Book 11. ] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 18 Logos of God. Now if, according to Paul's teaching, * he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit,"! every one who understands what being joined to the Lord is, and who has been actually joined to Him, is one spirit with the Lord; how should not that being be one in a far greater and more divine degree, which was once united with the Logos of God?’ He, indeed, manifested Himself among the Jews as the power of God, by the miracles which He performed, which Celsus suspected were accomplished by sorcery, but which by the Jews of that time were attributed, I know not why, to Beelzebub, in the words: « He casteth out devils through Beelzebub, the prince of the devils.”* But these our Saviour convicted of uttering the greatest absurdities, from the fact that the kingdom of evil was not yet come to anend. And this will be evident to all intelli- gent readers of the Gospel narrative, which it is not now the time to explain.
CHAPTER X.
CHAPTER X.
But what promise did Jesus make which He did not per- form? Let Celsus produce any instance of such, and make good his charge. But he will be unable to do so, especially since it is from mistakes, arising either from misapprehension of the Gospel narratives, or from Jewish stories, that he thinks to derive the charges which he brings against Jesus or against ourselves. Moreover, again, when the Jew says, “ We both found him guilty, and condemned him as deserving of death," let them show how they who sought to concoct false witness against Him proved Him to be guilty. Was not the great charge against Jesus, which His accusers brought for- ward, this, that He said, * I am able to destroy the temple of God, and after three days to raise it up again?”* But in so saying, He spake of the temple of His body; while they thought, not being able to understand the meaning of the speaker, that 3 εἰ yap xatd τὴν Παύλου διδασκαλίαν, λέγοντος" * ὁ xoXAGgstyoc τῷ κυρίῳ, dy ανεῦμα ἐστι." πᾶς ὁ νοήσας τί τὸ χολλᾶσθαι τῷ κυρίῳ, καὶ χολληθεὶς αὐτῷ, ἕν στι νεῦμα πρὸς τὸν χύριον᾽ πῶς οὐ πολλῷ μᾶλλον θειοτέρως καὶ μειζόνως ἐν ἐστι τὸ χοτε σύνθετον πρὸς τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ; 8 Matt. xii. 24. 4 Matt. xxvi. 61.
14 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Boox 1.
His reference was to the temple of stone, which was treated by the Jews with greater respect than He was who ought to have been honoured as the true Temple of God—the Word, and the Wisdom, and the Truth. And who can say that “ Jesus attempted to make His escape by disgracefully concealing Himself?" Let any one point to an act deserving to be called disgraceful. And when he adds, * he was taken prisoner,” I would say that, if to be taken prisoner implies an act done against one's will, then Jesus was not taken prisoner; for at the fitting time He did not prevent Himself falling into the hands of men, as the Lamb of God, that He might take away the sin of the world. For, knowing all things that were to come upon Him, He went forth, and said to them, “ Whom seek ye?” and they answered, “ Jesus of Nazareth;" and He said unto them, “I am He." And Judas also, who betrayed Him, was standing with them. When, therefore, He had said to them, “I am He,” they went backwards and fell to the . ground. Again He asked them, ‘“ Whom seek ye?” and they said again, ^ Jesus of Nazareth." Jesus said to them, * I told you I am He; if then ye seek me, let these go away."! Nay, even to him who wished to help Him, and who smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his ear, He said: ^ Put up thy sword into its sheath: for all they who draw the sword shall perish by the sword. Thinkest thou that I cannot even now pray to my Father, and He will presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must bet"? And if any one imagines these statements to be inventions of the writers of the Gospels, why should not those statements rather be regarded as inven- tions which proceeded from a spirit of hatred and hostility against Jesus and the Christians? and these the truth, which: proceed from those who manifest the sincerity of their feelings towards Jesus, by enduring everything, whatever it may be, for the sake of His words? For the reception by the disciples of such power of endurance and resolution continued even to death, with a disposition of mind that would not invent regarding their Teacher what was not true, is a very evident proof to all candid judges that they were fully persuaded of the truth of what they 1 John xviii. 4 sqq. 3 Matt. xxvi. 52-54.
Boox 1. ] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 15 wrote, seeing they submitted to trials so numerous and 40 severe, for the sake of Him whom they believed to be the Son of God.
CHAPTER XI.
