when it is said,\n\u201cThey did eat, and the eyes of both of them were opened.\u201d[1507] The eyes\nof sense were then opened, which they had done well to keep shut, that\nthey might not be distracted, and hindered from seeing with the eyes of\nthe mind; and it was those eyes of the mind which in consequence of sin,\nas I imagine, were then closed, with which they had up to that time\nenjoyed the delight of beholding God and His paradise. This twofold kind\nof vision in us was familiar to our Saviour, who says, \u201cFor judgment I\nam come into this world, that they which see not might see, and that\nthey which see might be made blind,\u201d[1508]\u2014meaning by the eyes that see\nnot the eyes of the mind, which are enlightened by His teaching; and the\neyes which see are the eyes of sense, which His words do render blind,\nin order that the soul may look without distraction upon proper objects.\nAll true Christians therefore have the eye of the mind sharpened, and\nthe eye of sense closed; so that each one, according to the degree in\nwhich his better eye is quickened, and the eye of sense darkened, sees\nand knows the Supreme God, and His Son, who is the Word, Wisdom, and so\nforth.\n\nFootnote 1504:\n\n 2 Cor. v. 16.\n\nFootnote 1505:\n\n Gen. iii. 6.\n\nFootnote 1506:\n\n Gen. iii. 5.\n\nFootnote 1507:\n\n Gen. iii. 7.\n\nFootnote 1508:\n\n John ix. 39.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XL.\n\n\nNext to the remarks of Celsus on which we have already commented, come\nothers which he addresses to all Christians, but which, if applicable to\nany, ought to be addressed to persons whose doctrines differ entirely\nfrom those taught by Jesus. For it is the Ophians who, as we have before\nshown,[1509] have utterly renounced Jesus, and perhaps some others of\nsimilar opinions who are \u201cthe impostors and jugglers, leading men away\nto idols and phantoms;\u201d and it is they who with miserable pains learn\noff the names of the heavenly doorkeepers. These words are therefore\nquite inappropriate as addressed to Christians: \u201cIf you seek one to be\nyour guide along this way, you must shun all deceivers and jugglers, who\nwill introduce you to phantoms.\u201d And, as though quite unaware that these\nimpostors entirely agree with him, and are not behind him in speaking\nill of Jesus and His religion, he thus continues, confounding us with\nthem: \u201cotherwise you will be acting the most ridiculous part, if, whilst\nyou pronounce imprecations upon those other recognised gods, treating\nthem as idols, you yet do homage to a more wretched idol than any of\nthese, which indeed is not even an idol or a phantom, but a dead man,\nand you seek a father like to himself.\u201d That he is ignorant of the wide\ndifference between our opinions and those of the inventors of these\nfables, and that he imagines the charges which he makes against them\napplicable to us, is evident from the following passage: \u201cFor the sake\nof such a monstrous delusion, and in support of those wonderful\nadvisers, and those wonderful words which you address to the lion, to\nthe amphibious creature, to the creature in the form of an ass, and to\nothers, for the sake of those divine doorkeepers whose names you commit\nto memory with such pains, in such a cause as this you suffer cruel\ntortures, and perish at the stake.\u201d Surely, then, he is unaware that\nnone of those who regard beings in the form of an ass, a lion, or an\namphibious animal, as the doorkeepers or guides on the way to heaven,\never expose themselves to death in defence of that which they think the\ntruth. That excess of zeal, if it may be so called, which leads us for\nthe sake of religion to submit to every kind of death, and to perish at\nthe stake, is ascribed by Celsus to those who endure no such sufferings;\nand he reproaches us who suffer crucifixion for our faith, with\nbelieving in fabulous creatures\u2014in the lion, the amphibious animal, and\nother such monsters. If we reject all these fables, it is not out of\ndeference to Celsus, for we have never at any time held any such\nfancies; but it is in accordance with the teaching of Jesus that we\noppose all such notions, and will not allow to Michael, or to any others\nthat have been referred to, a form and figure of that sort.\n\nFootnote 1509:\n\n See Book vi. chap. xxx. etc.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLI.\n\n\nBut let us consider who those persons are whose guidance Celsus would\nhave us to follow, so that we may not be in want of guides who are\nrecommended both by their antiquity and sanctity. He refers us to\ndivinely inspired poets, as he calls them, to wise men and philosophers,\nwithout mentioning their names; so that, after promising to point out\nthose who should guide us, he simply hands us over in a general way to\ndivinely inspired poets, wise men, and philosophers. If he had specified\ntheir names in particular, we should have felt ourselves bound to show\nhim that he wished to give us as guides men who were blinded to the\ntruth, and who must therefore lead us into error; or that if not wholly\nblinded, yet they are in error in many matters of belief. But whether\nOrpheus, Parmenides, Empedocles, or even Homer himself, and Hesiod, are\nthe persons whom he means by \u201cinspired poets,\u201d let any one show how\nthose who follow their guidance walk in a better way, or lead a more\nexcellent life, than those who, being taught in the school of Jesus\nChrist, have rejected all images and statues, and even all Jewish\nsuperstition, that they may look upward through the Word of God to the\none God, who is the Father of the Word. Who, then, are those wise men\nand philosophers from whom Celsus would have us to learn so many divine\ntruths, and for whom we are to give up Moses the servant of God, the\nprophets of the Creator of the world, who have spoken so many things by\na truly divine inspiration, and even Him who has given light and taught\nthe way of piety to the whole human race, so that no one can reproach\nHim if he remains without a share in the knowledge of His mysteries?\nSuch, indeed, was the abounding love which He had for men, that He gave\nto the more learned a theology capable of raising the soul far above all\nearthly things; while with no less consideration He comes down to the\nweaker capacities of ignorant men, of simple women, of slaves, and, in\nshort, of all those who from Jesus alone could have received that help\nfor the better regulation of their lives which is supplied by His\ninstructions in regard to the Divine Being, adapted to their wants and\ncapacities.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLII.\n\n\nCelsus next refers us to Plato as to a more effective teacher of\ntheological truth, and quotes the following passage from the _Tim\u0153us_:\n\u201cIt is a hard matter to find out the Maker and Father of this universe;\nand after having found Him, it is impossible to make Him known to all.\u201d\nTo which he himself adds this remark: \u201cYou perceive, then, how divine\nmen seek after the way of truth, and how well Plato knew that it was\nimpossible for all men to walk in it. But as wise men have found it for\nthe express purpose of being able to convey to us some notion of Him who\nis the first, the unspeakable Being,\u2014a notion, namely, which may\nrepresent Him to us through the medium of other objects,\u2014they endeavour\neither by synthesis, which is the combining of various qualities, or by\nanalysis, which is the separation and setting aside of some qualities,\nor finally by analogy;\u2014in these ways, I say, they endeavour to set\nbefore us that which it is impossible to express in words. I should\ntherefore be surprised if you could follow in that course, since you are\nso completely wedded to the flesh as to be incapable of seeing aught but\nwhat is impure.\u201d These words of Plato are noble and admirable; but see\nif Scripture does not give us an example of a regard for mankind still\ngreater in God the Word, who was \u201cin the beginning with God,\u201d and \u201cwho\nwas made flesh,\u201d in order that He might reveal to all men truths which,\naccording to Plato, it would be impossible to make known to all men,\neven after he had found them himself. Plato may say that \u201cit is a hard\nthing to find out the Creator and Father of this universe;\u201d by which\nlanguage he implies that it is not wholly beyond the power of human\nnature to attain to such a knowledge as is either worthy of God, or if\nnot, is far beyond that which is commonly attained (although if it were\ntrue that Plato or any other of the Greeks had found God, they would\nnever have given homage and worship, or ascribed the name of God, to any\nother than to Him: they would have abandoned all others, and would not\nhave associated with this great God objects which can have nothing in\ncommon with Him). For ourselves, we maintain that human nature is in no\nway able to seek after God, or to attain a clear knowledge of Him\nwithout the help of Him whom it seeks. He makes Himself known to those\nwho, after doing all that their powers will allow, confess that they\nneed help from Him, who discovers Himself to those whom He approves, in\nso far as it is possible for man and the soul still dwelling in the body\nto know God.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIII.\n\n\nObserve that when Plato says, that \u201cafter having found out the Creator\nand Father of the universe, it is impossible to make Him known to all\nmen,\u201d he does not speak of Him as unspeakable, and as incapable of being\nexpressed in words. On the contrary, he implies that He may be spoken\nof, and that there are a few to whom He may be made known. But Celsus,\nas if forgetting the language which he had just quoted from Plato,\nimmediately gives God the name of \u201cthe unspeakable.\u201d He says: \u201csince the\nwise men have found out this way, in order to be able to give us some\nidea of the First of Beings, who is unspeakable.\u201d For ourselves, we hold\nthat not God alone is unspeakable, but other things also which are\ninferior to Him. Such are the things which Paul labours to express when\nhe says, \u201cI heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to\nutter,\u201d[1510] where the word \u201cheard\u201d is used in the sense of\n\u201cunderstood;\u201d as in the passage, \u201cHe who hath ears to hear, let him\nhear.\u201d We also hold that it is a hard matter to see the Creator and\nFather of the universe; but it is possible to see Him in the way thus\nreferred to, \u201cBlessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see\nGod;\u201d[1511] and not only so, but also in the sense of the words of Him\n\u201cwho is the image of the invisible God;\u201d \u201cHe who hath seen me hath seen\nthe Father who sent me.\u201d[1512] No sensible person could suppose that\nthese last words were spoken in reference to His bodily presence, which\nwas open to the view of all; otherwise all those who said, \u201cCrucify him,\ncrucify him,\u201d and Pilate, who had power over the humanity of Jesus, were\namong those who saw God the Father, which is absurd. Moreover, that\nthese words, \u201cHe that hath seen me, hath seen the Father who sent me,\u201d\nare not to be taken in their grosser sense, is plain from the answer\nwhich He gave to Philip, \u201cHave I been so long time with you, and yet\ndost thou not know me, Philip?\u201d after Philip had asked, \u201cShow us the\nFather, and it sufficeth us.\u201d He, then, who perceives how these words,\n\u201cThe Word was made flesh,\u201d are to be understood of the only-begotten Son\nof God, the first-born of all creation, will also understand how, in\nseeing the image of the invisible God, we see \u201cthe Creator and Father of\nthe universe.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1510:\n\n 2 Cor. xii. 4.\n\nFootnote 1511:\n\n Matt. v. 8.\n\nFootnote 1512:\n\n John xiv. 9.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIV.\n\n\nCelsus supposes that we may arrive at a knowledge of God either by\ncombining or separating certain things after the methods which\nmathematicians call synthesis and analysis, or again by analogy, which\nis employed by them also, and that in this way we may as it were gain\nadmission to the chief good. But when the Word of God says, \u201cNo man\nknoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal\nHim,\u201d[1513] He declares that no one can know God but by the help of\ndivine grace coming from above, with a certain divine inspiration.\nIndeed, it is reasonable to suppose that the knowledge of God is beyond\nthe reach of human nature, and hence the many errors into which men have\nfallen in their views of God. It is, then, through the goodness and love\nof God to mankind, and by a marvellous exercise of divine grace to those\nwhom He saw in His foreknowledge, and knew that they would walk worthy\nof Him who had made Himself known to them, and that they would never\nswerve from a faithful attachment to His service, although they were\ncondemned to death or held up to ridicule by those who, in ignorance of\nwhat true religion is, give that name to what deserves to be called\nanything rather than religion. God doubtless saw the pride and arrogance\nof those who, with contempt for all others, boast of their knowledge of\nGod, and of their profound acquaintance with divine things obtained from\nphilosophy, but who still, not less even than the most ignorant, run\nafter their images, and temples, and famous mysteries; and seeing this,\nHe \u201chas chosen the foolish things of this world\u201d[1514]\u2014the simplest of\nChristians, who lead, however, a life of greater moderation and purity\nthan many philosophers\u2014\u201cto confound the wise,\u201d who are not ashamed to\naddress inanimate things as gods or images of the gods. For what\nreasonable man can refrain from smiling when he sees that one who has\nlearned from philosophy such profound and noble sentiments about God or\nthe gods, turns straightway to images and offers to them his prayers, or\nimagines that by gazing upon these material things he can ascend from\nthe visible symbol to that which is spiritual and immaterial. But a\nChristian, even of the common people, is assured that every place forms\npart of the universe, and that the whole universe is God\u2019s temple. In\nwhatever part of the world he is, he prays; but he rises above the\nuniverse, \u201cshutting the eyes of sense, and raising upwards the eyes of\nthe soul.\u201d And he stops not at the vault of heaven; but passing in\nthought beyond the heavens, under the guidance of the Spirit of God, and\nhaving thus as it were gone beyond the visible universe, he offers\nprayers to God. But he prays for no trivial blessings, for he has learnt\nfrom Jesus to seek for nothing small or mean, that is, sensible objects,\nbut to ask only for what is great and truly divine; and these things God\ngrants to us, to lead us to that blessedness which is found only with\nHim through His Son, the Word, who is God.\n\nFootnote 1513:\n\n Matt. xi. 27.\n\nFootnote 1514:\n\n 1 Cor. i. 27.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLV.\n\n\nBut let us see further what the things are which he proposes to teach\nus, if indeed we can comprehend them, since he speaks of us as being\n\u201cutterly wedded to the flesh;\u201d although if we live well, and in\naccordance with the teaching of Jesus, we hear this said of us: \u201cYe are\nnot in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if the Spirit of God dwelleth in\nyou.\u201d[1515] He says also that we look upon nothing that is pure,\nalthough our endeavour is to keep even our thoughts free from all\ndefilement of sin, and although in prayer we say, \u201cCreate in me a clean\nheart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me,\u201d[1516] so that we may\nbehold Him with that \u201cpure heart\u201d to which alone is granted the\nprivilege of seeing Him. This, then, is what he proposes for our\ninstruction: \u201cThings are either _intelligible_, which we call\nsubstance\u2014being; or _visible_, which we call _becoming_:[1517] with the\nformer is truth; from the latter arises error. Truth is the object of\nknowledge; truth and error form opinion. Intelligible objects are known\nby the reason, visible objects by the eyes; the action of the reason is\ncalled intelligent perception, that of the eyes vision. As, then, among\nvisible things the sun is neither the eye nor vision, but that which\nenables the eye to see, and renders vision possible, and in consequence\nof it visible things are seen, all sensible things exist, and itself is\nrendered visible; so among things intelligible, that which is neither\nreason, nor intelligent perception, nor knowledge, is yet the cause\nwhich enables the reason to know, which renders intelligent perception\npossible; and in consequence of it knowledge arises, all things\nintelligible, truth itself and substance have their existence; and\nitself, which is above all these things, becomes in some ineffable way\nintelligible. These things are offered to the consideration of the\nintelligent; and if even you can understand any of them, it is well. And\nif you think that a Divine Spirit has descended from God to announce\ndivine things to men, it is doubtless this same Spirit that reveals\nthese truths, and it was under the same influence that men of old made\nknown many important truths. But if you cannot comprehend these things,\nthen keep silence; do not expose your own ignorance, and do not accuse\nof blindness those who see, or of lameness those who run, while you\nyourselves are utterly lamed and mutilated in mind, and lead a merely\nanimal life\u2014the life of the body, which is the dead part of our nature.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1515:\n\n Rom. viii. 9.\n\nFootnote 1516:\n\n Ps. li. 10.\n\nFootnote 1517:\n\n \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2. For the distinction between \u03bf\u1f50\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 and \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, see Plato\u2019s\n _Sophista_, p. 246.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVI.\n\n\nWe are careful not to oppose fair arguments even if they proceed from\nthose who are not of our faith; we strive not to be captious, or to seek\nto overthrow any sound reasonings. But here we have to reply to those\nwho slander the character of persons wishing to do their best in the\nservice of God, who accepts the faith which the meanest place in Him, as\nwell as the more refined and intelligent piety of the learned; seeing\nthat both alike address to the Creator of the world their prayers and\nthanksgivings through the High Priest who has set before men the nature\nof pure religion. We say, then, that those who are stigmatized as \u201clamed\nand mutilated in spirit,\u201d as \u201cliving only for the sake of the body which\nis dead,\u201d are persons whose endeavour it is to say with sincerity: \u201cFor\nthough we live[1518] in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh;\nfor the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but mighty through God.\u201d\nIt is for those who throw out such vile accusations against men who\ndesire to be God\u2019s servants, to beware lest, by the calumnies which they\ncast upon others who strive to live well, they \u201clame\u201d their own souls,\nand \u201cmutilate\u201d the inner man, by severing from it that justice and\nmoderation of mind which the Creator has planted in the nature of all\nHis rational creatures. As for those, however, who, along with other\nlessons given by the Divine Word, have learned and practised this, \u201cwhen\nreviled to bless, when persecuted to endure, when defamed to\nentreat,\u201d[1519] they may be said to be walking in spirit in the ways of\nuprightness, to be purifying and setting in order the whole soul. They\ndistinguish\u2014and to them the distinction is not one of words\nmerely\u2014between \u201csubstance,\u201d or that which is, and that which is\n\u201cbecoming;\u201d between things apprehended by reason, and things apprehended\nby sense; and they connect truth with the one, and avoid the errors\narising out of the other; looking, as they have been taught, not at the\nthings \u201cbecoming\u201d or phenomenal, which are seen, and therefore\ntemporary, but at better things than these, whether we call them\n\u201csubstance,\u201d or \u201cspiritual\u201d things, as being apprehended by reason, or\n\u201cinvisible,\u201d because they lie out of the reach of the senses. The\ndisciples of Jesus regard these phenomenal things only that they may use\nthem as steps to ascend to the knowledge of the things of reason. For\n\u201cthe invisible things of God,\u201d that is, the objects of the reason, \u201cfrom\nthe creation of the world are clearly seen\u201d by the reason, \u201cbeing\nunderstood by the things that are made.\u201d And when they have risen from\nthe created things of this world to the invisible things of God, they do\nnot stay there; but after they have sufficiently exercised their minds\nupon these, and have understood their nature, they ascend to \u201cthe\neternal power of God,\u201d in a word, to His divinity. For they know that\nGod, in His love to men, has \u201cmanifested\u201d His truth, and \u201cthat which is\nknown of Him,\u201d not only to those who devote themselves to His service,\nbut also to some who are far removed from the purity of worship and\nservice which He requires; and that some of those who by the providence\nof God had attained a knowledge of these truths, were yet doing things\nunworthy of that knowledge, and \u201cholding the truth in unrighteousness,\u201d\nand who are unable to find any excuse before God after the knowledge of\nsuch great truths which He has given them.\n\nFootnote 1518:\n\n 1 Cor. x. 3, 4. The received text has \u201cwalk\u201d instead of \u201clive.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1519:\n\n 1 Cor. iv. 11, 12.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVII.\n\n\nFor Scripture testifies, in regard to those who have a knowledge of\nthose things of which Celsus speaks, and who profess a philosophy\nfounded on these principles, that they, \u201cwhen they knew God, glorified\nHim not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their\nimaginations;\u201d and notwithstanding the bright light of knowledge with\nwhich God had enlightened them, \u201ctheir foolish heart\u201d was carried away,\nand became \u201cdarkened.\u201d[1520] Thus we may see how those who accounted\nthemselves wise gave proofs of great folly, when, after such grand\narguments delivered in the schools on God and on things apprehended by\nthe reason, they \u201cchanged the glory of the incorruptible God into an\nimage made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed\nbeasts, and creeping things.\u201d[1521] As, then, they lived in a way\nunworthy of the knowledge which they had received from God, His\nprovidence leaving them to themselves, they were given \u201cup to\nuncleanness, through the lusts of their own hearts to dishonour their\nown bodies,\u201d[1522] in shamelessness and licentiousness, because they\n\u201cchanged the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the\ncreature more than the Creator.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1520:\n\n Rom. i. 21.\n\nFootnote 1521:\n\n Rom. i. 25.\n\nFootnote 1522:\n\n Rom. i. 24, 25.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVIII.\n\n\nBut those who are despised for their ignorance, and set down as fools\nand abject slaves, no sooner commit themselves to God\u2019s guidance by\naccepting the teaching of Jesus, than, so far from defiling themselves\nby licentious indulgence or the gratification of shameless passion, they\nin many cases, like perfect priests, for whom such pleasures have no\ncharm, keep themselves in act and in thought in a state of virgin\npurity. The Athenians have one hierophant, who, not having confidence in\nhis power to restrain his passions within the limits he prescribed for\nhimself, determined to check them at their seat by the application of\nhemlock; and thus he was accounted pure, and fit for the celebration of\nreligious worship among the Athenians. But among Christians may be found\nmen who have no need of hemlock to fit them for the pure service of God,\nand for whom the Word in place of hemlock is able to drive all evil\ndesires from their thoughts, so that they may present their prayers to\nthe Divine Being. And attached to the other so-called gods are a select\nnumber of virgins, who are guarded by men, or it may be not guarded (for\nthat is not the point in question at present), and who are supposed to\nlive in purity for the honour of the god they serve. But among\nChristians, those who maintain a perpetual virginity do so for no human\nhonours, for no fee or reward, from no motive of vainglory; but \u201cas they\nchoose to retain God in their knowledge,\u201d[1523] they are preserved by\nGod in a spirit well-pleasing to Him, and in the discharge of every\nduty, being filled with all righteousness and goodness.\n\nFootnote 1523:\n\n Rom. i. 28.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIX.\n\n\nWhat I have now said, then, is offered not for the purpose of cavilling\nwith any right opinions or sound doctrines held even by Greeks, but with\nthe desire of showing that the same things, and indeed much better and\ndiviner things than these, have been said by those divine men, the\nprophets of God and the apostles of Jesus. These truths are fully\ninvestigated by all who wish to attain a perfect knowledge of\nChristianity, and who know that \u201cthe mouth of the righteous speaketh\nwisdom, and his tongue talketh of judgment; the law of his God is in his\nheart.\u201d[1524] But even in regard to those who, either from deficiency of\nknowledge or want of inclination, or from not having Jesus to lead them\nto a rational view of religion, have not gone into these deep questions,\nwe find that they believe in the Most High God, and in His only-begotten\nSon, the Word and God, and that they often exhibit in their character a\nhigh degree of gravity, of purity, and integrity; while those who call\nthemselves wise have despised these virtues, and have wallowed in the\nfilth of sodomy, in lawless lust, \u201cmen with men working that which is\nunseemly.\u201d[1525]\n\nFootnote 1524:\n\n Ps. xxxvii. 30, 31.\n\nFootnote 1525:\n\n Rom. i. 27.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter L.\n\n\nCelsus has not explained how error accompanies the \u201cbecoming,\u201d or\nproduct of generation; nor has he expressed himself with sufficient\nclearness to enable us to compare his ideas with ours, and to pass\njudgment on them. But the prophets, who have given some wise suggestions\non the subject of things produced by generation, tell us that a\nsacrifice for sin was offered even for new-born infants, as not being\nfree from sin. They say, \u201cI was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my\nmother conceive me;\u201d[1526] also, \u201cThey are estranged from the womb;\u201d\nwhich is followed by the singular expression, \u201cThey go astray as soon as\nthey are born, speaking lies.\u201d[1527] Besides, our wise men have such a\ncontempt for all sensible objects, that sometimes they speak of all\nmaterial things as vanity: thus, \u201cFor the creature was made subject to\nvanity, not willingly, but by reason of him that subjected the same in\nhope;\u201d[1528] at other times as vanity of vanities, \u201cVanity of vanities,\nsaith the Preacher, all is vanity.\u201d[1529] Who has given so severe an\nestimate of the life of the human soul here on earth, as he who says:\n\u201cVerily every man at his best estate is altogether vanity?\u201d[1530] He\ndoes not hesitate at all as to the difference between the present life\nof the soul and that which it is to lead hereafter. He does not say,\n\u201cWho knows if to die is not to live, and if to live is not death?\u201d[1531]\nBut he boldly proclaims the truth, and says, \u201cOur soul is bowed down to\nthe dust;\u201d[1532] and, \u201cThou hast brought me into the dust of\ndeath;\u201d[1533] and similarly, \u201cWho will deliver me from the body of this\ndeath?\u201d[1534] also, \u201cWho will change the body of our humiliation.\u201d[1535]\nIt is a prophet also who says, \u201cThou hast brought us down in a place of\naffliction;\u201d[1536] meaning by the \u201cplace of affliction\u201d this earthly\nregion, to which Adam, that is to say, man, came after he was driven out\nof paradise for sin. Observe also how well the different life of the\nsoul here and hereafter has been recognised by him who says, \u201cNow we see\nin a glass, obscurely, but then face to face;\u201d[1537] and, \u201cWhilst we are\nin our home in the body, we are away from our home in the Lord;\u201d\nwherefore \u201cwe are well content to go from our home in the body, and to\ncome to our home with the Lord.\u201d[1538]\n\nFootnote 1526:\n\n Ps. li. 5.\n\nFootnote 1527:\n\n Ps. lviii. 3.\n\nFootnote 1528:\n\n Rom. viii. 20.\n\nFootnote 1529:\n\n Eccles. i. 2.\n\nFootnote 1530:\n\n Ps. xxxix. 5.\n\nFootnote 1531:\n\n Euripides.\n\nFootnote 1532:\n\n Ps. xliv. 25.\n\nFootnote 1533:\n\n Ps. xxii. 15.\n\nFootnote 1534:\n\n Rom. vii. 24.\n\nFootnote 1535:\n\n Phil. iii. 21.\n\nFootnote 1536:\n\n Ps. xliii. 19, LXX.\n\nFootnote 1537:\n\n 1 Cor. xiii. 12.\n\nFootnote 1538:\n\n 2 Cor. v. 6, 8.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LI.\n\n\nBut what need is there to quote any more passages against Celsus, in\norder to prove that his words contain nothing which was not said long\nbefore among ourselves, since that has been sufficiently established by\nwhat we have said? It seems that what follows has some reference to\nthis: \u201cIf you think that a Divine Spirit has descended from God to\nannounce divine things to men, it is doubtless this same Spirit that\nreveals these truths; and it was under the same influence that men of\nold made known many important truths.\u201d But he does not know how great is\nthe difference between those things and the clear and certain teaching\nof those who say to us, \u201cThine incorruptible spirit is in all things,\nwherefore God chasteneth them by little and little that offend;\u201d[1539]\nand of those who, among their other instructions, teach us that the\nwords, \u201cReceive ye the Holy Ghost,\u201d[1540] refer to a degree of spiritual\ninfluence higher than that in the passage, \u201cYe shall be baptized with\nthe Holy Ghost not many days hence.\u201d[1541] But it is a difficult matter,\neven after much careful consideration, to perceive the difference\nbetween those who have received a knowledge of the truth and a notion of\nGod at different intervals and for short periods of time, and those who\nare more fully inspired by God, who have constant communion with Him,\nand are always led by His Spirit. Had Celsus set himself to understand\nthis, he would not have reproached us with ignorance, or forbidden us to\ncharacterize as \u201cblind\u201d those who believe that religion shows itself in\nsuch products of man\u2019s mechanical art as images. For every one who sees\nwith the eyes of his soul serves the Divine Being in no other way than\nin that which leads him ever to have regard to the Creator of all, to\naddress his prayers to Him alone, and to do all things as in the sight\nof God, who sees us altogether, even to our thoughts. Our earnest desire\nthen is both to see for ourselves, and to be leaders of the blind, to\nbring them to the Word of God, that He may take away from their minds\nthe blindness of ignorance. And if our actions are worthy of Him who\ntaught His disciples, \u201cYe are the light of the world,\u201d[1542] and of the\nWord, who says, \u201cThe light shineth in darkness,\u201d[1543] then we shall be\nlight to those who are in darkness; we shall give wisdom to those who\nare without it, and we shall instruct the ignorant.\n\nFootnote 1539:\n\n Wisd. xii. 1, 2.\n\nFootnote 1540:\n\n John xx. 22.\n\nFootnote 1541:\n\n Acts i. 5.\n\nFootnote 1542:\n\n Matt. v. 14.\n\nFootnote 1543:\n\n John i. 5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LII.\n\n\nAnd let not Celsus be angry if we describe as lame and mutilated in soul\nthose who run to the temples as to places having a real sacredness, and\nwho cannot see that no mere mechanical work of man can be truly sacred.\nThose whose piety is grounded on the teaching of Jesus also run until\nthey come to the end of their course, when they can say in all truth and\nconfidence: \u201cI have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I\nhave kept the faith; henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of\nrighteousness.\u201d[1544] And each of us runs \u201cnot as uncertain,\u201d and he so\nfights with evil \u201cnot as one beating the air,\u201d[1545] but as against\nthose who are subject to \u201cthe prince of the power of the air, the spirit\nthat now worketh in the children of disobedience.\u201d[1546] Celsus may\nindeed say of us that we \u201clive with the body which is a dead thing;\u201d but\nwe have learnt, \u201cIf ye live after the flesh, ye shall die; but if ye by\nthe Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live;\u201d[1547] and,\n\u201cIf we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.\u201d[1548] Would\nthat we might convince him by our actions that he did us wrong, when he\nsaid that we \u201clive with the body which is dead!\u201d\n\nFootnote 1544:\n\n 2 Tim. iv. 7.\n\nFootnote 1545:\n\n 1 Cor. ix. 26.\n\nFootnote 1546:\n\n Eph. ii. 2.\n\nFootnote 1547:\n\n Rom. viii. 13.\n\nFootnote 1548:\n\n Gal. v. 25.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIII.\n\n\nAfter these remarks of Celsus, which we have done our best to refute, he\ngoes on to address us thus: \u201cSeeing you are so eager for some novelty,\nhow much better it would have been if you had chosen as the object of\nyour zealous homage some one of those who died a glorious death, and\nwhose divinity might have received the support of some myth to\nperpetuate his memory! Why, if you were not satisfied with Hercules or\n\u00c6sculapius, and other heroes of antiquity, you had Orpheus, who was\nconfessedly a divinely inspired man, who died a violent death. But\nperhaps some others have taken him up before you. You may then take\nAnaxarchus, who, when cast into a mortar, and beaten most barbarously,\nshowed a noble contempt for his suffering, and said, \u2018Beat, beat the\nshell of Anaxarchus, for himself you do not beat,\u2019\u2014a speech surely of a\nspirit truly divine. But others were before you in following his\ninterpretation of the laws of nature. Might you not, then, take\nEpictetus, who, when his master was twisting his leg, said, smiling and\nunmoved, \u2018You will break my leg;\u2019 and when it was broken, he added, \u2018Did\nI not tell you that you would break it?\u2019 What saying equal to these did\nyour god utter under suffering? If you had said even of the Sibyl, whose\nauthority some of you acknowledge, that she was a child of God, you\nwould have said something more reasonable. But you have had the\npresumption to include in her writings many impious things, and set up\nas a god one who ended a most infamous life by a most miserable death.\nHow much more suitable than he would have been Jonah in the whale\u2019s\nbelly, or Daniel delivered from the wild beasts, or any of a still more\nportentous kind!\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIV.\n\n\nBut since he sends us to Hercules, let him repeat to us any of his\nsayings, and let him justify his shameful subjection to Omphale. Let him\nshow that divine honours should be paid to one who, like a highway\nrobber, carries off a farmer\u2019s ox by force, and afterwards devours it,\namusing himself meanwhile with the curses of the owner; in memory of\nwhich even to this day sacrifices offered to the demon of Hercules are\naccompanied with curses. Again he proposes \u00c6sculapius to us, as if to\noblige us to repeat what we have said already; but we forbear. In regard\nto Orpheus, what does he admire in him to make him assert that, by\ncommon consent, he was regarded as a divinely inspired man, and lived a\nnoble life? I am greatly deceived if it is not the desire which Celsus\nhas to oppose us and put down Jesus that leads him to sound forth the\npraises of Orpheus; and whether, when he made himself acquainted with\nhis impious fables about the gods, he did not cast them aside as\ndeserving, even more than the poems of Homer, to be excluded from a\nwell-ordered state. For, indeed, Orpheus says much worse things than\nHomer of those whom they call gods. Noble, indeed, it was in Anaxarchus\nto say to Aristocreon, tyrant of Cyprus, \u201cBeat on, beat the shell of\nAnaxarchus,\u201d but it is the one admirable incident in the life of\nAnaxarchus known to the Greeks; and although, on the strength of that,\nsome like Celsus might deservedly honour the man for his courage, yet to\nlook up to Anaxarchus as a god is not consistent with reason. He also\ndirects us to Epictetus, whose firmness is justly admired, although his\nsaying when his leg was broken by his master is not to be compared with\nthe marvellous acts and words of Jesus which Celsus refuses to believe;\nand these words were accompanied by such a divine power, that even to\nthis day they convert not only some of the more ignorant and simple, but\nmany also of the most enlightened of men.