I have made these remarks in reply to the charges which Celsus and others bring against the simplicity of the language of Scripture, which appears to be thrown into the shade by the splendour of polished discourse. For our prophets, and Jesus Himself, and His apostles, were careful to adopt! a style of address which should not merely convey the truth, but which should be fitted to gain over the multitude, until each one, attracted and led onwards, should ascend as far as he could towards the comprehension of those mysteries which are con- tained in these apparently simple words. For, if I may venture to say so, few have been benefited (if they have indeed been benefited at all) by the beautiful and polished style of Plato, and those who have written like him; while, on the contrary, many have received advantage from those who wrote and taught in a simple and practical manner, and with a view to the wants of the multitude. It is easy, indeed, to observe that Plato is found only in the hands of those who profess to be literary men;? while Epictetus is admired by persons of ordinary capacity, who have a desire to be benefited, and who perceive the im- provement which may be derived from his writings. Now we make these remarks, not to disparage Plato (for the great world of men has found even him useful), but to point out the aim of those who said: ‘“ And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that our faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God."? For the word of God declares that the preaching (although in itself true and most worthy of belief) is not sufficient to reach the human heart, unless a certain power be imparted to the speaker from God, and a grace appear upon his words; and it is only by the divine agency that this takes place in those who speak effectu- ally. The prophet says in the sixty-seventh Psalm, that “the Lord will give a word with great power to them who preach.” * * Such is the reading of the Septuagint version. The Masoretic text has: ORIG.—VOL. II. Y 338 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Boor vt.
If, then, it should be granted with respect to certain points, that the same doctrines are found among the Greeks as in our own Scriptures, yet they do not possess the same power of attracting and disposing the souls of men to followthem. And therefore the disciples of Jesus, men ignorant so far as regards Grecian philosophy, yet traversed many countries of the world, impressing, agreeably to the desire of the Logos, each one of their hearers according to his deserts, so that they received a moral amelioration in proportion to the inclination of their will to accept of that which is good.
CHAPTER III.
Let the ancient sages, then, make known their sayings to those who are capable of understanding them. Suppose that Plato, for example, the son of Ariston, in one of his Epistles, is discoursing about the “ chief good,” and that he says, * The chief good can by no means be described in words, but is pro- duced by long habit, and bursts forth suddenly as a light in the soul, as from a fire which had leapt forth." We, then, on hear- ing these words, admit that they are well said, for it is God who revealed to men these as well as all other noble expressions. And for this reason it is that we maintain that those who have entertained correct ideas regarding God, but who have not offered to Him a worship in harmony with the truth, are liable to the punishments which fall on sinners. For respecting such Paul says in express words: “The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God — hath showed it unto them. For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being under- stood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: because that, when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible * The Lord gave a word; of them who published it there was a great host."
Boog v1. ] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 339 God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.”* The truth, then, is verily held [in unrighteousness], as our Scriptures testify, by those who are of opinion that “‘the chief good cannot be described in words,” but who assert that, “after long custom and familiar usage,’ a light becomes suddenly kindled in the soul, as if by a fire springing forth, and that it now supports itself alone.”
CHAPTER IV.
CHAPTER IV.
Notwithstanding, those who have written in this manner regarding the “chief good” will go down to the Pirzus and offer prayer to Artemis, as if she were God, and will look [with approval] upon the solemn assembly held by ignorant men; and after giving utterance to philosophical remarks of such profundity regarding the soul, and describing its passage [to a happier world] after.a virtuous life, they pass from those great topics which God has revealed to them, and adopt mean and trifling thoughts, and offer a cock to Esculapius!? And although they had been enabled to form representations both of the “invisible things” of God and of the “ archetypal forms” of things from the creation of the world, and from [the contemplation of] sensible things, from which they ascend to those objects which are comprehended by the understanding alone, — and although they had no mean glimpses of His * eternal power and Godhead,"* they nevertheless became foolish in their imaginations,” and their "foolish heart" was involved in darkness and ignorance as to the [true] worship of God. Moreover, we may see those who greatly pride them- selves upon their wisdom and theology worshipping the image of a corruptible man, in honour, they say, of Him, and some- times even descending, with the Egyptians, to the worship of birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things! And ix σολλῆς συνουσίας γινομένης περὶ τὸ πρᾶγμα αὐτὸ, καὶ τοῦ συζῆν.
