gone through, as you enjoined, my faithful Am- brosius, to the best of our ability, his preface, and the parts immediately following it, testing each one of his assertions as we went along, until we finished with the tirade’ of this Jew of his, feigned to have been delivered against Jesus. And in the second book we met, as we best could, all the charges con- tained in the invective’ of the said Jew, which were levelled at us who are believers in God through Christ; and now we enter upon this third division of our discourse, in which our object is to refute the allegations which he makes in his own person. He gives it as his opinion, that * the controversy between Jews and Christians is a most foolish one," and asserts that * the discussions which we have with each other regarding Christ differ in no respect from what is called in the proverb ‘a fight about the shadow of an ass;’”? and thinks that * there is nothing of importance? in the investigations of the Jews and Christians: for both believe that it was predicted by the Divine Spirit that one was to come as a Saviour to the human race, but do not yet agree on the point whether the person predicted has actually come or not.” For we Christians, indeed, have believed in Jesus, as He who came according to the predictions of the prophets. But the majority of the Jews 3 xard τὴν παροιμίαν καλουμένης ὄνον σκιᾶ; μάχης. On this proverb, see Zenobius, Centuria Sexta, adag. 28, and the note of Schottius. Cf. also Suidas, s.v. ὄνου oxia.—DE LA RUE.
3 σεμενὸν.
86 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book m1. are so far from believing in Him, that those of them who lived at the time of His coming conspired against Him; and those of the present day, approving of what the Jews of former times dared to do against Him, speak evil of Him, asserting that it was by means of sorcery’ that he passed himself off for Him who was predicted by the prophets as the One who was to come, and who was called, agreeably to the traditions of the Jews, the Christ.
CHAPTER II.
But let Celsus, and those who assent to his charges, tell us whether it is at all like * an ass's shadow," that the Jewish prophets should have predicted the birth-place of Him who was to be the ruler of those who had lived righteous lives, and who are called the “ heritage” of God;? and that Emmanuel should be conceived by a virgin; and that such signs and wonders should be performed by Him who was the subject of prophecy; and that His word should have such speedy course, that the voice of His apostles should go forth into all the earth; and that He should undergo certain sufferings after His condemnation by the Jews; and that He should rise again from the dead. For was it by chance* that the prophets made these announcements, with no persuasion of their truth in their minds, moving them not only to speak, but to deem their announcements worthy of being committed to writing? And did so great a nation as that of the Jews, who had long ago received a country of their own wherein to dwell, recognise certain men as prophets, and reject others as utterers of false predictions, without any conviction of the soundness of the distinction?? And was there no motive which induced them to class with the books of Moses, which were held as sacred, the words of those persons who were afterwards deemed to be prophets? And can those who charge the Jews and Christians with folly, show us how the Jewish nation could have continued to subsist, had there existed among them no promise of the knowledge of future events? and how, while each of the surrounding nations believed, 1 διά τινος γοητείας. 3 xara τὸ ᾿Ιονδαίων πάτριαι. 8 τῶν χρηματιζόντων μερίδος Θεοῦ. 4 ἄρα yàp ὡς ἔτυχε. 5 σὺν οὐδεμιᾷ πιθανότητι.
Boox m.] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 87 agreeably to their ancient institutions, that they received oracles and predictions from those whom they accounted gods, this people alone, who were taught to view with contempt all those who were considered gods by the heathen, as not being gods, but demons, according to the declaration of the prophets, “ For all the gods of the nations are demons,"! had among them no one who professed to be a prophet, and who could restrain such as, from a desire to know the future, were ready to desert? to the demons! of other nations? Judge, then, whether it were not a necessity, that as the whole nation had been taught to despise the deities of other lands, they should have had an abundance of prophets, who made known events which were of far greater importance in themselves! and which surpassed the oracles of all other countries.
CHAPTER III.
CHAPTER III.
In the next place, miracles were performed in all countries, or at least in many of them, as Celsus himself admits, in- stancing the case of Esculapius, who conferred benefits on many, and who foretold future events to entire cities, which were dedicated to him, such as Tricca, and Epidaurus, and Cos, and Pergamus; and along with Esculapius he mentions Aristeas of Proconnesus, and a certain Clazomenian, and Cleomedes of Astypalea. But among the Jews alone, who say they are dedicated to the God of all things, there was wrought no miracle or sign which might help to confirm their faith in the Creator of all things, and strengthen their hope of another and better life! But how can they imagine such a state of things? For they would immediately have gone over to the worship of those demons which gave oracles and performed cures, and deserted the God who was believed, as far as words went,* to assist them, but who never manifested to them His 1 Ps. xcvi. b, δαιμόνια; * idols,” Auth. Vers. We have in this passage, and in many others, the identification of the δαίμονες or gods of the heathen with the δαίμονες or δαιῤοόνια, ‘evil spirits,” or angels, supposed to be mentioned in Gen. vi. 2.