In the next place, that He was betrayed by those whom He called His disciples, is a circumstance which the Jew of Celsus learned from the Gospels; calling the one Judas, however, * many disciples,” that he might seem to add force to the accu- sation." Nor did he trouble himself to take note of all that is related concerning Judas; how this Judas, having come to entertain opposite and conflicting opinions regarding his Master, neither opposed Him with his whole soul, nor yet with his whole soul preserved the respect due by a pupil to his teacher. For he that betrayed Him gave to the multitude that came to apprehend Jesus, a sign, saying, “ Whomsoever I shall kiss, it is he; seize ye him,"— retaining still some element of respect for his Master: for unless he had done so, he would have betrayed Him, even publicly, without any pretence of affection. This circumstance, therefore, will satisfy all with regard to the pur- pose of Judas, that along with his covetous disposition, and his wicked design to betray his Master, he had still a feeling of a mixed character in his mind, produced in him by the words of Jesus, which had the appearance (so to speak) of some remnant of good. For it is related that, * when Judas, who betrayed Him, knew that He was condemned, he repented, and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the high priest and elders, saying, I have sinned, in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. But they said, What is that to us? see thou to that;"!
—and that, having thrown the money down in the temple, he departed, and went and hanged himself. But if this covetous Judas, who also stole the money placed in the bag for the relief of the poor, repented, and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, it is clear that the instruc- tions of Jesus had been able to produce some feeling of repent- ance in his mind, and were not altogether despised and loathed by this traitor. Nay, the declaration, “I have sinned, in that I have betrayed the innocent blood,” was a public acknowledg- ment of his crime. Observe, also, how exceedingly passionate” 1 Matt. xxvii. 3-5. 3 διάπυρος καὶ σφοδρά.
16 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book 1r.
was the sorrow for his sins that proceeded from that repentance, and which would not suffer him any longer to live; and how, after he had cast the money down in the temple, he withdrew, and went away and hanged himself: for he passed sentence upon himself, showing what a power the teaching of Jesus had over this sinner Judas, this thief and traitor, who could not always treat with contempt what he had learned from Jesus. Will Celsus and his friends now say that those proofs which show that the apostasy of Judas was not a complete apostasy, even after his attempts against his Master, are inventions, and that this alone is true, viz. that one of His disciples betrayed Him; and will they add to the scriptural account, that he betrayed Him also with his whole heart? To act in this spirit of hostility with the same writings, both as to what we are to believe and what we are not to believe, is absurd! And if we must make a statement regarding Judas which may overwhelm our oppo- nents with shame, we would say that, in the book of Psalms, the whole of the 108th contains a prophecy about Judas, the beginning of which is this: * O God, hold not Thy peace be- fore my praise; for the mouth of the sinner, and the mouth of the crafty man, are opened against me.”? And it is predicted in this psalm, both that Judas separated himself from the num- ber of the apostles on account of his sins, and that another was selected in his place; and this is shown by the words: “ And his bishopric let another take."? But suppose now that He had been betrayed by some one of His disciples, who was possessed by a worse spirit than Judas, and who had completely poured out, as it were, all the words which he had heard from Jesus, what would this contribute to an accusation against Jesus or the Christian religion? And how will this demon- strate its doctrine to be false? We have replied in the preced- ing chapter to the statements which follow this, showing that Jesus was not taken prisoner when attempting to flee, but that He gave Himself up voluntarily for the sake of us all. Whence it follows, that even if He were bound, He was bound agree- ably to His own will; thus teaching us the lesson that we should undertake similar things for the sake of religion in no spirit of unwillingness, 1 ἀπίθανον. 3 Ps. cix. 1, 2. 8 Ps, cix. 8.
Book 11.] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 17 CHAPTER XII.