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LV.\n\n\nWhen, to his enumeration of those to whom he would send us, he adds,\n\u201cWhat saying equal to these did your god utter under sufferings?\u201d we\nwould reply, that the silence of Jesus under scourgings, and amidst all\nHis sufferings, spoke more for His firmness and submission than all that\nwas said by the Greeks when beset by calamity. Perhaps Celsus may\nbelieve what was recorded with all sincerity by trustworthy men, who,\nwhile giving a truthful account of all the wonders performed by Jesus,\nspecify among these the silence which He preserved when subjected to\nscourgings; showing the same singular meekness under the insults which\nwere heaped upon Him, when they put upon Him the purple robe, and set\nthe crown of thorns upon His head, and when they put in His hand a reed\nin place of a sceptre: no unworthy or angry word escaped Him against\nthose who subjected Him to such outrages. Since, then, He received the\nscourgings with silent firmness, and bore with meekness all the insults\nof those who outraged Him, it cannot be said, as is said by some, that\nit was in cowardly weakness that He uttered the words: \u201cFather, if it be\npossible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless, not as I will, but as\nThou wilt.\u201d[1549] The prayer which seems to be contained in these words\nfor the removal of what He calls \u201cthe cup\u201d bears a sense which we have\nelsewhere examined and set forth at large. But taking it in its more\nobvious sense, consider if it be not a prayer offered to God with all\npiety. For no man naturally regards anything which may befall him as\nnecessary and inevitable; though he may submit to what is not\ninevitable, if occasion requires. Besides, these words, \u201cnevertheless,\nnot as I will, but as Thou wilt,\u201d are not the language of one who\nyielded to necessity, but of one who was contented with what was\nbefalling Him, and who submitted with reverence to the arrangements of\nProvidence.\n\nFootnote 1549:\n\n Matt. xxvi. 39.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVI.\n\n\nCelsus then adds, for what reason I know not, that instead of calling\nJesus the Son of God, we had better have given that honour to the Sibyl,\nin whose books he maintains we have interpolated many impious\nstatements, though he does not mention what those interpolations are. He\nmight have proved his assertion by producing some older copies which are\nfree from the interpolations which he attributes to us; but he does not\ndo so even to justify his statement that these passages are of an\nimpious character. Moreover, he again speaks of the life of Jesus as \u201ca\nmost infamous life,\u201d as he has done before, not once or twice, but many\ntimes, although he does not stay to specify any of the actions of His\nlife which he thinks most infamous. He seems to think that he may in\nthis way make assertions without proving them, and rail against one of\nwhom he knows nothing. Had he set himself to show what sort of infamy he\nfound in the actions of Jesus, we should have repelled the several\ncharges brought against Him. Jesus did indeed meet with a most sad\ndeath; but the same might be said of Socrates, and of Anaxarchus, whom\nhe had just mentioned, and a multitude of others. If the death of Jesus\nwas a miserable one, was not that of the others so too? And if their\ndeath was not miserable, can it be said that the death of Jesus was? You\nsee from this, then, that the object of Celsus is to vilify the\ncharacter of Jesus; and I can only suppose that he is driven to it by\nsome spirit akin to those whose power has been broken and vanquished by\nJesus, and which now finds itself deprived of the smoke and blood on\nwhich it lived, whilst deceiving those who sought for God here upon\nearth in images, instead of looking up to the true God, the Governor of\nall things.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVII.\n\n\nAfter this, as though his object was to swell the size of his book, he\nadvises us \u201cto choose Jonah rather than Jesus as our God;\u201d thus setting\nJonah, who preached repentance to the single city of Nineveh, before\nJesus, who has preached repentance to the whole world, and with much\ngreater results. He would have us to regard as God a man who, by a\nstrange miracle, passed three days and three nights in the whale\u2019s\nbelly; and he is unwilling that He who submitted to death for the sake\nof men, He to whom God bore testimony through the prophets, and who has\ndone great things in heaven and earth, should receive on that ground\nhonour second only to that which is given to the Most High God.\nMoreover, Jonah was swallowed by the whale for refusing to preach as God\nhad commanded him; while Jesus suffered death for men after He had given\nthe instructions which God wished Him to give. Still further, he adds\nthat Daniel rescued from the lions is more worthy of our adoration than\nJesus, who subdued the fierceness of every opposing power, and gave to\nus \u201cauthority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power\nof the enemy.\u201d[1550] Finally, having no other names to offer us, he\nadds, \u201cand others of a still more monstrous kind,\u201d\u2014thus casting a slight\nupon both Jonah and Daniel; for the spirit which is in Celsus cannot\nspeak well of the righteous.\n\nFootnote 1550:\n\n Luke x. 19.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVIII.\n\n\nLet us now consider what follows. \u201cThey have also,\u201d says he, \u201ca precept\nto this effect, that we ought not to avenge ourselves on one who injures\nus, or, as he expresses it, \u2018Whosoever shall strike thee on the one\ncheek, turn to him the other also.\u2019 This is an ancient saying, which had\nbeen admirably expressed long before, and which they have only reported\nin a coarser way. For Plato introduces Socrates conversing with Crito as\nfollows: \u2018Must we never do injustice to any?\u2019 \u2018Certainly not.\u2019 \u2018And\nsince we must never do injustice, must we not return injustice for an\ninjustice that has been done to us, as most people think?\u2019 \u2018It seems to\nme that we should not.\u2019 \u2018But tell me, Crito, may we do evil to any one\nor not?\u2019 \u2018Certainly not, O Socrates.\u2019 \u2018Well, is it just, as is commonly\nsaid, for one who has suffered wrong to do wrong in return, or is it\nunjust?\u2019 \u2018It is unjust. Yes; for to do harm to a man is the same as to\ndo him injustice.\u2019 \u2018You speak truly. We must then not do injustice in\nreturn for injustice, nor must we do evil to any one, whatever evil we\nmay have suffered from him.\u2019 Thus Plato speaks; and he adds, \u2018Consider,\nthen, whether you are at one with me, and whether, starting from this\nprinciple, we may not come to the conclusion that it is never right to\ndo injustice, even in return for an injustice which has been received;\nor whether, on the other hand, you differ from me, and do not admit the\nprinciple from which we started. That has always been my opinion, and is\nso still.\u2019[1551] Such are the sentiments of Plato, and indeed they were\nheld by divine men before his time. But let this suffice as one example\nof the way in which this and other truths have been borrowed and\ncorrupted. Any one who wishes can easily by searching find more of\nthem.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1551:\n\n Plato\u2019s _Crito_, p. 49.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIX.\n\n\nWhen Celsus here or elsewhere finds himself unable to dispute the truth\nof what we say, but avers that the same things were said by the Greeks,\nour answer is, that if the doctrine be sound, and the effect of it good,\nwhether it was made known to the Greeks by Plato or any of the wise men\nof Greece, or whether it was delivered to the Jews by Moses or any of\nthe prophets, or whether it was given to the Christians in the recorded\nteaching of Jesus Christ, or in the instructions of His apostles, that\ndoes not affect the value of the truth communicated. It is no objection\nto the principles of Jews or Christians, that the same things were also\nsaid by the Greeks, especially if it be proved that the writings of the\nJews are older than those of the Greeks. And further, we are not to\nimagine that a truth adorned with the graces of Grecian speech is\nnecessarily better than the same when expressed in the more humble and\nunpretending language used by Jews and Christians, although indeed the\nlanguage of the Jews, in which the prophets wrote the books which have\ncome down to us, has a grace of expression peculiar to the genius of the\nHebrew tongue. And even if we were required to show that the same\ndoctrines have been better expressed among the Jewish prophets or in\nChristian writings, however paradoxical it may seem, we are prepared to\nprove this by an illustration taken from different kinds of food, and\nfrom the different modes of preparing them. Suppose that a kind of food\nwhich is wholesome and nutritious has been prepared and seasoned in such\na way as to be fit, not for the simple tastes of peasants and poor\nlabourers, but for those only who are rich and dainty in their tastes.\nSuppose, again, that that same food is prepared not to suit the tastes\nof the more delicate, but for the peasants, the poor labourers, and the\ncommon people generally, in short, so that myriads of persons might eat\nof it. Now if, according to the supposition, the food prepared in the\none way promotes the health of those only who are styled the better\nclasses, while none of the others could taste it, whereas when prepared\nin the other way it promoted the health of great multitudes of men,\nwhich shall we esteem as most contributing to the public welfare,\u2014those\nwho prepare food for persons of mark, or those who prepare it for the\nmultitudes?\u2014taking for granted that in both cases the food is equally\nwholesome and nourishing; while it is evident that the welfare of\nmankind and the common good are promoted better by that physician who\nattends to the health of the many, than by one who confines his\nattention to a few.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LX.\n\n\nNow, after understanding this illustration, we have to apply it to the\nqualities of spiritual food with which the rational part of man is\nnourished. See, then, if Plato and the wise men among the Greeks, in the\nbeautiful things they say, are not like those physicians who confine\ntheir attentions to what are called the better classes of society, and\ndespise the multitude; whereas the prophets among the Jews, and the\ndisciples of Jesus, who despise mere elegances of style, and what is\ncalled in Scripture \u201cthe wisdom of men,\u201d \u201cthe wisdom according to the\nflesh,\u201d which delights in what is obscure, resemble those who study to\nprovide the most wholesome food for the largest number of persons. For\nthis purpose they adapt their language and style to the capacities of\nthe common people, and avoid whatever would seem foreign to them, lest\nby the introduction of strange forms of expression they should produce a\ndistaste for their teaching. Indeed, if the true use of spiritual food,\nto keep up the figure, is to produce in him who partakes of it the\nvirtues of patience and gentleness, must that discourse not be better\nprepared when it produces patience and gentleness in multitudes, or\nmakes them grow in these virtues, than that which confines its effects\nto a select few, supposing that it does really make them gentle and\npatient? If a Greek wished by wholesome instruction to benefit people\nwho understood only Egyptian or Syriac, the first thing that he would do\nwould be to learn their language; and he would rather pass for a\nbarbarian among the Greeks, by speaking as the Egyptians or Syrians, in\norder to be useful to them, than always remain Greek, and be without the\nmeans of helping them. In the same way the divine nature, having the\npurpose of instructing not only those who are reputed to be learned in\nthe literature of Greece, but also the rest of mankind, accommodated\nitself to the capacities of the simple multitudes whom it addressed. It\nseeks to win the attention of the more ignorant by the use of language\nwhich is familiar to them, so that they may easily be induced, after\ntheir first introduction, to strive after an acquaintance with the\ndeeper truths which lie hidden in Scripture. For even the ordinary\nreader of Scripture may see that it contains many things which are too\ndeep to be apprehended at first; but these are understood by such as\ndevote themselves to a careful study of the divine word, and they become\nplain to them in proportion to the pains and zeal which they expend upon\nits investigation.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXI.\n\n\nFrom these remarks it is evident, that when Jesus said \u201ccoarsely,\u201d as\nCelsus terms it, \u201cTo him who shall strike thee on the one cheek, turn\nthe other also; and if any man be minded to sue thee at the law, and\ntake away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also,\u201d[1552] He expressed\nHimself in such a way as to make the precept have more practical effect\nthan the words of Plato in the _Crito_; for the latter is so far from\nbeing intelligible to ordinary persons, that even those have a\ndifficulty in understanding him, who have been brought up in the schools\nof learning, and have been initiated into the famous philosophy of\nGreece. It may also be observed, that the precept enjoining patience\nunder injuries is in no way corrupted or degraded by the plain and\nsimple language which our Lord employs, but that in this, as in other\ncases, it is a mere calumny against our religion which he utters when he\nsays: \u201cBut let this suffice as one example of the way in which this and\nother truths have been borrowed and corrupted. Any one who wishes can\neasily by searching find more of them.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1552:\n\n Matt. v. 39, 40.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXII.\n\n\nLet us now see what follows. \u201cLet us pass on,\u201d says he, \u201cto another\npoint. They cannot tolerate temples, altars, or images. In this they are\nlike the Scythians, the nomadic tribes of Libya, the Seres who worship\nno god, and some other of the most barbarous and impious nations in the\nworld. That the Persians hold the same notions is shown by Herodotus in\nthese words: \u2018I know that among the Persians it is considered unlawful\nto erect images, altars, or temples; but they charge those with folly\nwho do so, because, as I conjecture, they do not, like the Greeks,\nsuppose the gods to be of the nature of men.\u2019[1553] Heraclitus also says\nin one place: \u2018Persons who address prayers to these images act like\nthose who speak to the walls, without knowing who the gods or the heroes\nare.\u2019 And what wiser lesson have they to teach us than Heraclitus? He\ncertainly plainly enough implies that it is a foolish thing for a man to\noffer prayers to images, whilst he knows not who the gods and heroes\nare. This is the opinion of Heraclitus; but as for them, they go\nfurther, and despise without exception all images. If they merely mean\nthat the stone, wood, brass, or gold which has been wrought by this or\nthat workman cannot be a god, they are ridiculous with their wisdom. For\nwho, unless he be utterly childish in his simplicity, can take these for\ngods, and not for offerings consecrated to the service of the gods, or\nimages representing them? But if we are not to regard these as\nrepresenting the Divine Being, seeing that God has a different form, as\nthe Persians concur with them in saying, then let them take care that\nthey do not contradict themselves; for they say that God made man His\nown image, and that He gave him a form like to Himself. However, they\nwill admit that these images, whether they are like or not, are made and\ndedicated to the honour of certain beings. But they will hold that the\nbeings to whom they are dedicated are not gods, but demons, and that a\nworshipper of God ought not to worship demons.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1553:\n\n Herod. i. 131.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIII.\n\n\nTo this our answer is, that if the Scythians, the nomadic tribes of\nLibya, the Seres, who according to Celsus have no god, if those other\nmost barbarous and impious nations in the world, and if the Persians\neven cannot bear the sight of temples, altars, and images, it does not\nfollow because we cannot suffer them any more than they, that the\ngrounds on which we object to them are the same as theirs. We must\ninquire into the principles on which the objection to temples and images\nis founded, in order that we may approve of those who object on sound\nprinciples, and condemn those whose principles are false. For one and\nthe same thing may be done for different reasons. For example, the\nphilosophers who follow Zeno of Citium abstain from committing adultery,\nthe followers of Epicurus do so too, as well as others again who do so\non no philosophical principles; but observe what different reasons\ndetermine the conduct of these different classes. The first consider the\ninterests of society, and hold it to be forbidden by nature that a man\nwho is a reasonable being should corrupt a woman whom the laws have\nalready given to another, and should thus break up the household of\nanother man. The Epicureans do not reason in this way; but if they\nabstain from adultery, it is because, regarding pleasure as the chief\nend of man, they perceive that one who gives himself up to adultery,\nencounters for the sake of this one pleasure a multitude of obstacles to\npleasure, such as imprisonment, exile, and death itself. They often,\nindeed, run considerable risk at the outset, while watching for the\ndeparture from the house of the master and those in his interest. So\nthat, supposing it possible for a man to commit adultery, and escape the\nknowledge of the husband, of his servants, and of others whose esteem he\nwould forfeit, then the Epicurean would yield to the commission of the\ncrime for the sake of pleasure. The man of no philosophical system,\nagain, who abstains from adultery when the opportunity comes to him,\ndoes so generally from dread of the law and its penalties, and not for\nthe sake of enjoying a greater number of other pleasures. You see, then,\nthat an act which passes for being one and the same\u2014namely, abstinence\nfrom adultery\u2014is not the same, but differs in different men according to\nthe motives which actuate it: one man refraining for sound reasons,\nanother for such bad and impious ones as those of the Epicurean, and the\ncommon person of whom we have spoken.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIV.\n\n\nAs, then, this act of self-restraint, which in appearance is one and the\nsame, is found in fact to be different in different persons, according\nto the principles and motives which lead to it; so in the same way with\nthose who cannot allow in the worship of the Divine Being altars, or\ntemples, or images. The Scythians, the nomadic Libyans, the godless\nSeres, and the Persians, agree in this with the Christians and Jews, but\nthey are actuated by very different principles. For none of these former\nabhor altars and images on the ground that they are afraid of degrading\nthe worship of God, and reducing it to the worship of material things\nwrought by the hands of men. Neither do they object to them from a\nbelief that the demons choose certain forms and places, whether because\nthey are detained there by virtue of certain charms, or because for some\nother possible reason they have selected these haunts, where they may\npursue their criminal pleasures, in partaking of the smoke of\nsacrificial victims. But Christians and Jews have regard to this\ncommand, \u201cThou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and serve Him alone;\u201d[1554]\nand this other, \u201cThou shalt have no other gods before me: thou shalt not\nmake unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in\nheaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water\nunder the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve\nthem;\u201d[1555] and again, \u201cThou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him\nonly shalt thou serve.\u201d[1556] It is in consideration of these and many\nother such commands, that they not only avoid temples, altars, and\nimages, but are ready to suffer death when it is necessary, rather than\ndebase by any such impiety the conception which they have of the Most\nHigh God.\n\nFootnote 1554:\n\n Deut. vi. 13.\n\nFootnote 1555:\n\n Ex. xx. 3, 4.\n\nFootnote 1556:\n\n Matt. iv. 10.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXV.\n\n\nIn regard to the Persians, we have already said that though they do not\nbuild temples, yet they worship the sun and the other works of God. This\nis forbidden to us, for we have been taught not to worship the creature\ninstead of the Creator, but to know that \u201cthe creation shall be\ndelivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory\nof the children of God;\u201d and \u201cthe earnest expectation of the creation is\nwaiting for the revelation of the sons of God;\u201d and \u201cthe creation was\nmade subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who made it\nsubject, in hope.\u201d[1557] We believe, therefore, that things \u201cunder the\nbondage of corruption,\u201d and \u201csubject to vanity,\u201d which remain in this\ncondition \u201cin hope\u201d of a better state, ought not in our worship to hold\nthe place of God, the all-sufficient, and of His Son, the first-born of\nall creation. Let this suffice, in addition to what we have already said\nof the Persians, who abhor altars and images, but who serve the creature\ninstead of the Creator. As to the passage quoted by Celsus from\nHeraclitus, the purport of which he represents as being, \u201cthat it is\nchildish folly for one to offer prayers to images, whilst he knows not\nwho the gods and heroes are,\u201d we may reply that it is easy to know that\nGod and the only-begotten Son of God, and those whom God has honoured\nwith the title of God, and who partake of His divine nature, are very\ndifferent from all the gods of the nations which are demons; but it is\nnot possible at the same time to know God and to address prayers to\nimages.\n\nFootnote 1557:\n\n Rom. viii. 19-21.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVI.\n\n\nAnd the charge of folly applies not only to those who offer prayers to\nimages, but also to such as pretend to do so in compliance with the\nexample of the multitude: and to this class belong the Peripatetic\nphilosophers and the followers of Epicurus and Democritus. For there is\nno falsehood or pretence in the soul which is possessed with true piety\ntowards God. Another reason also why we abstain from doing honour to\nimages, is that we may give no support to the notion that the images are\ngods. It is on this ground that we condemn Celsus, and all others who,\nwhile admitting that they are not gods, yet, with the reputation of\nbeing wise men, render to them what passes for homage. In this way they\nlead into sin the multitude who follow their example, and who worship\nthese images not simply out of deference to custom, but from a belief\ninto which they have fallen that they are true gods, and that those are\nnot to be listened to who hold that the objects of their worship are not\ntrue gods. Celsus, indeed, says that \u201cthey do not take them for gods,\nbut only as offerings dedicated to the gods.\u201d But he does not prove that\nthey are not rather dedicated to men than, as he says, to the honour of\nthe gods themselves; for it is clear that they are the offerings of men\nwho were in error in their views of the Divine Being. Moreover, we do\nnot imagine that these images are representations of God, for they\ncannot represent a being who is invisible and incorporeal. But as Celsus\nsupposes that we fall into a contradiction, whilst on the one hand we\nsay that God has not a human form, and on the other we profess to\nbelieve that God made man the image of Himself, and created man the\nimage of God; our answer is the same as has been given already, that we\nhold the resemblance to God to be preserved in the reasonable soul,\nwhich is formed to virtue, although Celsus, who does not see the\ndifference between \u201cbeing the image of God,\u201d and \u201cbeing created after\nthe image of God,\u201d pretends that we said, \u201cGod made man His own image,\nand gave him a form like to His own.\u201d But this also has been examined\nbefore.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVII.\n\n\nHis next remark upon the Christians is: \u201cThey will admit that these\nimages, whether they are like or not, are made and dedicated to the\nhonour of certain beings; but they will hold that the beings to whom\nthey are dedicated are not gods, but demons, and that a worshipper of\nGod ought not to worship demons.\u201d If he had been acquainted with the\nnature of demons, and with their several operations, whether led on to\nthem by the conjurations of those who are skilled in the art, or urged\non by their own inclination to act according to their power and\ninclination; if, I say, he had thoroughly understood this subject, which\nis both wide in extent and difficult for human comprehension, he would\nnot have condemned us for saying that those who worship the Supreme\nBeing should not serve demons. For ourselves, so far are we from wishing\nto serve demons, that by the use of prayers and other means which we\nlearn from Scripture, we drive them out of the souls of men, out of\nplaces where they have established themselves, and even sometimes from\nthe bodies of animals; for even these creatures often suffer from\ninjuries inflicted upon them by demons.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVIII.\n\n\nAfter all that we have already said concerning Jesus, it would be a\nuseless repetition for us to answer these words of Celsus: \u201cIt is easy\nto convict them of worshipping not a god, not even demons, but a dead\nperson.\u201d Leaving, then, this objection for the reason assigned, let us\npass on to what follows: \u201cIn the first place, I would ask why we are not\nto serve demons? Is it not true that all things are ordered according to\nGod\u2019s will, and that His providence governs all things? Is not\neverything which happens in the universe, whether it be the work of God,\nof angels, of other demons, or of heroes, regulated by the law of the\nMost High God? Have these not had assigned them various departments of\nwhich they were severally deemed worthy? Is it not just, therefore, that\nhe who worships God should serve those also to whom God has assigned\nsuch power? Yet it is impossible, he says, for a man to serve many\nmasters.\u201d Observe here again how he settles at once a number of\nquestions which require considerable research, and a profound\nacquaintance with what is most mysterious in the government of the\nuniverse. For we must inquire into the meaning of the statement, that\n\u201call things are ordered according to God\u2019s will,\u201d and ascertain whether\nsins are or are not included among the things which God orders. For if\nGod\u2019s government extends to sins not only in men, but also in demons and\nin any other spiritual beings who are capable of sin, it is for those\nwho speak in this manner to see how inconvenient is the expression that\n\u201call things are ordered by the will of God.\u201d For it follows from it that\nall sins and all their consequences are ordered by the will of God,\nwhich is a different thing from saying that they come to pass with God\u2019s\npermission. For if we take the word \u201cordered\u201d in its proper\nsignification, and say that \u201call the results of sin were ordered,\u201d then\nit is evident that all things are ordered according to God\u2019s will, and\nthat all, therefore, who do evil do not offend against His government.\nAnd the same distinction holds in regard to \u201cprovidence.\u201d When we say\nthat \u201cthe providence of God regulates all things,\u201d we utter a great\ntruth if we attribute to that providence nothing but what is just and\nright. But if we ascribe to the providence of God all things whatsoever,\nhowever unjust they may be, then it is no longer true that the\nprovidence of God regulates all things, unless we refer directly to\nGod\u2019s providence things which flow as results from His arrangements.\nCelsus maintains also, that \u201cwhatever happens in the universe, whether\nit be the work of God, of angels, of other demons, or of heroes, is\nregulated by the law of the Most High God.\u201d But this also is incorrect;\nfor we cannot say that transgressors follow the law of God when they\ntransgress; and Scripture declares that it is not only wicked men who\nare transgressors, but also wicked demons and wicked angels.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIX.\n\n\nAnd it is not we alone who speak of wicked demons, but almost all who\nacknowledge the existence of demons. Thus, then, it is not true that all\nobserve the law of the Most High; for all who fall away from the divine\nlaw, whether through heedlessness, or through depravity and vice, or\nthrough ignorance of what is right, all such do not keep the law of God,\nbut, to use a new phrase which we find in Scripture, \u201cthe law of sin.\u201d I\nsay, then, that in the opinion of most of those who believe in the\nexistence of demons, some of them are wicked; and these, instead of\nkeeping the law of God, offend against it. But, according to our belief,\nit is true of all demons, that they were not demons originally, but they\nbecame so in departing from the true way; so that the name \u201cdemons\u201d is\ngiven to those beings who have fallen away from God. Accordingly, those\nwho worship God must not serve demons. We may also learn the true nature\nof demons if we consider the practice of those who call upon them by\ncharms to prevent certain things, or for many other purposes. For this\nis the method they adopt, in order by means of incantations and magical\narts to invoke the demons, and induce them to further their wishes.\nWherefore the worship of all demons would be inconsistent in us who\nworship the supreme God; and the service of demons is the service of\nso-called gods, for \u201call the gods of the heathen are demons.\u201d[1558] The\nsame thing also appears from the fact that the dedication of the most\nfamous of the so-called sacred places, whether temples or statues, was\naccompanied by curious magical incantations, which were performed by\nthose who zealously served the demons with magical arts. Hence we are\ndetermined to avoid the worship of demons even as we would avoid death;\nand we hold that the worship, which is supposed among the Greeks to be\nrendered to gods at the altars, and images, and temples, is in reality\noffered to demons.\n\nFootnote 1558:\n\n Ps. xcvi. 5 (LXX.).\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXX.\n\n\nHis next remark was, \u201cHave not these inferior powers had assigned to\nthem by God different departments, according as each was deemed worthy?\u201d\nBut this is a question which requires a very profound knowledge. For we\nmust determine whether the Word of God, who governs all things, has\nappointed wicked demons for certain employments, in the same way as in\nstates executioners are appointed, and other officers with cruel but\nneedful duties to discharge; or whether as among robbers, who infest\ndesert places, it is customary for them to choose out of their number\none who may be their leader,\u2014so the demons, who are scattered as it were\nin troops in different parts of the earth, have chosen for themselves a\nchief under whose command they may plunder and pillage the souls of men.\nTo explain this fully, and to justify the conduct of the Christians in\nrefusing homage to any object except the Most High God, and the\nFirst-born of all creation, who is His Word and God, we must quote this\nfrom Scripture, \u201cAll that ever came before me are thieves and robbers;\nbut the sheep did not hear them;\u201d and again, \u201cThe thief cometh not but\nfor to steal, and to kill, and to destroy;\u201d[1559] and other similar\npassages, as, \u201cBehold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents\nand scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy; and nothing shall by\nany means hurt you;\u201d[1560] and again, \u201cThou shalt tread upon the lion\nand adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under\nfeet.\u201d[1561] But of these things Celsus knew nothing, or he would not\nhave made use of language like this: \u201cIs not everything which happens in\nthe universe, whether it be the work of God, of angels, of other demons,\nor of heroes, regulated by the law of the Most High God? Have these not\nhad assigned to them various departments of which they were severally\ndeemed worthy? Is it not just, therefore, that he who serves God should\nserve those also to whom God has assigned such power?\u201d To which he adds,\n\u201cIt is impossible, they say, for a man to serve many masters.\u201d This last\npoint we must postpone to the next book; for this, which is the seventh\nbook which we have written in answer to the treatise of Celsus, is\nalready of sufficient length.\n\nFootnote 1559:\n\n John x. 8-10.\n\nFootnote 1560:\n\n Luke x. 19.\n\nFootnote 1561:\n\n Ps. xci. 13.\n\n\n\n\n BOOK VIII.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter I.\n\n\nHaving completed seven books, I now propose to begin the eighth. And may\nGod and His only-begotten Son the Word be with us, to enable us\neffectively to refute the falsehoods which Celsus has published under\nthe delusive title of _A True Discourse_, and at the same time to unfold\nthe truths of Christianity with such fulness as our purpose requires.\nAnd as Paul said, \u201cWe are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did\nbeseech you by us,\u201d[1562] so would we in the same spirit and language\nearnestly desire to be ambassadors for Christ to men, even as the Word\nof God beseeches them to the love of Himself, seeking to win over to\nrighteousness, truth, and the other virtues, those who, until they\nreceive the doctrines of Jesus Christ, live in darkness about God and in\nignorance of their Creator. Again, then, I would say, may God bestow\nupon us His pure and true Word, even \u201cthe Lord strong and mighty in\nbattle\u201d[1563] against sin. We must now proceed to state the next\nobjection of Celsus, and afterwards to answer it.\n\nFootnote 1562:\n\n 2 Cor. v. 20.\n\nFootnote 1563:\n\n Ps. xxiv. 8.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter II.\n\n\nIn a passage previously quoted Celsus asks us why we do not worship\ndemons, and to his remarks on demons we gave such an answer as seemed to\nus in accordance with the divine word. After having put this question\nfor the purpose of leading us to the worship of demons, he represents us\nas answering that it is impossible to serve many masters. \u201cThis,\u201d he\ngoes on to say, \u201cis the language of sedition, and is only used by those\nwho separate themselves and stand aloof from all human society. Those\nwho speak in this way ascribe,\u201d as he supposes, \u201ctheir own feelings and\npassions to God. It does hold true among men, that he who is in the\nservice of one master cannot well serve another, because the service\nwhich he renders to the one interferes with that which he owes to the\nother; and no one, therefore, who has already engaged himself to the\nservice of one, must accept that of another. And, in like manner, it is\nimpossible to serve at the same time heroes or demons of different\nnatures. But in regard to God, who is subject to no suffering or loss,\nit is,\u201d he thinks, \u201cabsurd to be on our guard against serving more gods,\nas though we had to do with demi-gods, or other spirits of that sort.\u201d\nHe says also, \u201cHe who serves many gods does that which is pleasing to\nthe Most High, because he honours that which belongs to Him.\u201d And he\nadds, \u201cIt is indeed wrong to give honour to any to whom God has not\ngiven honour.\u201d \u201cWherefore,\u201d he says, \u201cin honouring and worshipping all\nbelonging to God, we will not displease Him to whom they all belong.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter III.\n\n\nBefore proceeding to the next point, it may be well for us to see\nwhether we do not accept with approval the saying, \u201cNo man can serve two\nmasters,\u201d with the addition, \u201cfor either he will hate the one, and love\nthe other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other,\u201d and\nfurther, \u201cYe cannot serve God and mammon.\u201d[1564] The defence of this\npassage will lead us to a deeper and more searching inquiry into the\nmeaning and application of the words \u201cgods\u201d and \u201clords.