2 The reading in the text is αὐτομολεῖν, on which Bohereau, with whom the Benedictine editor agrees, remarks that we must either read αὐτορολή- σοντας, or understand some such word as ἑτοίμους before avropoAsi».
8 τὸ μεῖζον αὐτόθεν. 4 μέχρι λόγον.
88 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book rrr.
visible presence. But if this result has not taken place, and if, on the contrary, they have suffered countless calamities rather than renounce Judaism and their law, and have been cruelly treated, at one time in Assyria, at another in Persia, and at another under Antiochus, is it not in keeping with the probabilities of the case! for those to suppose who do not yield their belief to their miraculous histories and prophecies, that the events in question could not be inventions, but that a certain divine Spirit being in the holy souls of the prophets, as of men who underwent any labour for the cause of virtue, did move them to prophesy some things relating to their contempo- raries, and others to their posterity, but chiefly regarding a cer- tain personage who was to come as a Saviour to the human race?
CHAPTER IV.
CHAPTER IV.
And if the above be the state of the case, how do Jews and Christians search after ^ the shadow of an ass,” in seeking to ascertain from those prophecies which they believe in common, whether He who was foretold has come, or has not yet arrived, and is still an object of expectation? But even suppose? it be granted to Celsus that it was not Jesus who was announced by the prophets, then, even on such a hypothesis, the investigation of the sense of the prophetic writings is no search after ** the shadow of an ass," if he who was spoken of can be clearly pointed out, and it can be shown both what sort of person he was predicted to be, and what he was to do, and, if possible, when he was to arrive. But in the preceding pages we have already spoken on the point of Jesus being the individual who was foretold to be the Christ, quoting a few prophecies out of a larger number. Neither Jews nor Christians, then, are wrong in assuming that the prophets spoke under divine in- fluence;? but they are in error who form erroneous opinions respecting Him who was expected by the prophets to come, and whose person and character were made known in their “ true discourses.”
CHAPTER V.
Immediately after these points, Celsus, imagining that the 1 xis οὐχὶ ἐξ εἰκότων κατασκενάζεται. 3 xa ὑπόθεσιν. * θεόθεν.
Book uri. J ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 89 Jews are Egyptians by descent, and had abandoned Egypt, after revolting against the Egyptian state, and despising the customs of that people in matters of worship, says that “ they suffered from the adherents of Jesus, who believed in Him as the Christ, the same treatment which they had inflicted upon the Egyptians; and that the cause which led to the new state of things’ in either instance was rebellion against the state.” Now let us observe what Celsus has here done. The ancient Egyptians, after inflicting many cruelties upon the Hebrew race, who had settled in Egypt owing to a famine which had broken out in Judea, suffered, in consequence of their injustice to strangers and suppliants, that punishment which divine Providence had decreed was to fall on the whole nation for having combined against an entire people, who had been their guests, and who had done them no harm; and after being smitten by plagues from God, they allowed them, with difficulty, and after a brief period, to go wherever they liked, as being unjustly detained in slavery. Because, then, they were a selfish people, who honoured those who were in any degree related to them far more than they did strangers of better lives, there is not an accusation which they have omitted to bring against Moses and the Hebrews,—not alto- gether denying, indeed, the miracles and wonders done by him, but alleging that they were wrought by sorcery, and not by divine power. Moses, however, not as a magician, but as a devout man, and one devoted to the God of all things, and a partaker in the divine Spirit, both enacted laws for the Hebrews, according to the suggestions of the Divinity, and recorded events as they happened with perfect fidelity.
CHAPTER VI. | Celsus, therefore, not investigating in a spirit of impartiality the facts, which are related by the Egyptians in one way, and by the Hebrews in another, but being bewitched, as it were,’ in favour of the former, accepted as true the statements of those who had oppressed the strangers, and declared that the Hebrews, who had been unjustly treated, had departed from Egypt after revolting against the Egyptians,—not observing how 1 Τῆς καινοτοβίας.. 3 Ἰιροκαταληφθεὶς ὡς ὑπὸ Φίλτρων τῶν Αἰγυπτίων.