And the following appear to me to be childish assertions, viz. that * no good general and leader of great multitudes was ever betrayed; nor even a wicked captain of robbers and commander of very wicked men, who seemed to be of any use to his asso- ciates; but Jesus, having been betrayed by his subordinates, neither governed like a good general, nor, after deceiving his disciples, produced in the minds of the victims of his deceit that feeling of good-will which, so to speak, would be mani- fested towards a brigand chief." Now one might find many accounts of generals who were betrayed by their own soldiers, and of robber chiefs who were captured through the instru- mentality of those who did not keep their bargains with them. But grant that no general or robber chief was ever betrayed, what does that contribute to the establishment of the fact as a charge against Jesus, that one of His disciples became His be- trayer? And since Celsus makes an ostentatious exhibition of philosophy, I would ask of him, If, then, it was a charge against Plato, that Aristotle, after being his pupil for twenty years, went away and assailed his doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and styled the ideas of Plato the merest trifling?’ And if I were still in doubt, I would continue thus: Was Plato no longer mighty in dialectics, nor able to defend his views, after Aristotle had taken his departure; and, on that account, are the opinions of Plato false? Or may it not be, that while Plato is true, as the pupils of his philosophy would maintain, Aristotle was guilty of wickedness and ingratitude towards his teacher? Nay, Chrysippus also, in many places of his writings, appears to assail Cleanthes, introducing novel opinions opposed to his views, although the latter had been his teacher when he was a young man, and began the study of philosophy. Aristotle, indeed, is said to have been Plato’s pupil for twenty years, and no inconsiderable period was spent by Chrysippus in the school of Cleanthes; while Judas did not remain so much as three years with Jesus. But from the narratives of the lives of philosophers we might take many instances similar to those on which Celsus founds a charge against Jesus on account of 18 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book 1r.
Judas. Even the Pythagoreans erected cenotaphs! to those who, after betaking themselves to philosophy, fell back again into their ignorant mode of life; and yet neither was Pythagoras nor his followers, on that account, weak in argument and de- monstration.
CHAPTER XIII.
This Jew of Celsus continues, after the above, in the follow- ing fashion: * Although he could state many things regarding the events of thelife of Jesus which are true, and not like those which are recorded by the disciples, he willingly omits them." What, then, are those true statements, unlike the accounts in -the Gospels, which the Jew of Celsus passes by without men- tion? Or is he only employing what appears to be a figure of speech,” in pretending to have something to say, while in reality he had nothing to produce beyond the Gospel narrative which could impress the hearer with a feeling of its truth, and furnish a clear ground of accusation against Jesus and His doctrine? And he charges the disciples with having invented the state- ment that Jesus foreknew and foretold all that happened to Him; but the truth of this statement we shall establish, although Celsus may not like it, by means of many other predictions uttered by the Saviour, in which He foretold what would befall the Christians in after generations. And who is there who would not be astonished at this prediction: “Ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testi- mony against them and the Gentiles;”* and at any others which He may have delivered respecting the future persecution of His disciples? For what system of opinions ever existed among men on account of which others are punished, so that any one of the accusers of Jesus could say that, foreseeing the impiety or falsity of his opinions to be the ground of an accu- sation against them, he thought that this would redound to his credit, that he had so predicted regarding it long before? Now if any deserve to be brought, on account of their opinions, before governors and kings, what others are they, save the Epicureans, who altogether deny the existence of providence?
1 Cf. Clem. Alex. Strom. v. c. ix. 3 δοχούσῃ δεινότητι ῥητορικῇ. 5 Matt. x. 18.
Boox 11] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 19 And also the Peripatetics, who say that prayers are of no avail, and sacrifices offered as to the Divinity? But some one will say that the Samaritans suffer persecution because of their religion. In answer to whom we shall state that the Sicarians/! on account of the practice of circumcision, as mutilating them- selves contrary to the established laws and the customs per- mitted to the Jews alone, are put to death. And you never hear a judge inquiring whether a Sicarian who strives to live according to this established religion of his will be released from punishment if he apostatizes, but will be led away to death if he continues firm; for the evidence of the circum- cision is sufficient to ensure the death of him who has under- gone it. But Christians alone, according to the prediction of their Saviour, * Ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake," are urged up to their last breath by their judges to deny Christianity, and to sacrifice according to the public customs; and after the oath of abjuration, to return to their homes, and to live in safety. And observe whether it is not with great authority that this declaration is uttered: ** Whoso- ever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father who is in heaven. And whosoever shall deny me before men,"? etc. And go back with me in thought to Jesus when He uttered these words, and see His predictions not yet accomplished. Perhaps you will say, in a spirit of incredulity, that he is talking folly, and speaking to no purpose, for his words will have no fulfilment; or, being in doubt about assenting to his words, you will say, that if these predictions be fulfilled, and the doctrine of Jesus be established, so that governors and kings think of destroying those who acknowledge Jesus, then we shall believe that he utters these prophecies as one who has received great power from God to implant this doc- trine among the human race, and as believing that it will prevail. And who will not be filled with wonder, when he goes back in thought to Him who then taught and said, “ This gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, for a testimony against 1 Modestinus, lib. vi. Regularum, ad legem Corneliam de Sicariis: ‘‘ Cir- cumceidere filios suos Judeis tantum rescripto divi Pii permittitur: in non ejusdem religionis qui hoc fecerit, castrantis poena irrogatur."