3 Cf. Plato, Phedo.
4 xai τὸ ἀόρατα τοῦ Θεοῦ, xal rdg ἰδέας Davracbivres ἀπὸ τῆς χτίσεως τοῦ κόσμον, καὶ τῶν αἰσθητῶν, AD ὧν ἀναβαίνουσιν ἐπὶ τοὶ νοούμενα τὴν τε ἀἴδιον αὐτοὺ δύναμιν καὶ θεότητα οὐκ ἀγεννῶς ἰδόντες, etc.
340 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book vi.
although some may appear to have risen above such practices, nevertheless they will be found to have changed the truth of God into a lie, and to worship and serve the “creature more than the Creator.^! As the wise and learned among the Greeks, then, commit errors in the service which they render to God, God “chose the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and base things of the world, and things that are weak, and things which are despised, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are;"? and this, truly, “that no flesh should glory in the presence of God.” Our wise men, however,—Moses, the most ancient of them all, and the pro- phets who followed him,—knowing that the chief good could by no means be described in words, were the first who wrote that, as God manifests Himself to the deserving, and to those who are qualified to behold Him,® He appeared to Abraham, or to Isaac, or to Jacob. But who He was that appeared, and of what form, and in what manner, and like to which of mortal - beings,! they have left to be investigated by those who are able to show that they resemble those persons to whom God showed Himself: for He was seen not by their bodily eyes, but by the pure heart. For, according to the declaration of our Jesus, 4 Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God."
CHAPTER V.
CHAPTER V.
But that a light is suddenly kindled in the soul, as by a fire leaping forth, is a fact known long ago to our Scriptures; as . when thd prophet said, * Light ye for yourselves the light of knowledge.”® John also, who lived after him, said, * That which was in the Logos was life, and the life was the light of © 3 ἐπιτηδείοις.
4 χαὶ τινι τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν. Boherellus understands ogoss, which has been adopted in the translation.
5 Cf. Matt. v. 8.
6 Hos. x. 12. φοτίσατε ἑαυτοῖς Pag γνώσεως (LXN.). The Masoretic text is, nyy 79 525 y", where for nyy (and time) the Septuagint translator apparently read nyt (knowledge), 1 and 4 being interchanged from their similarity.
Book vi. ] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 341 men;"! which “true light lighteneth every man that cometh into the world” (i.e. the true world, which is perceived by the understanding?), and maketh him a light of the world: “ For this light shone in our hearts, to give the light of the glorious gospel of God in the face of Christ Jesus."? And therefore that very ancient prophet, who prophesied many generations before the reign of Cyrus (for he was older than he by more than fourteen generations), expressed himself in these words: “The Lord is my light and my salvation: whom shall I fear?”* and, “Thy law is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path;"? and again, * The light of Thy countenance, O Lord, was manifested towards us;”° and, “In Thy light we shall see light." And the Logos, exhorting us to come to this light, says, in the prophecies of Isaiah: “ Enlighten thyself, enlighten thyself, O Jerusalem; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee."? "The same prophet also, when predicting the advent of Jesus, who was to turn away men from the worship of idols, and of images, and of demons, says, * To those that sat in the land and shadow of death, upon them hath the light arisen;"? and again, * The people that sat in darkness saw a great light." Observe now the difference between the fine phrases of Plato respecting the * chief good," and the declarations of our prophets regarding the “light” of the blessed; and notice that the truth as it is contained in Plato concerning this subject did not at all help his readers to attain to a pure worship of God, nor even him- self, who could philosophize so grandly about the * chief good,” whereas the simple language of the Holy Scriptures has led to their honest readers being filled with a divine spirit; and this light is nourished within them by the oil, which in a certain parable is said to have preserved the light of the torches of the five wise virgins.”
1 Cf. John i. 3, 4. 2 coy ἀληθινὸν καὶ νοητόν. 3 Cf. 2 Cor. iv. 6. 4 Ps. xxvii. 1 (attributed to David). 5 Ps. cxix. 105. 9 Ps. iv. 6 (Heb. ** Lift upon us," etc.). 7 Ps. xxxvi. 9. 8 Cf. Isa. Ix. 1. 9? Cf. Isa. ix. 2. 10 Cf. Isa. ix. 2.
1) ἐνθουσιᾶν. 13 Cf. Matt. xxv. 4.
842 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Boox vr.
CHAPTER VI.