\u201d Divine\nScripture teaches us that there is \u201ca great Lord above all gods.\u201d[1565]\nAnd by this name \u201cgods\u201d we are not to understand the objects of heathen\nworship (for we know that \u201call the gods of the heathen are\ndemons\u201d[1566]), but the gods mentioned by the prophets as forming an\nassembly, whom God \u201cjudges,\u201d and to each of whom He assigns his proper\nwork. For \u201cGod standeth in the assembly of the gods: He judgeth among\nthe gods.\u201d[1567] For \u201cGod is Lord of gods,\u201d who by His Son \u201chath called\nthe earth from the rising of the sun unto the going down thereof.\u201d[1568]\nWe are also commanded to \u201cgive thanks to the God of gods.\u201d[1569]\nMoreover, we are taught that \u201cGod is not the God of the dead, but of the\nliving.\u201d[1570] Nor are these the only passages to this effect; but there\nare very many others.\n\nFootnote 1564:\n\n Matt. vi. 24.\n\nFootnote 1565:\n\n Ps. xcvii. 9.\n\nFootnote 1566:\n\n Ps. xcvi. 5.\n\nFootnote 1567:\n\n Ps. lxxxii. 1.\n\nFootnote 1568:\n\n Ps. l. 1.\n\nFootnote 1569:\n\n Ps. cxxxvi. 2.\n\nFootnote 1570:\n\n Matt. xxii. 32.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IV.\n\n\nThe sacred Scriptures teach us to think, in like manner, of the Lord of\nlords. For they say in one place, \u201cGive thanks to the God of gods, for\nHis mercy endureth for ever. Give thanks to the Lord of lords, for His\nmercy endureth for ever;\u201d and in another, \u201cGod is King of kings, and\nLord of lords.\u201d For Scripture distinguishes between those gods which are\nsuch only in name and those which are truly gods, whether they are\ncalled by that name or not; and the same is true in regard to the use of\nthe word \u201clords.\u201d To this effect Paul says, \u201cFor though there be that\nare called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, as there are gods many,\nand lords many.\u201d[1571] But as the God of gods calls whom He pleases\nthrough Jesus to his inheritance, \u201cfrom the east and from the west,\u201d and\nthe Christ of God thus shows His superiority to all rulers by entering\ninto their several provinces, and summoning men out of them to be\nsubject to Himself, Paul therefore, with this in view, goes on to say,\n\u201cBut to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and\none Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him;\u201d adding,\nas if with a deep sense of the marvellous and mysterious nature of the\ndoctrine, \u201cHowbeit, there is not in every man that knowledge.\u201d When he\nsays, \u201cTo us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things;\nand one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things,\u201d by \u201cus\u201d he means\nhimself and all those who have risen up to the supreme God of gods and\nto the supreme Lord of lords. Now he has risen to the supreme God who\ngives Him an entire and undivided worship through His Son\u2014the word and\nwisdom of God made manifest in Jesus. For it is the Son alone who leads\nto God those who are striving, by the purity of their thoughts, words,\nand deeds, to come near to God the Creator of the universe. I think,\ntherefore, that the prince of this world, who \u201ctransforms himself into\nan angel of light,\u201d[1572] was referring to this and such like statements\nin the words, \u201cHim follows a host of gods and demons, arranged in eleven\nbands.\u201d Speaking of himself and the philosophers, he says, \u201cWe are of\nthe party of Jupiter; others belong to other demons.\u201d[1573]\n\nFootnote 1571:\n\n 1 Cor. viii. 5, etc.\n\nFootnote 1572:\n\n 2 Cor. xi. 14.\n\nFootnote 1573:\n\n Plato, _Ph\u00e6drus_, p. 246.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter V.\n\n\nWhilst there are thus many gods and lords, whereof some are such in\nreality, and others are such only in name, we strive to rise not only\nabove those whom the nations of the earth worship as gods, but also\nbeyond those spoken of as gods in Scripture, of whom they are wholly\nignorant who are strangers to the covenants of God given by Moses and by\nour Saviour Jesus, and who have no part in the promises which He has\nmade to us through them. That man rises above all demon-worship who does\nnothing that is pleasing to demons; and he rises to a blessedness beyond\nthat of those whom Paul calls \u201cgods,\u201d if he is enabled, like them, or in\nany way he may, \u201cto look not at the things which are seen, but at the\nthings which are unseen.\u201d And he who considers that \u201cthe earnest\nexpectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of\nGod, not willingly, but by reason of him who subjected the same in\nhope,\u201d whilst he praises the creature, and sees how \u201cit shall be freed\naltogether from the bondage of corruption, and restored to the glorious\nliberty of the children of God,\u201d[1574]\u2014such a one cannot be induced to\ncombine with the service of God the service of any other, or to serve\ntwo masters. There is therefore nothing seditious or factious in the\nlanguage of those who hold these views, and who refuse to serve more\nmasters than one. To them Jesus Christ is an all-sufficient Lord, who\nHimself instructs them, in order that when fully instructed He may form\nthem into a kingdom worthy of God, and present them to God the Father.\nBut indeed they do in a sense separate themselves and stand aloof from\nthose who are aliens from the commonwealth of God and strangers to His\ncovenants, in order that they may live as citizens of heaven, \u201ccoming to\nthe living God, and to the city of God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to\nan innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of\nthe first-born, which are written in heaven.\u201d[1575]\n\nFootnote 1574:\n\n Rom. viii. 19, 20.\n\nFootnote 1575:\n\n Heb. xii. 22, 23.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VI.\n\n\nBut when we refuse to serve any other than God through His word and\nwisdom, we do so, not as though we would thereby be doing any harm or\ninjury to God, in the same way as injury would be done to a man by his\nservant entering into the service of another, but we fear that we\nourselves should suffer harm by depriving ourselves of our portion in\nGod, through which we live in the participation of the divine\nblessedness, and are imbued with that excellent spirit of adoption which\nin the sons of the heavenly Father cries, not with words, but with deep\neffect in the inmost heart, \u201cAbba, Father.\u201d The Laced\u00e6monian\nambassadors, when brought before the king of Persia, refused to\nprostrate themselves before him, when the attendants endeavoured to\ncompel them to do so, out of respect for that which alone had authority\nand lordship over them, namely, the law of Lycurgus.[1576] But they who\nhave a much greater and diviner embassy in \u201cbeing ambassadors for\nChrist\u201d should not worship any ruler among Persians, or Greeks, or\nEgyptians, or of any nation whatever, even although their officers and\nministers, demons and angels of the devil, should seek to compel them to\ndo so, and should urge them to set at nought a law which is mightier\nthan all the laws upon earth. For the Lord of those who are \u201cambassadors\nfor Christ\u201d is Christ Himself, whose ambassadors they are, and who is\n\u201cthe Word, who was in the beginning, was with God, and was God.\u201d[1577]\n\nFootnote 1576:\n\n Herod. vii. 136.\n\nFootnote 1577:\n\n John i. 1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VII.\n\n\nBut when Celsus speaks of heroes and demons, he starts a deeper question\nthan he is aware of. For after the statement which he made in regard to\nservice among men, that \u201cthe first master is injured when any of his\nservants wishes at the same time to serve another,\u201d he adds, that \u201cthe\nsame holds true of heroes, and other demons of that kind.\u201d Now we must\ninquire of him what nature he thinks those heroes and demons possess of\nwhom he affirms that he who serves one hero may not serve another, and\nhe who serves one demon may not serve another, as though the former hero\nor demon would be injured in the same way as men are injured when they\nwho serve them first afterwards give themselves to the service of\nothers. Let him also state what loss he supposes those heroes or demons\nwill suffer. For he will be driven either to plunge into endless\nabsurdities, and first repeat, then retract his previous statements; or\nelse to abandon his frivolous conjectures, and confess that he\nunderstands nothing of the nature of heroes and demons. And in regard to\nhis statement, that men suffer injury when the servant of one man enters\nthe service of a second master, the question arises: \u201cWhat is the nature\nof the injury which is done to the former master by a servant who, while\nserving him, wishes at the same time to serve another?\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter VIII.\n\n\nFor if he answers, as one who is unlearned and ignorant of philosophy,\nthat the injury sustained is one which regards things that are outside\nof us, it will be plainly manifest that he knows nothing of that famous\nsaying of Socrates, \u201cAnytus and Melitus may kill me, but they cannot\ninjure me; for it is impossible that the better should ever be injured\nby the worse.\u201d But if by injury he means a wicked impulse or an evil\nhabit, it is plain that no injury of this kind would befall the wise, by\none man serving two wise men in different places. If this sense does not\nsuit his purpose, it is evident that his endeavours are vain to weaken\nthe authority of the passage, \u201cNo man can serve two masters;\u201d for these\nwords can be perfectly true only when they refer to the service which we\nrender to the Most High through His Son, who leadeth us to God. And we\nwill not serve God as though He stood in need of our service, or as\nthough He would be made unhappy if we ceased to serve Him; but we do it\nbecause we are ourselves benefited by the service of God, and because we\nare freed from griefs and troubles by serving the Most High God through\nHis only begotten Son, the Word and Wisdom.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter IX.\n\n\nAnd observe the recklessness of that expression, \u201cFor if thou worship\nany other of the things in the universe,\u201d as though he would have us\nbelieve that we are led by our service of God to the worship of any\nother things which belong to God, without any injury to ourselves. But,\nas if feeling his error, he corrects the words, \u201cIf thou worship any\nother of the things in the universe,\u201d by adding, \u201cWe may honour none,\nhowever, except those to whom that right has been given by God.\u201d And we\nwould put to Celsus this question in regard to those who are honoured as\ngods, as demons, or as heroes: \u201cNow, sir, can you prove that the right\nto be honoured has been given to these by God, and that it has not\narisen from the ignorance and folly of men who in their wanderings have\nfallen away from Him to whom alone worship and service are properly due?\nYou said a little ago, O Celsus, that Antinous, the favourite of Adrian,\nis honoured; but surely you will not say that the right to be worshipped\nas a god was given to him by the God of the universe? And so of the\nothers, we ask proof that the right to be worshipped was given to them\nby the Most High God.\u201d But if the same question is put to us in regard\nto the worship of Jesus, we will show that the right to be honoured was\ngiven to Him by God, \u201cthat all may honour the Son, even as they honour\nthe Father.\u201d[1578] For all the prophecies which preceded His birth were\npreparations for His worship. And the wonders which He wrought\u2014through\nno magical art, as Celsus supposes, but by a divine power, which was\nforetold by the prophets\u2014have served as a testimony from God in behalf\nof the worship of Christ. He who honours the Son, who is the Word and\nReason, acts in nowise contrary to reason, and gains for himself great\ngood; he who honours Him, who is the Truth, becomes better by honouring\ntruth: and this we may say of honouring wisdom, righteousness, and all\nthe other names by which the sacred Scriptures are wont to designate the\nSon of God.\n\nFootnote 1578:\n\n John v. 23.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter X.\n\n\nBut that the honour which we pay to the Son of God, as well as that\nwhich we render to God the Father, consists of an upright course of\nlife, is plainly taught us by the passage, \u201cThou that makest thy boast\nof the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?\u201d[1579] and\nalso, \u201cOf how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought\nworthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the\nblood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and\nhath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?\u201d[1580] For if he who\ntransgresses the law dishonours God by his transgression, and he who\ntreads under foot the word treads under foot the Son of God, it is\nevident that he who keeps the law honours God, and that the worshipper\nof God is he whose life is regulated by the principles and precepts of\nthe divine word. Had Celsus known who they are who are God\u2019s people, and\nthat they alone are wise,\u2014and who they are who are strangers to God, and\nthat these are all the wicked who have no desire to give themselves to\nvirtue,\u2014he would have considered before he gave expression to the words,\n\u201cHow can he who honours any of those whom God acknowledges as His own be\ndispleasing to God, to whom they all belong?\u201d\n\nFootnote 1579:\n\n Rom. ii. 23.\n\nFootnote 1580:\n\n Heb. x. 29.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XI.\n\n\nHe adds, \u201cAnd indeed he who, when speaking of God, asserts that there is\nonly one who may be called Lord, speaks impiously, for he divides the\nkingdom of God, and raises a sedition therein, implying that there are\nseparate factions in the divine kingdom, and that there exists one who\nis His enemy.\u201d He might speak after this fashion, if he could prove by\nconclusive arguments that those who are worshipped as gods by the\nheathens are truly gods, and not merely evil spirits, which are supposed\nto haunt statues and temples and altars. But we desire not only to\nunderstand the nature of that divine kingdom of which we are continually\nspeaking and writing, but also ourselves to be of those who are under\nthe rule of God alone, so that the kingdom of God may be ours. Celsus,\nhowever, who teaches us to worship many gods, ought in consistency not\nto speak of \u201cthe kingdom of God,\u201d but of \u201cthe kingdom of the gods.\u201d\nThere are therefore no factions in the kingdom of God, nor is there any\ngod who is an adversary to Him, although there are some who, like the\ngiants and Titans, in their wickedness wish to contend with God in\ncompany with Celsus, and those who declare war against Him who has by\ninnumerable proofs established the claims of Jesus, and against Him who,\nas the Word, did, for the salvation of our race, show Himself before all\nthe world in such a form as each was able to receive Him.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XII.\n\n\nIn what follows, some may imagine that he says something plausible\nagainst us. \u201cIf,\u201d says he, \u201cthese people worshipped one God alone, and\nno other, they would perhaps have some valid argument against the\nworship of others. But they pay excessive reverence to one who has but\nlately appeared among men, and they think it no offence against God if\nthey worship also His servant.\u201d To this we reply, that if Celsus had\nknown that saying, \u201cI and my Father are one,\u201d[1581] and the words used\nin prayer by the Son of God, \u201cAs Thou and I are one,\u201d[1582] he would not\nhave supposed that we worship any other besides Him who is the supreme\nGod. \u201cFor,\u201d says He, \u201cmy Father is in me, and I in Him.\u201d[1583] And if\nany should from these words be afraid of our going over to the side of\nthose who deny that the Father and the Son are two persons, let him\nweigh that passage, \u201cAnd the multitude of them that believed were of one\nheart and of one soul,\u201d[1584] that he may understand the meaning of the\nsaying, \u201cI and my Father are one.\u201d We worship one God, the Father and\nthe Son, therefore, as we have explained; and our argument against the\nworship of other gods still continues valid. And we do not \u201creverence\nbeyond measure one who has but lately appeared,\u201d as though He did not\nexist before; for we believe Himself when He says, \u201cBefore Abraham was,\nI am.\u201d[1585] Again He says, \u201cI am the truth;\u201d[1586] and surely none of\nus is so simple as to suppose that truth did not exist before the time\nwhen Christ appeared. We worship, therefore, the Father of truth, and\nthe Son, who is the truth; and these, while they are two, considered as\npersons or subsistences, are one in unity of thought, in harmony and in\nidentity of will. So entirely are they one, that he who has seen the\nSon, \u201cwho is the brightness of God\u2019s glory, and the express image of His\nperson,\u201d[1587] has seen in Him who is the image of God, God Himself.\n\nFootnote 1581:\n\n John x. 30.\n\nFootnote 1582:\n\n John xvii. 22.\n\nFootnote 1583:\n\n John xiv. 11, and xvii. 21.\n\nFootnote 1584:\n\n Acts iv. 32.\n\nFootnote 1585:\n\n John viii. 58.\n\nFootnote 1586:\n\n John xiv. 6.\n\nFootnote 1587:\n\n Heb. i. 3.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIII.\n\n\nHe further supposes, that \u201cbecause we join along with the worship of God\nthe worship of His Son, it follows that, in our view, not only God, but\nalso the servants of God, are to be worshipped.\u201d If he had meant this to\napply to those who are truly the servants of God, after His\nonly-begotten Son,\u2014to Gabriel and Michael, and the other angels and\narchangels,\u2014and if he had said of these that they ought to be\nworshipped,\u2014if also he had clearly defined the meaning of the word\n\u201cworship,\u201d and the duties of the worshippers,\u2014we might perhaps have\nbrought forward such thoughts as have occurred to us on so important a\nsubject. But as he reckons among the servants of God the demons which\nare worshipped by the heathen, he cannot induce us, on the plea of\nconsistency, to worship such as are declared by the word to be servants\nof the evil one, the prince of this world, who leads astray from God as\nmany as he can. We decline, therefore, altogether to worship and serve\nthose whom other men worship, for the reason that they are not servants\nof God. For if we had been taught to regard them as servants of the Most\nHigh, we would not have called them demons. Accordingly, we worship with\nall our power the one God, and His only Son, the Word and the Image of\nGod, by prayers and supplications; and we offer our petitions to the God\nof the universe through His only-begotten Son. To the Son we first\npresent them, and beseech Him, as \u201cthe propitiation for our sins,\u201d[1588]\nand our High Priest, to offer our desires, and sacrifices, and prayers,\nto the Most High. Our faith, therefore, is directed to God through His\nSon, who strengthens it in us; and Celsus can never show that the Son of\nGod is the cause of any sedition or disloyalty in the kingdom of God. We\nhonour the Father when we admire His Son, the Word, and Wisdom, and\nTruth, and Righteousness, and all that He who is the Son of so great a\nFather is said in Scripture to be. So much on this point.\n\nFootnote 1588:\n\n 1 John ii. 2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIV.\n\n\nAgain Celsus proceeds: \u201cIf you should tell them that Jesus is not the\nSon of God, but that God is the Father of all, and that He alone ought\nto be truly worshipped, they would not consent to discontinue their\nworship of him who is their leader in the sedition. And they call him\nSon of God, not out of any extreme reverence for God, but from an\nextreme desire to extol Jesus Christ.\u201d We, however, have learned who the\nSon of God is, and know that He is \u201cthe brightness of His glory, and the\nexpress image of His person,\u201d and \u201cthe breath of the power of God, and a\npure influence flowing from the glory of the Almighty;\u201d moreover, \u201cthe\nbrightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power\nof God, and the image of His goodness.\u201d[1589] We know, therefore, that\nHe is the Son of God, and that God is His Father. And there is nothing\nextravagant or unbecoming the character of God in the doctrine that He\nshould have begotten such an only Son; and no one will persuade us that\nsuch a one is not a Son of the unbegotten God and Father. If Celsus has\nheard something of certain persons holding that the Son of God is not\nthe Son of the Creator of the universe, that is a matter which lies\nbetween him and the supporters of such an opinion. Jesus is, then, not\nthe leader of any seditious movement, but the promoter of peace. For He\nsaid to His disciples, \u201cPeace I leave with you, my peace I give unto\nyou;\u201d and as He knew that it would be men of the world, and not men of\nGod, who would wage war against us, he added, \u201cNot as the world giveth\npeace, do I give peace unto you.\u201d[1590] And even although we are\noppressed in the world, we have confidence in Him who said, \u201cIn the\nworld ye shall have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome\nthe world.\u201d And it is He whom we call Son of God\u2014Son of that God,\nnamely, whom, to quote the words of Celsus, \u201cwe most highly reverence;\u201d\nand He is the Son who has been most highly exalted by the Father. Grant\nthat there may be some individuals among the multitudes of believers who\nare not in entire agreement with us, and who incautiously assert that\nthe Saviour is the Most High God; however, we do not hold with them, but\nrather believe Him when He says, \u201cThe Father who sent me is greater than\nI.\u201d[1591] We would not therefore make Him whom we call Father\ninferior\u2014as Celsus accuses us of doing\u2014to the Son of God.\n\nFootnote 1589:\n\n Wisd. vii. 25, 26.\n\nFootnote 1590:\n\n John xiv. 27.\n\nFootnote 1591:\n\n John xiv. 28.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XV.\n\n\nCelsus goes on to say: \u201cThat I may give a true representation of their\nfaith, I will use their own words, as given in what is called _A\nHeavenly Dialogue_: \u2018If the Son is mightier than God, and the Son of man\nis Lord over Him, who else than the Son can be Lord over that God who is\nthe ruler over all things? How comes it, that while so many go about the\nwell, no one goes down into it? Why art thou afraid when thou hast gone\nso far on the way? Answer: Thou art mistaken, for I lack neither courage\nnor weapons.\u2019 Is it not evident, then, that their views are precisely\nsuch as I have described them to be? They suppose that another God, who\nis above the heavens, is the Father of him whom with one accord they\nhonour, that they may honour this Son of man alone, whom they exalt\nunder the form and name of the great God, and whom they assert to be\nstronger than God, who rules the world, and that he rules over Him. And\nhence that maxim of theirs, \u2018It is impossible to serve two masters,\u2019 is\nmaintained for the purpose of keeping up the party who are on the side\nof this Lord.\u201d Here, again, Celsus quotes opinions from some most\nobscure sect of heretics, and ascribes them to all Christians. I call it\n\u201ca most obscure sect;\u201d for although we have often contended with\nheretics, yet we are unable to discover from what set of opinions he has\ntaken this passage, if indeed he has quoted it from any author, and has\nnot rather concocted it himself, or added it as an inference of his own.\nFor we who say that the visible world is under the government of Him who\ncreated all things, do thereby declare that the Son is not mightier than\nthe Father, but inferior to Him. And this belief we ground on the saying\nof Jesus Himself, \u201cThe Father who sent me is greater than I.\u201d And none\nof us is so insane as to affirm that the Son of man is Lord over God.\nBut when we regard the Saviour as God the Word, and Wisdom, and\nRighteousness, and Truth, we certainly do say that He has dominion over\nall things which have been subjected to Him in this capacity, but not\nthat His dominion extends over the God and Father who is Ruler over all.\nBesides, as the Word rules over none against their will, there are still\nwicked beings\u2014not only men, but also angels, and all demons\u2014over whom we\nsay that in a sense He does not rule, since they do not yield Him a\nwilling obedience; but, in another sense of the word, He rules even over\nthem, in the same way as we say that man rules over the irrational\nanimals,\u2014not by persuasion, but as one who tames and subdues lions and\nbeasts of burden. Nevertheless, He leaves no means untried to persuade\neven those who are still disobedient to submit to His authority. So far\nas we are concerned, therefore, we deny the truth of that which Celsus\nquotes as one of our sayings, \u201cWho else than He can be Lord over Him who\nis God over all?\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVI.\n\n\nThe remaining part of the extract given by Celsus seems to have been\ntaken from some other form of heresy, and the whole jumbled together in\nstrange confusion: \u201cHow is it, that while so many go about the well, no\none goes down into it? Why dost thou shrink with fear when thou hast\ngone so far on the way? Answer: Thou art mistaken, for I lack neither\ncourage nor weapons.\u201d We who belong to the church which takes its name\nfrom Christ, assert that none of these statements are true. For he seems\nto have made them simply that they might harmonize with what he had said\nbefore; but they have no reference to us. For it is a principle with us,\nnot to worship any god whom we merely \u201csuppose\u201d to exist, but Him alone\nwho is the Creator of this universe, and of all things besides which are\nunseen by the eye of sense. These remarks of Celsus may apply to those\nwho go on another road and tread other paths from us,\u2014men who deny the\nCreator, and make to themselves another god under a new form, having\nnothing but the name of God, whom they esteem higher than the Creator;\nand with these may be joined any that there may be who say that the Son\nis greater than the God who rules all things. In reference to the\nprecept that we ought not to serve two masters, we have already shown\nwhat appears to us the principle contained in it, when we proved that no\nsedition or disloyalty could be charged against the followers of Jesus\ntheir Lord, who confess that they reject every other lord, and serve Him\nalone who is the Son and Word of God.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVII.\n\n\nCelsus then proceeds to say that \u201cwe shrink from raising altars,\nstatues, and temples; and this,\u201d he thinks, \u201chas been agreed upon among\nus as the badge or distinctive mark of a secret and forbidden society.\u201d\nHe does not perceive that we regard the spirit of every good man as an\naltar from which arises an incense which is truly and spiritually\nsweet-smelling, namely, the prayers ascending from a pure conscience.\nTherefore it is said by John in the Revelation, \u201cThe odours are the\nprayers of saints;\u201d[1592] and by the Psalmist, \u201cLet my prayer come up\nbefore Thee as incense.\u201d[1593] And the statues and gifts which are fit\nofferings to God are the work of no common mechanics, but are wrought\nand fashioned in us by the Word of God, to wit, the virtues in which we\nimitate \u201cthe First-born of all creation,\u201d who has set us an example of\njustice, of temperance, of courage, of wisdom, of piety, and of the\nother virtues. In all those, then, who plant and cultivate within their\nsouls, according to the divine word, temperance, justice, wisdom, piety,\nand other virtues, these excellences are their statues they raise, in\nwhich we are persuaded that it is becoming for us to honour the model\nand prototype of all statues: \u201cthe image of the invisible God,\u201d God the\nonly-begotten. And again, they who \u201cput off the old man with his deeds,\nand put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of\nHim that hath created him,\u201d in taking upon them the image of Him who\nhath created them, do raise within themselves a statue like to what the\nMost High God Himself desires. And as among statuaries there are some\nwho are marvellously perfect in their art, as for example Pheidias and\nPolycleitus, and among painters, Zeuxis and Apelles, whilst others make\ninferior statues, and others, again, are inferior to the second-rate\nartists,\u2014so that, taking all together, there is a wide difference in the\nexecution of statues and pictures,\u2014in the same way there are some who\nform images of the Most High in a better manner and with a more perfect\nskill; so that there is no comparison even between the Olympian Jupiter\nof Pheidias and the man who has been fashioned according to the image of\nGod the Creator. But by far the most excellent of all these throughout\nthe whole of creation is that image in our Saviour who said, \u201cMy Father\nis in me.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1592:\n\n Rev. v. 8.\n\nFootnote 1593:\n\n Ps. cxli. 2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XVIII.\n\n\nAnd every one who imitates Him according to his ability, does by this\nvery endeavour raise a statue according to the image of the Creator, for\nin the contemplation of God with a pure heart they become imitators of\nHim. And, in general, we see that all Christians strive to raise altars\nand statues as we have described them, and these not of a lifeless and\nsenseless kind, and not to receive greedy spirits intent upon lifeless\nthings, but to be filled with the Spirit of God who dwells in the images\nof virtue of which we have spoken, and takes His abode in the soul which\nis conformed to the image of the Creator. Thus the Spirit of Christ\ndwells in those who bear, so to say, a resemblance in form and feature\nto Himself. And the Word of God, wishing to set this clearly before us,\nrepresents God as promising to the righteous, \u201cI will dwell in them, and\nwalk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my\npeople.\u201d[1594] And the Saviour says, \u201cIf any man hear my words, and do\nthem, I and my Father will come to him, and make our abode with\nhim.\u201d[1595] Let any one, therefore, who chooses compare the altars which\nI have described with those spoken of by Celsus, and the images in the\nsouls of those who worship the Most High God with the statues of\nPheidias, Polycleitus, and such like, and he will clearly perceive, that\nwhile the latter are lifeless things, and subject to the ravages of\ntime, the former abide in the immortal spirit as long as the reasonable\nsoul wishes to preserve them.\n\nFootnote 1594:\n\n 2 Cor. vi. 16.\n\nFootnote 1595:\n\n John xiv. 23.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XIX.\n\n\nAnd if, further, temples are to be compared with temples, that we may\nprove to those who accept the opinions of Celsus that we do not object\nto the erection of temples suited to the images and altars of which we\nhave spoken, but that we do refuse to build lifeless temples to the\nGiver of all life, let any one who chooses learn how we are taught, that\nour bodies are the temple of God, and that if any one by lust or sin\ndefiles the temple of God, he will himself be destroyed, as acting\nimpiously towards the true temple. Of all the temples spoken of in this\nsense, the best and most excellent was the pure and holy body of our\nSaviour Jesus Christ. When He knew that wicked men might aim at the\ndestruction of the temple of God in Him, but that their purposes of\ndestruction would not prevail against the divine power which had built\nthat temple, He says to them, \u201cDestroy this temple, and in three days I\nwill raise it again.... This He said of the temple of His body.\u201d[1596]\nAnd in other parts of holy Scripture where it speaks of the mystery of\nthe resurrection to those whose ears are divinely opened, it says that\nthe temple which has been destroyed shall be built up again of living\nand most precious stones, thereby giving us to understand that each of\nthose who are led by the word of God to strive together in the duties of\npiety, will be a precious stone in the one great temple of God.\nAccordingly, Peter says, \u201cYe also, as lively stones, are built up a\nspiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices,\nacceptable to God by Jesus Christ;\u201d[1597] and Paul also says, \u201cBeing\nbuilt upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ our\nLord being the chief corner-stone.\u201d[1598] And there is a similar hidden\nallusion in this passage in Isaiah, which is addressed to Jerusalem:\n\u201cBehold, I will lay thy stones with carbuncles, and lay thy foundations\nwith sapphires. And I will make thy battlements of jasper, and thy gates\nof crystal, and all thy borders of pleasant stones. And all thy children\nshall be taught of the Lord; and great shall be the peace of thy\nchildren. In righteousness shalt thou be established.\u201d[1599]\n\nFootnote 1596:\n\n John ii. 19, 21.\n\nFootnote 1597:\n\n 1 Pet. ii. 5.\n\nFootnote 1598:\n\n Eph. ii. 20.\n\nFootnote 1599:\n\n Isa. liv. 11-14.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XX.\n\n\nThere are, then, among the righteous some who are carbuncles, others\nsapphires, others jaspers, and others crystal, and thus there is among\nthe righteous every kind of choice and precious stone. As to the\nspiritual meaning of the different stones,\u2014what is their nature, and to\nwhat kind of soul the name of each precious stone especially applies,\u2014we\ncannot at present stay to examine. We have only felt it necessary to\nshow thus briefly what we understand by temples, and what the one Temple\nof God built of precious stones truly means. For as if in some cities a\ndispute should arise as to which had the finest temples, those who\nthought their own were the best would do their utmost to show the\nexcellence of their own temples and the inferiority of the others,\u2014in\nlike manner, when they reproach us for not deeming it necessary to\nworship the Divine Being by raising lifeless temples, we set before them\nour temples, and show to such at least as are not blind and senseless,\nlike their senseless gods, that there is no comparison between our\nstatues and the statues of the heathen, nor between our altars, with\nwhat we may call the incense ascending from them, and the heathen\naltars, with the fat and blood of the victims; nor, finally, between the\ntemples of senseless gods, admired by senseless men, who have no divine\nfaculty for perceiving God, and the temples, statues, and altars which\nare worthy of God. It is not therefore true that we object to building\naltars, statues, and temples, because we have agreed to make this the\nbadge of a secret and forbidden society; but we do so, because we have\nlearnt from Jesus Christ the true way of serving God, and we shrink from\nwhatever, under a pretence of piety, leads to utter impiety those who\nabandon the way marked out for us by Jesus Christ. For it is He who\nalone is the way of piety, as He truly said, \u201cI am the way, the truth,\nthe life.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXI.\n\n\nLet us see what Celsus further says of God, and how he urges us to the\nuse of those things which are properly called idol offerings, or, still\nbetter, offerings to demons, although, in his ignorance of what true\nsanctity is, and what sacrifices are well-pleasing to God, he call them\n\u201choly sacrifices.\u201d His words are, \u201cGod is the God of all alike; He is\ngood, He stands in need of nothing, and He is without jealousy. What,\nthen, is there to hinder those who are most devoted to His service from\ntaking part in public feasts?\u201d I cannot see the connection which he\nfancies between God\u2019s being good, and independent, and free from\njealousy, and His devoted servants taking part in public feasts. I\nconfess, indeed, that from the fact that God is good, and without want\nof anything, and free from jealousy, it would follow as a consequence\nthat we might take part in public feasts, if it were proved that the\npublic feasts had nothing wrong in them, and were grounded upon true\nviews of the character of God, so that they resulted naturally from a\ndevout service of God. If, however, the so-called public festivals can\nin no way be shown to accord with the service of God, but may on the\ncontrary be proved to have been devised by men when occasion offered to\ncommemorate some human events, or to set forth certain qualities of\nwater or earth, or the fruits of the earth,\u2014in that case, it is clear\nthat those who wish to offer an enlightened worship to the Divine Being\nwill act according to sound reason, and not take part in the public\nfeasts. For \u201cto keep a feast,\u201d as one of the wise men of Greece has well\nsaid, \u201cis nothing else than to do one\u2019s duty;\u201d[1600] and that man truly\ncelebrates a feast who does his duty and prays always, offering up\ncontinually bloodless sacrifices in prayer to God. That therefore seems\nto me a most noble saying of Paul, \u201cYe observe days, and months, and\ntimes, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you\nlabour in vain.