90 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Boox rr.
impossible it was for so great a multitude of rebellious Egyp- tians to become a nation, which, dating its origin from the said revolt, should change its language at the time of its rebel- lion, so that those who up to that time made use of the Egyptian tongue, should completely adopt, all at once, the language of the Hebrews! Let it be granted, however, according to his supposition, that on abandoning Egypt they did conceive a hatred also of their mother tongue,’ how did it happen that after so doing they did not rather adopt the Syrian or Phonician language, instead of preferring the Hebrew, which is different from both? But reason seems to me to demonstrate that the statement is false, which makes those who were Egyptians by race to have revolted against Egyptians, and to have left the country, and to have proceeded to Palestine, and occupied the land now called Judea. For Hebrew was the language of their fathers before their descent into Egvpt; and the Hebrew letters, employed by Moses in writing those five books which are deemed sacred by the Jews, were different from those of the Egyptians.
CHAPTER VII.
CHAPTER VII.
In like manner, as the statement is false “ that the Hebrews, being [originally] Egyptians, dated the commencement [of their political existence] from the time of their rebellion," so also is this, “that in the days of Jesus others who were Jews rebelled against the Jewish state, and became His followers;” for neither Celsus nor they who think with him are able to point out any act on the part of Christians which savours of rebellion. And yet, if a revolt had led to the formation of the Christian commonwealth, so that it derived its existence in this way from that of the Jews, who were permitted to take up arms in defence of the members of their families, and to slay their enemies, the Christian Lawgiver would not have altogether for- bidden the putting of men to death; and yet He nowhere teaches that it is right for His own disciples to offer violence to any one, however wicked. For He did not deem it in keeping with such laws as His, which were derived from a divine source, to allow the killing of any individual whatever. Nor would 1 Τὴν σύντροφον φωνὴν.
Boox m. | ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 91 the Christjans, had they owed their origin to a rebellion, have adopted laws of so exceedingly mild a character as not to allow them, when it was their fate to be slain as sheep, on any occasion to resist their persecutors. And truly, if we look a little deeper into things, we may say regarding the exodus from Egypt, that it is a miracle if a whole nation at once adopted the language called Hebrew, as if it had been a gift from heaven, when one of their own prophets said, “As they went forth from Egypt, they heard a language which they did not under- stand.” ἢ CHAPTER VIII.
In the following way, also, we may conclude that they who came out of Egypt with Moses were not Egyptians; for if they had been Egyptians, their names also would be Egyptian, because in every: language the designations [of persons and things] are kindred to the language? But if it is certain, from the names being Hebrew, that the people were not Egyptians,— and the Scriptures are full of Hebrew names, and these be- stowed, too, upon their children while they were in Egypt,—it is clear that the Egyptian account is false, which asserts that they were Egyptians, and went forth from Egypt with Moses. Now it is absolutely certain® that, being descended, as the Mosaic history records, from Hebrew ancestors, they employed a language from which they also took the names which they conferred upon their children. But with regard to the Chris- tians, because they were taught not to avenge themselves upon their enemies (and have thus observed laws of a mild and philanthropic character); and because they would not, although able, have made war even if they had received authority to do so,—they have obtained this reward from God, that He has always warred in their behalf, and on certain occasions has restrained those who rose up against them and desired to destroy them. For in order to remind others, that by seeing a jew engaged in a struggle for their religion, they also might be better fitted to despise death, some, on special occasions, and these individuals who can be easily numbered, have endured death for the sake of Christianity,—God not permitting the 1 Cf. Ps. Ixxxi. 5.? Suyyeveis εἰσιν αἱ προσηγορία. ὃ Σαφὼς ἐναργές.
92 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book rrr.
whole nation to be exterminated, but desiring that it should continue, and that the whole world should be filled with this salutary and religious doctrine. And again, on the other hand, that those who were of weaker minds might recover their courage and rise superior to the thought of death, God inter- posed His providence on behalf of believers, dispersing by an act of His will alone all the conspiracies formed against them; so that neither kings, nor rulers, nor the populace, might be able to rage against them beyond a certain point. Such, then, is our answer to the assertions of Celsus, * that a revolt was the original commencement of tlie ancient. Jewish state, and subsequently of Christianity."
CHAPTER IX.