Seeing, however, that Celsus quotes from an epistle of Plato another statement to the following effect, viz.: “ If it appeared to me that these matters could be adequately explained to the multitude in writing and in oral address, what nobler pursuit in life could have been followed by me, than to commit to writing what was to prove of such advantage to human beings, and to lead the nature of all men onwards to the light?”—let us then consider this point briefly, viz. whether or not Plato were acquainted with any doctrines more profound than are con- tained in his writings, or more divine than those which he has left behind him, leaving it to each one to investigate the subject according to his ability, while we demonstrate that our prophets did know of greater things than any in the Scriptures, but which they did not commit to writing. Ezekiel, e.g., received a roll, written within and without, in. which were contained * lamen- tations,” and “songs,” and “ denunciations;"? but at the com- mand of the Logos he swallowed the book, in order that its contents might not be written, and so made known to unworthy persons. John also is recorded to have seen and done a similar thing? Nay, Paul even heard * unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter."* And it is related of Jesus, who was greater than all these, that He conversed with His disciples in private, and especially in their secret retreats, con- cerning the gospel of God; but the words which He uttered have not been preserved, because it appeared to the evangelists that they could not be adequately conveyed to the multitude in writing or in speech. And if it were not tiresome to repeat the truth regarding these illustrious individuals, I would say that they saw better than Plato (by means of the intelligence which they received by the grace of God), what things were to be committed to writing, and how this was to be done, and what was by no means to be written to the multitude, and what was to be expressed in words, and what was not to be so con- veyed. And once more, John, in teaching us the difference between what ought to be committed to writing and what not, l χεφαλίδα βιβλίον. 2 οὐαί; cf. Ezek. ii. 9, 10.
Book νι ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 843 declares that he heard seven thunders instructing him on cer- tain matters, and forbidding him to commit their words to writing.!
CHAPTER VIL There might also be found in the writings of Moses and of the prophets, who are older not only than Plato, but even than Homer and the invention of letters among the Greeks, pas- sages worthy of the grace of God bestowed upon them, and filled with great thoughts, to which they gave utterance, but not because they understood Plato imperfectly, as Celsus ima- gines. For how was it possible that they should have heard one who was not yet born? And if any one should apply the words of Celsus to the apostles of Jesus, who were younger. than Plato, say whether it is not on the very face of it an incredible assertion, that Paul the tentmaker, and Peter the fisherman, and John who left his father's nets, should, through misunderstanding the language of Plato in his Epistles, have expressed themselves as they have done regarding God? But as Celsus now, after having often required of us immediate assent [to his views], as if he were babbling forth something new in addition to what he has already advanced, only repeats himself,” what we have said in reply may suffice. Seeing, how- ever, he produces another quotation from Plato, in which he asserts that the employment of the method of question and answer sheds light on the thoughts of those who philosophize like him, let us show from the Holy Scriptures that the word of God also encourages us to the practice of dialectics: Solomon, 6.9.) declaring in one passage, that “ instruction unquestioned goes astray;"? and Jesus the son of Sirach, who has left us the treatise called * Wisdom,” declaring in another, that “the knowledge of the unwise is as words that will not stand in- 1 Of. Apoc. x. 4.
2 roAAdxig δὲ ἤδη ὁ Κέλσος θρυλλήσας ὡς οἐξιούμοεενον εὐθέως πιστεύειν, ὡς καινόν τι παρὼ τῶ πρότερον εἰρημένα. Guietus thus amends the passage: πολλάκις δὲ ἤδη ὁ Κέλσος ὡξιούμενος εὐθέως πιστεύειν, ὡς καινόν TI παρὼ TO αρίτερον εἰρημένα θρυλλήσα;, etc. Boherellus would change οἰ ξιούρεενον into diver.
3 χαιδεία ἀνεξέλεγκτος πλανᾶται; cf. Prov. x. 17.
914 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book τι.
vestigation."! Our methods of discussion, however, are rather of a gentle kind; for we have learned that he who presides over the preaching of the word ought to be able to confute gainsayers. But if some continue indolent, and do not train themselves so as to attend to the reading of the word, and 4 to search the Scriptures," and, agreeably to the command of Jesus, to investigate the meaning of the sacred writings, and to ask of God concerning them, and to keep “knocking” at what may be closed within them, the Scripture is not on that account to be regarded as devoid of wisdom.
CHAPTER VIII.