\u201d[1601]\n\nFootnote 1600:\n\n Thucyd. i.\n\nFootnote 1601:\n\n Gal. iv. 10, 11.\n\n\n\n Chapter XXII.\n\n\nIf it be objected to us on this subject that we ourselves are accustomed\nto observe certain days, as for example the Lord\u2019s day, the Preparation,\nthe Passover, or Pentecost, I have to answer, that to the perfect\nChristian, who is ever in his thoughts, words, and deeds serving his\nnatural Lord, God the Word, all his days are the Lord\u2019s, and he is\nalways keeping the Lord\u2019s day. He also who is unceasingly preparing\nhimself for the true life, and abstaining from the pleasures of this\nlife which lead astray so many,\u2014who is not indulging the lust of the\nflesh, but \u201ckeeping under his body, and bringing it into\nsubjection,\u201d\u2014such a one is always keeping Preparation-day. Again, he who\nconsiders that \u201cChrist our Passover was sacrificed for us,\u201d and that it\nis his duty to keep the feast by eating of the flesh of the Word, never\nceases to keep the paschal feast; for the _pascha_ means a \u201cpassover,\u201d\nand he is ever striving in all his thoughts, words, and deeds, to pass\nover from the things of this life to God, and is hastening towards the\ncity of God. And, finally, he who can truly say, \u201cWe are risen with\nChrist,\u201d and \u201cHe hath exalted us, and made us to sit with Him in\nheavenly places in Christ,\u201d is always living in the season of Pentecost;\nand most of all, when going up to the upper chamber, like the apostles\nof Jesus, he gives himself to supplication and prayer, that he may\nbecome worthy of receiving \u201cthe mighty wind rushing from heaven,\u201d which\nis powerful to destroy sin and its fruits among men, and worthy of\nhaving some share of the tongue of fire which God sends.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIII.\n\n\nBut the majority of those who are accounted believers are not of this\nadvanced class; but from being either unable or unwilling to keep every\nday in this manner, they require some sensible memorials to prevent\nspiritual things from passing altogether away from their minds. It is to\nthis practice of setting apart some days distinct from others, that Paul\nseems to me to refer in the expression, \u201cpart of the feast;\u201d[1602] and\nby these words he indicates that a life in accordance with the divine\nword consists not \u201cin a part of the feast,\u201d but in one entire and\nnever-ceasing festival. Again, compare the festivals, observed among us\nas these have been described above, with the public feasts of Celsus and\nthe heathen, and say if the former are not much more sacred observances\nthan those feasts in which the lust of the flesh runs riot, and leads to\ndrunkenness and debauchery. It would be too long for us at present to\nshow why we are required by the law of God to keep its festivals by\neating \u201cthe bread of affliction,\u201d[1603] or \u201cleaven with bitter\nherbs,\u201d[1604] or why it says, \u201cHumble your souls,\u201d[1605] and such like.\nFor it is impossible for man, who is a compound being, in which \u201cthe\nflesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the\nflesh,\u201d[1606] to keep the feast with his whole nature; for either he\nkeeps the feast with his spirit and afflicts the body, which through the\nlust of the flesh is unfit to keep it along with the spirit, or else he\nkeeps it with the body, and the spirit is unable to share in it. But we\nhave for the present said enough on the subject of feasts.\n\nFootnote 1602:\n\n Col. ii. 16. The whole passage in the English version is, \u201cLet no man\n judge you in meat, or in drink, or in _respect of an holyday_\u201d (\u1f10\u03bd\n \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f11\u03bf\u03c1\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2). Origen\u2019s interpretation is not followed by any modern\n expositors. It is adopted by Chrysostom and Theodoret.\n\nFootnote 1603:\n\n Deut. xvi. 3.\n\nFootnote 1604:\n\n Ex. xii. 8.\n\nFootnote 1605:\n\n Lev. xvi. 29.\n\nFootnote 1606:\n\n Gal. v. 17.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIV.\n\n\nLet us now see on what grounds Celsus urges us to make use of the idol\nofferings and the public sacrifices in the public feasts. His words are,\n\u201cIf these idols are nothing, what harm will there be in taking part in\nthe feast? On the other hand, if they are demons, it is certain that\nthey too are God\u2019s creatures, and that we must believe in them,\nsacrifice to them according to the laws, and pray to them that they may\nbe propitious.\u201d In reference to this statement, it would be profitable\nfor us to take up and clearly explain the whole passage of the First\nEpistle to the Corinthians, in which Paul treats of offerings to\nidols.[1607] The apostle draws from the fact that \u201can idol is nothing in\nthe world,\u201d the consequence that it is injurious to use things offered\nto idols; and he shows to those who have ears to hear on such subjects,\nthat he who partakes of things offered to idols is worse than a\nmurderer, for he destroys his own brethren, for whom Christ died. And\nfurther, he maintains that the sacrifices are made to demons; and from\nthat he proceeds to show that those who join the table of demons become\nassociated with the demons; and he concludes that a man cannot both be a\npartaker of the table of the Lord and of the table of demons. But since\nit would require a whole treatise to set forth fully all that is\ncontained on this subject in the Epistle to the Corinthians, we shall\ncontent ourselves with this brief statement of the argument; for it will\nbe evident to any one who carefully considers what has been said, that\neven if idols are nothing, nevertheless it is an awful thing to join in\nidol festivals. And even supposing that there are such beings as demons\nto whom the sacrifices are offered, it has been clearly shown that we\nare forbidden to take part in these festivals, when we know the\ndifference between the table of the Lord and the table of demons. And\nknowing this, we endeavour as much as we can to be always partakers of\nthe Lord\u2019s table, and beware to the utmost of joining at any time the\ntable of demons.\n\nFootnote 1607:\n\n 1 Cor. viii. 4, 11.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXV.\n\n\nCelsus says that \u201cthe demons belong to God, and are therefore to be\nbelieved, to be sacrificed to according to laws, and to be prayed to\nthat they may be propitious.\u201d Those who are disposed to learn, must know\nthat the word of God nowhere says of evil things that they belong to\nGod, for it judges them unworthy of such a Lord. Accordingly, it is not\nall men who bear the name of \u201cmen of God,\u201d but only those who are worthy\nof God,\u2014such as Moses and Elias, and any others who are so called, or\nsuch as resemble those who are so called in Scripture. In the same way,\nall angels are not said to be angels of God, but only those that are\nblessed: those that have fallen away into sin are called \u201cangels of the\ndevil,\u201d just as bad men are called \u201cmen of sin,\u201d \u201csons of perdition,\u201d or\n\u201csons of iniquity.\u201d Since, then, among men some are good and others bad,\nand the former are said to be God\u2019s and the latter the devil\u2019s, so among\nangels some are angels of God, and others angels of the devil. But among\ndemons there is no such distinction, for all are said to be wicked. We\ndo not therefore hesitate to say that Celsus is false when he says, \u201cIf\nthey are demons, it is evident that they must also belong to God.\u201d He\nmust either show that this distinction of good and bad among angels and\nmen has no foundation, or else that a similar distinction may be shown\nto hold among demons. If that is impossible, it is plain that demons do\nnot belong to God; for their prince is not God, but, as holy Scripture\nsays, \u201cBeelzebub.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVI.\n\n\nAnd we are not to believe in demons, although Celsus urges us to do so;\nbut if we are to obey God, we must die, or endure anything sooner than\nobey demons. In the same way, we are not to propitiate demons; for it is\nimpossible to propitiate beings that are wicked and that seek the injury\nof men. Besides, what are the laws in accordance with which Celsus would\nhave us propitiate the demons? For if he means laws enacted in states,\nhe must show that they are in agreement with the divine laws. But if\nthat cannot be done, as the laws of many states are quite inconsistent\nwith each other, these laws, therefore, must of necessity either be no\nlaws at all in the proper sense of the word, or else the enactments of\nwicked men; and these we must not obey, for \u201cwe must obey God rather\nthan men.\u201d Away, then, with this counsel, which Celsus gives us, to\noffer prayer to demons: it is not to be listened to for a moment; for\nour duty is to pray to the Most High God alone, and to the\nonly-begotten, the first-born of the whole creation, and to ask Him as\nour High Priest to present the prayers which ascend to Him from us, to\nHis God and our God, to His Father and the Father of those who direct\ntheir lives according to His word. And as we would have no desire to\nenjoy the favour of those men who wish us to follow their wicked lives,\nand who give us their favour only on condition that we choose nothing\nopposed to their wishes, because their favour would make us enemies of\nGod, who cannot be pleased with those who have such men for their\nfriends,\u2014in the same way those who are acquainted with the nature, the\npurposes, and the wickedness of demons, can never wish to obtain their\nfavour.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVII.\n\n\nAnd Christians have nothing to fear, even if demons should not be\nwell-disposed to them; for they are protected by the supreme God, who is\nwell pleased with their piety, and who sets His divine angels to watch\nover those who are worthy of such guardianship, so that they can suffer\nnothing from demons. He who by his piety possesses the favour of the\nMost High, who has accepted the guidance of Jesus, the \u201cAngel of the\ngreat counsel,\u201d[1608] being well contented with the favour of God\nthrough Christ Jesus, may say with confidence that he has nothing to\nsuffer from the whole host of demons. \u201cThe Lord is my light and my\nsalvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life; of\nwhom shall I be afraid? Though an host should encamp against me, my\nheart shall not fear.\u201d[1609] So much, then, in reply to those statements\nof Celsus: \u201cIf they are demons, they too evidently belong to God, and\nthey are to be believed, to be sacrificed to according to the laws, and\nprayers are to be offered to them that they may be propitious.\u201d\n\nFootnote 1608:\n\n Isa. ix. 6 (LXX.).\n\nFootnote 1609:\n\n Ps. xxvii. 1, 3.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXVIII.\n\n\nWe shall now proceed to the next statement of Celsus, and examine it\nwith care: \u201cIf in obedience to the traditions of their fathers they\nabstain from such victims, they must also abstain from all animal food,\nin accordance with the opinions of Pythagoras, who thus showed his\nrespect for the soul and its bodily organs. But if, as they say, they\nabstain that they may not eat along with demons, I admire their wisdom,\nin having at length discovered, that whenever they eat they eat with\ndemons, although they only refuse to do so when they are looking upon a\nslain victim; for when they eat bread, or drink wine, or taste fruits,\ndo they not receive these things, as well as the water they drink and\nthe air they breathe, from certain demons, to whom have been assigned\nthese different provinces of nature?\u201d Here I would observe that I cannot\nsee how those whom he speaks of as abstaining from certain victims, in\naccordance with the traditions of their fathers, are consequently bound\nto abstain from the flesh of all animals. We do not indeed deny that the\ndivine word does seem to command something similar to this, when to\nraise us to a higher and purer life it says, \u201cIt is good neither to eat\nflesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything whereby thy brother stumbleth, or\nis offended, or is made weak;\u201d[1610] and again, \u201cDestroy not him with\nthy meat, for whom Christ died;\u201d[1611] and again, \u201cIf meat make my\nbrother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I\nmake my brother to offend.\u201d[1612]\n\nFootnote 1610:\n\n Rom. xiv. 21.\n\nFootnote 1611:\n\n Rom. xiv. 15.\n\nFootnote 1612:\n\n 1 Cor. viii. 13.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXIX.\n\n\nBut it is to be observed that the Jews, who claim for themselves a\ncorrect understanding of the law of Moses, carefully restrict their food\nto such things as are accounted clean, and abstain from those that are\nunclean. They also do not use in their food the blood of an animal nor\nthe flesh of an animal torn by wild beasts, and some other things which\nit would take too long for us at present to detail. But Jesus, wishing\nto lead all men by His teaching to the pure worship and service of God,\nand anxious not to throw any hindrance in the way of many who might be\nbenefited by Christianity, through the imposition of a burdensome code\nof rules in regard to food, has laid it down, that \u201cnot that which goeth\ninto the mouth defileth a man, but that which cometh out of the mouth;\nfor whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is\ncast out into the draught. But those things which proceed out of the\nmouth are evil thoughts when spoken, murders, adulteries, fornications,\nthefts, false witness, blasphemies.\u201d[1613] Paul also says, \u201cMeat\ncommendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better;\nneither, if we eat not, are we the worse.\u201d[1614] Wherefore, as there is\nsome obscurity about this matter, without some explanation is given, it\nseemed good to the apostles of Jesus and the elders assembled together\nat Antioch, and also, as they themselves say, to the Holy Spirit, to\nwrite a letter to the Gentile believers, forbidding them to partake of\nthose things from which alone they say it is necessary to abstain,\nnamely, \u201cthings offered to idols, things strangled, and blood.\u201d[1615]\n\nFootnote 1613:\n\n Matt. xv. 11, 17-19.\n\nFootnote 1614:\n\n 1 Cor. viii. 8.\n\nFootnote 1615:\n\n Acts xv. 28, 29. It was at Jerusalem.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXX.\n\n\nFor that which is offered to idols is sacrificed to demons, and a man of\nGod must not join the table of demons. As to things strangled, we are\nforbidden by Scripture to partake of them, because the blood is still in\nthem; and blood, especially the odour arising from blood, is said to be\nthe food of demons. Perhaps, then, if we were to eat of strangled\nanimals, we might have such spirits feeding along with us. And the\nreason which forbids the use of strangled animals for food is also\napplicable to the use of blood. And it may not be amiss, as bearing on\nthis point, to recall a beautiful saying in the writings of Sextus,\nwhich is known to most Christians: \u201cThe eating of animals,\u201d says he, \u201cis\na matter of indifference; but to abstain from them is more agreeable to\nreason.\u201d It is not, therefore, simply on account of some traditions of\nour fathers that we refrain from eating victims offered to those called\ngods or heroes or demons, but for other reasons, some of which I have\nhere mentioned. It is not to be supposed, however, that we are to\nabstain from the flesh of animals in the same way as we are bound to\nabstain from all vice and wickedness: we are indeed to abstain not only\nfrom the flesh of animals, but from all other kinds of food, if we\ncannot partake of them without incurring evil, and the consequences of\nevil. For we are to avoid eating for gluttony, or for the mere\ngratification of the appetite, without regard to the health and\nsustenance of the body. We do not believe that souls pass from one body\nto another, and that they may descend so low as to enter the bodies of\nthe brutes. If we abstain at times from eating the flesh of animals, it\nis evidently, therefore, not for the same reason as Pythagoras; for it\nis the reasonable soul alone that we honour, and we commit its bodily\norgans with due honours to the grave. For it is not right that the\ndwelling-place of the rational soul should be cast aside anywhere\nwithout honour, like the carcases of brute beasts; and so much the more\nwhen we believe that the respect paid to the body redounds to the honour\nof the person who received from God a soul which has nobly employed the\norgans of the body in which it resided. In regard to the question, \u201cHow\nare the dead raised up, and with what body do they come?\u201d we have\nalready answered it briefly, as our purpose required.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXI.\n\n\nCelsus afterwards states what is adduced by Jews and Christians alike in\ndefence of abstinence from idol sacrifices, namely, that it is wrong for\nthose who have dedicated themselves to the Most High God to eat with\ndemons. What he brings forward against this view, we have already seen.\nIn our opinion, a man can only be said to eat and drink with demons when\nhe eats the flesh of what are called sacred victims, and when he drinks\nthe wine poured out to the honour of the demons. But Celsus thinks that\nwe cannot eat bread or drink wine in any way whatever, or taste fruits,\nor even take a draught of water, without eating and drinking with\ndemons. He adds also, that the air which we breathe is received from\ndemons, and that not an animal can breathe without receiving the air\nfrom the demons who are set over the air. If any one wishes to defend\nthis statement of Celsus, let him show that it is not the divine angels\nof God, but demons, the whole race of whom are bad, that have been\nappointed to communicate all those blessings which have been mentioned.\nWe indeed also maintain with regard not only to the fruits of the earth,\nbut to every flowing stream and every breath of air, that the ground\nbrings forth those things which are said to grow up naturally,\u2014that the\nwater springs in fountains, and refreshes the earth with running\nstreams,\u2014that the air is kept pure, and supports the life of those who\nbreathe it only in consequence of the agency and control of certain\nbeings whom we may call invisible husbandmen and guardians; but we deny\nthat those invisible agents are demons. And if we might speak boldly, we\nwould say that if demons have any share at all in these things, to them\nbelong famine, blasting of the vine and fruit trees, pestilence among\nmen and beasts: all these are the proper occupations of demons, who in\nthe capacity of public executioners receive power at certain times to\ncarry out the divine judgments, for the restoration of those who have\nplunged headlong into wickedness, or for the trial and discipline of the\nsouls of the wise. For those who through all their afflictions preserve\ntheir piety pure and unimpaired, show their true character to all\nspectators, whether visible or invisible, who behold them; while those\nwho are otherwise minded, yet conceal their wickedness, when they have\ntheir true character exposed by misfortunes, become manifest to\nthemselves as well as to those whom we may also call spectators.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXII.\n\n\nThe Psalmist bears witness that divine justice employs certain evil\nangels to inflict calamities upon men: \u201cHe cast upon them the fierceness\nof His anger, wrath, and indignation, and trouble, sent by evil\nangels.\u201d[1616] Whether demons ever go beyond this when they are suffered\nto do what they are ever ready, though through the restraint put upon\nthem they are not always able to do, is a question to be solved by that\nman who can conceive, in so far as human nature will allow, how it\naccords with the divine justice, that such multitudes of human souls are\nseparated from the body while walking in the paths which lead to certain\ndeath. \u201cFor the judgments of God are so great,\u201d that a soul which is\nstill clothed with a mortal body cannot comprehend them; \u201cand they\ncannot be expressed: therefore by unnurtured souls\u201d[1617] they are not\nin any measure to be understood. And hence, too, rash spirits, by their\nignorance in these matters, and by recklessly setting themselves against\nthe Divine Being, multiply impious objections against providence. It is\nnot from demons, then, that men receive any of those things which meet\nthe necessities of life, and least of all ourselves, who have been\ntaught to make a proper use of these things. And they who partake of\ncorn and wine, and the fruits of trees, of water and of air, do not feed\nwith demons, but rather do they feast with divine angels, who are\nappointed for this purpose, and who are as it were invited to the table\nof the pious man, who hearkens to the precept of the word, which says,\n\u201cWhether ye eat or drink, or whatever ye do, do all to the glory of\nGod.\u201d[1618] And again, in another place it is written, \u201cDo all things in\nthe name of God.\u201d[1619] When, therefore, we eat and drink and breathe to\nthe glory of God, and act in all things according to what is right, we\nfeast with no demons, but with divine angels: \u201cFor every creature is\ngood, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:\nfor it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.\u201d[1620] But it could\nnot be good, and it could not be sanctified, if these things were, as\nCelsus supposes, entrusted to the charge of demons.\n\nFootnote 1616:\n\n Ps. lxxviii. 49.\n\nFootnote 1617:\n\n Wisdom of Sol. xvii. 1.\n\nFootnote 1618:\n\n Col. iii. 17.\n\nFootnote 1619:\n\n 1 Cor. x. 31.\n\nFootnote 1620:\n\n 1 Tim. iv. 4, 5.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIII.\n\n\nFrom this it is evident that we have already met the next statement of\nCelsus, which is as follows: \u201cWe must either not live, and indeed not\ncome into this life at all, or we must do so on condition that we give\nthanks and first-fruits and prayers to demons, who have been set over\nthe things of this world: and that we must do as long as we live, that\nthey may prove good and kind.\u201d We must surely live, and we must live\naccording to the word of God, as far as we are enabled to do so. And we\nare thus enabled to live, when, \u201cwhether we eat or drink, we do all to\nthe glory of God;\u201d and we are not to refuse to enjoy those things which\nhave been created for our use, but must receive them with thanksgiving\nto the Creator. And it is under these conditions, and not such as have\nbeen imagined by Celsus, that we have been brought into life by God; and\nwe are not placed under demons, but we are under the government of the\nMost High God, through Him who hath brought us to God\u2014Jesus Christ. It\nis not according to the law of God that any demon has had a share in\nworldly affairs, but it was by their own lawlessness that they perhaps\nsought out for themselves places destitute of the knowledge of God and\nof the divine life, or places where there are many enemies of God.\nPerhaps also, as being fit to rule over and punish them, they have been\nset by the Word, who governs all things, to rule over those who\nsubjected themselves to evil and not to God. For this reason, then, let\nCelsus, as one who knows not God, give thank-offerings to demons. But we\ngive thanks to the Creator of all, and, along with thanksgiving and\nprayer for the blessings we have received, we also eat the bread\npresented to us; and this bread becomes by prayer a sacred body, which\nsanctifies those who sincerely partake of it.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIV.\n\n\nCelsus would also have us to offer first-fruits to demons. But we would\noffer them to Him who said, \u201cLet the earth bring forth grass, the herb\nyielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose\nseed is in itself upon the earth.\u201d[1621] And to Him to whom we offer\nfirst-fruits we also send up our prayers, \u201chaving a great high priest,\nthat is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God,\u201d and \u201cwe hold\nfast this profession\u201d[1622] as long as we live; for we find God and His\nonly-begotten Son, manifested to us in Jesus, to be gracious and kind to\nus. And if we would wish to have besides a great number of beings who\nshall ever prove friendly to us, we are taught that \u201cthousand thousands\nstood before Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand ministered unto\nHim.\u201d[1623] And these, regarding all as their relations and friends who\nimitate their piety towards God, and in prayer call upon Him with\nsincerity, work along with them for their salvation, appear unto them,\ndeem it their office and duty to attend to them, and as if by common\nagreement they visit with all manner of kindness and deliverance those\nwho pray to God, to whom they themselves also pray: \u201cFor they are all\nministering spirits, sent forth to minister for those who shall be heirs\nof salvation.\u201d[1624] Let the learned Greeks say that the human soul at\nits birth is placed under the charge of demons: Jesus has taught us not\nto despise even the little ones in His church, saying, \u201cTheir angels do\nalways behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.\u201d[1625] And the\nprophet says, \u201cThe angel of the Lord encampeth round about them that\nfear Him, and delivereth them.\u201d[1626] We do not, then, deny that there\nare many demons upon earth, but we maintain that they exist and exercise\npower among the wicked, as a punishment of their wickedness. But they\nhave no power over those who \u201chave put on the whole armour of God,\u201d who\nhave received strength to \u201cwithstand the wiles of the devil,\u201d[1627] and\nwho are ever engaged in contests with them, knowing that \u201cwe wrestle not\nagainst flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers,\nagainst the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual\nwickedness in high places.\u201d[1628]\n\nFootnote 1621:\n\n Gen. i. 11.\n\nFootnote 1622:\n\n Heb. iv. 14.\n\nFootnote 1623:\n\n Dan. vii. 10.\n\nFootnote 1624:\n\n Heb. i. 14.\n\nFootnote 1625:\n\n Matt. xviii. 10.\n\nFootnote 1626:\n\n Ps. xxxiv. 7.\n\nFootnote 1627:\n\n Eph. vi. 11.\n\nFootnote 1628:\n\n Eph. vi. 12.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXV.\n\n\nNow let us consider another saying of Celsus, which is as follows: \u201cThe\nsatrap of a Persian or Roman monarch, or ruler or general or governor,\nyea, even those who fill lower offices of trust or service in the state,\nwould be able to do great injury to those who despised them; and will\nthe satraps and ministers of earth and air be insulted with impunity?\u201d\nObserve now how he introduces servants of the Most High\u2014rulers,\ngenerals, governors, and those filling lower offices of trust and\nservice\u2014as, after the manner of men, inflicting injury upon those who\ninsult them. For he does not consider that a wise man would not wish to\ndo harm to any, but would strive to the utmost of his power to change\nand amend them; unless, indeed, it be that those whom Celsus makes\nservants and rulers appointed by the Most High are behind Lycurgus, the\nlaw-giver of the Laced\u00e6monians, or Zeno of Citium. For when Lycurgus had\nhad his eye put out by a man, he got the offender into his power; but\ninstead of taking revenge upon him, he ceased not to use all his arts of\npersuasion until he induced him to become a philosopher. And Zeno, on\nthe occasion of some one saying, \u201cLet me perish rather than not have my\nrevenge on thee,\u201d answered him, \u201cBut rather let me perish if I do not\nmake a friend of thee.\u201d And I am not yet speaking of those whose\ncharacters have been formed by the teaching of Jesus, and who have heard\nthe words, \u201cLove your enemies, and pray for them which despitefully use\nyou, that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven; for\nHe maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain\non the just and on the unjust.\u201d[1629] And in the prophetical writings\nthe righteous man says, \u201cO Lord my God, if I have done this; if there be\niniquity in my hands; if I have returned evil to those who have done\nevil to me, let me fall helpless under mine enemies: let my enemy\npersecute my soul, and take it; yea, let him tread down my life upon the\nearth.\u201d[1630]\n\nFootnote 1629:\n\n Matt. v. 44, 45.\n\nFootnote 1630:\n\n Ps. vii. 3-6.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVI.\n\n\nBut the angels, who are the true rulers and generals and ministers of\nGod, do not, as Celsus supposes, \u201cinjure those who offend them;\u201d and if\ncertain demons, whom Celsus had in mind, do inflict evils, they show\nthat they are wicked, and that they have received no office of the kind\nfrom God. And they even do injury to those who are under them, and who\nhave acknowledged them as their masters; and accordingly, as it would\nseem that those who break through the regulations which prevail in any\ncountry in regard to matters of food, suffer for it if they are under\nthe demons of that place, while those who are not under them, and have\nnot submitted to their power, are free from all harm, and bid defiance\nto such spirits; although if, in ignorance of certain things, they have\ncome under the power of other demons, they may suffer punishment from\nthem. But the Christian\u2014the true Christian, I mean\u2014who has submitted to\nGod alone and His Word, will suffer nothing from demons, for He is\nmightier than demons. And the Christian will suffer nothing, for \u201cthe\nangel of the Lord will encamp about them that fear Him, and will deliver\nthem,\u201d[1631] and his \u201cangel,\u201d who \u201calways beholds the face of his Father\nin heaven,\u201d[1632] offers up his prayers through the one High Priest to\nthe God of all, and also joins his own prayers with those of the man who\nis committed to his keeping. Let not, then, Celsus try to scare us with\nthreats of mischief from demons, for we despise them. And the demons,\nwhen despised, can do no harm to those who are under the protection of\nHim who can alone help all who deserve His aid; and He does no less than\nset His own angels over His devout servants, so that none of the hostile\nangels, nor even he who is called \u201cthe prince of this world,\u201d[1633] can\neffect anything against those who have given themselves to God.\n\nFootnote 1631:\n\n Ps. xxxiv. 7.\n\nFootnote 1632:\n\n Matt. xviii. 10.\n\nFootnote 1633:\n\n John xiv. 30.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVII.\n\n\nIn the next place, Celsus forgets that he is addressing Christians, who\npray to God alone through Jesus; and mixing up other notions with\ntheirs, he absurdly attributes them all to Christians. \u201cIf,\u201d says he,\n\u201cthey who are addressed are called upon by barbarous names, they will\nhave power, but no longer will they have any if they are addressed in\nGreek or Latin.\u201d Let him, then, state plainly whom we call upon for help\nby barbarous names. Any one will be convinced that this is a false\ncharge which Celsus brings against us, when he considers that Christians\nin prayer do not even use the precise names which divine Scripture\napplies to God; but the Greeks use Greek names, the Romans Latin names,\nand every one prays and sings praises to God as he best can, in his\nmother tongue. For the Lord of all the languages of the earth hears\nthose who pray to Him in each different tongue, hearing, if I may so\nsay, but one voice, expressing itself in various dialects. For the Most\nHigh is not as one of those who select one language, barbarian or Greek,\nknowing nothing of any other, and caring nothing for those who speak in\nother tongues.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXVIII.\n\n\nHe next represents Christians as saying what he never heard from any\nChristian; or if he did, it must have been from one of the most ignorant\nand lawless of the people. \u201cBehold,\u201d they are made to say, \u201cI go up to a\nstatue of Jupiter or Apollo, or some other god: I revile it, and beat\nit, yet it takes no vengeance on me.\u201d He is not aware that among the\nprohibitions of the divine law is this, \u201cThou shalt not revile the\ngods,\u201d[1634] and this is intended to prevent the formation of the habit\nof reviling any one whatever; for we have been taught, \u201cBless, and curse\nnot,\u201d[1635] and it is said that \u201crevilers shall not inherit the kingdom\nof God.\u201d[1636] And who amongst us is so foolish as to speak in the way\nCelsus describes, and to fail to see that such contemptuous language can\nbe of no avail for removing prevailing notions about the gods? For it is\nmatter of observation that there are men who utterly deny the existence\nof a God or of an overruling providence, and who by their impious and\ndestructive teaching have founded sects among those who are called\nphilosophers, and yet neither they themselves, nor those who have\nembraced their opinions, have suffered any of those things which mankind\ngenerally account evils: they are both strong in body and rich in\npossessions. And yet if we ask what loss they have sustained, we shall\nfind that they have suffered the most certain injury. For what greater\ninjury can befall a man than that he should be unable amidst the order\nof the world to see Him who has made it? and what sorer affliction can\ncome to any one than that blindness of mind which prevents him from\nseeing the Creator and Father of every soul?\n\nFootnote 1634:\n\n Ex. xxii. 28.\n\nFootnote 1635:\n\n Rom. xii. 14.\n\nFootnote 1636:\n\n 1 Cor. vi. 10.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XXXIX.\n\n\nAfter putting such words into our mouth, and maliciously charging\nChristians with sentiments which they never held, he then proceeds to\ngive to this supposed expression of Christian feeling an answer, which\nis indeed more a mockery than an answer, when he says, \u201cDo you not see,\ngood sir, that even your own demon is not only reviled, but banished\nfrom every land and sea, and you yourself, who are as it were an image\ndedicated to him, are bound and led to punishment, and fastened to the\nstake, whilst your demon\u2014or, as you call him, \u2018the Son of God\u2019\u2014takes no\nvengeance on the evil-doer?\u201d This answer would be admissible if we\nemployed such language as he ascribes to us; although even then he would\nhave no right to call the Son of God a demon. For as we hold that all\ndemons are evil, He who turns so many men to God is in our view no\ndemon, but God the Word, and the Son of God. And I know not how Celsus\nhas so far forgotten himself as to call Jesus Christ a demon, when he\nnowhere alludes to the existence of any evil demons. And finally, as to\nthe punishments threatened against the ungodly, these will come upon\nthem after they have refused all remedies, and have been, as we may say,\nvisited with an incurable malady of sinfulness.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XL.\n\n\nSuch is our doctrine of punishment; and the inculcation of this doctrine\nturns many from their sins. But let us see, on the other hand, what is\nthe response given on this subject by the priest of Jupiter or Apollo of\nwhom Celsus speaks. It is this: \u201cThe mills of God grind slowly.\u201d[1637]\nAnother describes punishment as reaching \u201cto children\u2019s children, and to\nthose who came after them.\u201d[1638] How much better are those words of\nScripture: \u201cThe fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor\nthe children for the fathers. Every man shall be put to death for his\nown sin.\u201d[1639] And again, \u201cEvery man that eateth the sour grape, his\nteeth shall be set on edge.\u201d[1640] And, \u201cThe son shall not bear the\niniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of\nthe son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the\nwickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.\u201d[1641] If any shall say that\nthe response, \u201cTo children\u2019s children, and to those who come after\nthem,\u201d corresponds with that passage, \u201cWho visits the iniquity of the\nfathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them\nthat hate me,\u201d[1642] let him learn from Ezekiel that this language is\nnot to be taken literally; for he reproves those who say, \u201cOur fathers\nhave eaten sour grapes, and the children\u2019s teeth are set on edge,\u201d[1643]\nand then he adds, \u201cAs I live, saith the Lord, every one shall die for\nhis own sin.\u201d As to the proper meaning of the figurative language about\nsins being visited unto the third and fourth generation, we cannot at\npresent stay to explain.