But since he is manifestly guilty of falsehood in the state- ments which follow, let us examine his assertion when he says, * Tf all men wished to become Christians, the latter would not desire such a result.” Now that the above statement is false is clear from this, that Christians do not neglect, as far as in them lies, to take measures to disseminate their doctrine throughout the whole world. Some of them, accordingly, have made it their business to itinerate not only through cities, but even villages and country houses,’ that they might make con- verts to God. And no one would maintain that they did this for the. sake of gain, when sometimes they would not accept even necessary sustenance; or if at any time they were pressed by a necessity of this sort, were contented with the mere supply of their wants, although many were willing to share [their abundance] with them, and to bestow help upon them far above their need. At the present day, indeed, when, owing to the multitude of Christian believers, not only rich men, but persons of rank, and delicate and high-born ladies, receive the teachers of Christianity, some perhaps will dare to say that it is for the sake of a little glory” that certain individuals assume the office of Christian instructors, It is impossible, however, rationally to entertain such a suspicion with respect to Christianity in its beginnings, when the danger incurred, especially by its teachers, was great; while at the present day the discredit Boox rir. | ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 93 attaching to it among the rest of mankind is greater than any supposed honour enjoyed among those who hold the same belief, especially when such honour is not shared by all. It is false, then, from the very nature of the case, to say that “ if all men wished to become Christians, the latter would not desire such a result."
CHAPTER X.
CHAPTER X.
But observe what he alleges as a proof of his statement: " * Christians at first were few in number, and held the same opinions; but when they grew to be a great multitude, they were divided and separated, each wishing to have his own individual party:! for this was their object from the beginning." That Christians at first were few in number, in comparison with the multitudes who subsequently became Christian, is un- doubted; and yet, all things considered, they were not so very few. For what stirred up the envy of the Jews against Jesus, and aroused them to conspire against Him, was the great number of those who followed Him into the wilderness,—five thousand men on one occasion, and four thousand on another, having attended Him thither, without including the women and children. For such was the charm? of Jesus’ words, that not only were men willing to follow Him to the wilderness, but women also, forgetting * the weakness of their sex and a regard for outward propriety? in thus following their Teacher into desert places. Children, too, who are altogether unaffected by such emotions, either following their parents, or perhaps attracted also by His divinity, in order that it might be im- planted within them, became His followers along with their parents. But let it be granted that Christians were few in number at the beginning, how does that help to prove that Christians would be unwilling to make all men believe the doc- trine of the gospel?
1 στάσεις; ἰδίας. 3 καίτοι οὐ πάντη ἦσαν ὀλίγοι. 3 ἴυγξ.
4 The reading in Spencer’s and the Benedictine edition is ὑποτερονομένας, for which Lommatzsch reads vropepunuevas.
5 xal τὸ doxous. 6 ἀπαθέστατα.
94 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book m.
~ CHAPTER XI.
He says, in addition, that “all the Christians were of one mind," not observing, even in this particular, that from the beginning there were differences of opinion among believers regarding the meaning! of the books held to be divine. At all events, while the apostles were still preaching, and while eye- witnesses of [the works of] Jesus were still teaching His doc- ' trine, there was no small discussion among the converts from Judaism regarding Gentile believers, on the point whether they ought to observe Jewish customs, or should reject the burden of clean and unclean meats, as not being obligatory on those who had abandoned their ancestral Gentile customs, and had become believers in Jesus. Nay, even in the epistles of Paul, who was contemporary with those who had seen Jesus, certain particulars are found mentioned as having been the subject of dispute,—viz. respecting the resurrection,? and whether it were already past, and the day of the Lord, whether it were nigh at hand? or not. Nay, the very exhortation to “avoid profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: which some professing, have erred concerning the faith,”* is enough to show that from the very beginning, when, as Celsus imagines, believers were few in number, there were certain doc- trines interpreted in different ways.° CHAPTER XII.
CHAPTER XII.
In the next place, since he reproaches us with the existence of heresies in Christianity as being a ground of accusation against it, saying that “when Christians had greatly increased in numbers, they were divided and split up into factions, each individual desiring to have his own party;” and further, that “being thus separated through their numbers, they confute one another, still having, so to speak, one name in common, if indeed they still retain it. And this is the only thing which they are yet ashamed to abandon, while other matters are determined in different ways by the various sects.” In reply to which, we say that heresies of different kinds have never 1 ᾿ῬἘΕχδοχήν. 3 Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 12 sqq. 3 Cf. 2 Thess. ii. 2. * Cf. 1 Tim. vi. 20, 5 Tute παρεκδοχαεὶ.