In the next place, after other Platonic declarations, which . demonstrate that “the good” can be known by few, he adds: “Since the multitude, being puffed up with a contempt for others, which is far from right, and being filled with vain and lofty hopes, assert that, because they have come to the know- ledge of some venerable doctrines, certain things are true." * Yet although Plato predicted these things, he nevertheless does not talk marvels,? nor shut the mouth of those who wish to ask him for information' on the subject of his promises; nor does he command them to come at once and believe that a God of a particular kind exists, and that he has a son of a particular nature, who descended [to earth] and conversed with me." Now, in answer to this we have to say, that with regard to Plato, it is Aristander, I think, who has related that he was not the son of Ariston, but of a phantom, which approached Am- phictione in the guise of Apollo. And there are several other of the followers of Plato who, in their lives of their master, have made the same statement. What are we to say, more- - over, about Pythagoras, who relates the greatest possible amount of wonders, and who, in a general assembly of the Greeks, showed his ivory thigh, and asserted that he recognised the shield which he wore when he was Euphorbus, and who is said to have appeared on one day in two different cities! He, moreover, who will declare that what is related of Plato and Socrates belongs to the marvellous, will quote the story of l νῶσι; ἀσυνέτου, ἐδιεξέταστοι λόγοι; cf. Ecclus. xxi. 18. 3 ov τερατεύεται.
Book vt. | ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 345 the swan which was recommended to Socrates while he was asleep, and of the master saying when he met the young man, «( This, then, was thesswan!”! Nay, the third eye which Plato saw that he himself possessed, he will refer to the category of prodigies.” But occasion for slanderous accusations will never be wanting to those who are ill-disposed, and who wish to speak evil of what has happened to such as are raised above the multitude. Such persons will deride as a fiction even the demon of Socrates. We do not, then, relate marvels when we narrate the history of Jesus, nor have His genuine disciples recorded any such stories of Him; whereas this Celsus, who professes universal knowledge, and who quotes many of the sayings of Plato, is, I think, intentionally silent on the dis- course concerning the Son of God which is related in Plato’s epistle to Hermeas and Coriscus. Plato’s words are as follows: ** And calling to witness the God of all things—the ruler both of things present and things to come, father and lord both of the ruler and cause—whom, if we are philosophers indeed, we shall all clearly know, so far as it is possible for happy human beings to attain such knowledge.”?
CHAPTER IX.
CHAPTER IX.
Celsus quotes another saying of Plato to the following effect: “It has occurred to me to speak once more upon these subjects at greater length, as perhaps I might express my- self about them more clearly than I have already done: for there is a certain ‘real’ cause, which proves a hindrance in the way of him who has ventured, even to a slight extent, to write on such topics; and as this has been frequently mentioned by me on former occasions, it appears to me that it ought to be stated now. In each of existing things, which are necessarily employed in the acquisition of knowledge, there are three elel'The night before Ariston brought Plato to Socrates as his pupil, the latter dreamed that a swan from the altar of Cupid alighted on his bosom. Cf. Pausanias in Atticis, p. 58.
? εὐ Alicubi forsan occurrit: me vero uspiam legisse non memini. Credo Platonem per tertium oculum suam πολυράθειαν et scientiam, quá ceteris anteibat, denotare voluisse."—SPENCER.
3 Plato, Epist. vi.
346 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book v1.
ments; knowledge itself is the fourth; and that ought to be laid down as the fifth which is both capable of being known and is true. Of these, one is ‘name;’ the second is * word; the third, ‘image;’ the fourth, * knowledge"! Now, accord- ing to this division, John is introduced before Jesus as the voice of one crying in the wilderness, so as to correspond with the “name” of Plato; and the second after John, who is pointed out by him, is Jesus, with whom agrees the statement, “The Word became flesh," and that corresponds to the “ word” of Plato. Plato terms the third *image;" but we, who apply the expression “image” to something different, would say with greater precision, that the mark of the wounds which is made in the soul by the word is the Christ which is in each one of us, and this mark is impressed by Christ the Word.” And whether Christ, the wisdom which is in those of us who are perfect, correspond to the “ fourth” element—know- ledge—will become known to him who has the capacity to ascertain it.
CHAPTER X.
CHAPTER X.
He next continues: * You see how Plato, although main- taining that [the chief good] cannot be described in words, yet, to avoid the appearance of retreating to an irrefutable position, subjoins a reason in explanation of this difficulty, as even *nothing'? might perhaps be explained in words.” But as Celsus adduces this to prove that we ought not to yield a simple assent, but to furnish a reason for our belief, we shall quote also the words of Paul, where he says, in censuring the hasty* believer, *unless ye have believed inconsiderately." 5 Now, through his practice of repeating himself, Celsus, so far - as he can, forces us to be guilty of tautology, reiterating, after the boastful language which has been quoted, that “ Plato is not guilty of boasting and falsehood, giving out that he has made some new discovery, or that he has come down from 1 ὧν £y μὲν, ὄνομα" δεύτερον δὲ, λόγος" τὸ δὲ τρίτον, εἴδωλον" τὸ τέταρτον δὲ, ἐσιστημη.