\n\nFootnote 1637:\n\n \u201cThe mills of the gods grind slowly, but they grind to powder\u201d\n (Plutarch).\n\nFootnote 1638:\n\n Hom. _Il._ xx. 308.\n\nFootnote 1639:\n\n Deut. xxiv. 16.\n\nFootnote 1640:\n\n Jer. xxxi. 30.\n\nFootnote 1641:\n\n Ezek. xviii. 20.\n\nFootnote 1642:\n\n Ex. xx. 5.\n\nFootnote 1643:\n\n Ezek. xviii. 2-4.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLI.\n\n\nHe then goes on to rail against us after the manner of old wives. \u201cYou,\u201d\nsays he, \u201cmock and revile the statues of our gods; but if you had\nreviled Bacchus or Hercules in person, you would not perhaps have done\nso with impunity. But those who crucified your God when present among\nmen, suffered nothing for it, either at the time or during the whole of\ntheir lives. And what new thing has there happened since then to make us\nbelieve that he was not an impostor, but the Son of God? And forsooth,\nhe who sent his Son with certain instructions for mankind, allowed him\nto be thus cruelly treated, and his instructions to perish with him,\nwithout ever during all this long time showing the slightest concern.\nWhat father was ever so inhuman? Perhaps, indeed, you may say that he\nsuffered so much, because it was his wish to bear what came to him. But\nit is open to those whom you maliciously revile, to adopt the same\nlanguage, and say that they wish to be reviled, and therefore they bear\nit with patience; for it is best to deal equally with both\nsides,\u2014although these [gods] severely punish the scorner, so that he\nmust either flee and hide himself, or be taken and perish.\u201d Now to these\nstatements I would answer that we revile no one, for we believe that\n\u201crevilers will not inherit the kingdom of God.\u201d[1644] And we read,\n\u201cBless them that curse you; bless, and curse not;\u201d also, \u201cBeing reviled,\nwe bless.\u201d And even although the abuse which we pour upon another may\nseem to have some excuse in the wrong which we have received from him,\nyet such abuse is not allowed by the word of God. And how much more\nought we to abstain from reviling others, when we consider what a great\nfolly it is! And it is equally foolish to apply abusive language to\nstone or gold or silver, turned into what is supposed to be the form of\nGod by those who have no knowledge of God. Accordingly, we throw\nridicule not upon lifeless images, but upon those only who worship them.\nMoreover, if certain demons reside in certain images, and one of them\npasses for Bacchus, another for Hercules, we do not vilify them: for, on\nthe one hand, it would be useless; and, on the other, it does not become\none who is meek, and peaceful, and gentle in spirit, and who has learnt\nthat no one among men or demons is to be reviled, however wicked he may\nbe.\n\nFootnote 1644:\n\n 1 Cor. vi. 10.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLII.\n\n\nThere is an inconsistency into which, strangely enough, Celsus has\nfallen unawares. Those demons or gods whom he extolled a little before,\nhe now shows to be in fact the vilest of creatures, punishing more for\ntheir own revenge than for the improvement of those who revile them. His\nwords are, \u201cIf you had reviled Bacchus or Hercules when present in\nperson, you would not have escaped with impunity.\u201d How any one can hear\nwithout being present in person, I leave any one who will to explain; as\nalso those other questions, \u201cWhy he is sometimes present, and sometimes\nabsent?\u201d and, \u201cWhat is the business which takes demons away from place\nto place?\u201d Again, when he says, \u201cThose who crucified your God himself,\nsuffered no harm for doing so,\u201d he supposes that it is the body of Jesus\nextended on the cross and slain, and not His divine nature, that we call\nGod; and that it was as God that Jesus was crucified and slain. As we\nhave already dwelt at length on the sufferings which Jesus suffered as a\nman, we shall purposely say no more here, that we may not repeat what we\nhave said already. But when he goes on to say that \u201cthose who inflicted\ndeath upon Jesus suffered nothing afterwards through so long a time,\u201d we\nmust inform him, as well as all who are disposed to learn the truth,\nthat the city in which the Jewish people called for the crucifixion of\nJesus with shouts of \u201cCrucify him, crucify him,\u201d[1645] preferring to\nhave the robber set free, who had been cast into prison for sedition and\nmurder, and Jesus, who had been delivered through envy, to be\ncrucified,\u2014that this city not long afterwards was attacked, and, after a\nlong siege, was utterly overthrown and laid waste; for God judged the\ninhabitants of that place unworthy of living together the life of\ncitizens. And yet, though it may seem an incredible thing to say, God\nspared this people in delivering them to their enemies; for He saw that\nthey were incurably averse to any amendment, and were daily sinking\ndeeper and deeper into evil. And all this befell them, because the blood\nof Jesus was shed at their instigation and on their land; and the land\nwas no longer able to bear those who were guilty of so fearful a crime\nagainst Jesus.\n\nFootnote 1645:\n\n Luke xxiii. 21, 25.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIII.\n\n\nSome new thing, then, has come to pass since the time that Jesus\nsuffered,\u2014that, I mean, which has happened to the city, to the whole\nnation, and in the sudden and general rise of a Christian community. And\nthat, too, is a new thing, that those who were strangers to the\ncovenants of God, with no part in His promises, and far from the truth,\nhave by a divine power been enabled to embrace the truth. These things\nwere not the work of an impostor, but were the work of God, who sent His\nWord, Jesus Christ, to make known His purposes.[1646] The sufferings and\ndeath which Jesus endured with such fortitude and meekness, show the\ncruelty and injustice of those who inflicted them, but they did not\ndestroy the announcement of the purposes of God; indeed, if we may so\nsay, they served rather to make them known. For Jesus Himself taught us\nthis when He said, \u201cExcept a grain of wheat fall into the ground and\ndie, it abideth by itself alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much\nfruit.\u201d[1647] Jesus, then, who is this grain of wheat, died, and brought\nforth much fruit. And the Father is ever looking forward for the results\nof the death of the grain of wheat, both those which are arising now,\nand those which shall arise hereafter. The Father of Jesus is therefore\na tender and loving Father, though \u201cHe spared not His own Son, but\ndelivered Him up\u201d as His lamb \u201cfor us all,\u201d[1648] that so \u201cthe Lamb of\nGod,\u201d by dying for all men, might \u201ctake away the sin of the world.\u201d It\nwas not by compulsion, therefore, but willingly, that He bore the\nreproaches of those who reviled Him. Then Celsus, returning to those who\napply abusive language to images, says: \u201cOf those whom you load with\ninsults, you may in like manner say that they voluntarily submit to such\ntreatment, and therefore they bear insults with patience; for it is best\nto deal equally with both sides. Yet these severely punish the scorner,\nso that he must either flee and hide himself, or be taken and perish.\u201d\nIt is not, then, because Christians cast insults upon demons that they\nincur their revenge, but because they drive them away out of the images,\nand from the bodies and souls of men. And here, although Celsus\nperceives it not, he has on this subject spoken something like the\ntruth; for it is true that the souls of those who condemn Christians,\nand betray them, and rejoice in persecuting them, are filled with wicked\ndemons.\n\nFootnote 1646:\n\n \u1f00\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd. Spencer reads \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd in this and the following\n sentences.\n\nFootnote 1647:\n\n John xii. 24.\n\nFootnote 1648:\n\n Rom. viii. 32.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIV.\n\n\nBut when the souls of those who die for the Christian faith depart from\nthe body with great glory, they destroy the power of the demons, and\nfrustrate their designs against men. Wherefore I imagine, that as the\ndemons have learnt from experience that they are defeated and\noverpowered by the martyrs for the truth, they are afraid to have\nrecourse again to violence. And thus, until they forget the defeats they\nhave sustained, it is probable that the world will be at peace with the\nChristians. But when they recover their power, and, with eyes blinded by\nsin, wish again to take their revenge on Christians, and persecute them,\nthen again they will be defeated, and then again the souls of the godly,\nwho lay down their lives for the cause of godliness, shall utterly\ndestroy the army of the wicked one. And as the demons perceive that\nthose who meet death victoriously for the sake of religion destroy their\nauthority, while those who give way under their sufferings, and deny the\nfaith, come under their power, I imagine that at times they feel a deep\ninterest in Christians when on their trial, and keenly strive to gain\nthem over to their side, feeling as they do that their confession is\ntorture to them, and their denial is a relief and encouragement to them.\nAnd traces of the same feeling may be seen in the demeanour of the\njudges; for they are greatly distressed at seeing those who bear outrage\nand torture with patience, but are greatly elated when a Christian gives\nway under it. Yet it is from no feeling of humanity that this arises.\nThey see well, that, while \u201cthe tongues\u201d of those who are overpowered by\nthe tortures \u201cmay take the oath, the mind has not sworn.\u201d[1649] And this\nmay serve as an answer to the remark of Celsus: \u201cBut they severely\npunish one who reviles them, so that he must either flee and hide\nhimself, or be taken and perish.\u201d If a Christian ever flees away, it is\nnot from fear, but in obedience to the command of his Master, that so he\nmay preserve himself, and employ his strength for the benefit of others.\n\nFootnote 1649:\n\n Euripides, Hippolytus.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLV.\n\n\nLet us see what Celsus next goes on to say. It is as follows: \u201cWhat need\nis there to collect all the oracular responses, which have been\ndelivered with a divine voice by priests and priestesses, as well as by\nothers, whether men or women, who were under a divine influence?\u2014all the\nwonderful things that have been heard issuing from the inner\nsanctuary?\u2014all the revelations that have been made to those who\nconsulted the sacrificial victims?\u2014and all the knowledge that has been\nconveyed to men by other signs and prodigies? To some the gods have\nappeared in visible forms. The world is full of such instances. How many\ncities have been built in obedience to commands received from oracles;\nhow often, in the same way, delivered from disease and famine! Or again,\nhow many cities, from disregard or forgetfulness of these oracles, have\nperished miserably! How many colonies have been established and made to\nflourish by following their orders! How many princes and private persons\nhave, from this cause, had prosperity or adversity! How many who mourned\nover their childlessness, have obtained the blessing they asked for! How\nmany have turned away from themselves the anger of demons! How many who\nwere maimed in their limbs, have had them restored! And again, how many\nhave met with summary punishment for showing want of reverence to the\ntemples\u2014some being instantly seized with madness, others openly\nconfessing their crimes, others having put an end to their lives, and\nothers having become the victims of incurable maladies! Yea, some have\nbeen slain by a terrible voice issuing from the inner sanctuary.\u201d I know\nnot how it comes that Celsus brings forward these as undoubted facts,\nwhilst at the same time he treats as mere fables the wonders which are\nrecorded and handed down to us as having happened among the Jews, or as\nhaving been performed by Jesus and His disciples. For why may not our\naccounts be true, and those of Celsus fables and fictions? At least,\nthese latter were not believed by the followers of Democritus, Epicurus,\nand Aristotle, although perhaps these Grecian sects would have been\nconvinced by the evidence in support of our miracles, if Moses or any of\nthe prophets who wrought these wonders, or Jesus Christ Himself, had\ncome in their way.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVI.\n\n\nIt is related of the priestess of Apollo, that she at times allowed\nherself to be influenced in her answers by bribes; but our prophets were\nadmired for their plain truthfulness, not only by their contemporaries,\nbut also by those who lived in later times. For through the commands\npronounced by the prophets cities were founded, men were cured, and\nplagues were stayed. Indeed, the whole Jewish race went out as a colony\nfrom Egypt to Palestine, in accordance with the divine oracles. They\nalso, when they followed the commands of God, were prosperous; when they\ndeparted from them, they suffered reverses. What need is there to quote\nall the princes and private persons in Scripture history who fared well\nor ill according as they obeyed or despised the words of the prophets?\nIf we refer to those who were unhappy because they were childless, but\nwho, after offering prayers to the Creator of all, became fathers and\nmothers, let any one read the accounts of Abraham and Sarah, to whom at\nan advanced age was born Isaac, the father of the whole Jewish nation:\nand there are other instances of the same thing. Let him also read the\naccount of Hezekiah, who not only recovered from his sickness, according\nto the prediction of Isaiah, but was also bold enough to say,\n\u201cAfterwards I shall beget children, who shall declare Thy\nrighteousness.\u201d[1650] And in the fourth book of Kings we read that the\nprophet Elisha made known to a woman who had received him hospitably,\nthat by the grace of God she should have a son; and through the prayers\nof Elisha she became a mother. The maimed were cured by Jesus in great\nnumbers. And the books of the Maccabees relate what punishments were\ninflicted upon those who dared to profane the Jewish service in the\ntemple at Jerusalem.\n\nFootnote 1650:\n\n Isa. xxxviii. 19 (according to the LXX.).\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVII.\n\n\nBut the Greeks will say that these accounts are fabulous, although two\nwhole nations are witnesses to their truth. But why may we not consider\nthe accounts of the Greeks as fabulous rather than those? Perhaps some\none, however, wishing not to appear blindly to accept his own statements\nand reject those of others, would conclude, after a close examination of\nthe matter, that the wonders mentioned by the Greeks were performed by\ncertain demons; those among the Jews by prophets or by angels, or by God\nthrough the means of angels, and those recorded by Christians by Jesus\nHimself, or by His power working in His apostles. Let us, then, compare\nall these accounts together; let us examine into the aim and purpose of\nthose who performed them; and let us inquire what effect was produced\nupon the persons on whose account these acts of kindness were performed,\nwhether beneficial or hurtful, or neither the one nor the other. The\nancient Jewish people, before they sinned against God, and were for\ntheir great wickedness cast off by Him, must evidently have been a\npeople of great wisdom.[1651] But Christians, who have in so wonderful a\nmanner formed themselves into a community, appear at first to have been\nmore induced by miracles than by exhortations to forsake the\ninstitutions of their fathers, and to adopt others which were quite\nstrange to them. And indeed, if we were to reason from what is probable\nas to the first formation of the Christian society, we should say that\nit is incredible that the apostles of Jesus Christ, who were unlettered\nmen of humble life, could have been emboldened to preach Christian truth\nto men by anything else than the power which was conferred upon them,\nand the grace which accompanied their words and rendered them effective;\nand those who heard them would not have renounced the old-established\nusages of their fathers, and been induced to adopt notions so different\nfrom those in which they had been brought up, unless they had been moved\nby some extraordinary power, and by the force of miraculous events.\n\nFootnote 1651:\n\n \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLVIII.\n\n\nIn the next place, Celsus, after referring to the enthusiasm with which\nmen will contend unto death rather than abjure Christianity, adds\nstrangely enough some remarks, in which he wishes to show that our\ndoctrines are similar to those delivered by the priests at the\ncelebration of the heathen mysteries. He says, \u201cJust as you, good sir,\nbelieve in eternal punishments, so also do the priests who interpret and\ninitiate into the sacred mysteries. The same punishments with which you\nthreaten others, they threaten you. Now it is worthy of examination,\nwhich of the two is more firmly established as true; for both parties\ncontend with equal assurance that the truth is on their side. But if we\nrequire proofs, the priests of the heathen gods produce many that are\nclear and convincing, partly from wonders performed by demons, and\npartly from the answers given by oracles, and various other modes of\ndivination.\u201d He would, then, have us believe that we and the\ninterpreters of the mysteries equally teach the doctrine of eternal\npunishment, and that it is a matter for inquiry on which side of the two\nthe truth lies. Now I should say that the truth lies with those who are\nable to induce their hearers to live as men who are convinced of the\ntruth of what they have heard. But Jews and Christians have been thus\naffected by the doctrines they hold about what we speak of as the world\nto come, and the rewards of the righteous, and the punishments of the\nwicked. Let Celsus then, or any one who will, show us who have been\nmoved in this way in regard to eternal punishments by the teaching of\nheathen priests and mystagogues. For surely the purpose of him who\nbrought to light this doctrine was not only to reason upon the subject\nof punishments, and to strike men with terror of them, but to induce\nthose who heard the truth to strive with all their might against those\nsins which are the causes of punishment. And those who study the\nprophecies with care, and are not content with a cursory perusal of the\npredictions contained in them, will find them such as to convince the\nintelligent and sincere reader that the Spirit of God was in those men,\nand that with their writings there is nothing in all the works of\ndemons, responses of oracles, or sayings of soothsayers, for one moment\nto be compared.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter XLIX.\n\n\nLet us see in what terms Celsus next addresses us: \u201cBesides, is it not\nmost absurd and inconsistent in you, on the one hand, to make so much of\nthe body as you do\u2014to expect that the same body will rise again, as\nthough it were the best and most precious part of us; and yet, on the\nother, to expose it to such tortures as though it were worthless? But\nmen who hold such notions, and are so attached to the body, are not\nworthy of being reasoned with; for in this and in other respects they\nshow themselves to be gross, impure, and bent upon revolting without any\nreason from the common belief. But I shall direct my discourse to those\nwho hope for the enjoyment of eternal life with God by means of the soul\nor mind, whether they choose to call it a spiritual substance, an\nintelligent spirit, holy and blessed, or a living soul, or the heavenly\nand indestructible offspring of a divine and incorporeal nature, or by\nwhatever name they designate the spiritual nature of man. And they are\nrightly persuaded that those who live well shall be blessed, and the\nunrighteous shall all suffer everlasting punishments. And from this\ndoctrine neither they nor any other should ever swerve.\u201d Now, as he has\noften already reproached us for our opinions on the resurrection, and as\nwe have on these occasions defended our opinions in what seemed to us a\nreasonable way, we do not intend, at each repetition of the one\nobjection, to go into a repetition of our defence. Celsus makes an\nunfounded charge against us when he ascribes to us the opinion that\n\u201cthere is nothing in our complex nature better or more precious than the\nbody;\u201d for we hold that far beyond all bodies is the soul, and\nespecially the reasonable soul; for it is the soul, and not the body,\nwhich bears the likeness of the Creator. For, according to us, God is\nnot corporeal, unless we fall into the absurd errors of the followers of\nZeno and Chrysippus.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter L.\n\n\nBut since he reproaches us with too great an anxiety about the body, let\nhim know that when that feeling is a wrong one we do not share in it,\nand when it is indifferent we only long for that which God has promised\nto the righteous. But Celsus considers that we are inconsistent with\nourselves when we count the body worthy of honour from God, and\ntherefore hope for its resurrection, and yet at the same time expose it\nto tortures as though it were not worthy of honour. But surely it is not\nwithout honour for the body to suffer for the sake of godliness, and to\nchoose afflictions on account of virtue: the dishonourable thing would\nbe for it to waste its powers in vicious indulgence. For the divine word\nsays: \u201cWhat is an honourable seed? The seed of man. What is a\ndishonourable seed? The seed of man.\u201d[1652] Moreover, Celsus thinks that\nhe ought not to reason with those who hope for the good of the body, as\nthey are unreasonably intent upon an object which can never satisfy\ntheir expectations. He also calls them gross and impure men, bent upon\ncreating needless dissensions. But surely he ought, as one of superior\nhumanity, to assist even the rude and depraved. For society does not\nexclude from its pale the coarse and uncultivated, as it does the\nirrational animals, but our Creator made us on the same common level\nwith all mankind. It is not an undignified thing, therefore, to reason\neven with the coarse and unrefined, and to try to bring them as far as\npossible to a higher state of refinement\u2014to bring the impure to the\nhighest practicable degree of purity\u2014to bring the unreasoning multitude\nto reason, and the diseased in mind to spiritual health.\n\nFootnote 1652:\n\n Ecclus. x. 19. In the LXX. the last clause is, \u201cWhat is a\n dishonourable seed? They that transgress the commandments.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LI.\n\n\nIn the next place, he expresses his approval of those who \u201chope that\neternal life shall be enjoyed with God by the soul or mind, or, as it is\nvariously called, the spiritual nature, the reasonable soul,\nintelligent, holy, and blessed;\u201d and he allows the soundness of the\ndoctrine, that \u201cthose who had a good life shall be happy, and the\nunrighteous shall suffer eternal punishments.\u201d And yet I wonder at what\nfollows, more than at anything that Celsus has ever said; for he adds,\n\u201cAnd from this doctrine let not them or any one ever swerve.\u201d For\ncertainly in writing against Christians, the very essence of whose faith\nis God, and the promises made by Christ to the righteous, and His\nwarnings of punishment awaiting the wicked, he must see that, if a\nChristian were brought to renounce Christianity by his arguments against\nit, it is beyond doubt that, along with his Christian faith, he would\ncast off the very doctrine from which he says that no Christian and no\nman should ever swerve. But I think Celsus has been far surpassed in\nconsideration for his fellow-men by Chrysippus in his treatise, _On the\nSubjugation of the Passions_. For when he sought to apply remedies to\nthe affections and passions which oppress and distract the human spirit,\nafter employing such arguments as seemed to himself to be strong, he did\nnot shrink from using in the second and third place others which he did\nnot himself approve of. \u201cFor,\u201d says he, \u201cif it were held by any one that\nthere are three kinds of good, we must seek to regulate the passions in\naccordance with that supposition; and we must not too curiously inquire\ninto the opinions held by a person at the time that he is under the\ninfluence of passion, lest, if we delay too long for the purpose of\noverthrowing the opinions by which the mind is possessed, the\nopportunity for curing the passion may pass away.\u201d And he adds, \u201cThus,\nsupposing that pleasure were the highest good, or that he was of that\nopinion whose mind was under the dominion of passion, we should not the\nless give him help, and show that, even on the principle that pleasure\nis the highest and final good of man, all passion is disallowed.\u201d And\nCelsus, in like manner, after having embraced the doctrine, \u201cthat the\nrighteous shall be blessed, and the wicked shall suffer eternal\npunishments,\u201d should have followed out his subject; and, after having\nadvanced what seemed to him the chief argument, he should have proceeded\nto prove and enforce by further reasons the truth that the unjust shall\nsurely suffer eternal punishment, and those who lead a good life shall\nbe blessed.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LII.\n\n\nFor we who have been persuaded by many, yea by innumerable, arguments to\nlead a Christian life, are especially anxious to bring all men as far as\npossible to receive the whole system of Christian truth; but when we\nmeet with persons who are prejudiced by the calumnies thrown out against\nChristians, and who, from a notion that Christians are an impious\npeople, will not listen to any who offer to instruct them in the\nprinciples of the divine word, then, on the common principles of\nhumanity, we endeavour to the best of our ability to convince them of\nthe doctrine of the punishment of the wicked, and to induce even those\nwho are unwilling to become Christians to accept that truth. And we are\nthus anxious to persuade them of the rewards of right living, when we\nsee that many things which we teach about a healthy moral life are also\ntaught by the enemies of our faith. For you will find that they have not\nentirely lost the common notions of right and wrong, of good and evil.\nLet all men, therefore, when they look upon the universe, observe the\nconstant revolution of the unerring stars, the converse motion of the\nplanets, the constitution of the atmosphere, and its adaptation to the\nnecessities of the animals, and especially of man, with all the\ninnumerable contrivances for the wellbeing of mankind; and then, after\nthus considering the order of the universe, let them beware of doing\naught which is displeasing to the Creator of this universe, of the soul\nand its intelligent principle; and let them rest assured that punishment\nshall be inflicted on the wicked, and rewards shall be bestowed upon the\nrighteous, by Him who deals with every one as he deserves, and who will\nproportion His rewards to the good that each has done, and to the\naccount of himself that he is able to give. And let all men know that\nthe good shall be advanced to a higher state, and that the wicked shall\nbe delivered over to sufferings and torments, in punishment of their\nlicentiousness and depravity, their cowardice, timidity, and all their\nfollies.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIII.\n\n\nHaving said so much on this subject, let us proceed to another statement\nof Celsus: \u201cSince men are born united to a body, whether to suit the\norder of the universe, or that they may in that way suffer the\npunishment of sin; or because the soul is oppressed by certain passions\nuntil it is purged from these at the appointed period of time,\u2014for,\naccording to Empedocles, all mankind must be banished from the abodes of\nthe blessed for 30,000 periods of time,\u2014we must therefore believe that\nthey are entrusted to certain beings as keepers of this prison-house.\u201d\nYou will observe that Celsus, in these remarks, speaks of such weighty\nmatters in the language of doubtful human conjecture. He adds also\nvarious opinions as to the origin of man, and shows considerable\nreluctance to set down any of these opinions as false. When he had once\ncome to the conclusion neither indiscriminately to accept nor recklessly\nto reject the opinions held by the ancients, would it not have been in\naccordance with that same rule of judging, if, when he found himself not\ndisposed to believe the doctrines taught by the Jewish prophets and by\nJesus, at any rate to have held them as matters open to inquiry? And\nshould he not have considered whether it is very probable that a people\nwho faithfully served the Most High God, and who ofttimes encountered\nnumberless dangers, and even death, rather than sacrifice the honour of\nGod, and what they believed to be the revelations of His will, should\nhave been wholly overlooked by God? Should it not rather be thought\nprobable that people who despised the efforts of human art to represent\nthe Divine Being, but strove rather to rise in thought to the knowledge\nof the Most High, should have been favoured with some revelation from\nHimself? Besides, he ought to have considered that the common Father and\nCreator of all, who sees and hears all things, and who duly esteems the\nintention of every man who seeks Him and desires to serve Him, will\ngrant unto these also some of the benefits of His rule, and will give\nthem an enlargement of that knowledge of Himself which He has once\nbestowed upon them. If this had been remembered by Celsus and the others\nwho hate Moses and the Jewish prophets, and Jesus, and His faithful\ndisciples, who endured so much for the sake of His word, they would not\nthus have reviled Moses, and the prophets, and Jesus, and His apostles;\nand they would not have singled out for their contempt the Jews beyond\nall the nations of the earth, and said they were worse even than the\nEgyptians,\u2014a people who, either from superstition or some other form of\ndelusion, went as far as they could in degrading the Divine Being to the\nlevel of brute beasts. And we invite inquiry, not as though we wished to\nlead any to doubt regarding the truths of Christianity, but in order to\nshow that it would be better for those who in every way revile the\ndoctrines of Christianity, at any rate to suspend their judgment, and\nnot so rashly to state about Jesus and His apostles such things as they\ndo not know, and as they cannot prove, either by what the Stoics call\n\u201capprehensive perception,\u201d[1653] or by any other methods used by\ndifferent sects of philosophers as criteria of truth.\n\nFootnote 1653:\n\n \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIV.\n\n\nWhen Celsus adds, \u201cWe must therefore believe that men are entrusted to\ncertain beings who are the keepers of this prison-house,\u201d our answer is,\nthat the souls of those who are called by Jeremiah \u201cprisoners of the\nearth,\u201d[1654] when eager in the pursuit of virtue, are even in this life\ndelivered from the bondage of evil; for Jesus declared this, as was\nforetold long before His advent by the prophet Isaiah, when he said that\n\u201cthe prisoners would go forth, and they that were in darkness would show\nthemselves.\u201d[1655] And Jesus Himself, as Isaiah also foretold of Him,\narose as \u201ca light to them that sat in darkness and in the shadow of\ndeath,\u201d[1656] so that we may therefore say, \u201cLet us break their bands\nasunder, and cast their cords from us.\u201d[1657] If Celsus, and those who\nlike him are opposed to us, had been able to sound the depths of the\ngospel narratives, they would not have counselled us to put our\nconfidence in those beings whom they call \u201cthe keepers of the\nprison-house.\u201d It is written in the Gospel that a woman was bowed\ntogether, and could in no wise lift up herself. And when Jesus beheld\nher, and perceived from what cause she was bowed together, he said,\n\u201cOught not this daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has bound, lo, these\neighteen years, to be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day?\u201d[1658]\nAnd how many others are still bowed down and bound by Satan, who hinders\nthem from looking up at all, and who would have us to look down also!\nAnd no one can raise them up, except the Word, that came by Jesus\nChrist, and that aforetime inspired the prophets. And Jesus came to\nrelease those who were under the dominion of the devil; and, speaking of\nhim, He said with that depth of meaning which characterized His words,\n\u201cNow is the prince of this world judged.\u201d We are, then, indulging in no\nbaseless calumnies against demons, but are condemning their agency upon\nearth as destructive to mankind, and show that, under cover of oracles\nand bodily cures, and such other means, they are seeking to separate\nfrom God the soul which has descended to this \u201cbody of humiliation;\u201d and\nthose who feel this humiliation exclaim, \u201cO wretched man that I am! who\nshall deliver me from the body of this death?\u201d[1659] It is not in vain,\ntherefore, that we expose our bodies to be beaten and tortured; for\nsurely it is not in vain for a man to submit to such sufferings, if by\nthat means he may avoid bestowing the name of gods on those earthly\nspirits that unite with their worshippers to bring him to destruction.\nIndeed, we think it both reasonable in itself and well-pleasing to God,\nto suffer pain for the sake of virtue, to undergo torture for the sake\nof piety, and even to suffer death for the sake of holiness; for\n\u201cprecious in the sight of God is the death of His saints;\u201d[1660] and we\nmaintain that to overcome the love of life is to enjoy a great good. But\nwhen Celsus compares us to notorious criminals, who justly suffer\npunishment for their crimes, and does not shrink from placing so\nlaudable a purpose as that which we set before us upon the same level\nwith the obstinacy of criminals, he makes himself the brother and\ncompanion of those who accounted Jesus among criminals, fulfilling the\nScripture, which saith, \u201cHe was numbered with transgressors.\u201d[1661]\n\nFootnote 1654:\n\n Lam. iii. 34.\n\nFootnote 1655:\n\n Isa. xlix. 9.\n\nFootnote 1656:\n\n Isa. ix. 2.\n\nFootnote 1657:\n\n Ps. ii. 3.\n\nFootnote 1658:\n\n Luke xiii. 11, 16.\n\nFootnote 1659:\n\n Rom. vii. 24.\n\nFootnote 1660:\n\n Ps. cxvi. 15.\n\nFootnote 1661:\n\n Isa. liii. 12.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LV.\n\n\nCelsus goes on to say: \u201cThey must make their choice between two\nalternatives. If they refuse to render due service to the gods, and to\nrespect those who are set over this service, let them not come to\nmanhood, or marry wives, or have children, or indeed take any share in\nthe affairs of life; but let them depart hence with all speed, and leave\nno posterity behind them, that such a race may become extinct from the\nface of the earth. Or, on the other hand, if they will take wives, and\nbring up children, and taste of the fruits of the earth, and partake of\nall the blessings of life, and bear its appointed sorrows (for nature\nherself hath allotted sorrows to all men; for sorrows must exist, and\nearth is the only place for them), then must they discharge the duties\nof life until they are released from its bonds, and render due honour to\nthose beings who control the affairs of this life, if they would not\nshow themselves ungrateful to them. For it would be unjust in them,\nafter receiving the good things which they dispense, to pay them no\ntribute in return.\u201d To this we reply, that there appears to us to be no\ngood reason for our leaving this world, except when piety and virtue\nrequire it; as when, for example, those who are set as judges, and think\nthat they have power over our lives, place before us the alternative\neither to live in violation of the commands of Jesus, or to die if we\ncontinue obedient to them. But God has allowed us to marry, because all\nare not fit for the higher, that is, the perfectly pure life; and God\nwould have us to bring up all our children, and not to destroy any of\nthe offspring given us by His providence. And this does not conflict\nwith our purpose not to obey the demons that are on the earth; for,\n\u201cbeing armed with the whole armour of God, we stand\u201d[1662] as athletes\nof piety against the race of demons that plot against us.\n\nFootnote 1662:\n\n Eph. vi. 11.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVI.\n\n\nAlthough, therefore, Celsus would, in his own words, \u201cdrive us with all\nhaste out of life,\u201d so that \u201csuch a race may become extinct from the\nearth;\u201d yet we, along with those who worship the Creator, will live\naccording to the laws of God, never consenting to obey the laws of sin.