20 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book m.
them and the Gentiles," and beholds, agreeably to His words, the gospel of Jesus Christ preached in the whole world under heaven to Greeks and barbarians, wise and foolish alike? For the word, spoken with power, has gained the mastery over men of all sorts of nature, and it is impossible to see any race of men which has escaped accepting the teaching of Jesus. But let this Jew of Celsus, who does not believe that He foreknew all that happened to Him, consider how, while Jerusalem was still standing, and the whole Jewish worship celebrated in it, Jesus foretold what would befall it from the hand of the Romans. For they will not maintain that the acquaintances and pupils of Jesus Himself handed down His teaching con- tained in the Gospels without committing it to writing, and left His disciples without the memoirs of Jesus contained in their works. Now in these it is recorded, that “ when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed about with armies, then shall ye know that the desolation thereof is nigh."! But at that time there were no armies around Jerusalem, encompassing and enclosing and besieging it; for the siege began in the reign of Nero, and lasted till the government of Vespasian, whose son Titus destroyed Jerusalem, on account, as Josephus says, of James the Just, the brother of Jesus who was called Christ, but in reality, as the truth makes clear, on account of Jesus Christ the Son of God.
CHAPTER XIV.
Celsus, however, accepting or granting that Jesus foreknew what would befall Him, might think to make light of the ad- mission, as he did in the case of the miracles, when he alleged that they were wrought by means of sorcery; for he might say that many persons by means of divination, either by auspices, or auguries, or sacrifices, or nativities, have come to the know- ledge of what was to happen. But this concession he would not make, as being too great a one; and although he somehow granted that Jesus worked miracles, he thought to weaken the force of this by the charge of sorcery. Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events (although Matt. xxiv. 14.
Book 11.] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 21 falling into confusion about some things which refer to Peter, as if they referred to Jesus), but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions. So that he also, by these very admissions regarding foreknowledge, as if against his will, expressed his opinion that the doctrines taught by the fathers of our system were not devoid of divine power.
CHAPTER xv.
CHAPTER xv.
Celsus continues: ὁ The disciples of Jesus, having no un- doubted fact on which to rely, devised the fiction that he foreknew everything before it happened;" not observing, or not wishing to observe, the love of truth which actuated the writers, who acknowledged that Jesus had told His disciples beforehand, “ All ye shall be offended because of me this night," —a statement which was fulfilled by their all being offended; and that He predicted to Peter, * Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice,” which was followed by Peter’s threefold denial. Now if they had not been lovers of truth, but, as Celsus supposes, inventors of fictions, they would not have represented Peter as denying, nor His disciples as being offended. For although these events actually happened, who could have proved that they turned out in that manner? And yet, according to all probability, these were matters which ought to have been passed over:in silence by men who wished to teach the readers of the Gospels to despise death for the sake of confessing Christianity. But now, seeing that the word, by its power, will gain the mastery over men, they related those facts which they have done, and which, I know not how, were neither to do any harm to their readers, nor to afford any pre- text for denial.
CHAPTER XVI.
CHAPTER XVI.
Exceedingly weak is his assertion, that “the disciples of Jesus wrote such accounts regarding him, by way of extenuat- ing the charges that told against him: as if," he says, “any one were to say that a certain person was a just man, and yet were to show that he was guilty of injustice; or that he was pious, and yet had committed murder; or that he was im- mortal, and yet was dead; subjoining to all these statements 22 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Boox n.