Book m1. ] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. |. 9$ originated from any matter in which the principle involved was not important and beneficial to human life. For since the science of medicine is useful and necessary to the human race, and many are the points of dispute in it respecting the manner of curing bodies, there are found, for this reason, numerous heresies confessedly prevailing in the science of medicine among the Greeks, and also, I suppose, among those barbarous nations who profess to employ medicine. And, again, since philosophy makes a profession of the truth, and promises a knowledge of existing things with a view to the regulation of life, and endeavours to teach what is advantageous to our race, and since the investigation of these matters is attended with great differ- ences of opinion! innumerable heresies have consequently sprung up in philosophy, some of which are more celebrated than others. Even Judaism itself afforded a pretext for the origination of heresies, in the different acceptation accorded to the writings of Moses and those of the prophets. So, then, seeing Christianity appeared an object of veneration to men, not to the more servile class alone, as Celsus supposes, but to many among the Greeks who were devoted to literary pursuits,’ there necessarily originated heresies,—not at all, however, as the result of faction and strife, but through the earnest desire of many literary men to become acquainted with the doctrines of Christianity. The consequence of which was, that, taking in different acceptations those discourses which were believed by all to be divine, there arose heresies, which received their names from those individuals who admired, indeed, the origin of Christianity, but who were led, in some way or other, by certain plausible reasons, to discordant views. And yet no one would act rationally in avoiding medicine because of its heresies; nor would he who aimed at that which is seemly? entertain a hatred of philosophy, and adduce its many heresies as a pretext for his antipathy. And so neither are the sacred books of Moses and the prophets to be condemned on account of the heresies in Judaism.: CHAPTER XIII. Now, if these arguments hold good, why should we not 1 χολλὴν ἔχει διολκήν. 3 φιλολόγων. ὃ ro πρέπον.
96 ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. [Book 111.
defend, in the same way, the existence of heresies in Chris- tianity * And respecting these, Paul appears to me to speak in a very striking manner when he says, “ For there must be heresies among you, that they who are approved may be made manifest among you."! For as that man is “approved” in medi- cine who, on account of his experience in various [medical ] heresies, and his honest examination of the majority of them, has selected the preferable system,—and as the great proficient in philosophy is he who, after acquainting himself experimen- tally with the various views, has given in his adhesion to the best,—so I would say that the wisest Christian was he who had carefully studied the heresies both of Judaism and Christianity. Whereas he who finds fault with Christianity because of its heresies would find fault also with the teaching of Socrates, from whose school have issued many others of discordant views. Nay, the opinions of Plato might be chargeable with error, on account of Aristotle’s having separated from his school, and founded a new one,—on which subject we have remarked in the preceding book. But it appears to me that Celsus has become acquainted with certain heresies which do not possess even the name of Jesus in common with us. Perhaps he had heard of the sects called Ophites and Cainites, or some others of a similar nature, which had departed in all points from the teaching of Jesus. And yet surely this furnishes no ground for a charge against the Christian doctrine.
CHAPTER XIV.
After this he continues: “ Their union is the more wonderful, the more it can be shown to be based on no substantial reason. And yet rebellion is a substantial reason, as well as the advan- tages which accrue from it, and the fear of external enemies. Such are the causes which give stability to their faith.” To this we answer, that our union does thus rest upon a reason, or rather not upon a reason, but upon the divine working,’ so that its commencement was God’s teaching men, in the prophetical writings, to expect the advent of Christ, who was to be the Saviour of mankind. For in so far as this point is not really refuted (although it may seem to be by unbelievers), in the 11 Cor. xi. 19. 3 θείας ἐνεργείας. Ι Boox 111. ] ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS. 97 same proportion is the doctrine commended as the doctrine of God, and Jesus shown to be the Son of God both before and after His incarnation. I maintain, moreover, that even after His incarnation, He is always found by those who possess the acutest spiritual vision to be most God-like, and to have really come down to us from God, and to have derived His origin or subsequent development not from human wisdom, but from the manifestation’ of God within Him, who by His manifold wisdom and miracles established Judaism first, and Christianity afterwards; and the assertion that rebellion, and the advantages attending it, were the originating causes of a doctrine which has converted and improved so many men was effectually refuted.
CHAPTER xv.