\nWe will marry if we wish, and bring up the children given to us in\nmarriage; and if need be, we will not only partake of the blessings of\nlife, but bear its appointed sorrows as a trial to our souls. For in\nthis way is divine Scripture accustomed to speak of human afflictions,\nby which, as gold is tried in the fire, so the spirit of man is tried,\nand is found to be worthy either of condemnation or of praise. For those\nthings which Celsus calls evils we are therefore prepared, and are ready\nto say, \u201cTry me, O Lord, and prove me; purge my reins and my\nheart.\u201d[1663] For \u201cno one will be crowned,\u201d unless here upon earth, with\nthis body of humiliation, \u201che strive lawfully.\u201d[1664] Further, we do not\npay honours supposed to be due to those whom Celsus speaks of as being\nset over the affairs of the world. For we worship the Lord our God, and\nHim only do we serve, and desire to be followers of Christ, who, when\nthe devil said to Him, \u201cAll these things will I give thee if thou wilt\nfall down and worship me,\u201d answered him by the words, \u201cThou shalt\nworship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.\u201d[1665]\nWherefore we do not render the honour supposed to be due to those who,\naccording to Celsus, are set over the affairs of this world; for \u201cno man\ncan serve two masters,\u201d and we \u201ccannot serve God and mammon,\u201d whether\nthis name be applied to one or more. Moreover, if any one \u201cby\ntransgressing the law dishonours the lawgiver,\u201d it seems clear to us\nthat if the two laws, the law of God and the law of mammon, are\ncompletely opposed to each other, it is better for us by transgressing\nthe law of mammon to dishonour mammon, that we may honour God by keeping\nHis law, than by transgressing the law of God to dishonour God, that by\nobeying the law of mammon we may honour mammon.\n\nFootnote 1663:\n\n Ps. xxvi. 2.\n\nFootnote 1664:\n\n 2 Tim. ii. 5.\n\nFootnote 1665:\n\n Matt. iv. 9, 10.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVII.\n\n\nCelsus supposes that men \u201cdischarge the duties of life until they are\nloosened from its bonds,\u201d when, in accordance with commonly received\ncustoms, they offer sacrifices to each of the gods recognised in the\nstate; and he fails to perceive the true duty which is fulfilled by an\nearnest piety. For we say that he truly discharges the duties of life\nwho is ever mindful who is his Creator, and what things are agreeable to\nHim, and who acts in all things so that he may please God. Again, Celsus\nwishes us to be thankful to these demons, imagining that we owe them\nthankofferings. But we, while recognising the duty of thankfulness,\nmaintain that we show no ingratitude by refusing to give thanks to\nbeings who do us no good, but who rather set themselves against us when\nwe neither sacrifice to them nor worship them. We are much more\nconcerned lest we should be ungrateful to God, who has loaded us with\nHis benefits, whose workmanship we are, who cares for us in whatever\ncondition we may be, and who has given us hopes of things beyond this\npresent life. And we have a symbol of gratitude to God in the bread\nwhich we call the Eucharist. Besides, as we have shown before, the\ndemons have not the control of those things which have been created for\nour use; we commit no wrong, therefore, when we partake of created\nthings, and yet refuse to offer sacrifices to beings who have no concern\nwith them. Moreover, as we know that it is not demons, but angels, who\nhave been set over the fruits of the earth, and over the birth of\nanimals, it is the latter that we praise and bless, as having been\nappointed by God over the things needful for our race; yet even to them\nwe will not give the honour which is due to God. For this would not be\npleasing to God, nor would it be any pleasure to the angels themselves\nto whom these things have been committed. Indeed, they are much more\npleased if we refrain from offering sacrifices to them than if we offer\nthem; for they have no desire for the sacrificial odours which rise from\nthe earth.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LVIII.\n\n\nCelsus goes on to say: \u201cLet any one inquire of the Egyptians, and he\nwill find that everything, even to the most insignificant, is committed\nto the care of a certain demon. The body of man is divided into\nthirty-six parts, and as many demons of the air are appointed to the\ncare of it, each having charge of a different part, although others make\nthe number much larger. All these demons have in the language of that\ncountry distinct names; as Chnoumen, Chnachoumen, Cnat, Sicat, Biou,\nErou, Erebiou, Ramanor, Reianoor, and other such Egyptian names.\nMoreover, they call upon them, and are cured of diseases of particular\nparts of the body. What, then, is there to prevent a man from giving\nhonour to these or to others, if he would rather be in health than be\nsick, rather have prosperity than adversity, and be freed as much as\npossible from all plagues and troubles?\u201d In this way, Celsus seeks to\ndegrade our souls to the worship of demons, under the assumption that\nthey have possession of our bodies, and that each one has power over a\nseparate member. And he wishes us on this ground to put confidence in\nthese demons of which he speaks, and to serve them, in order that we may\nbe in health rather than be sick, have prosperity rather than adversity,\nand may as far as possible escape all plagues and troubles. The honour\nof the Most High God, which cannot be divided or shared with another, is\nso lightly esteemed by him, that he cannot believe in the ability of\nGod, if called upon and highly honoured, to give to those who serve Him\na power by which they may be defended from the assaults directed by\ndemons against the righteous. For he has never beheld the efficacy of\nthose words, \u201cin the name of Jesus,\u201d when uttered by the truly faithful,\nto deliver not a few from demons and demoniacal possessions and other\nplagues.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LIX.\n\n\nProbably those who embrace the views of Celsus will smile at us when we\nsay, \u201cAt the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of things in heaven, of\nthings on earth, and of things under the earth, and every tongue\u201d is\nbrought to \u201cconfess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the\nFather.\u201d[1666] But although they may ridicule such a statement, yet they\nwill receive much more convincing arguments in support of it than Celsus\nbrings in behalf of Chnoumen, Chnachoumen, Cnat, Sicat, and the rest of\nthe Egyptian catalogue, whom he mentions as being called upon, and as\nhealing the diseases of different parts of the human body. And observe\nhow, while seeking to turn us away from our faith in the God of all\nthrough Jesus Christ, he exhorts us for the welfare of our bodies to\nfaith in six-and-thirty barbarous demons, whom the Egyptian magi alone\ncall upon in some unknown way, and promise us in return great benefits.\nAccording to Celsus, then, it would be better for us now to give\nourselves up to magic and sorcery than to embrace Christianity, and to\nput our faith in an innumerable multitude of demons than in the\nalmighty, living, self-revealing God, who has manifested Himself by Him\nwho by His great power has spread the true principles of holiness among\nall men throughout the world; yea, I may add without exaggeration, He\nhas given this knowledge to all beings everywhere possessed of reason,\nand needing deliverance from the plague and corruption of sin.\n\nFootnote 1666:\n\n Phil. ii. 10, 11.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LX.\n\n\nCelsus, however, suspecting that the tendency of such teaching as he\nhere gives is to lead to magic, and dreading that harm may arise from\nthese statements, adds: \u201cCare, however, must be taken lest any one, by\nfamiliarizing his mind with these matters, should become too much\nengrossed with them, and lest, through an excessive regard for the body,\nhe should have his mind turned away from higher things, and allow them\nto pass into oblivion. For perhaps we ought not to despise the opinion\nof those wise men who say that most of the earth-demons are taken up\nwith carnal indulgence, blood, odours, sweet sounds, and other such\nsensual things; and therefore they are unable to do more than heal the\nbody, or foretell the fortunes of men and cities, and do other such\nthings as relate to this mortal life.\u201d If there is, then, such a\ndangerous tendency in this direction, as even the enemy of the truth of\nGod confesses, how much better is it to avoid all danger of giving\nourselves too much up to the power of such demons, and of becoming\nturned aside from higher things, and suffering them to pass into\noblivion through an excessive attention to the body; by entrusting\nourselves to the Supreme God through Jesus Christ, who has given us such\ninstruction, and asking of Him all help, and the guardianship of holy\nand good angels, to defend us from the earth-spirits intent on lust, and\nblood, and sacrificial odours, and strange sounds, and other sensual\nthings! For even, by the confession of Celsus, they can do nothing more\nthan cure the body. But, indeed, I would say that it is not clear that\nthese demons, however much they are reverenced, can even cure the body.\nBut in seeking recovery from disease, a man must either follow the more\nordinary and simple method, and have recourse to medical art; or if he\nwould go beyond the common methods adopted by men, he must rise to the\nhigher and better way of seeking the blessing of Him who is God over\nall, through piety and prayers.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXI.\n\n\nFor consider with yourself which disposition of mind will be more\nacceptable to the Most High, whose power is supreme and universal, and\nwho directs all for the welfare of mankind in body, and in mind, and in\noutward things,\u2014whether that of the man who gives himself up to God in\nall things, or that of the man who is curiously inquisitive about the\nnames of demons, their powers and agency, the incantations, the herbs\nproper to them, and the stones with the inscriptions graven on them,\ncorresponding symbolically or otherwise to their traditional shapes? It\nis plain even to the least intelligent, that the disposition of the man\nwho is simple-minded, and not given to curious inquiries, but in all\nthings devoted to the divine will, will be most pleasing to God, and to\nall those who are like God; but that of the man who, for the sake of\nbodily health, of bodily enjoyment, and outward prosperity, busies\nhimself about the names of demons, and inquires by what incantations he\nshall appease them, will be condemned by God as bad and impious, and\nmore agreeable to the nature of demons than of men, and will be given\nover to be torn and otherwise tormented by demons. For it is probable\nthat they, as being wicked creatures, and, as Celsus confesses, addicted\nto blood, sacrificial odours, sweet sounds, and such like, will not keep\ntheir most solemn promises to those who supply them with these things.\nFor if others invoke their aid against the persons who have already\ncalled upon them, and purchase their favour with a larger supply of\nblood, and odours, and such offerings as they require, they will take\npart against those who yesterday sacrificed and presented pleasant\nofferings to them.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXII.\n\n\nIn a former passage, Celsus had spoken at length on the subject of\noracles, and had referred us to their answers as being the voice of the\ngods; but now he makes amends, and confesses that \u201cthose who foretell\nthe fortunes of men and cities, and concern themselves about mortal\naffairs, are earth-spirits, who are given up to fleshly lust, blood,\nodours, sweet sounds, and other such things, and who are unable to rise\nabove these sensual objects.\u201d Perhaps, when we opposed the theological\nteaching of Celsus in regard to oracles, and the honour done to those\ncalled gods, some one might suspect us of impiety when we alleged that\nthese were stratagems of demoniacal powers, to draw men away to carnal\nindulgence. But any who entertained this suspicion against us, may now\nbelieve that the statements put forth by Christians were well-founded,\nwhen they see the above passage from the writings of one who is a\nprofessed adversary of Christianity, but who now at length writes as one\nwho has been overcome by the spirit of truth. Although, therefore,\nCelsus says that \u201cwe must offer sacrifices to them, in so far as they\nare profitable to us, for to offer them indiscriminately is not allowed\nby reason,\u201d yet we are not to offer sacrifices to demons addicted to\nblood and odours; nor is the Divine Being to be profaned in our minds,\nby being brought down to the level of wicked demons. If Celsus had\ncarefully weighed the meaning of the word \u201cprofitable,\u201d and had\nconsidered that the truest profit lies in virtue and in virtuous action,\nhe would not have applied the phrase \u201cas far as it is profitable\u201d to the\nservice of such demons, as he has acknowledged them to be. If, then,\nhealth of body and success in life were to come to us on condition of\nour serving such demons, we should prefer sickness and misfortune\naccompanied with the consciousness of our being truly devoted to the\nwill of God. For this is preferable to being mortally diseased in mind,\nand wretched through being separate and outcasts from God, though\nhealthy in body and abounding in earthly prosperity. And we would rather\ngo for help to one who seeks nothing whatever but the well-being of men\nand of all rational creatures, than to those that delight in blood and\nsacrificial odours.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIII.\n\n\nAfter having said so much of the demons, and of their fondness for blood\nand the odour of sacrifices, Celsus adds, as though wishing to retract\nthe charge he had made: \u201cThe more just opinion is, that demons desire\nnothing and need nothing, but that they take pleasure in those who\ndischarge towards them offices of piety.\u201d If Celsus believed this to be\ntrue, he should have said so, instead of making his previous statements.\nBut, indeed, human nature is never utterly forsaken by God and His\nonly-begotten Son, the truth. Wherefore even Celsus spoke the truth when\nhe made the demons take pleasure in the blood and smoke of victims;\nalthough, by the force of his own evil nature, he falls back into his\nerrors, and compares demons with men who rigorously discharge every\nduty, even to those who show no gratitude; while to those who are\ngrateful they abound in acts of kindness. Here Celsus appears to me to\nget into confusion. At one time his judgment is darkened by the\ninfluence of demons, and at another he recovers from their deluding\npower, and gets some glimpses of the truth. For again he adds: \u201cWe must\nnever in any way lose our hold of God, whether by day or by night,\nwhether in public or in secret, whether in word or in deed, but in\nwhatever we do, or abstain from doing.\u201d That is, as I understand it,\nwhatever we do in public, in all our actions, in all our words, \u201clet the\nsoul be constantly fixed upon God.\u201d And yet again, as though, after\nstruggling in argument against the insane inspirations of demons, he\nwere completely overcome by them, he adds: \u201cIf this is the case, what\nharm is there in gaining the favour of the rulers of the earth, whether\nof a nature different from ours, or human princes and kings? For these\nhave gained their dignity through the instrumentality of demons.\u201d In a\nformer part, Celsus did his utmost to debase our souls to the worship of\ndemons; and now he wishes us to seek the favour of kings and princes, of\nwhom, as the world and all history are full of them, I do not consider\nit necessary to quote examples.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIV.\n\n\nThere is therefore One whose favour we should seek, and to whom we ought\nto pray that He would be gracious to us\u2014the Most High God, whose favour\nis gained by piety and the practice of every virtue. And if he would\nhave us to seek the favour of others after the Most High God, let him\nconsider that, as the motion of the shadow follows that of the body\nwhich casts it, so in like manner it follows, that when we have the\nfavour of God, we have also the goodwill of all angels and spirits who\nare friends of God. For they know who are worthy of the divine approval,\nand they are not only well disposed to them, but they co-operate with\nthem in their endeavours to please God: they seek His favour on their\nbehalf; with their prayers they join their own prayers and intercessions\nfor them. We may indeed boldly say, that men who aspire after better\nthings have, when they pray to God, tens of thousands of sacred powers\nupon their side. These, even when not asked, pray with them, they bring\nsuccour to our mortal race, and if I may so say, take up arms alongside\nof it: for they see demons warring and fighting most keenly against the\nsalvation of those who devote themselves to God, and despise the\nhostility of demons; they see them savage in their hatred of the man who\nrefuses to serve them with the blood and fumes of sacrifices, but rather\nstrives in every way, by word and deed, to be in peace and union with\nthe Most High through Jesus, who put to flight multitudes of demons when\nHe went about \u201chealing,\u201d and delivering \u201call who were oppressed by the\ndevil.\u201d[1667]\n\nFootnote 1667:\n\n Acts x. 38.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXV.\n\n\nMoreover, we are to despise ingratiating ourselves with kings or any\nother men, not only if their favour is to be won by murders,\nlicentiousness, or deeds of cruelty, but even if it involves impiety\ntowards God, or any servile expressions of flattery and obsequiousness,\nwhich things are unworthy of brave and high-principled men, who aim at\njoining with their other virtues that highest of virtues, patience and\nfortitude. But whilst we do nothing which is contrary to the law and\nword of God, we are not so mad as to stir up against us the wrath of\nkings and princes, which will bring upon us sufferings and tortures, or\neven death. For we read: \u201cLet every soul be subject unto the higher\npowers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are\nordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the\nordinance of God.\u201d[1668] These words we have in our exposition of the\nEpistle to the Romans, to the best of our ability, explained at length,\nand with various applications; but for the present we have taken them in\ntheir more obvious and generally received acceptation, to meet the\nsaying of Celsus, that \u201cit is not without the power of demons that kings\nhave been raised to their regal dignity.\u201d Here much might be said on the\nconstitution of kings and rulers, for the subject is a wide one,\nembracing such rulers as reign cruelly and tyrannically, and such as\nmake the kingly office the means of indulging in luxury and sinful\npleasures. We shall therefore, for the present, pass over the full\nconsideration of this subject. We will, however, never swear by \u201cthe\nfortune of the king,\u201d nor by aught else that is considered equivalent to\nGod. For if the word \u201cfortune\u201d is nothing but an expression for the\nuncertain course of events, as some say, although they seem not to be\nagreed, we do not swear by that as God which has no existence, as though\nit did really exist and was able to do something, lest we should bind\nourselves by an oath to things which have no existence. If, on the other\nhand (as is thought by others, who say that to swear by the fortune of\nthe king of the Romans is to swear by his demon), what is called the\nfortune of the king is in the power of demons, then in that case we must\ndie sooner than swear by a wicked and treacherous demon, that ofttimes\nsins along with the man of whom it gains possession, and sins even more\nthan he.\n\nFootnote 1668:\n\n Rom. xiii. 1, 2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVI.\n\n\nThen Celsus, following the example of those who are under the influence\nof demons\u2014at one time recovering, at another relapsing, as though he\nwere again becoming sensible\u2014says: \u201cIf, however, any worshipper of God\nshould be ordered to do anything impious, or to say anything base, such\na command should in no wise be regarded; but we must encounter all kinds\nof torment, or submit to any kind of death, rather than say or even\nthink anything unworthy of God.\u201d Again, however, from ignorance of our\nprinciples, and in entire confusion of thought, he says: \u201cBut if any one\ncommands you to celebrate the sun, or to sing a joyful triumphal song in\npraise of Minerva, you will by celebrating their praises seem to render\nthe higher praise to God; for piety, in extending to all things, becomes\nmore perfect.\u201d To this our answer is, that we do not wait for any\ncommand to celebrate the praises of the sun; for we have been taught to\nspeak well not only of those creatures that are obedient to the will of\nGod, but even of our enemies. We therefore praise the sun as the\nglorious workmanship of God, which obeys His laws and hearkens to the\ncall, \u201cPraise the Lord, sun and moon,\u201d[1669] and with all your powers\nshow forth the praises of the Father and Creator of all. Minerva,\nhowever, whom Celsus classes with the sun, is the subject of various\nGrecian myths, whether these contain any hidden meaning or not. They say\nthat Minerva sprang fully armed from the brain of Jupiter; that when she\nwas pursued by Vulcan, she fled from him to preserve her honour; and\nthat from the seed which fell to the ground in the heat of Vulcan\u2019s\npassion, there grew a child whom Minerva brought up and called\nErichthonius,\n\n \u201cThat owed his nurture to the blue-eyed maid,\n But from the teeming furrow took his birth,\n The mighty offspring of the foodful earth.\u201d[1670]\n\nIt is therefore evident, that if we admit Minerva the daughter of\nJupiter, we must also admit many fables and fictions which can be\nallowed by no one who discards fables and seeks after truth.\n\nFootnote 1669:\n\n Ps. cxlviii. 3.\n\nFootnote 1670:\n\n Homer\u2019s _Iliad_, ii. 547, 548.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVII.\n\n\nAnd to regard these myths in a figurative sense, and consider Minerva as\nrepresenting prudence, let any one show what were the actual facts of\nher history, upon which this allegory is based. For, supposing honour\nwas given to Minerva as having been a woman of ancient times, by those\nwho instituted mysteries and ceremonies for their followers, and who\nwished her name to be celebrated as that of a goddess, much more are we\nforbidden to pay divine honours to Minerva, if we are not permitted to\nworship so glorious an object as the sun, although we may celebrate its\nglory. Celsus, indeed, says that \u201cwe seem to do the greater honour to\nthe great God when we sing hymns in honour of the sun and Minerva;\u201d but\nwe know it to be the opposite of that. For we sing hymns to the Most\nHigh alone, and His Only-begotten, who is the Word and God; and we\npraise God and His Only-begotten, as do also the sun, the moon, the\nstars, and all the host of heaven. For these all form a divine chorus,\nand unite with the just among men in celebrating the praises of the Most\nHigh God and His Only-begotten. We have already said that we must not\nswear by a human king, or by what is called \u201cthe fortune of the king.\u201d\nIt is therefore unnecessary for us again to refute these statements: \u201cIf\nyou are commanded to swear by a human king, there is nothing wrong in\nthat. For to him has been given whatever there is upon earth; and\nwhatever you receive in this life, you receive from him.\u201d We deny,\nhowever, that all things which are on the earth have been given to the\nking, or that whatever we receive in this life we receive from him. For\nwhatever we receive rightly and honourably we receive from God, and by\nHis providence, as ripe fruits, and \u201ccorn which strengtheneth man\u2019s\nheart, and the pleasant vine, and wine which rejoiceth the heart of\nman.\u201d[1671] And moreover, the fruit of the olive-tree, to make his face\nto shine, we have from the providence of God.\n\nFootnote 1671:\n\n Ps. civ. 15.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXVIII.\n\n\nCelsus goes on to say: \u201cWe must not disobey the ancient writer, who said\nlong ago,\n\n \u2018Let one be king, whom the son of crafty Saturn appointed;\u2019\u201d[1672]\n\nand adds: \u201cIf you set aside this maxim, you will deservedly suffer for\nit at the hands of the king. For if all were to do the same as you,\nthere would be nothing to prevent his being left in utter solitude and\ndesertion, and the affairs of the earth would fall into the hands of the\nwildest and most lawless barbarians; and then there would no longer\nremain among men any of the glory of your religion or of the true\nwisdom.\u201d If, then, \u201cthere shall be one lord, one king,\u201d he must be, not\nthe man \u201cwhom the son of crafty Saturn appointed,\u201d but the man to whom\nHe gave the power, who \u201cremoveth kings and setteth up kings,\u201d[1673] and\nwho \u201craiseth up the useful man in time of need upon earth.\u201d[1674] For\nkings are not appointed by that son of Saturn, who, according to Grecian\nfable, hurled his father from his throne, and sent him down to Tartarus\n(whatever interpretation may be given to this allegory), but by God, who\ngoverns all things, and who wisely arranges whatever belongs to the\nappointment of kings. We therefore do set aside the maxim contained in\nthe line,\n\n \u201cWhom the son of crafty Saturn appointed;\u201d\n\nfor we know that no god or father of a god ever devises anything crooked\nor crafty. But we are far from setting aside the notion of a providence,\nand of things happening directly or indirectly through the agency of\nprovidence. And the king will not \u201cinflict deserved punishment\u201d upon us,\nif we say that not the son of crafty Saturn gave him his kingdom, but He\nwho \u201cremoveth and setteth up kings.\u201d And would that all were to follow\nmy example in rejecting the maxim of Homer, maintaining the divine\norigin of the kingdom, and observing the precept to honour the king! In\nthese circumstances the king will not \u201cbe left in utter solitude and\ndesertion,\u201d neither will \u201cthe affairs of the world fall into the hands\nof the most impious and wild barbarians.\u201d For if, in the words of\nCelsus, \u201cthey do as I do,\u201d then it is evident that even the barbarians,\nwhen they yield obedience to the word of God, will become most obedient\nto the law, and most humane; and every form of worship will be destroyed\nexcept the religion of Christ, which will alone prevail. And indeed it\nwill one day triumph, as its principles take possession of the minds of\nmen more and more every day.\n\nFootnote 1672:\n\n Homer\u2019s _Iliad_, ii. 205.\n\nFootnote 1673:\n\n Dan. ii. 21.\n\nFootnote 1674:\n\n Ecclus. x. 4.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXIX.\n\n\nCelsus, then, as if not observing that he was saying anything\ninconsistent with the words he had just used, \u201cif all were to do the\nsame as you,\u201d adds: \u201cYou surely do not say that if the Romans were, in\ncompliance with your wish, to neglect their customary duties to gods and\nmen, and were to worship the Most High, or whatever you please to call\nhim, that he will come down and fight for them, so that they shall need\nno other help than his. For this same God, as yourselves say, promised\nof old this and much more to those who served him, and see in what way\nhe has helped them and you! They, in place of being masters of the whole\nworld, are left with not so much as a patch of ground or a home; and as\nfor you, if any of you transgresses even in secret, he is sought out and\npunished with death.\u201d As the question started is, \u201cWhat would happen if\nthe Romans were persuaded to adopt the principles of the Christians, to\ndespise the duties paid to the recognised gods and to men, and to\nworship the Most High?\u201d this is my answer to the question. We say that\n\u201cif two\u201d of us \u201cshall agree on earth as touching anything that they\nshall ask, it shall be done for them of the Father\u201d of the just, \u201cwhich\nis in heaven;\u201d[1675] for God rejoices in the agreement of rational\nbeings, and turns away from discord. And what are we to expect, if not\nonly a very few agree, as at present, but the whole of the empire of\nRome? For they will pray to the Word, who of old said to the Hebrews,\nwhen they were pursued by the Egyptians, \u201cThe Lord shall fight for you,\nand ye shall hold your peace;\u201d[1676] and if they all unite in prayer\nwith one accord, they will be able to put to flight far more enemies\nthan those who were discomfited by the prayer of Moses when he cried to\nthe Lord, and of those who prayed with him. Now, if what God promised to\nthose who keep His law has not come to pass, the reason of its\nnon-fulfilment is not to be ascribed to the unfaithfulness of God. But\nHe had made the fulfilment of His promises to depend on certain\nconditions,\u2014namely, that they should observe and live according to His\nlaw; and if the Jews have not a plot of ground nor a habitation left to\nthem, although they had received these conditional promises, the entire\nblame is to be laid upon their crimes, and especially upon their guilt\nin the treatment of Jesus.\n\nFootnote 1675:\n\n Matt. xviii. 19.\n\nFootnote 1676:\n\n Ex. xiv. 14.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXX.\n\n\nBut if all the Romans, according to the supposition of Celsus, embrace\nthe Christian faith, they will, when they pray, overcome their enemies;\nor rather, they will not war at all, being guarded by that divine power\nwhich promised to save five entire cities for the sake of fifty just\npersons. For men of God are assuredly the salt of the earth: they\npreserve the order of the world; and society is held together as long as\nthe salt is uncorrupted: for \u201cif the salt have lost its savour, it is\nneither fit for the land nor for the dunghill; but it shall be cast out,\nand trodden under foot of men. He that hath ears, let him hear\u201d[1677]\nthe meaning of these words. When God gives to the tempter permission to\npersecute us, then we suffer persecution; and when God wishes us to be\nfree from suffering, even in the midst of a world that hates us, we\nenjoy a wonderful peace, trusting in the protection of Him who said, \u201cBe\nof good cheer, I have overcome the world.\u201d[1678] And truly He has\novercome the world. Wherefore the world prevails only so long as it is\nthe pleasure of Him who received from the Father power to overcome the\nworld; and from His victory we take courage. Should He even wish us\nagain to contend and struggle for our religion, let the enemy come\nagainst us, and we will say to them, \u201cI can do all things, through\nChrist Jesus our Lord, which strengtheneth me.\u201d[1679] For of \u201ctwo\nsparrows which are sold for a farthing,\u201d as the Scripture says, \u201cnot one\nof them falls on the ground without our Father in heaven.\u201d[1680] And so\ncompletely does the divine providence embrace all things, that not even\nthe hairs of our head fail to be numbered by Him.\n\nFootnote 1677:\n\n Luke xiv. 34, 35; Matt. v. 13.\n\nFootnote 1678:\n\n John xvi. 33.\n\nFootnote 1679:\n\n Phil. iv. 13.\n\nFootnote 1680:\n\n Matt. x. 29, 30.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXI.\n\n\nCelsus again, as is usual with him, gets confused, and attributes to us\nthings which none of us have ever written. His words are: \u201cSurely it is\nintolerable for you to say, that if our present rulers, on embracing\nyour opinions, are taken by the enemy, you will still be able to\npersuade those who rule after them; and after these have been taken you\nwill persuade their successors, and so on, until at length, when all who\nhave yielded to your persuasion have been taken, some prudent ruler\nshall arise, with a foresight of what is impending, and he will destroy\nyou all utterly before he himself perishes.\u201d There is no need of any\nanswer to these allegations: for none of us says of our present rulers,\nthat if they embrace our opinions, and are taken by the enemy, we shall\nbe able to persuade their successors; and when these are taken, those\nwho come after them, and so on in succession. But on what does he ground\nthe assertion, that when a succession of those who have yielded to our\npersuasion have been taken because they did not drive back the enemy,\nsome prudent ruler shall arise, with a foresight of what is impending,\nwho shall utterly destroy us? But here he seems to me to delight in\ninventing and uttering the wildest nonsense.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXII.\n\n\nAfterwards he says: \u201cIf it were possible,\u201d implying at the same time\nthat he thought it most desirable, \u201cthat all the inhabitants of Asia,\nEurope, and Libya, Greeks and barbarians, all to the uttermost ends of\nthe earth, were to come under one law;\u201d but judging this quite\nimpossible, he adds, \u201cAny one who thinks this possible, knows nothing.\u201d\nIt would require careful consideration and lengthened argument to prove\nthat it is not only possible, but that it will surely come to pass, that\nall who are endowed with reason shall come under one law. However, if we\nmust refer to this subject, it will be with great brevity. The Stoics,\nindeed, hold that, when the strongest of the elements prevails, all\nthings shall be turned into fire. But our belief is, that the Word shall\nprevail over the entire rational creation, and change every soul into\nHis own perfection; in which state every one, by the mere exercise of\nhis power, will choose what he desires, and obtain what he chooses. For\nalthough, in the diseases and wounds of the body, there are some which\nno medical skill can cure, yet we hold that in the mind there is no evil\nso strong that it may not be overcome by the Supreme Word and God. For\nstronger than all the evils in the soul is the Word, and the healing\npower that dwells in Him; and this healing He applies, according to the\nwill of God, to every man. The consummation of all things is the\ndestruction of evil, although as to the question whether it shall be so\ndestroyed that it can never anywhere arise again, it is beyond our\npresent purpose to say. Many things are said obscurely in the prophecies\non the total destruction of evil, and the restoration to righteousness\nof every soul; but it will be enough for our present purpose to quote\nthe following passage from Zephaniah: \u201cPrepare and rise early; all the\ngleanings of their vineyards are destroyed. Therefore wait ye upon me,\nsaith the Lord, on the day that I rise up for a testimony; for my\ndetermination is to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kings,\nto pour upon them mine indignation, even all my fierce anger: for all\nthe earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy. For then will\nI turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the\nname of the Lord, to serve Him with one consent. From beyond the rivers\nof Ethiopia my suppliants, even the daughter of my dispersed, shall\nbring my offering. In that day shalt thou not be ashamed for all thy\ndoings, wherein thou hast transgressed against me: for then I will take\naway out of the midst of thee them that rejoice in thy pride; and thou\nshalt no more be haughty because of my holy mountain. I will also leave\nin the midst of thee an afflicted and poor people, and they shall trust\nin the name of the Lord. The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity,\nnor speak lies; neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their\nmouth: for they shall feed and lie down, and none shall make them\nafraid.\u201d[1681] I leave it to those who are able, after a careful study\nof the whole subject, to unfold the meaning of this prophecy, and\nespecially to inquire into the signification of the words, \u201cWhen the\nwhole earth is destroyed, there will be turned upon the peoples a\nlanguage according to their race,\u201d[1682] as things were before the\nconfusion of tongues. Let them also carefully consider the promise, that\nall shall call upon the name of the Lord, and serve Him with one\nconsent; also that all contemptuous reproach shall be taken away, and\nthere shall be no longer any injustice, or vain speech, or a deceitful\ntongue. And thus much it seemed needful for me to say briefly, and\nwithout entering into elaborate details, in answer to the remark of\nCelsus, that he considered any agreement between the inhabitants of\nAsia, Europe, and Libya, as well Greeks as barbarians, was impossible.\nAnd perhaps such a result would indeed be impossible to those who are\nstill in the body, but not to those who are released from it.\n\nFootnote 1681:\n\n Zeph. iii. 7-13.