the remark that he had foretold all these things." Now his illustrations are at once seen to be inappropriate; for there is no absurdity in Him who had resolved that He would become a living pattern to men, as to the manner in which they were to regulate their lives, showing also how they ought to die for the sake of their religion, apart altogether from the fact that His death on behalf of men was a benefit to the whole world, as we proved in the preceding book. He imagines, moreover, that the whole of the confession of the Saviour's sufferings confirms his objection instead of weakening it. For he is not acquainted either with the philosophical remarks of Paul, or the state- ments of the prophets, on this subject. And it escaped him that certain heretics have declared that Jesus underwent His sufferings in appearance, not in reality. For had he known, - he would not have said: “For ye do not even allege this, that he seemed to wicked men to suffer this punishment, though not undergoing it in reality; but, on the contrary, ye acknow- ledge that he openly suffered.” But we do not view His suf- ferings as having been merely in appearance, in order that His resurrection also may not be a false, but a real event. For he who really died, actually arose, if he did arise; whereas he who appeared only to have died, did not in reality arise. But since the resurrection of Jesus Christ is a subject of mockery to unbelievers, we shall quote the words of Plato,’ that Herus the son of Armenius rose from the funeral pile twelve days after he had been laid upon it, and gave an account ef what he had seen in Hades; and as we are replying to unbelievers, it will not be altogether useless to refer in this place to what Heraclides? relates respecting the woman who was deprived of life. And many persons are recorded to have risen from their tombs, not only on the day of their burial, but also on the day following. What wonder is it, then, if in the case of one who performed many marvellous things, both beyond the power of man and with such fulness of evidence, that he who could not deny their performance, endeavoured to calumniate them by comparing them to acts of sorcery, should have manifested also in His death some greater display of divine power, so that His 1 ὅσαι περὶ rovrov xal παρὰ τῷ Παύλῳ πεφιλοσόφηται.
3 Cf, Plato, de Rep. x. 2 Cf. Plin. Nat. Hist. vii. e. 52.
Boor 1.] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. __ 98 soul, if it pleased, might leave its body, and having performed certain offices out of it, might return again at pleasure? And such a declaration is Jesus said to have made in the Gospel of John, when He said: “ No man taketh my life from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.”' And perhaps it was on this account that He hastened His departure from the body, that ‘He might preserve it, and that His legs might not be broken, as were those of the robbers who were crucified with Him. * For the soldiers broke the legs of the first, and of the other who was crucified with Him; but when they came to Jesus, and saw that He was dead, they brake not His legs"? We have accordingly answered the question, * How is it credible that Jesus could have predicted these things?" And with respect to this, “How could the dead man be immortal?" let him who wishes to understand know, that it is not the dead man who is immortal, but He who rose from the dead. So far, indeed, was the dead man from being immortal, that even the Jesus before His decease—the compound being, who was to suffer death—was not immortal? For no one is im- mortal who is destined to die; but he is immortal when he shall no longer be subject to death. But * Christ, being raised from the dead, dieth no more: death hath no more dominion over Him;"* although those may be unwilling to admit this who cannot understand how such things should be said.
CHAPTER XVII.
CHAPTER XVII.
Extremely foolish also is his remark, “ What God, or spirit, or prudent man would not, on foreseeing that such events were to befall him, avoid them if he could; whereas he threw himself headlong into those things which he knew beforehand were to happen?" And yet Socrates knew that he would die after drinking the hemlock, and it was in his power, if he had allowed himself to be persuaded by Crito, by escaping from | prison, to avoid these calamities; but nevertheless he decided, 3 Οὐ μόνον οὖν οὐχ ὁ νεκρὸς θάνατος, AAA’ o0 ὁ πρὸ τοῦ νεκροῦ 'ImcoUg ὁ σύνθετος ἀθάνατος ἦν, 0g γε ἔμελλε τεθνήξεσθαι.
24 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Boox 1r.
as it appeared to him consistent with right reason, that it was better for him to die as became a philosopher, than to retain his life in a manner unbecoming one. Leonidas also, the Lace- demonian general, knowing that he was on the point of dying with his followers at Thermopyle, did not make any effort to preserve his life by disgraceful means, but said to his com- . panions, * Let us go to breakfast, as we shall sup in Hades." And those who are interested in collecting stories of this kind, will find numbers of them. Now, where is the wonder if Jesus, knowing all things that were to happen, did not avoid them, but encountered what He foreknew; when Paul, His own disciple having heard what would befall him when he went up to Jerusalem, proceeded to face the danger, reproach- ing those who were weeping àround him, and endeavouring to prevent him from going up to Jerusalem? Many also of our contemporaries, knowing well that if they made a confession of Christianity they would be put to death, but that if they denied it they would be liberated, and their property restored, despised life, and voluntarily selected death for the sake of their religion.
CHAPTER XVIII.