2 τρωνότερον φήσομεν ἐν τῇ Ψυχῇ γινόμενον μετα τὸν λόγον τῶν τραυβεάτων τύπον, τοῦτον εἶναι τὸν ἐν ἑκάστῳ Χριστὸν, dizo Χριστοῦ λόγου.
3 τὸ μηδέν. 4 εἰκῇ πιστεύοντι. 5 1 Cor. xv. 2.
Boox νι ORIGEN AGALNST CELSUS. 847 heaven to announce it, but acknowledges whence these state- ments are derived.” Now, if one wished to reply to Celsus, one might say in answer to such assertions, that even Plato is guilty of boasting, when in the Timaeus he puts the following language in the mouth of Zeus: “Gods of gods, whose creator and father I am,” and soon. And if any one will defend such language on account of the meaning which is conveyed under the name of Zeus, thus speaking in the dialogue of Plato, why should not he who investigates the meaning of the words of the Son of God, or those of the Creator! in the prophets, express a profounder meaning than any conveyed by the words of Zeus in the Zimeus? For the characteristic of divinity is the an- nouncement of future events, predicted not by human power, but shown by the result to be due to a divine spirit in him who made the announcement. Accordingly, we do not say to each of our hearers, * Believe, first of all, that He whom I intro- duce to thee is the Son of God;” but we put the gospel before . each one, as his character and disposition may fit him to receive it,inasmuch as we have learned to know *how we ought to answer every man."? And there are some who are capable of receiving nothing more than an exhortation to believe, and to these we address that alone; while we approach others, again, as far as possible, in the way of demonstration, by means of question and answer. Nor do we at all say, as Celsus scoffingly alleges, * Believe that He whom I introduce to thee is the Son of God, although He was shamefully bound, and dis- gracefully punished, and very recently? was most contume- liously treated before the eyes of all men;” neither do we add, “Believe it even the more [on that account]. For it is our endeavour to state, on each individual point, arguments more numerous even than we have brought forward in the preceding pages. CHAPTER XI. After this Celsus continues: “If these (meaning the Christians) bring forward this person, and others, again, a different individual [as the Christ], while the common and ready cry * of 1 χοῦ δημιουργοῦ. 2 Cf. Col. iv. 6. 3 «θὲς καὶ πρώην. 4 χοινὸν δὲ πάντων 9 xal πρόχειρον. For 4, Boherellus reads 7.
848 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book vr.
all parties is, * Believe, if thou wilt be saved, or else begone,’ what shall those do who are in earnest about their salvation? Shall they cast the dice, in order to divine whither they may betake themselves, and whom they shall join?” Now we shall answer this objection in the following manner, as the clearness of the case impels us to do. If it had been recorded that several individuals had appeared in human life as sons of God in the manner in which Jesus did, and if each of them had drawn a party of adherents to his side, so that, on account of the similarity of the profession [in the case of each individual] that he was the Son of God, he to whom his followers bore testimony to that effect was an object of dispute, there would have been ground for his saying, “If these bring forward this person, and others a different individual, while the common and ready cry of all parties is, ‘ Believe, if thou wilt be saved, or else begone,'" and so on; whereas it has been proclaimed to the entire world that Jesus Christ is the only Son of God who visited the human race: for those who, like Celsus, have sup- posed that [the acts of Jesus] were a series of prodigies,’ and who for that reason wished to perform acts of the same kind,’ that they, too, might gain a similar mastery over the minds of men, were convicted of being utter nonentities? Such were Simon, the Magus of Samaria, and Dositheus, who was a native of the same place; since the former gave out that he was the power of God that is called great,* and the latter that he was the Son of God. Now Simonians are found nowhere throughout the world; and yet, in order to gain over to himself many followers, Simon freed his disciples from the danger of death, which the Christians were taught to prefer, by teach- ing them to regard idolatry as a matter of indifference. But even at the beginning of their existence the followers of Simon were not exposed to persecution. For that wicked demon who was conspiring against the doctrine of Jesus, was well aware that none of his own maxims would be weakened by the teach-