\n\nFootnote 1682:\n\n \u201cA language to last as long as the world.\u201d\u2014BOUHEREAU.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIII.\n\n\nIn the next place, Celsus urges us \u201cto help the king with all our might,\nand to labour with him in the maintenance of justice, to fight for him;\nand if he requires it, to fight under him, or lead an army along with\nhim.\u201d To this our answer is, that we do, when occasion requires, give\nhelp to kings, and that, so to say, a divine help, \u201cputting on the whole\narmour of God.\u201d[1683] And this we do in obedience to the injunction of\nthe apostle, \u201cI exhort, therefore, that first of all, supplications,\nprayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men, for\nkings, and for all that are in authority;\u201d[1684] and the more any one\nexcels in piety, the more effective help does he render to kings, even\nmore than is given by soldiers, who go forth to fight and slay as many\nof the enemy as they can. And to those enemies of our faith who require\nus to bear arms for the commonwealth, and to slay men, we can reply: \u201cDo\nnot those who are priests at certain shrines, and those who attend on\ncertain gods, as you account them, keep their hands free from blood,\nthat they may with hands unstained and free from human blood offer the\nappointed sacrifices to your gods; and even when war is upon you, you\nnever enlist the priests in the army. If that, then, is a laudable\ncustom, how much more so, that while others are engaged in battle, these\ntoo should engage as the priests and ministers of God, keeping their\nhands pure, and wrestling in prayers to God on behalf of those who are\nfighting in a righteous cause, and for the king who reigns righteously,\nthat whatever is opposed to those who act righteously may be destroyed!\u201d\nAnd as we by our prayers vanquish all demons who stir up war, and lead\nto the violation of oaths, and disturb the peace, we in this way are\nmuch more helpful to the kings than those who go into the field to fight\nfor them. And we do take our part in public affairs, when along with\nrighteous prayers we join self-denying exercises and meditations, which\nteach us to despise pleasures, and not to be led away by them. And none\nfight better for the king than we do. We do not indeed fight under him,\nalthough he require it; but we fight on his behalf, forming a special\narmy\u2014an army of piety\u2014by offering our prayers to God.\n\nFootnote 1683:\n\n Eph. vi. 11.\n\nFootnote 1684:\n\n 1 Tim. ii. 1, 2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXIV.\n\n\nAnd if Celsus would have us to lead armies in defence of our country,\nlet him know that we do this too, and that not for the purpose of being\nseen by men, or of vainglory. For \u201cin secret,\u201d and in our own hearts,\nthere are prayers which ascend as from priests in behalf of our\nfellow-citizens. And Christians are benefactors of their country more\nthan others. For they train up citizens, and inculcate piety to the\nSupreme Being; and they promote those whose lives in the smallest cities\nhave been good and worthy, to a divine and heavenly city, to whom it may\nbe said, \u201cThou hast been faithful in the smallest city, come into a\ngreat one,\u201d[1685] where \u201cGod standeth in the assembly of the gods, and\njudgeth the gods in the midst;\u201d and He reckons thee among them, if thou\nno more \u201cdie as a man, or fall as one of the princes.\u201d[1686]\n\nFootnote 1685:\n\n Luke xix. 17.\n\nFootnote 1686:\n\n Ps. lxxxii. 1, 7.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXV.\n\n\nCelsus also urges us to \u201ctake office in the government of the country,\nif that is required for the maintenance of the laws and the support of\nreligion.\u201d But we recognise in each state the existence of another\nnational organization,[1687] founded by the Word of God, and we exhort\nthose who are mighty in word and of blameless life to rule over\nchurches. Those who are ambitious of ruling we reject; but we constrain\nthose who, through excess of modesty, are not easily induced to take a\npublic charge in the church of God. And those who rule over us well are\nunder the constraining influence of the great King, whom we believe to\nbe the Son of God, God the Word. And if those who govern in the church,\nand are called rulers of the divine nation\u2014that is, the church\u2014rule\nwell, they rule in accordance with the divine commands, and never suffer\nthemselves to be led astray by worldly policy. And it is not for the\npurpose of escaping public duties that Christians decline public\noffices, but that they may reserve themselves for a diviner and more\nnecessary service in the church of God\u2014for the salvation of men. And\nthis service is at once necessary and right. They take charge of all\u2014of\nthose that are within, that they may day by day lead better lives, and\nof those that are without, that they may come to abound in holy words\nand in deeds of piety; and that, while thus worshipping God truly, and\ntraining up as many as they can in the same way, they may be filled with\nthe word of God and the law of God, and thus be united with the supreme\nGod through His Son the Word, wisdom, truth, and righteousness, who\nunites to God all who are resolved to conform their lives in all things\nto the law of God.\n\nFootnote 1687:\n\n \u03c3\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n Chapter LXXVI.\n\n\nYou have here, reverend Ambrosius, the conclusion of what we have been\nenabled to accomplish by the power given to us in obedience to your\ncommand. In eight books we have embraced all that we considered it\nproper to say in reply to that book of Celsus which he entitles _A True\nDiscourse_. And now it remains for the readers of his discourse and of\nmy reply to judge which of the two breathes most of the Spirit of the\ntrue God, of piety towards Him, and of that truth which leads men by\nsound doctrines to the noblest life. You must know, however, that Celsus\nhad promised another treatise as a sequel to this one, in which he\nengaged to supply practical rules of living to those who felt disposed\nto embrace his opinions. If, then, he has not fulfilled his promise of\nwriting a second book, we may well be contented with these eight books\nwhich we have written in answer to his discourse. But if he has begun\nand finished that second book, pray obtain it and send it to us, that we\nmay answer it as the Father of truth may give us ability, and either\noverthrow the false teaching that may be in it, or laying aside all\njealousy, we may testify our approval of whatever truth it may contain.\n\n GLORY BE TO THEE, OUR GOD; GLORY BE TO THEE.\n\n\n\n\n INDEXES.\n\n\n I.\u2014INDEX OF PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE.\n\n\n OLD TESTAMENT.\n\n\n Genesis.\n i. 1, i. 127, 271\n i. 2, i. 349\n i. 11, ii. 519\n i. 24, i. 110\n i. 26, i. 262, ii. 190, 391\n i. 27, ii. 190\n i. 27, 28, i. 263\n ii. 2, 3, ii. 403\n ii. 4, ii. 403\n ii. 7, i. 39, ii. 200\n ii. 21, 22, ii. 201\n ii. 24, i. 109, ii. 216, 389\n iii. i. 222, ii. 383\n iii. 5, ii. 461\n iii. 6, ii. 461\n iii. 7, ii. 461\n iii. 8, ii. 406\n iii. 17, ii. 451\n iii. 19, i. 269\n iii. 24, ii. 391\n iv. 8, ii. 208\n iv. 10, i. 251\n v. 1, ii. 390\n v. 3, i. 23, 119\n vi. 3, i. 39, ii. 460\n vi. 5, 6, ii. 400\n ix. 10, 11, ii. 70\n xi. 1, 2, ii. 297\n xi. 4, ii. 161\n xi. 5-7, ii. 298\n xv. 5, ii. 277\n xvii. 14, i. 318\n xix. 17, ii. 211\n xxi. 2, ii. 208\n xxvi. 15, ii. 210\n xxvii. 12, 13, ii. 359\n xxvii. 27, i. 449\n xxx. 42, ii. 209\n xxx. 43, ii. 209\n xlviii. 22, i. 323\n xlix. 1, i. 253\n xlix., i. 456\n\n Exodus.\n iii. 2, i. 122\n iii. 6, i. 92\n iii. 8, ii. 451\n iii. 14, i. 38\n iv. 21, i. 169\n iv. 23, i. 175\n iv. 24, 25, ii. 318\n iv. 24-26, i. 222\n iv. 25, 26, ii. 319\n vii. 3, i. 169\n viii. 28, 29, i. 179\n ix. 12, i. 175\n ix. 17, i. 175\n xii. 8, ii. 510\n xii. 23, i. 223, ii. 383\n xvi. 29, i. 319\n xviii. 4, ii. 318\n xix. 19, i. 216\n xx. 3, 4, ii. 485\n xx. 12, i. 94, 324 _bis_\n xx. 13, i. 324\n xx. 18, ii. 404\n xx. 21, ii. 355\n xxi. 2, ii. 318\n xxi. 24, ii. 448\n xxii. 28, ii. 523\n xxiii. 20, i. 96\n xxiv. 2, ii. 263, 356\n xxv. 5, i. 293\n xxv. 40, i. 272\n xxx. 34, 35, ii. 273\n xxxii., i. 281\n xxxii. 4, ii. 77\n xxxii. 21, i. 281\n xxxiv. 2, ii. 59\n xxxv. 2, i. 387\n xxxv. 40, i. 306\n\n Leviticus.\n xi. 44, ii. 406\n xvi. 8, ii. 383\n xvi. 18, i. 223\n xvi. 29, ii. 510\n xvii. 10, i. 119\n xvii. 14, i. 118, 246\n xix. 26, ii. 262\n xix. 31, i. 424, ii. 276\n xxvi. 5, ii. 447\n\n Numbers.\n xv. 32, i. 387\n xxiii. 23, ii. 262\n xxiv. 17, i. 463, 464\n\n Deuteronomy.\n i. 10, ii. 277\n ii. 34, ii. 443\n iii. 1-3, ii. 56\n iii. 8, ii. 406\n iv. 16-18, ii. 193\n iv. 19, ii. 193, 274\n iv. 19, 20, ii. 277\n iv. 24, i. 8, 122, ii. 173\n vi. 13, ii. 279, 485\n viii. 3, i. 148\n ix. 3, ii. 173\n x. 12, 13, ii. 40\n xiii. 4, ii. 456\n xvi. 3, ii. 510\n xviii. 14, i. 436 _bis_, ii. 262\n xviii. 15, i. 436, ii. 262\n xxiv. 16, ii. 524\n xxv. 4, i. 94, 304, ii. 216\n xxviii., i. 142, 304\n xxviii. 12, ii. 444\n xxviii. 66, ii. 79\n xxxii. 8, i. 46\n xxxii. 8, 9, ii. 169, 297\n xxxii. 9, i. 46\n xxxii. 21, ii. 83, 151\n xxxii. 23, 24, i. 434\n xxxii. 30, ii. 444\n xxxii. 39, ii. 31\n xxxiv. 5, 6, ii. 57\n\n Joshua.\n xxiv. 32, i. 323\n\n 1 Samuel.\n ix. 10, i. 436\n xv. 11, i. 293\n xvi. 15, i. 293\n xviii. 10, i. 293\n\n 2 Samuel.\n xxii. 44, 45, ii. 83\n\n 1 Kings.\n iii. 16, i. 382, 383\n iv. 29-34, ii. 127\n x. 1-9, ii. 126\n xii. 14, i. 389\n xiv. 12, i. 436\n xvii. 21, 22, ii. 61\n xix. 18, i. 308\n xxii. 19-23, i. 223\n\n 2 Kings.\n i. 3, i. 436\n iv. 34, 35, ii. 61\n ix. 11, ii. 434\n\n 1 Chronicles.\n xvi. 8, i. 387\n xvi. 22, ii. 422\n\n Job.\n i. and ii., ii. 283\n i. 10, 11, i. 235\n ii. 10, ii. 396\n vii. 1, i. 236\n viii. 12, i. 113\n x. 8, ii. 200\n xv. 14, i. 347, ii. 143\n xxv. 5, i. 61\n xl., i. 284\n xl. 20, i. 53, ii. 384\n xli., i. 284\n xli. 34, i. 123\n\n Psalms.\n i. 1, i. 383\n ii. 2, i. 239\n ii. 3, ii. 538\n ii. 5, i. 97\n ii. 8, ii. 169\n iv. 6, ii. 341\n vi. 1, ii. 237\n vii. 3-5, ii. 447\n vii. 3-6, ii. 521\n viii. 3, i. 89\n ix. 13, 14, ii. 375\n xiii. 3, ii. 456\n xiv. 3, 4, ii. 418\n xvi. 9, 10, ii. 65, 113\n xviii. 11, ii. 355\n xix. 1, ii. 404\n xix. 4, i. 467\n xix. 8, ii. 456\n xxii. 15, ii. 473\n xxii. 20, 21, i. 120\n xxiv. 8, ii. 492\n xxvi. 2, ii. 541\n xxvii. 1, ii. 341\n xxvii. 1-3, i. 234\n xxvii. 1, 3, ii. 513\n xxxiii., ii. 402\n xxxiii. 5, ii. 188\n xxxiii. 6, i. 40, 345\n xxxiv. 7, i. 66, ii. 380, 520, 522\n xxxiv. 10-14, ii. 396\n xxxiv. 19, ii. 441\n xxxvi. 9, i. 8, ii. 341\n xxxvii. 8, ii. 238\n xxxvii. 9, 11, 22, 29, 34, ii. 452\n xxxvii. 30, 31, ii. 472\n xxxvii. 34, i. 90\n xxxix. 5, ii. 473\n xliii. 19, ii. 473\n xliv. 19, i. 126\n xliv. 23, ii. 238\n xlv. 1, 2, i. 282\n xlv. 2-5, i. 459\n xlv. 6, 7, i. 459\n xlv. 7, i. 109, 111, 347\n xlv. 8, i. 111\n xlv. 25, ii. 473\n xlviii. 1, 2, ii. 452\n xlix. 9, 10, ii. 351\n l. 1, ii. 493\n li. 5, ii. 472\n li. 10, i. 34\n li. 11, ii. 468\n li. 12, ii. 455\n liv. 5, i. 478, ii. 425\n liv. 6, ii. 425\n lviii. 3, ii. 472\n lxii. 1, i. 283\n lxiii. 8, ii. 456\n lxviii. 11, i. 467\n lxix. 21, ii. 41, 436\n lxxii. 7, i. 283\n lxxii. 8, i. 283\n lxxii. 11, i. 115\n lxxiii. 1, i. 104\n lxxvi. 2, ii. 452\n lxxvi. 10, i. 230\n lxxvii. 2, ii. 8, 456\n lxxviii. 34, i. 102\n lxxviii. 49, ii. 517\n lxxviii. 65, ii. 238\n lxxx. 13, 14, i. 166\n lxxxi. 5, ii. 91\n lxxxii. 1, ii. 189 _bis_, 493\n lxxxii. 1, 7, ii. 558\n lxxxiv. 3, i. 230\n lxxxvi. 8, ii. 271\n lxxxvii. 1, 2, ii. 216\n lxxxix. 32, ii. 398\n lxxxix. 50, 51, ii. 112\n xci. 13, ii. 490\n xcvi. 4, ii. 271\n xcvi. 5, ii. 189, 489, 493\n xcvii. 6, i. 124\n xcvii. 9, ii. 493\n ci. 9, ii. 442\n cii. 25, ii. 404\n cii. 26, 27, i. 254, 271, ii. 223\n cii. 27, i. 419, ii. 174, 405\n cii. 46, i. 58\n civ. 4, i. 122\n civ. 6, ii. 356\n civ. 14, 15, ii. 241\n civ. 15, ii. 551\n civ. 24, i. 29, 130\n civ. 24-26, ii. 263\n civ. 29, 30, i. 39\n cv. 15, ii. 422\n cvi. 20, ii. 36\n cvii. 20, i. 470, ii. 143, 279\n cix., ii. 27\n cix. 1, 2, ii. 16\n cix. 8, ii. 16\n cx. 1, i. 154\n cxv. 13, i. 383\n cxvi., ii. 539\n cxviii. 2, i. 104\n cxviii. 19, 20, ii. 375\n cxix. 18, ii. 8, 216, 456\n cxix. 73, ii. 200\n cxix. 105, ii. 341\n cxxvi., i. 205\n cxxxi. 1, 2, ii. 353\n cxxxvi. 2, ii. 271, 493\n cxxxvii. 8, 9, ii. 445\n cxxxix., i. 351\n cxli., ii. 140, 505\n cxlvii. 15, i. 467\n cxlviii. 3, ii. 281, 549\n cxlviii. 4, ii. 358\n cxlviii. 4, 5, ii. 315\n cxlviii. 5, i. 77\n\n Proverbs.\n ii. 5, i. 17, 355, ii. 448, 457\n iv. 23, i. 232\n v. 15-17, ii. 210\n viii. 5, ii. 134\n viii. 22-15, i. 18\n ix. 1-5, i. 147\n ix. 4, ii. 134\n ix. 5, 6, ii. 134\n x. 17, ii. 343\n x. 19, ii. 268\n xiii. 8, ii. 144\n xiii. 25, ii. 447\n xxii. 20, 21, i. 300\n xxii. 28, ii. 374\n xxiii. 5, ii. 384\n xxvii. 19, ii. 386\n xxviii. 6, ii. 446\n xxx. 24-28, ii. 253\n\n Ecclesiastes.\n i. 1-14, i. 64\n i. 2, ii. 472\n i. 6, ii. 374\n i. 9, i. 255, ii. 172\n x. 4, i. 223, 230\n\n Song.\n i. 3, i. 11\n\n Isaiah.\n i. 4, ii. 79\n i. 7, ii. 80\n i. 11, i. 140\n i. 13, 14, i. 119\n i. 19, 20, i. 165, ii. 399\n i. 20, ii. 404\n ii. 2, i. 386\n iii. 24, i. 86\n iv. 4, i. 143\n v. 8, ii. 79\n v. 11, ii. 79\n v. 12, ii. 453\n v. 18, ii. 79\n v. 20, ii. 79, 410\n v. 22, ii. 79\n vi. 1, 2, i. 443\n vi. 2, ii. 357\n vi. 3, i. 25, 340\n vi. 9, ii. 10\n vii. 10-14, i. 434\n vii. 11, i. 435\n vii. 14, i. 435\n vii. 15, i. 292\n vii. 16, i. 110\n viii. 4, i. 110\n viii. 8, 9, i. 283\n ix. 2, ii. 341 _bis_, 409, 538\n ix. 6, ii. 323, 513\n x. 17, i. 143, 349\n xi. 6, 7, i. 292\n xiv. 4, ii. 384\n xiv. 12-22, i. 52\n xxv. 8, i. 80\n xxvii. 1, i. 123, 224\n xxviii. 19, ii. 530\n xxxv. 5, 6, ii. 49\n xli. 22, 23, i. 340\n xlii. 4, i. 456\n xlii. 5, i. 35\n xliv. 11-14, ii. 507\n xlv. 3, i. 335\n xlv. 6, i. 92\n xlv. 7, i. 293, ii. 396, 398\n xlv. 12, i. 61\n xlvii. 14, 15, i. 102, 143, ii. 283, 398\n xlviii. 9, ii. 283\n xlviii. 16, i. 456\n xlix. 8, 9, i. 456\n xlix. 9, i. 456, ii. 538\n xlix. 12, ii. 257\n lii. 3, 15, i. 457\n lii. 12, ii. 539\n liii. 1-3, ii. 418\n liii. 1-8, i. 457\n liii. 2, 3, ii. 439\n liii. 7, ii. 62\n liii. 9, i. 110\n liv. 12, 11, ii. 452\n lx. 1, ii. 341\n lx. 19, ii. 393\n lxiii. 17, 18, i. 182\n lxiv. 8, i. 267\n lxv. 1, ii. 83\n lxvi. 1, i. 74, 92\n lxvi. 2, i. 89\n lxvi. 16, i. 143\n lxvi. 22, i. 255\n\n Jeremiah.\n i. 5, 6, i. 242\n i. 9, i. 122\n i. 9, 10, ii. 161\n i. 14, i. 123\n vii. 17, 18, ii. 275\n vii. 18, i. 62\n x. 24, ii. 237\n xiii. 24, ii. 172\n xv. 14, i. 293\n xvii. 21-24, i. 387\n xx. 7, i. 182, 397\n xxiii. 23, ii. 280\n xxiii. 24, i. 74, ii. 166, 280\n xxv. 15, 16, i. 143\n xxv. 28, 29, i. 143\n xxix. 22, i. 376\n xxxi. 10, ii. 526\n xxxiv. 14, ii. 313\n\n Lamentations.\n iii. 25, i. 104\n iii. 27, 29, 30, ii. 448\n iii. 34, ii. 538\n iii. 38, ii. 232\n iv. 20, i. 112, 339\n\n Ezekiel.\n i., i. 357\n i. 1, i. 443\n i. 19, 20, i. 169\n i. 28, i. 443\n ii. 1, i. 443\n ii. 6, ii. 80\n ii. 9, 10, ii. 342\n iii. 2, 3, i. 449\n x., ii. 357\n xi. 19, 20, i. 191\n xvi. 55, i. 102\n xviii. 2-4, ii. 525\n xviii. 3, ii. 99\n xviii. 4, i. 123\n xviii. 4, 19, i. 123\n xviii. 20, ii. 524\n xx. 3, ii. 127\n xx. 5, ii. 525\n xx. 25, ii. 443\n xxii. 18, 20, ii. 283\n xxvi., i. 239\n xxviii. 11-19, i. 50\n xxviii. 12, i. 224\n xxviii. 15, ii. 385\n xxviii. 19, ii. 385\n xxix. 3, ii. 217 _bis_\n xxxii. 1-28, ii. 384\n xxxii. 2, i. 123\n xxxii. 6, ii. 217\n xliii.-xlvi., i. 387\n xlviii., ii. 361\n\n Daniel.\n ii. 21, ii. 551\n iv. 8, i. 34\n iv. 37, ii. 453\n vii. 10, ii. 173, 519\n vii. 26, ii. 52\n viii. 23, ii. 385\n viii. 23-25, ii. 388\n ix. 24, i. 284\n ix. 27, ii. 388\n x., i. 239\n xii. 1, 2, 3, ii. 277\n xii. 3, ii. 191\n\n Hosea.\n iii. 4, i. 279\n viii. 12, ii. 340\n x. 9, ii. 127\n x. 12, i. 7\n xiii. 14, i. 80, ii. 127\n xiv. 9, ii. 217\n\n Joel.\n ii. 28, 150\n\n Amos.\n iii. 6, i. 293\n ix. 3, i. 123\n\n Micah.\n i. 12, i. 293, ii. 398\n i. 12, 13, ii. 396\n iv. 1, i. 387\n v. 2, i. 284, 453\n vi. 8, i. 165\n\n Habakkuk.\n iii. 2, i. 36\n\n Zephaniah.\n iii. 7-13, ii. 556\n\n Haggai.\n ii. 6, ii. 453\n\n Zechariah.\n i. 14, i. 230\n iii, 1, i. 224\n v. 7, ii. 363\n ix. 10, i. 292\n\n Malachi.\n iii. 2, ii. 173, 283\n iii. 2, 3, ii. 364\n iii. 3, i. 143\n iii. 6, i. 419, ii. 174, 405\n\n\n APOCRYPHA.\n\n\n Tobit.\n i. 12, i. 384\n i. 19, i. 385\n i. 22, i. 385\n ii. 3, i. 370\n xii. 7, ii. 287, 298\n\n Wisdom.\n i. 4, ii. 140, 298\n i. 5, ii. 432\n i. 7, ii. 166\n vii. 16, i. 191\n vii, 25, i. 22\n vii. 25, 26, i. 26, ii. 150, 502\n ix. 6, ii. 350\n x. 5, ii. 298\n x. 19, ii. 534\n xi. 17, i. 349\n xi. 20, i. 127\n xi. 26, ii. 188\n xii. 1, ii. 201\n xii. 1, 2, ii. 188, 473\n xvii. 1, ii. 518\n xviii. 24, i. 86\n\n Ecclesiasticus.\n vi. 4, i. 123\n x. 4, ii. 551\n xvi. 21, i. 341\n xviii. 13, ii. 188\n xxi. 18, ii. 344, 435\n xxxix. 21, 16, 17, ii. 242\n xliii. 20, i. 123\n\n Susannah.\n Ver. 52, 53, i. 376\n Ver. 56, i. 377\n\n Song of the Three Holy Children, i. 372\n\n 2 Maccabees.\n vii. 28, i. 77\n\n\n NEW TESTAMENT.\n\n\n Matthew.\n i. 20, i. 472\n i. 23, i. 434\n ii. 6, i. 284, 453\n ii. 13, i. 472\n iii. 17, ii. 76\n iv. 9, 10, ii. 541\n iv. 10, ii. 485\n iv. 12, i. 170\n iv. 16, i. 170\n iv. 19, i. 466\n v. 3, ii. 409\n v. 5, i. 90\n v. 6, i. 146\n v. 8, i. 17, ii. 340, 455, 466\n v. 13, ii. 553\n v. 14, ii. 278, 474\n v. 16, ii. 278\n v. 22, i. 166, 325\n v. 28, i. 325\n v. 34, i. 74\n v. 34, 35, i. 92\n v. 39, i. 166, ii. 448\n v. 39, 40, ii. 482\n v. 44, 45, ii. 521\n v. 45, ii. 188\n v. 48, i. 355, ii. 190\n v. 48, 49, i. 91\n vi. 9, i. 92\n vi. 24, ii. 493\n vi. 25-28, ii. 447\n vii. 7, i. 390\n vii. 14, ii. 354\n vii. 18, i. 103\n vii. 22, i. 402\n vii. 22, 23, i. 278, ii. 51\n vii. 24, i. 166\n vii. 26, i. 167\n viii. 3, i. 449\n ix. 12, ii. 141\n ix. 23, ii. 446\n ix. 37, 38, i. 468\n x. 3, i. 466\n x. 18, i. 278, ii. 18, 19\n x. 23, i. 471\n x. 29, i. 236\n x. 29, 30, ii. 554\n xi. 20, ii. 253\n xi. 27, i. 16, 96, 106, ii. 466\n xi. 28, ii. 77, 143\n xi. 29, ii. 8\n xii. 24, ii. 13\n xii. 32, i. 34\n xii. 33, i. 103\n xii. 35, i. 104\n xii. 42, i. 237, 238\n xii. 44, i. 334\n xiii. 9, ii. 456\n xiii. 54, ii. 354\n xv. 11, 17-19, ii. 515\n xv. 19, ii. 455\n xv. 24, i. 329\n xvii. 9, i. 450\n xviii. 10, i. 329, ii. 380, 520, 522\n xviii. 19, ii. 553\n xviii. 20, ii. 12\n xix. 14, i. 254\n xix. 17, i. 104, ii. 279\n xix. 24, ii. 354\n xx. 25, ii. 446\n xx. 28, ii. 191\n xxi. 2, ii. 208\n xxii. 12, 13, i. 100\n xxii. 30, i. 345, ii. 189\n xxii. 32, i. 92, ii. 494\n xxii. 37, 39, 40, i. 93\n xxiii. 12, ii. 142\n xxiii. 29-36, i. 378\n xxiii. 30, i. 397\n xxiii. 34, ii. 127\n xxiv. 4, ii. 385\n xxiv. 12, i. 122\n xxiv. 14, i. 278, ii. 20\n xxiv. 21, i. 256\n xxiv. 23-27, ii. 51\n xxiv. 27, i. 52\n xxiv. 35, i. 254, ii. 291\n xxv. 4, ii. 341\n xxv. 29, i. 149\n xxv. 34, i. 167\n xxv. 35, i. 169\n xxvi. 3, i. 105\n xxvi. 23, ii. 28\n xxvi. 29, i. 146\n xxvi. 38, i. 125, 346, ii. 11\n xxvi. 39, ii. 30, 31, 477\n xxvi. 48, ii. 67\n xxvi. 52-54, ii. 14\n xxvi. 55, ii. 67\n xxvi. 59-61, i. 394\n xxvi. 61, ii. 13\n xxvii. 3-5, ii. 15\n xxvii. 11-14, ii. 394\n xxvii. 17, i. 394\n xxvii. 18, i. 394\n xxvii. 19, ii. 39\n xxvii. 46-50, ii. 113\n xxvii. 51, 52, ii. 38\n xxvii. 54, ii. 41\n xxvii. 60, ii. 72\n xxvii. 63, i. 235\n xxviii. 1, 2, ii. 74\n xxviii. 9, ii. 74\n xxviii. 20, ii. 12, 280\n\n Mark.\n i. 12, ii. 6\n iii. 18, i. 466\n iv. 12, i. 194\n vi. 2, ii. 354\n vi. 3, ii. 375\n x. 8, i. 109\n x. 18, ii. 279\n x. 44, ii. 446\n xiii. 31, ii. 291\n\n Luke.\n i. 35, i. 34, 113\n v. 8, i. 468\n vi. 36, i. 355\n vi. 4, i. 25\n viii. 10, i. 170\n x. 4, i. 320\n x. 18, i. 52\n x. 19, i. 284, ii. 479, 490\n x. 22, i. 36, ii. 75\n xi. 9, i. 39\n xi. 48, ii. 79\n xi. 52, i. 299\n xii. 10, i. 34\n xii. 45, 46, i. 376\n xiii. 11, 16, ii. 538\n xiii. 26, 27, ii. 51\n xiv. 11, i. 185\n xiv. 34, 35, ii. 553\n xvii. 20, 21, i. 38\n xviii. 11, ii. 144\n xviii. 13, ii. 144\n xviii. 14, ii. 144\n xix. 14, i. 97\n xix. 17, ii. 558\n xix. 17, 19, i. 147\n xix. 26, i. 149\n xx. 36, i. 345, ii. 189\n xxii. 25, ii. 446\n xxii. 27, ii. 8\n xxiii. 21, 25, ii. 526\n xxiii. 44, 45, ii. 38\n xxiii. 53, ii. 72 _bis_\n xxiv. 15, 31, ii. 65\n xxiv. 30, 31, ii. 71\n\n John.\n i. 1, ii. 293, 408, 456, 496\n i. 1, 2, i. 130\n i. 1-3, i. 59\n i. 3, i. 329, 345\n i. 3, 4, ii. 341\n i. 5, ii. 75, 474\n i. 9, ii. 404\n i. 14, ii. 411\n i. 18, i. 16, 95, ii. 75, 450\n i. 26, ii. 12\n i. 26, 27, i. 346, ii. 280\n i. 32-34, i. 449\n i. 52, i. 450\n ii. 16, i. 92\n ii. 19, ii. 113\n ii. 19, 21, ii. 507\n iii. 8, ii. 36\n iv. 19, i. 31\n iv. 20, i. 10\n iv. 21, i. 8\n iv. 21-24, ii. 413\n iv. 23, 24, i. 10\n iv. 24, i. 75\n v. 23, ii. 498\n v. 31, i. 450\n v. 39, i. 325, ii. 44, 284\n v. 46, 47, ii. 6\n vii. 15, ii. 354\n vii. 42, i. 453\n viii. 40, i. 472, ii. 32, 439\n viii. 46, i. 110\n viii. 58, ii. 500\n ix. 39, ii. 461\n x. 3, i. 390\n x. 8-10, ii. 490\n x. 18, i. 108, 125, 346, ii. 23, 113\n x. 24, i. 450\n x. 30, ii. 500\n xii. 24, ii. 527\n xii. 27, i. 125, 346\n xiii. 2, i. 232\n xiii. 27, i. 224\n xiv. 2, i. 152, ii. 359\n xiv. 6, i. 1, ii. 409, 500\n xiv. 9, i. 24, 93\n xiv. 11, ii. 500\n xiv. 16, i. 472\n xiv. 23, i. 9, ii. 506\n xiv. 26, i. 36\n xiv. 27, ii. 502\n xiv. 28, ii. 502\n xiv. 30, i. 110\n xv. 22, i. 38\n xvi. 4, ii. 8\n xvi. 12, 13, i. 36, ii. 3\n xvi. 28, ii. 254\n xvi. 33, i. 233, ii. 401, 554\n xvii. 10, i. 29\n xvii. 16, i. 87\n xvii. 20, 21, i. 56\n xvii. 21, ii. 500\n xvii. 22, ii. 50\n xvii. 22, 23, i. 56\n xvii. 24 (21, 22), i. 85, 263\n xvii. 25, i. 104\n xviii. 4, etc., ii. 14\n xviii. 36, i. 465\n xix. 2, i. 242\n xix. 11, i. 235\n xix. 34, 35, ii. 40\n xix. 41, ii. 72 _bis_\n xix. 52, ii. 23\n xx. 22, i. 34, 39, ii. 473\n xx. 26, ii. 66\n xx. 26, 27, ii. 65\n xx. 27, ii. 64\n xxi. 18, ii. 47\n\n Acts.\n i. 3, ii. 66\n i. 5, ii. 474\n i. 8, i. 40\n iv. 32, ii. 500\n v. 36, 37, ii. 349\n v. 38, 39, i. 461\n v. 41, ii. 47\n vii., i. 98\n vii. 22, ii. 128\n vii. 42, 43, ii. 275\n vii. 52, i. 379\n viii. 10, ii. 348\n viii. 18, i. 34\n ix. 15, i. 233\n x. 9-15, ii. 2\n x. 14, ii. 319\n x. 38, ii. 548\n xv. 28, 29, ii. 515\n xvii. 28, i. 74, ii. 166\n xxi. 26, ii. 3\n\n Romans.\n i. 1-4, i. 94\n i. 3, 4, i. 248\n i. 14, ii. 134\n i. 18-23, ii. 339\n i. 19, ii. 129, 192\n i. 20, ii. 401, 459\n i. 20-22, ii. 129\n i. 21, ii. 129, 470\n i. 21-23, ii. 192\n i. 22, 23, ii. 152\n i. 23, ii. 498\n i. 24, 25, ii. 471\n i. 24, 26, 28, ii. 301\n i. 25, ii. 340, 470\n i. 26-28, ii. 129\n i. 27, ii. 472\n i. 28, ii. 471\n ii. 4, 5, i. 181\n ii. 4-10, i. 168\n ii. 11, i. 63, 69\n ii. 13-16, i. 141\n ii. 23, ii. 498\n ii. 28, i. 327\n ii. 29, ii. 445\n v. 7, ii. 189\n v. 8, ii. 188\n v. 14, ii. 206\n vi. 4, ii. 72\n vi. 9, ii. 23\n vi. 10, ii. 72\n vii. 9, ii. 142\n vii. 12, i. 103\n vii. 12, 14, ii. 444\n vii. 13, i. 103\n vii. 23, i. 246, 251\n vii. 24, ii. 473, 539\n viii. 2, i. 251\n viii. 7, i. 252\n viii. 8, ii. 460\n viii. 9, i. 247, ii. 468\n viii. 13, ii. 320, 460, 475\n viii. 14, ii. 262\n viii. 16, ii. 460\n viii. 19, i. 63\n viii. 19, 20, ii. 495\n viii. 19-21, ii. 281 _bis_, 486\n viii. 20, ii. 472\n viii. 20, 21, i. 63, 135, 254, 258-264\n viii. 22, i. 63\n viii. 32, ii. 527\n viii. 35-37, ii. 395\n viii. 37, i. 396\n viii. 38, 39, i. 233, 395\n ix. 6, i. 336\n ix. 6, 8, i. 327\n ix. 8, i. 329\n ix. 11, 12, i. 133\n ix. 14, i. 63\n ix. 16, i. 170, 203\n ix. 18, i. 171\n ix. 20, 21, i. 171\n x. 6-8, i. 38\n xi. 4, i. 308\n xi. 11, 12, ii. 424\n xi. 33, i. 339 _bis_\n xi. 36, ii. 407\n xii. 11, i. 122\n xii. 14, ii. 523\n xiii. 1, 2, ii. 548\n xiii. 14, i. 81\n xiv. 1, i. 396\n xiv. 9, ii. 68, 466\n xiv. 15, i. 374, ii. 514\n xiv. 21, ii. 514\n xv. 19, ii. 444\n xvi. 15, ii. 6\n xvi. 25, 26, ii. 141\n\n 1 Corinthians.\n i. 15, i. 18\n i. 18, ii. 128\n i. 21, ii. 284\n i. 23, 24, i. 411\n i. 24, i. 18, 28\n i. 26, i. 247, ii. 352\n i. 26-28, i. 282\n i. 27, ii. 151, 467\n i. 27, 28, 29, ii. 340\n i. 29, i. 185\n i. 30, ii. 310, 385\n ii. 2, i. 348, ii. 69\n ii. 2, 3, i. 69\n ii. 4, 5, i. 467, ii. 337\n ii. 6, i. 225, ii. 31, 139\n ii. 6, 7, i. 301\n ii. 6-8, i. 237, 239, 304, ii. 100\n ii. 7, i. 237, ii. 140\n ii. 9, i. 267\n ii. 10, i. 36\n ii. 11, ii. 192\n ii. 11, 12, 13, i. 298\n ii. 14, ii. 414\n iii. 6, 7, i. 207\n iii. 9, ii. 161\n iii. 12, i. 146, ii. 173, 283, 413\n iii. 13-15, ii. 173\n iii. 18, 19, i. 410\n iii. 19, ii. 349, 446\n iv. 11, 12, ii. 469\n iv. 12, 13, ii. 333\n v. 1, i. 267\n vi. 10, ii. 523, 525\n vi. 16, ii. 13\n vi. 17, i. 108, ii. 389\n vi. 20, i. 374\n vii. 18, i. 321\n vii. 31, i. 58, 86\n viii. 4, 11, ii. 511\n viii. 5, ii. 495\n viii. 5, 6, ii. 189\n viii. 8, ii. 514\n viii. 13, ii. 514\n ix. 8, ii. 5\n ix. 9, i. 304\n ix. 9, 10, i. 305, ii. 216\n ix. 26, ii. 474\n ix. 27, ii. 320\n x. 1, 2, ii. 216\n x. 3, 4, ii. 216, 469\n x. 4, i. 306\n x. 11, i. 306, ii. 209\n x. 13, i. 227, 228, 229\n x. 18, i. 327\n x. 23, i. 117\n x. 31, ii. 518\n xi. 3, i. 106\n xi. 19, ii. 96\n xii. 3, i. 34, 40\n xii. 4-7, i. 41\n xii. 6, i. 42\n xii. 8, ii. 128\n xii. 8, 9, ii. 351\n xii. 11, ii. 41\n xiii. 10, ii. 359\n xiii. 12, ii. 359, 460, 473\n xiv. 15, i. 121\n xv. 2, ii. 346\n xv. 3-8, ii. 66\n xv. 9, i. 67\n xv. 10, i. 233\n xv. 12, ii. 94\n xv. 22, ii. 206, 375\n xv. 25, i. 54\n xv. 25, 26, ii. 374\n xv. 28, i. 260, 270\n xv. 35-38, ii. 286\n xv. 39-42, i. 138\n xv. 40-42, ii. 278\n xv. 41, i. 129, ii. 224\n xv. 41, 42, ii. 191\n xv. 42, i. 4\n xv. 42, 43, ii. 287\n xv. 44, i. 137, ii. 224\n xv. 48, 49, ii. 287\n xv. 49, ii. 287\n xv. 50, ii. 287\n xv. 51, 52, ii. 285\n xv. 52, ii. 69 _bis_\n xv. 53, ii. 454\n xv. 53-56, i. 80\n xv. 54, ii. 374\n\n 2 Corinthians.\n i. 10, i. 56\n ii. 4, i. 116, 289\n iii. 6, i. 9, ii. 443\n iii. 7, 8, ii. 443\n iii. 15, ii. 330\n iii. 15-17, i. 9\n iv. 4, i. 355\n iv. 6, ii. 341\n iv. 10, ii. 460\n iv. 18, i. 89, 267, ii. 401\n v. 1, i. 89, ii. 454\n v. 1-4, ii. 454\n v. 6, 8, ii. 473\n v. 10, i. 213\n v. 13, i. 113\n v. 16, ii. 461\n v. 20, ii. 492\n v. 21, ii. 175\n vi. 16, ii. 506\n viii. 16, i. 230\n ix. 9, 10, i. 94\n x. 3, ii. 334\n x. 5, i. 230, ii. 161, 269\n xi. 14, ii. 494\n xi. 22, i. 94\n xii. 2, ii. 450\n xii. 4, ii. 342, 465\n xiii. 3, i. 3, 112, 344\n xiii. 4, i. 348\n\n Galatians.\n i. 4, ii. 396\n i. 19, i. 447\n ii. 5, ii. 445\n ii. 12, ii. 2\n ii. 20, i. 344\n iii. 3, i. 35\n iv. 10, 11, ii. 509\n iv. 21, 22, ii. 5\n iv. 21-24, ii. 210\n iv. 26, i. 329\n v. 2, ii. 219\n v. 8, i. 171, ii. 399\n v. 17, i. 227, 245, 247, ii. 510\n v. 19-21, i. 247\n v. 22, i. 35\n v. 25, ii. 475\n vi. 14, ii. 72\n\n Ephesians.\n i. 4, i. 256\n i. 21, i. 45\n ii. 2, i. 151, ii. 475\n ii. 3, ii. 238\n ii. 7, i. 85\n ii. 20, ii. 507\n iv. 10, i. 435\n iv. 13, i. 56\n iv. 14, ii. 286\n iv. 27, i. 232\n v. 1, ii. 406\n v. 16, ii. 396\n v. 31, 32, ii. 216\n vi. 2, 3, i. 94, 324\n vi. 11, ii. 520, 540, 556\n vi. 12, i. 225, 232, ii. 520\n vi. 13, i. 224\n\n Philippians.\n i. 23, i. 64, 149\n ii. 5-9, ii. 178\n ii. 6, 7, i. 348, ii. 175\n ii. 6-8, ii. 353\n ii. 10, 11, i. 29, ii. 543\n ii. 13, i. 170, 209\n iii. 10, ii. 72\n iii. 21, ii. 473\n iv. 8, 9, i. 101\n iv. 13, i. 233, ii. 554\n\n Colossians.\n i. 15, i. 22, 95, 105, 355, ii. 407, 450\n i. 16, i. 130\n i. 16, 17, i. 106\n i. 16-18, i. 59\n ii. 8, i. 396\n ii. 9, i. 110\n ii. 15, ii. 67\n ii. 16, i. 307, ii. 510\n ii. 18, 19, ii. 275\n iii. 3, i. 112, 347\n iii. 5, ii. 320, 460\n iii. 8, ii. 238\n iii, 17, ii. 518\n iv. 6, ii. 114, 347\n\n 1 Thessalonians.\n ii. 14-16, i. 379\n iv. 13-15, i. 69\n iv. 15, 16, ii. 285\n iv. 16, ii. 69\n iv. 16, 17, ii. 285\n iv. 17, i. 151\n v. 14, i. 325\n\n 2 Thessalonians.\n ii. 1-12, ii. 387\n ii. 2, ii. 94\n ii. 3, 4, ii. 52, 385\n ii. 4, ii. 388\n ii. 6-10, ii. 52\n ii. 9, ii. 389\n ii. 10-12, ii. 52\n\n 1 Timothy.\n i. 15, ii. 469\n ii. 1, 2, ii. 556\n ii. 5, ii. 384\n ii. 20, 21, ii. 236\n iii. 16, ii. 112\n iv. 1-3, i. 116, ii. 334\n iv. 4, 5, ii. 518\n iv. 10, ii. 188\n vi. 17, 18, ii. 444\n vi. 20, 21, ii. 94\n\n 2 Timothy.\n i. 3, i. 93, ii. 331\n i. 16-18, i. 212\n ii. 5, ii. 541\n ii. 10, ii. 141\n ii. 11, ii. 72\n ii. 15, ii. 268\n ii. 20, i. 135\n ii. 20, 21, i. 214\n ii. 21, i. 135\n iii. 6, ii. 363\n iii. 8, ii. 218\n iv. 7, ii. 474\n\n Titus.\n i. 9, 10, ii. 129\n i. 12, ii. 124\n iii. 3-6, i. 470\n iii. 10, ii. 333\n\n Hebrews.\n i. 3, i. 22, 24, 25, 343\n i. 7, i. 122\n i. 8, ii. 500\n i. 14, i. 45, 244, ii. 271, 520\n ii. 1, i. 232\n iii. 14, i. 390\n iv. 12, i. 20\n iv. 14, ii. 519\n iv. 15, i. 110\n v. 12-14, ii. 134\n v. 14, ii. 350\n vi. 7, 8, i. 177\n viii. 5, i. 113, 271, 306, 307\n ix. 26, i. 85\n x. 29, ii. 499\n xi. 24-26, i. 1\n xi. 28, i. 377\n xi. 37, 38, ii. 431, 441\n xii. 22, ii. 451\n xii. 22, i. 330, ii. 495\n xii. 29, ii. 413\n\n James.\n iv. 17, i. 38\n\n 1 Peter.\n i. 9, i. 121\n ii. 5, ii. 507\n ii. 9, ii. 277\n ii. 22, ii. 175\n iii. 15, ii. 114, 435\n iii. 18-21, i. 102\n v. 6, ii. 142\n v. 8, i. 244\n\n 1 John.\n i. 5, i. 449\n i. 5, i. 8, 343, ii. 278\n ii. 1, 2, i. 117\n ii. 2, ii. 130, 188, 505\n ii. 6, i. 347\n iii. 2, i. 263, ii. 190\n v. 19, i. 52, 86\n\n Revelation.\n i. 8, i. 29\n v. 8, ii. 505\n x. 4, ii. 243\n x. 9, ii. 342\n xiv. 6, i. 339\n xxi., ii. 262\n\n\n II.\u2014INDEX OF PRINCIPAL SUBJECTS.\n\n\n Abaris, the Hyperborean, ii. 112.\n\n Abraham, i. 419;\n and Isaac and Jacob, the names of, united with that of God, potent\n against demons, ii. 195-197.\n\n Abstinence, the, practised by the Pythagoreans and Christians, the\n different reasons for, ii. 320.\n\n _Acts of Paul_, _The_, quoted, i. 20.\n\n Adam, not the name of an individual but of the whole race, ii. 206.\n\n Ader [Hadad], i. 389.\n\n Adrian and Jesus, ii. 117, 118.\n\n Adultery, reasons why the followers of Zeno and Epicurus abstain from,\n ii. 484.\n\n Advents of Christ, two, predicted, i. 459.\n\n \u00c6sculapius and his supposed heavenly power, ii. 102, 103, 104.\n\n Africanus, the letter of, to Origen, i. 369, 370;\n reply of Origen to, 371, etc.\n\n Ages, the, i. 85.\n\n Allegories in Scripture, ii. 209, 210;\n Celsus accuses Christians of having recourse to, when ashamed of\n Scripture histories, 214;\n Celsus\u2019 objection to, refuted, 215-217.\n\n Altar, the only, recognised by Christians, ii. 505.\n\n Altars, images, and temples, why Christians reject and abhor, ii.\n 480-487.\n\n Ammon forbids the use of cows\u2019 flesh, ii. 306.\n\n Anaxarchus, anecdote of, ii. 475, 476.\n\n Angel, the, who had power to hurt the uncircumcised, ii. 318, 319.\n\n Angels, doctrine of the Church respecting, i. 7;\n how referred to by Paul, 45;\n a particular office assigned to each, 65;\n diversities among, the result of merit, 66;\n capable of good or evil, 67, 69;\n the substance of, 122, 123;\n superior to men, ii. 189, 190;\n employment and dignity of, 271, 519, 520;\n not to be worshipped or invoked, 272;\n that waited on Jesus, 327, 328.\n\n Angels, evil, ii. 517.\n\n Animal man, the, i. 120, 121.\n\n Animals, irrational, the superiority of man to, ii. 244-256;\n power of sorcery attributed to, by Celsus, 252;\n knowledge of God attributed to, by Celsus, 254-256;\n division of, by Moses, into clean and unclean, 260;\n according to Celsus, nearer to God and more beloved by Him than men,\n 263, 264.\n\n Annihilation of material substances not possible, i. 58.\n\n Anthropopathy, the, of Scripture, ii. 236, 239.\n\n Antichrist, ii. 385-388.\n\n Antinous, ii. 117, 118, 119.\n\n \u1f08\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03c7\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2, i. 86.\n\n Ants and bees asserted by Celsus to be not inferior in intelligence to\n man, ii. 246-248.\n\n Apollonius of Tyana, ii. 380.\n\n _Apopomp\u0153us_, i. 223.\n\n Apostles, the subjects of their preaching, i. 3, etc.\n\n Archilochus, the poet, ii. 105.\n\n Aristeas of Proconnesus, the story of, ii. 106-108;\n and Jesus, 108-111.\n\n Aristotle flees from persecution, i. 471.\n\n Ark, the, of Noah, ii. 207.\n\n Artaxerxes and Mordecai, i. 231.\n\n _Ascension of Moses, The_, quoted, i. 222.\n\n \u1f08\u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, i. 5.\n\n Augury, ii. 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257;\n demons the real source of, 259-261;\n forbidden by Moses, 262.\n\n Avenging injuries, ii. 479, 480.\n\n\n Babel, the overthrow of the tower of, ii. 180, 181.\n\n _Barnabas, The Epistle of_, quoted respecting the two ways, i. 231;\n respecting the disciples of Jesus, 468.\n\n Bees and ants asserted by Celsus to be not inferior to man in\n intelligence, ii. 246-256.\n\n Betrayal, the, of Jesus by Judas, ii. 15, etc., 17, etc.\n\n Bethlehem, Jesus born in, i. 453.\n\n Birds, divination or augury by, ii. 254, 255, etc., 258, 259.\n\n Birth, the influence of, i. 427.\n\n Blessedness, the future, of the saints, not carnal, i. 145, 146;\n but spiritual, 147-153.\n\n Bodily nature, the perpetuity of the, i. 77-79.\n\n Body, the, can rational creatures live without?, i. 80, 82;\n to be made immortal and incorruptible, the resurrection of, 137, ii.\n 284-292;\n varieties in the resurrection body, i. 138;\n a word to weak believers respecting the resurrection body, 139, etc.;\n as well as the soul, the work of God, Celsus refuted, ii. 220-224,\n 225, 226;\n Celsus misrepresents the views of Christians respecting, 533, 534;\n the care of, assigned by the Egyptians to thirty-six demons, 542,\n 543.\n\n Breath of the power of God, the, i. 26-28.\n\n Brightness of the Father\u2019s glory, Christ the, i. 24.\n\n\n Calimachus, his hymn to Jupiter quoted, ii. 124, 125.\n\n Callatians, a horrid custom of, ii. 307.\n\n Camel, easier for a, to go through the eye of a needle, etc., ii. 354,\n 355.\n\n Ch\u00e6remon, his _Treatise on Comets_ cited, i. 462.\n\n Christ, the words of, i. 1;\n apostolical doctrine respecting, 3;\n the only-begotten Son of God, 18;\n the wisdom of God, 18, 19, 20;\n the eternal generation of, 19, 22;\n generated by the divine will, 23;\n the image of the invisible God, 23, 24;\n the brightness of the glory of God, 24, 25;\n the figure of God\u2019s person or subsistence, 25;\n the breath of the power of God, 26;\n the efflux of God\u2019s glory, 28;\n the splendour of eternal light, 30;\n the stainless mirror of God\u2019s \u1f10\u03bd\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, 31;\n the image of God\u2019s goodness, 31, 32;\n the incarnation of, 106;\n His union with God, 108;\n His union with God the reward of His love, 109;\n possessed a human and rational soul, 110, 111;\n anointed with the oil of joy, 111, 112;\n and Moses, as lawgivers, 275, etc.;\n predicted, 279, etc., 285, etc.;\n all the majesty of His divinity not confined within the limits of the\n body of, 345-347;\n Jacob\u2019s prophecy of, 454;\n sufferings of, predicted, 456;\n two advents of, predicted, 459, etc.;\n the belief of Jews and Christians in the advent of, Celsus answered,\n ii. 180.\n _See_ Jesus.\n\n Christianity, the power of, i. 277, etc., 424, 425, 426;\n its own defence, 393, 395;\n its real evidence, 399, 400;\n general conspiracy against, 400;\n not a secret system, 403;\n martyrs for, praised by Celsus, 404;\n adaptability of, to all orders of mind, ii. 464;\n the object of, to make all men wise, 126, 127, 128, 152;\n Celsus\u2019 slanders of the teachers of, refuted, 153, 154, 155, 156.\n\n Christians, the, accused of entering into secret associations, i. 398,\n 399;\n hostility of the heathen to, 400;\n the morals of, 400, 401;\n regulations of, relating to idolatry, 401, 402;\n use no incantations in casting out demons, 402, 403;\n do not believe without a reason, 405;\n reformed by the power of their religion, 406;\n the points of difference between the Jews and, not trifling, ii. 85,\n 86, 88;\n not rebels against the Jewish State, 90, 91;\n the zeal of, to diffuse their principles, 92;\n few at first, yet not very few, 93;\n differences of opinion among, from the first, 94;\n existence of heresies among, no reproach to, 94-96;\n the basis of the union of, 96, 97;\n charged with inventing terrors, 98;\n the religion of, compared by Celsus with that of the Egyptians, 98,\n 99;\n charged by Celsus with inviting to their ranks the ignorant only,\n 125-131;\n further calumnies of Celsus against, 131, 133;\n their mode of admitting members, 132;\n instructions given by, graduated to the capacity of the hearers, 133;\n desire to instruct all classes of men, 134;\n Celsus\u2019 calumnies respecting the way their teachers deal with the\n young and ignorant, 135-138;\n the worst invited by, to do them good, 139, 140, 141;\n slander of Celsus, that wise men are driven from the religion of,\n 151;\n charged with seeking after the unintelligent, 152;\n other charges against the teachers of, repelled, 153-156;\n not won by vain hopes, 158;\n Celsus\u2019 ridicule of, as bats and ants, etc., 183, 184;\n the acknowledged opinions of, which make them noble, 185, 186;\n the character of, 187, 188;\n do not profess to monopolize God, 188, 189;\n the argument between the Jews and, 329;\n sects and heresies among, 331, 333, 335;\n old calumnies against, 365, 366;\n Celsus confounds them with certain silly errorists, 365, etc.;\n Celsus reviles\u2014answer to Celsus\u2019 revilings of, 373-376;\n their views of God misrepresented by Celsus, 449-450;\n their hope after death, 450-451;\n further calumnies of Celsus, 462;\n instructed and stigmatized by Celsus, 468, 469;\n how they live, 471;\n why they reject images, temples, and altars, 483-487;\n not inconsistent in their rejection of images, 487;\n use no barbarous words in prayer, 522;\n do not revile the statues of the gods, 523, 524, 525;\n the loving zeal of, for the salvation of men, 536;\n the liberty of, 538, 539, 540;\n urged by Celsus to help the king and fight for him\u2014how they do this,\n 556-558;\n why they refuse to take office under government, 558.\n\n Christs, false, 460, 461.\n\n Chrysippus\u2019 treatise _On the Cure of the Passions_ quoted, i. 470;\n _On the Subjugation of the Passions_, ii. 535.\n\n Churches of the Christians, and heathen assemblies, compared and\n contrasted, ii. 110, 112.\n\n Circumcision, i. 419;\n as practised by the Jews different from that practised by the\n Gentiles, ii. 316, 318;\n of Moses\u2019 son, 318, 319;\n abolished by Christ, 319.\n\n Clean and unclean animals, the reason of the Mosaic division into, ii.\n 260.\n\n Clement of Rome quoted, i. 86, 87.\n\n Cleomedes, the boxer, of Astypalea, ii. 105, 114.\n\n Clothing, the, of the soul and of the body, i. 81.\n\n Condescension, the, of God, ii. 172, 174, 175.\n\n Conflagration, the, of the world, Celsus\u2019 cavils against, ii. 281-285.\n\n Conflict, the, with the powers of evil, i. 232, etc.\n\n Confusion of tongues, the, at Babel, ii. 297-299.\n\n Consummation, the, i. 53-59.\n\n _Controversy between Jason and Papiscus, The_, concerning Christ,\n referred to, 218, 219.\n\n Conversion possible for the very worst, ii. 145-148.\n\n Converts from Judaism do not desert the law of their fathers, ii. 1, 2.\n\n Corporeal and incorporeal being, i. 59-65.\n\n Corporeity, will it ever be destroyed?, i. 82, 83, etc.\n\n Corruptible, the, putting on incorruption, i. 80, 81.\n\n Cosmogony, the Mosaic, the criticism of Celsus on, answered, ii.\n 390-392, 402, 403.\n\n Cows\u2019 flesh forbidden by Ammon, ii. 306.\n\n Creation, the, of the world in time, i. 253, etc.;\n objection to the creation of the world in time answered, 255;\n the peculiar term employed in Scripture to express, 258.\n\n Creation of man, the, ridiculed by Celsus, ii. 199, 200;\n and of beast, the work of God, 220-224.\n\n Creature, the, subjected to vanity, i. 63-65, 257, 258.\n\n Creatures, made by God in the beginning, i. 126;\n changeable and mutable, 128;\n varieties of, 129, 130.\n\n Crocodiles, Celsus has no fault to find with the worshippers of, ii.\n 310.\n\n Cup, the prayer of Jesus respecting the, ii. 32.\n\n Customs, ought those of our respective countries to be followed?, ii.\n 305, etc.;\n the variety and absurdity of, 306, etc.\n\n Cycles of mortal things, asserted by Celsus, refutation of the notion\n of, ii. 232, 233;\n taught by the Stoics, 389, 390.\n\n\n Dan and Bethel, i. 390.\n\n Daniel, the wisdom of, ii. 127.\n\n Daniel, additions to the book of, in the LXX., i. 371, 372, 373.\n\n Darkness, outer, i. 144.\n\n Darkness, the rulers and powers of, obtained their degrees of evil by\n their own conduct, i. 69.\n\n Darkness, the, round about God, ii. 355.\n\n Days, sacred, ii. 509, 510.\n\n Death, how could the Jews in captivity pass the sentence of?, i. 385.\n\n Death, the hope of Christians after, ii. 450, 451.\n\n Death, the last enemy, destroyed, i. 268, 269.\n\n Defection, the, of men, i. 43.\n\n Deluge, the, the cavils of Celsus respecting, ii. 206-208, 401.\n\n Demons, _formul\u0153_ used against, ii. 195, 196, 197;\n the source of augury by birds, etc., 259, 260, 261;\n the seven ruling, referred to by Celsus, 368, 369;\n cast out by Christians, 487;\n the worship of, inconsistent with the worship of God, 488-490;\n eating things offered to, 514-517;\n have nothing to do with food and drink, 516-518;\n first-fruits not to be offered to, 519;\n can inflict no injury on Christians, 521, 522;\n Jesus not a demon, 524;\n afraid of martyrs, 528;\n not set over the fruits of the earth, 542;\n thirty-six, among the Egyptians, have assigned to them the care of\n the human body, 542;\n caution, according to Celsus, required in the service of, 544-546;\n other references to, 110, 113, 114, 115, 117, 194, 232, 259, 260,\n 261, 264, 272, 512, 544.\n\n Desire of knowledge, the, to be satisfied in a future state, i.\n 146-151.\n\n Deuteronomy, the book of, i. 338, 339.\n\n\n Devil, the, and his angels, the doctrine of the Church respecting, i.\n 5;\n the titles of, 45;\n not incapable of goodness, 68;\n the agency of, as set forth in the Old Testament, 222;\n as revealed in the New Testament, 224;\n not the prompter to all sins, 227-229;\n how he and his allied powers tempt, 229;\n the contest against, 232, etc.;\n the charges of Celsus against the Christians in relation to, refuted,\n ii. 380-384;\n the fall of, 385.\n\n Diagram, a curious, referred to by Celsus as in use among certain\n heretics, ii. 362, 363, 368, 369, 376, 377.\n\n Disciples, the, of Jesus, their devotion to their Master, i. 430;\n defended against Celsus, 466-470;\n justified in fleeing from persecution, 471;\n truthfulness of, ii. 21, 23.\n\n Dionysius, ii. 103.\n\n Dioscuri, the, and Hercules, and \u00c6sculapius, no gods, ii. 102, 103.\n\n Divination, ii. 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259.\n\n _Doctrine of Peter, The_, the apocryphal work so called, quoted, i. 6.\n\n Dositheans, the, ii. 349.\n\n Dove, the descent of a, on Jesus, i. 440, 441, 442-446.\n\n\n Earth, the distribution of the several parts of, among superintending\n spirits, according to Celsus, ii. 293, etc.;\n the correct view respecting, 296, 297.\n\n Ebionite, meaning of the name, i. 329.\n\n Ebionites, who so called, ii. 1.\n\n Efflux of the glory of God, Christ the, i. 28.\n\n Egypt, how the Hebrews were delivered from, ii. 89, 90.\n\n Egyptians, the, what the Israelites did with the spoil of, i. 388, 389;\n the Jews not descended from, ii. 88-90;\n the religion of, foolishly compared by Celsus to that of the\n Christians, 98, 99;\n inconsistently lauded by Celsus, 423;\n assign the care of the human body to thirty-six demons, 542, 543.\n\n Elephants, the fidelity of, to oaths, according to Celsus, ii. 265.\n\n End, the, when it will come, i. 54;\n and the beginning, 55;\n what shall be after, 58;\n admonitory remarks respecting, 262-273.\n\n Enemy, the last, destroyed, i. 268, 269.\n\n _Enoch, The book of_, quoted, i. 352, ii. 325.\n\n Epictetus, an anecdote of, ii. 475, 476.\n\n Epicureans, reasons of the, for abstaining from adultery, ii. 484.\n\n Eros, the story of, from the _Symposium_ of Plato, ii. 203-205.\n\n Esaias sawn asunder, i. 377, 378.\n\n Esoteric and exoteric doctrines of Christianity, the, i. 403.\n\n Eternal generation of Christ, the, i. 19, 23.\n\n Etymological fancies in Scripture, i. 383.\n\n Euphrates, ii. 367.\n\n Euripides quoted, ii. 243.\n\n Eve, the formation of, ridiculed by Celsus, ii. 201.\n\n Evidences of the truth of Christianity, i. 445, 446.\n\n Evil, or good, every rational created nature capable of, i. 68;\n God, not the author of, 395-398;\n what sort of, God may be said to cause, 398;\n the final complete destruction of, 555.\n\n Evil beings, made such by themselves in their respective degrees, i.\n 69.\n\n Evils, never more nor fewer, according to Celsus\u2014refutation of this\n opinion, ii. 228, 229, 230;\n the inquiry into the origin of, difficult, 231, 232;\n the source of, 232;\n seeming, 235, 236;\n allowed for good ends, 398.\n\n Eyes, open and shut,\u2014the inner and outer, ii. 461.\n\n\n Faith, the reforming power of the Christian, i. 406;\n the call to, rational, 407.\n\n Faith in Jesus, ii. 120.\n\n Fallen spirits, i. 57;\n the restoration of, 57, 58.\n\n Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a summary of the doctrine of the, i. 342,\n etc.\n\n Figure of the Father\u2019s person, Christ the, i. 25.\n\n Fire, eternal, the threatening of, i. 40-43.\n\n Fire, God a consuming, i. 9;\n why God is represented as, ii. 172, 173.\n\n Flesh and spirit, i. 245-248.\n\n Floods and conflagrations, ii. 171.\n\n Food, spiritual, i. 147;\n different ways of preparing, i. 480, 481.\n\n Foolishness, the kind recommended by Christianity, i. 410.\n\n Foreknowledge, does not necessitate the events foreseen, ii. 25, 26,\n 27, 28;\n the gift of, does not necessarily imply virtue, 105;\n no proof of divinity, 262, 263.\n\n Foundation of the world, the, i. 256.\n\n Free-will, i. 4, 132, 133;\n fully asserted, 157, etc.;\n able to resist external causes, 161;\n proved from Scripture, 165, etc.;\n passages of Scripture apparently opposed to, explained, 168-221.\n\n\n Gehenna, ii. 263, 264.\n\n Generation, eternal, the, of Christ, i. 19, 22, 23.\n\n Glory, human, forbidden, ii. 447.\n\n God, apostolic doctrine respecting, i. 3;\n a Spirit, 8-11;\n light, _ibid._;\n fire, 9;\n incomprehensible, 11;\n revealed in His works, 12, 13;\n simple and uncompounded in His nature, 12, 15;\n the nature of, surpasses natural bodies, 15, 16;\n invisible,\u2014how said to be seen, 16, 17;\n the image of, 23, 24, 262, 263;\n omnipotent, 28, 301, ii. 149;\n nature of His power, 31;\n created all things, i. 34;\n the, of the law and the prophets the same as the Father of Jesus\n Christ, 91, etc.;\n not a body, 91;\n anthropopathic expressions respecting, in the Old Testament,\n explained, 96, 97;\n the justice and goodness of, 97-105;\n the soul of, 125, 126;\n nothing happens without the permission of, 235;\n what was He doing before He created the world?, 256;\n in the end, all in all, 264, 265;\n one, believed in by the Jews, 420, 421;\n His dealing with the good and the bad, ii. 149, 150;\n His descent upon earth objected to by Celsus,\u2014meaning of His descent,\n 162-166, 172;\n by descending on earth He does not vacate heaven, 166;\n why He desires to make Himself known to men, 167, 168;\n in every age has passed into the souls of men, 168;\n has revealed Himself to some preeminently, 169;\n Celsus accuses Christians of babbling about, 171;\n a consuming fire, 172, 173;\n the condescension of, 172, 173, 174, 175;\n further objections of Celsus to the descent of, to earth,\n answered\u2014object of the incarnation of, 177, 178;\n figurative language used to describe, 200, 404;\n the one Creator of body and soul, man and beast, 220-224;\n anger, wrath, etc., ascribed to\u2014how this is to be understood,\n 237-239;\n made all things for the sake of man, 239, 240, 241, 242;\n ever near His people, 280;\n the name given to, is not unimportant, but the contrary, 315-317;\n darkness round about, 355;\n those who call Him \u201caccursed,\u201d 365, 366, 367;\n in what sense said to make evil, 395, 397;\n not incapable of persuading men, 398, 399;\n in what sense said to repent, 399, 400;\n the resting attributed to, 403;\n man made in the image of, 405, 406;\n can He be reached by a word?, 408;\n how to know, 408, 409, 410, 411;\n the Spirit of, 413, 414;\n Celsus misrepresents the views of Christians respecting, 449, 450;\n how seen, 455;\n not confined to place, 456;\n not known by the senses, 457, etc.;\n hard to find out, 464, 465;\n adapts His truth to all classes, 464; seen in Christ, 465, 466;\n known by the simplest Christian, through the help of divine grace,\n 466, 467;\n the worship of Christ consistent with the sole worship of, 500, 501;\n worshipped equally well in different languages, 522.\n\n Gods, Scythian and Greek, ii. 377, 378;\n many, not to be served, 492, etc., 496-500;\n Christians do not revile the statues of the, 523.\n\n Goodness, divine, i. 32;\n and justice, 97, etc.;\n consistent with the infliction of punishment, 98, etc.\n\n Gospel, the, not perverted by Christians, ii. 33.\n\n Gospels, the, not all pure history, i. 315, 317, 320;\n their character and authors, ii. 121.\n\n Greek philosophy and learning to be made subservient to Christianity,\n i. 388.\n\n Gregory Thaumaturgus, letter of Origen to, i. 388.\n\n\n Hardening, the, of Pharaoh\u2019s heart, i. 169, etc., 176-191.\n\n Healing art, the possession of the, does not necessarily imply virtue,\n ii. 105.\n\n Heaven, i. 88, 89, 90, 152.\n\n Heavenly bodies, the, animated and endowed with souls, i. 59-65.\n\n _Heavenly Dialogue, A_, quoted by Celsus, ii. 503.\n\n Heavens, the, opened to Jesus at His baptism, i. 448, 449, 450;\n not called God, nor worshipped by the Jews, ii. 275-279.\n\n Hebrew Master, the, of Origen, cited, i. 35.\n\n Hebrews, the, not Egyptians by descent,\u2014how freed from Egyptian\n bondage, ii. 88-92.\n\n Hercules, proposed by Celsus to Christians as an object of homage,\u2014the\n character of, ii. 475, 476.\n\n Heresies among Christians no reproach, ii. 96-98, 331-333, 335.\n\n _Hermas, The Shepherd of_, quoted, i. 34, 35, 230, 301.\n\n Herod seeks to destroy the child Jesus, i. 464, 465.\n\n Heroes proposed by Celsus to the Christians as objects of homage\n superior to their own, ii. 475.\n\n Hesiod quoted as to the formation of Pandora, ii. 201, 202.\n\n Holy Spirit, the, the apostolic doctrine of, i. 3;\n what, 10;\n the existence of, 33;\n what we are taught in Scripture respecting, 34;\n not created, 35;\n one of the two seraphim of Isaiah, _ibid._;\n reveals God, 36;\n the nature of His working as distinguished from that of the Father\n and the Son, 37-40, 41, 43;\n taken from the unworthy, 39;\n dwells in the renewed, 39, 40;\n bestowed on the saints, 40;\n one, 114;\n every rational creature receives a share of, 114, 115;\n the advent of, after the ascension of Christ, 115;\n gifts of, 116;\n the Paraclete, 116, 117.\n\n Homer quoted respecting the sparrow, serpent, and eagle, ii. 258.\n\n Hope, the, of Christians after death, ii. 450, 451.\n\n Human nature, the dignity of, ii. 183-186.\n\n Humility, ii. 352, 353.\n\n\n Idol festivals, why not take part in?, ii, 511, 512.\n\n Idolatry, even heathen philosophers condemn, i. 401.\n\n Idols, abstinence from meats offered to, ii. 514, 515, 516.\n\n Ignorance receives no sanction from Christianity, ii. 125-131, 154.\n\n Image of God, the, man made in, i. 262-264, ii. 405, 487.\n\n Image of God\u2019s goodness, the, i. 32.\n\n Image of the invisible God, Christ the, i. 23, 24.\n\n Images, not gods, ii. 121;\n the making of, forbidden to the Jews, 193;\n why Christians reject, 480-487;\n the true, of God, 505, 506.\n\n Immortality, the, of rational natures, i. 353.\n\n Incantations, not used by Christians, i. 402, 403;\n the power of names in, ii. 315, 316.\n\n Incarnation, the, of Christ, i. 105;\n the wonderfulness of, 106, 107;\n the intermediacy of Christ\u2019s soul between the flesh and God in, 108,\n 109;\n the assumption of the soul in, a reward of that soul\u2019s virtues, 109;\n difficulty as to Christ\u2019s possessing a human soul, removed, 110;\n the subject illustrated, 111, 112;\n implies no change in God, the object of, ii. 174, 175, 176-179;\n cavilled at and ridiculed by Celsus, 415, 416, 421, 422.\n\n Incorporeal, meaning of the term, i. 5, 6.\n\n Inspiration, the, of the Scriptures, i. 274, 285.\n\n Instinct and reason, ii. 250-253.\n\n Interpretation, of the promises, not literal, but spiritual, i.\n 143-148;\n of the Scriptures, the true method of, 291-323.\n\n Isis and Osiris, ii. 309.\n\n Israel, the carnal and spiritual, i. 327.\n\n\n Jacob, and Esau, i. 133, 134;\n wrestles with an angel, 234;\n his prophecy of Christ, 455.\n\n James, the brother of our Lord, i. 447.\n\n\n Jesus, His conversation with the woman of Samaria, i. 11;\n silence of, before His judges, 393;\n charge of sorcery against, power of His name, 402, 403;\n acted by a divine power, 424, 425, 426;\n Celsus introduces a Jew disputing with, and refuting, 426, 427;\n Celsus\u2019 defamation of, turned into an argument to enhance the glory\n and divine power of, 427, 430;\n the attachment of His disciples to, and His death for men, 430, 431;\n the miraculous birth of, vindicated against Celsus, 431, 432;\n predicted to be born of a virgin, 433;\n no rational objection to the birth of, from a virgin, 437;\n absurdity of imputing the miracles of, to magic, 438, 439;\n descent of a dove on, 440, 441, 442, 443;\n no grounds for believing in Moses while He is rejected, 444, 445;\n evidence of the divinity of the doctrine of, 445, 446;\n the heavens open to, 448, 449, 450;\n prophecies relating to, 451, 452, etc.;\n born in Bethlehem, 453;\n the disciples of, Celsus\u2019 account of them, 466-470;\n flight of, into Egypt, justified against Celsus, 472, 473;\n the miracles of, defended, 474;\n the miracles of, not wrought by magic, 474-476;\n Celsus\u2019 silly carping about the body of, exposed, 476, 477;\n His promise of the Spirit of truth, ii. 3;\n observed the Jewish law, 7, 8;\n not arrogant, but meek and lowly, 8;\n inconsistency of the Jews in rejecting, 9, 10;\n Celsus\u2019 impeachment of the Godhead of, answered, 10, 11;\n never broke His promise, 13;\n never attempted disgracefully to hide from His enemies, 14;\n the betrayal of, 15;\n the argument of Celsus founded on the betrayal of, answered, 17,\n etc.;\n predictions respecting,\u2014Celsus\u2019 mode of dealing with the predictions\n respecting, refuted, 18, 21;\n the disciples of, lovers of truth, 21;\n really suffered, died, and was raised from the dead,\u2014an objection\n met, 22-24;\n if He foreknew the traitor and perjurer, why did they not desist from\n their purpose?, 24, 25;\n His foreknowledge did not compel the events foreknown, 25-28;\n His suffering real, and voluntarily and submissively endured, 29-33;\n predictions concerning the life of, 34, 35;\n the union of kingdoms at the time of the birth of, 35, 36;\n objection of Celsus drawn from the genealogies of, 37;\n \u2018what great deeds did He perform, being a God?\u2019 answered, 37, 38;\n could He not have delivered Himself from His enemies?\u2014punishment of\n the enemies of, 38, 39, 40;\n blood and water flow from the side of,\u2014Celsus\u2019 mockery of this, 40;\n vinegar and gall given to, 41;\n objection of Celsus that He gained over no one in His life,\u2014why the\n Jews are blamed for not believing in, 42-45;\n Celsus\u2019 assertion that He did not show Himself pure from evil, 43,\n 44;\n numbered with transgressors, 45, 46;\n conduct of the disciples on His being apprehended,\u2014Celsus\u2019 argument\n founded on this refuted, 47;\n Celsus\u2019 assertion that He only gained over ten sailors and\n tax-gatherers, 47, 48;\n why Christians were won over to, 48, 49;\n refutation of Celsus concerning the miracles of, 49-57;\n and the heroes of heathenism compared, 59, 60;\n the resurrection of, 60;\n ought He to have appeared after His resurrection to His persecutors?,\n 65-70;\n why did He not escape from the cross?, 71, 72;\n to whom He appeared after His resurrection, 74;\n purposes of His mission, 75;\n Celsus\u2019 argument derived from the incredulity of the Jews, answered,\n 77-81;\n censured by Celsus for using threats, 79, etc.;\n unbelief of the Jews as to, predicted and punished, 82, 83;\n the power of, to diffuse His doctrine and convert men, 83, 84;\n not to be compared with \u00c6sculapius, Hercules, etc., 102, 103;\n nor with Aristeas of Proconnesus\u2014advantages derived from, 106-111;\n nor with Abaris the Hyperborean, 112;\n nor with the Clazomenean, 113;\n nor with Cleomedes of Astypalea, 114;\n nor with Zamolxis, 115, 116;\n nor with Adrian, 117, 118;\n nor with Antinous, 119, 120;\n the human nature of, changed into God, 122, 123;\n and Cretan Jove, 124, 125;\n Celsus\u2019 objection that He was sent to sinners, 141, 142, 143;\n suffering of the Jews for their crime against, 182, 526, 527;\n cavils of Celsus respecting\u2014not the only one sent from God to men,\n 321, 322;\n angels wait on\u2014reply to Celsus on this point, 327, 328;\n the soul of, joined to the Word, 389, 390;\n personal appearance of\u2014Celsus\u2019 reproaches respecting this, 418-420;\n appearances after His resurrection not shadowy, 456;\n conduct of, under His sufferings, 476, 477;\n death of, 478;\n the worship of, consistent with the worship of the one God, 500, 501;\n the Son of God, 501, 502;\n not a demon, 523, 524;\n fruitfulness of the death of, 527.\n\n Jews, the, mutilated the Scriptures of the Old Testament, i. 377, 379;\n Celsus casts a slight upon, 411, 412;\n Numenius and others speak favourably of, 412, 413;\n the antiquity of, 413;\n believe in one God, 420, 421;\n falsely accused by Celsus of angel-worship and sorcery, 424;\n the inconsistency of, in rejecting Jesus,\u2014their unbelief foretold,\n ii. 9, 10, 77, 82, 83;\n punishment of their unbelief, 10;\n what they are to be blamed for respecting Jesus, 41;\n the points of difference between Christians and, not foolish, 85, 86,\n 88;\n how they adhere to their religion, 87, 88;\n blunder of Celsus as to the Egyptian descent of, 88, 89;\n the punishment of, for their treatment of Jesus, 182;\n Celsus\u2019 ridicule of Christians and, 183;\n vindicated against Celsus, the law and polity of, 192, 193;\n the genealogy of, 195, 197, 198;\n do not worship the heavens, 272, 273;\n do not consider the heavens to be God, 274;\n do not bow down to angels, 276, 277, 278;\n defended against the false charges of Celsus, 312, 313;\n have nothing in common with the Persians in the worship of God, 314;\n the circumcision practised by, different from that of other nations,\n 317, 318;\n reason of their abstinence from swine\u2019s flesh, 319, 320;\n were highly favoured by God, 320, 321, 530, 531.\n\n Job, additions to the book of, in the LXX., i. 378;\n and in the Hebrew text, _ibid._\n\n John the Baptist referred to by Josephus, i. 447.\n\n Jonah and Jesus, ii. 478.\n\n Joseph, Celsus\u2019 cavils respecting, ii. 213.\n\n Judaism, converts from, do not desert the law of their fathers, ii. 1,\n 5, 6.\n\n Judas, the conduct of, in betraying, and after betraying, Jesus, ii.\n 15, 16;\n foretold, 27.\n\n Judea and Jerusalem, figures of a heavenly land, ii. 451.\n\n Jupiter, the Cretan, ii. 124, 125.\n\n Just man, the, promised riches, ii. 444;\n how he slays and prevails, 445.\n\n Justice and goodness, their harmony and consistency, i. 97-105.\n\n\n \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae, i. 256, 258.\n\n Kings, the favour of, according to Celsus, to be sought, ii. 547, 548;\n swearing by the fortune of, 549;\n how Christians fight for and help, 556, 557.\n\n Knowledge, the increase of, in the future state, i. 148-151.\n\n \u039a\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2, i. 86.\n\n\n Labour, the wisdom of the necessity of, laid on man, ii. 242.\n\n Laius, and the oracle given to, ii. 26, 27.\n\n Land, the good, promised by God to the righteous, ii. 450, 451, 452.\n\n Languages, the confusion of, at Babel, ii. 297, 298, 299.\n\n Law, is it the king of all things?, ii. 310, 311.\n\n Law of Moses, the, the irrationality and impossibility of some of its\n precepts taken literally, i. 317-320;\n twofold, ii. 443, 444;\n promises riches to the just, 444.\n\n Laws, ancestral, is it impiety to abandon them?, ii. 293-298;\n when those of states and natural, are opposed, which to be followed?,\n 307, 308.\n\n Light, the, not to be worshipped, ii. 278, 279;\n and darkness, 409, 410.\n\n Light, God is, i. 8, 31.\n\n Lot and his daughters, the story of, assailed by Celsus,\u2014explanation\n of, ii. 211, 212.\n\n Lucifer, his fall from heaven, i. 51-53.\n\n\n Magi, the visit of the, to Jesus, i. 461, 464.\n\n Magic, the miracles of Jesus not wrought by, i. 474-476;\n over whom it has power, ii. 379, 380.\n\n Man, the account of the creation of, ridiculed by Celsus, ii. 199, 200;\n all things made for the sake of, 239, 240-244;\n superiority of, over irrational animals, 244-256.\n\n Marcion, ii. 324, 417.\n\n Martyrs, demons afraid of, ii. 528.\n\n Masters, no man can serve two, ii. 493.\n\n Meats and drinks, abstaining from, ii. 514, 515, 516.\n\n Mediator, the, through whom we come to God, ii. 271, 272.\n\n Men, not be compared to bats and worms, as Celsus compares them,\u2014the\n dignity of their nature, ii. 182-185;\n God\u2019s care over the first, 246.\n\n Minerva, ii. 550.\n\n Miracles of Jesus, the, their greatness, i. 474;\n not wrought by magic, 474-476;\n vindicated against Celsus, ii. 49-57.\n\n Miraculous appearances, on Greek testimony, witnessed by men, ii. 326,\n 327.\n\n Mithrus, the mysteries of, referred to by Celsus, ii. 260, 262.\n\n Moses, his history assailed by Celsus, i. 414, 415;\n a challenge on behalf of the laws of, 415, 416;\n Celsus strives to discredit his account of creation, 416;\n a divine spirit in, 417;\n excellency of the history transmitted by, 418;\n no reason for believing in, while rejecting Christ, 444, 445;\n and Jesus, the miracles of, ii. 54-57, 58, 59;\n the antiquity of, 171;\n his division of animals into clean and unclean, 260, 261;\n the cosmogony of, taken exception to by Celsus, 390-392, 402, 403.\n\n\n Name of Jesus, the power of, i. 403.\n\n Names, the origin, power, and mystery of, i. 421, 422, 423;\n not unimportant, ii. 315;\n the power of, in invocations, 316.\n\n New heavens and new earth, the, i. 56, 58.\n\n Numenius, his treatise on _The Good_, i. 412.\n\n\n Old Testament, the, and the New, their teaching harmonious, ii. 444,\n etc., 447.\n\n Only-begotten Son of God, Christ the, i. 18;\n the self-abasement of, 259.\n\n Ophites, the, referred to, ii. 362, 365, 366, 367, 462.\n\n Opposing powers, or powers of darkness, the, i. 222, etc.;\n our conflict with, 232, etc.\n\n Oracles, ii. 426, 456;\n and responses, 529;\n and the words of the prophets, 530.\n\n Orpheus, proposed by Celsus to Christians as an object of homage, ii.\n 275, 276.\n\n Osiris and Isis, ii. 309.\n\n\n Pandora, Hesiod\u2019s description of the formation of, ii. 201, 202.\n\n Papp\u00e6us, ii. 315-317.\n\n Parables, why Jesus spoke in, i. 195-202.\n\n Paraclete, the, i. 114, 116.\n\n Paradise, the, prepared for departed saints, i. 151.\n\n Passions, the, which affect the soul, i. 141.\n\n _Pastor, The, of Hermas_, quoted, i. 34, 35, 230, 301.\n\n Paul, his desire to depart, i. 159, 160;\n his wisdom, ii. 100, 101.\n\n Persecution, Jesus and His disciples justified in avoiding, i. 471.\n\n Persians, and Jews hold nothing in common in the worship of God, ii.\n 214;\n mysteries of the, 360;\n have no temples, 483;\n worship the creature, 485, 486.\n\n Peter, his superstitious adherence to Jewish observances,\u2014how delivered\n from it, ii. 1-3.\n\n Pharaoh, the hardening of the heart of, i. 171-191.\n\n Philosophers, the folly and error of, ii. 470.\n\n Ph\u0153nix, the, ii. 265.\n\n Planets, the, i. 87.\n\n Plato, quoted respecting Eros, ii. 203-205;\n and Scripture, the respective styles of, 336-338;\n the inefficacy of his teaching compared with that of the Scriptures,\n 339-341;\n Jesus does not quote and pervert the words of, as Celsus asserts,\n 354;\n excelled by the Scriptures in his idea of God, 355, 366;\n quoted as to _Elysium_, 450;\n quoted as to certain precious stones, 452;\n his _Tim\u0153us_ quoted, 464;\n on the avenging of injuries, 479.\n\n Potter, the, his power over the clay, i. 211, etc.\n\n Power of God, the, i. 26, 28.\n\n Prayer, to whom it is to be made, ii. 272, 273;\n Christians use no barbarous names in, 522.\n\n Precious stones, certain, spoken of by Plato, ii. 452.\n\n Predictions, respecting India, Egypt, and Babylon, etc., 331, 332;\n respecting Jesus Christ. _See_ Prophecies.\n\n Pre-existence, the, of rational creatures, i. 256-258.\n\n Prejudice, the power of, i. 455.\n\n Principalities and powers of darkness, the, i. 68-70.\n\n _Prino-prisein_ and _Schino-schisein_ difficulty of interpretation,\n the, i. 375, 381, 383.\n\n Promises, the, of future good, not to be interpreted literally and\n carnally, i. 145-153.\n\n Prophecies, the, the cavils of Celsus respecting, answered, ii.\n 431-440, 441, etc.;\n relating to Christ, 451, 453, etc., 456-458, 459.\n\n Prophets, the, the various ways God spake to, i. 380;\n quoted from each other, 386;\n necessary for the Jews, 436, 437;\n the character of, ii. 430, 431;\n power of the words of, 530.\n\n Providence, divine, maintained against Celsus, ii. 240-244, 266;\n incorrect views of, rectified, 488, 489.\n\n \u03a0\u03c3\u03c5\u03c7\u03ae, i. 123.\n\n Punishment, future, the Christian doctrine of, i. 140, etc., ii. 524,\n 532, 534, 535.\n\n Pythagoreans, the abstinence practised by, ii. 320.\n\n Pythian oracle, the, ii. 426, 429.\n\n\n Qualities always belong to substances, i. 351.\n\n Queen of Sheba, the, ii. 126.\n\n\n Rational natures, various, i. 44, 45;\n capable of sin, 45;\n evil, 45, 46;\n whether any were created so as to be incapable of sin or of virtue,\n 46, 47;\n the glory of some and the wickedness of others not original and\n essential to their being, but the result of desert, 48, 69;\n never sink into the condition of irrational animals, 70;\n can they lead an existence out of the body, 82;\n the immortality of, 353, etc.\n\n Repentance, attributed to God, ii. 399, 400.\n\n Resting, predicated of God, ii. 403.\n\n Restoration, the, of fallen beings, i. 56, 57.\n\n Resurrection, the, of the body, i. 136;\n weak believers instructed on the subject, 139;\n ridiculed by Celsus, explained and defended, ii. 282, 285, 286-288,\n 454, 455.\n\n Resurrection, the, of Jesus, ii. 59-62;\n the belief of, not the product of a dream, 63;\n why did not Jesus show Himself to His enemies after, 65-70;\n His appearances after, not phantom-like, 457.\n\n Riches, promised to the just man, in what sense, ii. 444;\n Jesus gave no laws contrary to this promise of, 446.\n\n\n Samaritan woman, Jesus converses with a, i. 11.\n\n Satan, ii. 385;\n and Antichrist, 385, 386. _See_ Devil.\n\n Scriptures, the, the teaching of the Church respecting, i. 5;\n the inspiration of, 274, etc., 285, etc.;\n the superhuman element in, does not present itself to the\n uninstructed, 287-290;\n how to be regarded and understood, 291, 294, 299;\n a threefold sense in, 300;\n the soul of, 303-308;\n the mysteries contained in, 308, etc.;\n stumbling-blocks in, 212;\n the histories of, not all pure history, but some to be mystically\n understood, 313-322;\n in regard to many things, the historical and literal sense of, the\n true sense, 323;\n passages of, which are true in their historical sense, more numerous\n than those which are to be spiritually understood, 324;\n the need of careful search to distinguish between what is literal in,\n and what is not, 325;\n our duty to grasp the whole meaning of, 326;\n etymological fancies in, 383;\n exhortation to the study of, 390;\n many of the histories of, allegories, ii. 209, 210;\n simplicity of the style of, compared with that of Plato, 326-338;\n the inefficacy of the teaching of Plato compared with that of,\n 339-341;\n exceed Plato in the idea they give of God, 355, 356.\n\n Scythian and Greek names of God, ii. 377, 378.\n\n Secret associations, Christians charged by Celsus with entering\n into,\u2014reply, i. 390.\n\n Sects among Christians, ii. 331-333, 335.\n\n Seeing God, i. 16, 17, ii. 465, 466.\n\n Sense and the senses, i. 15.\n\n Septuagint, additions to the Scripture in the\u2014defence of these\n additions, i. 371-373.\n\n Seraphim, the, i. 35, 340, 341.\n\n Serapis, ii. 309.\n\n Seriphian and Themistocles, i. 428.\n\n Serpent, the, Celsus ridicules the story of the temptation by, ii. 203;\n is the devil, 483.\n\n _Shepherd of Hermas, The_, i. 34, 35, 230, 301.\n\n Sicarians, the, ii. 19.\n\n Silence, the, of Jesus before His judges, i. 393.\n\n Simonians, the, ii. 332, 348.\n\n Sin, incentives to, ii. 226.\n\n Sinners, Christianity invites and restores to virtue, ii. 139-144;\n a change of life possible for, asserted against Celsus, 145-149.\n\n Sneezing, according to the poets, prophetic, ii. 261.\n\n Socrates pronounced the wisest of men, ii. 429.\n\n Son, the only-begotten, of God, Christ the, i. 18;\n self-abasement of, 257;\n subjection of, to the Father, 260-262;\n the generation of, 342, 343;\n the advent and incarnation of, 345-347;\n the dignity of, ii. 308, 388, 389, 502;\n the soul of Jesus joined with, 389, 390;\n Celsus misrepresents the views of Christians respecting, 503.\n\n \u201cSons of God\u201d and \u201cdaughters of men,\u201d ii. 325.\n\n Sorcery, Jesus charged with, by Celsus, i. 402, 403;\n the Jews charged with, 424;\n the miracles of Jesus not wrought by, ii. 49-56;\n the power of, attributed by Celsus to certain animals, 252, etc.\n\n Soul, the, apostolic teaching respecting, i. 4;\n a lost, 121, 122;\n meaning of the word, 123, 124;\n and spirit of Christ, 125;\n why acted on sometimes by evil spirits and sometimes by good, 242,\n etc.;\n and body alike the work of God, ii. 220-226.\n\n Souls, various sorts of, 118, 119;\n of angels and of God, 119, 120;\n has man two?\u2014three theories discussed, 244-252;\n good and bad, ii. 428.\n\n Spirit,\u2014what?, i. 9.\n\n Spirit of truth, the, promised by Jesus, ii. 3, 4;\n perpetually bestowed, 412, 413.\n\n Spirits, wicked, their mode of operation, i. 241;\n good, their agency, 242.\n\n Spiritual body, the, i. 266, 267.\n\n Splendour of the eternal light, Christ the, i. 30.\n\n Spoiling the Egyptians, i. 388, 389.\n\n Star, the, of the wise men, i. 462, 464.\n\n Stars, living rational beings capable of sin, i. 61, 62.\n\n Stony heart, the, how taken away, i. 191, etc.\n\n Stumbling-blocks designedly placed in the Scriptures, i. 312.\n\n Subjection, the, of the Son to the Father, i. 260, etc.\n\n Substance, i. 350.\n\n Suffering of Christ, the, predicted, i. 456, 457.\n\n Sun, the, and other planets endowed with life and souls, i. 59-65.\n\n Superiority and inferiority, not to be decided by a bodily standard,\n ii. 184.\n\n Susanna, the story of, inquiry of Africanus respecting the genuineness\n of, i. 369, 370;\n Origen\u2019s defence of the genuineness of, 371, etc.\n\n Swine\u2019s flesh, abstinence from, ii. 319, 320.\n\n\n Temple, the true, of God, i. 506, 507.\n\n Temptations, proportioned to the strength of the tempted, ii. 227-229;\n human, treated of at large, 244, etc.\n\n \u201cThings in heaven, earth, and under the earth,\u201d ii. 57.\n\n Thomas, the scepticism of, ii. 64, 65.\n\n Thoughts, how suggested, i. 229, 230.\n\n Threefold sense of Scripture, the, i. 300, etc.\n\n Thrones, dominions, etc., i. 56.\n\n Tobias, i. 384.\n\n Trinity, the, the unity and operations of the persons of, i. 37-41;\n the sum of the doctrine of, 342, etc.\n\n Truth is truth, by whomsoever spoken, ii. 480;\n how served up as food by philosophers and prophets and the disciples\n of Christ, 480, 481.\n\n Typical interpretation, i. 306.\n\n Tyre, the prince of, i. 49-51.\n\n\n Union among Christians, the basis of, ii. 96, etc.\n\n Unity of opinion, not characteristic of Christians from the beginning,\n ii. 94.\n\n\n Vanity, the creature made subject to, i. 63-65, 257, 258.\n\n Variety, the, of creatures in the world, i. 128;\n accordance of this with righteousness and reason, 131, etc.;\n brought to pass by the free-will of individuals, 132-136.\n\n Veil on the heart, the, i. 9.\n\n Vessels to honour and to dishonour, i. 213.\n\n Vinegar and gall, the, predicted, ii. 41.\n\n Virgin Mother, the, vilified by Celsus, vindication of, i. 426, 427,\n 431, 433;\n prediction of the birth of Christ of, 434, 435;\n the birth of Jesus of, open to no fair objection, 437, 438.\n\n\n Will, the free, i. 4, 132, 133, 157, etc.;\n able to resist external causes, 161;\n its freedom proved from Scripture, 165.\n\n Wisdom, threefold, i. 237;\n of the world, 238;\n of the princes of the world, 239;\n the sort condemned by Christianity, 410;\n of Christianity, 100, 101;\n Christianity designed to impart, 126, etc.;\n human and divine, 350, 351, 352.\n\n Wisdom of God, Christ the, i. 19, 20, 26, 28.\n\n \u201cWood, hay, stubble,\u201d ii. 173.\n\n Word, the incarnation of the, ii. 174, 175;\n different appearances of the, 176;\n final universal victory of the, 555.\n\n Words, not to be specially considered by searchers after truth, but the\n meaning of, i. 339, 341.\n\n Words of Christ, the, i. 1.\n\n World, the, the doctrine of the Church respecting, i. 5;\n the great variety in, 72;\n cause of the variety in, 72, 73;\n the unity of, in diversity, 73, 74;\n the oneness of, proved from Scripture, 75;\n the matter of, and its transformations and qualities, 75;\n the matter of, not uncreated, 76, 77;\n the beginning of,\u2014was there one before, and shall there be one\n after?, 79;\n this, the conclusion of many ages, 85;\n different meanings of the word in Scripture, 86;\n another besides this, 86, 87, etc.;\n comprehensiveness of, and variety of creatures in, 128-130;\n the accordance of this variety in, with righteousness and reason,\n 131, etc.;\n the cause of the variety in, 134-136;\n had its beginning in time, 253;\n shall come to an end, 255, etc.;\n another shall exist after this, 255;\n the end of, 262, etc.\n\n Worlds, the, not similar, but dissimilar, i. 84.\n\n Worship, to be given to God alone, and not to gods or demons, ii.\n 489-500;\n of the Father and the Son, 500, 501;\n equally acceptable to God in different languages, 522.\n\n Wrath of God, the, ii. 237-239.\n\n\n Zeno, the reasons why the followers of, abstain from adultery, ii. 484.\n\n Zipporah, and the circumcision of Moses\u2019 son, ii. 318, 319.\n\n\nEND OF VOL. II.\n\n\n MURRAY AND GIBB, EDINBURGH,\n PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTY\u2019S STATIONERY OFFICE.\n\n\n\n\n \u25cf Transcriber\u2019s Notes:\n \u25cb Text that was in italics is enclosed by underscores (_italics_).\n \u25cb Footnotes have been moved to follow the chapters in which they are\n referenced.","title":"The writings of Origen, Vol. 2 (of 2)","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":247839}